Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/16/2016 15A Downtown Master Plan and Yakima Public Marketplace Concept 10 I m i BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDASTATEMENT Item No. 15.A. For Meeting of: February 16, 2016 ITEM TITLE: Downtown Master Plan and Yakima Public Market Business Concept SUBMITTED BY: Sean Hawkins, Economic Development Manager 575 -6274 SUMMARY EXPLANATION: As follow -up to the City Council Retreat on February 8, 2016, please see the attached documents. ITEM BUDGETED: STRATEGIC PRIORITY: APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL: Interim City Manager STAFF RECOMMENDATION: BOARD /COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: ATTACHMENTS: Description Upload Date Type d DI it ostl.oir l pll< irn 2/11/2016 CA) ?r Memo Yalkliirrn< PUNK- Markel. E1 If liirn<II I3npsliirnE?ss Q::A)rncEplrA 2/11/2016 CA) ?r Memo no PLAN September 2013 yAKI mA DOWNTOWN MA _.. , —,, . ----,,,,,--- -', • •-•'..„.. ,,,/ „/"/ ---..„.0,5,-;,-; ,....„ - . , ..... ..... .. . ' ..<<- fi'' - ''' ,.,;,, - ---!,-,..----* / _..- ,.,..1 , 40011% -4 !) // '' ,/ -,,10 ...,:r ....,,,,,'-',"---,'-/-t-.,•' v STER ,,,.. ., /-- ---,-. 4. , ?.---. :., , --- - •f .- ' '','V ' •• ----------- „je„,4 , -,,,',•, --.4%4 7,- ..6,/,-• - , 4, '4. - ;',:',',,,' ',"''''• 1 :1 41 . t.,t ,:":A /40 ,,rf,',,.;,,,- / _ ,7 • .,:-. '•.:,,. , 4 1,F,, 17 ,,, , ;,.. ,- ° s , ' • ',' ' ; '1,1:',‘1'.4:',•,1';',1111 Mit -/' 4 / ' .----- 1"•14:414*- -' .4. ,k,k.,,, ' .4-44111114 Vg-• -,,•.,•2",-'i , 0 ,,, V , 1:'''' , :` , ; ', i• Ilit.,- ,.. e• >';",. 0 / / 7 ,,,,,,,,-;;„.„,,,..--,,,„ , , . , ,_,.; .„. , --... 111 ''' ' 'r ' ' 'il ', , ':;,<'',%•'•',/, 44,1p. '''' I At'• 0% ,,,,,.',',4 Y,',/,,.',',0.-tc/ ..,-,': ' ■ ,, ,;,, ,"' 'AV '''''' ' elt, „, Ite' ,,''' ' -...._ ".. ° ' 4 •—•''' -,' z ,'" - '''" 0 " . _' -",_ ' ", ,, - 4,',. - -----,,,,,,,, •, ', ' - - ' ,,,,,,,),,,,,,/,— ...,' ,. ,-,,(7-- , i ,,,f ,''' -K. ''. , ,(:•., ; ,,, ',-,.., A6C t•41 . :- . - , -..0.7.s-W,/,,,,/,;i'' ' -;.' , p ,.;,. ,0 ' - . ' ,-- - ----, , . : ii , : ' , , ,, :1.' . . i / :-' '''' 7 ' - , --..', ' , .,:; ''storr-:- ,- ' //)w.,7 ' • A 40t - - ' ,,,,00,,,- .....„ A ° - ' -,4"..,' , - ./1/, ., ,,. , , 4‘..' ' .------ l'-'''," :./ 0,,,-,4%' .,/,...;67. „,,,.. ,- ,,,,,o, ..;-- .,-, ,,,,, , ..' --....; ...,-,- ,.. ..„,, . ,,, : ''' ' " 4:41110 / ';'''',/•4 10P; • '''4t . 4 r'' ' ' ..",.,",(0-,6, 400,''''''' - ..,, • '' - ;1,0 ',,,.. _at ' ' • "494 , 4 /.• ' .. '''. V011074141114111940* :,;09,4; „At" )41110t, • :,;',14'4'.'!'i , ^,,,,44 / . 7 ''''J Pt ' ' ' ' N ''''', '...le; itr. "'IP •••••0740/piiiipidk..41110700yLf. - ' ....''''-' 2' ,' 3, o' - ,..' ' , '1 'At •• • 4,0 44 410' -■ - '401,w-:- ' r ‘ '...-, '1111015.„. '- — '''' '' ''''N' 4* .' li ' ' ; ;0"4040.4.4itio,414114"10140, • it ' , ' ' '. V.1;%(;e':.;fx - ' ,,f:*:. A . c _$.410.-/ " '''''''•••••-„, , , ',11/ ' ''''''" ;,, ' - ' .*%0P' , ii■ ,,, .........,...4. 4- '. 4'',,,..,..;>-":- ..':,,'",-,',;,:,x,-,:,;,:.e.,,-.a. .-:, ,...100. Aiiiiii•%44 02,... , • / , .,•', f" , ' ,- , „ -c, ,. A* ,' -',401-41voiesed ' ji„ t4),- .v''''''' ,,,,- -' --- --..., ... • ' -■44p-fr / ' , 4° • --....„. i -'01 • , „ /;// - 4. - ,./•%„0 - , , - •/;-- /,'Y',:,•7 ' 2 /r/ -- -„, - 4 ,,.. , :. // „., 01/1111ffigh. - '. • , , „ / - , , „..,,,, 4 4, "-, ,•-'" , 2,,,.0, ,.:•% lore,>•; •-y,',N■siliko, ;,), 0,, " f, ', , _ ' • ' - : 1 . • , .....„ y /, IA , ,,' ;„ : .,,e,:;74 , '';',.. ;,,„,..-:, if -,' ' ' / Afx, ',,. -e,.., mPtIllivV:-.11,k,-,,,, . T / „. .0.- . „„ , ,,- ..,,,„,„:„ „,.. .., ,o,- ..v,,,,, .„....._,,,,,!,,,,,,,,, .....;; . i d ,,,f .-- ..,-. / i , (,f-,, , f,, , ,,,,, , 4 ... ,,,,, „,.. P ' - °- /fr (; ' , e ' / c 1 • f Yakima ji,, e .%•",•-4,,, -*/1,-,7/16:' ,.." ,/ '' ' 4p., -' ' .,,' ; -1,,,;.... t , .4'n /,',,, °' , •Cf ) '... .., 4.7 Elf m _ ... PC _ , ndall Ara bula •*:;,-4.47,:-/ . 4."*",..9,:;;', , ,% - , .- ,.., . i Cra 4 ' -/ 'i741:4. '''''''. ' •.: 4 ' Fehr 8c Peers . ,,,,,,,,,, ;,,-,--,: .;,,t„..,,,, --.,„, ,- . , • , 0,, , .,.-,..,1,4-. Ar",; ' q0,' ,,) . .,,,,,,',_ ..,.. - ,,e.%-..-..../..-,,f-4.,, '': / je p ; 45 ,r,:''''' ,./ .41 ' ' ' ., '• V :-/' ',..; , / CREDITS Steering Committee Restaurant/Winery City Council Joe Morrier John Cooper Katherine Goodson Steve Pinza Micah Cawley, Mayor Joe Mann Mike Broadhead Laura Rankin Jessica Moskwa Maureen Adkison Steve Pinza Jessica Moskwa Tony Harrelson Kathi Bonlender Sara Bristol Brad Christianson Laura Rankin Ivone Petzinger Rick Ensey Nancy Rayner Dave Hansen Kathy Coffey John Baule Manuel Luguin North Front Street Association/ Dave Ettl Westside Group Patti Schneider Dave Dian Nancy Rayner David Tompkins Bill Lover Anita Monoian Doug Rich George Pechtel Patti Schneider Luz Gutierrez Bill Lover Corday Trick Brad Christianson City of Yakima Verlynn Best Sara Bristol Tony O'Rourke, City Manager Dave McFadden Kathy Coffey Downtown Hotels Joan Davenport Lisa Vallejo John Cooper Sean Hawkins Technical Advisory Committee Wanda Riel Jessica Viveros Steve Osguthorpe Glenn Denman James Scott Jim Steelman Brittany Udelhofen Royale Schneider Joseph Rosenlund Luis Guitterez Roger Peterson Consultants Dana Kallevig Jay Seely Crandall Arambula PC Mark Soptich Steve Osguthorpe Arts Groups George Crandall, Principal Ken Mehin Bruce Benson Mary Place Jan Lowell Don Arambula, Principal Kevin Futrell Jeff Schneider Elizabeth Miller Andy Grannito Jason Graf, Project Manager Kenneth Wilkinson Noel Moxley George Pechtel Brenda Payne John Gasperetti Jim Fitch Stakeholders Stephanie Clevenger Fehr & Peers- Transportation Property Owner /Real Estate Kendra Breiland Joe Morrier Elizabeth McGree Entertainment /Theater /Festival Ariel Davis Joe Mann Moriet Miketa Kathi Mercy Ellie Strosahl Larry Hull Jerry Mellen Steve Caffrey David Rogers Roger Wilson Gay Parker Don Eastridge Pat Strosahl Rich Austin Trolley Group Bob Desgrosellier Ken Johnson Jeff Peters Ed Neel Karl Pasten Paul Edmondson TABLE OF CONTENTS PLAN ELEMENTS Introduction 6 Fundamental Concept 8 City Center Concept 10 Land Use 12 Circulation 14 PROJECTS Game - Changer & Essential Projects 18 Yakima Plaza 20 'Retail Main Street' & Public Market 22 Yakima Avenue 24 Downtown Parking Strategy 26 Diversion Study 28 Policy Updates 29 Zoning Ordinance Updates 30 Design Guidelines 33 Downtown Street Standards 36 IMPLEMENTATION Introduction 42 Implementation Oversight 43 Schedule 44 Action Plans 45 Yakima Plaza Retail Main Street Public Market Yakima Avenue Downtown Parking Strategy Diversion Study Policy Updates Zoning Ordinance Update Design Guidelines Downtown Street Standards Retail Strategy 55 Finance 57 YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN 1 3 ,/,4././. i" %'. rr 1 isi app \e''.---A ,• , ypr ;-,..401,2 , / xi l / , -' i ' /• NFL ,, „- ,/ • �' 4:;, f /s/ ' F. } ` ✓ leg �? O� 7 � i r ?T I i 1Y .r � :��� PLAN ELEMENTS INTRODUCTION The Yakima Downtown Master Plan Project Summary identifies 2013 the essential concepts, land use, transportation and implementation Pro'ect Work Sco • e Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sep framework elements for the core commercial area of the Central Business Starting ■ District along Yakima Avenue and the surrounding vicinity. 1 Analyze Existing Conditions and Prepare Base Map Kick -Off Meeting with City Staff; Committee and Stakeholder Meetings; Public Workshop The Downtown Master Plan: Summary of Project Goals and Meeting Findings Retail Market Performance Research • Builds upon the recently implemented streetscape improvements Retail Supply and Demand Review along Yakima Avenue which includes new sidewalks, street lighting, n Designing and other amenities; The Plan suggests refinements and additional L Develop Alternatives that Respond to Project Goals City Staff Meeting; Committee Meetings; improvements for Yakima Avenue and other areas Public Workshop Identify Preferred Alternative Perform Technical Traffic/Transportation Review of • Provides an implementation 'road map' for creating a successful Preferred Alternative transformation of Downtown Yakima to a vibrant destination Retail Development Opportunity • Provides the basis for the creation of a Downtown Subarea plan and Implementin completion of a SEPA (State Environmental Policy Act) checklist by Prepare Project Summa Docum City Staff Meeting; Final Committee Meetings; City staff following the conclusion of this planning effort Public Meeting Retail Recruitment and Retention Strategy A prime objective of the planning effort was to provide a 'retail strategy' for Downtown. To achieve this objective the City hired a consultant to prepare a Downtown Yakima Retail Market Study for the study area. This Project Goals Plan supports and incorporates the findings in the retail market study. Identified by Stakeholder Meetings and Public Workshop #T CIRCULATION The Yakima Downtown Master Plan project was initiated in March of • Enhance the Downtown Pedestrian Experience • Make Yakima Avenue a Destination 2013 and completed in September of 2013. The Plan addresses issues • Create Bike - Friendly Streets and supports the goals identified by the citizens of Yakima, including • Locate a Downtown Trolley Downtown stakeholders, City staff, elected officials and the general LAND USE public. • Downtown is a Shopping & Entertainment Destination (Retail) • Create a Central Gathering Space (Plaza) • Embrace Yakima's Cultural Diversity &Heritage (Mercado) • Encourage Downtown Investment • Ensure Adequate & Convenient Parking • Cultivate Local Retail & Business Development • Improve Downtown Safety • Establish Development Guidelines & Standards • Preserve /Enhance Historic Buildings • Increase Downtown Housing Options • Create a Family- Friendly Downtown 6 1 PLAN ELEMENTS STUDY AREA & STUDY INFLUENCE AREAS • — We' -1� 0 I r Nom.. `:► f-++r- ,_ t: . w , ,.._ . — , I .,::: --- • 1 1 , —,.... 1.1--m _, _ JID .� _ �_. - - -- - - - - •fit - : * I�fu .� _ , , 1 , t i_ g • • w — 1 ' �� fer„ ,-, V . ' — i iL . • . � i R is__ C .• Lincoln Avenue J 2r • . ; _ - ;(dam. - i .� ,4 ''` . ' � • .. -r = -`T Ili cit s +,, i. St I Area ,.. � R i ' t t-..,-,_. t; 1. ,-- e� I ..A.,1 - - = _ - ,-- ••1a- - . It I W #., f . - } - I �.�, - �_ . I -_�! -a� .S N ! /.' • • ; - ^•� K W _. ,♦ '- -- ,• f ' t. �. - . � y , 1 1 . , . •• - ' `-0 ., 0 STUDY AREA . . + .. ,i ° CBS ±�'' - '1 ,.' I . t — t • i I l r _a _ v� f _ • _ _ � I Ima ventrc$ M � 1,_,, � u l � � :�:... � - ' r'_ I L .��.t_ -J T M.- r� i•. ... v✓r _ • ° 1 .. � •c- e ti ��: I�A•.� .. , ri__ .1 r•i.. .(�_ �� f ar ^• mss -- ., : . _ — __- -. • _ . -tudl In fluence Area .., T • u �., . € • � L' .. - - - ° ' —. .. - Walnut Street "'� s ," a. s C r ` _ __ - _ - ill r, , t j 1 ; "4II, _ j i #. ° -- 1 ''_' 4 -;::::t - I .'S'• ti 4D . 1 '.. - ^ '"1 . 84 417_ , ,' *-=- :i t _,,,, fi g . t =_17 - --.. _ 1: ..-- 1 , - . e;4 - . f - 0j _ ' i .,u.a. ` _ "` 1d, ' -,�1 „_.,,.t' • 411; ' • >+� ?,� !!-t -.. .'A ii, & -- - -- =i l : i1..1�F YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN 1 7 FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPT The Plan provides an integrated land use and transportation framework • Envisions Yakima Avenue as a 'complete street' where the needs incorporating complementary and supportive plan elements. The Master of the pedestrians, cyclists, motorists, and transit requirements are Plan: addressed equally. Two distinct street features for Yakima Avenue • Divides the study area into distinctive 'centers' that support and support and strengthen adjacent land uses. To calm traffic and strengthen existing assets — historic buildings, development establish Yakima Avenue as a destination rather than a conduit patterns, and existing attractors for through traffic, a reduction of travel lanes from four to two is envisioned. The street is also envisioned as a 'Signature Street' incorporating a significant amount of additional greenery to enhance the pedestrian environment and reduce the scale of the roadway. CITY CENTER BOULEVARD DISTRICT CENTER PARKWAY IIT- - _ t �, i ' ! �� , t 1 71.•, 1 \ J. �. . . %or If • � � 111\ , 7 5 . .. ,,,, '&0:4,, - 1, 1, • _, ::: 10 ,.. c - S-:: - ..--- . 7 • r-- ' ! ? / J ' - ' • Heart of the Downtown Yakima Avenue as a Destination Nodes of Activity Yakima Avenue as a Green Street • Private investment is focused • Yakima Avenue is enhanced • Hubs of retail activity are • Parkways have a greater emphasis around a multi - purpose public to prioritize the pedestrian established outside the City on 'mobility'— movement plaza that will provide a location from Front to Naches; Special Center at key intersections where through the district rather than for year -round civic gatherings consideration and emphasis is pedestrian- and street - oriented an emphasis on creating a • Focus of Retail opportunities are given to intersection crosswalks development patterns exist destination concentrated along Chestnut, to ensure that areas north and • Centers are envisioned to include • Along these street segments, Front and Second serving as the south of Yakima are seamlessly specialty uses, 'incubator' or the median is omitted to center of street - oriented retail integrated similar uses that support but do accommodate a continuous left activity not only for the study area • Additional greenery is added to not compete with the City Center turn lane for essential mid -block but all of the City of Yakima 'humanize' the street; A median access to existing auto - oriented • Existing uses such as the Yakima and curbside landscaping are uses; Curbside landscaping is Mall, government services and featured enhanced theaters are integrated and strengthened or re- purposed 8 1 PLAN ELEMENTS FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPT - - -- - - - - - -- � — ��Rp (5 MIN(�TF Lincoln Avenue . . . x � e ∎ W j � � MLKJrBoulevard • . I . O`S RIGT CEN � `S .�R IGT CEN ` � � .t FR '� O`S .�RIGT CE/V . t , 1 e � s �1 1 I Yakima Avenue . PARKWAY BOULEVARD i II j i l r �) r i ,....r. r , � � I � , '� Chest r. venue II - r - f 0 . . e. __J ` % Walnut Street 0. . d — - - - -- - --.-- — - - - -- a d w a a w a d a� d w a Spruce Street c > d s > ° Q > Q d in in Q Q s Q Q n n s n s N t S t -o O C O t S S S d X O L d i i N L O a K an In In LL LL F In LL LL LL In 1— LL z In W Pine Street YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN 1 9 CITY CENTER CONCEPT RETAIL POSITIONING FRAMEWORK (Downtown Yakima Retail Market Study) The City Center reestablishes the historic core of Downtown as the heart ' eart — _ ""' ' 5 ' ` � _ - of the City. The City Center Concept includes: e , �: • • Yakima Plaza— Establishes a central gathering space for activities A new 'downtown living room' will be created. The plaza will be - designed to accommodate numerous year-round activities and LL A Street provide an 18 -hour active, vibrant and distinctive space. The plaza will strengthen and build upon existing assets such as the existing Millennium Plaza art installment, Capitol Theater, and Federal Building. • New Parking Options— Ensures adequate and convenient parking „ V Chestnut Avenue's r A partnership must be developed between the City and the '- = +� • 1t k- business community to ensure parking in close proximity to retail is reserved for customers. Short -term and long -term strategies for retail - ip ', •_ . � 1 = A - ,� ' and employee parking include opening up new parking west of the 3 — z' =. - , - v w - plaza by refurbishing the Dragon Inn Parking Garage, opening up new 0 High Priority M Medium Priority M Low Priority on- street parking by converting some parallel to angled, entering into agreements with downtown banks for evening and night time parking, • 'Chestnut Main Street'— Reestablishes the Downtown as the refurbishing a City owned lot for employee parking on 3rd and Walnut community's destination for retail shopping and entertainment and new parking policies to ensure the best spots in Downtown are for The focus of retail activity will be concentrated along a new 'Chestnut customers while moving employees to perimeter locations. Additionally, Main Street'. The street will provide a location for the retail mix the City should examine opening a ramp off of 3rd street to the former dentified in the Downtown Yakima Retail Market Study. This initial mall parking garage for employee, special event and overflow retail phase of downtown retail development will consist of over 130,000 parking. As demand grows overtime, a new retail parking garage could square feet of ground floor, street oriented, pedestrian friendly retail be constructed at a location west of the plaza. Parking for the public storefronts along Chestnut and parcels fronting the planned plaza and market is envisioned as on- street diagonal parking along Front Street public market. An additional 190,000 square feet of retail opportunities and within a new lot at the intersection of Front and Walnut. are envisioned along Front, Second, Third and Yakima Avenue. • Public Market— Embraces Yakima's unique history, cultural diversity and heritage A new regional retail 'anchor', the public market, is located along the western edge of Front Street between Chestnut and Yakima Avenue. The site can accommodate a 4,800 square -foot market building and a 4,800 square -foot covered vendor structure that may be used year round. Additional uses may include a Museum and Cultural Center. 10 1 PLAN ELEMENTS CITY CENTER a, �, i rforman o ir n o 1 .,. Park 1 _ § r - —E. . . i. LL , __ - In _. _. F 1 - LL • ■ A Street _. [[ 4r I Public o Em to ee Mall Re tail 1 m • , , Parking Parking Redevelopment E � . New Parking u Entry's _ 1 i 2 [ r 1.7., I , I t P ark o ' l l. r d' ■ ■ INN . , ] ■ I Yakim. a 1 It. . r1 _., ark 4 111 w I _ g - - r ( : i N • 4 ■•%' ''l r I- >- 1 Ilt Irri: r AI ' - . - . r 1 `rte }■ Fe O . O . O 1 r . a 1 _ • , hi. 0 r � = Chestnut Avenue '..c�• a 111' `r 1 1 1 1 O 1 1 1 1 1 I � ansit Public enter .... ____ Market r" 1 '' --�"` • Parking I c �I � � \F ,t 1 M New Development () Yakima Plaza ID Public Market M Parking O New Parking Options O 'Chestnut Main Street' (Long term) YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN 111 LAND USE The land use framework provides a retail /commercial strategy for grouping complementary uses into two districts within the study corridor. The framework respects historic development patterns, and reflects community desires, real estate market trends, and projected growth capacity. Existing healthy or desirable uses are strengthened and sites for infill and redevelopment are maximized. Within the framework there is an emphasis on establishing distinctive and vibrant ground -floor uses. A mix of use is promoted for upper floors of existing and new buildings. CITY CENTER MIXED USE DISTRICT CENTER MIXED USE r . riman 0 . . , . -7 1111 I .41 _ II IV w -14 • •1 R Ev • � ,v, -., _ - I- - w -_ Heart of the Downtown Nodes of Activity Currently the core is characterized by commercial, office, historic street - oriented Currently the area is characterized by auto - oriented commercial, visitor - oriented retail, regional entertainment, and City and County government uses. The lodging, the Yakima Convention Center and other service uses. The framework framework envisions: envisions: • An expansion of and requirement for, edge -to -edge ground -floor retail, • Retail development at key intersections where street - oriented retail (the sale of goods, entertainment, eating and drinking establishments storefronts exist or where possible redevelopment parcels are located; exclusively) along identified street frontages. Retail ground -floor uses will These 'nodes' are intended to complement City Center retail and offer surround, activate, and animate the future plaza opportunity sites for entrepreneurial tenants that benefit from proximity to • Promotion of new mixed use development on vacant or underutilized the City Center mixed -use district parcels. Where viable, upper floor residential apartments, condominiums or • Healthy existing or new commercial uses beyond these nodes that may be office uses would be encouraged either pedestrian- oriented or auto - oriented • A strong pedestrian bias and a highly- active street environment • Strengthened visitor - oriented uses; Additional Convention, Center- • A prohibition of new auto - oriented uses; existing uses are de- emphasized supportive uses that complement the existing hotel and dinning offerings would be promoted • Retention and strengthening of all government uses • Repurposing the Yakima Mall; Uses would include retail along Yakima Avenue and Third. Redevelopment would consider government, museum, art gallery, and residential uses that will complement existing core uses • De- emphasis on long -term surface parking and an emphasis on development of a strategically located retail parking structure 12 1 PLAN ELEMENTS LAND USE J J 1 J Lincoln Avenue MLK Jr Boulevard A Street ai d in S C ■ ■ ■ z Yakima Avenue Yakima Plaza Chestnut Avenue r C Walnut Street d + z d w m z z w z m d w ; d Spruce Stre Q ac > d > ac 1 to d in d s > > Q > > to -o n in c Q Q s Q c Q + 4 to c n s d n s S t i -a p C +' o -a i S S S N X o L d N L o N X in to to LL LL 1— to u- LL E to 1 — LL z to W Pine Street M City Center Mixed Use M District Center Mixed Use M Public Spaces ■ Required Ground -Floor Retail YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN 113 CIRCULATION The prime objective of the circulation framework is to re- establish all The Yakima Avenue corridor from Seventh Avenue to Ninth Street is over Downtown roadway corridors as a 'complete streets' where the needs of one and a quarter miles in length, which is beyond a comfortable walking all travel modes — motor vehicles, transit, bicycles, and pedestrians are distance. To increase accessibility to corridor destinations, bicycle and provided for in a balanced manner. trolley 'pedestrian- accelerator' infrastructure are envisioned. Yakima Avenue is envisioned to become a 'signature street' that would attract new private investment and strengthen existing uses. The street would: • Build upon the streetscape improvements that have recently been completed • Include additional landscaping to improve the appearance of the downtown and create a more inviting atmosphere PEDESTRIAN AUTO BICYCLE TROLLEY ,S y ti _ r - . -- , ,, 3 -1,i_ . WIT • • _ - _ - - - - 'RI, Prioritized over all travel modes Traffic Calmed Yakima Avenue Reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled Pedestrian - Accelerator • Yakima Avenue is designed • A reduction in roadway capacity • A network of on- and off- • The existing historic Yakima Valley (especially at crosswalks) for the from four to two travel lanes is street bicycle routes provides Trolley service is extended along most vulnerable— children, the proposed. The 'road diet' will connections between the Yakima Avenue; A future extension elderly and those with disabilities free -up space for constructing neighborhoods west of Seventh to the Mill District redevelopment • Additional street furniture such bicycle and pedestrian Avenue to the City, District and site is proposed as pedestrian - scaled lighting, infrastructure and landscaping Convention Centers. • Alternative alignments crossing benches and bicycle racks are • The road would accommodate • A Protected Bikeway along Yakima the existing freight rail corridor included essential daily service vehicles Avenue provides a comfortable are identified. A Yakima (e.g.