Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-06-12 EURA MINUTES• • • ENGLEWOOD URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY June 12, 2002 I. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Englewood Urban Renewal Authority was called to order at 6:30 p.m. in the Community Development Conference Room of the Englewood Civic Cen- ter. Chairperson Weddle presided. Members present: Members absent: Staff present: Guest present: Roth, Woodward, Bertoluzzi, Fish, Burns, Weddle Garrett Senior Planner Mark Graham David Woolfall, Carter-Burgess II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 15 , 2002 Chairperson Weddle stated that the Minutes of May 15 , 2002 were to be considered for approval. Roth moved: Fish seconded: The Minutes of May 15 , 2002 be approved as written . AYES: NAYS: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Bertoluzzi, Fish, Roth, Weddle None Woodward Burns, Garrett The motion carried. Ill. GENERAL IRON WORKS REDEVELOPMENT Traffic Impact Analysis Mr. Graham introduced Mr. David Woolfall of Carter-Burgess. Mr. Woolfall and Carter- Burgess did the Traffic Impact Analysis on the redevelopment proposal, and have done the City-wide traffic study for Englewood. Mr. Woolfall stated that Carter-Burgess approached this assignment as a typical traffic im- pact study, to determine the impact on the existing roadway system if the General Iron site, the Winslow property, and the remainder of the 1-1-zoned area were redeveloped. The conclusion reached is that existing two-lane roadways can handle traffic generated by the redevelopment. The assumption is that most of the generated traffic will be focused toward South Galapago Street and West Yale Avenue to Broadway. Mr. Woolfall stated that while existing roadways can accommodate the projected traffic, parking restriction along Yale Avenue, for instance, may have to be considered . Bates Avenue is also narrow. He H:IGROUPIBOARDSIURA\Minu1cs c"linutcs :0021.EURA 06-1 2-02.doc • • • pointed out that the Fullerton Company development would direct traffic generated from that site to "interior" roads and not to Bates Avenue. He reiterated the goal to keep traffic generated by the development project focused to Galapago Street. Mr. Woolfall discussed the Galapago/lnca/Dartmouth Avenue intersection, noting the north/south streets of Galapago and Inca are off-set approximately 150 feet. Proposed im- provements to the intersection include an angled intersection (70°), or a round-about. The angled intersection impacts two single-family homes on the west side of South Galapago Street in the 3000 block south; the round-about would be on a slope, but could work so far as traffic capacity is concerned. Mr. Woolfall stated there is an existing traffic signal at South Inca Street and West Dartmouth Avenue. Mr. Woolfall commented on the South Santa Fe Drive/West Dartmouth Avenue intersec- tion; this intersection carries very heavy traffic, and an interchange is on the 2025 DRCOG plan. Discussion ensued. Mr. Woolfall speculated that interchange design for the Santa Fe Drive/Dartmouth Avenue intersection would be very similar to the Belleview/Santa Fe Drive interchange. Mr. Woolfall emphasized that right now, the Santa Fe/Dartmouth inter- change is "only a dot on the map", and pointed out that the Broadway/285 interchange had been removed from the map for lack of funding . Ms. Weddle asked whether South Galapago Street would need to be widened or not. Mr. Woolfall stated that right-now, the roadway is onl y 32 ft.; the roadway needs to be in- creased to 40 ft. to allow on-street parking and turn lanes. This can be done within the ex- isting right-of-way. Discussion ensued. Mr. Graham stated that Mr. Fullerton and the Winslow family are par- ticipating in the planning efforts for the redevelopment. Mr. Fullerton would prefer to have on-street parking, and proposed a bicycle path along the rear of the GIW redevelopment to the light rail station. Extension of the bicycle path through the western edge of the Wins- low property to connect to a second bridge at Cornell has been discussed; the Winslow family seems to be in agreement with this proposal. This would provide a bicycle trail from Yale to Dartmouth. The City would then need to provide a solution to get the bicycle trail across Dartmouth (perhaps over Dartmouth ) to connect to CityCenter. Further discussion on the need to widen streets ensued. Mr. Woolfall reiterated that Gala- pago will remain a two-lane street; the roadway may widened. Yale Avenue may be wid- ened, by discontinuing on-street parking. He pointed out that Yale Avenue is a Den- ver/Englewood City boundary, and removal of on-street parking may be accomplished on