2026-10-13 - Community Reinvestment Agency

00:07[music]

00:18[music]

00:24[music]

00:30[music]

00:44[music]

01:07[music]

01:12[music]

01:18[music]

01:29[music]

01:41[music]

01:58[music]

02:07[music]

02:13[music]

02:20[music]

02:24[music]

02:31[music]

02:36[music]

03:06[music]

03:12[music]

03:18[music]

03:23[music]

03:31[music]

03:39[music]

03:45[music]

04:00Heat. Heat. [music]

04:07>> [music]

04:12[music]

04:23[music]

04:31[music]

04:43>> Heat. Heat.

05:00[music]

05:07>> [music]

05:13[music]

05:18[music]

05:23>> Salt Lake City and welcome to the

05:24October 13, 2026 Community Reinvestment

05:27Agency board meeting. I have to give a

05:30shout out to the US Navy. They

05:32celebrated 251 days or 51 251 years

05:36yesterday. So, happy birthday to the

05:38Navy. Go Blue.

05:43Our meetings are public and you're

05:45welcome to join us in person on Zoom or

05:46by watching on the Salt Lake uh City

05:49Council's agenda page, YouTube or SLCTV.

05:52We hope you continue to join in

05:53whichever manners you feel most

05:54comfortable.

05:57uh and think uh we begin our meetings

05:59with comments to the board. And I'd like

06:00to remind you that written comments may

06:02be submitted to the CRA office via mail

06:04to PO Box145476

06:07Salt Lake City, Utah 84114

06:10or by emailing us at

06:12council.commentsslc.gov

06:15or calling our phone line at 8015357654.

06:21Before we start, I want to remind

06:22everyone about our rules of decorum,

06:24which are in place to ensure our

06:25meetings move along well and to help

06:27everyone feel comfortable sharing their

06:28comments. A copy of the full rules of

06:30the quorum are available.

06:33If you'd like to make a general comment,

06:35say we are accepting comments in person

06:36or online on Zoom. Scott Corpney from

06:39our staff will moderate our Zoom and

06:40we'll message you with any questions

06:42about uh your registration. If you need

06:44to speak with our staff, please select

06:46Scott from the list of participants or

06:49so you can uh also raise your hand on

06:51Zoom to indicate that you need something

06:53from the host. Staffs are handling many

06:55tasks, so please limit messages to

06:56technical issues and minimal information

06:59updates. Taylor and our staff will be

07:01calling those who wish to comment based

07:02on the order in which that we receive

07:04the names. If you're on Zoom, please

07:05unmute your mic when Taylor calls your

07:07name. And now we will move to our

07:10general comment period. Taylor, please

07:13start with our first commenter.

07:16>> Thank you, Miss

07:18Chair. We have one person register to

07:20speak. That will be Anthony Washburn

07:22who's here in person.

07:24>> Okay.

07:29>> Good evening, council members. My name

07:31is Anthony Washburn and I'm here kind of

07:33representing the Westside Coalition

07:34Housing Subcommittee. What I comments

07:37fall in line with our values. I'm here

07:39to express my concerns about the

07:41proposed changes to the CRA tax

07:44increment reimbursement policies and the

07:46potential impact on the west side,

07:48particularly the north temple corridor.

07:50While I understand the need to protect

07:52public funds, limiting reimbursement,

07:54shortening terms, and restricting

07:56eligibility for larger investments,

07:58could make smaller infill projects and

08:00mixed income housing more difficult to

08:02build. We must also ask whether our

08:04current affordability requirements do

08:06enough to ensure our working families

08:08can continue to afford to live in our

08:11community. These changes will influence

08:13what's built in the future. I urge the

08:16council to carefully consider their

08:18impact on the westside neighborhoods and

08:19ensure our smaller developments and

08:21genuinely affordable housing remain

08:23viable. Responsible growth should be

08:26about more than the size of the project

08:28or its return on investment. It should

08:31be about building a community where

08:32growth benefits the people who live

08:34here. Thank you for your time and

08:36consideration.

08:38>> Thank you.

08:43Any other commenters?

