Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-04-18 EURA MINUTES• • • ENGLEWOOD URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY APRIL 18, 2001 I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting of the Englewood Urban Renewal Autho rity was called to order in the Com- munity Development Conference Room at 6:35 p .m., Chair Robin Weddle presiding. Present: Absent: Roth , Woodward, Bertoluzzi, Haraldsen, Wedd le Fish , Alternate Member Simpson , Executive Director/Executive Secretar y Garrett, Lindsey Also Present: Senior Planner Mark Graham Larry S. Ful lerton, Fullerton Company DRC Member Tomasso A ltern ate member Ron Fish was welcomed to the meeting . II . GENERAL IRON WORKS DEVELOPER SELECTION Mr. Simpson stated he wanted to bring the Autho rity members up-to-date on the GIW D e- veloper selection process , which has been on-going since Januar y, 2001 . Ms . Weddle and Mr. Woodward served on the Dev elopment Review Committee, along with May or Pro Tern Bradshaw and Councilman Mike Yurchick, and Commun ity Representatives Ray Tomasso and Cindy Scott. City Manager Sears , Capital Project Manager Kahm , and M r. Simpson also served on the Development Re v ie w Committee. Mr. Simpson stated the DRC has recommended that the Fullerton Company be se le cted, and this recommendation has been transmitted to the City Council. Council has given consensus to accept this rec- ommendation . The Authority will be asked to approve a resolution authorizing the EURA to enter into an agreement for exclusi v e negotiation with the Fullerton Company for a pe- riod of 120 days with a goal to reach a GIW Redevelopment Agreement. Mr. Simpson asked Mr. Graham to pro v ide more in-depth background on the selection process . Mr. Graham introduced Mr. Fullerton to the Authority. Mr. Graham stated that the process really began last Fall , when the North Englewood Re - development Plan , which was done b y Mr. Arthur Anderson, was approved by the Author- ity and the City Council. Mr. Graham sta t ed that members of the Authority wo ul d recall Mr. Anderson 's documentation of "blight" in the north Englewood industrial area , which led H:'GRO UP'BOARDSIURA IMmuteslMin 200 llE URA •-18 -0 I doc • to the creation of the North Englewood Urban Renewal area by the Englewood City Coun- cil. • • Following creation of the urban renewal area, Requests for Qualifications were mailed to development companies. Only four responses to the "Request for Qualifications" (RFQ) were received, two were submitted on time, and two were not. The Fullerton Company and Urban Neighborhoods were the two redevelopment companies that responded on time. The Development Review Committee was formed ; both development companies met with the Development Review Committee (DRC), and were deemed qualified . They were asked to prepare a response to the Request for Proposal for rede v elopment of the GIW site. A calendar was established outlining DRC meeting dates, and established dead- lines for specific step accomplishment. Mr. Graham stated that Mr. Tim Leonard provided the DRC financial perspective on the proposal, and Mr. Ron Straka pro v ided architectural perspective on the proposal. Mr. Simpson stated that during the RFP period, U rban N eighborhoods requested a two- week time extension, which he granted to both development companies. One w eek into this two-w eek extension time, Urban N eighborhoods withdrew from the selection process . Mr. Graham stated that the deadline for submitting a redevelopment proposal was March 30 th; Fullerton Company submitted their development proposal on time, and met all re- quirements of the submittal criteria . On March 31 , members of the DRC toured several of the projects done by the Fullerton Compan y and were very impressed with these projects. Presentation of the proposal b y the de v eloper to the DRC was done on April 11 th . The DRC made the determination to rec o mmend selection of The Fullerton Company as the GIW rede v eloper. Mr. Graham discussed acquisition of the property. RTD will acquire the property from Bar- ton Brothers, and the City will then ac q uire the southern portion fr o m RTD . Lan d p ri ce ne- gotiations with RTD are on-going at the present time . Mr. Graham stated that Mr. Fullerton 's proposal encompasses residential , retail, office and open space. Mr. Graham stated that the Fullerton Company was very responsive to the request for qualifications and th e request for proposal, and that the Compan y doe s ha v e the c