Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-02-13 EURA MINUTES• • • ENGLEWOOD URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY February 13, 2002 I. CALL TO ORDER The regular/annual meeting of the Englewood Urban Renewal Authority was called to order at 6 :30 p.m . in the Community Development Conference Room on the third floor of the Englewood Civic Center. Chairperson Robin Weddle presided. Members present: Members absent: Staff present: Guest present: Bertoluzzi, Burns, Fish, Roth, Weddle Woodward (late) Simpson, Executive Director/Executive Secretary Garrett Senior Planner Graham Administrative Services Director Frank Gryglewicz Pat Dawe, RNL , Consultant II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES November 14, 2001 Ch ai r Weddle stated that the Minutes of November 14, 2001 were to be considered for approval. Mr. Fish asked that Page 2, §IV, be amended to reflect that the Bates Station Framework Plan was a "d raft " plan . Bertoluzzi moved : Fish seconded: The Minutes of November 14, 2001 be approved as amended on Page 2. AYES: NAYS: Fish, Roth, Bertoluzzi, Weddle None ABSTAIN: Burns ABSENT: Garrett, Woodward The motion carried . Ill. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Chair Vice-Chair Executive Director/Executive Secretary Chair Weddle stated that the Authority must elect a slate of officers for 2002. She called for nominations. H.'.GROUP'BOARDS \URA IMinu1es 1Minutcs 2002 \EURA 02· 13 ·02 doc '• • Roth mo v ed : Fish seconded: Bertoluzzi moved: Fish seconded : That Robin Weddle serve as Chair for 2002 . That the existin g slate of officers that have served in 2001 be elected to ser v e in 200 2, and Mr. Simpson be designated as the Executive Di- rector/Executive Secretary of the Authority. AYES : NAYS: Burns , Roth , Bertoluzzi, Fish , Weddle None ABSTAIN : None ABSE NT: Garrett, Woodward The motion carried . IV. BUDGET 2002 Operating Budget Debt Ser v ic e Budget Ms. Weddle asked that Mr. Gry glewicz lead the discussion regarding the proposed budget. Mr. Gry gle w icz re v iewed the proposed operating budget and the proposed debt service • bud ge t. Mr. Burn s as ke d w hat th e budget line item "professional services " entails . Mr. Simpson stated that the Authority has in the past, and will in 200 2, make use of consultants to assist in rede v elopment of the General Iron Works site . Mr. Bertoluzzi asked w hat sources fund the EURA budget. Mr. Gryglewicz stated that the funds are allocated b y the City Council. Ms. Weddle asked where the other "revenue " noted i n the Operating Budget will come from. Mr. Gryglewicz stated that, again, this would be a transfer to the EURA budget by the City Council from the City general fund. Mr. Gryglewicz clarified that all City funds are "pooled", but separate "accounts" are estab- lished for each authority, board, commission, or department, and allocations are made to those "accounts ". Mr. Fish questioned the rationale for year-to-year funding . Mr. Simpson discussed budget history of the Authority for the last few years, noting that the budget has been quite low. However, as redevelopment efforts on General Iron increase, budget needs also increase. Mr. Gry glewicz discussed additional financial information presented to the Authority. Mr. Woodward entered the meeting and took his chair with the Authority. • Mr. Gry glewicz discussed the Tax Increment Revenue Comparison Report. Mr. Gryglewicz noted that the property tax revenues in 2001 had increased, while the sales tax revenues H:IGRO UP' BOARDS IURAIMinuteslMinutcs 2002 \EURA 02· 13.02.doc • • • were down. Mr. Bertoluzzi questioned discrepancies in some of the financial information . Mr. Gryglewicz explained that year-end figures are still being refined. The decrease in sales tax revenues was attributed to closure of the Home Base and Office Depot stores south of Hampden Avenue. Mr. Gryglewicz discussed payments to the Trustee. He stated that revenues that the City receives from the TIF Districts is paid to the Trustee for disbursement to bondholders. He stated that bondholders are still receiving payment, and will receive their initial investment and possibly 1 % to 2% interest. They will not, however, receive the 11 % interest that many bondholders had hoped to realize; however, the bonds were unrated, uninsured, high risk when issued. Mr. Gryglewicz briefly discussed the collections per month by TIF District for the last five years, as well as a y early collection by TIF District for the last five years . Redevelopment of sites such as the Home Base and Office Depot were discussed by Mr. Gry glewicz . Prospective tenants may request rebates or other financial consideration that impact revenues received by both the City and the TIF District. Mr. Gry glewicz also stated that the Trustee is again raising the issue on the date TIF will end. Total District I revenues will come to the City and other taxing entities in 2007; total District II revenues come to the City in 2011 . Mr. Bertolu zz i as ke d the sour ce o f fund s for debt ser v ice pa y ments . Mr. Gry glewicz stated that th ese funds are TIF re v enues in District I and District II. Mr. Gryglewicz explained tax increment financing for the members, and noted that any revenues above the "base amount" go to the trustee to service the debt -payment to bondholders . In 1991, when the Authority defaulted on full payment due, the trustee called all bonds due and acceler- ated payment. When full payment is not made, interest is compounded; thus, each year the total due to retire the bonds is increased no matter what is paid to the Trustee. At ter- mination of TIF , the EURA will petition the Courts to "extinguish" whatever debt is remain- ing. Mr. Simpson stated he understood the bonds are repaid 60 to 70 cents on the dollar. Mr. Gryglewicz reiterated that a few years ago, the financial staff did some computations, and determined at that time that investors would receive the return of their principal plus 1 % to 2% interest by the time the TIF expires. Brief discussion ensued. No modifications were made to the proposed 2002 General Fund Operating Budget for the EURA; nor were modifications made to the 2002 Debt Service Budget. Mr. Gryglewicz was thanked for his presentation, and excused himself from the meeting . H:IGRO UPIBOARDS IURA IMinu1eslMinu1cs ~OO~I E U RA 02-1 J-02 doc • • • v . NORTH ENGLEWOOD INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT URBAN RENEWAL AREA PROGRESS REPORT. Mr. Simpson reported that a lot of progress has been made on the General Iron Works re- development project. He reported that at a recent City Council "retreat" where city-related projects were identified, the General Iron Works redevelopment was at the top of the list. Mr. Simpson further stated that in addition to the Tuesday afternoon staff and director meetings regarding the redevelopment, on-going meetings with Larry Fullerton and various consultants have been established on Wednesday and Thursday afternoons. Discussions focus on legal aspects on Wednesdays, and on design factors on Thursdays. Design factors include street and intersection designs, trip studies, etc. Mr. Simpson discussed several agreements that have not yet been finalized, two of which are with RTD. One RTD agreement pertains to land acquisition and the second pertains to the transit station at Bates. Mr. Simpson stated that the land acquisition agreement has been held in abeyance until demolition and remediation costs are determined. RTD has engaged Fiore Construction Company to do the demolition on the site, and soils remedia- tion on the north portion of the site that will be used for the RTD maintenance facility . Once these costs have been determined, it will provide the EURA a better understanding of costs the Authority and redeveloper will have to bear on the south portion of the site. Mr. Simpson stated that RTD is still in condemnation proceedings with the previous landowner, so there is no firm figure on ground cost at this time . The Transit Station Agreement pertains to construction of the LRT station at Bates Avenue. RTD and the City/EURA ha v e not reached agreement on what the construction includes. Mr. Simpson stated that the City is of the opinion that some of the costs should be attrib- uted to the light rail maintenance facility, and not to the transit station. He stated that there is a meeting scheduled this Friday to discuss some of these issues. Once the figures can be firmed up on each of these Agreements, the Agreements will go forward for signature -hopefully to the Authority and City Council sometime in April or May, 2002. Mr. Simpson emphasized the importance of these agreements and determin- ing the costs involved to the success of the redevelopment effort. Mr. Bertoluzzi asked what the appraised value of the total site is, and what did RTD base the condemnation deposit on. Mr. Simpson estimated that it was in the $4 .50 to $6.50 per square foot range, probably closer to the $6 .50 per square foot figure . Mr. Graham noted that this is just for the land acquisition; demolition and remediation costs will be added to the base land figure. RTD will pay Barton Brothers for the land, and the EURA will be pur- chasing the south portion of the site from RTD. Mr. Woodward asked about salvage value from the buildings. Mr. Simpson stated that this would be taken out. Mr. Woodward noted that if the majority of the existing buildings are located on the south half of the site to be acquired for redevelopment, the Authority should receive salvage credits . H.'GROU P'BOAROS\U RA 1Minu1es \Minu1cs ~002\E U RA 02-1 l-02 doc • • • Mr. Graham noted that RTD will be moving about 70,000 cubic yards of dirt -approxi- mately 2/3 of the cost to RTD for demolition will be dirt removal costs. Mr. Simpson re- minded members who were able to tour the GIW site that the north portion where the maintenance facility is proposed will be lowered by approximately eight feet; the cost of this change in elevation will be borne by RTD . The building demolition costs will be part of the EURA/redeveloper costs. Mr. Burns asked if RTD asked for input from the City on choice of contractor? And what about "add-ons" to the base demolition/remediation costs. Mr. Simpson stated that RTD did not solicit input from the City prior to selection of the demolition contractor. The City had 110 opportunity to review the RFP that was issued by RTD for the job. Mr. Graham ad- vised that the City does have a someone who received a bid package, at their request, and attended the meetings . The City has had someone in on every stage of the project. Mr. Simpson agreed that Major Environmental