This agenda has more items than usual, but seriously, it seems like the city has increased its role in development in major ways and the Board of Estimates seems to have as much role in development as the Plan Commission. Check out all these items on tonight’s agenda. Too bad we aren’t applying an equity lens to these projects yet – the items that benefit the community the most and impact low income people the most have the least amount of money being spend on them, one project actively works against equity and 2 projects that are the biggest ticket items have no direct equity value at all to the city. Where is that equity tool when we need it?!
ALLIED DRIVE GROCERY – $300,000
This project seems like it it is one where there are true community benefits, and ironically, its the smallest amount of money that is being spent.
– Verona/Allied Drive Food Retail & Economic Redevelopment Staff Team Report: Recommendations to Secure a Full-Service Affordable Grocery Store in the Allied Drive Neighborhood
Here are the reasons the city is involved here (from the report)
– We believe our role is to support the efforts and needs of the neighborhood.
– The Allied Drive Neighborhood is an important part of the City of Madison because it serves as a home for many Madisonians with working and lower incomes. The City invested heavily in the creation of affordable housing options for individuals and families in this neighborhood. We recognize the importance of having affordable housing options in a City that is experiencing rapid economic growth and very low vacancy rates.
– Short term and long term solutions should reflect the wants of the neighborhood while recognizing this is an important commercial intersection for the entire region.
This is a pivotal moment for the commercial district of the area because of the large Verona Road reconstruction project and the closing of the Walgreens.
– Through conversations with neighborhood residents and neighborhood service organizations, we know that Walgreens served as a major source of groceries for the area. Being aggressive and proactive in facilitating an affordable full service grocery is strongly desired by the neighborhood.
– We recognize the City and stakeholders have tried other interventions to improve food access in this geographic area with limited success; we looked at past projects to learn and create solutions.
– Any large financial investment from the City needs to support solutions that have the ability to become long-term city or community assets.
– We recognize that food access and food insecurity are two different, and extremely complicated, issues. Efforts to improve food access will not solve all of the area’s food insecurity issues, but is an important step in the right direction. These issues have been studied and surveyed throughout the years and we need new ideas and interventions to address these issues. When researching the current needs of the neighborhood we looked at past programs, past food retailers experiences, suggested solutions from food industry leaders, neighborhood activists and residents.
This is what they are recommending:
Recommendations:
1) Financial assistance in securing a full-service, affordable, grocery store.
Allocate funds, not to exceed $300,000 for financial assistance in the form of a low interest or forgivable loan for either the acquisition of property or working capital in the Allied Drive neighborhood to incentivize the establishment of a full service affordable grocery store.
The City’s allocation of funds will require a budget amendment. In addition, a process will be established for the issuance of funds. This process should be established with guidance from the Food Policy Council and the Economic Development Committee.2) Encouragement and financial support of the Allied Cooperative.
The Allied Cooperative is a leader in the discussion surrounding the closing of Walgreens in the Verona Road-Allied Drive neighborhood. They are exploring ways to address food insecurity in their neighborhood. This work looks beyond just food access and explores ways to create a cooperative business model that could establish a small, corner store that would provide limited food access to residents in the area and/or worker owned businesses that could provide employment and economic advancement for neighborhood residents possibly in small scale food production or other light manufacturing.We believe strongly that these efforts do not compete with the efforts in Recommendation #1.
The City’s Business Development Specialist will continue to work with the Allied Cooperative and their mentors at Willy Street Cooperative (as directed and desired by the Allied Cooperative) to help their business planning process and encourage them to explore potential City funding opportunities like the Emerging Opportunity Grants Program or the Madison Food PolicyCouncil’s Healthy Food Retail fund.
We also recognize that their efforts may work well as a project the Cooperative Enterprise Development Program. Funding for the Cooperative Enterprise Development Program is set to begin in 2016 (see attached information sheet). The current direction of the efforts of the Allied Coop is a great example of “creative community problem solving” through worker owned businesses:
– Funding and technical support for creative community problem solving through small business creation. This could include assisting the creation of small or corner food businesses in neighborhoods with food insecurity, cooperatives that help create gathering spaces or neighborhood amenity businesses and working with the trade unions to set up union cooperatives.3) Short term and “emergency” funds need to be available in this transition period.