only the Englewood side if Denver is not agreeable to the parking restriction. Traffic that will be coming through the redevelopment area was further discussed -how will the traffic access the redevelopment area. Mr. Woolfall discussed truck traffic. He stated that some truck traffic is coming out of Den- ver to reach Dartmouth Avenue . He stated the assumption is that the "diagonal" street de- picted in the Fullerton development will become a truck route. Mr. Fish asked if these H:I GROUPIBOARDSI URAIMinutes\Minutcs ~002\EURA Q6.l 2·02.doc • • • trucks would be stopping in the area. It was pointed out that typical delivery trucks, such as UPS, would be throughout the neighborhood, plus delivery trucks for the local retail out- lets proposed. Mr. Woodward questioned whether more truck traffic would be anticipated than what was generated by Barton Supply when they owned the GIW site. Mr. Woolfall stated that traffic counts did not include demolition trucks, and that Carter-Burgess does not have the truck count generated by Barton Supply when they controlled GIW. Mr. Fish asked if there are any plans to prevent trucks coming out of Denver from traveling through the neighborhood to get to Dartmouth Avenue . Mr. Graham stated this issue has been discussed with Traffic Engineer Vostry, and any solution will require support from neighborhood residents requesting relief from the truck traffic. Mr. Graham stated that eve- ryone needs to keep in mind that "alternative traffic patterns/routes isn 't getting rid of the traffic, only displacing it" -the traffic will move to another route in another neighborhood . Mr. Burns entered the meeting and took his seat with the Authority. Mr. Roth stated that the normal delivery trucks will have to access and move through the area. Mr. Woodward noted that some trucks coming in from Denver may provide services to business south of Yale Avenue . Discussion ensued. Mr. Graham stated that traffic patterns and volume will be the foremost issue of any public forum , and when residents become concerned about volume, speed, or traffic routes, the y approach the City to seek a resolution to their concerns . Mr. Graham stated that balanced traffic solutions are desirable -if a one-wa y street system is imple- mented, residents would need to recognize that they might have to adopt a new traffic pat- tern to get to or from their home . Mr. Woolfall briefly discussed the public forum on the transportation plan held in April. One of the biggest issues brought up at that time was parking for light rail stations. The goal is to see truck traffic directed to South Galapago Street. Members of the Authority discussed a possible redesign of the street layout for the Fuller- ton project. Other means of protecting the existing residential neighborhood from traffic impact -such as construction of a sound wall along South Elati Street -were briefly ex - plored. Mr. Graham stated that semi-truck traffic to the RTD maintenance facility is projected at one or two per day, which is minor compared to the truck traffic generated by Barton Sup- ply. Mr. Woolfall estimated that maximum traffic usage of the Elati/Galapago diagonal street may be 4,000 vehicles per day, possibl y up to 6,000 vehicles per day . Mr. Roth stated that this seems like a lot of traffic for a transit-oriented/pedestrian-oriented district. Mr. Fish questioned the possibility of South Elati Street becoming a "thoroughfare" between Yale and Dartmouth . Mr. Graham stated that he does not think this would be defensible - neither the Planning Commission nor the City Council would approve such a proposal. Several y ears ago, when Civitas was doing the "Small Area Plan", this proposal was floated H:'GROU P'BOARDS\URA IMmu1cs \Mmu1cs :IXJ2\EURA 06-11-02 .doc • • • and disapproved ; Mr. Graham suggested that it will not meet with approval now. Financial impacts on construction of streets and the location of those streets was briefly addressed. Mr. Fish noted that the Bates /Galapago intersection approach appears to be narrower than other segments of these streets. The design of this intersection was discussed. Extension of streets to the Winslow property, and buying property from the Winslow family, were discussed. Mr. Graham stated that in discussions with the Winslow representatives, they have been "very cautious" about anything that would reduce the developable area of their property; he noted there are utility easements on their site, some of which cannot be relocated, that reduce buildable area. Mr. Graham noted that Mr. Vostry, City Traffic Engi- neer, doesn't like the proposed 70° Galapago/lnca intersection, nor does he like the idea of a round-about at the intersection. These two