Loading...
A - Study Session Boulder Transit Village StatusAttachment A BOULDER CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION October 28, 2003 Boulder Transit Village Status 6:00 P.M. Council Chambers NOTE PUBLIC WRITTEN COMMENT TO CIN COUNCIL 1777 BROADWAY, SECOND FLOOR, OR P O BOX 791, 80306 OR FAX 303- 441-4478 ATfN ALISA IEWIS, OR E-MAIL COUNCIL~CI BOULDER CO US MEMORANDUM TO Mayor and Members of City Council FROM: Frank Bruno, Gty Manager Peter Pollock, Planning Department John Pollak, Housing and Human Services Lmda Hill-Blakely, Housing and Human Services Doug Newcomb, Open Space and Mountain Parks Jan Geden, Parks and Recreatron Jeff Lakey, Parks and Recreation Tracy Winfree, Public Works/Transportation Micki Kaplan, Pubhc Works/Transportation Bill Boyes, Public Works/Facilities and Asset Management DATE: October 20, 2003 SUBJECT Study Session - October 28, 2003 Boulder Transtt Village status PURPOSE A city goal is to create a Boulder Transit Village (Transit Village), which includes transpoRation improvements and housmg and to take advantage of pro~ected improvements to Boulder's regional transportation system. A site selection process completed in July 2001 pomted to the land at the noRheast corner of Pearl and 30`h as the favored locat~on That site is the home to a long standmg Boulder business, Pollard Motor Company (Pollard) The city has worked to find an alternaUVe location for that busmess and also authonzed the use of condemnation to secure the site if necessary After re~ecting a substantial number of alternative sites presented by the city, Pollud was offered a site at the Municipal Serv~ce Center (City Yards) complex at Peazl Parkway, east of 49~h Street. Statmg several ob~ections to that site, Pollard suggested that property that is part of the Valmont City Park (Valmont Pazk) ~ust east of the yazds (and Goose Creek) would be of mterest. Valmont Park is mtended for mtensive h~gh-use recreational faciht~es m harmony with other park goals Some mi[ial work 6as been done to explore that ophon and significant concerns were raised by the Parks Board. Staff conrinues to refine op[~ons fo~ the Crty Yacds and Valmont Park sites. The purpose of this C~ty Council study sess~on is fourfold: 1. To bnef C~ty Council on the status of the Transit V~llage, the efforts to relocate the Pollard busmess, and the consideration of altematrve city sites (City YardsNalmont Pazk site). 2. To secure Council's help m identifytng possible new options and any addmonal ~ssues to be addressed. 3. To get feedback on staff s proposed next steps m the process. 4 To identify ~mportant considerations that should be mcorporated mto the dec~sion makmg process. II QUESTIONS FOR COUNCIL. 1. Does Council have any questions concernmg the status of the Transrt Village, the efforts to relocate the Pollazd busmess, or the consideration of alternat~ve sues~ 2. Does Council have any new options or add~uonal issues that should be further addressed by staff'? 3. Does Council have any comments concernmg the proposed next steps m the process? 4 Does Council have any important cons~derations that should be addressed m the decision-makmg process~ III BACKGROUND The purpose of this section is to brmg Council "up to speed" on the status of the Trans~t Village, the efforts to relocate the Pollazd busmess, and the consideration of alternatrve s~tes. A Transit Village Status Proiect Descnption The Transit Village is envisioned to be an integrated, m~xed-use, transit onented development that combmes current and future transit on the same site with housmg, commercial and retail uses. The following elements would be provided on the Trans~t Village s~te • a transrt station to accommodate safe, efficient and convenient transfers for passengers of the current community transit network (CTN), local, regional and express buses; • a"ternunus" and transfer stanon for future CTN, local and regional transit includmg future bus rapid transit and future commuter ra~l, • a 100 - 125 veh~cle park-n-nde facilrty; • enhanced pedestrian and b~cycie facilines; • supportive commercial and retail development; and • a sigmficant level of affordable housmg. The housmg would be a mix of mazket rate and affordable housing, and a mix of ownership and rental umts. The housmg analysis mdicates that a range of 200 -~00 umts is feas~ble and the transit village concept combining transrt, commercial and retail with housmg is marketable. The project may be constructed ~n phases dependmg on financing and final design. It should be noted that funds aze c~rrently available to acquue property and construct the first phase transit and the housmg for the project. (See below for Boulder Transit Village Concept map.) Benefits of Trans~t Villaee Intens~ve mixed-use development pro~ects azound transit statrons are commoniy known as transit-oriented developments, or TODs. TOD pro~ects aze considered to have positive benefits in terms of econom~c development, transit ndership and congesuon management. Independent Map 1: Location of Valmont City Park, City Yards & Future Boulder Transit Village ~, ; ~ ~ - - ~ w, ~.a _ ~~~+~ ~ ¢~ t~ ' 1 f ~ ~ ! ~ L i • I ' ~ ~ I ~ -.-ri ~~ ~ ~ ,^ ~I . ~a~1=~~_. ., ~. - _ _ " , ,gyT}~ ~3i`'7d+'r~,;~ ...~ _ ` - , _ ~ _`"' ~,' ~ ~ -:..z ~'~S.r_ ~ fi . <w~ ~ - -' . ~ _~_, A UiLOn Po~k~np Cau~~ Proenlypa U NHaipC~~~~ul Slryal V~ofO~ypa wi _. ~S' i ~~A ~+'~[ }^a1.+ - ~~r ~ - r __ 7 r umo~ ro.nnome~ i i~.o wo.k SiW ~YplaulOx >~Jwr C.Wiox ; ~ ~ y ~ } t . - , ~, ~ ' ~l- / = - ~ ~ ('~~ ~ 3 ~~ , r ~ . ~r L,_. - - ; -- ---, -- - 1 ~, - - - ~-~ ~' ~ -' - l ~ ' ` = --- _ M "Y ~ - __ i ' _ Ty ~ ~~_ 1 + _ ~ - ~ i a~~. L'*?OP?~ @ n ~ _ ~. ~ µry ~; ` t~ + i ~i ~ ( ~ a ~ ' ~ , . ~--.% , ~ 'i t ~t~ ^ /~ovu V ~ii. ~.~ C % 1 )I I _ ' ~ ~ r 'i~~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ jl ' ~ ~ ~ ; M~ 1 ' + L1~~ ~ .~~"~ ~ ,::~ ` ` ~ i ~ , ~~ ~ ~~ I ~ . t , ' t Crb 10~qOMt~yyWn ~n:~.u CONCEe1 qllfitNA~iVf / 3 Mi~uU Vso / Hyb~~tl GCq6nVbp M1yv~ .- a f n xo.,me. ~euo~.~ rm~~ r.eno~ k Inla~moUO1 fu~lll~y Peo~o~~V~ i PoctB~ Pp~Y P~olOlyOe ~b~~ imm.aawoeavnn.epwde~Yaamau ~'~ ' "~' ~I<oa ]]54'n t12m1Si Xpetp Vl,+On4oMUq wrea w w+as~v •m. ~.,u a ~,.MCe 1mu ]IIIVEytoql 113Gtt~pip(eb rnwYeO:emrwrcGC .WqntireMyup~ 35Mn blpmMtlf~l~.wMat ireao-ororroewam~wbaaaaw~mie . ~eaw.