Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDowntown Development Authority - Minutes - 11/02/2006DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Regular Directors' Meeting Steve Taylor, Chair 221-0524(W) Kurt Kastein, Council Liaison223-0425 (W) Linda Gula, Staff Liaison 484-2020(W) MINUTES of November 2, 2006 REGULAR MEETING The Board of Directors of the Downtown Development Authority met in Regular Session at 7:30 a.m. on November 2, 2006, in the Board Room at Home State Bank, 303 East Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins, CO 80521. PRESENT George Brelig Carey Hewitt, Secretary/Treasurer McCabe Callahan (late arrival) Patty Spencer Steve Taylor, Chair Jack Wolfe, Vice Chair Karen Weitkunat F-11_:1-i3l►`MJI Kim Jordan Kurt Kastein William Sears STAFF Robert Steiner, DDA Executive Director Matt Robenalt, DDA Project Manager Lucia Liley (late arrival) GUESTS Darin Atteberry, Chuck Seest, David Short, Mike Jensen, Carl Glazer, Chris Ray, Troy Torgerson, Matt Poncelow, and Peter Carey. CALL TO ORDER Mr. Taylor called the meeting to order at 7:30 a.m. Roll call was taken. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Mr. Wolfe, seconded by Mr. Hewitt: To approve the minutes of October 18, 2006. Motion approved unanimously. In subsequent discussion, Ms. Liley asked for and received approval to present legal language amendments regarding holiday displays. Mr. Attebeny noted that he was not present for that meeting, contrary to the minutes that show him as present. Mr. Taylor and Mr. Hewitt accepted the amendments. DDA BOARD MINUTES PAGE 2 November 2, 2006 Lulu Asian Bistro is a development proposed by Michael Jensen for the current China Palace space. The scope of the project encompasses construction of a second floor with roof space to be used for dining by the Stonehouse Grill next door. In reviewing the staff response, Mr. Steiner expressed some reservations concerning the anticipated level of appraised value to be ascertained by the County. Other issues include the sign on the wall, a hot issue for Landmark Preservation, the resulting design work to accommodate that feature, and requested renderings of the proposed front and rear facades. Although the staff recommendation is not to exceed the $63,600 requested, particularly in light of the real possibility that the building would appraise for less than expected, Mr. Steiner reminded the Authority of the agreement by which the owner would make up any shortfall in the generated increment. Troy Torgerson and Mr. Jensen reviewed the scope of the project, using renderings to illustrate design features. The funding possibilities to consider are the $50,000 f tgade improvement program and the tax increment approach. The presenters stated that a fair amount of time, expense, and effort has gone into preserving the owl sign and the ability to view it. Those efforts to enhance the sign and keep it in perpetuity can be viewed as a community amenity and thus appropriate for higher levels of funding from a combined approach, thereby generating the $75,000 request rather than the more standard $63,000 TIF request. Mr. Jensen detailed the machinations of the leasing and building valuation. If the valuation is under the anticipated amount, he acknowledged the responsibility of making up the shortfall. However, even under that scenario, TIF funding represents a valued financing tool to help generate the project. The proposed valuation will take into consideration the signed lease and was generated by the County. Some possibilities remain on movement of tax credits and a conservation easement approach, but the DDA is mercifully excluded from those discussions. In response to questions by the Authority, it was noted that HVAC equipment would be housed on the Stonehouse Grill in order to allow for quieter and less restricted dining. New signage is being designed with anchor points on the front of the building. LDC, which had viewed the project as not ripe for consideration, has agreed to a $30,000 fagade loan, contingent on DDA funding. The varied heights of the buildings on this block are consistent with the block's historic nature. Access to the roof will be through Stonehouse Grill and a fire escape. It was agreed that awning design is subject to acceptance by the Authority. Moved by Mr. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Callahan: To approve TIF funding of $63,596, contingent upon approval of the rendering of the awning design, as submitted by the developer. Motion approved unanimously. 