08:47All right. Thank you very much. Uh we

08:49have no public hearing today and moving

08:52on to the uh agency business and item C1

08:56which is approval of minutes. I'll look

08:58for a motion to approve the meeting

08:59minutes of July 14th, 2026 and August

09:0218th, 2026.

09:04>> Move for approval.

09:06>> Second.

09:06>> Second.

09:07>> Have a motion from council member board

09:09member Petro. Second from board member

09:11Pui. Any discussion?

09:14All in favor say I.

09:15>> I.

09:16>> I.

09:17>> I mean I opposed.

09:19>> That mass motion passes unanimously. And

09:22we're we're kind of adjusting the

09:23schedule today uh for uh some critical

09:26items later on. So, we're going to move

09:27on to item number C3, which is is a

09:30resolutions on the home in Rio Grand

09:32contract update. I have Kate Ward at the

09:35table and Danny Waltz. Oh, and Jim.

09:43Great. Thank you. The board will receive

09:45a briefing and consider adop adopting a

09:48resolution to approve the term sheet for

09:50an amended lease with home in

09:53sorry home in Rio Grand LLC at 428 West

09:57300 South for the past 16 years. The

10:00property has been leased at no cost or a

10:03dollar a year um to operate the income

10:06targeted transitional shared housing

10:07facility. The proposed amendments cover

10:10several areas including new lease

10:13extensions, room rent cap, um shifting

10:16responsibility for maintenance and

10:18insurance to the CRA and other other

10:21items. Um, a policy question you may

10:24want to consider is um discussing

10:29funding sources to be used to pay for

10:31major building repairs and capital

10:32maintenance if the revenue that the CRA

10:35is proposing to collect um doesn't cover

10:38all the maintenance and insurance needs.

10:40With that, I'll turn it over to the CRA.

10:42Thanks.

10:47>> Okay. I'm Jim Sarai. I'm the property

10:49manager for the CRA and uh we'll go

10:52ahead with the slide presentation.

11:05>> This is the wrong one.

11:07>> Uh sorry, this is the wrong

11:10presentation, Mr. Chair.

11:11>> Sorry, I was really confused there

11:12[laughter] for a minute.

11:14>> Jim Jim's not suffering from stage

11:15fright. We uh we need the home in

11:17presentation. Sorry. C3 the home in

11:22presentation.

11:32>> All right, here we go.

11:33>> Okay, there you go.

11:35>> Okay, so we'll just uh in this

11:37presentation, we'll go over the request,

11:39what we're looking for. We'll talk about

11:41the background a little bit, details um

11:43of each of the term sheet uh items and

11:47uh talk about next steps. Next slide.

11:52Um this uh just gives us a little

11:54picture of what the term sheet has on

11:57it. Um the contract entity changing term

12:00extension, [clears throat] room rent

12:02cap, property insurance, rent and

12:04maintenance responsibilities. And we'll

12:06discuss each of these in more detail.

12:08Next slide.

12:11Um, many of you may not be familiar with

12:14the Rio Grand Hotel, um, or the home in

12:17at Rio Grand. So, it was built in 1911,

12:20renovated in 1993. Uh, it's a two-story

12:23building, and it was originally built

12:25for transient uh, railroad workers uh,

12:28at one of the two depots. The hotel was

12:31purchased by the CRA in 2009, and we

12:34purchased it for the incomes targeted

12:37transitional shared housing. Um, and we

12:40had a couple of other facilities then

12:41that were being demolished and we had to

12:43wanted to replace those in the

12:45community. And so, uh, we contracted

12:48with Home in Rio Grand, Inc. And that

12:51was the current tenant and operator and

12:54Brent Willis is the owner of Rio Grand

12:56or Homein at Rio Grand and he was

12:58running a similar facility in Karns,

13:00Utah. And so, uh, it was a really good

13:02fit for us. Um Brent had an idea as

13:07manage the facilities as ins with

13:09inkeeper laws and that way he could hold

13:12uh the tenants to a strict set of rules

13:15and be able to kick them out and um make

13:18sure that uh it was kept in in the right

13:22way. So next slide.

13:27The home in at Rio Grand has 50 guest

13:29rooms. They each have a twin bed and a

13:31counter with a little sink and a closet.

