CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Land Use, Governance, Funding & Implementation

Transcription

1 M a r y l a n d P a r k L a k e D i s t r i c t Advisory Committee Meeting CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Land Use, Governance, Funding & Implementation City of Maryland Heights, Missouri November 07, 2018

2 Agenda Review the Conceptual Development Plan Land Use and Development Program Preferred Option (first presented August 29, 2018) Present the Governance Options and Implementation Principles of the Draft Funding & Governance Plan Discuss and obtain Advisory Committee feedback on the Governance Options and Implementation Principles No decisions are expected at this meeting

3 INTRODUCTION

4 Introduction Project Objective Maryland Park Lake District The objective of this planning process is to develop an Economic Development Plan for the Maryland Park Lake District in Maryland Heights. This Plan is inclusive of a: Conceptual Development Plan; Infrastructure Plan; and Implementation Plan. The Economic Development Plan is a long-term vision (30+ years) intended to be implemented with the full participation of Lake District Property owners.

5 Introduction Lake District Vision Maryland Park Lake District

6 Planning + Implementation: Multi-level / multi-jurisdictional City will facilitate development Flood Protection: Missouri River Levee at 500-year flood event Stormwater Management: Howard Bend Levee District responsible for the finance, design, construction and maintenance of a regional stormwater conveyance and storage system Will be designed to manage upland flow for 100-year joint frequency storm-event Stormwater system to serve multifunctional purpose of open space & recreation Maryland Park Lake District Introduction Comprehensive Plan Premises Maryland Park Lake District Transportation: An efficient and effective transportation system that also integrates pedestrian, bikeways and transit Public Utilities: Provision of water and sewer mains and local service lies will be the responsibility of the developers to fund and construct, pursuant to applicable public standards Development Quality: Development will occur in a manner that creates character and adds value Sustainable Solutions: Development will be evaluated based on its social, environmental and economic sustainability

7 Introduction Work Process Maryland Park Lake District Phase 1.0: Site Analysis & Assessment Goals & Strategies Phase 2.0: Land Use & Development + Infrastructure Strategy Phase 3.0: Phase 4.0: Phase 5.0: Conceptual Development Plan Draft Lake District Economic Development Plan Final Lake District Economic Development Plan

8 Introduction Next Phase Phase 4.0: Draft Lake District Economic Development Plan Develop the Draft Lake District Development Plan Plan to build up on the physical & spatial recommendations of the Conceptual Development Plan, integrating all Constituent Plan components developed by the Project Team. Create an illustrative Urban Design Plan, with potential subareas plans. Develop draft implementation components: Draft Implementation Plan, Draft Design Guidelines & Draft Development Guidelines.

9 Introduction Next Phase Phase 5.0: Final Lake District Economic Development Plan Develop the Final Lake District Economic Development Plan Refine, revise, and finalize the Lake District Economic Development Plan, inclusive of the Conceptual Development Plan, the Infrastructure Plan [by others] & the Implementation Plan [with others].

10 Conceptual Development Plan

11 Maryland Park Lake District Planning Assumptions 1. Store upland run-off within the Lake District 2. Design for 9.9 Rainfall Event 3. Plan for 444 Groundwater Levels 4. Create integrated and connected large-scale Development Areas through District-Wide Flood & Stormwater Management System 5. Reduce Flooding of the Active Recreation areas within Creve Coeur Park 6. Improve Creve Coeur Lake Water Quality & Reduce Sedimentation 7. Plan for Flood Safety / Levels of Risk appropriate for the Land-Use 8. Store Creve Coeur Creek flow in existing Creve Coeur Park wetlands assuming preservation of vegetation & no excavation (cut & fill)

12 Conceptual Development Plan FLOOD & STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN Total Protected Land Approx. 4,100 Acres Private Land Approx. 3,200 Acres Public Land Approx. 900 Acres Total Flood Storage Area Approx. 2,100 Acres Private Land Approx. 300 Acres Public Land Approx. 1,800 Acres

13 Conceptual Development Plan RIVER VALLEY SUB-DISTRICT Residential Land Use with supporting retail and services Detailed development program and density to be determined based on market study and economic assessment

14 Conceptual Development Plan RIVERPORT SUB-DISTRICT Mixed-Use/Entertainment Land Uses Detailed development program and density to be determined based on market study and economic assessment

15 Conceptual Development Plan EXPRESSWAY & CRYSTAL SPRINGS SUB-DISTRICTS ALTERNATE 1 Active and Passive Recreation with Mixed-Use Land Uses Detailed development program and density to be determined based on market study and economic assessment

