HomeMy WebLinkAbout5-18-16 RDA MinutesRDA Minutes March 16, 2016 Page 1
REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES
May 18, 2016
PRESENT:John Bermingham,Steve Cummings,Steve Hintz,Jason Lasky, Doug
Pearson,Archie Stam
EXCUSED:Thomas Belter
STAFF:Allen Davis, Executive Director/Community Development Director;Darlene
Brandt,Grants Coordinator;Andrea Flanigan, Recording Secretary
Chairman Cummings called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm. Roll call was taken and a
quorum declared present.
A plaque for Years of Service on Public Boards and Commissions was awarded to Archie
Stam.
The minutes of March 16, 2016 and were approved as distributed (Lasky/Stam).
Hintz entered at 4:05 PM.
The Redevelopment Authority was made aware of a claim filed with the RDA’s and City’s
Insurance Company.Mint Properties filed for alleged sewer backup damages at 608
Central Street.The RDA does not need to take action at this time.
Public Hearing:
Spot Blight Designation 458 W. 6th Avenue
Chairman Cummings opened the public hearing on the proposed spot blight designation
for 458 W. 6th Avenue
No one appeared and the public hearing was closed.
Res. 16-08 Approve Spot Blight Designation;Accept Donation of Property at 458 W.
6th Avenue
Motion by Stam to move Res. 16-08
Seconded by Bermingham
RDA Minutes March 16, 2016 Page 2
Mr. Lasky stated he agreed with staff’s recommendation to take down the building.
The item was called. Motion carried 6-0.
Res. 16-09 Grant Utility Easement & Release Utility Easement; 400 Block of Marion
Road
Motion by Hintz to move Res. 16-09
Seconded by Pearson
Mr. Bermingham inquired about the need for granting and releasing easements.
Mr. Davis stated the easement is no longer needed because the storm sewer was
disconnected and capped when buildings were demolished. Granting the utility
easements on the south side of Marion Road is for private companies to serve new
residential and mixed use developments.
The item was called. Motion carried 6-0
Res. 16-010 Approve Land Disposition at Franklin Street and Ida Avenue ($4,375)
Motion by Lasky to move Res. 16-10
Seconded by Pearson
Mr.Bermingham inquired if there is any reason the Redevelopment Authority would not
want to sell the property at this time. Is this RDA looking at land assemblage for this area?
Mr. Davis responded that neighbors to the south of the property have re-sided their home
and other residents in the neighborhood have been making improvements as well. The
Lofton’s, are looking to purchase the vacant lot and have already made improvements to
their home. Mr. Davis stated it wouldn’t be necessary to acquire surrounding properties at
this time.
Mr. Lasky stated adding the vacant lot to the Lofton’s property makes it look consistent
with the block.
Mr. Hintz inquired what is meant by,the small parcel in question could be retained as part
of the public space.
Mr. Davis stated if the property is not sold to the Lofton’s it will remain a public space,
since it is already adjacent to the urban green space. If sold to the Lofton’s they are able to
make their own improvements on the land.
RDA Minutes March 16, 2016 Page 3
Mr. Bermingham stated that from a planning stand point,it makes sense to add it to the
Lofton’s property.
Mr. Cummings stated that houses around the urban green spaces have been making
improvements to keep up the look of the neighborhood.
The item was called. Motion carried 6-0.
Discussion: Acquisition Policy
Mr. Davis stated staff has prepared a list of criteria that could be used for developing an
Acquisition Policy. In reviewing past acquisitions the highest priorities seem to have been:
1.Blighted conditions of the structure.
2.Location of the structure.
-Redevelopment Area.
-Consistent with a Neighborhood Plan
-Visibility
3.Cost of the acquisition/demolition –back taxes, assessments, hazardous material
removal, and demolition costs.
4.Potential Re-use of the property
-Redevelopment
-Combination with neighboring parcels.
-Public improvements planned
-Possible sale price
5.Potential Impact on the neighborhood.
Mr. Davis stated typically the RDA acquires vacant properties,because if acquiring an
occupied property,relocation costs are very expensive. Mr. Davis stated he is looking for
feedback from the RDA on which items are a higher priority or lower compared to where
they currently rank.
Mr. Lasky stated he believes the potential impact on the neighborhood is a higher priority
than the cost.
Mr. Bermingham stated the RDA is not able to acquire a property unless it is blighted or
part of a redevelopment area. This makes blighted conditions a statutory item.
Mr. Hintz stated there seems to be two kinds of acquisitions the RDA handles. One is the
Oshkosh Avenue type, where land was acquired to improve traffic and roads. The second
is acquisition of blighted properties where the purpose is more general in maintaining the
RDA Minutes March 16, 2016 Page 4
neighborhood. Mr. Hintz stated he would give highest priority where there is an
established city purpose.Mr. Hintz inquired which type of acquisition is a higher priority,
the occasional property that may need to be spot blighted or where entire blocks are being
assembled for land such as south side redevelopment area.Mr. Hintz stated while
determining these policies it may be important to set some guidelines for how much the
RDA is willing to spend on acquiring these properties.