13:34Um,

13:37each room's furnished. Yeah, you can see

13:39that the optional microwave,

13:41refrigerator, or window, air

13:42conditioner. They'll add a little bit to

13:43the price, but um, we always have a full

13:47waiting list at the Rio Grand. Um, about

13:4980% of the residents transition from the

13:52prison system, while the other 20% come

13:54from the city's unsheltered population.

13:57Guests pay about $510 monthly right now

14:00and can they they can stay up to 18

14:02months if they uh are in good behavior

14:05um and in good good reckoning with the

14:08the hotel. 90% of the outgoing guests

14:12transition to more permanent housing.

14:14Next slide.

14:17The first one is the contract entity

14:20change. Uh, as I mentioned, Brent's

14:22company, Homing, Rio Grand LLC, was what

14:26uh we first contracted with and since

14:29then he's created a nonprofit

14:32organization called a Tall Order, Inc.

14:35and uh it has a board now and and has

14:38several employees and will be able to

14:41continue long after Brent's gone. So, um

14:44that's the first change. Lease

14:46extensions is because of that first

14:48change. uh we wanted to be able to have

14:50lease extensions that could go into the

14:52future um if we so desired it. We have

14:55added additional four successive

14:57five-year periods and uh the CRA doesn't

15:01have to take on all of those um

15:04extensions, but we have the opportunity

15:07to.

15:09Room rent cap is referring to

15:12how much

15:14the home in can charge renters. Um,

15:17originally it was $80 [clears throat]

15:20per week. So, if you look at that, it

15:22hasn't gone up too much since 2010. But,

15:26um, it was just really confusing. It was

15:28based on a CPI and, uh, the the mode to

15:33figure out how much they could raise

15:34their rent was kind of confusing and we

15:36wanted to clarify that. And so with this

15:39amendment, we'll have the option to

15:41raise rent up to 75%

15:43of the current rate of a studio

15:45apartment at 40% AMI.

15:48So we took so it's basically 40% AMI and

15:51it's not a complete studio. So that's

15:53why we have it at 75.

15:56Property insurance um since 2010 the uh

16:00property insurance for the building has

16:02gone up quite a bit. The value of the

16:04building has gone up quite a bit. um so

16:07much to the point where their property

16:08insurance doubled this last year and uh

16:13they were at

16:15the point of almost needing to raise the

16:18rent uh too much for their tenants. So

16:23they came to us [clears throat] and we

16:25um thought it made sense for us to take

16:28on the property insurance for the home

16:31in and we could insure it for full value

16:33or we could insure it for less if we

16:35decided to. Um

16:38the leasey will will continue to carry

16:40all other kinds of insurance. So they

16:42they will have all all other insurance.

16:45Next slide.

16:50Tenant rent as uh

16:53was mentioned. They uh paid $1 a year

16:56per per year and uh

17:00with the

17:03matter of us paying for starting to pay

17:05for the insurance costs, we thought they

17:07should pay at least what they had been

17:09paying for property insurance. And that

17:12turned out to be about 4% of their total

17:14annual revenue. And uh we decided that

17:18that would make a good cut if it was 4%

17:21annual revenue every year divided

17:22monthly. Um we would have a little

17:25escalation in rent and be able to uh

17:29keep the rent up a little bit.

17:32Maintenance responsibilities. Uh these

17:34last two items was it was very unclear

17:36in the original document who would pay

17:37for what. Um, we originally wanted to

17:41help pay for certain things to keep the

17:44hotel up in in in good standing. Um, but

17:48it was confusing and so we wanted to in

17:51this amendment really just outline

17:54exactly who would pay for what. And um,

17:58as you see here on this uh, spreadsheet,

18:00it's guest rooms. We'll pay for

18:02flooring, cabinetry, plumbing,

18:03electrical, lighting, countertops, and

18:05doors. And same kind of thing with all

18:08the finishes in the common areas. We'll

18:10pay 50% of that and then the hotel

18:12operator would pay another their 50%.