- FedEx or UPS delivery dedicated route— separated from Avenue at -grade crossing trucks) and emergency vehicles vehicle traffic by a raised curb, for of the existing freight tracks riders of all ages and abilities. is preferred. An alternative Walnut Street underpass route would be constructed if an at -grade crossing cannot be accommodated 14 1 PLAN ELEMENTS CIRCULATION Lincol7Avenue 114111111 , , ... — — - — - — — — — — - . -- ■, M11104BoTalevard ••••A••• 1 • I, ■ • i i `• ■ / ` f • If A St Fr i �� C -� r I— 7 , Ilr, .___ s MilliEn Avenue 41. r- r- r t Ir r ( n - MI 1 i • t i Chestnut Avenue `• . � / `�� r te . 'Il r ` ^ • IL■ M t , . • ■ ■ Walnut!Street 4% ••• .71 ...' ' .. . • ..., • ..... ' . s ...• c a a w a a Spruce Street s > a) Q > Q a) d d `' in in Q Q s Q C Q n in - n. s a) � s a) s s - a s _c s 3 u a o a u 3 u d K w o s d s s d s o as x rn In In LL LL 1— In LL LL LL v) - LL Z N W • Pine Street Yakima • Valley 4 Trolleys ., ■ Yakima Complete Street ■ Protected Bikeway, Proposed ■ Arterial Parallel Routes ■ Bike Lanes, Existing ■ Trolley Route, Existing ■ Bike Routes, Existing ■ Trolley Line, Proposed ■ •■ Bike Routes, Planned YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN 115 "A 1' ` ` \ , fir+ ` ler //:::,- cv/„, 4, V ,i ‘ ,„,_., ,, , , , „,,, ., , .„. ,..,.„,„ 4. ,, , ,... .,. 4 . #,, :,„,,, ,, . ,,,, -) �, 8, Y`'` ' \ „:,'\ \ ` _„f r y \ � �:it 0. / \ Z' - 4 ' , , • -.\,- ',rev, , It ..-,--- ts-V4,-•. tit. Ii o 0 *, �� `. _ , yam <4\ t '^ ',`'.,' '.. \ •„, 4 # i; ' ' *''': 44Nk‘ 7 . \., @ .5 � r ti p , @`��. V. !■ . ... \ ' , . \,,, A \), GAME - CHANGER & ESSENTIAL PROJECTS Establishing implementation momentum early is essential for the long term success of the Yakima Downtown Plan. Symbolically, initiation of these projects provides evidence to the general public, downtown stakeholders, and investors that the City of Yakima is financially committed to Downtown revitalization. The Yakima Plaza is 'game- changing' in that it fundamentally changes the Downtown investment environment. Strategically, the Plaza is phased to 'set the table' for later projects. Essential projects represent a 'menu' of implementation projects that would be initiated and substantially completed within five years of plan adoption. The game- changing and essential projects are identified and brief descriptions of key actions are described on the following pages. The order of projects does not imply priority or importance. At the passage of the five -year timeframe, the implementation strategy should be assessed and updated. Additionally, consideration should be given to updating the Plan. 18 1 PROJECTS GAME - CHANGER & ESSENTIAL PROJECTS • '` Lincoln Avenue •------------ mmiImg--------- = =------ - - - - -, ` , ``.` te e , ``� �� MLKJr. Boulevard 1 ``. • r----- ■xmup - - - - - -- or 0 — 4 - = 1m = = = = - -7■NE N. 1 i • 1 • I • i 1 i ♦ . v , . 1 w— f r� , , • 1 f , 1 � _ �,_ — ,� A St 1 I in - i r N Q Q 47,. + rl s N f r .r r r r ik- r i I` it - r r p. r ;� A 2 '' �`. 0 • ' ! r , r- I . r- - " r�. 1 ' I— I I ' - 'i i I h © 0 lir M i • tk Chestnut Avenue i 1 LJy © E _ IN 7 r ^ � , w lr r , 1 r— t `` �' I `` � Walnut Street i = = = +mm.i- - - - = —= = - - - -- — =— �� - - - = }J . . . . -,, - - - - - - - - - � -- -- - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - a) a) z a) c w a ai a� a Spruce Street > c d _c > ° Q > Q d in in Q Q _c - Q n in to _c d to s d t S i i S S S > i V N o N V i '5 V N X : o L d i N L o N K a1 In In LL u_ F In u_ LL u_ In F u_ z In iL Pine Street Game - Changer Project Essential Projects 1 Yakima Plaza 2 Retail Main Street (Front & Chestnut Streets) 5 Downtown Parking Strategy 8 Zoning Ordinance Update 3 Public Market 6 Diversion Study 9 Design Guidelines 4 Yakima Avenue 7 Policy Updates 10 Downtown Street Standards YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN 1 YAKIMA PLAZA Intent Establishing a public assembly space is an essential first step in revitalizing Downtown Yakima. It is a 'game- changer'. The most notable benefits include: • Creating a multi - purpose, dedicated space for year -round civic activities • Providing a focus for new ground -floor retail and upper -floor housing or employment development PROPOSED PROJECT — LOOKING NORTHWEST PROPOSED PROJECT — LOOKING SOUTHWEST 1. ��� ��. ► � _ Orion 4 — .� i Cinemas �� l P I�w �'���� +' � ' $ , irk mini, �� `�. > '_ • • ••• , , .....db, • ; OA Op:. . . t - t ?lc , Orion . Cinemas � ♦ fi e '- � t y./' • � A '1‘ t �. , Capitol Olive d Federal Building Theater Garen S . i kk l * � � 4. A 20 I PROJECTS PROPOSED PROJECT EXISTING CONDITIONS II' , an. h - 'UP �► l''--11 , .1 ft, r _ • i � - t s - - -� _ .., f o. Ill .. • YAKIMA AVENUE ■ - — YAKIMA AVENUE ,.. • Olive F ' + i t • ...L. ' • , & 1 • 1 ,_ . _ f' t Garden • r t � ► } 9 ._ . i`4 F_ I 1 1— O'. = F. - - IRestrooms c� y U-10 ��� I's'+ , �Il �d I' ■ `" • tit • Fu , e' v J..�sJtlt w 1— • • Z -� 0 ► {� ;^j . Z 1. . -.% • %. � . 4"*.. 2 • • ,,.,..„ • `�• lag • .. ,,„, • • ..._. ......• ki.,......,,,, ;_i, . Pavilion ` . _ r _ ! ,r r lirl' r CHESTNUT AVENUE _ l i CHESTNUT AVENUE f ■ • • Orion ` 1 07.14.-- it _w_�'fr+!•. • j1 Cinemas i _ Project elements include: Site Area: 195,000 SF (4.5 AC) • Preservation and integration of the existing Millennium Plaza art elements Existing Use: City -Owned Parking Lot • A family-oriented fountain and lawn 'Fun Zone' Public Right -of -Way • An 'orchard' of ornamental flowering trees with areas for sitting and relaxing surrounding the Millennium Plaza and Family Fountain Fun Zone • Paved multi - purpose area (140' by 200' minimum dimensions) that includes electric and water utility facilities suitable for a variety of events • Retail pavilion and public restrooms • Special gateway streetscapes at the intersections of Second and Third Streets and Yakima Avenue • Redesign and reconstruction of Third, Chestnut and Second Streets surrounding the Plaza to be traffic calmed, curbless, and specially paved as an extension of the multi - purpose Plaza area YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN I 21 'RETAIL MAIN STREET' & PUBLIC MARKET WENATCHEE PUBLIC MARKET EXAMPLE Intent Front Avenue and Chestnut Avenue right -of -way improvements are intended to support new pedestrian - friendly, street - oriented — storefronts. w - �, { I• ra +1 r r 3-",, ` * j Retail Main Street �, - ; , : i At a minimum, the streetscape design would: - `` L « ..vim • Reduce travel lane widths to accommodate wider sidewalks and "` reduce pedestrian street crossing distances - • Eliminate /prohibit turn -lane pockets ' • Provide curbside parking adjacent to existing or future retail development • — '.: 111 - 4 4 7 II 111/1 ...r il • Eliminate /prohibit parking lot access driveways on Chestnut; `�••• A I , • r - Minimize alley driveway impacts on the pedestrian environment if_ - � � n s _ _ - • Provide for canopy street trees and incorporate existing healthy - 4 street trees into the landscape plan wherever possible — - '°-¢ �' • Include pedestrian - scaled ornamental street /walkway lighting Public Market • Incorporate special shade structures such as arbors along Chestnut The development of a Public Market will provide an 'anchor' retail use • Provide at least one on street bicycle parking corral along Chestnut for the Chestnut 'Main Street' retail framework. The proposed Public Market and supportive parking lot sites should be assembled by the City • Include benches and public art for Public Market development. • Incorporate landscaped curb extensions at all intersections where on- street parking exists or is planned • Feature specially paved crosswalks at all intersections • Feature specially paved sidewalks similar in material and design to the Plaza and Public Market paving • Include tabled intersections or depressed curbs at the Chestnut & First and Chestnut & Front intersections • Tighten intersection radii (25' max) Front Street improvements in particular would: • Not preclude a future trolley trackway and potential station platform • Be designed to accommodate Public Market functions; Consider Temporary barriers (bollards) to limit traffic access for special events 22 I PROJECTS PROPOSED PROJECT EXISTING CONDITIONS ■ . i _ YAKIMA AVE NUE - r YAKIMA AVENUE w 1 w w r _k !F i UJ i Pi Or 0 .. • r, - 7 * 1 7, ce 1 1 Y Z, .. _ I r 1 � L 1 .. F ` Z * a 1 • CHESTNUT AVENUE 1 CHESTNUT AVENUE =i i Y �� - i 1. 415'Siliir�i , II' , . - 1 - • 177 I . NG 1 .�� ft 1 1:1]' _ • r I r r _.. , F� i PAR 1 y _ ..•. .... .... .. .. ... . . ..., _ . . 1 .. ____ . • _ a.. ... YID .__ , The Retail Main Street improvements would include the reconstruction of Retail Main Street Area: 108,857 SF (2.5 AC) all surfaces, including burying of any above grade electrical power lines Existing Use: Yakima Street Right - of - Way or cable wires. The design of the Public Market would include similar Public Market Site Area: .63 AC (27,442 SF) materials and finished as the Retail Main Street and Plaza improvements. Existing Use: BNSF Lot The character of the Public Market would reflect the culture, history and setting of Yakima and be compatible with the existing train depot Public Market Parking Site Area: 31,178 SF (.72 AC) structures north of Yakima Avenue. Existing Use: Retail Hardware Parking Wholesale Service Repair YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN I 23 YAKIMA AVENUE Intent Signature Street elements: Right -of way improvements to Yakima Avenue will create a more vibrant Boulevard • business climate and improved Downtown livability. Two different Awide landscape median treatments— 'Boulevard' and 'Parkway' are envisioned in response to • Left -turn lanes at key intersections the corridor length and adjacent land uses. The Boulevard will support ■ Curbside landscaping street - oriented retail development by creating a more pedestrian - scaled green streetscape within the City Center. The Parkway will create a more Parkway green pedestrian - friendly environment yet accommodate existing auto- • A continuous turn lane oriented commercial development outside the City Center. Improvements ■ Curbside landscaping to Yakima Avenue are only envisioned within the existing curb -to- curb and will preserve and strengthen recently completed sidewalk enhancements. TYPICAL BOULEVARD SECTION 1 }�� © T. " Ji J . _._ ±Opp r � ' ..,A .„ .Eit / 0 C.J• :' II 1 1 1 I I I I I I l if . o I f j5 I OO 1 A e ' 1 �+, Le O alliw W 0 O p ,- / 11:C ......_ ; 24 I PROJECTS Complete Street elements include: • Traffic calming design— Reduced number of travel lanes from four to • Enhanced key intersections — Landscaped curb extensions, special two crosswalk treatments, depressed corner curbs will be provided • Protected bikeways —On- street bike parking corrals at key locations • Adjusted signalization to reduce roadway speed • Provisions for future Trolley — Streetscape design that will include • Removal of all pedestrian activated crosswalk buttons double- tracks located in shared auto travel lanes; Station platforms • Prohibition of new driveway access — Existing driveways will be would generally be located two blocks apart throughout the new maintained if desired by current property owners or businesses corridor TYPICAL PARKWAY SECTION / ' . : . : a r r � 4 4f „ . , ,---.... 4 , ii ,o, 0 ,. . .....c.,.ft . O ei r '' i. ar 419 _ -- l ��� / � � OA Protected Bikeway (5') ® ' O Door Zone (3') I L ' ` .�_ Q Parking Lane Tree Wells Q� • One Travel Lane (Boulevard: 12' Parkway: 14') 0 0 O O Potential Trolley Lines in Traffic 0� „ „... V 0 O Boulevard: Median /Turn Lane (10') Parkway: Turn Lane (14') YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN I 25 DOWNTOWN PARKING STRATEGY LONG -TERM STRATEGY To address current and future parking demand, a phased strategy will 1 require a: New Parking Supplemental A STREET Entrance Parking Short -Term Strategy —The temporary strategy for replacing the 220 _ - parking spaces displaced by Yakima Plaza will include: - �y r ii, • Examining the Dragon Inn parking garage as possible retail and i f . ,I , employee parking - net gain 100 spaces + i • Resurfacing and improving City lot at 3rd and Walnut for employee _ parking - net gain 65 spaces I • , , 1 .-- , . • Entering into agreements with nearby bank locations for usage of g g Y g their parking lots on nights and weekends for plaza, restaurant, and I. YAKIMAAVENUE theatre usage - net gain 80 spaces l Retail Parking ' • Expand on- street parking options on 2nd Street, 3rd Street and A Structure 7. ' Street - net gain 56 -60 spaces W I- 111 111 UJ The temporary strategy adds a total of 300 spaces for retail and employee o 1-o �� 1 parking. Z < ce ce To supplement additional retail customer parking, spaces would be ■ T AVENUE leased by the City in the Yakima Mall parking structure for retail, special event and downtown employee parking. To facilitate better utilization of I _ t Ir his structure, a new auto entry ramp and pedestrian vertical circulation j L , (elevators and stairways) access should be constructed. The location for J F-7_1_ I 11 I [ ' the new entry would be along Third Street. _ 1 i ,--- r Long -Term Strategy —The initial long -term startegy would be to acquire I' � ��' �,- ' and assemble the parcels south of the existing alley bounded by Second -' Street, First Street and Chestnut Avenue and construct a new municipal 111- i lot (160 spaces approximately) at this location. As retail demand grows, the parking lot would be replaced with a 400 -space municipal ...I parking structure. The parking structure would include ground -floor retail space lining Chestnut Avenue. A separate mixed -use building with ground -floor retail oriented to the Plaza and Second Street would be constructed. 26 I PROJECTS SHORT -TERM STRATEGY EXISTING CONDITIONS Mil a v v'1 l It lATw•.r Sup . I " II a.. e , T I i AL • "' A STREET . ' " : Parking ` -- A STREET - _ ' 1 ' I •.• - • Mil i CITY f c�iC .. 1 - 06. PARKING 1 it + LOT — q • . •- -. - J1f /4 . r• 1 �— �. , d ,. . Pig f - m_ !. 80 Spaces YAKIMA AVENUE Y - 7 YAKIMA AVENUE "*�' Night & Weekend + • _ F _ 1 ..� �N w !I . 4+rf/� S F 3 . �" w rI� :"% F - . - W W 1 W tJI J P - 7 . �� W W W - NI ?JJ :. J I_7 - W W , !� � . • 1 � � `, ti R � W . � F '---. "— 's!1�1,'ei CITY F a. �' I ; P " : ' ! V w 60 Spaces = v , pi, , . PARKING - 1v, w x ., 1 �i i •• {.i ; Or - p (vas ,.v City Parking Lot f �' • u� Z 4 ya, LOT ... i a F, - LL . 1 , s - ce � d LL l`H' to ~ ��•f �+ .rP °—., 0 �,♦ - r : = t� i. ,t w. Mi_ O CHESTNUT AVENUE i_ rr r CHESTNUT AVENUE r.= W !° - :a..•..,.. r ,C v. ..w - • � yam.... * y _ y I wti.. ti ■ 2; , ...ter., ; • 11111 i._. F .AI-. _ • i . ` ii•r.: a "."J 60 Spaces , ° ' . 100 S aces • , I i s : _ _ - ; - r - . • ar . i P City Parking Lot ; �� t9�` _ � • Dragon Inn I� I ' , + "- -=i i J( 1 r i 1 WALNUT AVENUE l WALNUT AVENUE 1 -----.1 [r Mft-' -- : -;: " k -■ . t1 s . #mi=l' " W - '' '1 1111" • ,... - Alikaislii ' 1 .:. • ' ' iiii eilliaba Iriga' ' Existing City Parking Lot Area: 220 Spaces Existing Use: Parking Lot (City Owned) YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN I 27 DIVERSION STUDY Intent TRAFFIC CONCEPT Preliminary traffic assessment of Yakima east -west arterials— Yakima, .' { fir _` Walnut, MLK, and Lincoln Avenues indicates that there is excess roadway ;„ :. � �: j 4 ,. capacity to meet travel demand today and in the future 2035 planning —' T.rN r/,.., horizon. To reduce the current Yakima Avenue roadway capacity from - . . - ,.. ■ four travel lanes to two will require transferring 25% of the vehicles that w +� _ .A' use the street for trips through Downtown to an alternative route(s). To : identify what 'by-pass' route(s) is most appropriate and effective will T require additional traffic analysis and land use planning to assess the i� ,gfi �i impacts and benefits. The Divers Study should identify methods and : _ '� . = � r Yaki Avenu ,".'*41.: locations where diversion would occur. - .:,:o T 1 n r : - `.f . r I " +.? 1 ' " Potential diversion elements may include: , n ig1IL r - • Wayfinding ., .,. • Physical diverters such as roundabouts, channelized right turn lanes • y . i - 'o • or trap lanes 7 s.. ' ` 4" i r .. l PRELIMINARY TRANSPORTATION A 1 ' Li i `, Diverter ' II Wayfinding . : Roundabout) Signs • ::a+• - 28 I PROJECTS POLICY UPDATES Intent In compliance with the Washington Growth Management Act (RCW Yakima Urban Area 36.70A.080(2)), this Master Plan document will need to be adopted by the City Council as an amendment to the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Comprehensive Plan 2025 Plan, 2025. This Master Plan will form the basis for a City- initiated and staff - prepared Comprehensive Plan Amendment which may be characterized 1111 MEM as a Sub Area Plan, and also include amendatory text to the Transportation Plan Element and Capital Facilities Plan Element to reflect proposed changes under this Plan. These actions are important to ensure that future _ _ -- projects described in the Yakima Downtown Master Plan Comprehensive Plan are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Compliance with the State Environmental PolicyAct(SEPA) is also required as part of the Comprehensive Plan process. The Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, 2025 was adopted with an "Integrated SEPA /GMA Document" as provided in WAC 197 -11 -210 to -238. The SEPA review for this Comprehensive Plan Amendment will reflect this context. Transportation Plan Update In addition, the Master Plan outlines some key follow -up studies, as Sections of the Yakima Urban Transportation Plan 2025 will need to be well as adjustments to the zoning regulations of the Central Business updated to include consideration of the Master Plan. City Council should District, proposed design guidelines and other implementation measures. approve funding for the Diversion Study to more definitively determine These items may follow adoption of or be produced in concert with the necessary updates to the Transportation Plan. The study should: Comprehensive Plan Amendment and SEPA review. • Identify and incorporate the necessary routes and infrastructure changes required to distribute traffic to parallel routes that allow for Comprehensive Plan Update the conversion of Yakima Avenue from a 4 -lane section to a 3 -lane Necessary text changes to the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan section 2025 will need to be prepared for the Planning Commission and City • Include a list of necessary capital projects and costs for roadway Council review. Planning staff will: capacity improvements, streetscape enhancements, bicycle and • Prepare comprehensive plan text amendments and necessary legislation pedestrian improvements and way finding as needed for each element of the Comprehensive Plan • Consider re- classifying Yakima Avenue's functional classification based • Complete a SEPA checklist on proposed cross - section changes YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN I 29 ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATES Intent Key ordinance updates might include: The intent of the zoning ordinance updates is to clarify and strengthen • Adjustments to foster mixed -use development and increase essential permitted land use types, site design and improvementstandards. Downtown vitality, existing regulations that limit or prohibit upper - Wherever possible unnecessary permitted uses and inappropriate site floor uses should be revised or amended to maximize residential design and improvement standards should be eliminated. density (dwelling units per acre) and /or intensity (floor area ratio). No maximum densities or intensities should be applied. Instead, Yakima Urban Zoning Ordinance Update maximum heights or other means of controlling compatibility, The study area is primarily regulated under Central Business District (CBD) massing, and building form should be enacted as part of updates to zoning requirements, with a small portion zoned Light Industrial (M -1). the Site Design and Improvement Standards. The Yakima Downtown Plan land use framework is, for the most part, • Downtown Business Parking requirements should be reassessed. consistent with existing zoning. However, in some instances additional Currently, Downtown businesses are largely within the Parking regulation will be required to ensure that specific uses are required and Exempt Boundary (Zoning Ordinance 2012 -34 Figure 6 -1). As part of current uses are prohibited within the Downtown to meet the Yakima an Employee Parking Study, the feasibility of requiring either on -site Downtown Master Plan vision. To align current code requirements with parking or in- lieu -of fees to be assessed to provide off -site parking the Yakima Downtown Master Plan elements, two approaches to address should be assessed. inconsistencies might be to : 1. Maintain current zoning and provide additional or revised permitted Throughout Downtown, existing permitted conforming uses (Class 1) use tables. Additionally, provide new or revised site design and should be 'grandfathered' to remain, be improved upon, or sold and improvement development standards. operated 'as -is' until renovated as property owners deem necessary. 