Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-06-21 EURA MINUTES• • • ENGLEWOOD URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY Special Meeting June 21, 2000 I. CALL TO ORDER The special meeting of the Englewood Urban Renewal Authority was called to order in the Community Development Conference Room of Englewood Civic Center, 1000 Englewood Parkway, Englewood, Colorado , Chairperson Weddle presiding. Members present: Members absent: Also present: Haraldsen , Linds ay, Roth , Woodward, Bertoluzzi , Weddle Gryglewic z, Executive Director/Executive Secretary Garrett EURA Attorney Paul C. Benedetti City Attorney Dan Brotzman Community Development Director Robert Simpson Senior Planner Harold J. Stitt Senior Planner Mark Graham EDDA Director Harold Celva EDDA Chair Connie Sanchez Members of the Authority , staff, and visitors introduced themselves. II. ACOMA STREET PARKING LOT PROJECT Chairperson Weddle asked Executive Director Gryglewicz to update the Authority on the Acoma Street parking lot project. Mr. Gryglewicz suggested that EDDA Director Celva provide an overview of the proposal. Mr. Celva stated that the property owners and merchants in the downtown area are very con- cerned about ownership of the South Acoma Street site remaining in the hands of the Englewood Urban Renewal Authority. Loss of the parking lot would be detrimental to property values and businesses served by this parking lot. The Broadway and Acoma frontage for the site has been vacant in excess of 15 years, and is owned partly by the EURA, and partly by the City of Engle- wood. EDDA proposes that the separate ownerships be combined into one (EDDA), and that the parking lot be redeveloped and impro ved by EDDA. The parking lot would then be transferred to the City of Englewood, and EDDA would retain ownership of the north portion of the site from Broadway to Acoma Street. The face block along Broadway and Englewood Parkway would be marketed to developers . Mr. Celva stated that this site needs to be improved; it serves as a gateway to the CityCenter development. 1 • • • Paul Benedetti, EURA legal counsel, stated that there have been meetings with City staff and EURA staff, EDDA Director Celva, EDDA legal counsel Windholz, and himself regarding dis- position of the Acoma site. He distributed a second draft of a Tri-Party Agreement, and stated that he has been working with City Attorney Brotzman to write the new Tri-Party Agreement between the City of Englewood, EURA, and EDDA regarding this site. Mr. Benedetti stated there are six parcels of land involved -three owned by the EURA, three owned by the City of Englewood. Mr. Benedetti stated that the premise back of the new Tri-Party Agreement is that EDDA will take ownership of these six parcels from the EURA and the City of Englewood -at no cost to the EDDA other than payment of any legal fees incurred by the EURA in the course of this transaction. The property transfer will be "as-is" to EDDA. EDDA is working with the City of Englewood to develop a special assessment district, wherein property owners will be assessed to pay for improvements to the parking lot. The approval to issue debt must be placed on the November ballot, and approval of the EURA, the EDDA , and Englewood City Council must be obtained, ordinances prepared and approved no later than July 17, 2000 . Mr. Benedetti directed the attention of the Authority and guests to Section 10 of the Tri-Party Agreement, "Covenants". Once the parking area is improved and transferred to the City , it must be used to pro vide "X " number of parking spaces for "X" number of years. Mr. Benedetti pointed out that there are several blank spaces for dates , footage , etc. that need to be filled in. The Covenants a lso cite several uses that will be prohibited on this site, and sets forth the provi- sion that all uses on the property will be subject to approval of the City of Englewood. The Covenants also contain a provision that if the EDDA sells, leases, or otherwise transfers all or any part of the property to a third party, the City is to be paid the proceeds received by EDDA less reasonable costs and expenses actually incurred by EDDA in connection with the property transfer. This clause also contains an "X" space for date insertion. Mr. Benedetti stated that the Agreement stipulates that the EURA and City waive remedy of damages except recovery of reasonable attorneys ' fees and costs incurred in enforcement of re- spective rights upon default by EDDA. Mr. Benedetti stated that the EDDA can be forced , if in default of provisions contained in the