Bookmark1
Start Position
Start Position
Bookmark2
Chair Fullmer opened the meeting on December,23, at:28 AM.      CONSENT ITEMS2.1  Approval of the December23, RDA Meeting Minutes2.2  Appointment of an RDA Director (Resolution (U2023-12)
Chair Fullmer opened the meeting on December,23, at:28 AM.      CONSENT ITEMS2.1  Approval of the December23, RDA Meeting Minutes2.2  Appointment of an RDA Director (Resolution (U2023-12)
Bookmark3
Mayor Fullmer asked to move consent item2 to the next meeting.
Mayor Fullmer asked to move consent item2 to the next meeting.
Bookmark4
Motion: BOARDMEMBER WELSH MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT ITEMS AS PRESENTED WITH THE REMOVAL OF ITEM2 TO THE NEXT MEETING. BOARDMEMBER FLAKE SECONDED THE MOTION. CHAIR FULLMER, BOARDMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, SIFUENTES, AND WELSH VOTED YES. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.     BUSINESS ITEMS1  DISCUSSION AND ACTION – The Forge Tax Increment Participation Agreement (Resolution U2023-11) Dakota Pacific is requesting approval of a Tax Increment Participation Agreement. The RDA Board will act to adopt (or deny) this request by resolution.
Motion: BOARDMEMBER WELSH MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT ITEMS AS PRESENTED WITH THE REMOVAL OF ITEM2 TO THE NEXT MEETING. BOARDMEMBER FLAKE SECONDED THE MOTION. CHAIR FULLMER, BOARDMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, SIFUENTES, AND WELSH VOTED YES. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.     BUSINESS ITEMS1  DISCUSSION AND ACTION – The Forge Tax Increment Participation Agreement (Resolution U2023-11) Dakota Pacific is requesting approval of a Tax Increment Participation Agreement. The RDA Board will act to adopt (or deny) this request by resolution.
Bookmark5
City Attorney, Jayme Blakesley, stated that this item refers to the agreement talked about during the City Council meeting. He said the amendment requires City Council approval and RDA Board approval.
City Attorney, Jayme Blakesley, stated that this item refers to the agreement talked about during the City Council meeting. He said the amendment requires City Council approval and RDA Board approval.
Bookmark6
Motion:BOARDMEMBER WELSH MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUESTED FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE LAND DONATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION. BOARDMEMBER SIFUENTES SECONDED THE MOTION. CHAIR FULLMER, BOARDMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, SIFUENTES, AND WELSH VOTED YES. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.     ADJOURNMENTChair Fullmer called for a motion to adjourn the meeting.
Motion:BOARDMEMBER WELSH MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUESTED FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE LAND DONATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION. BOARDMEMBER SIFUENTES SECONDED THE MOTION. CHAIR FULLMER, BOARDMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, SIFUENTES, AND WELSH VOTED YES. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.     ADJOURNMENTChair Fullmer called for a motion to adjourn the meeting.
Bookmark7
Steve Borup with Dakota Pacific presented the tax increment participation agreement.
Steve Borup with Dakota Pacific presented the tax increment participation agreement.
Bookmark8
Chair Fullmer recommends that the council either discuss the item or continue to the next meeting. Councilmember Sifuentes expressed her concerns and stated she would like to continue the item to the next meeting. A discussion ensued.
Chair Fullmer recommends that the council either discuss the item or continue to the next meeting. Councilmember Sifuentes expressed her concerns and stated she would like to continue the item to the next meeting. A discussion ensued.
Bookmark9
Motion: BOARDMEMBER SIFUENTES MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO THE NEXT MEETING ON DECEMBER,23. BOARDMEMBER FLAKE SECONDED THE MOTION. CHAIR FULLMER, BOARDMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, SIFUENTES, AND WELSH VOTED YES. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.  2  DISCUSSION AND ACTION – First Amendment to Geneva West Side Property Land Donation and Development Agreement (Resolution U2023-13) City Attorney, Jayme Blakesley will present a first amendment to the Geneva West Side Property Agreement. The Mayor and City Council will act to adopt (or deny) this request by resolution.
