Projects near Haymarket, Antelope Valley on full city hall plate

 12 comment(s)  
 E-mail Story
 Print Story
  Share

 digg it!
 Facebook
 del.icio.us
Seed Newsvine
Fark It
Reddit

Text Size: 

Tools Sponsor

BY DEENA WINTER/Lincoln Journal Star

Councilman Jon Camp questioned the viability of a redevelopment project south of the Haymarket when its backers appeared before the City Council Monday to request public assistance.

The target was a familiar one: WRK, headed by brothers Will and Robert Scott. WRK has a number of revitalization projects downtown, in the Haymarket and elsewhere. It also heads up a team selected by the city this year to develop amenities — possibly hotels, restaurants and stores — to accompany a new arena if voters approve one next spring.

Last month, WRK officials took a barrage of questions from Camp when they went before the council to seek assistance in demolishing a Haymarket warehouse to build a hotel.

In its latest project, WRK plans to renovate three buildings into mixed use commercial buildings and possibly build a residential/commercial building on the block bounded by Eighth, Ninth and M streets and Rosa Parks Way. The redevelopment plan includes a restaurant.

WRK expects to invest $7.6 million, and it seeks up to more than $800,000 in tax increment financing, likely to be spent on moving utilities and improving streetscape.

Urban Development Assistant Director Dallas McGee said without TIF, it’d be difficult to redevelop the block.

Camp, however, asked a series of questions:  How much did WRK pay for the property? What kind of rental rates they expect to charge? And did the project meets the “but for” test (but for TIF, the project wouldn’t fly), since demolition work had already begun and about $400,000 already had been spent.

“How could you say you’re not going to do this but for TIF?” Camp asked. He suggested the numbers didn’t work and a bank wouldn’t give WRK a loan for such a project.

“I’m trying to understand where the economics are to do this,” he said. “I don’t know how you come up with the money.”

WRK’s attorney, Kent Seacrest, said the council doesn’t have to “prove that we’re smart” and will make money. But Camp wasn’t the only council member questioning whether the project needs TIF.

Council members John Spatz and Ken Svoboda were also dubious, since some buildings were improved in the 1980s without public help and two buildings were occupied before WRK bought them.

Seacrest said if TIF isn’t approved, WRK might have to reduce the quality, size or amenities or perhaps sell the buildings at a loss.

In the end, the council voted 5-1, with Camp voting against, to allow city officials to negotiate a redevelopment agreement with WRK. Such an agreement spells out how much TIF would be generated and how it would be used. That agreement must then be approved by the council. Spatz and Svoboda said they voted “yes” reluctantly and couldn’t guarantee they’ll do the same next time around.

Council debates restriction on Ag Society

After being tabled by the city since December 2005, plans to bring a motel, restaurant and other businesses to 14 acres near the Lancaster Event Center finally appear headed for approval.

The development got shelved due to worries that the Lancaster County Agricultural Society’s plans to build an arena might compete with the city’s proposal to build a new arena. On Monday, the City Council held a public hearing on an annexation, zoning change and amendment to the city-county Comprehensive Plan that would allow the Ag Society’s development at 84th Street and Havelock Avenue.

The Ag Society has no immediate plans to build an arena but has talked about building one with 3,500 to 4,000 fixed seats and won’t rule it out in the future.

Included in the legislation is a memorandum of understanding between the city and Ag Society which prevents the Ag Society from building an arena with more than 2,000 fixed seats until after 2012 and would set up an oversight commission to sort out conflicts over competing events.

Planning Director Marvin Krout said the memo was designed to give the city time to have an election on a new arena — and possibly a second vote if the first one fails. He said it often takes a couple of tries to get such projects to pass.

Alan Wood, an attorney representing the Ag Society, said the Ag Society supports a Haymarket arena, which he said wouldn’t duplicate an Ag Society arena because theirs would cater to agricultural events. He said until a new Lincoln arena is approved, it’d be premature to require an oversight commission.

The council will take final action on the legislation next week, but indicated while voting on amendments Monday that it may not require the memorandum since the Ag Society opposes it.

Assurity headquarters

The City Council approved a redevelopment project that could be the largest private development yet in the Antelope Valley Project.

The council approved a project that would put a new headquarters for Assurity Life Insurance Co. in Antelope Valley, with the city kicking in up to $7.4 million in tax increment financing.

More than $55 million will be invested to build a new 180,000-square-foot building on seven acres near 19th and Q streets, with part of the building rented to tenants.

Assurity President and CEO Tom Henning said Assurity is interested in locating in Antelope Valley — despite higher costs than alternative sites — because it wants to jumpstart revitalization; locate next to a major research university; have better access to the interstate via the future 19th Street and locate near a planned Union Plaza park.

Henning said the company expects to add to its staff of 450 — who have an annual payroll of about $24 million — in the coming years, and possibly build another building.

The council’s approval means the city can begin negotiating a redevelopment agreement with Assurity, which must come back to the council for approval.

Design standards for Antelope Valley

As the Antelope Valley Project prepares to host some of its first tenants, city officials are considering whether the area needs design standards to ensure quality buildings go into the swath of central Lincoln.

Such standards would regulate things like building materials used, landscaping and where drive-through windows can be located.

The council held a public hearing on proposed design standards for the area bounded by 17th, 23rd, K and R streets. The design standards would also apply downtown.

Urban Development Director David Landis said the standards aren’t meant to be an obstacle to developers but to assure businesses that they’ll be surrounded by projects of similar quality.

Omaha and La Vista have such standards, and Lincoln has them in neighborhoods. Existing property would be grandfathered and would not have to adhere to the standards.

Assurity CEO and President Tom Henning said he’d like assurance the neighboring area will develop in a way Assurity can be proud to make the Antelope Valley its home.

The Downtown Lincoln Association supported the standards but doesn’t like it that in some areas of Antelope Valley, businesses would not be required to provide parking. The DLA is concerned that the city could end up diverting parking funds to pay for parking in Antelope Valley rather than downtown.

Bob Harris, interim president of the Lincoln Community Foundation, said the foundation plans to announce a $500,000 gift from a deceased couple for the planned Union Plaza park in Antelope Valley. But he said the foundation would need assurances — via design standards — that the surrounding area would be developed “to an appropriate standard.”

Westgate Bank President Carl Sjulin — who noted that his bank is looking to put a branch downtown — also said the design standards would provide clarity and certainty to banks considering approving loans in the area.

Mark Hoistad, program director for the University of Nebraska-Lincoln’s College of Architecture, said he doesn’t oppose design standards but thinks they should lay out guidelines rather than define things that can’t be done. He suggested the standards could prevent progressive designs such as those of Sheldon Art Gallery or Wells Fargo Bank.

Peter Hind, professor at the architecture college, said he’s also not opposed to design standards but doesn’t like the prohibition on certain building materials.

However, city officials said the planning director can waive the standards if a design enhances the setting and meets the overall intent and spirit of the standards. And the City Council would be able to overrule the director. The council votes on the changes next week.

Reach Deena Winter at 473-2642 or dwinter@journalstar.com.