apabilities to address environmental and financial elements in c onjun c ti o n w ith the re- development. Mr. Graham stated that the DRC did recommend that the EURA accept the proposal of The Fullerton Compan y. If the EURA adopts Resolution #1, Series of 2001 , this will authorize exclusive negotiations with the Fullerton Compan y for 12 0 days to establish a Redevelop- ment Agreement. Once a rede v elopment agreement has been prepared and executed, re- development of the GIW site can begin . Mr. Graham stated that EURA Legal Counsel Benedetti did review the resolution included in the Authority 's meeting packet. H·'GRO UPIBO ARDS IURA IMinuu:s 1."1 in :OO ll EURA J-1 8-01 doc • • • Mr. Graham asked Mr. Fullerton to review his proposed redevelopment plan for the Author- ity. Mr. Fullerton thanked members of the Authority for the opportunity to meet with them, and extended his thanks and appreciation to Ms . Weddle and Mr. Woodward, and to staff members, who have been working on the DRC since late 2000 or early 2001. Mr. Fuller- ton advised Authority members that the display boards depict a "conceptual" redevelop- ment; street locations etc. have not been firmly determined. Mr. Fullerton stated that his development team is comprised of representatives from two architectural firms, a land planning firm , an environmental firm, and a public relations firm . Mr. Fullerton stated that he views the GIW site as an opportunity to continue the momen- tum begun by redevelopment of CityCenter. The redevelopment will be a Transit Oriented Development (TOD ), and a ke y element of this will be a new light rail station to be con- structed at Bates Avenue. Mr. Fullerton stated that he considers the new light rail station to be a great amenity for the rede v elopment site. He stated he envisions this light rail station to ser v e this rede v elopment are a. Mr. Full erton st ated th at as pa rt o f this p ro po sa l, his de - velopment team w ould like to relocate the old Englewood Depot to close proximity with the new light rail station ; it may be used as part of the light rail station and the relocation will get the structure back b y the rail lines. A multi-story office building of 100,000 square feet will be developed; this will have retail on the ground le v el , and structured parking . This particular piece of the development w ill probably be the last phase. Mr. Fullerton stated that the de v elopment w ill contain five mid-rise residential buildings, with parking under- neath the structures; each structure w ill co ntain appro x imatel y 50 units. A public p ark w ill be de v eloped in the center of the de v elopment, as well as park/open spa ce b y the light rail station. Mr. Fullerton stated that the lo w rise residenti al buildings wi ll be on the north /w est angle of the property; these w ill be smaller units, and w ill be less ex pensi ve. Mr. Fullerton commented that in the St. Luke 's Hospital rede v elopment project, his com- pan y and Post Properties are doing the project, and that he is ver y impres sed with the job that Post Properties is doing. Mr. Fullerton discussed infrastructure construction; the first step will be to build the streets and the park/open space area on the west by the proposed light rail station. Mr. Fullerton stated that it will take four to fi v e y ears to full build-out of the proposed redevelopment. The total rede v elopment will contain betw een 400 to 500 resi d ential units , with limited re- tail and office uses . Mr. Simpson asked Ms. Weddle and Mr. Woodward if the y had comments regarding the proposed rede v elopment, inasmuch as the y were part of the DRC. Mr. Woodward stated that he has found this to be a "fascinating proce ss", and that the pro- posals submitted b y the two responding dev elop e rs we re co mpl et ely d ifferent in natur e . Mr. Wood w ar d stated th a t h e is v er y ple ased with the Fullert o n C o mpa ny pr opo sal , and that Mr. Fullerton and his development te am ha v e put together a great proposal. Mr. Woodward stated that the Fullerton Compan y proposal is for the south half of the GIW site, H:IGRO UPI BO ARDSIURA IMinuteslMin 200 ll EURA 4. \ S-O\ .doc • and will not impact the remainder of the neighborhood . Mr. Woodward stated that he thinks this will be a great project for Englewood. • • Ms . Weddle stated that in her opinion, this proposed redevelopment will be great for this neighborhood, and it will encourage y oung people to move into Englewood to live . Ms. Weddle stated that