Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Mail Packet - 3/29/2022 - Urban Renewal Authority Board Meeting Agenda - March 31, 2022City of Fort Collins Page 1 Jeni Arndt, Chair Joe Wise, Vice-chair Susan Gutowsky Julie Pignataro Tricia Canonico Shirley Peel Kelly Ohlson Emily Francis Kristin Stephens Kristen Draper Andy Smith Remote Meeting City Hall West 300 LaPorte Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 on Connexion Channel 14 and 881 on Comcast Caitlin Quander Kelly DiMartino Anissa Hollingshead Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck Interim Executive Director Secretary Upon request, the City of Fort Collins will provide language access services for individuals who have limited English proficiency, or auxiliary aids and services for individuals with disabilities, to access City services, programs and activities. Contact 970.221.6515 (V/TDD: Dial 711 for Relay Colorado) for assistance. Please provide 48 hours advance notice when possible. A petición, la Ciudad de Fort Collins proporcionará servicios de acceso a idiomas para personas que no dominan el idioma inglés, o ayudas y servicios auxiliares para personas con discapacidad, para que puedan acceder a los servicios, programas y actividades de la Ciudad. Para asistencia, llame al 970.221.6515 (V/TDD: Marque 711 para Relay Colorado). Por favor proporcione 48 horas de aviso previo cuando sea posible. URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY BOARD MEETING March 31, 2022 ● 5:00 PM PUBLIC PARTICIPATION OPTIONS There will be three options for people who would like to participate in the meeting: • Live via the Zoom online meeting, • Live via the telephone, • By submitting emails to cfrickey@fcgov.com All options will be available for those wishing to provide general public comment, as well as public comment during individual discussion items. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (ONLINE VIA ZOOM) Individuals who wish to address the Board via remot e public participation can do so through Zoom at https://zoom.us/j/98687657267. Individuals participating in the Zoom session should watch the meeting through that site, and not via FCTV, due to the streaming delay and possible audio interference. The Zoom meeting will be available beginning at 4:30 p.m. on the day of the meeting. Participants wanting to ensure their equipment setup is working should join prior to 5:00 p.m. For public comments, City of Fort Collins Page 2 the Chair will ask participants to click the “Raise Hand” button to indicate you would like to speak at that time. Staff will moderate the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address the Board. In order to participate, you must: • Have an internet-enabled smartphone, laptop or computer. Using earphones with a microphone will greatly improve your audio experience. • Join the Zoom meeting using the link on the front page of the agenda or on the URA webpage at: http://www.renewfortcollins.com/meeting-agendas. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (VIA PHONE) • Dial public participation phone number, 1-346-248-7799. • Enter the Meeting ID: 986 8765 7267 followed by the pound sign (#). • The meeting will be available beginning at 4:15 p.m. Please call in to the meeting prior to 5:00 p.m., if possible. For public comments, the Chair will ask participants to indicate if you would like to speak at that time – phone participants will need to press *9 to do this . Staff will be moderating the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address the Board. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (VIA EMAIL): Individuals not comfortable or able to access the Zoom platform or able to participate by phone are encouraged to participate by emailing general public comments you may have to cfrickey@fcgov.com. If you have specific comments on any of the discussion items schedu led, please make that clear in the subject line of the email and send prior to the meeting Thursday evening. WATCH THE MEETING: ● Anyone can view the Council meeting live on Channels 14 and 881 or online at www.fcgov.com/fctv and will be replayed the following morning at 10 am. Documents to Share: If residents wish to speak to a document or presentation, email those materials to URA at cfrickey@fcgov.com no later than 3 p.m. the day of the meeting. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE • CALL MEETING TO ORDER • ROLL CALL • AGENDA REVIEW • Executive Director’s Review of Agenda. • CITIZEN PARTICIPATION • CITIZEN PARTICIPATION FOLLOW-UP • COMMISSIONER REPORTS City of Fort Collins Page 3 Discussion Items The method of debate for discussion items is as follows: ● Chair introduces the item number and subject; asks if formal presentation will be made by staff ● Staff and/or Applicant presentation (optional) ● Chair requests public comment on the item (three-minute limit for each person) ● Board questions of staff on the item ● Board motion on the item ● Board discussion ● Final Board comments ● Board vote on the item Note: Time limits for individual agenda items may be revised, at the discretion of the Chair, to ensure all have an opportunity to speak. Please sign in at the table in the back of the room. The timer will buzz when there are 30 seconds left and the light will turn yellow. It will buzz again at the end of the speaker’s time. 1. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes for the February 24, 2022 Urba n Renewal Authority Board Meeting. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes of the February 24, 2022 Urban Renewal Authority Board meeting. 2. URA Retreat Follow-up. The purpose of this item is to continue follow-up discussions from the URA Board retreat. • OTHER BUSINESS • ADJOURNMENT Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY March 31, 2022 City Clerk STAFF Anissa Hollingshead, City Clerk SUBJECT Consideration and Approval of the Minutes for the February 24, 2022 Urban Renewal Authority Board Meeting. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes of the February 24, 2022 Urban Renewal Authority Board meeting. ATTACHMENTS 1. February 24, 2022 (PDF) G.1 Packet Pg. 4 City of Fort Collins Page 1 URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY BOARD February 24, 2022 5:01 PM • ROLL CALL PRESENT: Smith, Stephens (5:00pm-6:00pm), Wise, Gutowsky (5:05pm) Pignataro (5:00pm- 5:15pm) Francis, Arndt, Canonico, Ohlson, Draper ABSENT: Peel STAFF: Birks, Frickey, Gula-Yeast • AGENDA REVIEW Josh Birks, Interim Executive Director, stated there were no changes to the published agenda. • COMMISSIONER REPORTS Commissioner Stephens reported on a meeting with Bryan Willson regarding Powerhouse II and stated there could be opportunities for some partnerships with Powerhouse II and the URA. Clay Frickey, Redevelopment Program Manager, stated CSU is getting ready to submit its plans to the City for the Powerhouse II project. He commented on the possibility of including retail space for a small grocer as part of the project and stated it remains to be seen if the project will seek URA support. Chair Arndt reported on opening a line of communication with Safeway and its real estate arm regarding concerns about the old Albertson’s property on North College Avenue. (Secretary's Note: Commissioner Gutowsky arrived at 5:05 PM) 1. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes for the January 27, 2022 Urban Renewal Authority Board Meeting. (Adopted) The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes of the January 27, 2022 Urban Renewal Authority Board meeting. Commissioner Gutowsky made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Pignataro, to approve the minutes of the January 27, 2022 URA meeting as written. RESULT: ADOPTED [9 TO 0] MOVER: Susan Gutowsky, District 1 SECONDER: Julie Pignataro, District 2 AYES: Smith, Stephens, Gutowsky, Pignataro, Francis, Arndt, Canonico, Ohlson, Draper ABSTAIN: Wise EXCUSED: Peel 2. Board Retreat Follow-up. Clay Frickey, Redevelopment Program Manager, stated the URA retreat topics included: revising the Strategic Plan, establishing criteria for evaluating development proposals and new plan areas, and determining how proactive versus reactive the Board would like to be. G.1.1 Packet Pg. 5 Attachment: February 24, 2022 (11350 : Minutes - 0224) City of Fort Collins Page 2 Chris Hutchinson, Trebuchet Group, provided an outline of follow-up topics. The first topic discussed was historical context, environment and building, connecting the past, embodied energy, and sense of place. Commissioner Smith commented on Fort Collins’ history being critical in the built environment. The next topic was connecting residents to what they want to do: schools, home, work, rivers, Denver. Mr. Hutchinson discussed transportation as being the primary factor with this topic. Vice Chair Wise commented on the importance of walkable areas. Commissioner Smith commented on the importance of complete neighborhoods and safe pedestrian infrastructure. The next topic was housing options for everyone. Commissioner Francis noted she agrees with all of the topics; however, she does not have additional comments. Mr. Hutchinson requested general input or questions. Stephens noted no URA projects have included affordable housing components. She specifically cited the non-affordable housing located around the mall. Commissioner Gutowsky asked if housing for everyone includes housing for the homeless. Frickey replied it would be remiss to not include unhoused individuals as part of the housing equation. Commissioner Ohlson stated he is interested in housing options for those who need the most help, not in providing assistance for expensive housing. He suggested the phrasing should be reworded. Commissioner Smith concurred the URA should not invest in anything other than affordable housing; however, he suggested it may be acceptable to include market rate housing in a project. Vice Chair Wise suggested using the phrase ‘affordable and attainable.’ Commissioner Smith commented on URA projects being intended to stimulate positive economic and sociological activity in the neighborhood around the project area. Vice Chair Wise stated the primary objective of every URA project is to remedy and prevent blight, which should perhaps be included in the list of outcomes. Commissioner Draper questioned whether the focus on affordable housing eliminates the possibility of mixed housing developments. Commissioner Ohlson suggested market rate units could be part of a project but should not benefit from the tax increment financing dollars. He commented on the need to make projects better than the mall project. Frickey provided more details on how subsidies work for housing in URA projects. Commissioner Gutowsky requested additional information regarding the community charisma and personality topic. Chair Arndt commented on the difference between being proactive and being reactive and stated it is difficult to do a proactive prioritization of topics when specific projects cannot be visualized. Vice Chair Wise stated it is unrealistic to assume any given project will accomplish all of the outcomes; however, it allows the Board to state it will not invest public money in a project that is contrary to the stated outcomes. G.1.1 Packet Pg. 6 Attachment: February 24, 2022 (11350 : Minutes - 0224) City of Fort Collins Page 3 Frickey replied to Commissioner Gutowsky’s question and stated the topic is closely related to the sense of community and creating a built environment that is uniquely Fort Collins. Commissioner Gutowsky concurred with Chair Arndt that it is difficult to rank the importance o f the outcomes as they are not associated with particular projects. Commissioner Francis concurred. Mr. Hutchinson stated ranking the items could help to allow everyone a voice in identifying what is most important. Commissioner Francis stated she is happy with the list and does not feel the need to prioritize items. Vice Chair Wise concurred there may not be a need for prioritization given the items that are going to be relevant depend on the nature of the project. Commissioner Smith suggested the possibility of using the outcomes as a scorecard for projects. Frickey replied that is a possibility. He noted there is a scorecard already existing for the North College plan area. Commissioner Draper stated she would like to list the outcome of ‘everyone has a high quality of life through equitable opportunities, means, and access’ moved to the top of the list as it is more of an umbrella statement. Commissioner Canonico agreed the outcomes provide enough criteria to limit projects while still providing flexibility to accept a range of projects. Commissioner Ohlson suggested the outcome mentioned by Commissioner Draper is too broad and unrealistic; however, he supported including an item related to equity. Mr. Hutchinson suggested members consider the proactive versus reactive nature of the Board. Interim Executive Director Birks suggested members may want to discuss opinions as to why previous URA projects have not met the listed outcomes. Commissioner Ohlson discussed the URA assistance provided to the student housing project at Prospect and College noting it was never a project that was praised. Commissioner Ohlson noted metro districts were not previously allowed to be used for residential- only developments and he commented on the use of a metro district for the housing developed around the mall after that policy was changed. Interim Executive Director Birks stated it could be posited one of the reasons the URA has not seen more than a limited number of these guiding principles delivered on by projects is because it waits for the private market to bring it a project and then attempts to push a square peg through a round hole. He suggested an alternative would be to seek out projects that are focused on the guiding principles. Commissioner Canonico requested staff provide information on other URAs that take that approach. Vice Chair Wise stated it is important that the URA make the community aware of its