Services has been involved; they are a consulting firm the City has worked with on projects that require environmental remediation. Mr. Simpson stated that Mr. Major is very good, and has provided "expert witness" testimony on remediation cases. Mr. Graham stated that the RTD Voluntary Clean-Up Plan was approved by the Colorado Department of Health and Environment. Once the City gets all pertinent documents, Mr. Major will do inspections and provide oversight of RTD cleanup. Mr. Simpson stated that permission was granted today to allow the trucks to use the City streets. He further stated that RTD was at the City Council meeting Monday evening, February 11 1h; they hope to be- gin demolition b y March. The neighborhood will be notified by RTD by use of door- hangers . Mr. Simpson reiterated that demolition is scheduled to begin very shortly, and the site should be "flat " b y June. Mr. Graham stated that Galapago Street will be the major entrance to the site for use by the trucks. There have been some discussions with Winslows to use their property, but Mr. Graham stated that the trucks will probably use Galapago. Mr. Woodward inquired about the possibility of using the railroad . Mr. Simpson stated that use of the rail lines would be at the option of the contractor. Mr. Burns asked where materials from the demolition will be taken. Mr. Graham stated that the steel materials will be probably be transported to Pueblo. Mr. Graham stated that Bill Major of Major Environmental Services will provide oversight on some facets of the demolition/remediation process, but will not be on the site at all times. There are also City inspectors through the Safety Services-Building Division that will be doing inspections on demolition . Mr. Woodward noted that staff has made reference to when the site is "clean" -does this mean the total site is clean and clear -all demolition and remediation is done? Mr. Simp- son responded that the north portion, to be used for the maintenance facility, will have dirt removed to a depth of eight feet; on the south portion, there will be concrete slabs and foundations yet to be removed and soil remediation to be done. H:\GRO UPIBOARDSIURAIM in u1eslMinu1es 2002\EURA 02-13 ·02.doc • • • Mr. Burns noted that a study done by Secor identified several concrete foundations that may be many feet deep. Mr. Graham agreed, and stated that there are several "pits" on the site , and determination will have to be made on how to resolve this issue . Ms. Weddle asked whether the site will be fenced to prevent transient use of the buildings. Mr. Graham stated that site security is required to be maintained. There are no plans, how- ever, to maintain an on-site watchman overnight. Mr. Simpson stated that Mr. Fullerton has prepared a clean-up plan for the south portion of the site ; the plan was prepared by his consultant, Hirsch-Gibney. This plan has been sub- mitted for City review, and Major Environmental Services will do the review. By next week, we hope that the review will be completed, and Mr. Fullerton can forward the plan to the State for review and approval. This process usually takes about 45 days . Mr. Graham noted that once the plan receives State approval, it becomes a document to support reme- diation funding estimates. Mr. Graham emphasized that the clean-up plan goes with the land; once the plan is approved, the land will be "encumbered" with the State-approved clean-up plan; those duties will become an obligation of the developer. Mr. Woodward asked if the letter to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Envi- ronment, dated January 28 1 h, regarding the voluntary clean-up plan , has been sent. Mr. Graham stated that it has not been sent yet. Mr. Simpson stated that staff is seeking Au- thority authorization to sign and send the letter . Mr. Bertoluzzi asked if staff felt there would ever be a point where the City would feel that the rede velopment project should be abandoned. When staff reports that the City Council has set the rede v elopment as a top priority, and that the redevelopment is to be done -he finds this rather frightening. Mr. Simpson stated that if the redevelopment proposal should change, staff and the City Council would have to re-evaluate redevelopment of the site. Mr. Burns stated that he is pleased that the City Council has made the determination that the rede v elopment is a top priority. He pointed out that during the CityCenter redevelop- ment process, there were several shifts in approach to the redevelopment. Mr. Simpson agreed, and noted that there have already been changes in the approach to the GIW rede- velopment -notably, that the City/EURA will be in control, and the redeveloper is a part of the process . Mr. Simpson introduced Mr. Pat Dawe, from RNL Designs. This firm has been working on several issues for the City, and has also been working on the RTD maintenance facility de- signs. Mr. Simpson briefed the Authority on RNL responsibilities, and on Carter-Burgess re- sponsibilities -depiction/design of street designs (RNL ), and traffic assumptions and projec- tions (Carter-Burgess ). Mr. Simpson stated that we are also looking at a "public plaza" - try ing to determine location and function ; and where the old Englewood Depot will be lo- cated in the redevelopment. The transit station is also a