~.wvr~ ~siva>~nre~n s'~ crmms,:n wV w%iaue~.ww~,wmrowm- AY ' ~mimo-n incaPVmqce:. iaowsfcvrma:a F6 Y?]WfYMbnp4M 0MS:4fwCUT n ra x q6~1P]09ubOM 41b4n ~a~Ornv a a n+Mx~eaec~cvewan~w~ cam~wioae~acmv a~.nvs 'T BOULDERIRANSrtVILLAGE ~ ~~ ~ - %Cw11WKVWAMMN~13 mm -u.m. CvM~Wic~ Wn Wlv WYYne fblzk ~9T+~I~C~AN~ur~run~i.~nuu+w~u.~~au~~uuurinynw~uwwWn~uuua~~ rr, irr~.ri oi~ia.~iM1+m~~~iauau~~wun~m~euLiu~u~ ~ ~i.;wi~wau~~~ i R 6a~~~~`+ t, ~? ~ C~ ~ ~~ ~ - -_-_~ crs~" - r ~ T-' __~ i ~ ~"1 ~ 1 ~ I i-.-.--~ _ r-__~ ~ ' ~ r J ,~ ~ I~l~ , ~l NW . ,~ , J.4,~ m~ ~~ ~ ~ _ ~- ~, -~~ ~ ~ ~ YM0.5 _ - ~l ~ ~1~ v ' ~~~ 1 , ~BN&F6WN4NE PU7FDRN9 ~ NISTORICpEPOi ~ BINE FACIUTY NORTNBOIINDCp1ANTER RNL ~~ 901RHBDiM~ COMMUIFH RN~~ ~~ ~ ,~„l, ` $ 1__~ ~-_` I - ' '~ ~~~lJ = ;~, , ~~~ ' ~ ~I t ~I ~~~-~~ ~a _!_-,y ~ t, ~. ~ ,~ ~\ \` -~l\ - _ ^ ~~ ~) ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~- ~ ~ ,o~ ~~~ ' ~.. . __ 1~~~ !=, ~'~ ~ _ ~ ~~ ~~ -=_ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~-~ ,; ~ ~ -~~ ~-~ = =--=--- ; EDl1LDERINTENMCORLTftNtl3RCENlLR ~{, ~.~...~1~1 ~ i '`,t 55~ _"°'~+~:iunio'.?` at~n°n~~ '~~. , fn.tPr=Bur4ess studies mdicate that a TOD w~ll reduce traffic congestion and au pollut~on by up to 30~10 compared w~[h a typical suburban developmenL TOD residents have a high propenstty to use pubhc trans~t. In addiUon, there is a sigmficant demand and mazket for housmg that is m denser, walkable, close to trans~t and m mixed-use commumt~es Pro~ect Historv The Boulder Transit Village emerged as a vision from approximately seven years of publ~c process mcludmg local and regional planning efforts such as the 28'h Street 2000 Corridor Study, the US36 Major Investment Study, Regional Transportation Distnct (RTD) Transit Development Plan, and the North 28`h Street Transportation Network Plan. The City Council, Boulder Urban Renewal Authority, Plannmg Board, Transportat~on Advisory Board, Housmg Technical Review Group, Housmg Imptementat~on Team, RTD Board of Directors and the pubhc, have all been mvolved w~th this pro~ect. It is consistent with the city's Comprehens~ve Housing strategy, Comprehensive Plan, the Crossroads Consortmm Report and RTD FasTracks Plan The pro~ect began neazly seven years ago when RTD approached the City of Boulder to construct a"sister" park-n-ride facility near the Tabie Mesa park-n-nde in South Boulder Rather than have two lazge parkmg structures define the entrance to the city, ~t was suggested, and RTD agreed, that these RTD funds be red~rected to the 28`h Street Comdor Pro~ect. These cap~tal funds would be better used to support new facilities for the future commun~ty transd network and new and current regional trans~t service. The 28'h Street 2000 Corndor Planning project identified that an additional "major, multi-modal" transrt staUon (m addit~on to the downtown 14`h & Walnut Station), would be needed near the "vicinity oF' 30~h & Pear] Street to accommodate current and future transit (bus and rail). In order to maximize several city council goals, the city began explonng a trans~t oriented development that mcluded housmg and commercial uses on the same site, rather than Lm~t the pro~ect to a"major transit station". S~te Selection The "Boulder Trans~t Village Site Select~on ReporP', July, 2001 documents the second phase of site select~on and is available on the city's websrte. (See http //www.ci.boulder.co us/publicworks/depts/trans/pro~ects/bldr trans vilg/transttviil~e html) The report documents the technical site select~on research conducted by Transportation Plamm~g Consultants Carter & Burgess and architects Van Meter, Will~ams and Pollack and a multr departmental staff team comprised of Plannmg, Transportahon, Housmg and RTD staff. S~te selection research mcluded an extensive techmcal evaluation of d~fferent properttes m the v~cmrty of 30~h and Pearl Streets. One of the more important techmcal factors m selechng the Transit Village sIIe was the abilrty to accommodate commuter ra~l and bus networks at the stte and to find a site lazge enough to accommodate the trans~t and the housing program S~te selection also included three different housing development concepts to ensure that the "marriage" of trans~t with housmg on the 11- acre s~te could work m a vanety of different density and development schemes With mput and review by a variety of c~ty boards, and the public, the City Council approved selectmg the 11- acre site at the northeast corner of 30'h & Pearl as the srte for the future Transu Village in July 2001 and duected staff to proceed with land acquisition Proiect Status Per counc~l d¢ecuon provtded m September 2002, staff u currently pursumg a negot~ated agreement with the property owner, "Thirt~eth & Pearl LLC" to purchase the Boulder Transit Village srte. Sufficient resources have been assembled to purchase the property at fatr mazket value and the property owner has stated that they are wilLng to move from the srte on cond~uon that a suitable relocation site can be found for Pollazd, the current tenant. Staff has been act~vely pursumg relocation s~tes dunng the last 14 months Project nulestones mclude. , • Apri12002: Intergovernmental Agreement w~th RTD to partner on the pro~ect and provide $2.5 milhon for land acquis~t~on and parucipate m construction. • July 2002. City adopts a busmess assistance and relocat~on plan For Pollazd and directs staff to proceed with land aquisihon. • September 2002: Ciry Council author~zes use of eminent domam for the Transit Village pro~ect Council also directed staff to pursue a negotiated settlement tf possible • November 2002. Fuli cash financing assembled for land acqutsition. • February 2003. Crty makes first wntten offer to purchase Boulder Transrt Village site • March 2003 First wr~tten Counter offer received from 30'h & Pearl LLC • Fall, 2003. Development plan for financmg of "housing elemenP' and first phase trans~t construction completed Financmg for housmg tncludes housing grants, a lme of credit from Fanme Mae and private developer funds. • October, 2003• RTD submits apphcation for CMAQ grant for $9 milhon for construction of Boulder Transit Vtilage "transit° port~on of the pro~ect m partnership with Crty of Boulder. Unresolved Issues A settlement offer