covenants, to transfer the property back to the City . Mr. Benedetti cautioned that the property will not revert to the EURA , but will revert to the City of Englewood. Mr. Bertoluzzi asked if he understood correctly that EDDA 's concern is that the EURA could sell their property upon receipt of a reasonable offer, and EDDA wants to take steps to assure continued use of the site for parking. Mr. Celva stated that this is correct. Mr. Bertoluzzi cited § 10 a of the proposed revised Agreement, and questioned the need for the word "retail" in this statement. Mr. Benedetti agreed that removal of the word "retail" does not adversely impact the intent of this statement. Time citations were discussed. Mr. Celva stated that property owners that are being asked to "invest" in the improvement of the parking lot would be more comfortable if firm time frames are set forth in the Agreement. Mr. Celva suggested that 20 or 25 years would be an acceptable time frame; he pointed out that property owners may be paying off the assessment for 10 to 15 years. Mr. Benedetti suggested that City Council will have to grant approval of the Tri-party 2 • Agreement. Mr. Brotzman agreed, but noted that City Council does want to hear from the Au- thority what they feel is a reasonable length of time to restrict the use of the site to parking. • • Mr. Bertoluzzi cited § 10 c, Resale Proceeds. He suggested that he is not comfortable with the wording of this provision; he asked if the provision can be reworded to prohibit sale of the prop- erty until expiration of debt service obligations of the Authority. Mr. Bertoluzzi expressed con- cern that if the EDDA were to sell the site -say in three or four years -might the bondholders take issue with the EURA. Brief discussion ensued. Mr. Benedetti pointed out that at the pre- sent time, the site is not producing any revenues for the City or the tax increment district. He expressed doubt that the bondholders could take issue with the Authority on transfer of the prop- erty. Mr. Celva suggested that the issue is two-fold: development on the north Broadway/Englewood Parkway frontage of the site vs. continued parking lot usage on the South Acoma Street frontage. He reiterated that the parking lot improvements will be assessed to the property owners for a 10 to 15 year period; these property owners want assurance that the site will be used for parking lot purposes longer than the assessment period, at least. Mr. Celva stated that the objective of EDDA on the parcel they will hold for development is to tum it to the private sector for devel- opment as soon as possible. Development of the site will bring additional property and sales tax revenues to the City and the EURA. Mr. Celva stated that the EDDA is not looking to sell the property "for profit", but possibly transfer the property to a developer free of cost. He is of the opinion that acquisition of the property free of cost will provide an incentive to a developer to come up with a viable business development. Ms. Weddle asked the name of the developer that has generated all this concern and discussion on the use of the parking lot. Mr. Gryglewicz expressed the opinion that the merchants feel the property would be much more valuable if the north portion were to be developed, and they would also have assurance of continued parking use on the Acoma Street frontage. Ms. Sanchez stated that no developer has approached EDDA ; it is merchant concern that has generated the discussion on acquisition of the sites. Mr. Celva suggested that under the bond offering statement, the only basic security the bond- holders have is revenue generated by the TIF . Mr. Benedetti stated that it is a "gross pledge", but TIF revenue is the main source of security to the bondholders. Mr. Benedetti asked that the Authority and guests keep in mind that the Authority can transfer the property, but that this must be done to further compliance of the Urban Renewal Plan . Mr. Gryglewicz asked if a developer presents an offer for the entire parcel -Broadway, Park- way, and Acoma Street frontage -and has a development proposal that will eliminate the Acoma Street parking and ultimately "harm" the Broadway merchants that rely on that parking, can the Authority refuse the offer to purchase. Mr. Benedetti stated that the EURA could refuse the pur- chase offer; there is no requirement to sell the property. Mr. Haraldsen asked how the City acquired the property in the first place . Mr. Benedetti pointed out that the majority of the property is owned by the EURA. Mr. Celva stated that there was a fire; the