The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10-14-2024 City Council Work Session MinutesSTA TE OF ALABAMA COUNTY OF BALDWIN ) ( ) ( The City Council met in a Work Session at 4:30 p.m., Fairhope Municip al Complex Council Chamber, 161 North Section Street, Fairhope , Alabama 3653 2, on Monday , 14 October 2024. Pre se nt were Council Pres ident Pro Tempore Jack Burrell , Councilmembers: Jimmy Conyers , and Jay Robinso n, Mayor Sherry Sullivan, City Attorney Marcu s E. McDowell, Attorney Christopher S. Williams , and City Clerk Lisa A. Hanks. Council Presid ent Corey Marting and Councilmember Ke vin Boone were absent. Co uncil Pres ident Pro Tempore Burrell called the meeting to order at 4:30 p .m. The following topics were discu ssed: • The first item on the Agenda was the Di scu ssion of Alabama Departm ent of Transportation: Ag ree m ent for the In stallation and/or Operation and/or Maintenance of Traffic Cont ro l Signals and/or Ro adway Lighting by City Engineer Ri chard Johnson. H e exp lai ned the se three traffic signal s are on State Highway 18 1. Co un cilm ember Robinson asked about certification or hire som eone with certification . Mr. Johnson rep li ed thi s would be th e cheapes t way to handle . Counci l President Pro Tempore Burrell as ked City Clerk Lisa Hanks to forward to th e next C it y Council agenda. • The next item on th e Agenda was th e Parking Authority Presentation by Chairman Bryan Flowers . H e commented Chief Hollinghead ha s been great for insight an d information. Mr. Flowers presented th e Power Point Presentation re garding Arts Alley Parking initiati ve. (See attached Pow er Point Presentation) He sa id they want to have th eir boo t s on th e gro und by visiting each downtown merchants and give them pos tcards to hand out abo ut Arts Alley Parking. Mr. Flowers sa id they would do a fo ll ow up for Arts Alley Parking. Council Pres ident Pro Tempore Burrell said he liked it and it is a great initiative. Councilmember Robin so n as was their any way to incenti vize parking. • The Impact Fee Study Presentation was next o n th e Agenda. Building Official Erik Cort in as and Ben Griffin from TischlerBise. Mr. Cortinas exp lained the fees an d fee sc hedul e . Mr. Griffin sent through th e Pow er Point Present ation called "Imp act Fee Study Update" and answered any que sti on s . (See attached Power Point Prese nt ation) Counc ilm ember Burrell qu estioned multi-fam ily fees and the reduction. Mr. Corti na s sa id th e fees are ro uted to se parate accounts: Fire, Parks, Poli ce, an d Transportation . H e commented r enovati on s are pro-rated . Mr. Cortinas sa id th e only catego.ry th at did not in crease was multi -fami ly unit s. H e sa id th e maps wi ll help citizens because th ey do not know where the City stops or begins . Mr. Cortinas said he hopes to have the draft ordinance at th e first meeting in November and begin charging new fees in January 2025 . • Counc ilmember Ro bin son sa id the Hi storic Preservation Com mi ssion will have their first meeting thi s week. • Council President Pro Tempore Burrell gave an update on th e Fairhop e Airport Authority; an d sa id the new FBO begins October 15 , 202 4 . Monday , 23 September 2024 Page -2- • City Engineer Richard Johnson addressed Agenda Items No. 11 , No. 14 , No . 17 , and No. 22; and answered any questions if needed. • Gas Superintendent Wes Boyett addressed the City Council regarding Agenda Item No. 15 ; and answered any questions if needed . • Water and Wastewater Director Daryl Morefield addressed the City Council regarding Agenda Item s No. 18 through No . 