has been "on the table" from the Polluds s~nce March 4, 2003 Pollard representauves have stated they are willmg to move from 30'h & Pearl and make a deal wtth the City today, if they can be provided a 6 acre relocahon site at the "old eco-cycle site" located ~ust east of the City Yards on which Parks has planned uses for a 132 acre future Valmont Crty Park. (See Map 1). Although crty staff have consistently stated to the Pollard's representauves that this site is not available, other alternat~ves have not been acceptable to the Pollards and Council direction has been ro pursue a negotiated settlement if poss~ble. The wilhngness of the Pollazds to relocate may not be available m the future. If this occurs, the only choice lefr by the city crught be to pursue emment domam Current fund~ng options may not exist indefinitely In parttcular, housmg and RTD funds are available now and are reserved The Metro Mayors caucus, m partnership with the Colorado Housmg Finance Authonry, has targeted 2004 Pnvate Acuvity Bonds for transit-oriented development This represents a wmdow of opportunity to access low ~nterest financing and tax credrts for Boulder Transit Village. In addition, it may be difficult to conanue holding but not using funds m the face of other pressmg pnonues Local and regional tax revenues contmue to dechne, making the ability to leverage and provide "locai match" to future TOD grants difficult to obtain, particularly from RTD, one of our important project partners. B Pollard Busmess Relocation Status D~scusswns began with the property owner before the site selection s[udy deterntmed m July, 2001, that the I 1 2 acre site, located at the northeast corner of 30~h and Pearl Streets is the best locat~on for the Boulder Transrt Village The property ~s owned by Thirtieth and Pearl, LLC, a Colorado L~mited Liabiltty Company and is managed for the Pollazd family by the LLC trustees. The Pollard Motor Company operates a Jeep dealership and a used car sales operat~on on the property The City and the Pollards agreed that before negotiat~ons for acqu~sit~on of the land could go very far, a new locat~on for the Pollard Motors Company busmess should be ~denufied Since Mazch, 2002, a seazch for an acceptable business relocauon site has been underway. The C~ty's property agent, plus a consultant w~th expert~se m sitmg automob~le dealerships and the Poilard's own consuitant worked together to determme the s~te's charactenshcs and performed searches of both vacant land and redevelopment sites. The busmess relocahon s~te search began wIIh identifying every vacant land pazcel (mciudmg potenttal scrape offs) over 2 acres m size m Boulder County which at the time mcluded Broomfield. The Longmont azea was excluded because a Jeep dealership already resides there The poss~ble s~tes for Pollazd Motors located outside of Boulder are shown below ai.wuwue~oeaw tr-° -~ :`-,~ ~ Vacant Land Sites ~ ~~~~~~_~\ ~ , \,~ ~ ~.'~...~. ~ j _. ( ,--/ I ~ ~ /~•~,G • ~'~ ,~ r-' r..-~-' ~l~ \ ~ ~' __'~- =t----...•,...~- r"'~~~:'- <,~ ~ , ., J • ~ ; Nb l4wi n ~ ~ \ v . - ~ '-~ -- -- --- _ =~„ ~A;S_M , ~ 1 ~r , V `/ y4 i- - ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~.. . ~~ ~_v~ `T~ G +,~~ ~ ~Obw~11n • ~ • ` + ~^ I \ ~C frl• \ '~ ~ ~`_ \ ~IMrni ~ p ~ ` ~ 1 l 'a ` ' ~ C ~ Ou :~' I~ .,~i ° I G Ft ~ i " ~7 ~ .ir ~ •c! Jo ~. ~ `r--~ ~ ~~ .i \s _ . ~'~ Y+M1e'~^ -~ \1 Y I _r..~.... ~!"~~-~.....~ I Addrtionally, 12 potent~al sites for Pollard Motor Company were discovered withm the C~ty of Boulder. All potential sites were evaluated for theif potential to sell automobiles both new and used. For the Pollard Motor Company, th~s potential is largely dependent upon havmg 3 factors: a location near its Boulder customers, significant traffic volume passmg the stte with good visibihty of the product and a 6 acre site size (they have 11 acres now). The umverse of potent~al busmess relocation sites for Pollard Motors was pared down to the 9 s~tes with the best potential wh~ch aze shawn below Potential Pollard Motors Relocation Sites Item abel ddress Srte Size amments 1 tevmson Srte WC Dillon and Hwy 287, 2 5 to 4 0 acres is locauon will be at one of the ezits of the fayetre orthwest Parkway 2 WC 63rd and 287 Arapahoe, Boulder 5 5 acres 2.OIXl sf ex~snnc improvement offered by rapahac urtent owner for $4 287 200 3 randv~ew Phdips 675 Arapahoe, Boulder 3 45 acres 19,120 sf exisnng ~mprovement 4 Hugh M Woods EC 63rd and Lookout, Boulder 5 8 acres z~stmg approx~mately 20,OW sf mprovement 5 aterview est of 8oulder Auto Park, 14 0 acres d~acent to ez~sung auto dealerships oulder 6 Flauron Crossmg C Flanron Circle & Coalton up ro I3 6 acres d~acent ro reg~onal mall, askmg $14 00 / sf oad,Supenor 7 6th 8c SBR 6th and South Boulder Road, 10 8 acres skmg $435.000 wsv~lle 8 & E of South 54 112th Street, Lafayatte 3 75 acres skmg $725,000 ubhc Road and Hwy 2 9 120th and Perry 700 West 121 st Place, 8 0 acres skmg $1,300,000 roomfield Prepared by Bnstol Realty Counsebrs of Colorado, lnc Already improved busmess sites m Boulder were exammed a second ttme independent of their ownership or availab~lity and mqu~nes ware made to property owners about the possibil~ty of a purchase The City's property agent monttors the real estate market and continues to seek new posstbilities. Add~tionally, some promtnent landowners and commercial real estate brokers were mformally consulted about poss~ble sites and remam cognizant of the need for a site. The result remams the same. The above hst contams the 9 best busmess sites identified. After learning that none of the sites discovered were acceptable to Pollard Motors as a busmess relocauon site, the City Council directed the City staff to look for a potenual site at the City Yards (Mumcipal Services Center). The t~mmg comcided with the update of the Yards Master Plan. During the begmnmg of that plannmg process, several6 acre sites with 1000 feet of frontage on Peazl Pazkway were ident~fied and proposed to Pollard Motors (See Map 2) After studymg the proposed sues m the City Yards, the Pollard Motor Company rejected them and termed them unacceptable. The City requested the reasons why the Yards sites were unacceptable and the 9 reasons listed below were given MAP 2: CONCEPTUAL POLLARD MOTORS COMPANY SITE ON THE CITY YARDS 6 Acres for Commercial Development - ; ..,:.