Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem B: URA - West Broadway Project Update EURA UGENE RBAN ENEWAL GENCY AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Work Session: West Broadway Project Update Meeting Date: May 9, 2007 Agenda Item Number: B Department: Planning and Development Staff Contact: Denny Braud www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5536 ISSUE STATEMENT At this work session, theUrban Renewal Agency (URA) will consider input received at the April 30, 2007, public workshop and consider the West Broadway Request for Qualifications (RFQ) responses submitted by Beam Development (Beam) and KWG Development Partners (KWG). BACKGROUND On November 27, 2006, the URA provided direction to issue an RFQ for the redevelopment of West Broadway with approved criteria. An RFQ was issued on December 8, 2006, with a submission due date of February 9, 2007. The City received responses from Beam, CenterCal Properties, Greg Bryant, KWG, and MidTown Development. The action taken by the URA at the March 12, 2007, work session directed staff to work with Beam and KWG to explore project concepts in more detail, with opportunities for community input, and to bring the supplemental information back to the URA for review and approval. On April 12, 2007, the council received a staff memo that addressed the financial capacity of the Downtown Urban Renewal District and the other tools to support downtown redevelopment. On April 16, 2007, the council held a workshop on downtown development issues with an invited panel of development professionals. On April 19, 2007, the Eugene Redevelopment Advisory Committee (ERAC) reviewed the supplemental information submitted by Beam and KWG. ERAC unanimously voted in favor of moving forward in a positive manner with downtown development and concluded that the qualifications of both Beam and KWG were acceptable, with a primary preference for awarding the project to KWG and a secondary preference for awarding the project to Beam. On April 25, 2007, the council held a work session on the financial tools that are available to support downtown redevelopment. At the same work session, the URA also reviewed the supplemental information submitted by Beam and KWG. Several questions were asked at the April 16 City Council workshop and at the April 25 work sessions. Staff’s response to the questions is included in Attachment A. At the April 25 work sessions, URA deferred a decision until after the scheduled April 30, 2007, public workshop. However, the URA did provide direction to the Agency Director to renew the purchase options on the Centre Court building and adjacent parcel (the hole), the Washburne Building, and the properties under option on the south side of Broadway between Olive and Charnelton streets (Diva to L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070509\S070509B.doc Shawmed property). On April 26, 2007, the purchase options on these properties were extended by six months. On April 30, 2007, a public workshop was held to gather input on Beam and KWG concepts and the selection options being considered by the URA. The workshop was co-sponsored by ERAC, Citizens for Public Accountability (CPA), and Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce. Over 200 citizens attended the workshop. The workshop format included an overview of the previous planning and citizen involvement efforts downtown, an overview of the Beam and KWG concepts and RFQ selection options, and an overview of the financial capacity of the downtown urban renewal district. Information from CPA on an alternative option that could include some development and future planning efforts was also provided. Workshop participants participated in small group discussions related to the RFQ selection options. A summary of the input received at the workshop is included in Attachment B. RELATED CITY POLICIES Future redevelopment of the West Broadway Redevelopment Area is consistent with the policies and implementation strategies included in the Downtown Plan, including: Downtown development shall support the urban qualities of density, vitality, livability and ? diversity to create a downtown, urban environment. Actively pursue public/private development opportunities to achieve the vision for an active, ? vital, growing downtown. Use downtown development tools and incentives to encourage development that provides ? character and density downtown. Promote multi-story, mixed-use structures downtown through financial incentives or code ? amendments. Stimulate multi-unit housing in the downtown core and on the edges of downtown for a variety ? of income levels and ownership opportunities. Provide and promote development and community events that reinforce downtown’s role as the ? cultural center for the city and region. Reinforce the creative, distinctive culture of downtown as the arts and entertainment center of ? the city. In addition, the future development of the West Broadway Redevelopment Area is responsive to the following Growth Management policies: Policy 1: Support the existing Eugene Urban Growth Boundary by taking actions to increase density and use existing vacant and under-used land within the boundary more efficiently. Policy 2: Encourage in-fill, mixed-use, redevelopment, and higher density development. Policy 3: Encourage a mix of business and residential uses downtown using incentives and zoning. Policy 10: Encourage the creation of transportation-efficient land use patterns and implementation of nodal development concepts. Policy 14: Development shall be required to pay the full cost of extending infrastructure and services, except that the City will examine ways to subsidize the costs of providing infrastructure or offer other incentives that support higher-density infill, mixed use, and redevelopment. – This item is also related to one of the new 2007-2008 Council Goals: Downtown InitiativeFacilitate significant revitalization of downtown core. L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070509\S070509B.doc COUNCIL OPTIONS The following three options have been identified: Option 1: Select KWG Development Partners Option 1 is a comprehensive approach to the redevelopment of West Broadway and assumes a significant commitment of financial