215-217 JEFFERSON This is a f spade grant request rather than a TIF project. Project cost is $175,000, with a request for 50% of the total fapade costs, representing $47,595. The requirements are the same for qualified expenses, and the expense list has been pared to those items that are applicable, resulting in a final figure of $71,380, with eligible funding of $35,690. Costs ascribed to design and general conditions appear somewhat high, and the view of the back fagade is in potential jeopardy from development that may occur on property located in close proximity. Carl Glazer, the architect and owner, spoke for the project. He stated that due to the nature of the environment, the building has not been financially robust for 21 of the 23 years that he has owned it. With the movement and development taking place nearby, the moment is opportune for improvements. Mr. Glazer detailed the difficulties facing retail ventures on Jefferson Street. The original funding request would allow the building to see a $793 rent reduction per month and break even; the reduced funding level would result in a $600 rent reduction per month. He outlined the history of patio and alley development on this block, the nature of the construction on the Jefferson Street side, and the costs thereof. In public comments, Mr. Jensen spoke approvingly of the economic stimulation involved with the proposed improvements of this building. DDA BOARD MINUTES PAGE 3 November 2, 2006 In questions by the Authority, discussion was held of the fagade grant program being the only viable DDA funding mechanism for this project. Mr. Glazer stated he could not viably grant an easement on the parking lot in back. in response to concerns about general conditions, Mr. Glazer noted that he is also the architect on the project, and he feels his fees are competitive. The project is hoped to be completed by March 2007. The presence of trucks on Jefferson Street is a huge factor and barrier to continued successful development of the corridor. Moved by Mr. Hewitt, seconded by Ms. Weitkunat: To support the proposed project through fagade grant funding of $35,690. In response to concerns, Mr. Brelig stated that the fees in the general conditions are higher on a percentage basis for smaller projects such as this. In response to Mr. Taylor's concern of an approximate third of the funding going to "soft" costs, Mr. Glazer detailed time spent on design, discussions, and negotiations that had been necessitated by the project. Mr. Brelig was untroubled by the costs but advocated submission of greater detail of those costs. Motion approved with one dissension. POUDRE FIRE AUTHORITY This project is proposed for DDA property, on the west side of the Remington parking structure, over the existing pocket park. Matt Poncelow detailed the appearance, layout, and footprint of the proposed addition. The scale and appearance will be consistent with the existing structure. The remaining park area will feature seating areas that are safer and more visible than the existing amenities. The silver designation with LEED is a necessary portion of the project. Recovery of old cooper roofing elements is a very positive aspect of this project. Moved by Mr. Hewitt, seconded by Ms. Spencer: To approve the proposed project. Motion approved unanimously. MOUNTAIN AVENUE PROPERTIES The Board of Directors approved this project for $76,000 in June 2006. However, since that time, significant upgrades have been added to the design. Approximately $160,000 of increased value will be seen, justifying an increase in funding from $76,000 to $100,000. Chris Ray reviewed the upgraded design features, the added expenses caused by the project expansion, and the cost of removal of tenants. It was noted that the ultimate expenditures for this improvement exceed $1 million. Moved by Mr. Hewitt, seconded by Mr. Wolfe: To increase financial support of the proposed project from $76,000 to $100,000. Motion approved unanimously. 210 SOUTH COLLEGE This is a fayade grant request. Total fagade costs are $60,341, justifying a grant figure of approximately $30,000. Facade costs are 13% of the total cost. Peter Carey explained the change of use to a sandwich shop with outdoor seating. General design, door placement, and materials have all been changed from the prior use. Public comment expressed enthusiasm for the creativity and attractiveness of the design elements. Comments by members of the Board of Directors noted unusual features, the applicant's long history in downtown, and the inventiveness in use of space and outer articulations. Moved by Mr. Brelig, seconded by Mr. Wolfe: To accept the funding recommendation of Staff. Motion approved unanimously. DDA BOARD MINUTES PAGE 4 November 2, 2006 ART IN PUBLIC PLACES Art in Public Places has a current budget of $19,500. They wish to place a gateway structure on North College Avenue, in a space yet to be identified, and are seeking expansion of the budget through DDA in order to purchase a more impressive structure. The structure will most likely be placed closed to the Poudre River, along College Avenue. The $19,500 currently available was generated from North College projects. Urban Renewal Authority representation is being considered. Mr. Steiner reminded all present that the