~ _„~s -~ ~ ~ -~ --- - -__ ~_ ~ ~ ~~ I R ~ ~~- ~~ ; (~ I ~ I -- -----~ I 1 I ~ l~ 1 /, ,~ ~~ ~ `/ ~' % ~- ~~, ~:~ 1 , < ; <~~ ~- / ~T ~ ~ ~,,.,y.,, ~,1 \ <=~ ~L _ - _~__ ~ ,,~ ~ ~; ~ ~ ~=- ,~, ~r~~ ~- ~; ~~~..~~~%:%~" ~ !%~ ~~T, \ ~l .~`.i i b'~ ~b~~ % ~~j~ __ ~ s`~~4~ ~~` ~..~1 ~ ~ - x ~~ /~ ~ `~ ~n-~ ~'` ~%" _ ~ ~ -x-. ! U h r~ ~~iP - y~ ^+ ~ ~~/ ~ -~,~ __ _' __ ~ ~ ~vL. L'~ _ _ ~ ._, i'y° ~ ~.N- ~ ~ C ~ . ! (JL `,~~~ " '-' `~,- ~ ~ ~~~~~/' ~,; _' ~- - '_ _ ~ ~ ~ "g+~ ~- ',/ i~. 4'~ /, ; f.; F. f_= ~ i , ~ - F -p~l°i 10(b) BoulderCityYards Ophon 2-Phase 1,-Nt B Detailed Use Plan 1. The power lme and rts easement l~mit the use of the s~te and ~s unacceptable from a v~sual and mazkenng perspective. 2 The Yards sites are not located on two through streets 3. Being next to Eco-Cycle (trash, recycle, noise), the Yards sites don't portray the image Chrysler is loolung for 4. The 100-year flood plain designatwn reduces the usable area. (Later it was d~scovered the flood plam designation was amended and is not a factor) 5. The Yazds sites aze located on a curve that Lmits their vis~bIlrty from eastbound traffic 6 The long slunny configurations are not operaaonally pracucal and the visibiLty of the s~tes is linuted because they aze uphill from the road 7. Questtonable envtronmental condihons may exist due to pnor mdustnal act~v~ty. 8 The Yards sites are not located at a signalized intersection 9 There is a potential for future unknown unsatisfactory uses to occur in the City Yazds ad~acent to the s~te In general the Pollard Motors Company's posrtion on business relocahon is- they have an A+ location now, no comparable sites exist anywhere m Boulder, so, they deserve the best site that can be found In March, 2003, the Pollards offered to accept a certain 6 acres of City land ad~acent to the Yards on Peazl Parkway, but on land programmed for use m the Valmont City Park. The site acceptable to the Pollard Motor Company is located on Pearl Parkway opposite the City Yards is along the east edge of the pazk and is shown m the graphic above. The Pollards were prev~ously advised and were advised agam that a sue in the Pazk was not available At present the Pollards remam willmg to accept the above site m the Park. No other potential busmess relocat~on sttes acceptable to the Pollards have been ~dentified The City has reassessed its posiuon and is now examming the ~mpact on the Pazk and ~s seekmg poss~bilit~es to rtuagate or off-set the impact to the Pazk tf 6 acres were to be sold to the PoUard Motor Company. It should be no[ed land that m July, 2002, the crty adopted a Real Property Acquisit~on Pohcy and Relocauon Plan to direct both the property acqmsiuon and the plan to assist Pollard Morors m the relocauon of Us auto sales and service busmess. C Alternatrve City site status 1 Crty Yazds S~te Dunng 2002, miUally the Pollards requested 6 acres at the City Yazds to relocate Pollazd Motors and mdicated they might be w~llmg to relocate if a suitable s~te were found. The c~ty was concurrently developmg a master plan for the Ctty Yards site and added this wotk effort to their scope. The city contracted with EDAW architects to develop the master plan and options for possible relocat~on sites at the Yazds for Pollard Motors. After extensive staff rev~ew and evaluanon, it was deternuned and generally considered acceptable that 6 acres would be available for relocation of Pollard or development of a commercial piece of property for sale along Peazl Parkway so long as replacement property for future Ctty Yards uses was acquired (See Map 2). This six-acre "yards" site was formally offered to the propeRy owner with expectation that it would be acceptable For a vanety of reasons communicated ro council and descnbed in more detail m Section B of this memo, the property owner rejected this srte formally and m writmg. As a counter to the ctty's offer, the propetty owner instead requested six acres located a few hundred feet to the east of the municipal yards site located at the `bld eco-cycle site", planned by Puks to be part of a proposed new 132 acre future Valmont Pazk. The Parks staff was contacted to discuss the feasibility of the Pollazd's request. City Yards Master Plan Status Several concept plans on relocahon of Yards functions to existtng and potential off-site faciht~es have been completed. One of the mam goals of the Yards Master Plan is to keep as many funcuons on-s~te as possible but to recognize that the Airport property is also used for storage of materials. Currently the Yards Master Plan project is on hold until a decision is reached on the relocation of Pollard Motors and how much existing Yazds property will be needed to support Valmont Park development 2. Valmont Pazk Proiect Description Valmont Park ~s a parUally developed, 132-ac~e commumty park. The current park destgn orgamzes acuve recreat~on sites clustered m close proximiry to one another, making a"one-stop shoppmg" srtuauon for park users. To date the pro~ect has mcluded land acquisiuon, armexation, and m~tial development mcludmg mfrastructure roads, parkmg, paths, imgauon, open mult~-use turf area, and the Wonderland Creek Channel. Benefits of Valmont Park Valmont Park, wh~ch is Boulder's lazgest "crown ~ewel" m the parks system, plays a ma~or role m eventually meeting commumty demand for active recreat~on space. A recent (December 2002) update ro the City's Recreation Faciliues Needs Assessment has shown that even if Valmont Pazk is humedly completed, many needs, especially for multi-use turf, will remam unfulfilled. In an effort to try to share resources to meet some of these unmet needs, the Parks and Recreation Department is currently engaged wrth the Boulder Valley School D~stnct m a study of how the ~oint needs of the [wo orgamzations for outdoor space rtught be met A consultant's report is expected m January 2004 It will be used to inform the 2004 Pazks and Recreauon Master Plan update which is in progress. Project Historv In 1995, Boulder res~dents passed a.25 cent sales tax ~ncrease ballot measure for parks and recreauon pro~ects, mcluding acquis~UOn of a lazge city park parcel needed to meet the commumty pazk acreage standards, and fulfill