16 Conceptual Development Plan EXPRESSWAY & CRYSTAL SPRINGS SUB-DISTRICTS ALTERNATE 2 Logistics Development with Active and Passive Recreation and Mixed-Use Land Uses Detailed development program and density to be determined based on market study and economic assessment

17 Conceptual Development Plan EXPRESSWAY & CRYSTAL SPRINGS SUB-DISTRICTS ALTERNATE 3 Mixed-Use along MO-141 with Active Recreation and Residential Land Uses Detailed development program and density to be determined based on market study and economic assessment

18 Conceptual Development Plan MARYLAND PARK LAKE DISTRICT CHALLENGES Lack of an agreed upon, integrated districtwide and market based vision Fragmented governance and cooperation for implementation Lack of funding, both capital and O+M (operations and maintenance)

19 CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Funding & Governance Strategies PRECEDENT CASE STUDY

20 Monarch Chesterfield Levee District District Area: 4,240 acres Location: Missouri River Bottoms, St. Louis County Context Similarities: 500 Year Missouri River levee protected, along Interstate 64. Development Type/Model: Multiple land owners + developer & incremental parcel-by-parcel development

21 Monarch Chesterfield Levee District HISTORY In 1940 s the region comprised of a network of farm levees The Levee District was formed July 1947, pursuant to an Order of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Missouri. By 1963, levee was certified to be at 100 year protection level. After the 1993 floods, officials decided that the levee needed to be raised far beyond existing standards to provide protection to private investment.

22 Monarch Chesterfield Levee District 1993 FLOOD 1993 flooded 4,400 with damages between $250-$500 million. The City & County realized early that the levee needed to be raised to bring in investment in the Valley. Motivation came from developments at Earth City & Riverport, which remained dry during the 1993 flood. A 20-member task force, including local businessmen, identified key goals and funding sources which the city published in November The consensus favored Maximum Floodplain Development.

23 Monarch Chesterfield Levee District GOVERNING ENTITY Board of Supervisors pursuant to Missouri Revised Statutes. Chesterfield City Council established a TIF District in October The Chesterfield Community Development Corp. (CCDC), the city's economic-development agency, oversees the TIF district. The TIF commission coordinated its efforts with the five member board of supervisors of the privately controlled Levee District.

24 Monarch Chesterfield Levee District CAPITAL FINANCING SOURCES TIF District, federal reimbursement for levee, City of Chesterfield funds, and private lenders. Bonds were issued for necessary infrastructure improvements to the redevelopment district. The debt was amortized for 23 years. The TIF District paid of the bonds in 13 years in in 2007, 10 years earlier than original expected closure of The city has applied for more than $16 million in federal credits through the Corps for work already completed (FEMA PL 84-99).

25 Monarch Chesterfield Levee District MANAGEMENT & OPERATIONS FINANCING Annual taxation of property owners (maintenance tax) $68 million in new infrastructure improvements, $25 of those required to raise Monarch Chesterfield Levee. $32 million of additional infrastructure improvements ($100 million total); $1 billion in resulting economic activity. $72.5 million TIF scheme payed for most of the levee and road improvements.

26 CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft Funding & Governance Plan

27 Howard Bend Levee District District Area: 6,500 acres protected. Total 8500 acres of land. Location: Missouri River Bottoms, St. Louis County. The Howard Bend Levee District is located in the Cities of Maryland Heights and Chesterfield, St. Louis County, Missouri approximately 17 miles west of the City of St. Louis. Context Similarities: 500 year Missouri River levee protected, handles flows from three creeks/ watersheds, along MO- 141/364. Development Type/Model: Incremental development, parcel-by-parcel

28 Howard Bend Levee District OVERVIEW Levee Districts are formed under the Circuit Court of St Louis County pursuant to the Revised Missouri Statutes. Part of FEMA s PL program, which makes them eligible for reimbursement for flood fighting and related major maintenance costs. The board of supervisors of any drainage district organized under the provisions of sections to will levy an uniform tax of not more than eight dollars per acre upon each acre of land within such district. (Revised Statutes State of Missouri)

29 Howard Bend Levee District HISTORY Prior to 1987 the District area was largely protected by an agricultural levee maintained by the Howard Bend Levee Association. An Association (501(a)) is a group of persons banded together for a specific purpose. The Association must have a written document, such as articles of association, showing its creation. (Internal Revenue Service) A Levee District is a judicial district separated for a special purpose, presided over by a federal district court Google Earth Imaging

