Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City of EI Paso Downtown Plan Phase II (Implementation) <br /> <br />\'(/orking with Olll economist, Texas Perspectives (TXP), the Gateway Planning Team developed the second <br />phase of the City of El Paso's Downtown Plan. The Phase II Plan focused on refmement and implementation <br />of the Downtown 2015 Plan. It p.rovides the implementation pad1\\'~Y to assist City Council, the TIRZ (fa.'C <br />Increment Financing) Board, and city staff in implementing the plan successfully <br /> <br />One of the keys to successful unplementation of the Downtown Plan is the creation of a cohesive management <br />structure. Such a management structure should be sustainable, adapti\'e and facihtative of public-pri\'ate <br />partnerships The Gateway Planning Te:lrn recommends a new management framewmk through the creation of <br />a new Dowo;uwn Management Coordinating Entity tha, would coordinate development projects. publIc <br />services, and events <br /> <br />In addition, the Phase II plan recommends the use of public art to better <br />coordinate art-related activities and develop a cohesive streetscape plan with <br />amenities designed by local artists. The plan also recommends pedestrian and <br />streetscapc in1provements that focus on linking wayfmding and public art with <br />transit amenities such as bus shelters, bike racks, and transit signage to support <br />Sun Metro's Downtown Trolley Circulator. <br /> <br /> <br />The Phase II plan recommends discrete action items to work towards realizing the <br />vision cstablished in the Downtown 2015 Plan, Bascd on the catalyst projects <br />moving forward, thc Team establishes critical pedestrian linkages required within <br />downtown to take ~d\'antage of emerging project which include new mh:ed use <br />and rehabilitation of existing buildings. Investment in streetsCJlpe improycments <br />will be undertaken in the comext pf tpjs Linkages Plan in conjunction with <br />projects as tbey come on line. <br /> <br /> <br />The most critical aspect of <br />implementation provides the <br />city and the TIRZ board criteria <br />to evaluate different projects <br />requesting public incentives and <br />funding of public infrastructure <br />improvements. To this end, the <br />plan recommends higher <br />priority to projects that promote <br />downtown living, linkages to <br />transit, and synergies wim <br />existing projects. Projects that <br />leverage priv~te funds as well as <br />that promote the cultural arts will also be given priomy. Based on this criteria and project impact, development <br />projects will be classified as "Site-Specific Private" projects or "Public" projects. "Site-Specific" projects are <br />generally smaller in scope, affecting one or two property <br />owners and public participation would be in the form of <br />regubtory reform or refunding for public infrastructure <br />imprO\-ements; while "Public" projects arc larger in scope, <br />often requiring the city's initiative for successful <br />implementatlnn These generally include larger streetscape <br />projects, streets, open space, and plazas. <br /> <br />o.,~:., <br /> <br />to c; <br /> <br /> <br />D' <br />0'. <br />1[... _ - '. <br />,. . <br />X;". . <br /> <br />!y.7Cr <br /> <br />SUN MErRO <br /> <br />In addition to generating "order of magnitude" costs for <br />critical streetscape linkages, the Phase II Plan also updates <br />the TIRZ projections, providing the TIRZ Board with the <br />public scctor's capacity to support downtown <br />redevelopment. <br /> <br /> <br />www.gatewayplanning.com <br />