alternatives are not that attractive to the Wins- low's either, but we may be able to live with either one of the alternatives. He suggested that in 20 or 25 years, this intersection design may have to be revisited, particularly if there is an interchange constructed at Dartmouth Avenue and South Santa Fe Drive. Ms. Weddle asked if staff knew what de v elopment the Winslow's ma y be considering. Mr. Graham stated that the famil y has not been forthcoming with a lot of information, but he understood that they ma y be considering something "similar " to Mr. Fullerton 's proposal. They do not want to "sell" property, so whatever is developed would be on a long-term lease basis . Long-term lease versus sale of property was discussed. Mr. Bertoluzzi asked if the Authority could not hold property and use long-term lease rather than turning property to developers. Mr. Graham pointed out that City Council has said the y wanted a "for sale product" on the GIW site rather than lease /rental. Mr. Graham pointed out that at the present time there is no acquisition agreement between RTD and the EURA on this property. The FT A did, at one time, encourage holding the property, but RTD was not interested. Mr. Bertoluzzi discussed a recent trip to Pittsburgh , and noted that Echo Star has leased space in an old steel mill that has been renovated. The idea of the City becoming a "landlord" was addressed. Mr. Burns stated that this issue has been considered several times, and that many people do not feel the City should hold land and develop it. He pointed out, however, that we would not have the CityCenter de- velopment if the City had not stepped in and taken over the project. As far as a "for sale product", senior citizens want a place to bu y in Englewood without the responsibility of yard maintenance . The condo/townhouse form of housing can also free up the traditional single-family home for young families with children if current long-time owners decide to purchase a condo/townhouse . Mr. Graham agreed there is not a variety of housing in Englewood, and there is need for a diversity -people need a choice -single-family, con- dominium, townhouse, own, rent, etc . Mr. Graham also noted Authority members need to keep in mind that the GIW site has an environmental clean-up obligation of approximately $1 ,000,000. H:\GRO UP' BOARDSIURA \Minutes\Minutes 2002\EURA 06-12·02 .doc • • • The impact that proximity to a light rail station may have on ownership and use of the automobile was briefly discussed. Mr. Woolfall stated that development of light rail transit line to the Denver Tech Center is the next step, and it will be interesting to see what traffic patterns develop or change once that connection is in place. Mr. Graham stated that in developments done by The Fullerton Company in downtown Denver, he understood residents have to pay an additional $25,000 to $30,000 for a sec- ond parking space; one parking space comes with purchase of the residential unit. Financing issues were raised for discussion. Mr. Graham stated a memorandum addressing financing options was prepared for City Council in January of 2002 . The initial concern now is how to pay the City's portion of the station construction . Mr. Graham pointed out that The Fullerton Company -indeed no developer that had considered the site -has said that without the light rail transit station, they are not interested in the site. Mr. Fullerton's proposed development will include approximately 400 residential units, plus 100,000 square feet of office space; this will generate tax revenues for the City. The developer will assume responsibility for infrastructure improvements on his site, and the City/ Authority will be responsible for infrastructure improvements be y ond the redevelopment parcel. Mr. Graham pointed out that at the present time, the Galapago/lnca/Dartmouth intersection, and indeed, South Galapago Street, is not within the urban renewal district; therefore, im- provement projects on these two issues are not eligible for Tax Increment Funding. He stated that a decision on whether to conduct an expanded condition survey and expand the urban renewal district needs to be made in the near future. Mr. Roth asked why the residential uses on the west side of South Galapago were not included in the original condi- tion survey . Mr. Graham responded Redevelopment Area boundaries followed 1-1 and 1-2 zone district boundaries . Discussion of tax revenues that might be expected from Winslow site development ensued. Mr. Graham pointed out that as a rule of thumb multi-family, commercial and industrial traf- fic is not directed through a single-family neighborhood. In the development scenario that we are faced