We are concerned that some of the most vulnerable residents of the Allied neighborhood will be deeply affected by the closing of Walgreens. We would like to recommend funding not to exceed $15,000 to be used for the offset of public transportation and other transportation services for those identified as most vulnerable. Community partners, such as Joining Forces for Families, local WIC Offices (Public Health Madison and Dane County) and Allied Cooperative, will assist in determining the guidelines for such a program. Staff’s recommendation is that one of the community partners administers the emergency funds, not the City. Staff recognizes this is an extremely short term, temporary solution that will not extend past the dollar amount agreed upon by Council.
The Walgreen’s is planned to close at the end of December. We believe these recommendations address both the short and long term issues facing our friends and neighbors in the Allied Neighborhood.
TOOLS TO CREATE TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT FOR BUS RAPID TRANSIT – $575,000
This also has community benefits, but it seems like there is alot of work to be done and the project is a long way off, I hope the money is well spent.
– SUBSTITUTE Amending the 2015 adopted capital budget to create a new project with authorized expenditures of $575,000 within the Planning and Community and Economic Development agency (PCED) entitled “Urban Footprint Scenario Transit Oriented Planning,” and to transfer funds to the project from the Sustainability Fund – etc etc etc
Here’s the fiscal note explanation:
This resolution will amend the budget to create a new capital project in the 2015 adopted capital budget of the Planning and Community and Economic Development agency (PCED) entitled “Urban Footprint Scenario Transit Oriented Planning,” with authorized expenditures of $575,000, comprised of $300,000 in Federal TIGER grant funds, $250,000 in City General Obligation borrowing to be transferred from the “Implement Sustainability Plan” capital budget of Facilities Management (Project No.9, Acc’t No. 810778), and a $25,000 grant from the State Smart Transportation Initiative. (An additional $25,000 in matching grant funds is provided by MG&E andwill be paid directly to Vandewalle Associates for station area planning services in South Madison, which may include the development of architectural renderings and site design assistance). Ten percent (10%) of the grant funds (or $60,000) will be held in contingency to cover project overruns such as additional staff time to complete the grant work or additional consulting services needed
In addition, the Resolution amends the 2015 adopted operating budget of the Planning Division to create a new 1.0 Limited Term Employee Planner 2 or 3 to provide Project Management services including data analysis/GIS, site design, public outreach and other transit station area planning services required by the grant application. Finally, the Resolution authorizes the City to enter into an agreement with Calthorpe Analytics to purchase the Urban Footprint Development Scenario Modeling Tool (plus associated training) at a cost not to exceed $325,000.
This is an explanation of what they are doing:
In April, 2014, the Common Council authorized (via Resolution #RES-14-00274, adopted April 8, 2014) the City of Madison to apply to the US Department of Transportation’s TIGER grant program and, if awarded, to subsequently amend the capital budget to create a new capital project and to allocate up to $250,000 in matching funds from the Sustainability Fund capital project administered by City Facilities Management and for which the capital budget authorizes $1,000,000 in General Obligation borrowing. RES-14-00274 also indicated that the purpose of the grant is in large measure for the purchase of a unique “UrbanFootprint Development Scenario Planning Tool,” a planning tool offered by a single contractor.
Madison is nearing the implementation of a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system. In advance of the development of the system, the city will initiate plans for transit-oriented development (TOD) at three key station areas along the initial BRT system routes. In order to develop these TOD plans, we will use the cutting edge UrbanFootprint scenario planning tool to preview TOD scenarios and study their impacts on key indicators such as equity, connectivity, congestion, and the environment. Our use of UrbanFootprint will not only advance our BRT TOD planning, but will be available for critical transportation and land use decision making in the future.
$13 MILLION IN TIF FOR PRIVATE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT
I don’t see clear community benefits in this and it seems the riskiest/most half-baked, and of course its where we are spending the most amount of money with the least study and community discussion. The staff report mentioned in the resolution isn’t in legistar, so I don’t know what it says. This is the city’s justification for spending the money “to eliminate blighting conditions and encourage development of a wide range of commercial and housing options and attract and retain business and employment in Downtown Madison” Nice words, not sure it does any of that (its not obvious) and there are no ways to check to see if it does what they say it will do – no checks and balances in the system.