Motion: BOARDMEMBER SIFUENTES MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO THE NEXT MEETING ON DECEMBER,23. BOARDMEMBER FLAKE SECONDED THE MOTION. CHAIR FULLMER, BOARDMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, SIFUENTES, AND WELSH VOTED YES. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.  2  DISCUSSION AND ACTION – First Amendment to Geneva West Side Property Land Donation and Development Agreement (Resolution U2023-13) City Attorney, Jayme Blakesley will present a first amendment to the Geneva West Side Property Agreement. The Mayor and City Council will act to adopt (or deny) this request by resolution.
Bookmark10
Motion: BOARDMEMBER RASMUSSEN MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT:39 AM. BOARDMEMBER SIFUENTES SECONDED THE MOTION. CHAIR FULLMER, BOARDMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, SIFUENTES, AND WELSH VOTED YES. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.  MINUTES APPROVED ON:    Mayh24                         CERTIFIED CORRECT BY:   /s/Heidi Jackman heidi jackman, deputy Recorder
Motion: BOARDMEMBER RASMUSSEN MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT:39 AM. BOARDMEMBER SIFUENTES SECONDED THE MOTION. CHAIR FULLMER, BOARDMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, SIFUENTES, AND WELSH VOTED YES. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.  MINUTES APPROVED ON:    Mayh24                         CERTIFIED CORRECT BY:   /s/Heidi Jackman heidi jackman, deputy Recorder
We are starting, we are holding it as December 13th, Wednesday the time is. 00:00:00
I don't know what is the time. My computer's right now 1228. OK, we are going to go ahead. The consent items. I'm asking that we 00:00:06
actually move 2.2 to the next meeting because we would have to hold, we'd have to pull it off, have a discretion, go into closed 00:00:13
session. I don't want to do any of that tonight. So I'm asking that we move that and just approve 2.1. So we probably need a 00:00:21
motion tonight. Move that items as presented with the removal of item 2.2. 00:00:28
For the next meeting. For the next meeting, OK. 00:00:36
OK. All in favor, Aye, Christy first, tie second. OK. 00:00:40
Thank you. We'll go ahead and start with our discussion in action the Forge tax increment participation agreement, unless you guys 00:00:46
are really tired and you want to come back in two weeks, no, okay, go ahead. 00:00:52
I have a really quick question just before we go into this. 00:01:09
What we are approving on 3.2, is there any long discussion on it or basically just an adoption of what we just adopted? Would you 00:01:14
mind if we switch 3.1 to 3.2 really quick just to allow other people to go home? OK. 00:01:22
Going to come up. I mean, you don't need to. We'll just have Jamie, do you want to present what we're doing and then we'll make a 00:01:31
motion. 00:01:34
Oh. 00:01:39
So. 00:01:42
This is the this is the agreement we talked about during the City Council meeting that applies to the West Geneva property. It's 00:01:45
an amendment to an existing agreement. The amendment relates to the the agreement, the Rd. as a party. And so it requires City 00:01:53
Council approval and RDA approval. It splits the collection period into two. OK. Are there any questions from the RDA board? 00:02:01
OK, if there are no questions I need a motion. 00:02:11
I move to approve the requested First Amendment to the Land Donation and Development Agreement as described in the attached 00:02:16
resolution. All right, by Christy, second by Marty. This is done by resolution, so requires roll call. Tice Amber. Aye. Yay, 00:02:23
Marty. Yay, Christy. Yay. Okay, that passed. We will go back to 3.1. Thanks for staying with us for two days. 00:02:30
Have a good night, drive safe. 00:02:40
I'm jealous. I'm jealous. 00:02:42
I'm not a night owl, I'm an early bird. 00:02:48
All right, go, go. 00:02:53
Steve Borup, Dakota Pacific What was approved in the City Council meeting is something we're excited about. 00:02:56
We believe it's going to be a landmark development. 00:03:06
That is sustainable and the kind of development that the city needs. 00:03:12
If you look at the academics and those who study how to deal with population growth, most fall on the side of the kind of 00:03:19
development that we just proposed mixed-use. 00:03:22
Walkable, sustainable, minimal land use. 00:03:27
One has to ask, why isn't more of this developed in Utah County? If this is where academics and people who study this think this 00:03:33
is the future for development, why isn't more done? 00:03:37
People often think density is always better for a developer and it's always going to be more profitable. Well, it's not done 00:03:44
because there are costs associated with it. One of the costs can be the increased cost of public space in an urban environment, 00:03:51