18:14[clears throat]

18:15Um major building components again it

18:19was unclear and we wanted to clear that

18:21up and say that it was all the CRA's

18:23responsibility to care for the building

18:26envelope as far as foundations, roof, uh

18:28plumbing, those kinds of things, any

18:31kind of infrastructure. And um so we

18:36wanted to point that out. Um next slide.

18:41So next steps, the board could consider

18:43the resolution and approve uh the

18:45amendments term sheet and then we'll

18:47work with our attorneys to get the

18:49documents executed.

18:51Uh next

18:55are there any questions?

18:57>> All right. Thank you very much board.

18:58Any questions?

19:02Um, thank you for this presentation.

19:03I've got just a couple questions that

19:05were uh listed in the briefing. Um,

19:08first would love to understand what

19:11funding sources would be used um to pay

19:14for major building repairs um given that

19:16the project area has expired. And then

19:19the second question is um if the CRA is

19:22responsible for those major structural

19:24components and new proposed agreement um

19:27have we had an assessment of what are

19:29those capital needs?

19:33I'll take the first.

19:34>> Sure.

19:36>> I'll I'll take the first one. Um, you

19:39may or may not recall as a board a

19:41couple years ago, you allocated $500,000

19:43for the Rio Grand. That was an

19:45allocation from the depot district

19:47project area before it expired. And that

19:49was intended to help do some capital

19:51repairs that were needed. Uh, I'll let

19:53Jim answer to the status of those and

19:56what we think may still be needed as far

19:58as funding. Um, even though we've

20:01adjusted the income that we receive and

20:03even though we've allowed the tenant to

20:05adjust their rent, we do not anticipate

20:08this being a significant revenue

20:10generator of a property. And in fact,

20:12it'll probably be more of a liability

20:14because of our maintenance and funding

20:16obligations. So, you as a board will see

20:18that come to you as part of our annual

20:20budget and will likely be an allocation

20:22from our affordable housing funds. This

20:24will be [snorts] something that we will

20:26apply or request funding for to maintain

20:29a proper reserve account to cover those

20:31obligations for maintenance. And then as

20:32those are either spent down and need to

20:34be replenished, those will come before

20:36you as part of the budget. But it'll

20:38have to come from our affordable housing

20:40funds that are allowed to spend on a

20:43project such as this.

20:46>> And then Jim, if you want to speak to

20:47the capital repairs. Uh the second part,

20:50we've used some of that money that Danny

20:52just mentioned to uh upgrade the hotel

20:54and some of the things we've done is the

20:56foundation. Um we've done some

20:59foundation repair where uh it was

21:01underneath some bathrooms, but we've

21:02looked at the foundation. We've uh made

21:06that in in good shape. Right now, we're

21:08in the under the process of replacing

21:10the boiler. Uh we replaced all of the

21:13plumbing, all the pipes in the building.

21:16Um the roof was about I think 5 to seven

21:19years old now um since we replaced the

21:22roof. So we don't see a lot on in in the

21:26future. Um it's in it's a building

21:28that's in really good shape.

21:31[clears throat]

21:32>> Thank you.

21:33>> Yeah.

21:34>> So going on that line of of of thought,

21:37um do we have you know estimates of like

21:41what is coming down? It's an old

21:42building and old buildings require a lot

21:44of maintenance. So, do we have you know

21:47some understanding of like what some

21:50major major expenditures are coming on

21:53that building? Uh that would be my first

21:55out of three questions.

21:58>> We haven't updated that list since the

22:00time that Jim mentioned that we did that

22:01budget and identified those repairs. We

22:04are working with our architect firms to

22:06kind of start getting price estimates

22:08for future repairs. And as part of that,

22:10I think we can start laying out what

22:12would be a capital replacement plan and

22:14understand those costs

22:16>> that that that um that is I think an

22:19important piece of of of this equation.

22:21I I also I would like to know if the if

22:25the amended agreement as drafted

22:27includes some protections or anticipate

22:29some protections for the CRA in case of

22:32mismanagement, right? Like so you know

22:36gross maintenance uh you know that

22:39causes bigger project problems like you

22:41know the perfect example is probably

22:44like a leaking uh you know pipe that was

22:48left to leak for way too long and now

22:51you have to replace floors and walls.