resources. Upon selection, staff would begin working with KWG to develop more concrete project details, particularly related to the level of financial participation from the URA. Staff would also work with the URA, the community, and KWG to develop and initiate a public involvement plan for the project. Option 1 would require the URA to maintain the existing purchase option agreements on the West Broadway properties and to continue negotiations on key properties that are not currently under option. In May, detailed financial strategies related to the KWG proposal would be brought to the URA for consideration. An estimated timeline for Option 1, including potential financing steps and future URA approvals, is included in Attachment C. Option 1 Summary (KWG) Estimated Total Project Cost: $191.2 Million Estimated Public Investment: $24.8 Million (13% of total project) $15.9M parking, $5M utilities, $1M offsite, $1.5M buydown for profit yield, $1.3M affordable housing loan Estimated Private Investment: $167.5 Million (87% of total project) Concept Result: Hotel (87,800 sq.ft., 106 rooms), retail (132,279 sq. ft.), theatre (55,000 sq. ft.), grocer (55,000), condo units (288 units), affordable rental units (184), underground parking (600 spaces) URA Decision and Timing: May 2007: ?Council review of financing strategies ?Begin process to amend Downtown urban renewal plan ?Begin process for Section 108/BEDI funds ?Public hearing on Section 108 financing May – August 2007: Public involvement (see Attachment G) June 2007: Council resolution on Section 108 application July 2007: Public hearing on urban renewal plan amendment September 2007: ?Council approval of urban renewal plan amendment L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070509\S070509B.doc ?Council final project approval, including property transactions ?Council budget authority approval Option 2:Select Beam Development Option 2 would lead to the renovation of the Centre Court building and the Washburne building, and a yet-to-be-defined level of new construction in the adjacent vacant land. This option assumes a more modest commitment of financial resources. Upon selection, staff would begin working with Beam to develop more concrete project details, particularly related to the level of financial participation from the URA. Staff would also work with the URA, the community, and Beam to develop and initiate a public involvement plan for the project. Option 2 would require the URA to maintain the existing purchase option agreements on the Centre Court and Washburne properties. The URA would let the options on the remaining properties expire. In May, detailed financial strategies related to the Beam proposal would be brought to the URA for consideration. An estimated timeline for this option, including potential financing steps and future URA approvals, is included in Attachment D. Option 2 assumes that th the URA would move forward with the TK Partners’ project, as previously selected in the 10 and Charnelton Request for Proposals process. Option 2 Summary (Beam) Estimated Total Project Cost: $ 18.1 Million Estimated Public Investment: $ 1.6 Million (9% of total project) Estimated Private Investment: $ 16.5 Million (91% of total project) Concept Result: Retail (40,600 sq. ft.), office (55,423 sq. ft.), surface parking (5,600 sq. ft., 15 spaces) * Supplemental information also indicated a scenario with flex/live uses but limited detail was provided. URA Decision and Timing: May 2007: Council review of financing strategies May – August 2007: Public involvement (See Attachment G) September 2007: ?Final project approval, including property transactions ?Budget authority approval Option 3: Take no action on the RFQ responses Under Option 3, the URA would let the options on the remaining properties expire. Option 3 assumes th that the URA would continue with the TK Partners project, as previously selected in the 10 and Charnelton Request for Proposals process. This option could be expanded to include a planning process L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070509\S070509B.doc focused on the future redevelopment of West Broadway. An estimated timeline for this option is included in Attachment E. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION The Agency Director concurs with the URA’s conclusion that Beam and KWG submitted qualified responses to the RFQ. The Agency Director has considered the information provided by Beam and KWG, the ERAC recommendation, and the input received from the public. Based on KWG’s demonstrated qualifications and its overall responsiveness to the approved RFQ objectives and criteria, the Agency Director recommends selection of KWG Development Partners (Option 1, as stated above). Upon selection, the next steps would be to: 1) begin the process for a Downtown Urban Renewal Plan amendment, 2) begin the application process for HUD Section 108/BEDI funds, 3) take a specific public involvement plan to the Planning Commission/Citizen Involvement Committee for approval, 4) bring back specific project financing strategies for City Council and URA approval, 5) negotiate project design and details with KWG over the next four months, and 6) return to City Council and the URA for approval of the project and financing details (estimated for September 2007). SUGGESTED MOTION Move to select KWG Development Partners and direct the Agency Director to: 1) begin the process for a Downtown Urban Renewal Plan amendment; 2) begin the application process for HUD Section 108/BEDI funds; 3) take a specific public involvement plan to the Planning Commission/Citizen Involvement Committee for approval; 4) bring back specific project financing strategies for City Council and URA approval; 5) negotiate project details with KWG over the next four months; and 6) bring back the final project and financing details for City Council and URA approval in September 2007. ATTACHMENTS A. Response to Questions B. Summary of Input from Public Workshop C. Option 1 Timeline D. Option 2 Timeline E. Option 3 Timeline F. Draft Public Involvement Outline FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Denny Braud Telephone: 682-5536 Staff E-Mail: denny.braud@ci.eugene.or.us L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070509\S070509B.doc