objectives, and it is also important to remember the URA is working with dollars from a number of entities that would normally receive those funds. He reiterated the main purpose of the URA is to cure or prevent blight. G.1.1 Packet Pg. 7 Attachment: February 24, 2022 (11350 : Minutes - 0224) City of Fort Collins Page 4 Chair Arndt concurred with Vice Chair Wise and noted the URA is utilizing funds from mils that have been voted on for a specific purpose and repurposing them. Interim Executive Director Birks stated he is not arguing against following the purpose of the Urban Renewal Authority statute, which he noted does not discuss economics or social engineering. He questioned how the Board wants to go about using the opportunity to remediate and prevent the further spread of blight once it is discovered. Commissioner Draper stated she would like staff to provide some information as to how other URAs approach these issues and how they may purchase properties for projects. Commissioner Canonico commented on the possibility of purchasing the former Albertson’s site on North College and subsequently requesting specific proposals from developers. She also commented on the possibility of the Board being both reactive and proactive. Frickey stated he could provide some case studies on other URAs and he cited an example of the URA in Salt Lake City purchasing a piece of land for a library which then spurred additional development in the area. He asked if it would be helpful for the Board to see how well its existing plan areas and projects perform against the list of criteria. Members replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Gutowsky requested staff also look at how the College and Drake project aligns with the outcomes. Commissioner Smith commented on a URA project in Silverthorne. Vice Chair Wise noted the URA is always reacting to blight; however, the Board can still remain proactive in terms of promoting the list of objectives to developers and favoring projects that meet those objectives. He commented on the importance of avoiding overreach as URAs in other communities have done. Commissioner Ohlson stated it seems the members are aligned in their desire to be partially reactive and partially proactive. He also commented on the self-created blight at the former K- Mart site and discussed the importance of ensuring URA projects provide a public gain. Commissioner Francis expressed concern about the ability of the Board to find developers who can create the vision highlighted by the goals. She requested staff summarize what has been discussed to this point. Frickey replied the Board should discuss where it lands on the proactive versus reactive spectrum and stated he will provide a summary of existing URA projects as they compare to the outlined priorities. • OTHER BUSINESS Frickey noted the March meeting date will be changed due to the City Manager hiring process. He questioned whether members would like the meeting to be remote or in person. Commissioner Ohlson suggested one more month of remote meetings. Members concurred. G.1.1 Packet Pg. 8 Attachment: February 24, 2022 (11350 : Minutes - 0224) City of Fort Collins Page 5 • ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 6:43 PM. ________________________________ Chair ATTEST: ________________________________ Secretary G.1.1 Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: February 24, 2022 (11350 : Minutes - 0224) Agenda Item 2 Item # 2 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY March 31, 2022 Economic Health STAFF Clay Frickey, Redevelopment Program Manager SUBJECT URA Retreat Follow-up. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to continue follow-up discussions from the URA Board retreat. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Authority Board continues follow-up discussions from its retreat at the Authority Board meeting on February 24, 2022. At the February meeting, Board members expressed an interest in refining a set of criteria with which to evaluate new projects and plan areas. The criteria staff presented at the Board meeting in February were developed by the Authority Board at its retreat in the summer of 2019. Board members directed staff to assess the existing plan areas and all previously approved projects using the criteria. The goal of this exercise is to see how user-friendly the criteria are and how applicable the criteria are at the plan area and project scales. Staff has assessed each plan area and previously approved project against the criteria developed by the Board. (Attachment 1) Based on staff's initial assessment, the older plan areas (North College and Prospect South) perform poorly against