2. Create a new 'Downtown Master Plan Development Overlay' with all Furthermore, existing private property shown for public uses (such as uses subject to Type (2) and either Class (2) or Class (3) review using a park) would not be rezoned until the parcels are acquired by a public the Downtown Master Plan as a regulatory review guide. entity or transferred to public use by easement, dedication, or other means. 30 I PROJECTS Specific Permitted Use Updates There are two essential zoning ordinance permitted -use updates that must be addressed: • Existing permitted -use tables for the CBD zone should be updated to prohibit, provide restrictions, or set forth conditions -of -use upon auto - oriented uses ( drive - through windows of banks, restaurants, Yakima Avenue and other similar businesses) within the entirety of the City Center Mixed -use District and along the parcels fronting the length of Yakima Yakima Avenue. Plaza Chestnut Avenue _ ■ ■ ■ r • Requirement of ground-floor 'retail'—defined exclusively as the sale of goods, restaurants, and entertainment street frontages of Chestnut Avenue, Second Street fronting the plaza and Front Street parcels facing the public market (see graphic) should be required. . ., Exceptions for residential or office lobbies should be allowed/ reviewed as a conditional use. Prohibition of service bays, entrances N -0 to parking lots or service and loading bays should also be enacted. N o o L m in ■ Required Ground -Floor Retail / Build -to -Lines M City Center Mixed Use YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN 131 Site Design and Improvement Standard Updates To ensure that the Retail Main Street framework is active and animated, requiring additional 'form- based' building site design and facade design standards should be enacted: BUILD -TO -LINES ACTIVE EDGES I Al" . W la . iii v c I .5 m 3 m 30 6 I fm t.„ _ S ft rPCFSjd/d_44,a I e fini Floa 4 MI _11 WI174Oµ sv Build -to -Lines require a continuous 'street wall' Active edges are building frontages with direct sidewalk entries and a high degree of transparency. Active framing identified retail streets and the plaza edges increase visual and physical interaction between people inside and people outside of the buildings (minimum). A diagram that illustrates where and create a safe and vibrant pedestrian environment. Access to service/loading bays, and parking lot/garage ground floors of buildings must engage the entrances are prohibited along designated active -edge frontages. A required active edges diagram identifies property line directly should be provided as only building frontages where active -edge treatments is essential for the City Center Mixed -Use District. The suggested. Exceptions to these 'zero- setback' following active -edge criteria should be met for all ground floors throughout the City Center District: requirements might include— windows and • A minimum of70 percent transparent glass along ground -floor facades; frosted, tinted, reflective or walls recessed up to 18" from the property line other types of glass that diminish transparency should be prohibited to accommodate columns or other architectural • Primary ground -floor uses must be oriented to the public right -of -way elements. Conditional approval of deeper setbacks should be reviewed for: The following active -edge criteria should be met for all other land uses throughout the Downtown: • Dining and entertainment uses that intend to use the setback area for outdoor seating • Primary entrances must be oriented toward the street • Interruptions for accommodation of • Windows should be provided along facades; but no minimum percentage of transparency should be passageways, building lobbies, or private required courtyard entrances • Art walls, flower booths, newsstands or other activating uses are appropriate throughout 32 I PROJECTS DESIGN GUIDELINES Intent Design Guideline Content Yakima Downtown Design Guidelines would aid designers and developers The guideline document should be the primary tool for the design review in understanding the City's urban design expectations by providing process for any new project that occurs in the Yakima Downtown Plan a framework for an orderly discretionary review process that would area. It should be divided into four sections or 'Guideline Elements,' supplement and strengthen downtown regulatory codes. The guidelines each of which addresses a particular set of design concerns that affect would ensure a degree of order, harmony and quality within the built the Downtown environment. These guideline elements would include environment; they would foster the development of buildings and projects the following: that are attractive individually yet contribute to a downtown that is unified and distinctive as a whole. • Pedestrian Emphasis • Architecture Role of Design Guidelines • Lighting There should always be many ways of meeting a particular guideline. The guidelines should not prescribe specific design solutions, nor should they 'Signs be rigid requirements without flexibility. For each of these guideline elements, there should be an introductory The design guidelines should provide a descriptive template for page describing the intent of that section of guidelines, followed by maintaining and improving the urban character of Downtown, without specific guidelines. Each specific guideline should contain a descriptive dictating or prescribing a specific style or theme. The guidelines statement of the guideline itself as well as examples of recommended and should however foster the evolution of Downtown Yakima from an auto- not recommended applications, both listed in text form and illustrated dominated to a pedestrian - friendly downtown where buildings should be in photo examples. The visual examples should be included in each built edge -to -edge and engage public sidewalks. Moreover, the Design guideline element, as models for design and review purposes. They would Guidelines should ensure that new development does not treat existing provide designers, developers, and the Design Commission a means to older buildings as urban leftovers; lost and unattached fragments of effectively judge a building relative to appropriate and inappropriate the past. Rather, new construction and rehabilitation should respect design criteria. and build upon the few remaining unique qualities of Yakima's existing historic downtown. YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN 133 Yakima Character The guidelines should address Yakima's unique 'sense of place,' its special quality and personality. People's image of Yakima is that of an All- American town which is hospitable and family- oriented. They should address what gives Yakima this feeling, this 'character' as a unique collection of spaces and buildings, not simply a group of individual projects that could be anywhere. PEDESTRIAN EMPHASIS ARCHITECTURE LIGHTING SIGN . VI - 7 .;' - ' ■ i i . . r 4 , . ,-..i ;,.: - - '. , viti, i t,', _ . �- �. II II II II Il -,,,,40...A• . 1 II b ' . 1 U R 8 AN s �. "-- - — FAR E F . . ` — ` - 1 r c E R I ES N In Downtown Yakima, the pedestrian The Architecture Guidelines should Lighting should not only provide Signs should make it easy to locate should be the 'priority.' These promote quality development while nighttime security, but also encourage and identify businesses as well as guidelines should address the ways reinforcing the individuality and nighttime patronage of businesses. providing other information relevant in which buildings and spaces may spirit of Yakima. The guidelines Lighting should create an atmosphere to getting around and doing business be designed to create a convenient, should promote architectural types of festivity and activity, especially in Downtown. However, signs should comfortable, human-scaled indigenous to Yakima and /or the where special elements or places are never overwhelm either building or environment where people will want Northwest. Buildings in Yakima should concerned. Utilitarian application landscape. Moreover, signs should to be. seem to be 'at home', reflecting its of glaring, offensively - colored provide information in a highly graphic character and heritage, suiting its lights should not be appropriate for format that is complementary to climate, landscape, and downtown Downtown. downtown architecture. Tasteful urban setting. logos, symbols and graphics are encouraged. A strong pedestrian orientation should be encouraged for all signs. 34 I PROJECTS Design Review Process GUIDELINES 'CHECKLIST' EXAMPLE Projects should be evaluated for consistency with the Yakima Downtown - Master Plan, the Yakima Zoning Ordinance and the proposed Design ProjectNo.: Project Address: Date: NOT HIGH Guidelines. The Design Guidelines should be applied during City review Yes COMPLIES g p p g y APPLICABLE PRIORITY RIOR CONTEXT AND SITE of development applications. City staff should review development CS1 Natural Systems and Site Features ❑ A. Energy Use proposals in the Downtown and determine the appropriate review B Sunlight and NaturalVenulauon ❑ ❑ ❑ C. Topography ❑ ❑ ❑ procedures. Decisions to approve, approve with conditions, or denying D Plants and "abltat ❑ ❑, ❑ E. Water ❑ ❑ ❑ a proposal should be made by staff or by an appointed 'Design and CS2 Urban Pattern and Form A. Location m the Oty and Neighborhood ❑ ❑ ❑ Landmarks Commission'. Development projects should be reviewed to B Adjacent sites, Streets, and Open Spaces ❑ ❑ C. Relationship to the Block ❑ ❑ determine consistency with permitted uses and site design standards D "eight, Bulk, and Scale ❑ ❑ updated Zoning Ordinance, and substantial consistency with the A5 Em hasong Character of an u ghborh od Attnbut p g Y A. Empnasi�ing Positi °e Neighborhood Attributes ❑ L�J d ❑. Downtown Design Guidelines. Where a project is not found consistent B Local "ist° and Culture ❑ ❑ ❑ kr n Guidelines, staff or the Design and Landmarks PUBLIC Open with the Downtown Design g PL1 Open Space Connectivity impose conditions of approval requiring the project B Network of and Commission may p pp q g p J B walkways and Connections ❑ ❑ ❑ to be modified, or it can be established that design details or other site outd °or Uses andActi hies PL Walkability A s bd factors warrant finding for approval of the project without meeting the B. Saety y ❑ ❑ B. Safety and nd t Secuhty ❑ ❑ particular design guidelines. For those applications that are substantially C Weather g to ion V o o ❑ inconsistent with the guidelines, staff or the Design and Landmarks PL3 Street -Level Interaction Commission should also have the option to deny the development BRetallEdges o C. Residential Edges ❑ V ❑ request. PL4 Active Transportation A. Entry Locations and Relationships ❑ ❑ ❑ B. Planning Ahead for Cyclists ❑ ❑ All new development, additions, remodels, and renovations within the C Planning AheadforTransit ❑ ❑ ❑ DESIGN CONCEPT Downtown should be subject to design review for determination of J g DC1 Project Uses and Activities consistency with the Design Guidelines. The process for design review A Arrangement oflntenorUses ❑ ❑ Y g p g B. Vehicular Access and Circulation ❑ might be based on the extent of work proposed and whether it falls under C Parking and ServiceUses ❑ ❑ ❑ DC2 Architectural Concept one of three categories as follows: A Massing ❑ ❑ B. Architectural and Facade Composition ❑ ❑ 1. Exterior Maintenance and Repair (Administrative staff review only D Scaleand exturee`turalFeatures o o for all work requiring a building permit) E Forman ion DC3 Open n Spa Concept A. Building -open Space Relationship ❑ ❑ ❑ 2. Minor Exterior Modifications (Administrative staff review) B Open Space Uses and Activities 0 0 0 C De . sign 3. Major Exterior Modifications (Review before a newly appointed DC4 Materials A. Exterior Elements and Finishes d ❑ d 'Design and Landmarks' Commission) B sI V °❑ ❑ To aid the design review process the guidelines should be summarized D Trees, Landscape and "ardscapeMaterials ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ into a single, one page 'checklist' (see example). YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN 135 DOWNTOWN STREET STANDARDS Intent GENERAL REQUIREMENTS EXAMPLE Implementation of Downtown Street Standards will ensure that a complete- streets approach to circulation design is built as envisioned in the Yakima Downtown Master Plan. Additionally, the Standards would ensure that a unified, consistently applied design of streetscape �� N improvements are constructed throughout Downtown. The City, other ublic a encies, private utility companies and private developers would o * , " o p g p Y p p p y be required to adhere to the Standards when constructing all new street 3.0 improvements and any major replacement or repairs. The Standards document should include general requirements and y �' a I� design elements. SIDEWALK ROADWAY General Requirements The General Requirements should classify and locate downtown 'street RIGHT -OF -WAY types', describe the required street type plan and section, and dimension all essential design elements of each street type for all public rights -of- way. The General Requirements should generally describe the: • Roadway— measured from face -of -curb to face -of -curb within the right - of -way; the roadway includes travel and turn lanes, curbside parking and protected bikeways, bike lanes, bus, accommodation for potential future trolley infrastructure, landscaped medians, etc. • Sidewalk— measured from development property line to face -of -curb within the right -of -way; in some instances sidewalks may extend into development easements or setbacks 36 I PROJECTS GENERAL REQUIREMENTS EXAMPLE STANDARD SECTION ELEMENTS - Traffic: Two -way; Two 11 -ft. Staggered Continental Crosswalk I I I I I n I r R travel lanes, one 11 -ft. Benches, Bike Racks, Litter Receptacles 1. 4' At = left-turn lane = 1 ' """ t ' Landscaped Curb Extension i; 1 A , , Parking: 7 -ft. 6 -in. parallel lane, with Accent Trees i t e , 4151 each side of street Travel /Turn Lanes I Sidewalk: 26 ft. wide, each side Parking Lane I i I of street + Li Bicycle: 7 -ft. protected Canopy ] py Trees M p bikeway, each side of f ° ' Protected Bikeway I I ` I I of street - ' 1 1„ Intersections: Laid -down corners, Sidewalk Lighting I , I gg sta ered continental I. 1 7 :r: 1 g.:..1 crosswalks, bike boxes , i , l. Curbs: 1-ft. concrete ' Paving: Scored concrete, Scored Concrete 11�� �T . ,1 tinted concrete, Accent Pavers I•o! 6 _1 1 accent pavers and asphalt i -- 'i Trees: Canopy, accent Bike Box ,:::: ` � +' ; Landscape: Shrubs and _ , groundcover in 4 -ft. Roadway Lightin � B::::: 1111111111 x 6 -ft. tree wells and curb extensions — Lighting: Roadway and sidewalk Furnishings: Benches, trash Retail I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I k receptacles, bike racks Street .1 A I uy Plan 1r= YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN I 37 Design Elements The design elements prescribe specific design and specifications of all roadways and sidewalks for each street type. The design elements are the following: • Sidewalk and Roadway Zones— identify the character and U arrangement of 'functional zones' within sidewalks and roadway lanes. Provide detailed dimensioned layouts (plans and sections) for all elements within each sidewalk zone and roadway lane • Sidewalk and Roadway Details— provide construction design details 1. .T for all key elements within the right-of-way li le-. • Street Furniture Elements— identify the type, location, and material specifications for lighting, benches, bicycle racks, landscape planting BZ PBZ lists, etc. 3' j 7' j 4' j 1' 7' 5' 26' ' SIDEWALK AND ROADWAY ZONES EXAMPLE IF • • • I , NM • • I • • - - - • •■•■ R..I.. uzimi .1 ::F:1 FLZ j. Building Zone (BZ) Pedestrian Zone (PZ) Furnishings /Landscape Zone (FLZ) The area immediately adjacent to the building An unobstructed area for pedestrian through- This is the location of all elements supporting facade. This zone accommodates retail movement, free of cafe seating, sandwich pedestrian, vehicular and bicycle use of the displays, cafe tables /seating, and minor boards, signal poles, utility poles, etc. This right -of -way, including sign poles, lighting, building projections such as downspouts. This zone should not be interrupted by driveways street furniture, landscape, rain gardens zone is interrupted at doorways, corners and on the Retail Street. and bicycle parking facilities. This zone is driveways. interrupted at corners and driveways. 38 I PROJECTS SIDEWALK AND ROADWAY DETAILS EXAMPLE STREET FURNITURE ELEMENTS EXAMPLE \ \ .% 1 • Expansion or \ 1 Construction Joint (Typ.) lip,,, I 4 Concrete Protected Bikeway e `A i -y' ,MI Concrete Banding (Typ.) ‘s E Scored Concrete " 1 ^ •••••••- Medium Broom Finish i I N< > erection Shown (Typ.) o I f•••• C? ncrete Curb I rn - ` 'll_ f•••••••• Tuee Well with Grate . \ minim •f ) � r \ I nuunuu \ I nuunuu _ a i . \ I NI \ III Landscaped Planting Bed •► Scored Concrete ' ••••� N Concrete Band (Typ.) 11 . Accent Pavers I. •••• 1 Medium Broom Finish a•- >< > 1 Direction Shown (Typ.) 1 > l Li Sidewalk Lighting o, y • Manufacturer —Kim Lighting • e z e 6' j 4' 5' jr1i2, jr z, jr 1 e • Model— Bounce, single luminaire, 10 -ft. pole 3' e 7' e 4' e 7' 5' height BZ PZ FLZ PBZ DZ • Finish — Platinum Silver 26 YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN 139 40 I PROJECTS � ..� P . ma " i 1 �, 9„ t �1► 0 '! /s/ , V 4 } ` ✓leg �? O� i.F d / /, /F / el .