– $13 M in TIF to 25 W Main, LLC for Dvelopment to 135 N Carroll
What we are getting:
– 186,000 square feet of office
– Approximately 100 apartment units
– 43,000 gross square feet of commercial and retail space
– 2,400 square feet of storage
– Approximately 548 parking stalls
The project still needs to be approved by:
– Joint TIF Review Board (city, county, MATC and school district)
– The state in 2016
And we are giving them $5M before the state certifies the TID, so we need contingency plans in case it doesn’t work out. If approved they will pay us back $2M per year for 10 years through their taxes, but they have a 0% interest loan and we boroow the money and pay the interest on it. At least there is a “clawback” provision for if the project doesn’t cost as much as they claim (i.e. the gap isn’t as big as they claim) and we would get 50% of their savings. This seems to incentivise lying.
Finally, the project requires exceptions to TIF policies. The loan is for more than we would usually do leaving less money for community improvements (usually roads, traffic, etc) It is only supposed to take 55% maximum to pay back the funds, but this is 71% of the
Since the staff report isn’t attached, or for that matter any information besides what is provided in the resolution, who knows what I’m missing.
BUYING PRPERTY ON THE SOUTH SIDE TO CONTROL WHAT HAPPENS THERE – No money . . . yet
The budget amendment to buy this property was shot down during the budget. The testimony was essentially that they didn’t want this property to become a “soup kitchen” or “homeless shelter” and they were concerned that there were better projects that could go there. I think the council made the right decision, but the alder in the area is acting much like his predecessor and I”m not seeing much of a difference except the former alder actually got things done in his own mysterious kinds of ways.
Here’s the deal:
The South Park Street Corridor (the “Corridor’) is experiencing increased redevelopment activity. Vacant parcels of land and improved, but underdeveloped, properties within the Corridor are being listed for sale. There exists the possibility that the full development potential of these properties will not be realized if they are purchased individually which may reduce the potential assemblage opportunities for redevelopment projects. The City has acquired parcels under a previous Land Banking Fund program that provided funding to purchase and stabilize developable parcels of land. This program was used to fund the purchase of the former Don Miller properties on East Washington Avenue and Union Corners. Land Banking Fund Guidelines were approved that the City used to dispose of these properties through a Request for Proposal Process.
Currently the former Expo Inn, located at 910 Ann Street (the “Property”), is listed for sale (see attached exhibit). This resolution, if adopted, will (1) direct City staff to assess the suitability of the City’s purchase of the Property to preserve, to the fullest extent possible, the principals of coherent redevelopment within the South Park Street Corridor; (2) identify funding sources for the purchase of the Property; and, (3) initiate negotiations for the purchase of the Property. The negotiated terms and conditions for the purchase of the Property will require Common Council approval. The anticipated costs of the purchase of the Property including miscellaneous acquisition and closing costs (e.g. appraisal, environmental assessments, prorated taxes) and costs associated with the demolition of the improvements on the Property are estimated to be $1,000,000.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Common Council hereby (1) directs City staff to assess the suitability of the City’s purchase of the Property to preserve, to the fullest extent possible, the principals of coherent redevelopment within the Corridor; (2) identify funding sources for the purchase of the Property; and, if the purchase is determined to be suitable and funding sources are identified, (3) initiate negotiations for the purchase of the Property.
JUDGE DOYLE SQUARE DO-OVER – No mention of $ amount
Try, try, try again. Just don’t try too hard
– Authorizing the Issuance of a Request for Proposals for the Development of the Judge Doyle Square Project on Blocks 88 and 105
Justification/Public benefit?
Judge Doyle Square represents an important opportunity to add another dynamic and high quality, tax-generating development for the benefit of the City and its other taxing jurisdictions. Judge Doyle Square can be a destination for residents, employees and visitors by expanding and unifying the restaurant and entertainment district on the south side of the Capitol Square.