the criteria. The Board established the North College and Prospect South pla n areas with broad goals and objectives and did not have to negotiate with affected taxing entities. As such, these plan areas do not perform as well against the criteria. The College and Drake plan area, however, performs better due to the negotiations th at took place with affected taxing entities. College and Drake contains a defined list of projects that all taxing entities agreed upon, minimizing the URA's impact on affected taxing entities and ensuring that each project is in the public's interest and not an entitlement to developers. Foothills Mall's performance against the criteria could change based on McWhinney's acquisition of the property and potential plans to redevelop the mall. Many of the projects rated as neutral against the criteria. The pr ojects that performed best from staff's perspective are projects that enhance the culture and uniqueness of Fort Collins like the Lyric Cinema Cafe, Jax, and the Innosphere. The residential projects the URA has approved in the past have a mixed score and v iolate some of the criteria. These projects have not added to the neighborhood character of the plan areas even though some of these projects have provided stormwater benefits like the Summit and Aspen Heights. Foothills Mall has performed the worst so far against these criteria even though this could ultimately change depending on how McWhinney approaches redevelopment of the mall. ATTACHMENTS 1. Criteria Assessment (PDF) G.2 Packet Pg. 10 How Plan Areas Score on CriteriaNorth College Prospect South Foothills Mall College and DrakeHistoric context, environment and building (connect to past, embodied energy, sense of place)Connecting residents to what they want to do (to schools, work, home, rivers, Denver)Housing options for everyoneSense of community ‐ neighborhoodsCommunity charisma and personalityAvoid unfair impacts to government partnersBenefits for all residents – no one left outAvoid cookie‐cutter, strip mall development“That was amazing” projects in 30 yearsAvoid perception of entitlement to developersEveryone has high quality of life through equitable (opportunities andmeans) accessMeets criterionMixedViolates criterionNeutral or N/AATTACHMENT 1G.2.1Packet Pg. 11Attachment: Criteria Assessment (11392 : URA Retreat Follow-up) How Projects Score on CriteriaAspen Heights Jax Kaufman & RobinsonNorth College MarketplaceHistoric context, environment and building (connect to past, embodied energy, sense of place)Connecting residents to what they want to do (to schools, work, home, rivers, Denver)Housing options for everyoneSense of community ‐ neighborhoodsCommunity charisma and personalityAvoid unfair impacts to government partnersBenefits for all residents – no one left outAvoid cookie‐cutter, strip mall development“That was amazing” projects in 30 yearsAvoid perception of entitlement to developersEveryone has high quality of life through equitable (opportunities andmeans) accessMeets criterionMixedViolates criterionNeutral or N/AG.2.1Packet Pg. 12Attachment: Criteria Assessment (11392 : URA Retreat Follow-up) How Projects Score on CriteriaHistoric context, environment and building (connect to past, embodied energy, sense of place)Connecting residents to what they want to do (to schools, work, home, rivers, Denver)Housing options for everyoneSense of community ‐ neighborhoodsCommunity charisma and personalityAvoid unfair impacts to government partnersBenefits for all residents – no one left outAvoid cookie‐cutter, strip mall development“That was amazing” projects in 30 yearsAvoid perception of entitlement to developersEveryone has high quality of life through equitable (opportunities andmeans) accessFeeder Supply Innosphere Valley Steel The Lyric Prospect Station The SummitMeets criterionMixedViolates criterionNeutral or N/AG.2.1Packet Pg. 13Attachment: Criteria Assessment (11392 : URA Retreat Follow-up) How Projects Score on CriteriaHistoric context, environment and building (connect to past, embodied energy, sense of place)Connecting residents to what they want to do (to schools, work, home, rivers, Denver)Housing options for everyoneSense of community ‐ neighborhoodsCommunity charisma and personalityAvoid unfair impacts to government partnersBenefits for all residents – no one left outAvoid cookie‐cutter, strip mall development“That was amazing” projects in 30 yearsAvoid perception of entitlement to developersEveryone has high quality of life through equitable (opportunities andmeans) accessFoothills MallMeets criterionMixedViolates criterionNeutral or N/AG.2.1Packet Pg. 14Attachment: Criteria Assessment (11392 : URA Retreat Follow-up)