Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-02-15 EURA MINUTES• e ENGLEWOOD URBAN RENEW AL AUTHORITY February 15, 1995 I. CALL TO ORDER. The regular meeting of the Englewood Urban Renewal Authority was called to order at 5:40 P.M. in Conference Room A of Englewood City Hall, Chairman Steve Mulhern presiding. Present: Graebner, Vormittag, Smith, Richmond, Mulhern Merkel, Executive Director/Executive Secretary Absent: Havens, Drew Mr. Mulhern welcomed Mr. Graebner and Mr. Richmond to the Authority, and asked that everyone introduce themselves, and give a background sketch of their activities and interests. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. April 6, 1994 Chairman Mulhern called for consideration of the Minutes of the last meeting. Vormittag moved: Smith seconded: The Minutes of April 6, 1994 be approved as written. The motion carried. ID. ELECTION OF OFFICERS. Chair Vice-Chair Executive Director/Executive Secretary Mr. Mulhern called for nominations for the position of Chair for 1995. Smith moved: Vormittag seconded: Steve Mulhern be elected Chair for 1995. The motion carried. Mr. Mulhern called for nominations for the position of Vice-Chair for 1995. Richmond moved: Vormittag seconded: Darrell Smith be elected Vice-Chair for 1995. 1 The motion carried. Mr. Mulhern asked that the Authority reappoint Mr. Merkel as the Executive Director- Executive Secretary for 1995. Smith moved: Richmond seconded: Mr. Merkel be designated Executive Director/Executive Secretary of the Urban Renewal Authority for 1995. The motion carried. IV. NEW BUSINESS. Mr. Merkel provided a synopsis of the Englewood Urban Renewal Authority activities from the early '80's. Flood control improvements along Little Dry Creek are a large part of the re- development activities undertaken by the Authority, and extend from South Clarkson Street through Englewood to the Little Dry Creek/South Platte River confluence. The redevelopment projects include Trolley Square, Englewood Marketplace, Phar-Mor Plaza, and Englewood Exchange. Tax Increment Bonds were sold to finance the public improvements, and tax in- crement revenues were pledged to retire the bonds. The Authority has been in default on re- payment of the bonds since June, 1991. There is a revenue stream for the Authority, but it is insufficient to meet debt service payments. All revenues which come to the Authority are im- mediately wired to the trustee, Central Bank. The Authority has explored possible restructur- ing of the bond issue, and the meeting of April 6, 1994 with Walt Kane from Hanifen-Imhoff and Legal Counsel Paul Benedetti was centered on that issue. The Authority is not involved in new projects, and there has not been a need for regular monthly meetings in recent years. A. 1995 BUDGET Mr. Merkel presented a proposed budget for 1995, which includes total estimated expenditures of $7,670. He emphasized that the Authority has no funds appropriated, and operates on a "negative" budget with the year-end expenses being picked up by the City of Englewood. However, the State requires that a "budget" for the Authority be filed each year. Smith moved: Richmond seconded: The 1995 Budget for the Englewood Urban Renewal Authority be ac- cepted and approved as presented. The motion carried. B. REVENUE REPORT Revenue reports revised earlier this date were distributed to the membership. Members dis- cussed the impact that new businesses and/or closures of existing businesses may have on the revenue stream to the Authority. Responsibility for leasing vacancies in the redevelopment 2 ' e • e areas was discussed; Mr. Merkel advised that the Economic Development Division of the De- partment does work with leasing agents for the various developments in an effort to keep the projects fully leased. Trolley Square was discussed. Mr. Merkel stated that the FDIC still has control of this devel- opment, will approve no more than a month-to-month lease, and will not provide tenant finish. Prospective tenants are understandably reluctant to consider this site. There have been several prospective purchasers interested in Trolley Square, but trying to negotiate with the FDIC and the owner is frustrating. Mr. Merkel expressed optimism regarding a possible ownership change in the near future. Discussion ensued. C. CINDERELLA CITY UPDATE Chairman Mulhern discussed the process followed to select a redeveloper for the Mall. Mr. Mulhern commended Project Coordinator Larry Fullerton for a well-conceived process, which involved all segments of the community. Requests for Qualifications were mailed in mid- September, and the City advertised for interested developers on a nation-wide basis. Twelve formal responses were received , which were narrowed down to four companies, Homart, Miller/Kitchell, Dial Companies, Comstock/Pacifica, and ultimately to the Miller/Kitchell team. City Council has authorized exclusive negotiations with the Miller/Kitchell redevelop- ment team; a redevelopment agreement is being negotiated at this time, and progress is being made with the ownership of the Mall, as well. Mr. Mulhern stated that in choosing the four finalists , the selection committee considered: • Financial capability. • Local expertise and local presence. • Understanding of the "site" and understanding of Englewood as it relates to the site. • How the committee felt about the companies based on their responses during interviews. Mr. Mulhern displayed conceptual renderings of the proposed redevelopment, and commented on key elements of the proposal. The RTD park and ride and Light Rail station proposed in the redevelopment area was discussed. Mr. Merkel commented that there will be a number of opportunities for public input on the proposal; Miller/Kitchell personnel have already met with the Englewood Downtown Devel- opment Authority membership, and have plans to meet with the Chamber membership and neighborhood groups. In response to a question from Mr. Graebner, Mr. Merkel stated that the square footage of the "footprint" of the buildings in the proposed redevelopment will be approximately 2/3 of the current Mall's "footprint". The proposed redevelopment and reconfiguration of the site was further discussed. 