City acquired the burned site , cleared it, and it has remained vacant. Mr. Haraldsen 3 9 asked why the City purchased the property after the fire. Mr. Stitt stated that the City purchased the property when it became available, with the intent that it be developed. Mr. Haraldsen asked who will own the property after the property is transferred by the Authority and City. Mr. Benedetti stated that the Englewood Downtown Development Authority (EDDA) will own the property; that is the purpose of the Agreement before the Authority for discussion this evening. Mr. Celva stated that the ownership by the EDDA would be "short-term"; the park- ing lot would be developed and transferred back to the City. The development parcel (north par- cel) will be marketed to developers. Mr. Benedetti pointed out that, as a practical matter, parking is needed for the downtown area, and continued use of the site for parking purposes does comply with the Plan. Discussion ensued. Mr. Brotzman stated that the City Council wants to make sure that the prop- erty will be developed. Mr. Celva stated that a big benefit is to bring control of all the separate parcels under one ownership so that the parking area can be improved, and the north portion sold for development. Mr. Woodward asked about the number of parking spaces currently on the site, and what is pro- posed. Mr. Celva stated that right now there are 133 off-street parking spaces; under the new development plan there is "something like" 134 spaces. • Ms. Weddle asked Ms. Sanchez how many parking spaces her business would have in the park- ing lot. Mr. Celva stated that Ms. Sanchez's business is required to have 14 off-street parking spaces; she has provided five. Her business is nine spaces deficient in required off-street park- ing. Mr. Celva noted that counting the 133 spaces in the Acoma Street lot, plus the on-street parking, it comes close to 160 spaces. Mr. Celva pointed out that the Odd Fellows Hall needs to provide 70 off-street spaces; they do not come close to meeting this minimum requirement. • Mr. Haraldsen asked about including a non-competition clause in the Agreement. Mr. Celva stated that he had been in retail business for 25 years, and that competition is healthy. He pointed out that it is a matter of getting businesses that will bring people in to the area to shop. Mr. Haraldsen suggested developing a list of desirable businesses that wouldn't compete with existing businesses. Mr. Celva stated that they do not want to limit the private sector and mar- ketability of the site. Mr. Celva further stated that a market analysis of the Broadway corridor has been done, and EDDA will be working with the Community Development Department to attract "niche" businesses. Mr. Woodward again referenced § 10 a; he asked if this parking will be free to the public, or will it be metered. Mr. Celva reiterated that the intent of the EDDA, after acquisition of the property, is to improve the parking lot and transfer that portion back to the City. If the City wants to meter the lot, tum operation over to a parking authority, or make the parking free to the public, it will be the City's determination . Further discussion on resale of the property by EDDA ensued. Mr. Celva stated that sale of the property by EDDA will require authorization of the City Council. 4 • • • Ms. Weddle asked when this issue will go to City Council, assuming it is approved in principle by the Authority . Mr. Celva stated that process has to be approved no later than July 17, 2000 in order to be placed on the November ballot. Ms. Weddle asked if other Broadway merchants know what is being discussed. Do they know the approximate amount of the assessment they may face. Ms. Sanchez stated that the merchants are aware of the efforts to acquire the property; they do not know the assessment amounts be- cause those figures have just recently been determined. Mr. Celva stated that the costs to the property owner will be "pass-through" to the tenants and customers. Mr. Woodward referenced § 10 a, and asked if the parking spaces will support existing and new "retail" uses only. Mr. Celva stated that he recalled asking that this wording be modified to al- low commercial, retail, and residential - a mixed use development. Mr. Celva stated that he does have concern regarding the Agreement , §7 and §9, which calls for written approval from the EURA and the City on design and financing of the parking improve- ments. Mr. Celva discussed problems he feels he has had getting meetings scheduled with the EURA. Mr. Celva recited that he had requested