the need for a location appropnate for the type of acave recreahon facilities associated with commumty demand. This ballot measure responded direcdy to the recommendations of the approved 1995 Pazks and Recreation Master Plan. After concludmg a public heazmg on September 3, 1996, City Council voted on a mot~on to approve acquisi[ion of prtvate land to be con~oined with exisnng City land to create the presently descnbed 132 acre Valmont Pazk. In round numbers, the Council authorized the acqms~tion of 105 new acres of pnvate land to add to the 27 acres of "City Yards / Park Operat~ons / Ecocycle drop-off site" land to make a complete park site. From 1996 to date, approximately $19,500,000 of publ~c funds have been spent and over 72 pubhc meetings have been held, to assemble the site, prepare and approve plans and design gmdelmes, complete site clean up and annexation, relocate prairie dogs, identify potenual recreaUOn facility development partners, and complete mitial construction. The approved Concept and Site Review delineates the park development program, mcludmg• • three lazge recreation buildmgs: 98,000 squaze feet, 52,000 square feet, 23,000 square feet • An additional recreation buildmg: potential adapted re-use of the 8,000 sf Park Operation Buildmg • two histonc buildmgs the Platt and Roney Farmhouses • open multi-use turf uea • children's play area • large-group p~cmc shelter(s) area . two leg~on and four httle league ball fields • 1.4-acre dog pazk • 1.5-acre commumty gardens and support building . general park and community use areas, trails, and bndges • specialty garden for communrty gathenngs • cross country ski trail • 20-foot wide b~ke racmg track (multi-use tra~l) • skate park • hard surface courts (roller hockey, tennts, other) • 6.5-acre Pazk Operat~ons and Forestry area • 4-acre plus Mixed Use Neighborhood Commercia! area • Public Works to remove all uses from site • Eco-cycle to remove all uses from s~te • 27 percent of the site dedica[ed to landscape restoration and/or wildl~fe development including Wonderland Channel, Goose Creek Channel, two ditches and all area between ditches, storm drainage areas, irngation pond, and wildhfe comdor. Srte Selection ' In order to meet the standards for community-scaled pazks (100 to 300 acres was needed as of 1996), to provide space for lighted ball fields, and to support Council's transportation and growth management goals by reducing the potential for new ~ob growth, the former industnal land was purchased for a park. Critena for the large city park site selection inciuded: • Sufficient acreage and appropnate topography to support development of multiple active and mtensrve use facilmes with shared mfrastructure, access, and parkmg within one site. • Location in the city lirruts, ideally sunounded by complimentazy land uses (non- residential development), and accessible by ma~or or minor artenal roads • Locauon accessible by alternative modes: bicycle and pedestnan trails, bus routes. • Location with natural amenities. Pro~ect Status The mitial 13-acre pazk si[e (multi-use turf, trails, s~ttmg and picmc areas, and mfrastructure) was completed in summer of 2003. The Parks and Recreation Department is workmg with Boulder Ice, Inc., the Tenms Center, and the Boulder Valley School District on a pilot pro~ect to develop recreaUon faciliues through a land lease of park propeRy. A raw water pond, pump house, and irrigation system mfrastructure are currently being designed for construction m 2004. Unresolved Issues The Parks and Recreauon Advisory Board (PRAB) met in a special meeting on October 6, 2003 to prepaze a letter to Crty Council members outlinmg its concerns about poten[ially locating Pollard on 6 acres of the Valmont Park site. The letter was sent to Council under separate cover. There currently is no identified fundmg source for further development and eventual complehon of Valmont Puk. To implement the approved design will cost at least $80 crullion dollazs (2002) Three pilot pro~ects that move toward pnvately developed spaces and buildmgs (includmg an ice center, a tennis center, and perhaps school district ball fields) aze providmg the potential for capital mvestment m a way that w~ll lead to useable space for meetmg city-wide recreahon demands in the foreseeable future. At a~omt study session between Ciry Council and PRAB m the spring of 2001 the issue of establishment of wildLfe comdors m Valmont Pazk was discussed. The session advtsed the Pazks and Recreation Department to design future phases that ensure no net loss of act~ve recreation space and facilities with wildLfe migration routes considered m the design. The wildhfe corridor currendy hes along the eastern boundary of the site, south of Valmont Road. The wildlife corndor is an issue that will require future discussion and resoluUOn The w~ldlife 10 corridor as proposed traverses planned sites for Valmont Pazk pazkmg lots to accommodate park users and also the acreage desired for relocating Pollard Motors. There aze also substantial financial ~mpl~cations for plamm~g, redes~gn and public process that would need to be considered. The loss of six acres of parkland to commercial use at Valmont Pazk would cause a"npple effect." Some of the issues to consider mclude the purpose, character, and extent of the wildltfe corndor, the relocation, reduct~on, or deletion of recreation facilities and mfrastructure, the pazk's southern access, and the ahgnment and aesthetics of the park entry There aze also significant issues related to potentially re-opening the public process for determming the park development program and the site reorgamzation. It is hkely such a process would be required grven the pubhc mterest m the park. Plannmg, redesign and the publ~c process would all entail the use of public funds N OPTIONS The followmg section descr~bes a vaziety of options regazdmg relocatmg Pollazd Motors to the Yards or Valmont Park sites It should be noted that staff contmues to acuvely mvesugate poss~ble relocation sites on pnvate land m the crty of Boulder A. No Boulder Transit Village pro~ect at the Pollard site Option A addresses the quesuon of is it possible for the Boulder Transit Village to be developed at another location m the City (not at the Pollazd