30 Howard Bend Levee District OVERVIEW Created in July 1987 by the Circuit Court of St. Louis County, pursuant to the petition of the owners of a majority of the land within the District. Initially created for a period of 100 years. Construction of the 500 year river levee was completed in 2004 and a FEMA Letter of Map Revision was dated April 13, 2006 specifying that most of the property in the District is not flood plain, may be developed, subject to the land use regulations, and qualifies for flood insurance. (Howard Bend Levee District)

31 Howard Bend Levee District GOVERNING ENTITY Board of Supervisors (5): One is elected by the property owners each August for a term of five years. Property owners get one vote per acre. The Board is responsible for construction and maintenance of the District s entire flood protection system. Board of Supervisors has the power & authority to hold and control all water power created by works of the District. (Howard Bend Levee District Revised Statutes State of Missouri)

32 Howard Bend Levee District JURISDICTIONAL ROLES Howard Bend Levee District reviews development plans with regard to storm water conveyance, channel protection, and flood control. The District is also responsible for maintaining the levee system. City of Maryland Heights reviews development plans to ensure conformance with Chapter 10, Flood Control, of the Municipal Code. By enforcing them, the City is able to participate in the National Flood Insurance Community Rating System. (Framework Document City of Maryland Heights, 2015)

33 Howard Bend Levee District JURISDICTIONAL ROLES Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is the federal agency responsible for the National Flood Insurance Rate Program (NFIP). FEMA publishes the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM). The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Levee Safety Program works to better understand, manage, and reduce the flood risks associated with levees. They maintain a national inventory of levee systems, inspect and assess levee systems, and communicate risk- related issues. (Framework Document City of Maryland Heights, 2015)

34 Howard Bend Levee District JURISDICTIONAL ROLES Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District (MSD) has jurisdiction over storm water management and sanitary sewers. In the Howard Bend Levee District, MSD predominately reviews development plans to ensure that their storm water quality regulations are satisfied. MSD is also the utility provider for sanitary sewers in the area. (Framework Document City of Maryland Heights, 2015)

35 Howard Bend Levee District CAPITAL FINANCING SOURCES Municipal Levee District Improvement Bonds. Paid for Levee Construction Prior to 1987 the District area was largely protected by an agricultural levee. The District determined that major improvements to the flood protection system were necessary in the 1990 s to attract economic development. Separate installment rates are set to defray the cost of principal and interest payments owed under bonds issued by the District Separate assessment from maintenance tax paid by property owners to pay for the Improvement Bonds (Howard Bend Levee District)

36 Howard Bend Levee District MANAGEMENT & OPERATIONS FINANCING Annual taxation of property owners (maintenance tax), and Public Law The PL program permits the District to receive reimbursement for most costs associated with flood fighting during major high water event Major repairs could qualify as well. A separate rate is set for the maintenance assessments necessary for the annual operating expenses of the District. (Howard Bend Levee District)

37 Howard Bend Levee District COUNTY & CITY 4 City Wards 1 Levee District 78 Private Property Owners 13 Public Property Owners Over half the City s total land area.

38 Conceptual Development Plan MARYLAND PARK LAKE DISTRICT IMPLEMENTATION, GOVERNANCE & FUNDING PRINCIPLES Master Plan is adopted by all the principal entities (Maryland Heights, Howard Bend Levee District & St. Louis County) One FEMA Letter of Map Amendment for the District New Governance Model support by the necessary technical expertise to implement the Master Plan on a everyday basis Diversified funding structure to leverage a range of funding opportunities Access new capital and O+M funding sources to support existing funding streams

39 Implementation Phasing Flood & Stormwater Control Plan is spatially consistent and can be incrementally upgraded according to market demand. System is designed so that short-term development will not preclude future development of a higher value. Obtain a ONE-TIME permit for all flood and stormwater improvements.

40 Implementation Assumption ONE TIME APPLICATION Permit (EPA) 2 to 2 1\2 years Wetlands, streams, lakes, ponds and other waters are regulated by state and federal law, and permits are required to impact these water bodies. Obtaining state and federal wetland permits is a time consuming process. Letter of Map Amendment (FEMA) 1 to 2 years A Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA) is an official amendment, by letter, to an effective National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) map. A LOMA establishes a property's location in relation to the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA).