the people living i n this development will do business in Englewood, and the entire City will benefit from the redevelopment. Mr. Haraldsen noted that a letter from Concours Cars of Denver was included in the packet; he asked what impact the proposed redevelopment will have on this business . Mr. Simpson stated that he has not responded to the letter to this date, that he wanted to dis- cuss it first with the EURA. Mr. Simpson stated that the proposed redevelopment project applies only to the GIW site, and will not impact Concours Cars at 2830 South Elati . Zon- ing modifications for the entire industrial corridor is still under discussion. Mr. Simpson stated that he would look for guidance from the Authority, but w ould sug gest that the re- sponse state that the redevelopment is applicable only to the GIW site , and that redevel- opment of property occupied b y Concours Cars is not anticipated at this time. Mr. Fullerton stated that if his redevelopment has an y impact on the Concours Cars, it would be a positive impact in the form of possible new customer s. He stated that his Company has no designs to purchase property east of South Elati Street. Mr. Woodward noted the letter makes pointed references to a problem with the landlord; this is be y ond the scope of the Authority to address . Mr. Woodward stated that one other point he would like to make in regard to Mr. Fullerton 's proposal, is that it will be the first TOD residential development on the light rail sy stem in th e e ntire Den ve r Metro area. H e said there are a lot of positives to this project. Mr. Simpson agreed ; the City Center TOO is a mixed co mmerc ial /residential dev elopment, but the Fullerton Compan y proposal will be primaril y residential , with a small amount of of- fice and retail included . The retail services w ill be "neighborhood services " -such as a barber shop, coffee/sandwich shop , a pastr y shop , etc. -and limited to 30 ,000 sq . ft. over- all. The emphasis will be on the residential for-sale aspect of the development. Mr. Fish asked if there will be any industrial development permitted in the TOO . Mr. Simp- son stated that the property will be rezoned sometime late this year or early next year, and that no industrial uses will be included in the rede v elopment. He reiterated that the focus of the redevelopment will be on housing, office and small retail uses . Mr. Haraldsen stated that in his opinion, it is a great id ea to relocate the depot to the rede- velopment site . He suggested that the depot be improved and used to sell coffee and sandwiches for transit riders. Mr. Simpson stated that it will be important to have staff and Mr. Fullerton meet later with the Historical Society to begin discussions for relocation of the depot. Mr. Haraldsen stated he understood there wil.1 be a meeting in the depot sometime this weekend . H:I GRO UP'BO ARDS IURA IMinu1 es l Min 1001 \EURA .1 -18-0 1 doc • Mr. Roth noted that Mr. Fullerton had alluded to the panoramic views residents of the re- development will have. He pointed out that there is concern on the part of residents to the east of the redevelopment site regarding height of the structures in the TOD, and whether the new structures will inhibit their views from their residences. Ms . Weddle stated that there will be neighborhood meetings where such concerns can be discussed . Mr. Simpson agreed that there will be neighborhood meetings for discussion of concerns. He pointed out the rede v elopment will entail demolition of existing structures and cleaning the prop- erty; the redevelopment needs to have sufficient density to make the project financially fea- sible, and to achieve the density, the new structures ma y be higher. • • Mr. Fullerton asked what neighborhood Mr. Roth was referencing -he noted that the neighborhood immediately surrounding the GIW site is fairly flat, and wouldn 't have view opportunities; is Mr. Roth referring to areas east of Broadway. Mr. Roth stated that he was referring to residential areas east of Broadway; this topography is higher , and some of the homes were built to take advantage of the view. Mr. Simpson asked Mr. Roth if there is a building height the neighborhood has considered to be the "limit". Mr. Roth stated that he didn 't know the height of the existing structure, but he would guess that this would probably be the "limit"; he pointed out that this struc- ture is mostl y hidden when the tr ees are leafed-out. Ms. Weddle asked if members of the Authority had questions . Mr. Bertoluzzi asked if the park/open space areas proposed in the redevelopment will be City-owned and maintained, or privatel y owned and maintained . Mr. Simpson stated that the issue of street design and mainte nance, as we ll as park design and maintenance, ne eds to be explored more full y during the ne gotiation period . He stated that Mr. Fullerton had stated in his presentation that the displa y boards depict a "conceptual " plan , and that actual rede v elopment ma y not oc c ur as c urrentl y sho w n . Mr. Fullerton stated that he would prefer to have the City assume maintenance of the parks and of the streets. Mr. Woodward noted that if residents are assessed for maintenance of the parks/open space, the y could become possessi v e and expect that others not be granted use or access to these amenities. Mr. Bertoluzzi asked about financing; he stated that he heard nothing about "bonds " or an y other form of financing durin g the pr esentation . Mr. Simpson stated that discussions on financing ha v e alread y been scheduled ; he pointed out that there ar e a v ariety of financing tools available, and the y will be explored to determine which will work the best for this pro- ject. Mr. Haraldsen asked what street name will be given to the "diagonal" street. Mr. Haraldsen was advised that this has not been determined . H·'G ROU PI BOARDS\i_;RA \M in u1 es 1Mm :0011 EU RA J-18-0 I doc • Mr. Fish stated that he understands where the proposed redevelopment is headed, but has no questions at this time. • • Mr. Bertoluzzi referenced proposed Resolution #1, Section #1, and asked who will be rep- resenting the Urban Renewal Authority on the negotiating team with the Fullerton Com- pany. Mr. Simpson stated that this has been discussed with Legal Counsel Benedetti; it is Mr. Benedetti's suggestion that the Executive Director (Mr. Simpson ) be designated as the EURA representative on the negotiating team. Mr. Graham will also be on the negotiating team, as a representative for the City of Englewood. Mr. Benedetti and Mr. Mike Miller, special counsel for the City of Englewood, will also be on the negotiating team. Mr. Ber- toluzzi stated that he is comfortable having Mr. Simpson representing the Authority, but suggested that an additional member might also be included on the team. He stated that he would like to see Mr. Garrett and possibly one additional commissioner, also serve on the negotiating team. This would make the EURA more participatory in the redevelopment process. Mr. Simpson stated that the negotiating team will report back to the Authority. Mr. Simp- son pointed out that the negotiating team will be meeting during workday hours; if an Au- thority member is available to meet during this time period, they are welcome to partici- pate . Mr. Simpson also pointed out that with legal counsel participating in the negotiations, it would be difficult to arrange evenings the y would be willing to meet. Mr. Bertoluzzi agreed that asking Authority members to participate in negotiations during the day is im- practical. Brief discussion ensued. Mr. Simpson pointed out that the Authority may ulti- mately be meeting more than once per month when the negotiation/redevelopment gets underway. Mr. Bertoluzzi stated that he is prepared to vote to approve the Resolution and the process, but stressed the need for a reasonable flow of information to the Authority membership . Woodward moved : Weddle seconded: The Urban Renewal Authority accept and approve Resolution #1, Se- ries of 2001, A RESOLUTION OF THE ENGLEWOOD URBAN RE- NEWAL AUTHORllY' ACCEPTING PROPOSAL TO NEGOTIATE EX- CLUSIVELY WITH THE FULLERTON COMPANY FOR 120 DAYS FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE GENERAL IRON WORKS SITE IN THE NORTH ENGLEWOOD INDUSTRIAL REDEVELOPMENT URBAN RENEWAL AREA. AYES : NAYS : ABSTAIN : ABSENT: Woodward, Bertoluzzi, Haraldsen , Roth , Weddle None None Garrett, Lindsey The motion carried . H:I GROUP'BOARDSI URA 1Minutes\Min 2001 \EURA ~-1 8-0 1 doc • • • Ill. EURA BYLAW AMENDMENT Attendance Policy Mr. Simpson stated that an amendment to the Bylaws was prepared, and has been modi- fied as suggested in November, to address attendance requirements . A new Section 5 is added, entitled Attendance of Members; subsequent sections have been renumbered ac- cordingly. Bertoluzzi moved: Roth seconded: The Bylaws be amended to include a new Section 5, Attendance of Members. AYES: NAYS: ABSTAIN: ABSENT : Bertoluzzi, Haraldsen, Roth, Woodward, Weddle None None Garrett, Lindsey The motion carried. IV. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Chairman Vice-chairman Ms. Weddle stated that the Authority needs to consider election of officers for the ensuing year. She stated that if members of the Authority have no objection, she would like to serve another term as Chairman; the redevelopment project for the GIW site has begun , and she would like to follow this process through as Chairman. Members of the Authority vo iced strong support for Ms. Weddle 's continued c hairmanship . Ms. Weddle asked Mr. Bertoluzzi if he would care to serve another term as v ice-chairman . Mr. Bertoluzzi stated that this was agreeable to him . Roth moved: Woodward seconded: The current officers of the EURA , Ms . Weddle as Chair and Mr. Bertoluzzi as Vice-chair, continue to serve as officers of the Au- thority for this year. AYES: NAYS: ABSTAIN : ABSENT : Haraldsen, Roth , Woodward, Bertoluzzi , Weddle None None Garrett, Lindsey The motion carried . H 'G ROL'P'BOAROS'L:RA 'Minu1eslMtn :001 EURA-l-18-0 1 doc • • • v. APPROVAL OF MINUTES January 10, 2001 The Minutes of January 10, 2001 were considered for approval. Roth moved: Weddle seconded: The Minutes of January 10, 2001 be approved as written. AYES: NAYS : ABSTAIN : ABSENT : Haraldsen, Roth, Woodward, Bertoluzzi, Weddle None None Lindsey, Garrett The motion carried . VI. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Further brief discussion ensued on the letter from Concours Cars . Mr. Simpson reiterated his intent to respond that there is no intent to acquire their property for rede v elopment. Mr. Roth suggested that the business owners are concerned that their business and prop- erty were considered part of the "blight" cited in the area . Ms. Weddle suggested that it may help calm people down once we start meeting with the neighborhood. Mr. Fish asked about the writer's request to be allowed to relocate his business within the redevelopment area . Mr. Simpson stated that this request cannot be addressed at this time; the zoning for the redevelopment is not in place . Mr. Simpson discussed the need to get the "entitlement issu es" such as zonin g o f the site moving forward. Information on the zoning will be brought to the Authority. Th e zoning issue is also of concern to the de v eloper; the Fullerton C o mpan y cannot clo se on acquisi- tion of the property until the zoning to allow the development is in place . Mr. Graham pointed out that the issue of structure height will also be addressed in the zoning of the site . Mr. Simpson stated that there are a variety of things the City, the Authority, and the Fullerton Company; have to do over the next several months. Meetings to discuss financ- ing issues are being scheduled, and there are several alternative financial tools to be ex- plored . The land cost and cost for remediation also have to be addressed . There have been discussions with RTD over the last few months, and additional meetings have been scheduled; the price RTD is asking for the south portion of the site is still being negotiated. Mr. Simpson stated that he was v er y serious in his earlier comments about additional meet- ings for the Authority. He noted that the regular meeting night is the second Wednesday of every month; he suggested the possibility of also meeting on the fourth Wednesday of each month when the need arises. Brief discussion ensued. Mr. Roth stated that he serves on the Code Enforcement Advisory Committee, which regularl y meets on the third Wednesday of every month. H:IGRO UPIBOARDS\URA IMinuteslMin 200 1\E URA -1-18-0 1.doc • • • VII. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE Mr. Lindsey 's absence was noted. Ms. Weddle stated that a letter has been prepared di- rected to Mr. Lindsey asking for his resignation because of non-attendance. Mr. Simpson discussed a similar situation that existed on the Planning Commission that was recently re- solved by the City Council declaring the position vacant, and appointing a new member. It was the consensus of the Authority that a letter be prepared to the Mayor setting forth the attendance record of Mr. Lindsey, asking that he be removed from membership, and Mr. Fish, alternate member, be appointed a full-voting member. Mr. Simpson stated that the next meeting of the Authority is scheduled for May 9 1 h. Nothing else was raised for discussion. The meeting was declared adjourned. Gertrude G. Welty, Recording Secre ry H:IGROUP\BOARDSIURAIMinutcs lMin 2001 \EURA ~-18-0 1 .doc