Idaho Falls Redevelopment Agency

IDAHO FALLS REDEVELOPMENT AGENC Y P.O. BOX 50220 IDAHO FALLS, ID 83405 September 19, 2024 Regular Meeting Minutes Council Chambers Call to Order: Lee Radford called the meeting to order at 12:00. Members Present: Lee Radford, Chris Pelkola Lee, Chris Harvey, Brent Thompson, Terri Gazdik Members Absent: Jon Walker, Lisa Burtenshaw Also Present: Wade Sanner, Catherine Smith, Meghan Conrad, Esq. (via Teams), Renae Magee (via Teams), and interested citizens. 1. Modification to Agenda. None. 2. Approval of Minutes August 15, 2024. Thompson moved to accept the Minutes for August 15, 2024, Harvey seconded the motion, and the motion passed unanimously. 3. Approval of Expenditures and Finance Report. Lee Radford presented the Finance Report dated September 19, 2024. In the River Commons Area: $390.00 to Brad Cramer – Perspective Planning and Consulting, LLC for close out approach in River Commons; $2,836.00 to Elam and Burke for legal services; $1,190.00 to City of Idaho Falls for administrative services. In Eagle Ridge Area: $200.00 to City of Idaho Falls for administrative services. In Jackson Hole Junction: $200.00 to the City of Idaho Falls for administrative services. In Pancheri East $175.00 to Elam and Burke. Chris Pelkola Lee moved to approve the Finance Report dated September 19, 2024, Thompson seconded the motion, and the motion passed unanimously. 4. Ratify the Approval of the Confirmation of Reimbursement Regarding Owner Participation Agreement with Tailwater BF9 Venture LP (Anderson Bush Urban Renewal District). This is a low-income housing project near Bush Elementary. Radford reminded the Board that this is two separate lots, with two different owners (BF9 and BF4). They are similar reimbursements. Sanner indicated that it has been reviewed by staff and the engineering team. BF9 reimbursement is for rock blasting for Black Feather 9% - 600 W Anderson Street, in the amount $433,000.00. Radford indicated the reimbursement is for rock blasting and fill, and it was necessary to do blasting and fill to get a flat surface to build. Radford confirmed that Public Works has also looked at these invoices. Sanner indicated that they looked at standard practices and past work, and Public Works feels this is reasonable for the work done, and the scope of work wasn’t out of the ordinary. Radford clarified that this is under the OPA that was agreed to reimburse from the TIF as it comes in over the years. This amount does fit within the OPA and appears, after investigation, to be reasonable. Conrad reminded the Board that this is divided with two separate loans (LITEC loans) 9% and 4% of the project area that deals with the construction financing and so there are two DBA’s that address this project. When they entered into the OPA they used estimated costs and identification of projects that are eligible for reimbursement. Once those improvements are completed the developer has to submit invoices as well as evidence that payment has been made so there aren’t liens on the property. Conrad stated that they have a confirmation of agency reimbursement form, as the agency only reimburses the actual eligible costs. The submission of the documentation is reviewed internally by City staff to determine reasonableness, and if the amounts are eligible, they memorialize in a confirmation of reimbursement form and that sets the number that will be reimbursed once the triggers for reimbursement are met. For this project, the scope of work was blasting, and it was consistent with the originally requested amount. Because of the financing needs this was reviewed and signed prior to agency consideration so this is a ratification. It will be a similar process for BF4. Thompson asked about the costs that are not related to blasting, such as utility costs, which are being reimbursed at 100% as opposed to any percentage of the cost. Thompson asked about the 4th to the last item, to “connect to existing water main lines” $13,500.00 (on BF4). Radford asked if there are any questions on BF 9. Conrad stated that the costs if deemed eligible may be reimbursed 100% but they are only entitled to receive the agreed upon percentage of the Revenue allocation proceeds from directly attributed to this site. If they get $100 in revenue allocation proceeds only the agreed upon percentage would be reimbursed. Radford stated that the reimbursement amount of BF9 is $432,039.00. Harvey moved to ratify the Confirmation of Reimbursement for BF9 in the amount of $432,039.00, Chris Pelkola Lee seconded the motion, and it passed unanimously. 