41 Implementation Funding CAPITAL FUNDING FEDERAL SOURCES Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) Grant Program (FEMA) Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Grant Program (FEMA) Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) (FEMA) Low Impact Development/Green Infrastructure Grant Program (EPA) Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development (BUILD) Transportation Discretionary Grants Program (DOT)

42 Implementation Funding CAPITAL FUNDING (Continued) STATE SOURCES Department of Transportation (MODOT) Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Department of Conservation (MDC) HOWARD BEND LEVEE DISTRICT Levee District Tax (Repayment of Bonds, New Projects) COUNTY SOURCES County Property Tax Allocation Sales Tax Pool Allocation CITY & LOCAL SOURCES Parks & Stormwater Tax (Maryland Heights) Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District Transportation Development District (TDD) Community Improvement District (CID/NID) Metropolitan Sewer District (MSD) Grants

43 Implementation Funding OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE FEDERAL SOURCES Public Law Reimbursement (FEMA) HOWARD BEND LEVEE DISTRICT Levee Maintenance Tax COUNTY SOURCES County Property Tax Allocation County Sales Tax Park Maintenance Fund Special Road & Bridge Fund CITY & LOCAL SOURCES Parks & Stormwater Tax (Maryland Heights) Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District Capital Improvement Program (Maryland Heights)

44 Implementation Funding DISTRICTS TIF REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (Establishing A Redevelopment Area) Redevelopment Area are intended to foster economic redevelopment and to eliminate those conditions that may cause the Redevelopment Area to remain blighted, as defined in Chapter 353 RSMo. TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (TDD) House Bill 191 amended section , RSMo to require Department of Revenue to begin collecting sales taxes imposed by TDDs. TDDs can impose a sales tax in increments of 1/8% up to 1% Formed by filing a petition in Circuit court is a separate political subdivision of the state.

45 CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft Funding & Governance Plan Governance Model 01: INTER-GOVERNMENTAL PARTNERSHIP

46 Governance Strategy Inter-Governmental Partnership Model OPTION 01 INTER-GOVERNMENTAL PARTNERSHIP City, County & Levee District form a partnership via an Operational Agreement with a Governing Board (representation to be determined) who hires an Executive Director and staff Operational Agreement to outline policies, procedures & responsibilities of Board based upon the accepted master plan and an implementation plan

47 FUNDING Operational Agreement supported by a Funding Agreement which identifies projects per the Master Plan (MP) implementation phasing and funding sources All partners contribute to costs of Executive Director & staff, office and necessary professional services All partners control their own funding stream but pool funds for MP designated and agreed upon projects Operations and Maintenance (O+M) occurs per the current funding or if changed by agreement at the time of the project conception Maryland Park Lake District Governance Strategy Inter-Governmental Partnership Model OPTION 01

48 IMPLEMENTATION RESPONSIBILITIES Partnership individually & collectively adopts the MP and Operational and Funding Agreements Partnership Board hires Ex. Director and staff who have the day-to-day responsibility for MP implementation Each partner operates their individual finance mechanism but pools the funding for maximum impact Executive Director develops detailed implementation and funding plans for approval of the Board Day to day O+M by individual partners Maryland Park Lake District Governance Strategy Inter-Governmental Partnership Model OPTION 01

49 CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft Funding & Governance Plan Governance Model 02: REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

50 Governance Strategy Redevelopment Authority OPTION 02 REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY City, County and Levee District forms a new Redevelopment Authority (RA) that has certain legal powers and designated operational polices, procedures, and responsibilities to implement the approved Master Plan (MP) RA Executive Director and staff will report to and be governed by a Board comprised of the City, County and Levee District (representation to be determined). Maryland Park Lake District

51 Governance Strategy Redevelopment Authority OPTION 02 SOURCES OF FUNDING The RA manages the funding streams on behalf of the Levee District, City and County The RA will apply for additional grants and implement its own funding sources such as a TIF or TDD districts, etc. based upon the legal designation The RA has the opportunity to bond the funding streams to implement the MP in a more organized, coherent and expedient process. Maryland Park Lake District

52 Governance Strategy Redevelopment Authority OPTION 02 IMPLEMENTATION RESPONSIBILITIES Partnership individually & collectively adopt the MP and agree to establish the RA and serve on the Board RA hires Executive Director and staff with the day-to-day responsibility for MP implementation, O+M, etc. RA is responsible for and operates individual sources of funding on behalf of granting authorities Executive Director develops detailed implementation and funding plans for approval of the Board Coordinates with landowners, Parks, MoDOT, etc.. Maryland Park Lake District

53 DISCUSSION

54 Governance Strategy OPTION 01 Inter-governmental Partnership OPTION 02 Redevelopment Authority