Photo provided An artist’s rendition of a proposed mixed use apartments development on land near Cummins’ parking garage in downtown Columbus.
Columbus redevelopment officials have tabled a request to move forward with engaging the developer of The Taylor to build another multifamily and commercial development, which would call for a contribution of $5.4 to $5.8 million in tax increment financing (TIF) dollars.
The Columbus Redevelopment Commission voted Monday to table a resolution to pursue a project agreement with Flaherty & Collins Properties for the potential development, which would be located in front of the Cummins Inc. parking garage at Seventh and Washington streets.
The motion passed 3-2, with Kyle Hendricks, Shannon McDonald and Al Roszczyk voting in favor of a continuance. Trena Carter and Cynthia Boll voted against.
Hendricks made the motion after a lengthy discussion among commission members, with Columbus City Council members and other members of the public also providing comment on the project.
“There area lot of stakeholders in this room that are involved in a lot of different areas,” said Hendricks. “We have local business. We’ve got arts and culture. We’ve got the youth. We’ve got new residents. I’m not convinced, from the conversation that we’ve had today, that we should move forward on this project, from more of a strategic standpoint than any one single detail.”
Deron Kintner, general counsel with the developer, described the concept as a five-story apartment building with approximately 50 to 55 units with some first-floor commercial or retail space.
Flaherty & Collins plans to buy the land from Cummins and have residents and tenants pay the company for use of its parking. Kintner said that this is not expected to be too expensive; it’s just intended to help Cummins cover the cost of operations.
Additionally, Cummins is expected to pay for a portion of the construction costs for a firewall between the new building and the garage.
The proposed resolution being considered by the redevelopment commission states that “under the terms of the proposed Project Agreement, the commission would agree to (contribute) an amount not greater than $5,800,000 toward the cost of the Additional Mixed-Use Project, subject to the completion of all procedures required by law.”
The document indicated that funds from the Central TIF district would be used to make this contribution.
According to Pope, approving the resolution would authorize redevelopment officials to continue negotiating a project agreement with Flaherty & Collins.
She said that the total project cost is estimated at $15.5 million, and the commission previously discussed filling in a funding gap of $5.4 million. However, redevelopment officials are considering the possibility of adding two more commercial or retail tenants on the ground floor, which would widen the gap to $5.8 million.
“We’re still under negotiations, but that $400,000 would go for the build-out for those tenants along the ground floor,” said Pope.
She also stated that the department plans to create a new TIF to recoup the commission’s contribution, assuming the project moves forward.
TIF districts allow the commission to siphon off increasing property taxes in an selected area to fund projects intended to benefit the community.
The commission previously created a TIF district centered on Second Street and Lafayette Avenue to help recoup the city’s investment into The Taylor, which is expected to cost $41 million, per estimates from Flaherty & Collins.
The city agreed to invest $11.8 million into the development under the project agreement, according to Bruce Donaldson with the Indianapolis law firm Barnes & Thornburg.
City officials have said in the past that the development’s property tax dollars will reimburse the city for this contribution.
The proposed “Washington St. TIF” would serve a similar purpose, allowing the commission to capture the property’s increment for about 20 to 26 years and recoup its investment, said Pope.
She noted that a number of approvals would be required in order to fund the project and facilitate the creation of a new TIF, including votes by the redevelopment commission, the Columbus Plan Commission, Columbus City Council and the Economic Development Commission. The process would be expected to take a couple months once the initial resolution is approved.
City Council members Grace Kestler, Frank Miller and Tom Dell attended Monday’s commission meeting virtually and offered their perspectives on the project.
Kestler, who serves as a liaison to the redevelopment commission, expressed concerns at a previous meeting about how the new apartments may be expensive. She said that given the need for more affordable housing in Columbus, the development might not be the best use of the commission’s TIF dollars.
She reiterated these concerns at Monday’s meeting and added that she also dislikes the idea of getting rid of the green space in front of the garage.
“The Taylor is not finished, and I know there is also some questions about the grocery store on the table and what the future of that looks like,” said Kestler. “And I would like to see those pieces of those commitments possibly finished before we really consider eating up some really beautiful space for more realistically higher-end housing.”
Miller also discussed a desire for the commission to wait and said that he and other council members have questions about the potential project.
“I would like to have the temperature read of the council before you move ahead any further,” he said.
He added that creating additional office space might be a better use of the land.
On the other hand, Dell, owns a small business downtown, said he was in favor of commission approving the resolution sooner as opposed to later.
“People drive business, and the more people you can get to live in an area is going to drive more business,” he said.
Some members of the public offered comments and questions about the project as well. Hutch Schumaker, who is a board member of the Landmark Columbus Foundation and owns property near the site, indicated some support for the project but also had a number of questions, including how much control the city would have over the design.
Others discussed a desire for more first-floor retail space, issues with housing affordability downtown and the importance of ensuring the use of the site benefits downtown.
“Downtown is a system,” said Laura Miller with the Office of Downtown Development, a new grassroots initiative. “And as we introduce more things into it, we need to make sure that we’re adhering to a balance.”
After a lengthy discussion, Hendricks made a motion to table the subject for further review by city council and the community, with a decision being made at a future redevelopment commission meeting.
“What are we proactively bringing to the downtown as a whole?” he asked. “And to Ms. (Laura) Miller’s point earlier, as a system, do we need 55 more very high-end apartments in this area versus some other use for that space? The $5.8 (million) is the cost, what’s the opportunity cost of doing something else that could be potentially better or worse for the community?”
McDonald, who expressed support for the development, seconded the motion, having said earlier in the meeting that a continuance might provide an opportunity to educate people about the project and field questions.
“We want to make sure that the public understands the different stakeholders here,” he said. “Obviously they’re a huge part of the process, but I think we want to make sure that everybody kind of understands what the redevelopment commission’s obligations are for a project like this. And it’s really development and taking a place that’s been kind of desolate or dead, a place that, it meets green space, but it’s kind of sat vacant and an opportunity to make it sort of vibrant and bring more people into downtown.”
The commission’s next meeting is set for July 17.
When asked what effect tabling the resolution would have on the project, Kintner said that he doesn’t have a number he can set to it. He added that he “undershot” the number on the actual financial gap, and the company will plans to eat the difference.
“Costs have been going up,” said Kintner. “I think they are stabilizing a little bit, but there’s no — I don’t think anyone thinks there’s a world in which costs are going to come down. There is also a very real ceiling in what you can get in Columbus on rents, so just because costs go up 10%, rents aren’t necessarily going to go up in Columbus 10%. … So the gap’s only going to get larger for us. Again, I’m not going to ask for more money. It’s not how we operate. But time kills deals, right?”