22:53And so do we have any protection to also

22:56make sure that the the the management is

22:59on top of on top of uh looking for the

23:02looking out for the building since we

23:04are not in it all the time.

23:06>> We hope to do that within that 50%

23:08window where they pay 50% of most of

23:10those kind of repairs. Um so

23:13[clears throat] and we'll have regular

23:14building inspections as far as that goes

23:16too. U we're hoping that that 50% clause

23:21is it'll help that in that.

23:23>> So you basically like it's almost like a

23:25self-p policing type of mechanism. They

23:27don't want to probably pay 50% of major

23:30repairs. So that are encouraged to um to

23:34um to keep an eye on things. Okay.

23:37That's an interesting way. the the the

23:39last thing I wanted to know. I guess

23:41there's one is moreformational and then

23:44one is a little more about how much you

23:47you talked about 4% of their annual

23:50revenue I believe. Uh yes, a 4% annual

23:53revenue uh as you know as the lease for

23:55for the property. Um how is that

23:59reported to the city? Is that a like

24:01honor code type of thing or is that

24:02require some documentation and how much

24:06CRA staff is going to take to review

24:08that?

24:09>> They would have to report that annually

24:10as part of their audited financial

24:12statements and then that'll set the the

24:14price based off the revenue stated.

24:16>> And then the last one is more

24:18information to me and probably for the

24:19public. 75% of for 40% AMI of a studio

24:23apartment the rate of that you know just

24:26give us some ballpark so for the public

24:28to understand what we're talking about.

24:30As far as rent,

24:32>> I don't I I don't know if we know this

24:35off the top of our head, but we can get

24:36that for you.

24:37>> I think that would be it's a good you

24:39know piece of information for the public

24:41of like how the city is invest

24:43investment and making affordable places

24:46to live and what you know this is not a

24:48huge space but it's you know it's a

24:50place that is providing housing in our

24:52city at affordable rates and it's a

24:54decent it's a nice place to to be. Um,

24:58so I I think that for context is

25:00important beyond the technicalities of

25:02of the contract, which I think are

25:03important and relevant to us. I think

25:05for the sake of the public, I think it's

25:07important to know that

25:07>> we we've done those calculations as part

25:09of just the negotiation, but I don't

25:11want to quote a dollar amount right now

25:13100% certain. So I don't claim to know

25:16those numbers off the top of my head,

25:17but we will get that to you.

25:19>> Thank you.

25:20>> Any other questions?

25:22I appreciate first of all just

25:24appreciate for us looking at this

25:25because and I appreciate the numbers

25:27that you said that 90% of uh the

25:31residents find permanent housing outside

25:34and that's a great uh metric and I

25:38appreciate that the work that they do in

25:39the providing housing at an affordable

25:42rate for those coming out of

25:44incarcerations and those trying to get

25:45back on their feet and then that they're

25:48able to

25:49hopefully get on their feet 90% of them

25:51that's Great. Moving out. So, appreciate

25:53all the work that the the city and the

25:56the building's done. If there's no other

25:58questions, I will entertain a motion to

26:01adopt the resolution, a contract update.

26:05>> Mr. Chair, I move that the board adopt a

26:08resolution approving the home in Rio

26:10Grand uh lease amendment for income

26:12targeted lodging at 428 West 300 South.

26:16>> Second. I have a motion from board

26:20member Pui, a second from board member

26:21Neighbor Pierce. Any questions,

26:24discussion? All in favor say I.

26:26>> I.

26:27>> I.

26:27>> I'm an I. Opposed. That passes

26:29unanimously. Moving on to item number

26:32five, information of the Rio Grand

26:34District phase one public improvements.

26:36Thanks, Jim.

26:38And we have Wayne Mills coming up and

26:41Marcus Lee

26:44and Cara.

26:56Wayne, the floor's yours.

27:00>> Boy, Danny's not even coming up here.

27:02He's just

27:04Many of you have seen this presentation

27:08before. It's a long presentation. This

27:11thing does not want to move. Um,

27:14so I'm just going to kind of uh I'm

27:16going to go through it very quick. So I

27:18apologize if it seems a little all over

27:20the place, otherwise we'll be here for

27:22an hour. So let's move through this

27:24quickly. Allow time for questions. Um,

27:28next slide, please. So why are we here?