sculpture would have to be within DDA boundaries in order for the DDA to be able to support it. Moved by Mr. Wolfe, seconded by Mr. Hewitt: To provide a matching grant of the $19,500 currently available, contingent upon DDA participation in the selection board and the receipt of regular updates. Motion approved unanimously. UNATTENDED HOLIDAY DISPLAYS Ms. Liley reviewed the proposed policy to allow no private, unattended displays in Old Town Square in favor of displays that have been made for, owned, and maintained by the DDA. Ms. Liley's written report details the necessity of this policy. In public comments, questions were asked about the Santa Claus hut. Ms. Liley reiterated that all displays would need to be DDA property. Moved by Mr. Wolfe, seconded by Mr. Callahan: To approve DDA Resolution No. _, formalizing the policy regarding unattended displays in Old Town Square. OTHER BUSINESS UniverCity Connections UniverCity Connections is hosting a gathering to support an initiative to bring CSU forward as a stronger presence downtown and in the river corridor. The meeting is 5:15 p.m. on November 9'h at the Hilton Hotel, and all Board of Directors members are formally invited. Beet Street Executive Director Applicants have been narrowed to two. Follow-up meetings and social interactions with the public are being scheduled. The successful candidate is expected to be on -board by the first of 2007. The public interest for the Beet Street project is very keen indeed, and this hiring represents a substantial step toward fulfillment of the goal. Other areas of interest, such as the Mason Street corridor and Jefferson Street revamping are gaining momentum. An amazing amount of optimism is being generated in a flat revenue environment. Sales tar figures Chuck Seest stated that downtown sales tax receipts for September 2006 are up 8%, contrasted with the City as a whole at 3.5%. It was noted that the presence of five Saturdays during that month may be a partial explanation. Staffing Discussion has been held concerning a financial coordinator who would divide time between the DDA and the Beet Street project and a clerical/receptionist employee for the front desk of the DBA. The net financial result of this employment allocation is a positive financial impact for the DDA. Mr. Seest of the City's Finance Department has proposed a contract employment relationship with the City and DDA. DDA BOARD MINUTES PAGES November 2, 2006 Mr. Seest noted the anticipated sunsetting of the DDA and expressed concern over the ramifications of hiring a full- time employee with a shortened life span of the hiring entity. He advanced the idea of hiring an employee under the City umbrella and contracting the employee's services to the DDA under an Intergovernmental Agreement, While legal advice must be separate from that received by the City, a shared employee arrangement could be handled within the system. Mr. Seest further noted that additional TIF districts are in the process of creation, with the DDA viewed as a highly successful model. As these districts may wax and wane, it would be beneficial to have a flexible funding mechanism in place to address these types of employment issues. As the DDA/DBA/Beet Street arrangement evolves, a more flexible employment arrangement may prove to be beneficial. In discussion, it was noted that between DDA and Beet Street, more than sufficient work exists to justify a full-time employee, with the possibility of the position moving to a full-time Beet Street employee. Even with sunsetting of the TIF, the DDA will continue in some iteration beyond 2011. The possibility of fading away should be the polar opposite of the DDA's goal in the oncoming years, given its importance and benefit to the community. The DDA is distinct from other TIF districts, in that such entities as URAs are part of the City administration, whereas the DDA has its own discrete identity. Mr. Steiner noted other natural divisions of responsibility between the City and the DDA, in the realm of the DDA having its separate counsel and Executive Director, hiring its own planning experts and other consultants, and the necessity of primary adherence by DDA staffers to the objects of the DDA, over other considerations. A shared employment arrangement could blur those lines. This position is historically, legitimately, and justifiably an internal position within the separate province of the DDA. Mr. Atteberry expressed a wish to take time between this meeting and next to analyze the positions set forth by Mr. Seest and Mr. Steiner. The need was stressed for expediency in resolving this issue so that the employment decision can be made and advanced appropriately. In light of other expressed concerns, the matter was rescheduled for review and decision at the next Board of Directors meeting. ADJOURN There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:45 a.m Carey HewittSecretary