site). Th~s question refers to the site selection process wh~ch was completed in July, 2001, reviewed by City Council and described eazlier m this memorandum (Refer to July 12, 2001 WII' to City Council for more mformation and Boulder Transit Village Site Selection Report, July 2001) Council will recall that the first phase of site selection had already been narrowed to "the vicmity of 30`h & Pearl" via the 28'h Street-2000 Comdor pro~ect. Signtficant new transit services were bemg planned for the 28`h street and 30'h street corridors via local and regional planning efforts. The vicmity of 30`h and Pearl was selected due to the goal of having a multi-modal transit station located in the city of Boulder rather than on the urban fnnge, at the nexus of the current and future communrty transit network routes and regional bus routes, and obviously, ad~acent to future commuter rail tracks. The second phase of srte selection focused on reviewmg sites m the 30`h & Peazl azea. Essentially, four srtes in the azea of 30'h and Pearl were considered. The most criLCal site evaluahon critena used to select the transit village site were: • Efficiency of the srte area and configuration to accommodate the transit center, includmg future commuter rail and bus rapid transit; • Accessibility of the site (buses, autos pedestnans, bicyclists, emergency) • Site availability (environmental clearance, other encumbrances) • Investment Cost • Consistency with Crty of Boulder po(icies A fatal flaw screening was completed which resulted m elimmaUng most of the srtes due to an inability to safely or efficiently accommodate the trans~t elements. Most of these "fatal flaws" mvolved issues such as a major dev~auon of existing bus routes to access the site, inadequate track frontage to accommodate the commuter rail, techmcal ~ssues regazdmg the rail and or reduced safety for users of the station Upon complet~on of the screening the possible transit village site, the conclusion was that the preferred location for the pro~ect was the Pollard Motors site. Key findmgs that led to th~s conclusion were: Approximately 3.5 to 5 acres were needed to accommodate cunent and future transit needs mcluding future Bus Rapid Transit and commuter rail, dependmg on whether park and nde element is structured or surface pazlang • Advantages of the Pollard Motors s~te mclude the size of site, its access to the rail tracks, the relatively small number of business and property owners, the ability to safely and efficiently accommodate cunent and future transit and rail operations, mgress and egress for safe bus movements and the ability to accommodate housing and commercial development on site. . Size of the site was large enough to accommodate and integrate the housing and transit elements on the srte Imnacts to the Transit Villase Protect. The Transit Village has been one of the top City Council pnonties for the last several yeazs and is one of the few pro~ects that address all four of Council's top goals of econonuc and environmental sustainability, affordable housmg and multi-modal transportation Dectding to pursue this pro~ect at another locat~on other than Pollard site would require a new stte selection study and would Lkely result m a location outside the urban center more on the urban frmge. Additional impacts would be• • A new neighborhood servmg as a"catalysP' for redevelopment and establishing a new "mixad-use" neighborhood at 30`h & Pearl Street would not occur . EconomtC development aspects of the pro~ect would not be real~zed. . Ci[y Council goals to advance affordable housing and transportation goals would be sigmficantly impacted. • Regional plamm~g effoRS such as the US36 EIS that assume a commuter rail and bus rapid transit station at 30`h & Peul Street would be seriously slowed down and senously impacted • Investment of seven yeus of plamm~g process, staff time, m[ergovernmental agreements and wsts for a vanety of regional and local transportation planning studies, economic development and housing studies would be lost. 12 B Partial Acqms~tion of Pollard Site Option B evaluates whether it is viable for the housmg component to scale back to a more compact pro~ect that allows Pollard to remam at their current locauon at 30`h and Pearl Street and allow the Transrt V~llage pro~ect to be constructed "behmd" the current PoAazd Motors. PreLminary analysis of a much smaller residential development mdicates very margmal financial and mazketmg feas~bility The proposed Transit Village s~te at 30`h & Pearl Streets covers 11 23 acres. If Pollazd were to retam the western 6 acres, that would leave 5 23 acres for transit, housmg, roads and mfrastructure and commercial. The site selection study commissioned for this pro~ect mdicated that 3.5 - 5 acres is needed to accommodate current and future transit needs alone. That leaves something m the cange of .23 to 1 73 acres that might be potentially developed as housing In addition to the option descnbed above, a variatton was explored that mcluded consol~datmg the Pollard busmess mto a multi-story structured auto dealership bu~ldmg. This concept assumes Pollard Motors would contmue to operate their business at the Transrt VIllage s~te and would, m theory, enable the Trans~t Village to be constructed on the remaming acreage The city's property agent presented this option to Pollard. Though there is precedent for multi-storied auto dealerships nearby, such as John Elway, this was not considered acceptable to Chrysler Chrysler controls the Jeep dealership franchises nationwide, and thus, has considerable authonty Thus, this option was cons~dered unacceptable to Pollard Motors and to the property owner. I~acts to the Transit Villa~nroiect: This option likely eLmmates the "Village/housing" portion of the pro~ect. Anythmg under one acre would not merit development for housing Even if one to two acres were avatlable for housmg development, there would be serious marketing and logistical limitations For example, from a marketing and economic perspective, the northeast corner of the site would not be viable for housing This is because any such development there would be surrounded on three sides by a car lot, tram tracks, and the transiWus stop Th~s would not be a mazketable configuration