a meeting in August of 1999; the Authority did not meet until November, 1999; he sent a letter early in 2000 to the Authority stressing time con- straints for formation of the district, but the Authority did not meet to discuss the Acoma Street issue until May 3, 2000. A special meeting was scheduled for May 31, --it was cancelled; and it is now June 21 51 . Mr. Celva stated that he feels bound to work with and consult the EURA board, but suggested that the EURA appoint a liaison to the EDDA to attend their meetings, and report back to the EURA. Mr. Celva again urged that written approval by the EURA on any as- pect of the property or development after transfer to EDDA be eliminated from the Agreement. Mr. Haraldsen asked Mr. Celva if he knew the Chairperson on the EURA, and could he contact that individual. Mr. Haraldsen suggested that possibly the City Council could "step in" if Mr. Celva felt he was not getting response in a timely manner. Mr. Celva stated that City Council must approve all actions of the EDDA; he again asked that the Agreement be modified to elimi- nate only the requirement for EURA written approval. Mr. Bertoluzzi stated that he could not approve elimination of this requirement for EURA writ- ten approval. He suggested a possible inclusion that approval be given within a specific time period after submission to the Authority. Discussion ensued. Mr. Benedetti asked if a two-week time period would be acceptable to the EURA; he also suggested wording be included that if ap- proval is not received within two weeks, it is not deemed to give consent to the proposal. Ms. Weddle asked if telephone polls would be acceptable. Mr. Benedetti stated that telephone polls are acceptable so long as there is formal ratification at the next meeting. Mr. Roth stated that he felt telephone polls might be a good idea. Mr. Bertoluzzi stated that he did not want to approve use of telephone polls; this procedure requires members to make a decision without benefit of group discussion. Discussion ensued . 5 • • • Mr. Benedetti suggested writing into the Agreement authorization for staff to agree to minor changes in the Agreement. Discussion ensued. Mr. Bertoluzzi moved: The EURA approve the second draft of the Tri-Party Agreement in substance, with minor changes of applicable figures and dates to be made . Further discussion ensued. Ms. Weddle asked if the figures, dates, and times should be nailed down now to eliminate "minor changes". Further discussion followed. Changes made to the Agreement include: • Page 1 -the date of June 21 , 2000 was inserted in the preamble of the Agreement. • Page 4 --#9 , line 3: requirement for written approval from EURA within two weeks of submission is to be included in the language of the Agreement. • Page 4 --#9 , line 4 : " ... completed on or before 12/31/2001, or ... " • Page 4 --#10 a: Until 12/31/26 , ... • Page 4 --# 10 a: "not less than 130 parking spaces ... " • Page 4 --#10 b: "use the northerly 78.5 feet of the ... " • Page 4 --#10 c : " .... before the 12/31/11 anniversary ... " Mr. Woodward asked if most of the buildings in thi s block of South Broadway were owner- occupied or leased. Mr. Celva estimated that over half of the buildings are owner-occupied. Discussion ensued. Mr. Benedetti noted that the EURA has no financial resources and no way to improve the subject property. EDDA is willing to improve the parking lot and ensure continu- ance of the parking lot for the downtown merchants. Mr. Woodward asked about the bondhold- ers if the property is transferred. Mr. Benedetti discussed the unlikelihood that bondholders would come back to the Authority regarding the transference of the land; he reiterated the prem- ise that this site was to provide parking. Mr. Woodward asked if the covenants go with the land , even if the land reverts to the City through default by EDDA. Mr. Benedetti stated that this is correct. He stated that he will add a statement to that effect in the Agreement. Brief discussion ensued. Ms . Weddle asked the pleasure of the Authority . Bertoluzzi moved: Haraldsen seconded: The Englewood Urban Renewal Authority approve the June 21, 2000 draft of the Tri-Party Agreement in principle, and refer said Agreement to the Englewood Cit y Council. AYES : NAYS: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Haraldsen, Lindsay, Roth , Woodward, Bertoluzzi, Weddle None None Garrett 6 • The motion carried. • • Ms . Weddle noted that there was no further business on the agenda for the Authority , and de- clared the meeting adjourned. Gertrude G. Welty, Recording Secretar 7