the highly programmed environment. The land cost that you're donating to it is a higher value. But the second is the parking cost. 00:03:58
A parking stall for surface is 3 or $4000. A parking stall for structured parking is 25 to $30,000, ten times the cost to park. 00:04:06
So if I have a 5000 square foot restaurant that wants to come and they need 25 stalls, if I surface park, I base you know $75,000 00:04:18
in parking. If I structure park I have 750 to $800,000 of parking. Who covers that difference when you're structured parking and 00:04:25
how is it covered? In an urban environment, your parking ratios are lower, that often helps. And your rents are higher, that often 00:04:31
helps. Hence urban environments get built out with with with high density. 00:04:38
So the question is, does it make sense to take future increment from this property and help subsidized to create this kind of 00:04:46
project? 00:04:51
Umm, you know, if we didn't do this, you could take the four to five parking structures that may be on the side or three to five, 00:04:58
each of them three to five levels tall, and you flatten that out across the site. OK, 75% of the site. Well, you've basically 00:05:04
covered the entire site and more and you don't have enough. So the only way to deal with it now is to decrease density. You now 00:05:10
have to make what was, you know, 60,000 square feet of retail. You have to make it on that block down to 38,000 square feet of 00:05:16
retail. That decreases the tax base. 00:05:22
That decreases the money coming into Vineyard. So the question is, is there an investment that makes sense to create the kind of 00:05:29
development that is sustainable, that is smart? 00:05:34
And and can we use other sources of funds to actually lift the economic benefit to Vineyard even after some subsidy? 00:05:41
So if you were to take that parking and you were flatten it, you basically have to reduce the density by 1 by by 1/3. 00:05:50
So the tax increment decreases by 1/3. 00:05:59
We'll get into. 00:06:07
What our ask is, but what we're going to present and what our thesis is, is that actually by Vineyard investing, some of the 00:06:10
increment that's going to come from this project is actually an increase to the pockets of Vineyard citizens and the economic base 00:06:16
as a whole. 00:06:23
So our request, well, first of all, we're going to spend just under $400 million of additional investment in this property, 320 of 00:07:02
that's in buildings instructed in livable buildings or commercial buildings, 60 million of that's going to be in parking 00:07:08
structures, 6,000,000 in public open space and 2 million in roads and utilities to to complete that. 00:07:15
The participation agreement that we submitted says that the parking structures and the public open space can be qualified expenses 00:07:24
to receive a portion of the increment that the RDA gets can go to help reimburse that to close the economic gap. 00:07:31
Overall. 00:08:53
The finances for Vineyard will be better by enabling this kind of development versus traditional development. 00:08:54
And that's it. 00:09:01
OK. Any questions from the board? 00:09:03
If you do, I recommend that you. 00:09:07
I mean, you're more than welcome to deliberate in public and have all these conversations and make sure that you truly understand 00:09:12
it. We can also continue it so. 00:09:17
Yeah, I I think we should continue it because I. 00:09:25
I didn't know any any of this until just right this moment at 12:40 and I'm tired and I'm I'm like, This is why I wanted to take 00:09:29
structured parking out of the combination. But I think your math makes sense. I'm not saying it's not, but it's like. 00:09:37
We make this great development and then like an hour and a half later I find out it's going to cost 41 million. 00:09:47
I see the Internet, so I think I just need time to digest all of that before I want to go. A yes, all right, let's make a motion. 00:09:54
Unless you say the traditional development would be 1/3 of that 73 million. And so that's where it is actually additive, right, 00:10:04
There's $45 million of added. 00:10:09
The city comes out four to $5,000,000 better with this development than traditional development because of the density so. 00:10:15
OK. 00:10:23
Does anybody want to make a motion? There's still three of you. Otherwise you want to continue it. 00:10:24
I move to continue this item to our next meeting, which I presume presume is on the 27th of December. There's a first time Marty 00:10:33
to continue this. Can I get a second? Second by Tice? All in favor, Aye. All right. I need a motion to adjourn. And the second, 00:10:40
all in favor, aye. OK. 00:10:46
I have no idea. 00:10:55
Link
Start video at
Social
Embed

* you need to log in to manage your favorites

My Favorites List
You haven't added any favorites yet. Click the "Add Favorite" button on any media page, and they'll show up here.