for res~dential use. The Transit Village concept is considerably more viable for residenLal development Such a site would have frontage on 30 h Street and would not mclude a car lot as a ma~or neighbor to the west It would be adjacent to a grocery/shoppinglentertainment (movie) area, and there would be very attractive view corridors to the west and south A recent analysis conducted by housmg planning staff suggests that the economics of a much smaller (1.25 acre) pro~ect are mugmal Assummg a high level of density of 35 umts per acre, (considerably higher than any current or recent dens~t~es developed, but this site might be appropriate for such a high density), and assum~ng 1.25 acres ava~lable for housing, thts could mean a residential development of about 44 units. Rough esumates of development costs are as follows: $708,000 for land at $13 square foot); $1,089,000 for infrastructure ($20 squaze foot), $4,400,000 for construction ($100 square foot, 44 two bedroom and 1000 square foot un~ts), p(us 20% developer's fees and overhead, totalmg 13 approximately $7 4 m development costs. Assummg half of the umts, 22, as permanently affordable, w~th 20% of those, or 9 umts, not subs~d~zed, and $30,000 in subsidy for 13 unrts, with selling pnces for the permanently affordable units at $138,000, the sales pnce for the market rate units would need to be $182,000 The above analysis presents a picmre of a relahvely small pro~ect that will require substantial staff time and mvestment. It would result m a limrted number of affordable homes and would have margmal econorrvc viabil~ry It would have quesuonable mazketmg potential for a less than desirable residential site. Additional impacts are • The housmg component of the pro~ect has been central to the process of assembhng the finances that make the pro~ect possible. As a result, sigmficanUy shnnlung the scope of the housmg component of the project would require a re-evaluation of fundmg feasibihty • Congesuon m~tigahon would be significanUy lessened m the absence of housmg on sue. • Ehmmating most of the housmg from the pro~ect would probably reduce transit use because rt would also ehmmate some transit ongms (The people who hve a[ the village are most likely to use the convement transit options available on-s~te). • The "transit stat~on" alone at the site would not create a new neighborhood, would not advance city affordable housing, transportahon and economic sustamability goals or serve as a"catalysP' for redevelopment m the area. Potent~al Im~acts to Pollard Motors and 30`h & Pearl LLC: It ~s assumed that this option has few impacts, or impacts that would be considered acceptable to the property owner or the busmess smce they stated m writmg they would be willmg to sell this portion of their property. This option allows the owner to retam ownership of that port~on of land currently occupied by Pollard and thus, would not requue relocating Pollazd This option may have potential impacts to Pollazd depending on where and how the road network fits on the site m con~unction with the existing Pollazd Motors. If this option were implemented, road access to 30`" would need to be reseazched further and may potenually include additional impacts to Pollazd. C. Land swap for Crty Yazds site Option C has several alternat~ves, which involve usmg a portion of existing yards for e~ther Pollard, other commercial development; or combining uses with Valmont Pazk. One alternatlve assumes providing six acres at the mumcipal yards, located on the north side of Pearl Parkway, west of Goose Creek, and east of Gephazdt Motors at the City's Yards for relocatmg Pollazd, or for sale for commercial development (See Map 2). If th~s option were pursued, replacement land would be required for the City Yards. The replacement land may be able to phased and purchased m the future pendmg completion of [he Yazds Master Planning process. It may be beneficial for the city to acquire property adjacent to or in close proxirrvty ro the existmg Yazds site in an amount equal to or greater than the amount of area lost due to use as a 14 park or commerc~al business This opUOn assumes that the exisung azea currently used by the Yards on the north side of Peazl Parkway could be sold for pnvate development. Another vanauon of th~s opaon could mclude azeas adjacent to Valmont Park that could be shared or mcorporated mto the pazk Either opuon would be acceptable as long as the amount of land dedicated for Yards use does not decrease Advantages of this option are that there are few negative impacts to ex~sting and planned uses The public and past public processes aze not impacted, the future Valmont Park ~s not impacted and the Yards would not be negatively impacted. In add~uon, the Ciry Yazds does not need the commercially viable frontage on Peazl Pazkway Staff has recogmxed that there is cons~derable econom~c value for the ctty to cons~der sellmg th~s desirable and marketable piece of land on the north side of Pearl Parkway Impacts to CitV Yards. Potenual posit~ve impacts of selling six acres of yards land would enable purchase of other more appropnate and less expens~ve land for future expansion and/or replacement for the Yards and may allow replacement of some land already progra[nmed for park use. The pnmary disadvantage of this opuon is it may be difficult to acquire replacement land m close proximity to the Yazds. If replacement land is unable to occur, rt should be noted that further relocation of Yards funcuons off-site would reduce efficiency, mcrease costs, and mcrease vehicle miles traveled. Potential Imnacts to Pollazd Motors Although city staff believe that a relocation of the Pollards to the Yards s~te is v~able, the owner has stated they are unwillmg to accept this site due to the overhead power lines, lack of an mtersection at this locauon and too "narrow" a lot wnfiguration Thus, it ~s assumed that this opuon is not acceptable to the property owner and would requtre an e~runen[ domam action. Impacts to the property owner mclude expenses and hme mcuned due to a city actwn of ermnent domain D Land Swap for Valmont Pazk This option involves accepung the 30`~' and Pearl LLC counteroffer with s~x acres of pazkland provided for commercial development It assumes