The City has an unusual opportunity to fashion a project to re-build the functionally obsolete Government East parking ramp, using the property as a catalyst for new tax producing development. This opportunity can significantly improve the walkability of the Central Business District (CBD) which is the most important element to improve the CBD as a destination. It’s the first City initiated development project as a result of the new downtown plan and is intended to:
· Utilize two City-owned, tax-exempt parcels to significantly expand the City’s tax base and employment by replacing an obsolete parking facility, activating South Pinckney Street and improving the pedestrian connections between the Square and Monona Terrace;
· Unlock the development potential of the sites through careful selection of mixed uses that includes residential, retail, restaurant, bicycle and parking facilities, and a hotel;
· Retain and grow the business of the Monona Terrace Community and Convention Center; and
· Increase economic and retail activity from additional convention attendees, visitors, downtown workers and residents.The result of this effort will be a healthier downtown though increased property values, added employment opportunities and downtown residents, improved public facilities, and additional external capital injected into the region’s economy by visitors to Madison.
This is the reboot – not much detail but will be released within a few weeks:
1. The RFP be issued no later than January 30, 2015 with proposals due to the City from development teams by April 15, 2015.
2. The Judge Doyle Square Negotiating Team, with the assistance of appropriate City staff resources, will review the RFP responses and report its recommendations to the Board of Estimates no later than May 15, 2015. The Board of Estimates will be responsible for considering those recommendations and recommending follow-up actions to the Common Council for consideration.
3. The RFP include the following requirements:
a. The RFP may address redevelopment on both blocks or on Block 105.
b. The Madison Municipal Building on Block 88 will remain in civic use (the existing loading dock will be removed). In addition, the City plans to limit vehicular access and establish a pedestrian mall on Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd between the City County Building and Madison Municipal Building.
c. The City of Madison will construct, own and operate the parking to be constructed on Blocks 88 and 105. The City’s plans to replace the Government East Ramp on Block 105 and to construct the needed accessory parking required for the new development in a parking facility on Blocks 88 and 105, and to lease the parking required by the development to the private developer. While the City intends to own and operate the parking, it will entertain proposals where the developer would construct the parking. The parking has to be constructed under public works bidding requirements.
d. The City is committed to maintaining a significant amount of the existing public parking supply during the construction process.
e. The project must be a high-quality mixed-use project that is compatible with surrounding buildings and uses including the Madison Municipal Building, a National Register of Historic Places building.
f. The project must create a new, walkable extension of the surrounding retail/entertainment district in the 200 block of South Pinckney Street.
g. A high priority for selection will be given to any project that delivers a major private sector office user(s) totaling 100,000 square or greater as a component of the development.
h. The project must include a hotel component to complement the Monona Terrace Community and Convention Center. The City’s target room count is a minimum of 250 rooms with as large a room block as possible reserved for Monona Terrace, a national affiliation (hotel flag) and a national sales force and reservation system. The proposal should include plans for a high quality, interesting and reasonably priced restaurant either within or adjacent to the proposed hotel.
i. To the extent a development is sited on Block 88, the City has been considering configuration and massing options for a 70,000 to 140,000 gross square foot City office building on the site also. Development teams should provide the City with options for additional city office space as a part of the RFP response. The mass of the hotel building should be located closer to East Wilson and South Pinckney Streets (i.e., it should be away from East Doty Street).
j. The development must be affordable for taxpayers with the following expectations:
i. The City of Madison will be responsible for financing the cost of the parking.
ii. The air rights above the parking must be purchased or leased at fair market value as determined by the City’s appraisal.
iii. No TIF assistance shall be available for the non-parking elements of the project.
We’ll see how the council tinkers with this . . . and again, I have to ask, like with the $13M in TIF, how will we measure if it does any of the things it claims it will do? What are the measurements? It all seems so taken for granted it will do things, but there is no accountability.
CONCLUSION
I think these projects show a real issues with equity, and all the talk about equity. It seems like development escapes any kind of equity lens and I haven’t heard any plans to apply it, but it sure would be an interesting discussion. I think the lens particularly needs to be applied when the city is spending money. The fact that the biggest ticket items have the least amount of obvious equity is really disturbing. I wonder if any alders will bring this up – or if these items will all just be rubber stamped.