2 1; and answered any que stions if needed. • Electric Superintendent Ben Patterson addressed the City Council regarding Agenda Item No. 15; and answered any questions if needed . Mr. Patterson said Monday Florida Power reached out to the Mayor for help . He said we sent an Electric Crew to Winter Park, Florida; and then went to New Smyrna Beach . • D eve lopment Services Manager Mike Jeffries addressed the City Council regarding Agenda Items No. 7 through No. IO ; and answered any question s if needed. • Community Affairs Director Paige Crawford addressed the City Council and gave an update on the Working Water Front Project. She said the pier will be closed on Wednesday morning for work on the new pier hand rails. Ms. Crawford gave a shout out to the Arts and Crafts Foundation. She mentioned the Homecoming Parade on Wednesday, the Witches Ride on Thursday, and Downtown Trick or Treat on Saturday. • IT Systems Administrator Sean Spratlin addressed the City Council regarding Agenda Item No . 24; and answered any questions if needed . • Mayor Sherry Sullivan addressed the City Council regarding Agenda Items No. 23 and No . 27; and answered any que stion s if needed . • Police Chief Stephanie Hollinghead addressed the City Council regarding Agendas Item No. 25 , No . 26, No. 32 , and No . 33; and answered any questions if needed. • City Treasurer Kim Creech addressed the City Council regarding Agenda Item s No. 6 and No. 28; and answered any questions if needed . • Human Re so urces Director Hannah Noonan addressed the City Council regarding Agenda Item No . 5; and answered any questions if needed. • Assistant Public Works Director John Thomas addressed the City Counci l regarding Agenda Item s No. 12 , No . 13 and No . 16; and answered any que stions if needed . There being no furt h er business to come before the City Council, the meeting was du ly adjourned at 6:00 p.m. t Pro Tempore 6 ddaL L ~s,MMC City Cler ·. ... ... .... Parking Authority City Council Presentation Fairhope Parking Authority Key Initiatives Create and Promote the "Arts Alley Parking" Brand • Safe , clean , and accessible • Use "A rts Alley Parking " instead of "parking garage " Strengthen Relationships with Downtown Merchants • Parking Authority members will visit downtown merchants individually to keep them updated on our initiatives including the City Shuttle, the parking study , loading zones , and encouraging parking in the Arts Alley Parking for employees and customers • Merchants will give Arts Alley Parking postcards to customers • Postcards will also be available in the Welcome Center Public Relations Efforts • Work closely with the City of Fairhope to develop & implement public relations strategies • Social media plan to promote Arts Alley Parking and all parking lots • Article in City Sketches newsletter featuring results of our parking study; upcoming plans to improve Arts Alley Parking with quarterly cleanings and staining ; explanation about Arts Alley Parking alleviating traffic by those who continuously circle; nice pictures of Arts Alley Parking • Expanding city holiday events to include Arts Alley Parking such as Christmas, Easter (egg hunt), Halloween (trick or treating), and Mardi Gras • Using temporary digital signage on Fairhope Avenue and Section Street to promote Arts Alley Parking Enhancing the City Shuttle Service • Prescribed stops between the P olice Station and Civic Center crosswalks , Library , K1 area , and the Arts Alley Parking • Signage at each stop that