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Loading...
Unable to preview the file.
Loading...
Unable to preview the file.
We are starting, we are holding it as December 13th, Wednesday the time is. 00:00:00
I don't know what is the time. My computer's right now 1228. OK, we are going to go ahead. The consent items. I'm asking that we 00:00:06
actually move 2.2 to the next meeting because we would have to hold, we'd have to pull it off, have a discretion, go into closed 00:00:13
session. I don't want to do any of that tonight. So I'm asking that we move that and just approve 2.1. So we probably need a 00:00:21
motion tonight. Move that items as presented with the removal of item 2.2. 00:00:28
For the next meeting. For the next meeting, OK. 00:00:36
OK. All in favor, Aye, Christy first, tie second. OK. 00:00:40
Thank you. We'll go ahead and start with our discussion in action the Forge tax increment participation agreement, unless you guys 00:00:46
are really tired and you want to come back in two weeks, no, okay, go ahead. 00:00:52
I have a really quick question just before we go into this. 00:01:09
What we are approving on 3.2, is there any long discussion on it or basically just an adoption of what we just adopted? Would you 00:01:14
mind if we switch 3.1 to 3.2 really quick just to allow other people to go home? OK. 00:01:22
Going to come up. I mean, you don't need to. We'll just have Jamie, do you want to present what we're doing and then we'll make a 00:01:31
motion. 00:01:34
Oh. 00:01:39
So. 00:01:42
This is the this is the agreement we talked about during the City Council meeting that applies to the West Geneva property. It's 00:01:45
an amendment to an existing agreement. The amendment relates to the the agreement, the Rd. as a party. And so it requires City 00:01:53
Council approval and RDA approval. It splits the collection period into two. OK. Are there any questions from the RDA board? 00:02:01
OK, if there are no questions I need a motion. 00:02:11
I move to approve the requested First Amendment to the Land Donation and Development Agreement as described in the attached 00:02:16
resolution. All right, by Christy, second by Marty. This is done by resolution, so requires roll call. Tice Amber. Aye. Yay, 00:02:23
Marty. Yay, Christy. Yay. Okay, that passed. We will go back to 3.1. Thanks for staying with us for two days. 00:02:30
Have a good night, drive safe. 00:02:40
I'm jealous. I'm jealous. 00:02:42
I'm not a night owl, I'm an early bird. 00:02:48
All right, go, go. 00:02:53
Steve Borup, Dakota Pacific What was approved in the City Council meeting is something we're excited about. 00:02:56
We believe it's going to be a landmark development. 00:03:06
That is sustainable and the kind of development that the city needs. 00:03:12
If you look at the academics and those who study how to deal with population growth, most fall on the side of the kind of 00:03:19
development that we just proposed mixed-use. 00:03:22
Walkable, sustainable, minimal land use. 00:03:27
One has to ask, why isn't more of this developed in Utah County? If this is where academics and people who study this think this 00:03:33
is the future for development, why isn't more done? 00:03:37
People often think density is always better for a developer and it's always going to be more profitable. Well, it's not done 00:03:44
because there are costs associated with it. One of the costs can be the increased cost of public space in an urban environment, 00:03:51
the highly programmed environment. The land cost that you're donating to it is a higher value. But the second is the parking cost. 00:03:58
A parking stall for surface is 3 or $4000. A parking stall for structured parking is 25 to $30,000, ten times the cost to park. 00:04:06
So if I have a 5000 square foot restaurant that wants to come and they need 25 stalls, if I surface park, I base you know $75,000 00:04:18
in parking. If I structure park I have 750 to $800,000 of parking. Who covers that difference when you're structured parking and 00:04:25
how is it covered? In an urban environment, your parking ratios are lower, that often helps. And your rents are higher, that often 00:04:31