„ �(% ✓ ,/,,fl i a . ° }�: # :; ir k ' -..:',, . : r,,,,7; '''',• , ....., ,,,...' -,......,--- % v IMPLEMENTATION INTRODUCTION Yakima Downtown Master Plan implementation requires the The implementation strategy details the keysteps the City will need to take identification of public actions that will produce a sustained and to establish immediate momentum and maintain a focused revitalization widespread private market reaction. Revitalization of Downtown effort over a five -year timeframe. Elements of the implementation strategy Yakima will require the expenditure of City financial and staff resources include: to 'prime the pump' for private development. Implementation Oversight The Implementation Strategy identifies a concise list of manageable Appointing an Implementation Oversight Committee provides the game- changing and essential projects that best address the project necessary ongoing advocacy for implementation of the Master Plan. An objectives and in turn will result in significant positive change and outline of the committee's roles and responsibilities are provided. substantial private investment. Schedule The implementation measures, primarily investments in physical The schedule outlines the sequence for implementing the game- changer, infrastructure improvements (including associated planning, programming, essential projects and necessary regulatory updates within the first five design, engineering and construction) should be initiated substantially years. by the City of Yakima and in some instances through coordination with the private development sector as public - private partnerships. Action Plans The necessary actions needed to implement the game- changer and Additionally, to ensure consistency with the Yakima Downtown Master essential projects, and necessary regulatory updates are identified. Each Plan proposals, regulating policies, plans, ordinances, guidelines and project or regulatory update incorporates the necessary steps required financing strategies will need to be either updated or created by the City to initiate the project, and subsequent steps needed to complete the and consultants. Adoption of these documents will be required of the project within specific timelines and with assigned responsibilities. Where Yakima City Council, or other regulating bodies. applicable, probable cost or fee estimates are provided. All the projects identified will require coordination and leadership Retail Strategy by the City of Yakima. In some instances public - private partnerships will need to be established. It is recommended that a single point -of Recommended actions, a timeline, and responsibilities for encouraging contact staff position be created to coordinate and manage these projects retail revitalization and establishing priority areas for incentivizing specific through implementation. As an oversight body, it is recommended that retail development concentrations along the Yakima Avenue corridor the Yakima Downtown Master Plan Steering Committee be repurposed is provided. The complete Downtown Yakima Retail Market Study is into an 'Implementation Oversight Committee'. This committee would included in the Appendix. review plan implementation proposals and provide recommendations to Finance the City Council for any expenditure of public resources throughout the Financing implementation of the Downtown Master Plan will likely come life of the implementation plan. from a variety of sources. A list of Federal, State and Local funding sources is identified. Once the Yakima City Council arrives at an agreement on the implementation projects, the responsibilities, schedules, and specific financing strategies should be finalized. 42 I IMPLEMENTATION IMPLEMENTATION OVERSIGHT In an effort to shepherd the Master Plan and implementation projects Committee Purpose through to completion an Implementation Oversight Committee made The Oversight Committee should meet regularly to review implementation up of the Master Plan steering committee and supplemented with progress, and identify opportunities for advancing implementation additional City department and agencies representatives is essential efforts. Tasks of the Oversight Committee should include: for plan success. The Oversight Committee should: ■Meeting Monthly • Be formally appointed by City Council • Keeping the Master Plan 'Alive and Breathing' • Receive support from City staff regarding necessary data and • Tackling topics and components of the Master Plan, setting goals, information needs, scheduling of regular meetings and preparation finding community members to engage in goals, advocating for of an annual report and briefing materials goals, and creating committees to achieve goals • Meet at regular intervals throughout the life of the Master Plan ■Seeing this plan through implementation to review and provide recommendations to the City and Council on implementation progress • Recognizing that City support is essential for plan success • Prepare an annual report and briefing to City Council • Recognizing that accomplishments of the Master Plan are the result of a community -wide effort The following is an outline of the three fundamental elements of an Oversight Committee. Committee Annual Report The Oversight Committee should prepare an annual report. An annual Committee Members report and briefing to City Council identifies implementation progress The Oversight Committee should include a diverse and representative and provides a basis for establishing partnerships and prioritization of City group of downtown members including property and business owners, funds for implementation projects. The annual report should include: representatives of downtown business associations and advocacy groups, • An update on accomplishments for the last year and City departments, agencies, and commissions. Oversight Committee • An updated list of Master Plan accomplishments since the start of members might be representatives of: the plan • Downtown Business Improvement District • The committee's immediate goals for the near future • Downtown Redevelopment Agency • Downtown Business Association • City Transportation, Planning and Public Works • Housing Authority and Parking Commission • Transit Agency • City Council and Planning Commission • Downtown Owner • Property Owner YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN 143 SCHEDULE Implementation of all identified projects should be initiated within five years of Yakima Downtown Master Plan adoption. PROJECTS TIMELINE YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 O Yakima Plaza Start Construction Documents 0 'Retail Main Street' * Star Const ents O Public Market ** Start I IW 4O Yakima Avenue Start Construction Document - _' 0 Downtown Parking Strategy Start Construction - Construct Replacement Parking Lot Documents ' 6 / Diversion Study Start ' 0 Policy Updates O Zoning Ordinance Update I Q Design Guidelines 0 Downtown Street Standards * The streetscape concepts and preliminary conceptual cost estimates should ** Following Plan adoption a Public Market Feasibility Study should be initiated be developed concurrently with the development of the Plaza design. and a Request for Qualifications should be solicited by the City. 44 I IMPLEMENTATION ACTION PLANS YAKIMA PLAZA The plaza is a Game - Changer. Retail revitalization starts with the plaza. ACTION MONTHS TO PRIMARY PRELIMINARY COST/ COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY FEE ESTIMATE 1) INITIATE PROJECT CITY Appoint Plaza Oversight Committee Finalize Project Scope & Improvement Area Map Identify Plaza Management Structure Identify Operating Fund Requirements & Sources Prepare Construction Budget Estimate Plaza, $10 Mill. - 3 Blocks, $3 Mill. Identify & Secure Construction & Operating Funds 2) SELECT DESIGN TEAM 4 CITY Prepare Request for Qualifications (RFQ) Review Qualifications (Oversight Committee) Select Design Team 3) PREPARE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS 8 CONSULTANT Consultant Fees @10% - $1.3 Mill. Prepare Design Alternatives Refine Preferred Alternative Prepare Contract Documents Bid Project 4) CONSTRUCT IMPROVEMENTS 18 CONTRACTOR Develop & Approve Construction Phasing Plan Construct Street Improvements Construct Plaza Improvements YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN 145 'RETAIL MAIN STREET' The 'Retail Main Street' is the centerpiece for new retail development in the Downtown. ACTION MONTHS TO PRIMARY PRELIMINARY COST/ COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY FEE ESTIMATE 1) INITIATE PROJECT CITY Appoint Main Street Oversight Committee Finalize Project Scope & Improvement Area Map Prepare Construction Budget Estimate 4 Blocks @ $1 Mill. Per Block Identify & Secure Construction Funding 2) SELECT DESIGN TEAM Mk 4 CITY Prepare Request for Qualifications (RFQ) Review Qualifications (Oversight Committee) Select Design Team 3) PREPARE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS 8 CONSULTANT Consultant Fees @10% - $400,000 Prepare Design Alternatives Refine Preferred Alternative Prepare Contract Documents Bid Project 4) CONSTRUC I M IIDVEMENTS 18 CONTRACTOR Develop & Approve Construction Phasing Plan Construct Street Improvements 46 I IMPLEMENTATION PUBLIC MARKET The public market will serve as a retail anchor and Downtown visitor destination. ACTION MONTHS TO PRIMARY PRELIMINARY COST /FEE COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY ESTIMATE 1) INITIATE PROJECT 12 CITY 11 Appoint Public Market Oversight Committee Secure Site To Be Developed 2) DETERMINE FEASIBILITY 12 CONSULT. Prepare Request for Qualifications (RFQ) Review Qualifications (Oversight Committee) Select Consultant to Prepare Feasibility Study Consultant Fees @ $75,000 Review Consultant Recommendations Identify & Secure Construction & Operating Funds 3) SELECT DESIGN TEAM j= 4 CITY Prepare Request for Qualifications (RFQ) Review Qualifications (Oversight Committee) Select Design Team 4) PREPARE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS 8 CONSULTANT To Be Developed N. Prepare Design Alternatives Refine Preferred Alternative Prepare Contract Documents for Roadway Improvements Bid Project 5) CONSTRUCT IMPROVEMENTS M EM111111.8 CONTRACTOR Develop & Approve Construction Phasing Plan Construct Improvements YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN I 47 YAKIMA AVENUE Streetscape improvements, to calm traffic, will create a 'signature street'. ACTI MONTHS TO PRIMARY PRELIMINARY COST/ COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY FEE ESTIMATE 1) INITIATE PROJECT CITY Appoint Yakima Avenue Oversight Committee Finalize Project Scope & Improvement Area Map Prepare Construction Budget Estimate 16 Blocks @ $700,000 Per Block Identify & Secure Construction Funding 2) SELECT DESIG'TEAM 4 CITY Prepare Request for Qualifications (RFQ) Review Qualifications (Oversight Committee) Select Design Team 3) PREPARE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS 8 CONSULTANT Consultant Fees @10% - $1.1 Mill. Prepare Design Alternatives Refine Preferred Alternative Prepare Contract Documents Bid Project 4) CONSTRUCT IMPFINEMENI 24 CONTRACTOR Develop & Approve Construction Phasing Plan Construct Street Improvements 48 I IMPLEMENTATION DOWNTOWN PARKING STRATEGY The strategy will address short -term and long -term retail parking needs. YO • S 0 •• V . •V •• V 1 . •. • / ACTION COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY ESTIMATE 1) INITIATE PROJECT CITY d Appoint Parking Oversight Committee Secure Replacement Parking Site West of Plaza 12 To Be Developed 2) DEVELOP SHORT -TERM RETAIL PARKING CITY Identify Locations for Increasing Parking 4 Restripe and Make Improvements 12 TIATE SUPPLEMENTAL PARKING STUDY CITY Select Consultant Investigate Feasibility of New Entrance to Mall Parking Consultant To Be Developed Investigate Potential for Leasing Employee Parking Consultant To Be Developed 4) DEVELOP I RM RETAIL PA 12 CITY To Be Developed Identify & Secure Construction & Operating Funds Select Design Team Prepare Contract Documents for Parking Structure Consultant Construct Retail Parking Structure Contractor YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN 149 DIVERSION STUDY A transportation and land use study will identify a strategy for diverting Yakima Avenue traffic to alternative by -pass routes. ACTION COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY ESTIMATE 1) INITIATE PROJECT 4 CITY Appoint Diversion Study Oversight Committee Finalize Feasibility Project Scope & Study Area Map 2) DETERMINE FEASIBILITY MI1P 12 CONSULT. Prepare Request for Qualifications (RFQ) Review Qualifications (Oversight Committee) Select Consultant to Prepare Feasibility Study Consultant Fees @ $75,000 Review Consultant Recommendations Identify & Secure Construction Funding 3) SELECT DESIGN TEAM 4 CITY Prepare Request for Qualifications (RFQ) Review Qualifications (Oversight Committee) Select Design Team for Roadway Improvements 4) PREPARE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS CONSULTANT • Prepare Design Alternatives Refine Preferred Alternative Prepare Contract Documents for Roadway Improvements Bid Project .TRUCT IMPROVEMENTS 12 CONTRACTOR Develop & Approve Construction Phasing Plan Construct Improvements 50 I IMPLEMENTATION POLICY UPDATES The Downtown Plan will be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan. 'O. 'S 0 .. v 1 .•. • / ACTION COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY ESTIMATE 1) INITIATE PROJECT 2 CITY Develop Scope of Work 2) UPDATE POLICY 6 CITY Prepare Draft Update Review Update Finalize Update and Adopt YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN 151 ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE Regulating plans will be consistent with the Downtown Plan vision. ACTION MONTHS TO PRIMARY PRELIMINARY COST /FEE COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY ESTIMATE 1) INITIATE PROJECT 2 CITY Develop Scope of Work 2) UPDATE ZONING ORDINANCE 6 CITY Prepare Draft Update Review Update Finalize Update and Adopt 52 I IMPLEMENTATION DESIGN GUIDELINES Discretionary design guidelines supporting zoning ordinances will ensure Downtown projects are constructed as envisioned. 'O. 'S 0 .. V 1 . •V • / ACTION COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY ESTIMATE 1) INITIATE PROJECT 2 CITY Develop Scope of Work 2) SELECT DESIGN GUIDELINE CONSULTANT 2 CITY Prepare Request for Qualifications (RFQ) Review Qualifications Select Consultant 3) PREPARE DESIGN GU 6 CONSULTANT Consultant Fees @ $75,000 Prepare Draft Design Guidelines Review Design Guidelines Finalize Design Guidelines YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN 153 DOWNTOWN STREET STANDARDS Requirements for all public right -of -way improvements will ensure that a high - quality public realm is constructed. 'O. 'S 0 .. V 1 . •V • / ACTION COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY ESTIMATE 1) INITIATE PROJECT 2 CITY Develop Scope of Work 2) SELECT STANDARDS CONSULTANT 4 CITY Prepare Request for Qualifications (RFQ) Review Qualifications Select Consultant 3) PREPARE STREET STANDARDS CONSULTANT Consultant Fees @ $150,000 Prepare Draft Street Standards Review Draft Street Standards Finalize Street Standards 54 I IMPLEMENTATION RETAIL STRATEGY The Retail Strategy* for Downtown Yakima is intended to build on Yakima's existing assets, nascent local business initiatives and events, and provide a unique and enjoyable retail experience not otherwise available in Yakima. Concerted effort therefore must be made by the City in stakeholder engagement, marketing, and developing City policies that incentivize and direct retail growth to the Downtown, as well as to identify funding and /or sponsorship opportunities. The following are recommended actions to be taken immediately by the City to encourage retail revitalization in the Downtown: • Set up a Retail Task Force to support the City's efforts in promoting • Facilitate the temporary use /lease of underutilized parking and and facilitating retail growth in the Downtown. other vacant lots within the study area for expansion of existing retail • Embed the Retail Positioning Framework identified on the following operations (esp F &B) that abut such lots. page into the Downtown zoning ordinance and design guidelines • Publicize the Yakima Downtown Master Plan and proactively engage to ensure a distinctive retail environment for the Downtown can be in specific marketing strategies aimed at key stakeholders /real estate realized. professionals / investors / retailers to promote the Yakima Downtown • Establish policies and criteria that provide a framework for incentives Master Plan. This should include attendance by City officials at retail for the establishment and revitalization of retail developments/ conferences or trade shows such as the annual Retail Convention businesses within the Downtown. The City should seek to obtain the (RECON) in Las Vegas. buy -in of such incentives from local banks to support incentives that • Identify potential sponsors / sponsorship opportunities to support involve no- interest loans for eligible businesses. the implementation of a key catalyst project, such as the expansion • Engage and encourage local landlords /real estate professionals to of Millennium Plaza Park support retail incubation ideas through the offering of short -term and /or discounted lease terms. This can be facilitated through a Retail Task Force. *The complete Downtown Yakima Retail Market Study Report can be found in a separate Appendix to this document. YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN 155 The Retail Strategy for Downtown Yakima should be guided by a retail .:1 — _ - . •ff ti' �• F L z oning framework that identifies three specific retail zones within the ` � Downtown, each with different retail characteristics and priorities, as follows: _ _ ' • Zone 1- should be positioned as a lifestyle zone, and encourage A Street �. ' `, activity generating uses and retail that fosters a vibrant atmosphere. - Retail focus should be on food and beverage, local products /retail NJ 41111 businesses, convenience and entertainment and leisure. - ! I j " Chestnut Avenue' a r • `r, 0 , • Zone 2- is intended for retail uses that support tourist retail needs, with A ' . � - — • _x r , it a focus on food and beverage, convenience and comparison shopping, _ � • - culture and arts. ,�' - - B d , j �� • Zone 3- is a less vibrant area intended for general retail needs that as ''r - - 'j • - - - - - :z serve the Yakima population, such as housewares, interiors, furniture, 0 Zone 1 M Zone 2 0 Zone 3 lighting, electronics, DIY, grocery and other comparison goods. ACTION MONTHS TO COMPLETE PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY 1) Set up a Retail Task Force i.II City & Council 2) Draft retail related zoning and design guidelines 3 City Planning Department 3) Establish policies7criteria that provide a framework for retail incentives City Planning Department 4) Establish short -term and discounted leases for vacant or underutilized Ongoing once policies are City & Council municipal property to encourage retail growth in the Downtown. (City should in place lead by example and encourage private developers /landlords to do similar) 5) Develop a marketing - — 6) City officials attend retail conferences or trade shows such as the annual Ongoing City & Council Retail Convention (RECON) in Las Vegas 7) Identify potential sponsors /sponsorship opptunities for catalyst projects it . (eg. expansion of Millennium Plaza park) ‘M 56 I IMPLEMENTATION FINANCE Intent The revitalization of Downtown is a multi -year task, and success is enhanced by a multi -year commitment of funding and incentive programs. There are many financing tools which will be available to downtown Yakima to implement the projects identified in the Yakima Downtown Master Plan. The following are a list of possible federal, state, and local funding sources: FEDERAL Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP -21) Federally- funded through the Department of Housing and Urban Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP -21) MAP -21 is Development, this grant program provides funding for housing, a milestone for the U.S. economy and the Nation's surface transportation infrastructure improvements, and economic development and must serve program. By transforming the policy and programmatic framework for the interests of low and moderate - income populations. investments to guide the system's growth and development, MAP -21 creates a streamlined and performance -based surface transportation New Market Tax Credit Program (NMTC) program and builds on many of the highway, transit, bike, and pedestrian This federal program is intended to attract private- sector investment programs and policies established in 1991. into qualifying low- income communities to help finance community development projects, stimulate economic opportunity, and create jobs. TIGER Grants The program offers federal tax credits for making private investments in The Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery, or TIGER qualified Community Development Entities (CDEs). Discretionary Grant program, provides a unique opportunity for the U.S. Department of Transportation to invest in road, rail, transit and port Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credits for Certified Historic Structures projects that promise to achieve critical national objectives. Congress This program gives tax credits in which a portion of the renovation dedicated $1.5 billion for TIGER I, $600 million for TIGER II, $526944 million investment in an historic building is credited back against federal income for FY 2011 and $500 million for the FY 2012 round of TIGER Grants to taxes, in exchange for certain federal (Department of Interior) renovation fund projects that have a significant impact on the Nation, a region or a standards being followed. metropolitan area. Low - Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) and HOME Investment Economic Development Administration- U.S Department of Partnership Program Commerce (EDA) This federal tax credits program created in 1986 under Section 42 of the The EDA provides funds for technical assistance, planning and the IRS code encourages the development of affordable