h ighlights the "Arts Alley Parking " brand • Rev italizing golf ca rt shuttles with custom wrap from the Arts Alley Parking artwork Future, Long-Term Initiatives • One-way streets • Delivery Unloading Zones -Push for optimal times -Enforcement Appendix Arts Alley Parking Analysis Summary • The objective of the study is to determine how often the parking garage is utilized. The committee wanted to determine the number of open parking spaces that are open for people to park in . • The survey was conducted from May 9-June 1 and June 17-July 31 , 2024 . A total of 108 surveys were completed. • There are 90 hotel designated parking spaces and 150 for the general public (we did not include handicap and electric vehicle charging station parking spots). • The committee counted all open spots during the survey . The hotel open parking spots were separated from general parking open spots. • The surveys were conducted Monday through Saturday (we excluded Sundays because the downtown area is not that busy as many businesses are closed). • Survey times were 11 :00 am , 2:00 pm, 4:00 pm and 7pm • Survey Summary"Findings : o In May, 74 % of the hotel parking spots were open for parking, equating to 66 spaces available to park in o In June and July, 70 % of the hote l parking spots were open for parking, equating to 63 spaces available to park in o In May, 43 % of the general parking spots were open for parking, equating to 65 spaces available to park o In June and July, 41 % of the gene ral parking spots were open for parking, equating to 62 spaces available to park in • Survey finding by day of week : o For the hote l, there were an average of 67 spots open on Monday, 62 on Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday, 65 on Thursday and 64 on Saturday o For the gene ral public parking spots, there were 75 spots open on Monday, 66 on Tuesday, 57 on Wednesday, 60 on Thursday, 54 on Friday and 63 on Saturday • In conclusion, our committee believes the parking garage has plenty of parking spots available for the general public to park in . At any given time there are approximately 65 general open parking spaces. The hotel also has about 65 open parking spaces . Public Parking Post Card Overview Front/Back FREE SHUTTLE SERVICE 251-850-6348 10 am. to 4 p.m. Monday to Saturday To utilize the shuttle service, meet the shuttle at the restroom facility/transit rub and simply dial 251-850- 6346 for a ride. The driver will transport you to your downtown destination. The shuttle service caters to the Cen tral Business Dist rict TISchlerBlse FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING .· ..... • Impact Fee Basics • Land Use Assumptions • Impact Fee Components • Fire • Parks and Recreation • Police • Transportation • Fee Summary 2 ~ T1schlerB1se FISCAL. I ECONOMI C I PLANNING 3 • One-time payment for growth-related infrastructure, usually collected when building permits are issued • Can't be used for operations, maintenance, or replacement • Level of service (LOS) may not exceed what is provided to existing development • Three requirements • Need • Growth • Infrastructure (system improvements , not project-level improvements) • Benefit • Short range expenditures • Geographic service areas and/or benefit districts • Proportionate to demand ~ T1schlerB1se FISCAL I E CONOMIC I P L ANNING • Cost Recovery Approach {Past) • Future development is "buying in " to the cost the community has already incurred to provide growth-related capacity • Common in communities approaching buildout • Incremental Expansion Approach {Present) • Formula-based approach based on existing levels of service • Fee based on current cost to replicate existing levels of service (i.e ., replacement cost) • Plan-Based Approach {Future) • Usually reflects an adopted CIP or master plan • Growth-related costs are more refined ~ 4 ===============================----_-_-_-_-_-_ -_ -_ -_ -_ -_ ----~~ Tisch ler B1se FISCA L I E CONOMIC I P L ANNING • Site specific • Developer constructs a capital facility included in fee calculations • Debt service • Avoid double payment due to existing or future bonds • Dedicated revenues • Property tax, local option sales tax, gas tax, etc. ~ s =============================================== Tisch lerB1se FISCAL. I ECONOMIC I P L ANNING -Roads C::Parcels o eorporate Limits 6 Fairhope will collect impact fees within the city limits. ~ T1schlerB1se F ISCAL I E CONOMI C I P L ANNING 7 The analysis uses American Community Survey (ACS) data to convert population projections to housing units. Housing Type I Persons I h Id I Persons per I Housing Units Persons per House o s Household Housing Unit Single-Family Units1 20,178 7,189 2.81 7,875 2.56 Multi-Family Units2 1,470 830 1.77 1,379 1.07 Total 21,648 8,019 2.70 9,254 2.34 Source: U.S . Census Bureau, 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates 1. Includes detached and attached (i.e. townhouses) 2. Includes dwellings in structures with two or more units, mobile homes, and boats, RVs, vans etc. Housing I Vacancy Rate Mix 85.1% 8.70% 14.9% 39.80% 100.0% 13.30% ~ T1schlerB1se FISCAL. I ECONOMIC I PLANNING = ,~ ~-£(th Nonresidential Employment Density Factors .. f ' 8 ITE I Code 110 130 140 150 254 320 520 530 540 610 620 710 715 730 770 820 The analysis converts projected employment to nonresidential floor area using factors published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). I Demand I Wkdy Trip Ends I Wkdy Trip Ends I Emp Per Square Feet Land Use/Size Unit Per Dmd Un1t 1 Per Employee1 Dmd Unit Per Emp Light Industrial 1,000 Sq Ft 4.87 3 .10 1.57 637 Industrial Park 1,000 Sq Ft 3.37 2.91 1.16 864 Manufacturing 1,000 Sq Ft 4 .75 2 .51 1.89 528 Warehousing 1,000 Sq Ft 1.71 5 .05 0 .34 2,953 Assisted Living bed 2 .60 4 .24 0 .61 na Motel room 3.35 25.17 0.13 na Elementary School student 2.27 22.50 0.10 na High School student 4.11 8 .86 0.46 na Community College student 1.15 14.61 0.08 na Hospital 1,000 Sq Ft 10 .77 3.77 2.86 350 Nursing Home bed 3.06 3.31 0 .92 na General Office (average size) 1,000 Sq Ft 10.84 3 .33 3.26 307 Single Tenant Office 1,000 Sq Ft 13.07 3.85 3.39 295 Government Office 1,000 Sq Ft 22 .59 7.45 3 .03 330 Business Park 1,000 Sq Ft 12 .44 4.04 3 .08 325 Shopping Center (average size) 1,000 Sq Ft 37.01 17.42 2.12 471 1. Trip Generation . Institute ofTransportation Engineers, 11th Edition (2021). ~ T1schler B1se FISCAL I ECONOMI C I PLANNING A:Sd~. eff6a-'~·:?ft lf,, ~zr : 1 Development Projections .. Residential projections based on recent population growth. Nonresidential projections based on existing ratio of jobs to population. Fairhope, Alabama Population Resident 23 ,998 24 ,505 25 ,012 25 ,519 26 ,026 26 ,533 27 ,040 27 ,547 Lodg i ng 993 1 ,008 1 ,023 1,038 1,053 1,068 1,083 1 ,098 Peak Population 24,991 25,513 26,035 26,557 27,079 27,601 28,123 28,645 Housing Units Si ngle Fam i ly 9 ,231 9 ,4 1 5 9 ,600 9 ,784 9 ,969 10,154 10,338 10,523 Multi -Family 1,617 1 ,649 1 ,681 1 ,713 1 ,746 1 ,778 1 ,810 1,842 Total 10,847 11,064 11,281 11,498 11,715 11,931 12,148 12,365 Lodging Rooms 662 672 682 692 702 712 722 732 Employment Indu