helps. Hence urban environments get built out with with with high density. 00:04:38
So the question is, does it make sense to take future increment from this property and help subsidized to create this kind of 00:04:46
project? 00:04:51
Umm, you know, if we didn't do this, you could take the four to five parking structures that may be on the side or three to five, 00:04:58
each of them three to five levels tall, and you flatten that out across the site. OK, 75% of the site. Well, you've basically 00:05:04
covered the entire site and more and you don't have enough. So the only way to deal with it now is to decrease density. You now 00:05:10
have to make what was, you know, 60,000 square feet of retail. You have to make it on that block down to 38,000 square feet of 00:05:16
retail. That decreases the tax base. 00:05:22
That decreases the money coming into Vineyard. So the question is, is there an investment that makes sense to create the kind of 00:05:29
development that is sustainable, that is smart? 00:05:34
And and can we use other sources of funds to actually lift the economic benefit to Vineyard even after some subsidy? 00:05:41
So if you were to take that parking and you were flatten it, you basically have to reduce the density by 1 by by 1/3. 00:05:50
So the tax increment decreases by 1/3. 00:05:59
We'll get into. 00:06:07
What our ask is, but what we're going to present and what our thesis is, is that actually by Vineyard investing, some of the 00:06:10
increment that's going to come from this project is actually an increase to the pockets of Vineyard citizens and the economic base 00:06:16
as a whole. 00:06:23
So our request, well, first of all, we're going to spend just under $400 million of additional investment in this property, 320 of 00:07:02
that's in buildings instructed in livable buildings or commercial buildings, 60 million of that's going to be in parking 00:07:08
structures, 6,000,000 in public open space and 2 million in roads and utilities to to complete that. 00:07:15
The participation agreement that we submitted says that the parking structures and the public open space can be qualified expenses 00:07:24
to receive a portion of the increment that the RDA gets can go to help reimburse that to close the economic gap. 00:07:31
Overall. 00:08:53
The finances for Vineyard will be better by enabling this kind of development versus traditional development. 00:08:54
And that's it. 00:09:01
OK. Any questions from the board? 00:09:03
If you do, I recommend that you. 00:09:07
I mean, you're more than welcome to deliberate in public and have all these conversations and make sure that you truly understand 00:09:12
it. We can also continue it so. 00:09:17
Yeah, I I think we should continue it because I. 00:09:25
I didn't know any any of this until just right this moment at 12:40 and I'm tired and I'm I'm like, This is why I wanted to take 00:09:29
structured parking out of the combination. But I think your math makes sense. I'm not saying it's not, but it's like. 00:09:37
We make this great development and then like an hour and a half later I find out it's going to cost 41 million. 00:09:47
I see the Internet, so I think I just need time to digest all of that before I want to go. A yes, all right, let's make a motion. 00:09:54
Unless you say the traditional development would be 1/3 of that 73 million. And so that's where it is actually additive, right, 00:10:04
There's $45 million of added. 00:10:09
The city comes out four to $5,000,000 better with this development than traditional development because of the density so. 00:10:15
OK. 00:10:23
Does anybody want to make a motion? There's still three of you. Otherwise you want to continue it. 00:10:24
I move to continue this item to our next meeting, which I presume presume is on the 27th of December. There's a first time Marty 00:10:33
to continue this. Can I get a second? Second by Tice? All in favor, Aye. All right. I need a motion to adjourn. And the second, 00:10:40
all in favor, aye. OK. 00:10:46
I have no idea. 00:10:55
scroll up