3 Mr. Richmond expressed concern regarding a possible K-Mart or Target being one of the ten-• ants. He discussed the Westland Mall redevelopment, and his disappointment in the outcome e of that project. Mr. Richmond commented that K-Mart does not maintain their properties, and urged that whoever the tenants are they not be allowed to "hide behind landscaping". Mr. Smith commented that, in his opinion, discount stores such as K-Mart and Target are not good anchor stores, and don't fit into the downtown concept. Mr. Mulhern emphasized that no ten- ants are signed at this time. The issue of control of the development was raised and discussed. Mr. Merkel stated that the committee was looking for consistency in maintenance and appearance of the various buildings and the city's desire to keep the development fully leased. Mr. Mulhern discussed the issue of deed restrictions and "dark clauses". Mr. Smith urged that the design elements be carefully scrutinized, and commented that one of the problems with Trolley Square is that the design is wrong for Englewood. Mr. Mulhern stated that one of the strong points for the Miller- Kitchell team is their affiliation with Urban Design, one of the premier design firms in the country. The importance of keeping Urban Design involved in this project has been stressed to Miller/Kitchell. Mr. Merkel agreed that retaining the Urban Design group is one of the criteria Miller/Kitchell must comply with. Mr. Graebner asked for clarification of the KRA VCO/Equitable ownership of the Mall , and the eventual acquisition of the Mall by the new developer .. Mr. Merkel and Mr. Mulhern dis- cussed the current ownership, noting that it appears that Equitable has successfully negotiated KRA VCO out of the ownership is~ue. Negotiations are now between Miller/Kitchell and Equitable. The possible donation of the Mall to the City because of tax purposes, and the City then immediately turning the Mall over to Miller/Kitchell was discussed. The maintenance agreement for the parking deck was discussed , with the clarification that the maintenance is a large liability for Equitable and therefore, a good incentive to divest themselves of the Mall. The redevelopment budget has been estimated at $42,000,000. Miller/Kitchell may have re- vised this downward slightly. Projected revenues were briefly commented on. Mr. Mulhern stressed that only rough esti- mates have been projected , and revenues will greatly depend on tenant mix. The impact that RTD and the light rail station will have on the redevelopment, and the city as a whole, was considered. Mr. Vormittag stated that incorporation of the RTD park and ride and the light rail station is a big point of consideration for him. Mr. Graebner commented that light rail should extend from Highlands Ranch to Denver International Airport. He asked how far south the lines are planned in Littleton. Mr. Mulhern stated he understood the line is pro- jected south to Mineral Avenue. Mr. Smith commented on the Atlanta light rail system, and how well it works. Further discussion ensued on the light rail issue and the funding therefore. Mr. Graebner inquired about the impact of the bond default on the City. Mr. Mulhern stated that it has "tarnished" the reputation, but to this point the Authority has avoided a lawsuit on the issue. Mr. Merkel stated that prior to the default, the bondholders were kept abreast of the 4 • revenue streams and the likelihood of default. Mr. Mulhern stressed that the bonds, when e sold , were junk bonds --unrated, uninsured, high interest-bearing , and high risk. Repayment of the bonds continues through 2004. Bondholders receive payments in June and in Decem- ber. Mr. Graebner asked if revenue streams to the Authority would increase as a result of the redevelopment of the Mall . Mr. Merkel stated that only property tax revenue increments were pledged to the Authority from the Mall site; sales tax revenues are pledged to the general fund of the City. This will not change with the redevelopment of the site. Brief discussion ensued. V. OLD BUSINESS. There was nothing brought up for discussion. VI. PUBLIC FORUM. No one was present to address the Authority. VII. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE. Mr. Merkel suggested that staff may plan a few more meetings this year to keep members up- to-date on development activities on the Mall . He had nothing further to discuss under this section of the Agenda. VIII. COM:MISSIONER'S CHOICE. No member of the Authority raised any issues for discussion. IX. ADJOURN. Graebner moved: Smith seconded: The meeting be adjourned. The motion carried; meeting declared adjourned at 7:10 P.M. Gertrude G. Welty , Recording Secretary 5