strial 823 840 858 875 893 910 927 945 Commercial/Retai l 2 ,171 2 ,217 2 ,263 2 ,309 2 ,354 2,400 2 ,446 2,492 Office/Institutional 5 ,987 6 ,113 6 ,240 6 ,366 6 ,493 6 ,619 6 ,746 6 ,872 Total 8,981 9,171 9,360 9,550 9,740 9,930 10,119 10,309 Nonres. Floor Area (xl,000) Industri al 524 535 546 557 569 580 591 602 Commerc i al/Retail 1 ,023 1 ,044 1 ,066 1,087 1,109 1 ,131 1 ,152 1,174 Office/Institutional 1 ,838 1 ,877 1 ,916 1 ,955 1,993 2 ,032 2 ,071 2 ,110 Total 3,385 3,456 3,528 3,599 3,671 3,742 3,814 3,885 9 28,054 28 ,561 29,068 5,070 1,113 1,128 1,143 150 29,167 29,689 30,211 5,220 10,707 10,892 11 ,077 1,846 1 ,874 1,906 1,939 322 12,582 12,798 13,015 2,168 742 752 762 100 962 979 997 174 2,538 2 ,584 2,630 459 6,999 7 ,125 7 ,252 1,265 10,499 10,689 10,878 1,897 613 624 635 111 1,195 1,217 1,239 216 2 ,149 2,187 2,226 388 3,957 4,028 4,100 ~ T1schlerB1se FISCAL I ECONOM IC I P L ANNING • Service Area: Citywide • Fee Components • Facilities: Incremental • Apparatus: Incremental • 10-Year Demand • Facilities: 3,417 square feet, $1. 7 million • Apparatus: 2.4 units, $800k 10 ~ T1schlerB1se FISCAL I ECONOMI C I P L ANNING Fee Componen t I Cost per Person I Cost per Trip Component Fire Facilities $235.64 $102 .53 Fire Apparatus $109.81 $47 .78 Facilities Impact Fee Report $4 .16 $2 .42 Facilities Total $349.61 $152.73 Apparatus Apparatus Residential Nonresidential Residential Nonresidential Single Family Multi-Family Industrial 2 .44 $373 $292 $81 Industrial Commercial/Retail 12 .21 $1,865 $1,467 $398 Com merci al/Retai I Offi ce/I nstituti on al 5 .42 $828 $574 $254 Office/Institution al Lodging (per room) 1.68 $257 $197 $60 Lodging l. See Land Use Assumption s 11 Comparison of 2018 to 2024 I Unit I 2018 I 2024 I % Change Level of Service/ Unit Cost square foot 22 ,901 22 ,901 0% square foot $325 $500 54% unit 23 16 -3 0 % unit $207,370 $333,494 61% Proportionate Share 70% 64% -9% 30% 36% 22% Cost per Demand Unit person $378.51 $349.61 -8% trip $117 .79 $152 .73 30% Demand Factor PPHU 2 .32 2.56 10% PPHU 1.58 1.07 -32% Trips/ KSF 2.48 2.44 -2% Trips/ KSF 12.46 12 .21 -2% Trips/ KSF 4 .87 5 .42 11% Trips/ Room 1.68 1.68 0% ~ T1schlerB1se FISCAL. I ECONOMIC I P L ANNING •, . '. • Service Area: Citywide • Fee Components • Recreation Facilities: Incremental • Park Amenities: Incremental • 10-Year Demand • Recreation Facilities: 9,546 square feet, $4.8 million • Park Amenities: 19 units, $1.8 million 12 ~ T1schlerB1se FISCAL. I ECONOMIC I P l.ANNJNG ~-~~ !f,,~vr:1 Proposed Parks and Recreation Fees --1111 .. i ' Fee Component I Cost per Person Component Recreation Facilities $914 .33 Park Amenities $340 .97 Rec Facilities Impact Fee Report $5 .52 Rec Facilities Total $1,260.82 Amenities Amenities Land (removed) I Persons per I Proposed I Current I Increase/ Development Type Housing Un1t 1 Fees Fees (Decrease) Land (removed) Single Family 2 .56 $3,228 $2 ,998 $230 Residential Multi-Family 1.07 $1,349 $2 ,044 ($695) Lodging (per room) 1.50 $1,891 $1 ,932 ($41) Single Family 1. See Land Use As sumptions Multi-Family Lodging 13 Comparison of 2018 to 2024 I Unit I 2018 I 2024 I % Cha n ge Level of Service/ Unit Cost square foot 45 ,700 45,700 0% square foot $343 $500 46% unit 82 89 9% unit $66,767 $95,743 43% acre 213 .75 N/A N/A acre $48,721 N/A N/A Cost per Demand Unit person $1 ,290.40 $1,260 .82 -2% Demand Factor PPHU 2 .32 2 .56 10% PPHU 1.58 1.07 -32% 0cc . /Room 1.50 1.50 0 % ~ T1schlerB1se FISCAL I E CONOMI C I P L ANNING • Service Area: Citywide • Fee Components • Facilities: Incremental • Vehicles: Incremental • Equipment: Incremental • 10-Year Demand • Facilities: 6,200 square feet, $3.1 million • Vehicles: 8 units, $529k • Equipment: 2 units, $65k 14 ~ T1schlerB1se FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING Fee Componen t I Cost per Person I Cost per Trip Component Police Facilities $439 .60 $172 .91 Police Vehicles $75 .09 $29 .53 Facilities Police Equipment $9 .27 $3 .65 Faci I it i es Impact Fee Report $4 .52 $1.78 Vehicles Total $528.48 $207.87 Vehicles Equipment (new) Equipment (new) Residential Nonresidential Residential Nonresidential Si ngle Family Industrial 2.44 $507 $238 $269 Multi -Fam i ly Commerc i al /Retail 12 .21 $2,538 $1,195 $1,343 Indu strial Offi ce/1 nst ituti on al 5 .42 $1,127 $467 $660 Commercial/Retail Lodging (per room) 1.68 $349 $161 $188 Office/Inst itution al 1. Se e Land Use Ass umption s Lodging 15 Comparison of 2018 to 2024 I Unit I 2018 I 2024 I % Change Level of Service/ Unit Cost square foot 26 ,104 29,304 12% square foot $315 $500 59% un i t 47 37 -21 % unit $36,617 $67 ,641 85 % unit N/A 10 N/A unit N/A $30,910 N/A Proportion ate Share 70% 72 % 2% 30% 28 % -5 % Cost per Demand Unit person $319 .47 $528.48 65% trip $95 .91 $207 .87 117% Demand Factor PPHU 2 .32 2 .56 10% PPHU 1.58 1.07 -32 % Trips/ KSF 2.48 2.44 -2 % Trips/ KSF 12 .46 12 .21 -2 % Trip s / KSF 4 .87 5 .42 11% Trips/ Room 1.68 1.68 0 % ~ T1schlerB1se FISCAL.. I E CONOM IC I PLANNING • Service Area: Citywide • Fee Components • Capacity Improvements: Incremental • Resurfacing Improvements : Plan-Based • 10-Year Demand • Capacity Improvements: 10.2 lane miles , $10.2 million • Resurfacing Improvements: • Growth: 1.7 lane miles , $250k • Existing : 8.3 lane miles , $1.25 million • Total: 10 .0 lane miles, $1.5 million 16 ~ T1schlerB1se FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING Fee Component I Cost per Trip Component Capa ci ty Improvements $618 .76 Resurfacing Improvements $15 .43 Capacity (cost) Impact Fee Report $3 .08 Capacity (cost) Total $637.27 Re surfacing (cost) Resurfac i ng (cost) All Development Single Family Multi -Family Industrial Commercial/Retail Office/In stitutional Lodging Industrial 2 .44 $1,552 $562 $990 Com m erci al/Ret ai I 12 .21 $7,783 $2 ,826 $4,957 Offi ce/Inst itut i on al 5.42 $3,454 $1 ,104 $2,350 Lodging (per room) 1.68 $1,067 $379 $688 1. Se e Land Use Ass umption s 17 Comparison of 2018 to 2024 I Unit I 2018 I 2024 I % Change Level of Service/ Unit Cost trip $171.36 $618 .76 261 % year $510,500 $1,016 ,328 99 % trip $37 .18 $15.43 -58% year $415,000 $150 ,000 -64 % Cost per Demand Unit trip $226 .85 $637 .27 181% Demand Factor Tr i ps/Unit Trips/ Un i t Tr i ps/ KSF Trip s / KSF Trip s / KSF Trip s /Room 5.33 5 .90 11% 2 .48 1.61 -35% 2.48 2.44 -2 % 12.46 12 .21 -2 % 4 .87 5.42 11 % 1.68 1.68 0 % ~ T1schlerB1se FISCAL. I ECONOMI C I PL.ANNING Proposed Fees Increase/ (Decrease) 18 Development Type Industr ial Commercial/Reta i l Office/Institution al Lodging (per room) Industrial Commercial/Retail Offi ce/lnstituti on al Lodging (per room) I Fi re $373 $1 ,865 $828 $257 $81 $398 $254 $60 I Parks and I Pol ice Rec r eation $0 $507 $0 $2 ,538 $0 $1 ,127 $1,891 $349 $0 $269 $0 $1 ,343 $0 $660 ($41) $188 I Transportation I Proposed I Cui re n t I I ncrease/ Fees Fees (Decrease) $1 ,552 $2,432 $1 ,092 $1 ,340 $7 ,783 $12,186 $5 ,488 $6 ,698 $3,454 $5,409 $2 ,145 $3,264 $1 ,067 $3 ,564 $2 ,669 $895 $990 $1,340 $4,957 $6,698 $2 ,350 $3,264 $688 $895 ~ T1schlerB1se FISCAL I ECONOMI C I PLANNING .. . ' Questions? 19 ~ T1schlerB1se FISCAL. I ECONOMIC I PLANNING