27:31We're here to update the board and

27:33provide opportunity for discussion on

27:35CRA's progress on implementing the Rio

27:38Grand District vision implementation

27:40plan. and [clears throat] also discuss

27:43CRA's approach to construction

27:45maintenance management and parking. Next

27:48slide.

27:51So, just as a little reminder, the Rio

27:53Grand District is located on the western

27:55edge of downtown, sandwiched between the

27:58historic Rio Grand depot and the Salt

28:01Lake Central Station. And the CRA owns

28:04approximately 11 acres within the

28:06district. Next slide.

28:11Uh in 2024, the CRA completed a um draft

28:16Rio Grand District vision and

28:18implementation plan and um at the end of

28:222024, the CRA board um endorsed that

28:26plan.

28:29Next slide.

28:32So just a couple of the uh key concepts

28:35of the Rio Grand District vision plan.

28:38It [clears throat] calls for um breaking

28:39up the uh the two large 10acre blocks

28:42with new streets and plazas. Uh

28:45reconstructing 300 South into a festival

28:48street and new and um constructing new

28:52and upgrading the existing utilities to

28:54support future development. Next slide.

28:58[clears throat] All of that leading to

29:00uh very dense downtown light development

29:02with ground floor businesses to activate

29:05street life.

29:07Next slide please. I said this is going

29:10to be quick. Um

29:14so to start the implementation process

29:16um we worked on schematic design of the

29:19public improvements and we did that for

29:21the entire district as you can see in

29:23the diagram here. Next slide.

29:27We then broke up the uh the district

29:30into two phases. Um and as you can see

29:33phase one is in the orange, phase two in

29:36blue. Um the reason why we broke it into

29:40phases is we wanted to start focusing

29:42our attention and resources on the uh

29:45the infrastructure needed to support USA

29:47climbing which we think is going to be

29:49an important um activator of the

29:52district and um we wanted to ensure that

29:56our public improvements are in place

29:58when uh USA climbing starts coming on

30:01board. Next slide.

30:04So phase one, 40% design. Uh phase one

30:07is what we're here to discuss today. Uh

30:10we moved on to 40% design so we could um

30:14start building uh construction cost

30:16estimates and maintenance cost

30:18estimates. Um as you could see here,

30:20what that includes is two new public

30:23streets, Market Street Wood Court. um

30:27reconstruction of 300 South, a new

30:30public plaza called Arts Alley South,

30:32and then the uh some of the backbone

30:34infrastructure needed to support the

30:36district as a whole. Next slide.

30:40So, just to give you a quick little

30:42overview of the current design. Um

30:45[clears throat]

30:46so, we uh as I mentioned, we have two

30:48new public streets. Uh those are called

30:51Market Street and Woodbmine Court. Those

30:53are what we're referring to as typical

30:56streets. Um, and they follow a typical

30:59design um, scenario with, you know,

31:03travel lanes and or linear travel lanes,

31:06sidewalks, um, street trees and

31:08landscaping. Um, let's go to the next

31:10slide.

31:12We'll just show some of the the images

31:14of what we're talking about here. So,

31:16this is Market Street. As you can see,

31:18those two travel lanes. Um we do have

31:21some wide travel lanes on these two

31:23streets and that's so we can provide uh

31:25fire aerial access for the adjacent

31:28development in the future. So it does

31:30make for some wide streets um kind of

31:34auto travel lane streets. Um we have

31:37unique um furnishings such as light

31:40posts and garbage cans and things of

31:42that nature. Next slide.

31:46And this is [snorts] a pretty picture of

31:47Market Street.

31:49Next slide.

31:52Some of the images of Woodbine Court.

31:54And next slide.

31:57And Woodbine Court here. Woodbine Court

31:59is actually and Market Street are both

32:01adjacent uh to the um USA climbing um

32:07facility, the future USA climbing

32:09facility, and we'll we'll be there to

32:12serve that use as well as improve uh

32:15mobility in the district itself.

32:18Next slide.

