Title
A resolution adopting the Envision Shook's Run Master Facilities Plan
(Legislative)
Presenter:
Carl Schueler, Comprehensive Planning Manager
Peter Wysocki, Planning and Community Development Director
Aaron Egbert, Senior Engineer, Public Works Department
Body
Summary:
The Envision Shook's Run Master Facilities Plan (FMP) is a major multi-disciplinary facilities planning effort focused on the approximately 4.2 mile long Shooks Run Corridor. It is being proposed to be adopted as an element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The FMP addresses stormwater, road, bridge, transit, parks, recreation and utilities improvements in the context of a holistic transformative vision plan developed via a robust public process. The Plan is intended to be supportive of existing neighborhoods within the corridor and to encourage reinvestment and redevelopment especially along the lower segments. Because of the expected multi-decade funding and implementation horizon, the FMP is anticipated to supported by a more detailed and adaptable SIP (Sustainable Infrastructure Plan). The SIP will be administered at the staff level, but coordinated with stakeholders as appropriate.
Previous Council Action:
City Council recently adopted the Experience Downtown Plan which has significant relevance to the FMP area. This item was introduced at a January 23, 2017 City Council Work Session.
Background:
A complete draft of the Plan has been provided as a separate attachment.
The Envision Shook's Run web site can also be accessed for additional background and information: <http://www.envisionshooksrun.com/>
The January 19, 2017 Planning Commission staff report is also attached. It provides additional analysis and background.
As described in more detail in the Plan itself, Shooks Run has been the direct and indirect focus of several prior plans. However, it was determined a holistic and multi-disciplinary approach was needed in part to provide context for major facilities improvement needs along the corridor.
Through a highly participatory public, staff and stakeholder’s process, three vision themes were recommended as options:
• Infrastructure Option
• Greenway and Linear Park
• Transformative
Ultimately, a majority of participants clearly identified the Transformative Option as the Recommended Option. It assumes the most amount of change for the Corridor (especially along its southern reaches, and assumes a central role for the Corridor as part of the fabric of the City.
This recommended Corridor Theme is depicted through a series of annotated graphics included in the Plan.
The Corridor is divided into five (5) distinct segments based on a combination of existing and future conditions:
• Headwaters
• Residential Greenway
• Urban Waterway
• Urban Canyon
• Confluence
Key elements and contents of the Plan include:
• A high quality multi-modal trail system proposed along the entire corridor
• An associated linked network of parks and public spaces
• Character streets that connect with and cross the Creek
• Enhanced multimodal connections
• Recommendations for destination elements
• Encouragement of land use reinvestment throughout the corridor, and significant transformative change along the southern reaches
• Identified bridge improvements
• Prototypical channel sections
• Options for a few key and challenging sections such as around Palmer High School and the Transit Mix site
• Implementation
o Full implementation is understood to be a multi-decade proposition, with much of funding undetermined at this time
• Potential funding strategies
• Recommended update and amendment process and schedule additional tactical and specific “action steps” that will move each goal toward implementation.
• An analysis of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and its key elements (including the 2014 Parks System Master Plan) is addressed in the attached Planning Commission staff report.
Financial Implications:
Altogether, the sum total of improvements contemplated in the FMP may be in excess of $300 million. Although some of these projects and costs are particular to the “transformative” vision for the corridor, many of the projects will be required in any case to meet basic safety and infrastructure needs. However, this FMP itself does not obligate future City or other funding. It does provide a roadmap for adaptive funding prioritization to be used with the Sustainable Infrastructure Plan.
Board/Commission Recommendation:
The Envision Shook's Run Master Facilities has been presented to a number of Boards and Commissions.
• The Active Transportation Advisory Committee voted unanimously to support the plan on November 15, 2016.
• The Citizens’ Transportation Advisory Board voted unanimously to support the plan on December 6. 2016.
• The Drainage Board took action to support this document on December 1, 2016.
• The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board unanimously recommended approval on October 13, 2016.
• The Downtown Review Board voted to approve the plan 7-0 on January 4, 2017 subject to recommended changes to incorporation of the following modifications:
§ Revised language addressing support of private development and developer participation as presented at the meeting.