that the land swtable for park purposes is provided elsewhere and is of equrvalent character and relationship to ~ts surroundmgs with equrvalent programmmg capability. It also assumes that other issues conceming value are resolved. Two site design alternatives within the pazk were explored wtth the PRAB at its September 22, 2003 meeang An illustration of hypothetical aiternatives to accommodate the dealership on pazkland was d~scussed In both hypothetical alternatives, Pollard was allocated approximately s~x acres m the same general locauon beheved to be preferred by Pollard. In addit~on to identifymg a location for Pollard, two vaziables were used to create the two study alternaaves mcludmg a) hypotheacally shrinking the Pazks and Recreation Department's Park Operations site, and b) deleting the proposed skate park facility, and then to cursonly explore the begmning of the "ripple effects" to the adopted concep[ plan of such a move (See Pazks and Recreation Adv~sory Board Memo dated September 22, 2003 for more informauon) ts Basically, the mternal reorganuation alternauves use land located at the western edse of the park, south of Valmont Road for accommodatmg uses that would be los[ by relocaung Pollard Motors to the site Those uses mclude mdoor recreahon buildm~s and assoc~ated parkmg, and the potential relocation, m one of the two alternatrves, of the Park Operat~ons Faciliry Both hypothetical examples show part~al resolution of [he loss of six acres to non-pazl. uses, but some new issues are created, and not all outstanding ~ssues aze resolved Further analysis of the site reorgamzation opt~ons, site use pro~rammmg opuons, user group need opt~ons, wildltfe comdor options, road opuons, cost ~mpl~cations, mamtenance impLcauons and so foRh would be required ro begm to resolve the npple effects that are only suggested by these hypotheucal reorganizauon alternat~ves If the park is to be redesigned m the future, it would seem to be m the best interest of the publ~c to_begin with a review of the pazk vision, rrussion, and goals. E. New Options On September 22, the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board discussed potential opt~ons for the locat~on of Pollard Mo[ors on [he southem pomon of the Valmont Park srte Two opt~ons were pcesented as descnbed above. Both of these options assumed that any displaced funct~ons of the park would have to be accommodated on the exishng park sue or be lost from the pazk Staff has begun a process to see if any add~tional opuons could be generated by loolung for opportumties to relocate puk functions to the crty yards srte, thereby preservmg as much of the Valmont park site for park functions while accommodaung a relocat~on of the Pollard bus~ness onto the Valmont Park site. In addition, an additional ophon at the Crty Yazds site is bemg evaluated to detemune if a locauon unencumbered by overhead power lmes and at an mtersection location could be provided Several des~gn alternatrves have been generated by staff and will be shared wuh Council at the study sess~on (and have been mformally shazed with the Pazks Board.) As discussed under the process and timeline below, staff anttcipa[es further refinement of these opt~ons m concert with the Pazks staff, Pollazd Motors, and the Pazks Boazd VI NEXT STEPS There are two categones in the next steps m this process I) makmg the final decls~on on wh~ch site to pursue for the relocadon of the Pollazd business, and 2) the steps that would be necessary to implement that decision. DECISION-MAKING The focus of the dec~sion-makmg process is to secure final direct~on from Ciry Council on which srte (if any) to pursue for the relocat~on of the Pollard busmess. Th~s mcludes further refinements to the Vaimont Pazk site opuon and the City Yards site opuons. Subsequent to those refinements and recommendations from the Parks and Plamm~g Boards, Council can then give direcuon. Staff antic~pates that such direction could be given m late Januazy. 16 The steps after Council direction aze less certam m terms of uming, but mvolve final negotiapons with the Pollards and final Council approval of the proposed deal. The followmg is an oudine of the steps addressed above. 1. Furthet refinement of options for the Valmont Pazk and City Yazds sites - November/December 2003 • Staff refinement of options • Staff shares options with Pollard • Secure feedback from Pollud • Refine ~f necessary • Review w~th Pazks Boazd and secure their recommendation/comments 2. Direction from City Council - January 2004 • Bnng forwazd entire range of altematives and Pollazd preferences • Rece~ve direcUon on which opuon to pursue 3. Final negotiation w~th the Pollazds. • Finalize location, pnce, and other aspects 4. Crty Counc~l approval. IMPLEMENTATION Once Council direct~on is given, and once a final deal is approved by the Poilazds and Council, and dependmg upon which sites aze implicated, a senes of steps must be taken to deliver an appropriate s~te to the Poilards and to adjust the approvals of the sites from which land would be transferred. Below ~s an outlme of the process steps required depending on which alternative ~s to be pursued Process steps for the transfer of a city site to Pollard. a For the city yards site• • City Council decision. . Subdivision/Comp Plan land use des~gnation change/Rezomng b For the Valmont Park srte: • Pazks Board recommendation. • Planning Boazd recommendation • City Council decision. • Subdrvision/Comp Plan land use des~gnation change/Rezonmg. 2. Process steps for readjustmg the plan for the city stte after transfer to Pollazd a. For the city yards sue: • Addrt~onal Iand acquisition • Amend the city yards master plan • Amend the city yards PUD 17 b For the Valmont Pazk site• • Prepare revised concept plan • Review the revised concept plan with the Parks Boazd, Plannmg Board • Prepaze a revised srte review plan • Review the revised site review plan w~th Parks Boazd • Secure a stte review amendment from the Planning Boazd, sub~ect to Council call-up • Perhaps amend the c~ty yards PUD dependmg on opuon selected 3 Process steps for a partial acquisition of the Pollard site • Subdivision • Site review For Pollard Motors • Comp Plan land use designauon change/Rezoning/Site review for Transit Village I8