5. Board Consideration for Approval of the Confirmation of Reimbursement Regarding the Owner Participation Agreement with Tailwater BF4 Venture LP (Anderson Bush Urban Renewal District). Sanner stated that there is blasting, fill, as well as public improvements, including curb gutter sidewalk, utility elements, water, and sewer main with a total of $1.7 million. Sanner indicated Public Works has reviewed this and the amount is not outside of the OPA. Thompson has a question age 2 of the invoice of the Confirmation of Agency Reimbursement Form on the 4th from end line to connect to existing water main line and asked if that is a connection to the site as it is owned by the developers as opposed to a cost within the right of way and is that appropriate? Conrad stated that it needs to be followed up for that expense item as to the location of the connection point. Conrad stated that they can follow up with the developer and suggested if the existing amounts meet the approval, approve the amount without the $13,500 as they do some additional due diligence. Radford stated that the 8” water mains are for future public use, the extensions of the sewer main in the public right of way is public use, but the connection to existing water main lines is a good point that it is not clear that it is all public. Thompson feels that all private development will have that cost to connect to existing water lines in the right of way and that is not appropriate to reimburse for that cost. Thompson suggested ratifying subject to correction of that line item if needed. Gazdik suggested adjusting the overhead and general conditions portion if that is excluded. Radford suggested moving the Confirmation of Agency Reimbursement No. 1 for Tail Water BF4 Venture, excluding the repayment of any amounts relating to the connection to existing water main lines subject to further information from the applicant. Thompson suggested adding “subject to a technical change if necessary.” Conrad stated that this has not been signed off on so it is not a ratification so they can approve up to $1,696,663.42 providing the Board Chair the authority to consider the eligibility of $13,569.81 pursuant to additional information and review by Public Works. Pelkola Lee asked if that amount ($1,696,663.42) contains an adjustment to the general conditions and overhead lines. Conrad indicated that it does include a small adjustment. Gazdik indicated that the overhead adjustment would still need to be made. Chris Pelkola Lee moved to approve the Confirmation of Agency Reimbursement No. 1, while excluding approval of the connection to existing water main lines and any associated general conditions and overhead associated with that cost for future application by the applicant if they want to come back to the Board. Gazdik seconded the motion, the motion passed unanimously. 6. Resolution Approving the Urban Renewal Plan for Yellowstone Square Urban Renewal Project. Conrad is presenting for Renae Magee today. Radford has a conflict and will recuse himself. Thompson will Chair this item. Conrad presented: Slide 1 – This plan was previously reviewed in June and since that time Magee has had further conversations to discuss additional projects to include within the scope of the plan and it has updated the Economic Feasibility Study to address revenue projections as well as projects to be undertaken. This is 42 Acres (Former Fred Meyer Shopping Center). Slide 2 – Plan Elements – All of the statutory elements set forth in Idaho Code Section 50-2905 have been met in the plan narrative and attachments. 1. Cannot exceed 10% of total taxable value of the City and this plan is well under the 10% test. 2. Public works improvements 3. Economic feasible 4. Project costs 5. Fiscal Impact Statement 6. Method of financing 7. Termination Date (2044) 8. Description of Disposition of retention of assets. Slide 3 – Base value of $9.4 million is less than 1%. Well below the value of the City $808 million. Slide 4 – Project list within Yellowstone Square Area: including rock removal, rehabilitation of sewer lift station, public right of way improvements, sidewalk. The estimated costs are $615,500 to be completed through 2028. The Economic Feasibility study does discuss future public improvements such as intersection improvements or potential round about and additional sidewalk widening and landscaping that could happen after reimbursement and there is $1.5 million to fund additional projects. The additional costs would be reimbursed by 2034. Slide 5 – Revenue Generation showing how the new development will generate revenue and what portion of that revenue is eligible to reimburse the developer under an OPA. This project is anticipated to proceed in 4 phases. The 1st Phase is car wash and 8100 square foot retail center at the intersection of Yellowstone and Anderson. This project could receive CO in 2025 and