§ Revised language and a “call out” map addressing an alternative option for the Urban Canyon segment which could accommodate an expansion of the Catalyst Campus development into the current Transit Mix parcel.
§ Changes to the language (on page 49) addressing potential conversion of the BNSF railroad right-of-way to other uses, to emphasize the importance of assuring that options for the use if this property for future rail or other transit use have been fully evaluated.
§ Additional clarification of concerning the Plan amendment process and the use and intent of the Sustainable Infrastructure Plan (SIP) to be prepared following adoption of this FMP
§ Additional technical and grammatical revisions
(Note: these changes have all been incorporated into the current January 12, 2017 draft Plan)
o A summary of comments from the DRB meeting are also included as an attachment.
• The City’s Planning Commission (CPC) considered this Plan on December 15, 2016 and continued the item to their January 19, 2017 hearing in order to obtain a recommendation by the DRB. On January 19th, the CPC unanimously recommended approval of the FMP. This recommendation came with concurrence to include a number of non-substantive clarifying amendments provided in response to very recent suggested final edits from Catalyst Campus representatives.
A draft version of the CPC record of decision is provided as an attachment.
Stakeholder Process:
The Envision Shook's Run Master Facilities Pan has been informed and formulated by a robust 2-year public involvement and stakeholder process. This process is summarized in the Plan itself and in the attached Planning Commission staff report. Included as an attachment, is a summary of the most recent public comments received concerning the draft FMP.
Recent Input and Changes:
A few significant topics and issues have emerged in the past few months in part due to the opportunity to respond to a completed draft FMP. These topics and issues have been identified and addressed by staff, stakeholders, and in association with recent board and commission meetings: The most significant topics have included the following:
• Urban Canyon Segment, Catalyst Campus and Transit Mix Property
o Representatives of Catalyst Campus have provided feedback refining their latest options for future phases of their major redevelopment project. These could include acquisition of the Transit Mix parcel to the south. Catalyst representatives have also generally highlighted questions concerning the requirements for developer participation for identified improvements including amenities
§ As a result, the FMP has been revised for this segment to provide for alternative options, each consistent with the overall vision
§ Additional language has been added to the Plan clarifying expectations with respect to developer participation and adaptation of the Plan to respond to market conditions.
• Downtown Partnership Concerns
o The Downtown Partnership has recently commented with some specific recommended changes (which have been addressed), as well as echoing the adaptability and ease of the FMP amendment concerns noted above.
• Use and Timing of the SIP
o Concerns have been raised by stakeholders and boards and commissions (e.g. DRB and PC about the uncertainties associated with the next phase Sustainable Infrastructure Plan (SIP), given its pertinence to private redevelopment and uncertainties associated with the availability and timing of public and public/private funding.
§ Staff’s recommendation is that the FMP needs to be adopted in order to provide direction and context for the SIP (the initial development of which is an expensive and detailed process). However, language has been added to the FMP reinforcing the intent to make the SIP process flexible, equitable and participatory.
• BNSF Rail Spur
o The BNSF (Burlington Northern and Santa Fe) railroad right-of-way and spur line occupies part of the southern corridor. Over time, rail activity and ownership has been reduced in the corridor. The FMP assumes a continuation of this trend and incorporation of the remaining spur east of Wahsatch primarily as park land, water quality features and possible destination elements.
§ However, concerns have been raised to the effect that any further abandonment of rail right-of-way involving the City should be carefully considered and deliberate from the perspective of reasonably assuring that viable options for future rail or transit use have not been foreclosed. Additional language has been added to the Plan to address this concern.
Alternatives:
1. Approve the Envision Shook's Run Master Facilities Plan as presented;
2. Modify the proposed Plan;
3. Deny the Plan leaving essentially no plan in place that comprehensively addresses the Shooks Run vison and priorities;
4. Refer the matter back to Staff, Boards, and Commissions for further consideration
Recommended Action
Proposed Motion:
Approve a resolution adopting the Envision Shook's Run Master Facilities Plan based on the findings that the plan complies with the criteria found in Section 7.5.408 of City Code, subject to minor technical and typographical corrections...
Summary of Ordinance Language
N/A