Mr. Pearson inquired if there could be a scoring system created using the five criteria
listed for the Acquisition Policy. Mr. Pearson agreed with Mr. Lasky in moving up the
impact of the neighborhood over cost.
Mr. Hintz stated there are certain neighborhoods that are being preserved with the
occasional spot blight but some other parts of the City seem to be cleared out and
redeveloped.Mr. Hintz inquired where our priorities are and how much are we willing to
spend.
Mr. Lasky stated the RDA needs to have flexibility when it comes to acquiring properties,
but also some type of structure. Flexibility allows conversation for the authority to make
the decision.
Mr. Hintz agreed with Mr. Lasky in that the RDA does not want to box itself in by creating
all of the policies. It is important to be on the same page when it comes to making these
decisions.
Mr. Bermingham stated there are only three reasons to purchase real estate which he can
see, amass enough property to redevelop, acquisition of property for the good of the
community (road/traffic improvements), and acquisition to improve a neighborhood. All
three have different purposes and all three are appropriate for the RDA. It would be
beneficial to prioritize these types of acquisitions and create guidelines rather than
policies.
Mr. Cummings inquired if it was possible to designate an area as blighted and acquire the
properties, re parcel the land and start fresh to design a new section of the city.
Mr. Davis stated it is possible, however if the properties are not vacant it can cost
hundreds of thousands of dollars to relocate people. Typically this type of assemblage is a
slow process rather than a fast transition.
Mr. Bermingham stated this is happening in the south shore redevelopment zones.
Typically we see commercial or industrial redevelopment, neighborhood redevelopment is
different than what we are used to.
RDA Minutes March 16, 2016 Page 5
Mr. Lasky stated it is important to have on the list of criteria and factor into the equation
the economic impact of the redevelopment on the tax base.
Mr. Davis stated most properties are voluntary offerings to the City or RDA. The City has
not condemned anything recently and it has been rarely used in the past. It should be one
of the lowest criteria when it comes to determining if acquisition is necessary. Mr. Davis
proposed to rework the criteria and continue the discussion and possibly come up with a
point system for acquisition.
Mr. Lasky stated he would like to document the intentions of land acquisition for a better
history of why the RDA is acquiring certain parcels, or land in certain areas so we do not
lose scope of the initial reasoning behind the acquisitions. People at the table will change
and it will give a better understanding of the goals and outcomes.
Mr. Hintz stated independent of any decisions, it should be clear what we are trying to do
in the City in terms of acquiring properties in certain geographic areas. Are we doing a
complete redevelopment of a neighborhood or are we trying to preserve a neighborhood.
Mr. Stam inquired if the property acquired at 458 W. 6th will be for sale and how is it
advertised.
Mr. Davis stated after the property is demolished it will be for sale. There will be for sale
signs on the property and it will be advertised on the City’s website.
Mr. Lasky inquired the zoning of the property.
Ms. Brandt stated the property is zoned R-2 Residential and would be rebuilt residential.
Mr. Bermingham inquired if there are other communities that have acquisition policies or
guidelines in place.
Mr. Davis stated he was not able to find other communities with policies in place.
Executive Director’s Report
Mr. Davis stated One Oshkosh created a brochure shows how non-profits, the City of
Oshkosh and other partners will work together on a wide range of projects in Oshkosh
Neighborhoods. GO-HNI will be at Council on May 24, 2016 to give a presentation on
conducting Community Building and Engagement, acquisition, rehabilitation, rentals and
sales on behalf of the City. More partners such as Housing Authority and Habitat for
Humanity have become involved with the neighborhood revitalization.
RDA Minutes March 16, 2016 Page 6
The City has received $150,000 grant from WEDC for the Buckstaff demolition which is on
the agenda for the May 24th Council meeting. The City will have to come up with other
funding to match the $150,000 that the City did not receive to reach the $300,000 needed
for demolition.
The Boatworks Grand Opening for Boatworks Park is on June 16th at 4:00 PM.
Construction continues on the riverwalk on the east side of Oregon Street. The project
came in well under budget and DNR gave permission to use the remaining grant funds to
install sheet pile on the west side of Oregon Street. Additional grants have been applied
for the riverwalk west of Oregon Street to install riverwalk as far west as it will allow.
City staff is still waiting to hear on the Idle Industrial Sites grant from WEDC for the
Morgan District.The grant is expected to be awarded in June.
Mr. Art Dumke continues to work with staff to explore multiple development options and
funding scenarios for the Pioneer.
Mr. Andy Dumke wants to retain the liquor license for the former Granary property where
he plans to develop a new restaurant. Rivers 1.5 continues with construction. Mr. Dumke
still has an option to purchase on the corner of Jackson Street and Marion Road.
The water tower consultant is close to finishing the design of the water tower. The final
design plans will be presented to the RDA.
There was no further discussion.The meeting adjourned at approximately 4:43 PM.
(Stam/Lasky)
Respectfully submitted,
Allen Davis
Executive Director