go to tax rolls on 2026 and revenue flowing into Agency in 2027. Phase 2 is the construction of warehouse on the northern portion and this project could have a CO in 2025 with revenue to the agency in 2027. Phase 3 is a convenient store with CO in 2026 and revenue in 2028. Phase 4 is a second commercial building and projected that revenue would be available in 2031. The developer estimated the value using estimated project costs with a potential valuation of $27 million. Magee compared the types of development to similar development in the area and determined that sometimes values do some in less and she used a very conservative $16.2 million of the total valuation at construction. Slide 6 – This is a post July 1, 2016 Plan and there are limitations on the ability to amend the plans or else there is a base reset. Slide 7 - Plan Approval Process. The Eligibility Study was approved in 2023; the draft plan was reviewed in June 2024; Today is the resolution to approve the Plan. Slide 8 – Next Steps if approved. The plan and resolution would be submitted to the City for processing, with a review by City Planning and Zoning for confirmation to the Comprehensive Plan; Notice of Publication and Transmittal to the overlapping taxing district needs to occur by October 11, second notice published on October 25, with November 14 City Council Hearing. Attachment 4 is the zoning map and future land use map were not included in the packet materials and they are standard maps. The outstanding issue is the survey map and legal of the boundary of the District and they are working on coordinating when those are ready and those could change the timeline. Thompson asked Sanner about the development already going on at the intersection and asked if that is all development that isn’t required for the OPA. Sanner stated that they were permitted for general construction and not dealing with IFRA District. Conrad stated that part of the resolution does note that the attachments to the plan need to be finalized before it is considered by City Council and a motion should refer to 1, 2, 4 needing to be finalized and inserted into the Plan. Conrad stated that the motion should direct staff to have all attachments before moving forward to the City. Conrad read the Resolution by Title. 2024 - 09 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY OF IDAHO FALLS, IDAHO, ALSO KNOWN AS THE IDAHO FALLS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, RECOMMENDING AND ADOPTING THE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN FOR THE YELLOWSTONE SQUARE URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT, WHICH PLAN INCLUDES REVENUE ALLOCATION FINANCING PROVISIONS SUBJECT TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CHAIR, VICE-CHAIR, OR ADMINISTRATOR AND THE SECRETARY OF THE AGENCY TO MAKE CERTAIN TECHNICAL CHANGES; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CHAIR, VICE-CHAIR, OR ADMINISTRATOR TO TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION; PROVIDING FOR THIS RESOLUTION TO BE EFFECTIVE UPON ITS PASSAGE AND APPROVAL; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Gazdik Moved to approve the Resolution Approving the Urban Renewal Plan for Yellowstone Square Urban Renewal Project, and further directing staff to ensure that attachments 1, 2 and 4 are attached to the Plan before it goes to City Council, Chris Pelkola Lee seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Radford asked if he should sign the Resolution where he recused himself. Conrad suggested having Thompson sign as Vice Chair. 7. Presentation by McNeil Development, LLC for Proposed New Urban Renewal District on Riverwalk Drive. Sanner stated that the developer is not on Teams. Sanner indicated that he reached out over a week ago to the developer, but did not hear back. Radford stated that McNeil development is looking at another hotel on Riverwalk Drive and they are ready to start moving forward on lots in the area. Lorin Walker was going to give more explanation. Gazdik asked if it is east or west. Radford stated that west side, north of Cooper Norman Building. Radford stated that it is within a former project area, and they did pay for building Riverwalk Drive, but there is blasting to get the hotel in. Radford feels it would pay back. Thompson suggested it would spur the other properties along. Radford feels it is a positive development for the area. Sanner indicated that it was Preston Walker that was going to speak to the Board. 8. RAI and Legislative Update. Conrad has nothing to report. Next meeting October 17, 2024. Thompson moved to adjourn the meeting, Gazdik seconded the motion passed unanimously. Radford adjourned the meeting at 12:50 Respectfully Submitted: Beckie Thompson