multifamily rental development of projects that result in the creation of new employment. housing. Technical assistance grants usually average about $25,000 and require a small cash match. Capital grants and revolving loan funds are available on a 50/50 matching basis and vary in size from hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars. YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN I 57 STATE AND LOCAL Special Districts for Business Improvement, Parking & Other Real Estate Excise Tax 1 (REET 1)14 Infrastructure RCW 82.46.010 authorizes cities and counties to levy a quarter percent Neighborhood residents and downtown property owners can elect to levy (0.25 %) excise tax on the sale price of real estate. Cities and counties with special taxes on themselves for special activities and capital improvements a population of 5,000 or more that are planning under GMA may spend within an established special district. Business Improvement Districts, these funds only on capital projects listed in the capital facilities plan for example, can fund downtown revitalization activities, promotions, element of their comprehensive plans. and events. Parking Districts can assist development efforts in locating parking facilities in a manner consistent with good community design Real Estate Excise Tax 2 (REET 2)15 and respectful of the historic streetscape. Cities and Counties may Cities and counties that are required to or choose to plan under the also create special improvement districts to pay for projects with bond Growth Management Act may levy a second quarter percent (0.25 %) repayment to be made by the adjoining landowners receiving the benefit excise tax on the sale price of real estate. In 2004, the Yakima City of the improvement. Council authorized the second quarter Real Estate Excise Tax. The City uses these funds for to purchase materials for crack filling and chip General Obligation Bonds sealing local access streets. The revenues have also been used for street The sale of general obligation bonds can be used to finance specific maintenance and repair purposes, as well as other projects listed on the public infrastructure and facilities improvements. A G.O bond sale, Capital Facilities Plan. subject to voter approval, can provide the financing initially required for major projects. Property Tax Property tax funds the day -to -day operations of the City's street and Road Improvement Districts traffic operations division. Programs may be mandated, provide for the RIDs can be used to finance a wide range of public improvements, such safety of the citizens, or are good stewardship programs that protect as upgrading substandard residential streets. RIDs involve the issuance of the $250 million investment that the public has made to the existing special assessment bonds with a pledge of repayment by the benefited transportation system. property owners or developers. The County can partially offset the cost of RIDs by contributing a staff person to help organize and promote the Local Option Fees and Taxes RIDs and by paying some of the preliminary engineering design work for Establishment of the Local Option Vehicle License Fee for general determining the types and cost of improvements needed. RIDs are typically transportation purposes could generate additional revenue to be used not a funding source for general transportation improvements. for targeted areas such as the focused public investment areas, safety projects, paving gravel roads, & alternative mode improvements. A local Gas Tax option fuel tax is another potential revenue source. A portion of gas tax receipts are allocated to cities and counties for street and road system maintenance and improvements. Congressional Direct Appropriations State appropriation bills may include funding for particular local or state transportation projects. 58 I IMPLEMENTATION Downtown Development Incentives Fund Grants Philanthropic support can provide a significant one -time grants or funds Both Yakima County and the City of Yakima actively seeks grant funds for over a sufficiently long period of time to capitalize financing for private capital projects. In the past, funding sources have included Transportation investment through such means as: Improvement Board, Washington Traffic Safety Commission, Hazard • Revolving loan fund offering interest rate write downs Elimination, Freight Mobility, Congestion Management and Air Quality, • Matching funds for contributions to downtown projects Surface Transportation Program, County Road Administration Board (CRAB), Urban Arterial Trust Account (UATA), Transportation Improvement • Direct incentives for targeted retailers - would provide a Account (TIA), Bridge Replacement (BR), County Arterial Preservation "negotiation fund" for target retailers or categories Program (CAPP), and Rural Arterial Program (RAP). Washington Department of Transportation ( WSDOT) Proportional Share Contributions The WSDOT distributes a variety of federal funds and provides state Private developers have contributed funds toward capital projects based matching funds requirements for a variety of auto, pedestrian, bicycle on a pro -rata share of new, site - generated traffic volumes as a share of and rail infrastructure projects. the total project cost and total future traffic toward projects contained Other Funding Types in the Six -Year Transportation Plan list. Rates are based on a formula Another method that may be available to Yakima for implementation that assesses a proportionate share of the total project cost relative to of projects is to structure a range of public and private incentives for the trip rate. downtown retail, business development, and affordable housing. These Miscellaneous Local Revenue "indirect funding" mechanisms might typically include: The City of Yakima receives local revenues from miscellaneous sources. • Granting bonus densities under the zoning code in exchange for These include mitigation payments and transfers of funds from other provision of a public amenity or benefit jurisdictions for reimbursable work. • Special permitting for uses such as sidewalk cafes to animate street life • Allowing sponsorships of public space programming to encourage pedestrian activity • Below- market -rate land sales or ground leases • Fast track approval processes for downtown housing development to lower developer costs while at the same time providing a benefit at little or no cost to the city • Below- market -rate public bond financing to reduce the cost of capitol for designated development projects • Property tax deferrals in exchange for provision of public amenities YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN 159 Crandall Arambula PC vwwv.ca -city.com Revitalizing America's Cities Yakima Public Business August 2015 Prepared for: City of Yakima BDS PLANNING & URBAN DESIGN ECONorthwest ECONOMICS • FINANCE • PLANNING GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS This page intentionally blank Acknowledgments This report was produced for the City of Yakima by the consulting team of BDS Planning & Urban Design, ECONorthwest, and Graham Baba Architects. City of Yakima Micah Cawley, Mayor Tony O'Rourke, City Manager Sean Hawkins, Economic Development Manager BDS Planning & Urban Design Founded in 2009, BDS offers comprehensive community development services, with emphasis on projects that require building consensus and unlikely coalitions, communicating complex information, demonstrating leading ideas, and shaping policy. www.bdsplanning.com ECONorthwest For over 4o years ECONorthwest has helped its clients make sound decisions based on rigorous economic, planning, and financial analysis. www.econw.com. Graham Baba Architects Graham Baba Architects is a vibrant Seattle architecture firm recognized for the successful place- making of commercial, residential, artistic, institutional, and public spaces. www.grahambaba.com BDS ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS i This page intentionally blank B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS ii Table of Contents SUMMARY V 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. OUTREACH AND DEMAND FORECAST 3 2.1 OUTREACH RESULTS 3 2.2 DEMAND FORECAST 6 3. MARKET CONCEPT 11 3.1 LOCATION 11 3.2 DESIGN 12 3.2.1 Ground Floor 12 3.2.2 Mezzanine 15 3.2.3 Basement 15 4. OPERATING STRUCTURE 17 4.1 PUBLIC MARKET 17 4.2 COMMERCIAL KITCHEN 18 5. OPPORTUNITIES, CHALLENGES, AND BEST PRACTICES19 6. CONSTRUCTION AND FINANCING 23 6.1 CONSTRUCTION COST 23 6.2 FINANCIAL PLAN 23 7. OPERATING FORECAST 27 7.1 MODEL FRAMEWORK AND ASSUMPTIONS 27 7.1.1 Revenues 27 7.1.2 Expenses 28 7.2 FINANCIAL FORECAST 30 8. ECONOMIC IMPACTS AND BENEFITS 33 9. APPENDIX A: OUTREACH RESULTS 35 10. APPENDIX B: WORKSHOP SUMMARY 41 B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS iii This page intentionally blank B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS iv Summary During the fall and winter of 2014 -15, the consulting team of BDS Planning & Urban Design, ECONorthwest, and Graham Baba Architects researched the feasibility of a Public Market and Mixed -Use Incubator /Commercial Kitchen in Yakima, Washington. The team determined that the project was in fact feasible, given certain conditions, which are included in the following summary of the team's findings: 1. Sales: Market vendors would generate between $4.2 million and $6.5 million in sales each year. 2. Size: The market would ideally encompass two stories and a basement totaling 27,500 square feet. The ground floor (15,000 square feet) would house approximately 3o vendors and a communal seating area. The mezzanine (5,000 square feet) would accommodate a commercial kitchen, child- care facilities, educational programming, and small events. The basement (7,500 square feet) would provide storage as well as space for loading, unloading, and circulation. 3. Hours of Operation: The market would be open at least Wednesday through Sunday and remain open until at least 6:oo PM on weekdays. 4. Vendors: Food vendors' stalls would comprise about 10 percent of the total area. Other vendors would provide staple goods, large dry goods, specialty goods, and competitively priced goods. Priority would be given to vendors whose products are local. In addition, vendors would have access to a washing and packaging system. 5. Operating Structure: The market would be a nonprofit entity, with access to public funding, tax - exempt donations, and tax exemptions. BDS ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS v 6. Coordination: The market would coordinate efforts and operations with the existing farmers' market in a number of ways, e.g., by providing discounts to vendors who rent space at both markets. 7. Parking: Safe, free parking would be provided to customers within two blocks of the market. 8. Costs: It would cost approximately $7,500,000 to build the market, and this financing would be accomplished before construction occurs. Options for such financing include City and County grants, private donations, sponsorships, tax credits, block grants, and funds from State and Federal Agriculture Departments. Pay for the core employees— manager, assistant manager, and bookkeeper —would be approximately $160,000 each year. 9. Revenues: The market would receive revenues from vendors (approximately $280,000 in rent each year), operators of the commercial kitchen and event spaces (approximately $82,000 each year), and, potentially, corporate sponsors. Once the market is stabilized in 2019, it would net approximately $58,000 each year. 10. Impact: The market would increase local employment, provide economic stability, generate tax revenues, support development of the local food - processing industry, draw visitors, improve traffic to nearby businesses, and motivate investment in the area. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS vi 1. Introduction This is a report on the proposed development of a Yakima Public Market. The report was based on extensive research (local as well as national) and prepared by BDS Planning & Urban Design, EGONorthwest, and Graham Baba Architects. It not only demonstrates the feasibility but also describes how to implement the building and operating of the market to the advantage of Yakima's businesses as well as its citizens. The primary recommendations of the report are to secure debt -free funding for the market before construction and to establish the market as a nonprofit entity. More detailed recommendations can be found in the Summary. What needs to happen next includes the following: • Establish an entity and delineate procedures to implement the recommendations. • Secure the appropriate permits for the market as well as for parking space. • Build and maintain partnerships with individuals and groups who can help finance, operate, and publicize the market. The team of BDS Planning and Urban Design, ECONorthwest, and Graham Baba Architects remains accessible to help pursue these objectives. BDS ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 1 This page intentionally blank B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 2 2. Outreach and Demand Forecast To establish the feasibility of a Pubic Market and /or Mixed -Use Incubator / Commercial Kitchen in Yakima, the consultant team reached out to interested communities in Yakima and also forecast demand by comparing Yakima's socio- economic characteristics with the requirements of typical public markets and commercial kitchens. 2.1 Outreach Results The Project Team reached out to several different populations in order to determine to what extent and how the project should proceed. These efforts included 1) a survey administered to members of the Yakima community in the winter of 2015, 2) a day- long workshop in the fall of 2014, 3) a meeting with a Food Artisan group in August 2014, and 4) meetings with market vendors, also in August 2014. 2.1.1 Survey The purpose of the survey was primarily to identify the buying habits of local residents and the characteristics of a public market that residents would favor. Here are the highlights: • The vast majority of respondents patronize grocery stores for food and beverages. They go several times a week and two - thirds of them spend X75 -$1oo a week. • Respondents consider local production their top criterion for choosing what and where to purchase food and beverages, followed by price and then convenience. • Almost half of respondents patronize a farmers market or specialty food market at least once a month; about a fifth of them go at least once a week. • Respondents like the farmers market or specialty food market primarily because the produce is local and fresh. If they don't like anything about them, it's the price. • Fully 83% of respondents would like to see a public market in Yakima. About half would like to see it in downtown Yakima. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 3 They'd like the market to include food and beverage vendors (94 %), prepared foods (80 %), restaurants (66 %), event space (60 %), a commercial kitchen (52 %), and educational programs (47 %). The survey was given to about 600 people, about three - quarters of whom lived in the local area. The results indicate a strong desire for a public market, preferably in downtown Yakima. See Appendix A for more details about survey results. 2.1.2 Workshop The Project team toured potential sites for a public market, brainstormed options, considered existing plans and data from previous research, and identified priorities. Here are the highlights: • There is strong demand from the City of Yakima for downtown revitalization and strong demand from potential vendors for a public market and commercial kitchen. • Successful public markets around the country maintain an appropriate size, charge reasonable rents, include a variety of vendors, take advantage of iconic urban buildings, benefit from a commercial kitchen, have a strong operating entity, and are free from debt. The team made the following recommendations: • The City should proceed with planning a public market and commercial kitchen conjoined with the public plaza in downtown Yakima; this location would benefit the new market, the existing market, and the community as a whole. • The market would be 15,00o- 20,00o square feet, not including 2,000 -4,000 square feet for a commercial kitchen and additional space for storage. • Stalls would be 12 feet x 12 feet, which would accommodate as many as 3o vendors. • Funding sources would include public agencies and private sponsors, as well as tax credits. Revenue would accrue from vendor rentals and other charges. • Criteria for site selection would be transparent. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 4 • Both public and private advocates for the market would be identified and brought on board to help with development and operations. 2.1.3 Meeting with Food Artisan Group Brian Scott facilitated this meeting with 25 business owners and others concerned and knowledgeable about small businesses. The discussion focused on the proposed public market: the characteristics they'd like to see, the logistics they thought were necessary, and the concerns they had. The highlights follow. Characteristics of a proposed public market: • A variety of goods for sale, including "gourmet" as well as economically priced items • A downtown location • A co -op kitchen • Local products • An affordable kitchen • 24 -hour access • Open year -round • Locked, refrigerated, dry, and temperature - controlled storage • Variable fee schedule • Effective management • Food trucks • "Business incubator" with support services • Logistics: o Need for parking o Truck access o Scalable loading area o Connection with tourism in the Yakima valley • Concerns: o Sufficient room for expansion o Limited consumer base o Need to create excitement B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 5 2.1 .4 Meetings with Market Vendors Individual meetings took place with various market vendors on Sunday, August 10, in Yakima, and Saturday, August 16, in Wenatchee. Again, the topic was the proposed public market. In general, vendors seemed eager to know more about the market, especially how it might affect the current public market of which they were a part. Highlights: • Many vendors wanted a venue in which they could sell their products throughout the year. • They placed a high priority on effective management (some seemed displeased with current management of the public market). • They expressed concern that a new market might displace the current one. • They were very interested in a commercial kitchen, particularly if it was accessible and reasonably priced. • They considered parking essential. • Vendors from outside Yakima were less interested in a second market. • Some vendors thought that a market friendly to children was important. • Many vendors emphasized the desirability of ancillary events, such as food demonstrations, cooking classes, and even weddings. 2.2 Demand Forecast The purpose of this section is to demonstrate the feasibility of a public market, given conditions in the target area. It focuses on the market itself, based on the assumption that the project's success or failure will depend first and foremost on the ability of its vendors to capture a share of the market. To determine what share of spending would occur at the Yakima Market, members of the Project team calculated the size of the existing specialty food market sector, estimated the number of visitors and average visitor spending at businesses in this sector, B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 6 and then estimated Yakima Market's share of those visitors and spending. Due to the potential variability in what vendors the market will offer, we calculated a range of total sales for the market. At the high end, we estimate that vendors at the market would generate $6.5 million in sales. At the low end, we estimate that vendors at the market would generate $4.2 million in sales. 2.2.1 Market Estimate The Yakima public market will cater primarily to local patrons. For the purposes of this study, we assume the local market consists of households residing within a 32 -mile perimeter of downtown Yakima. Income and spending characteristics. According to 2013 estimates from Nielsen /Claritas, a nationally recognized market research data firm, 93,020 households live within 32 miles of downtown Yakima. Twenty -five percent are upper middle income, upper income, or affluent. Almost half of the households are lower middle income or middle income. The remaining 3o percent are low income. Table 1: Household Counts and Shares by 2013 Income 2013 Household Income Number Percent Less than $25,000 28,167 30% $25,000 to $50,000 24,921 27% $50,000 to $75,000 16,885 18% Over $75,000 23,047 25% Total households within 32 miles 93,020 100% Source ECONorthwest with data from Nielsen /Claritas. Using the most recent (2012) U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics' consumer expenditure survey by household income, we determined that households in the market area spent over $382 million on food for consumption at home and $229 million on food and beverages consumed outside of home. Total spending was $672 million for area households. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 7 Table 2: Household Food and Beverage Spending by Distance from Downtown Yakima, 2012 MM$ Under 2 2to4 4to8 8to16 16to32 32 mile Food and beverage purchases by resident households miles miles miles miles miles radius Food purchased at stores & markets for use at home: Cereal products: flour, pasta, rice, etc. $2.9 $5.6 $1.6 $0.9 $5.3 $16.2 Bakery products 5.6 10.9 3.1 1.8 10.3 31.7 Beef 3.5 6.9 2.0 1.1 6.5 20.0 Pork 2.7 5.1 1.5 0.8 4.9 15.0 Other meat products: lamb, deli meats, sausage, etc. 1.9 3.7 1.1 0.6 3.5 10.9 Poultry 2.5 4.9 1.4 0.8 4.7 14.3 Fish & seafood 1.9 3.9 1.1 0.6 3.6 11.1 Eggs 0.9 1.6 0.5 0.3 1.6 4.8 Dairy Products 6.5 12.9 3.7 2.0 12.0 37.1 Fresh fruits 4.0 8.0 2.3 1.3 7.4 22.9 Fresh vegetables 3.5 6.9 2.0 1.1 6.5 20.0 Processed fruit: juiced, dried, canned, frozen, fresh prepared 1.8 3.5 1.0 0.6 3.3 10.1 Processed vegetables: canned, frozen, fresh prepared, etc. 2.1 4.0 1.1 0.7 3.8 11.7 Sweet products: sugar, syrup, jams, candy, artificial sweeteners 2.3 4.5 1.3 0.7 4.2 13.0 Fats & oils: includes salad dressing, margarine, peanut butter 1.8 3.5 1.0 0.6 3.4 10.3 Miscellaneous foods 10.9 21.5 6.2 3.4 20.2 62.2 Alcoholic beverages 6.4 14.0 4.0 2.0 12.0 38.4 Nonalcoholic beverages: soda, water, coffee, tea, mixes 5.8 11.3 3.3 1.8 10.8 33.1 Total food & beverages bought for use at home $66.8 $132.8 $38.3 $21.1 $123.9 $382.9 Food from stores & markets for use out of town 3.0 5.9 14.5 27.2 9.7 60.3 Food & beverages away from home (restaurants, carts, etc.) 38.3 82.7 23.8 12.2 72.0 229.0 Total household spending on food & beverages $108.0 $221.4 $76.6 $60.4 $205.6 I $672.1 Source ECONorthwest with data from Nielsen /Claritas. Specialty food market sector. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are 37 specialty food stores in Yakima County. Specialty Food Magazine reported that the average specialty food store is 5,010 square feet. Assuming that, on average, these stores are comparable in size to other specialty food stores across the nation, then there are approximately 185,370 square feet of specialty food stores in the county. On a square foot basis, the Yakima Market would increase the volume of specialty food stores by ten percent. The specialty vendor component of the market includes the entire first floor (15,000 square feet) plus the vendor storage space in the basement (4,000 square feet). Once open, the Yakima Market would comprise nine percent of the specialty food sector in the County. Numb of visits. The Project team used data from the community survey on how frequently households shop at specialty markets to determine the number of likely visitors to the Yakima Market. Based on the number of households by income level (Table 1) and the frequency at which people at that income level shop at public markets, we determined that existing markets receive 1.5 million visits by households each year. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 8 The Yakima Market would likely receive 11 percent of those visits, which equates to its fair share of the market (based on the square footage ratios)' and a marginal increase to account for the convenience and unique experience of shopping with multiple vendors at once. In total, the Yakima Market would receive 156,063 visits from households each year. Table 3: Household Visitors to the Yakima Market Shopping Frequnecy Assumed Visits Per HH Population by Total Number of Yakima Market Visits to Yakima Year Visit Frequency Visits Capture Market Never 0 7,976 0 0 Once per year 1 14,204 14,204 1,519 Once every 3 to 6 months 3 13,992 41,977 4,488 Once every 2 to 3 months 6 12,708 76,249 11 % 8,152 Once per month 12 24,200 290,399 31,048 Once per week or more 52 19,940 1,036,879 110,857 Total number of visits 93,020 1,459,707 156,063 Source ECONorthwest with data from the U.S. Census Bureau, Specialty Food Magazine, and the community survey. Spending. Due to the potential variability in what vendors the market will offer, we calculated a range of total sales for the market. If the market offers a diverse range of products, including a dry goods store, more people will shop at the market who otherwise would have gone to a grocery store for the convenience factor. Therefore, it will capture a share of food and beverage spending at grocery stores, and vendor sales will likely reach the high end of the range. If the market offers solely specialty and prepared foods, it will capture a smaller share of food and beverage spending and total vendor sales will likely fall in the low end of the range. At the high end, we estimate that vendors at the market would generate $6.5 million in sales. This figure equals the total number of household visits to the market multiplied by an average transaction size of $41.49, which is the average value of a specialty food transaction in the U.S., according to Specialty Food Magazine. 1 Specialty food stores vary in patronage and revenues depending on a range of factors, including quality and variety of products, cost, location, and other characteristics. For the purposes of this assessment, we need to understand only the total estimated volume of specialty food store activity to estimate the share of activity that Yakima Market could capture. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 9 At the low end, we estimate that vendors at the market would generate $4.2 million in sales. This estimate assumes that one -third of the households that visit the market would make a large volume of food and beverage purchases (an average transaction of $41.49). It assumes that the other two - thirds would make prepared food and quick service restaurant purchases, which would total $2o per household visitor. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 10 3. Market Concept The consulting team for the Public Market /Mixed Use Incubator Feasibility Study met in Yakima for a one -day workshop on October 27, 2014. They collaboratively evaluated the previous outreach and analysis, toured potential sites, brainstormed options, and presented a synthesis of options to the Steering Committee, City Manager, Council members, and others. This day- long workshop provided the basis for the market concepts related to location and design presented here. See Appendix B for a summary of the workshop. 3.1 Location The Consulting Team assessed seven sites selected by the City of Yakima for the feasibility study. After a tour, the Consulting Team discussed the pros and cons of each site. They also considered two sites of their own choosing. The Team considered each site in relation to its location and size, existing buildings /infrastructure, lighting, ambiance, parking, and adjacency to the proposed plaza, among other criteria. Each of the sites considered had merits for a Public Market and /or a Commercial Kitchen. Most of the sites could be physically adapted to support these uses. A primary issue, however, is the relationship of the Public Market and Commercial Incubator Kitchen to the Public Plaza. Downtown Yakima already struggles to compete economically. Successful commercial districts function best when their destination uses are close together to focus and reinforce the attraction of the whole district. As such, the consulting team strongly suggests that the Public Market be co- located with the Public Plaza in order to reinforce the community's investments and draw more activity. The consulting team also looked at the co- location of a commercial kitchen with the public market using the same criteria. The Team agreed that there is not a definitive answer to whether these facilities should be co- located. Given the local enthusiasm for both, however, the opportunity for one to reinforce the other should be seriously considered. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 11 3.2 Design There is no "one size fits all" approach to public market design. Broadly, Yakima Public Market would be a year -round indoor market located in the heart of Yakima. It would be a place for the community residents and visitors to shop at and support local businesses as well as experience a unique venue, and for local businesses to grow and thrive. The Project team has developed a carefully thought out plan for the specific components of the market based on its experience in public market design in conjunction with feedback from potential vendors and the community at large. The team envisions a two -story and basement, 27,500 square foot, public market building. The ground floor (15,000 square feet) would be the heart of the market. It would house the vendors and a communal seating area. A mezzanine level (5,000 square feet) would include a commercial kitchen and small event space. The basement (7,500 square feet) would provide substantial cold and dry storage for both the vendors and the commercial kitchen tenants. We recommend that the market initially be open five days per week, Wednesday through Sunday. Maintaining regular and convenient operating hours is always a challenge with markets consisting of small businesses. To maintain consistency, which is an important factor in building customer loyalty, the market should require vendors to be open during set business hours. To serve close -in residents, it should require vendors to stay open past 6:00 PM on weekdays. Prepared food vendors who cater to the lunchtime crowd may wish to be open seven days per week, to offer lunch to office workers in the area. The Yakima Public Market could facilitate this by providing direct outdoor access to prepared food vendor stalls via a food service window or garage door (the latter also offers an opportunity to have market activities spill out onto the sidewalk during favorable weather). 3.2.1 Ground Floor The ground floor of the market would be approximately 15,000 square feet. We recommend housing all of the vendors on this B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 12 floor, so that all benefit from the same volume of foot traffic. This floor should also include a common area with seating for patrons who wish to sit and enjoy food or beverages on -site, and perhaps space for a musician on the weekend or special occasions. The sketch below shows one possible design for the space. It allows for 8,360 net rentable square feet of vendor space. This share of floor space is in line with other public markets that we researched. Figure 1: Ground Floor Market Concept 1AND01 STAND02 STAND03 STAND04 STAND05 STAND06 STAND07 STAND 08 STAND09 2404 2404 210.1 240s1 110.1 240d 240d 3261 3261 now 00000 Mateo 5%D01*0 wood wrk Boo Wen *Whip %Ge11dr4a C40 I•••••• Shoo _ Il k. Sr I Ye?: '44 40 • . ..•... 0 WASHROOM STAND 10 F %ung H%%N. • • . SOOA — New 4.704 — - . I _I Balm WASHROOM OA ----- STAND 11 sob _. k<o�m STAIRS& — — ELEVATOR '.• •.b • • •n I �+ STAND 12 tgt SON I Wks !l STAND 13 • Hq4 Wm( aea Sh06 Is a it • _�— - n,ar . __A STAND 17 STAND 16 STAND 15 STAND 14 60001 600.1 60Y4 •.vd Cheese Shop : Prague% Deb rnee M•M GRAHAM BABA .1 P.; 1 I The ground floor sketch shows space for 18 vendors, but the actual number of vendors will vary depending on vendor demand. Given the relatively high portion of vendor survey respondents that had an idea for a business or were just starting a business, the team recommends providing a higher number of small vendor spaces (e.g., 72 or 144 square feet), which will increase the total number of vendor stalls. To begin, we recommend that the market offer 30 vendor stalls ranging in size from 6 by 12 feet to 36 by 36 feet. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 13 Table 4: Recommended Vendor Stalls by Size Stall size 6 x 12 12 x 12 12 x 24 24 x 24 36 x 36 Total Number of vendors 8 12 4 4 2 30 Total square feet 576 1,728 1,152 2,304 2,592 8,352 Ideally, as incubator or other startup businesses mature, they will purchase larger spaces, which may again shift the size of the vendor stalls and total number of vendors. We recommend a flexible interior design with mobile partial walls dividing vendor spaces, which would allow management to easily adapt the market space to meet changing demand. In addition to the size of vendor stalls, management must also pay close attention to the types of vendors. Vendor diversity is important Eleven percent of community survey to the success of the market. Team members conducted interviews respondents stated that one with a number of market operators across the country regarding how of the major drawbacks to specialty food markets in they structure their vendor mixes. Using this research, in conjunction Yakima is the lack of variety. with interviews of potential local vendors, we developed an example vendor mix for the Yakima Public Market. A few recommendations about the vendor mix: Table 5: Vendor Mix • Limit the number of prepared food vendors to Category Number Bread, Bakery, Pastry 2 approximately ten percent of the total square Book, News 1 footage. Otherwise, the market will feel more like Cafes 2 a food court, which has been a detriment to other Cheese 2 markets in the U.S. Coffee, Tea 1 Flowers, Garden 1 • Customers, particularly those in Yakima (based Meat, Poultry, Charcuterie 2 on the community survey) like one -stop Seafood 2 shopping. So, try to provide a variety of staple Produce 2 Specialty Foods 4 goods. Providing a large dry goods space (which Ethnic Foods 4 may be offered by a local full service grocer) is Prepared Foods 5 one way to achieve this outcome. Dry Goods 1 Wine, Beer, Spirits 1 • Offer items at a range of price points. For Total 30 example, select one produce vendor that offers more expensive local, organic, or hard -to -find produce and another produce vendor that stocks competitively priced produce. More than two - thirds of households in Yakima County make under $50,000 per year. These households still shop at specialty markets according to our research, but they will be more price- conscious. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 14 3.2.2 Mezzanine The mezzanine would consist of a commercial kitchen and a small event space. The Project team urges the co- location of the market and commercial kitchen for two reasons. First, public markets and commercial kitchens have a symbiotic relationship. They require many of the same ancillary facilities (i.e., loading areas and cold and dry storage space); vendors that opt to use both facilities will have lower transportation costs, as they will no longer need to transport goods from their current production facility to their retail location. They target similar consumer groups, and can engage in cross marketing at low to no cost. New markets scheduled to open in Pittsburgh and Portland will include commercial kitchens. Second, the two facilities benefit one another. Most respondents across vendor outreach surveys have an idea for a business or are just starting a business. These individuals likely do not have a product ready to sell and could benefit from an incubator that would provide them with the strategic support and facilities required to start and manage their business. These individuals might start by working in the commercial kitchen (if it were part of an incubator experience) to develop and test their products. Once their products were ready to sell, they could easily rent a space in the market. The event space should be non - specific, to allow for a variety of uses. On the weekends, we recommend using the event space for childcare. Childcare will attract families to the market and keep them shopping longer. The event space would also be suitable for educational programming, which would tie into the mission of the market. 3.2.3 Basement Vendors and commercial kitchen users need both cold and dry storage. They rent this additional space on a per square foot basis to store excess inventory; they can keep their booths tidy and organized, and consolidate the number of deliveries. Among markets that reported sufficient storage for tenants, the average market provided 81 square feet of cold storage and 90 square feet of dry storage per tenant. We recommend building 4,000 square feet B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 15 of storage space. The remaining space in the basement should be used for loading, unloading, and circulation. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 16 4. Operating Structure Possible management and operating structures —and their associated costs and benefits —will vary depending on the size and scope of each market segment. The market has two unique components that have different objectives and operating needs: the public market and the commercial kitchen. The purpose of this section is to describe the options available to the City and to provide a bottom line assessment of the feasibility of each. 4.1 Public Market There are several operating models to consider for the public market. Nonprofit. Most public markets are nonprofit owned and operated. A board of directors would govern the organization. An executive director with the support of a small staff would manage the operations. The benefits of a nonprofit model include: access to public funding, access to tax - exempt donations, and potential tax exemptions. The drawbacks to a nonprofit model include: a group of citizens required to sit on a Board of Directors and stay engaged for the long haul, and potential difficulty in raising funds for construction and ongoing maintenance. For Profit. The City may choose to find a private entity to construct, own, and manage the public market. The benefits of a for - profit entity include: access to traditional sources of bank financing and private equity to fund construction, responsiveness to operational challenges, and energy. The drawback to a for - profit entity is a priority of profit over mission. Public Ownership. The City of Yakima could choose to own and operate the market as a City venture. The benefits of City ownership include: access to public funds and the ability to run it as a mission -based organization. The drawbacks to City ownership include: annual competition for funding with other city responsibilities and potential changes in city priorities over time. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 17 4.2 Commercial Kitchen Due to the number of Yakima residents with an interest in starting a food - related business or who have just started a food - related business, we recommend that a separate entity operate the commercial kitchen as part of an incubator /accelerator. This entity would pay a flat rate per month to the public market owner to lease the commercial kitchen and a portion of the storage space. This entity might also master -lease a set number of vendor spaces from the market. It would manage or contract with the market to manage the sub - leasing and operations of those spaces. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 18 5. Opportunities, Challenges, and Best Practices This section highlights opportunities, challenges, and best practices for the Yakima Public Market. It draws on both the primary research conducted by the Project Team and secondary research conducted by ECONorthwest. The secondary research drew from analyses of public markets and commercial kitchens, as well as studies from the USDA and other relevant sources. Research focused on the following markets and kitchens, as they are in a region with many similar characteristics or have demonstrated success: • Eastern Market (South Hall), Washington, DC • Findlay Market, Cincinnati, OH • Granville Island Public Market, Vancouver, BC • Lexington Market, Baltimore, MD • Melrose Market, Seattle, WA • Pike Place Market, Seattle, WA • Pittsburgh Public Market, Pittsburgh, PA • Pybus Public Market, Wenatchee, WA • Reading Terminal, Philadelphia, PA • Rochester Public Market, Rochester, NY • Soulard Market, St. Louis, MO • Sprout Regional Food Hub, Springfield, MO • The Starting Block, Hart, MI This section highlights the best practices that emerged from this research, which may inform market operations. Capital funding. Public market and commercial kitchen facilities are expensive, both to construct and to operate. In its early years, a public market is lucky if it generates net operating income. If a market or commercial kitchen has debt obligations on top of operating costs, it may be unable to provide an adequate B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 19 level of maintenance and service. In such cases, the facility will lose customers as it ages, which will ultimately lead to a further decline in vendor sales and vendor rents. Markets or commercial kitchens that use debt financing for their capital facilities often find themselves in this position. The Yamhill Market in Portland, Oregon, is one such example. Unable to service debt, physical deterioration followed and, after several years, the market closed. Creative destruction. An economic principle explains why most public markets succeed. These markets allow for rapid, cost - effective "creative destruction " — an economics term describing the process of incessantly creating new businesses and destroying old ones that become uncompetitive. That is, public markets rapidly respond to changing customer demand and interests. It costs relatively little to change out vendors. A vendor, new or existing, who has an innovative product or idea, can more easily execute it in a public market, which is designed for easy set -up and attracts large numbers of potential customers. Likewise, a vendor with a product or cost structure that consumers view unfavorably can fail and be replaced quickly within the confines of the market. Fixed stores and restaurants lack this flexibility. Thus, a market that is capable of accommodating changes quickly can better satisfy consumers' interests. Farmers market partnership. A number of survey respondents indicated concern regarding competition between the proposed public market and the existing farmers market. Due to the proximity of these two projects and the small size of the market, we strongly urge the two ventures to work together. One option would be for the farmers market to serve as an extension of the public market on Sunday mornings. Another is for vendors who rent space at both markets to receive a discount. A third opportunity for collaboration is for the two to invest in joint branding and marketing to improve visibility and market penetration for both. Parking. While a number of customers will walk, bike, or take public transit to the market, most customers will drive. There must be safe parking within two blocks of the market and it must be free to the customer while they shop. Recall that most sales will come from households with children, and such families are unlikely to use public transportation, as it is expensive and difficult to manage when carrying packages. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 20 Social gathering. A major feature that attracts people to public markets is the social gathering phenomenon. People find safe, familiar, busy places very appealing. The market design should maximize this effect. For example, it could offer a children's play area, a central square with ample seating, and occasional events. Accessibility. The market must be easily visible and attractive from afar (beacon effect). For drivers, pedestrians, and public transit riders to find their way to the market, it should provide clear signage for parking and entrances. Local first. Two - thirds of community survey respondents said that "local" was the first or second most important factor in their food purchasing decisions. Therefore, we recommend that market management prioritize vendors whose products are local, and that they focus advertising on this point. Pricing. Most of the spending on food for home use comes from households earning less than $80,000. These households are price sensitive, so successful markets must offer competitive values. To do so, markets must have strong retail efficiencies: good, safe truck access; plenty of secure storage; and enough easily accessible parking to ensure a large flow of customer traffic. Packaging. The value of consumer time is exemplified by the fact that 7o percent of the lettuce bought in America today is pre- packaged. Such pre - packaged goods represent one out of every six dollars spent on vegetables today. In this form greens are mixed, washed, and ready to use. It saves buyers time and offers greater variety. As one option for this growing genre of customers, consider having a washing and packaging system that farmers could share at the market. Childcare. To attract families to the market and keep them shopping longer, the market may consider providing free childcare. The market should also have one or more features that would appeal to children of various ages. Doing so would reduce adult consumer friction when deciding where to shop. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 21 This page intentionally blank B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 22 6. Construction and Financing GBA produced a construction cost estimate for the market and ECONorthwest provided an explanation of potential funding sources. 6.1 Construction Cost GBA produced a cost estimate for the Yakima Market that applies to new construction or rehabilitation of an existing structure . The estimate is for a facility with a 15,000 square foot ground floor footprint, a 7,500 square foot basement, and a 5,o0o square foot mezzanine. The total cost to construct the facility would be $7,522,056. This cost includes both hard costs and project development /soft costs. It reflects anticipated costs for a basic, metal- framed, warm shell, and core complete with basic heating, washrooms, power distribution, and basement storage space that is critical to tenant operations. The cost to open does not include tenant improvements, such as electrical within the spaces, finishes, and lighting. The Market may wish to offer a tenant improvement allowance to help cover these costs. An allowance for a test kitchen is included. The model is very similar to the Pybus Market building in Wenatchee. This cost figure would apply for a new structure on a clear, flat site or the adaptive reuse of an existing structure. Given the vintage of buildings in the area, structural work for either scenario would be relatively equal. Any building that is suitable will require a full seismic retrofit as well as ADA and energy code compliance. 6.2 Financial Plan Most successful public markets are debt -free on the capital side and focus their longer term funding and financing plans on ongoing operations. The pro forma indicates that the project 2 Source: The Robinson Company. Yakima Public Market, Order of Magnitude Cost Estimate: December 19, 2014 (Rev. 1/8/2015), with supplemental email between GBA and ECONorthwest (March 19, 2015). B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 23 should generate positive earnings once stabilized, so the primary challenge will be to finance the total development costs of the facility (site acquisition, design, engineering, permitting, securing financing, and actual construction). Having recently gone through this exercise on the capital side, we've become familiar with a portfolio of possibilities that range from public agency and private foundation grants to tax credits and crowd funding. The options available to the market will depend on what entity owns and manages the market, what are the competing priorities for public dollars, and how much risk the public sector is willing to take in providing and /or pursuing alternative financing among other factors, so an in -depth assessment of financial options is inappropriate at this stage. We recommend completing a robust finance strategy once the market concept and management structure are complete. Some options include: • City and County grants. The state has some prohibitions on lending of credit, but the market may qualify for these general funds or general obligation bond funds if it serves a "public purpose." • Private donations. Most public markets rely heavily on private donor contributions (individual, foundation, and corporate donation, and crowd funding). Markets organized as 501(c)(3) organizations may have an easier time soliciting donations, as they are tax - deductible. • Sponsorships and naming rights. Corporations and individuals may be willing to pay for naming rights for a specific segment of the market. This payment may occur one time or be ongoing. • New Markets Tax Credits. If the market is in a "very distressed" census tract, it may qualify for these tax credits. Competition is stiff, however, so it is not necessarily a dependable source of funding. • Historic Tax Credits. If the market is in a historic building, it can obtain tax credits for up to zo percent of the qualified rehabilitation cost. This source of funding may be accessible if the City selects a historic building with adaptive reuse potential. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 24 • Community Development Block Grants. If the activities of the market benefit low- and moderate - income people, then the market may be eligible for Community Development Block Grants. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development provides these funds to the City and County. • State and Federal Agriculture Department Funds. Agriculture Departments at both the state and federal levels offer funds that can support public market development. The James Beard Public Market in Portland has successfully solicited Agriculture Department funds for capital construction of its market. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 25 This page intentionally blank B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 26 7. Operating Forecast The operating forecast shows the revenues, costs, and earnings of the Yakima Market. 7.1 Model Framework and Assumptions This section summarizes the Yakima Market financial model framework and describes key assumptions for both its revenues and costs. It assumes that all revenues and costs will rise with inflation. Unless otherwise specified, all dollar values are in 2015 dollars. 7.1.1 Revenues The Yakima Market will receive revenues from two definitive sources: (1) market vendors (stall and storage space leases), and (2) operators of the ancillary elements (commercial kitchen and event space). It may also receive revenues from corporate sponsors. ECONorthwest did not forecast revenues from corporate sponsorships, as the market may exhaust this source in the near term during its capital financing campaign. Market Vendors. Table 6 shows annual vendor lease rates and revenues at stabilization for the market. These rates are "all -in" rates, meaning that they include common area maintenance (CAM) and property tax charges. They do not include utilities, for which we recommend the market individually meter and bill, as vendors that prepare food on site will have higher utility usage. Assuming a vacancy factor of 6 percent at stabilization (in line with other markets), vendors at the market will pay $280,872 in rent each year. Table 6: Annual Vendor Lease Rates and Revenues at Stabilization, 2015 $ Variable 6 x 12 12 x 12 12 x 24 24 x 24 36 x 36 Total Number of units 8 12 4 4 2 30 Rent per unit per year $3,300 $6,300 $11,700 $21,000 $33,000 Total rental revenue, 100% occupancy $26,400 $75,600 $46,800 $84,000 $66,000 $298,800 Vacancy factor (6 %) (1,584) (4,536) (2,808) (5,040) (3,960) (17,928) Total rental revenue, at stabilization $24,816 $71,064 $43,992 $78,960 $62,040 $280,872 ECONorthwest developed lease rates based on consultations with other public markets as well as with commercial real estate broker Alex Hughes of Debbie Thomas Real estate in Portland, Oregon. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 27 Mr. Hughes specializes in unique real estate. Rent rates are a function of projected sales revenues. In addition to the unit leases, Yakima Market will also receive revenues from vendors for storage space. The model assumes that each vendor would require on average 63 SF of cold storage and 7o SF of dry storage. On an annual basis, storage would command revenues of $33 per square foot for cold storage and $12 per square foot for dry storage. Both the demand figures and lease rates reflect averages for several markets surveyed. Table 7: Annual Storage Space Lease Rates and Revenues at Stabilization, 2015 $ Variable SF Lease rate /SF Revenue Leased storage space (94% occupancy) Cold 1,781 $33.00 $58,775 Dry 1,979 12.00 23,747 Total 3,760 $82,522 Ancillary Market Components. This analysis assumes an all - in lease rate of $10 per square foot per year for the commercial kitchen and event spaces in the market. Given 4,000 leasable square feet, these components will generate $40,00 per year in lease revenues. Given the uniqueness of both the commercial kitchen and event space, the potential for these spaces to be used for educational /incubation purposes, and the lack of true comparable facilities in the market, this rate should be viewed as a placeholder. We recommend that the market explore partnership opportunities in the next phase of its analysis. 7.1.2 Expenses This section summarizes the assumptions used for operating and other expenses in the financial forecast. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 28 Payroll and Benefits. Table 8 presents the number and cost of the staff required to operate the Yakima Market. In total, it will require 2.5 full -time equivalent (FTE) employees. Using wage data from the Washington State Employment and Security Department and a benefit load of 3o percent, ECONorthwest calculated that these employees would cost a total of $160,550 in wages and benefits. All of these employees are integral to the successful operation of the market from day one, so there is no ramp -up period for staff. Table 8: Employees and Annual Payroll and Benefits, 2014 $ Total Pay and Position FTEs Annual Wage Total Payroll Benefits Manager 1 $75,000 $75,000 $97,500 Assistant manager 1 30,000 30,000 39,000 Bookkeeper 0.5 37,000 18,500 24,050 Total 2.5 $123,500 $160,550 This is a lean staffing model that assumes the facility will contract out marketing, janitorial, and maintenance services. We also recommend that the market offer incentive pay to the manager based on the manager's ability to lease up vendor stalls and support vendor revenues. Utilities. ECONorthwest adjusted utility consumption data for a Portland branch of Whole Foods as the basis for its utility cost estimate. It adjusted this cost to account for the smaller Yakima Market size and lower cost of utilities. The analysis estimates that utilities, including electricity, gas, trash, recycling, and compost, will cost an average of $0.48 per square foot per month, or $5.76 per square foot per year. The Yakima Market likely will only cover the cost of utilities for common areas and other non - leased SF; it will pass on the cost of utilities for leased space to vendors and the operators of other ancillary components. Therefore, the total cost of utilities for the Market itself would be $87,000. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 29 Pest Control, Office, Legal, and other Professional. ECONorthwest used data from other public market business plans to estimate the pest control, office, legal, and other professional costs to Yakima Market. It reduced these costs marginally to account for the lower cost of services in Yakima. On an annual basis, we assume that Yakima Market will pay $11,000 for pest control, $15,000 for general office and other expenses, and $5,000 for legal and other professional expenses. Janitorial and Maintenance Services. To minimize the operating expenses, ECONorthwest recommends that the market contract out janitorial and maintenance services. We assumed this cost would equate to roughly the cost of hiring a full -time maintenance employee, $40,000 per year. The actual cost will depend on if the market uses two separate contractors (e.g., one for janitorial and one for maintenance) and how frequently it requires service. Marketing. The analysis assumes that the market will spend $20,000 on marketing each year. This figure reflects the per square foot expenditures of Seattle's Pike Place Market. Insurance. ECONorthwest obtained an insurance quote for Yakima Market from a commercial insurance broker in the James Beard Public Market in the Portland area, and adjusted the policy and premium for the construction cost estimate for the Yakima Market. ECONorthwest estimates that insurance will cost $11,000 per year. This quote assumes that vendors and other lessors would have their own insurance, and that the market would be responsible solely for the building and any property inside that is not leased. 7.2 Financial Forecast This section shows the financial performance of Yakima Market over a ten -year period. The analysis assumes that the market opens in January 2017 and reaches stabilization by January 2019. Therefore, our financial statements show performance from 2017 through 2026. Both the earnings and cash flow statements indicate that Yakima Market, if it is successful in attracting and retaining customers, will be a profitable enterprise. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 30 Table 9 provides the earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) statement for Yakima Market. The EBITDA statement is a good indicator of organizational performance, as it shows the net operating profit, while eliminating the effects of financing and accounting decisions. In its first two year of operations, Yakima Market will have small net losses as it ramps up. At stabilization in 2019, the market will generate positive earnings of $58,501. EBITDA will rise at about the rate of inflation in each year thereafter, as this analysis assumes that both lease rates and expenses (with the exception of property taxes) rise with inflation. Table 9: Earnings Statement, 2018 - 2027, Current Dollars 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Occupancy and Lease Rates Vendors Leasable SF, indoor and outdoo 8,352 8,352 8,352 8,352 8,352 8,352 8,352 8,352 8,352 8,352 Occupancy rate 75% 80% 94% 94% 94% 94% 94% 94% 94% 94% Leased SF 6,264 6,682 7,851 7,851 7,851 7,851 7,851 7,851 7,851 7,851 Average lease rate, $ /SF, all in $37 $38 $39 $40 $41 $42 $43 $44 $45 $46 Commercial Kitchen and Event Space Leasable SF 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 Occupancy rate 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Leased SF 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 Average lease rate, $ /SF, all in $10 $11 $11 $11 $11 $12 $12 $12 $13 $13 Storage Cold Leasable SF 1,895 1,895 1,895 1,895 1,895 1,895 1,895 1,895 1,895 1,895 Occupancy rate 50% 75% 94% 94% 94% 94% 94% 94% 94% 94% Leased SF 947 1,421 1,781 1,781 1,781 1,781 1,781 1,781 1,781 1,781 Average lease rate, $ /SF, all in $34.23 $35.00 $35.85 $36.75 $37.67 $38.61 $39.58 $40.57 $41.58 $42.62 Dry Leasable SF 2,105 2,105 2,105 2,105 2,105 2,105 2,105 2,105 2,105 2,105 Occupancy rate 50% 75% 94% 94% 94% 94% 94% 94% 94% 94% Leased SF 1,053 1,579 1,979 1,979 1,979 1,979 1,979 1,979 1,979 1,979 Average lease rate, $ /SF, all in $12.45 $12.73 $13.04 $13.36 $13.70 $14.04 $14.39 $14.75 $15.12 $15.50 Revenues Vendors $232,484 $253,510 $305,165 $312,794 $320,614 $328,629 $336,845 $345,266 $353,898 $362,745 Commercial Kitchen 41,497 42,421 43,460 44,546 45,660 46,801 47,971 49,171 50,400 51,660 Storage 45,537 69,828 89,659 91,901 94,198 96,553 98,967 101,441 103,978 106,577 Total revenues $319,518 $365,760 $438,284 $449,241 $460,472 $471,984 $483,783 $495,878 $508,275 $520,982 Cash Operating Expenses Payroll and benefits $166,557 $170,269 $174,436 $178,797 $183,267 $187,849 $192,545 $197,358 $202,292 $207,350 Yakima utilities 90,255 92,267 94,525 96,888 99,310 101,793 104,338 106,946 109,620 112,360 Pest control 11,412 11,666 11,951 12,250 12,556 12,870 13,192 13,522 13,860 14,206 General office and other 15,561 15,908 16,297 16,705 17,122 17,550 17,989 18,439 18,900 19,372 Legal and professional 5,187 5,303 5,432 5,568 5,707 5,850 5,996 6,146 6,300 6,457 Janitorial and maintenance 41,497 42,421 43,460 44,546 45,660 46,801 47,971 49,171 50,400 51,660 Marketing 20,748 21,211 21,730 22,273 22,830 23,401 23,986 24,585 25,200 25,830 Insurance 11,412 11,666 11,951 12,250 12,556 12,870 13,192 13,522 13,860 14,206 Cash operating expenses $362,628 $370,710 $379,783 $389,277 $399,009 $408,984 $419,209 $429,689 $440,432 $451,442 EBITDA - $43,110 -$4,950 $58,501 $59,964 $61,463 $62,999 $64,574 $66,189 $67,843 $69,539 B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 31 This page intentionally blank B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 32 8. Economic Impacts and Benefits The market will have a range of beneficial impacts on local governments, the regional economy, and the local community. Economic Impacts. Suppliers of goods and services to the market, including farmers, wholesalers, and shippers, will see demand from the market and its vendors, thus increasing their employment. Those are indirect impacts. More importantly, the earnings going to employees, vendors, and farmers because of the market will be spent and re -spent throughout the region. These induced impacts would be significant. Fiscal Impacts. In addition to economic impacts, the market will have fiscal impacts in the form of tax revenues to state and local governments. The $4.2 to $6.5 million in sales each year would generate substantial sales tax revenues. If a private entity or nonprofit owns the Market, it would pay property tax revenues. Dynamic Impacts. Over the long -term, the market will have dynamic impacts on the economy. Dynamic impacts are qualitative and long -term. Over time, and particularly if the market has an incubator /accelerator component, it will support development of the local food processing industry. Agricultural producers and local entrepreneurs will have the opportunity to produce value -added products, which have higher margins. As the number and size of these businesses grow, so too will the region's brand, drawing more food- and beverage - related businesses from outside the area. Eventually, we would expect Yakima to develop a robust food and beverage cluster. Community and Economic Development Impacts. The Market will draw visitors from across the County to downtown. If it is located adjacent to the public plaza, the Market may increase pedestrian traffic to the plaza and nearby businesses. As a result, we would expect new businesses to locate downtown and invest in its revitalization. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 33 This page intentionally blank B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 34 9. Appendix A: Outreach Results During the winter or 2015, the City of Yakima conducted an online community survey to ask residents about their shopping habits and interest in a public market in Yakima. Respondents to the survey were overwhelmingly supportive of a public market, and most favor locating it in downtown Yakima. The opportunity for local fresh produce was by far the greatest appeal, followed by variety and quality. A summary of survey findings follows below. On your most recent grocery shopping trip ... WHERE DID YOU GO? Most shop for groceries at a grocery (84 %) or grocery /department (38 %) store. For "Other," Costco was named 29 times out of 105 responses (28 %). HOW MUCH DID YOU SPEND? Most spent between $5o and $150 (62 %). RANK THE FOLLOWING CONSIDERATIONS IN ORDER OF IMPORTANCE TO YOUR PURCHASING DECISIONS Rankings of Locally Produced, Price, Convenience, and Organic, respondents' rankings were very balanced, with locally produced and price at the top and organic at the bottom. Score Consideration 2.91 Locally Produced 2.87 Price 2.40 Convenience 1.82 Organic B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 35 OVERALL, HOW SATISFIED WERE YOU WITH YOUR MOST RECENT GROCERY SHOPPING EXPERIENCE? Respondents were largely satisfied (80 %) with their grocery shopping experience. Those not satisfied had various comments about why, including: Not Local (30/121) 25% Low Quality Produce (24/121) 20% Not Fresh (21/121) 17% Not Organic (15/121) 12% Price / Too Expense (12/121) 10% Not Specialty (7/121) 6% Don't like Walmart (6/121) 5% Want a Farmers Market (5/121) 4% Low Quality (5/121) 4% Want a Trader Joes (4/121) 3% For food and beverage shopping in the last two weeks ... WHERE DID YOU GO? Grocery store (e.g. Safeway) 89% 473 Grocery /department store (e.g. Walmart) 37% 211 Convenience store 10% 55 Farmers market 8% 47 Specialty foods market 19% 108 Other (please specify) 19% 105 Other: Costco (27/105) 26% Restaurant (22/105) 21% HOW MANY TIMES DID YOU PURCHASE FOOD OR BEVERAGE IN THE LAST TWO WEEKS? 61% Three or more times 29% Twice HOW MUCH DID YOU SPEND? Over $100 78% Over $150 56% Over $200 32% Over $250 16% HOW MANY TIMES DID YOU VISIT A FULL SERVICE OR FAST -FOOD RESTAURANT IN THE PAST TWO WEEKS? Average of twice for both full- service and fast food. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 36 HOW MUCH DID YOU SPEND IN THE LAST TWO WEEKS AT RESTAURANTS? 65% spending less than $100. HOW FREQUENTLY DO YOU VISIT FARMERS MARKETS OR SPECIALTY FOOD MARKETS? 48% once a month or more, including 19% once a week or more WHAT DO YOU LIKE ABOUT THE FARMERS MARKETS OR SPECIALTY FOOD MARKETS YOU VISIT? With almost all survey respondents answering the question, about half named "local," half named "fresh," and almost a third named "produce" as what they like about farmers markets or specialty food markets. "Variety," "quality," "organic," and "price" were also common responses. Local (256/505) 51% Fresh (238/505) 47% Produce (157/505) 31% Variety (63/505) 12% Quality (46/505) 9% Organic (37/505) 7% Price (19/505) 4% WHAT DO YOU NOT LIKE ABOUT THE FARMERS MARKETS OF SPECIALTY FOOD MARKETS YOU VISIT? Price or cost was the number one answer by respondents to what they do not like about farmers markets or specialty food markets, at 13 %. Other issues mentioned frequently included "selection," "hours /schedule," and "inconvenience." Notably, just as many people responded with "nothing" that they do not like as to most of the negative responses. Price /cost (60/460) 13% Selection (42/460) 9% Nothing (37/460) 8% Hours /schedule (32/460) 7% Inconvenience (27/460) 6% B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 37 WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE A PUBLIC MARKET IN YAKIMA? Respondents overwhelmingly like the idea of a public market in Yakima, with 83% supporting the idea, and only 9% against. Yes 83% No 9% Don't know 8% IF NO, PLEASE EXPLAIN ... Of those responding no to a public market in Yakima, the most common reason was that there is "no need" for it. Parking was also a common response. Notably, several people mentioned taxes (or a poor use of tax dollars) to this open -ended question. No need (36/46) 78% Parking (27/46) 59% Taxes (5/46) 11% WHAT WOULD BE AN IDEAL LOCATION FOR A PUBLIC MARKET IN YAKIMA? With almost everyone answering the question, the overwhelming favorite location for a public market in Yakima was "downtown," with 45% mentioning downtown in this open -ended question, although a handful of respondents made strong statements against locating a public market downtown (mostly because of problems with the downtown area). Several people mentioned locating the market in combination with Millennium Plaza and /or the new plaza. B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 38 WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE IN A PUBLIC MARKET? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) When asked what they would like to see in a pubic market, almost all respondents chose food and beverage vendors and prepared foods. Two - thirds selected restaurants, and almost as many selected an event space. About half (53 %) selected a commercial kitchen, and almost half (47 %) selected educational programs. Food and beverage vendors 94% 496 Prepared foods 80% 425 Restaurants 66% 350 An event space 59% 314 A commercial kitchen 53% 278 Educational program 47% 249 Other (please specify) 32% 167 WHAT IS YOUR ZIP CODE? Most respondents were from local ZIP codes, with 74% from 98908, 98902, or 98901. 98908 155 98902 137 98901 64 98942 32 98903 26 Other 69 483 HOW OLD ARE YOU? Respondents were from a solid cross section of ages, with 76% falling between 25 and 64 years of age. Under 18 0% 1 18to24 14% 72 25 to 34 23% 123 35 to 44 22% 115 45 to 54 15% 80 55 to 64 16% 83 65 or older 10% 55 529 B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 39 HOW MANY PEOPLE LIVE IN YOUR HOME (INCLUDING YOURSELF)? Respondents came from a variety of household sizes, with two - person households by far the most common (42 %), followed by three- and four - person households. 1 57 2 221 3 96 4 88 5 43 6 12 7 4 8 2 9 2 525 WHAT IS YOUR ANNUAL TOTAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME? Respondents' incomes were higher than Yakima's population as a whole, with 47% having a household income over $75,000 per year. Less than $25,000 9% 47 $25,000 to $50,000 19% 100 $50,000 to $75,000 24% 126 Over $75,000 47% 245 518 B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 40 10. Appendix B: Workshop Summary B D S ECONorthwest GRAHAM BABA ARCHITECTS 41 Public Market /Mixed Use Incubator Feasibility Study Options Workshop Summary October 27, 2014 Executive Summary The following is a summary of options for a public market /mixed -use incubator as presented to the City of Yakima on October 27, 2014. During this daylong workshop, the consulting team toured potential sites and brainstormed options, while considering existing plans and findings from previously completed outreach with potential vendors. These activities helped the team identify priorities for a public market and /or mixed -use incubator in Yakima. Existing plans and key findings from initial outreach: • The City of Yakima has identified downtown revitalization as a community priority; • Conceptual design is complete and fundraising is underway for an iconic public plaza in downtown Yakima; • There is strong demand in Yakima and nearby communities from potential vendors in a public market; • There is also strong demand for a commercial kitchen from food artisans in the Yakima area. Successful public markets have many of the following characteristics in common: • They are 'right sized' for their communities; • Vendors are charged reasonable rents and have an option to rent more than one space to meet their needs; • They have a mix of vendors selling local produce and prepared foods; • Their success is, in large part, related to the number and diversity of vendors they have; • They have taken advantage of iconic buildings or features; • They are debt free (which allows for reasonable rents); capital costs were funded up front through allocations from public agencies, fundraising, crowdsourcing, and use of applicable tax credits; • They have a strong operating entity to oversee development and on -going operations; • They sometimes include and benefit from a fully equipped, licensed, and accredited commercial kitchen that may or may not be operated by the same entity. Based on the above, the Consulting Team recommends that the City of Yakima: • Proceed with planning for a Public Market and Incubator Kitchen to capitalize on and accelerate existing momentum in downtown Yakima; • Consider the above characteristics when making decisions about the future of a public market; • Conjoin the Public Market and Incubator Kitchen with the Public Plaza to reinforce both investments. These findings, characteristics, and recommendations will inform the remaining phases of the feasibility study. Introduction The consulting team for the Public Market /Mixed Use Incubator Feasibility Study met in Yakima for a one -day workshop on October 27, 2014. They collaboratively evaluated the previous outreach and analysis, toured potential sites, brainstormed options, and presented a synthesis of options to the Steering Committee, City Manager, Councilors and others. This summary highlights options for a public market and /or mixed -use incubator for the City of Yakima. BDS PLANNING & URBAN DESIGN Yakima - Options Workshop- Summary- v4- 20141027.docx 12/5/14 Public Market /Mixed Use Incubator Feasibility Study OPTIONS WORKSHOP SUMMARY 2 Public Market Concepts Ron Paul is a public market expert who is leading the charge to build the James Beard Public Market in Portland, Oregon as a year - round, food focused venue. Ron also brings his unique expertise as a former chef, restaurateur, and chief of staff to a Portland City Councilor (who is now mayor of Portland). Ron portrayed some of the essential characteristics of successful public markets. A public market requires a critical mass and mix of vendors who sell local products and prepared food whenever possible, but understand that the regional growing season can limit those offerings. Selling accurately labeled foods from elsewhere in the world is a necessity for the public market to succeed. The space needs to be 'sized right' for the community. Iconic public markets have a vibrancy and sense of community that attracts vendors, consumers, and visitors —they tell the story of the local people, their food, and their culture. A teaching kitchen, or accelerator /incubator kitchen, can help people learn more about food in general. More importantly, a commercial kitchen allows small businesses to prepare their products and expand their product lines in a fully equipped, licensed, and accredited space. The Consulting Team previously discussed the variables of co- locating a public market with an accelerator kitchen in the City of Yakima. The Team agreed that a public market and accelerator kitchen should be co- located if possible, but could also be developed close to each other for synchronicity if not necessarily in the same building. Based on comparably sized cities across the country, the City of Yakima might consider a public market that: • Is 15,000 20,000 square feet in space (gross), ideally with an additional 2,000 -4,000 square foot (gross) accelerator kitchen for vendors, and additional space for storage; • Uses a 12' x 12' stall module design to accommodate as many as 30 vendors, which can result in higher sales at lower overhead; some vendors will be happy with a small space. Others will want more space based on their business (e.g. produce) to showcase their products; and • Has, on average, 25 - 30 vendors. Pybus Market in Wenatchee, by comparison, is 25,000 square feet with 17 vendors. Economics & Funding Abe Farkas has over three decades of experience in planning and developing a wide variety of mixed -use, sustainable projects and structuring successful public - private partnerships that have improved urban neighborhoods, downtowns, business districts, and university environments. Abe's work at ECONorthwest, as well as his past experiences at the Portland Development Commission and City of Eugene, include analyzing the financial feasibility for a number of diverse projects, including the Portland Public Market Feasibility Analysis and Business Plan. Abe provided a brief overview about the economics of successful public market. Fundamentally, a public market needs to start out debt -free on the capital side. Additionally, successful markets have a strong operating entity (can be non - profit, public or private) to oversee development and on -going operations. It is possible that the development overseer and the on -going operator might be different entities, but they do need to coordinate from the beginning. Procuring and evaluating tenant interest depends largely on how rent is explained to them. It is better to talk about rent on a daily or monthly basis, rather than per year or per square foot. The key is getting tenants to consider what they might expect in gross revenues on a daily basis, and relating that to a percentage of rent paid daily or monthly. The numbers used in the examples are orders of magnitude only, and meant solely to stimulate thinking. They are ranges; and could be more, or less, depending on the situation. Construction may cost $200 to $300 per square foot; this includes hard and soft costs. Various soft costs are often estimated up to 20 % -35% because they include architecture, building fees, technical fees etc. A 15,000- 20,000 square foot public market for Yakima could cost between $3.5 and $5.1M to build. B DS 12/5/14 Public Market /Mixed Use Incubator Feasibility Study OPTIONS WORKSHOP SUMMARY 3 In order to remain debt free on the capital side, potential sources of capital funding should include: • Allocations from public agencies, city, county, state, and federal government; • Fundraising, naming rights, short and long -term sponsorships, and crowdsourcing; and • Rehabilitation or adaptive reuse tax credits for historic buildings. Site Assessment Brian Douglas Scott is Principal of BDS Planning & Urban in Seattle. He has more than 30 years of experience in comprehensive community development. Brian's past experience includes 15 years as President and Executive Director of the Oregon Downtown Development Association. As project director of the Ankeny /Burnside Redevelopment Framework in Portland, he helped facilitate a permanent home for the Portland Saturday Market in conjunction with more than $30M in related public and private development. Brian explained how the Consulting Team assessed the seven sites selected by the City of Yakima for the feasibility study. After a tour, the Consulting Team discussed the pros and cons of each site. They also considered two sites of their own choosing. The Team considered each site in relation to its location and size, existing buildings /infrastructure, lighting, ambiance, parking, and adjacency to the proposed plaza, among other criteria. The pros and cons of each site were identified. P IEI PublicM k t / CommerCi Kitchen 511e - ■:ta: , i.l< c ar, v� •xt a t t :''''W‘1,,\ bRF t r • p t _ _ � i � ' F t A, \l4M . , -: - i ' ,:!' • '‘ ...."r .• VI, ' . .... .., . ' 4,00- .., ... ,;• _ V. e y i �� �•'�• ' �• / E Plata '- V t _ ::- . i ..... _- • -. 0 _ -...„,„ .. l it t .., . T• s � F 1 . � j Left: Sites considered for Public Market " A - 0 sir Below: Summary of Co- location & Site Evaluations Incubator Kitchen Public Market Locations Co- Locate Separate North Front South Front IHellison Food Court Wilson K &K Dragon Inn Plaza Plaza co- located adjacent •Synergy •Cheaper •Ambiance • Size & shape •Building •Location •Location •Location •Location • Location! • Location! •Focus •Simpler •Adjacencies • Market "feel" •Facilities •Tax credits •Parking •Adjacent •Adjacent •Adjacent •Visibility •Opportunity •Size •Activating •Activating •Activating to to change •Light •Tax credits • Ownership 0 o_ Avai lability • Residential adjacencies •Tax credits •Cost •Missed •Distant •Distant •Distant •Nonadjacent Small per •Nonadjacent •Tough •New •Availability? •Space opportunity •Small •Parking •Parking •Ambiance floor •Not iconic building construction •Size? c •Complicated •Ownership •Adjacencies • Expensive to •Small •Complexity •Mixed -use • Loss of •Displace 0 0 • New •Ownership retrofit •Adjacencies •Expensive to challenges existing uses parking construction • New • Image retrofit • Expensive to • Requires construction retrofit whole bldg. B D S 12/5/14 Public Market /Mixed Use Incubator Feasibility Study OPTIONS WORKSHOP SUMMARY 4 Each of the sites considered had merits for a Public Market and /or a Commercial Kitchen. Most of the sites could be physically adapted to support these uses. A primary issue, however, is the relationship of the Public Market and Commercial Incubator Kitchen to the Public Plaza. Downtown Yakima already struggles to compete economically. Successful commercial districts function best when their destination uses are close together to focus and reinforce the attraction of the whole district. As such, the consulting team strongly suggests that the Public Market be co- located with the Public Plaza in order to reinforce the community's investments and draw more activity. The consulting team also looked at the co- location of a commercial kitchen with the public market using the same criteria. The Team agreed that there is not a definitive answer to whether these facilities should be co- located. Given the local enthusiasm for both, however, the opportunity for one to reinforce the other should be captured. Market Concept Brett Baba, co- founder of Graham Baba Architects in Seattle in 2006, is an architect with over 30 years of experience with residential and public projects. The firm's best -known project is the nationally recognized, multi -use Melrose Market, which opened in Seattle in 2010. Graham Baba also designed the Pybus Public Market in Wenatchee, which provides an excellent precedent and successful model for a public market in Yakima. Brett described the need for a public market to have iconic character. Pybus Market had the space already, along with iconic buildings (war -time steel manufacturing). Another popular market is the Ferry Terminal in San Francisco. i' !' .�� � � a -�, ' l. + "` - 111111,- k � . .Ili: I k, /', `1 -l. J '4 71 N + , iI l4 ( A 1iY1A .r � . 1' I 1 . +�-, .. ' I 'r. -'M l °P. ' ' MX ,p 11 11W le / 'Or. ; . tei I _ $ ' . % la . Left (above & below): Pybus Public Market, BLIC Wenatchee, WA PU e, Right (above & below): M p R K Ferry Terminal Market San Francisco, CA ,' ali+s�“06 °4 ae WM 'Ma t 1 1 iffill MIMI III 3 To be a long -term success, a public market has to be a place that has iconic character. For some of the possible sites for the Yakima Public Market, building facades would need to be dramatically enhanced, which can be very expensive. Brett explained the Consulting Team's discussion about the need for an iconic feeling as reinforcement for the recommendation that the Public Market be located in conjunction with the Public Plaza. B D 5 12/5/14 Public Market /Mixed Use Incubator Feasibility Study OPTIONS WORKSHOP SUMMARY 5 Discussion Below are highlights from the concluding discussion: • A close relationship between a public market and the farmers market will benefit both markets and community. • Previously completed outreach suggests there is a high level of interest from vendors in a public market. • A compelling vision and location for a public market will catalyze demand and community excitement. • To be debt free, a market will need to be funded by donors, grants, allocations, applicable tax credits etc. • The operating budget for the market would be funded through vendor rentals and other generated revenue. Additional vendor interviews would be needed to determine a threshold for possible rents. • If the City moves forward with a public market, transparent criteria for site selection will be needed. • If the City moves forward with this project, public and private champions for the public market will be required both for development and for operations. B DS 12/5/14