factor in design constraints. Mr. Simpson stated that staff has been working with Mr. Fullerton regarding all of this, and de- sign plans are very conceptual at this time . H· .GRO Ul"BOA RD S\lJ RA IMinu 1cs\Minu1cs 2002\EURA 02· l l-02.doc • • Mr. Dawe presented a power-point depiction of sight views from various points east and south of the GIW site. Slides of existing development were shown; slides with new struc- tures "ghosted" in atop existing structures, and slides of block buildings shown. Mr. Dawe noted that the actual structures will not be as imposing as the block depictions -there will be windows, architectural features , and landscaping to soften the visual impact of the rede- velopment. Members of the Authority posed questions or made comments throughout the presenta- tion. Mr. Dawe was thanked for the presentation. He excused himself from the meeting. VI. SECOND EXTENSION ON NEGOTIATING AGREEMENT The Ironworks at Englewood, LLC Mr. Simpson stated that the First Extension to the Agreement to Negotiate has expired. Staff is asking that a second extension be approved to allow exclusive negotiation with The Fullerton Company until August 31, 2002 . Mr. Woodward recalled discussions that occurred when the original agreement was signed; extensions that might be granted would be for "short" periods of time . This agreement ex- tension is not for a short time period, but for six months. He asked if the approach to the negotiations ha s chan ged . Mr. Simpson stated that a lot of progress has been made in the negotiations, but there ar e issues that still need review . He pointed out that "entitlement" issues , such as zoning designation, are not yet in place, and won 't be completed before August, at the earliest. Mr. Simpson discussed the need for the Authority to also meet in March; at that time, we should have a better sense of cost estimates on land, demolition, and remediation. Also in March, draft documents of zoning regulations should be available for discussion. Ms . Weddle noted that reference is made to "The Fullerton Company" and also to "The Ironworks at Englewood, LLC". She questioned how the references should read, and whether references should be changed back to "The Fullerton Company." Discussion en- sued. Burns moved: Roth seconded: The Second Amendment to the Agreement to Negotiate be approved. AYES: NAYS: ABSTAIN : ABSE N T: Burns, Fish, Bertoluzzi, Woodward, Roth, Weddle None None Garrett • The motion carried. H:IGROL:PIBOARDSIURAIMinutcslMinutcs !OO !IEURA 02-13-02 doc • • • Staff was directed to verify the proper name reference: "The Fullerton Company" or "The Ironworks at Englewood, LLC" on all documents. VII. VOLUNTARY CLEAN-UP PLAN LETTER The Voluntary Clean-up letter was briefly considered. Staff was authorized to sign and send the letter. VIII. LEGAL COUNSEL'S CHOICE No legal counsel was present. IX. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE Mr. Burns noted there is a great deal of office space available for lease in Denver; is this a market issue to be considered in the GIW redevelopment. Mr. Simpson agreed that it is an issue to be considered; however, the GIW redevelopment won 't be on-line until at least 2004 for residential units, and the office building was projected to be constructed after the residential units were built. Mr. Burns stated that he has spoken to Mr. Weinburger of Situs Realty, and they are not re- structuring leas es or rental rates in either of their large office buildings in Englewood. Mr . Simpson stated that Engle woo d is in a go od office market area, and that all of the office space in the new City Center development is fully leased , much of it yet to be completed. Mr. Simpson noted that the South Central Denver market and the availability of the transit line ma y be a factor i n a stronger office rental market in Englewood . Ms . Weddle noted there will be displacement of many businesses along the T-Rex corridor for the next several years, which ma y also be a favorable factor for the office market in Englewood. "Absorption " studies were briefly discussed. Mr. Graham commented that typically TIF dis- tricts work better if commercial buildings come on line before residential development. Mr. Simpson briefly discussed the residential market; sales are doing quite well in the $200,000 to $300,000 range; Mr. Fullerton has indicated he hopes to offer most of the residential units in the $200,000 to $450,000 range. He noted that market values within a transit sta- tion corridor are about 20% higher. Further discussion on the office market in Englewood ensued. Reuse of some of the older buildings, such as Home Base and Office Depot, was mentioned. Mr. Simpson stated that the Garts Brothers Sporting Goods corporate offices located in Englewood because of the proximity to the light rail line. This business brought in approximately 300 high-paying jobs. He also noted that at least three users have expressed interest in relocating to Englewood - the y need approximatel y 100,000 to 150,000 square feet of space . There is no space to accommodate a user of this size in the CityCenter development. Brief discussion ensued . H GROl,;PIBOARDSll..;JlA ,Minutes 'Minu u:s :?002 \Ei,;RA 02· I J-02.doc • Gertrude G. Welty, Recording Secreta • • H:IGROUP\BOARDSI URAIMinutcslMinutcs 2002 \EURA 02-13 -02.doc