with here, it appears unavoidable. He commented that the Winslow family seems interested in getting the homes on the west side of South Galapago included in their redevelopment package, and are, apparently, negotiating with one or two of the home- owners to acquire the property. Mr. Burns asked if City Council has considered expansion of the district. Mr. Graham stated that Councilman Garrett has raised the issue at the Council level. Mr. Bertoluzzi asked if the Winslow family is interested in the studies that have been done, and do they want to participate in redevelopment. Mr. Graham stated that yes, the Wins- low family is interested, and representatives do participate in the redevelopment meetings. Design issues on the Galapago/lnca/Dartmouth intersection were further discussed. Mr . Woolfall discussed the problem with left turning movements to the north and south with the current off-set of the major streets. Ms . Weddle asked who would be responsible for a H:IGROUPIBOARDSI URA IMinu1es 1Minutes ~002\EURA 06-12-02 .doc • • • separate pedestrian /bicycle crossing on Dartmouth Avenue. Mr. Graham stated that con- struction of pedestrian /bicycle crossing bridge is negotiable. Several alternatives were briefly mentioned; Mr. Graham pointed out that no cost figures have been run for any of the alternatives, and that City Council would be involved. Mr. Graham reviewed a meeting regarding finance issues that was held approximately six weeks ago. It was determined at that meeting that the Developer will use bond counsel of the City's choice. Mr. Graham reiterated that some of the largest infrastructure expenses are not presently eligible for TIF financing. Mr. Bertoluzzi asked if staff had a current esti- mate on the cost of the project to the City. Mr. Graham stated that staff meets on June 13 with the economist to update cost estimates. He stated that current cost estimates have been done over the course of the last three years. Current estimates are about $4,000,000 for infrastructure costs that the EURA would be responsible for . Means to finance these costs are being explored, and could include the possibility of land-swap and certificates of part1C1pation . Mr. Graham stated that approximately $6,000,000 of infrastructure im- provements will be required of RTD and the developer. Anticipated revenues were briefly discussed. Mr. Woolfall was thanked for his attendance and discussion. IV. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE A. Revenue Report Mr. Graham distributed financial information from Mr. Gryglewicz, Director of Financial and Administrative Services. This information was prepared in response to an inquiry at the last meeting whether repayment of principle to bondholders had been compromised by closure of several businesses -such as Home Base, Office Depot, and Phar-Mor. Mr. Gry- glewicz has concluded in this memorandum, and the appended spread-sheet, that bond investors had recouped their principal investment and will realize some interest, but not as much as they had hoped for. B. Monthly Property/Sales Tax Report This report was received for the record, and so noted. C. Project Time Line Mr. Graham presented a timeline regarding the development of zoning regulations, applica- tion of those regulations to the land, and the effective date of these actions. Mr. Graham stated that the City Council asked the Planning Commission to accelerate progress on this project, and this entails extra meetings on the part of the Planning Commission. If this time- line is followed as set forth, the ordinance regulations and rezoning of the land would be- come effective on November 25, 2002 . H GROUP'BOARDS \URA .. \1inutcs ,Minut cs :OO ~\Et.:RA 06·11-02 .doc • • • Mr. Graham pointed out that one of the issues Mr. Fullerton has made clear is that he will not acquire the property from the EURA until the entitlement (zone district) regulations are in effect. The agreement for construction of the light rail station must also be in place. D. Agreement to Negotiate Mr. Graham noted that the Agreement to Negotiate with Mr. Fullerton will expire at the end of August, and will have to be extended again . He suggested that the Authority may want to meet with Mr. Fullerton to determine if we are making progress on key issues. E. Tent Talk Mr. Graham invited all members of the Authority to the Tent Talk get-together scheduled for June 13 from 6 to 8 p .m. This will be in the Civic Center Plaza, and Mr. Fullerton will be present with depictions of his proposed development. Nothing further was brought up for discussion. The meeting was declared adjourned. Gertrude G . Welty, Recording Se 'retary H:IGRO UPIBOARDSIURAIMinutcslM inutcs 2002\EU RA 06-12-02 .doc