32:21So, now we get to more of the the fun

32:23stuff and that's 300 South and Arts

32:26Alley. So, this really is like the heart

32:29of the district. Um, and this is where

32:31the Rio Grand District vision plan calls

32:34for a truly unique experience.

32:36Next slide.

32:39So, Arts Alley South is the southern

32:42component of the arts campus as

32:44identified in the Rio Grand District

32:46vision plan. Next slide.

32:49And that is being designed as more of a

32:52kind of a passive hangout space, a place

32:54where the future residents and um and uh

32:58visitors can can just kind of hang out.

33:02Um another cool feature of this plaza is

33:05you can kind of see in the back there,

33:07that's the Salt Lake Mattress Building,

33:09which you've heard or you've discussed

33:11um in previous meetings. Um excuse me.

33:15That'll be um that's being uh rebuilt as

33:20part of the USA climbing project. Um and

33:23we'll incorporate a ground floor uh cafe

33:27which can then spill out into this

33:28plaza. Next slide.

33:33Um 300 South. So the the Rio Grand

33:36District Van Plan calls uh this street

33:39of future Festival Street. We're going

33:43back and forth on that name. There's a

33:44lot of festival streets happening right

33:46now. So, we're just telling people it's

33:47a really cool plaza you can drive on for

33:50the time being. Um, so this street

33:52really provides a a unique um place that

33:56we could be creative in our design. Next

33:58slide.

34:00You'll see some of the design concepts

34:02here where we really are trying to make

34:05this a unique shared space um with

34:08nonlinear travel lanes um where

34:11pedestrians and cars and autos share the

34:13space um significant tree canopy um

34:19landscaping and then next slide

34:22and the addition of canary lights

34:24overhead to um kind of add to the

34:27environment. Next slide.

34:30Another pretty picture. Next slide.

34:35Um the reason [clears throat] why the

34:36the plan calls it a festival street uh

34:41is because this is a place that we could

34:42hold festivals. And so we're

34:44incorporating a lot of um infrastructure

34:48to help um hold those events like

34:51electrical infrastructure, electrical

34:53outlets and and tent you know anchor

34:56points and things like that.

34:59Next slide.

35:03Okay, we know that uh well, let me back

35:06up. The Rio Grand District plan, one of

35:08the uh vision statements is that this is

35:10the best transitoriented development

35:12site in Utah. And in response, we think

35:15we've designed something special, but we

35:17know that that comes with a cost. So,

35:18we've start putting together our

35:20preliminary cost estimates. Next slide.

35:24Um

35:26so construction we've start putting

35:28together our preliminary construction

35:30cost estimates based on 40% design as

35:34you can see in the slide here um our

35:36initial cost estimates are about 14.5

35:39million for phase one um that does

35:42include before you get too much sticker

35:43shock that does include a 20%

35:46contingency so we're trying to kind of

35:48pad that up so we have some wiggle room

35:51um but we've started looking at funding

35:53sources to um find ways to pay for this.

35:57Uh we currently have about $5 million of

36:00allocated CR funding specifically

36:02allocated towards this um towards this

36:05development. Uh we're also currently

36:07pursuing um a bond and according to our

36:11initial estimates, we could be eligible

36:13for about 7.6 million. Um we know we

36:17would need to go through the process

36:19through the city process for that bond.

36:21Um we've also um had discussions with

36:25our finance department as well as

36:26transportation division on being

36:28included in the

36:31city's [clears throat] uh future impact

36:32fee plan. And according to initial

36:35estimates, we could be eligible for

36:37about a million dollars for the new

36:38streets in that plan. So that brings our

36:41total sources to about 13.7 million,

36:43leaving a gap of just under a million

36:45dollars. Next slide.

36:49And so some of the ways we're looking at

36:51filling the construction gap, [snorts]

36:53uh potentially looking at an increased

36:55bond capacity by including maybe some

36:58additional revenue sources to back the

37:00bond. Um potentially reallocating some

37:03existing CRA funds. Uh we know that that

37:06would take board uh review and approval.

37:09Um then there's potential for value

37:11engineering and that's as we continue to

37:13move forward on further design of maybe

37:15finding some uh less expensive um

37:20construction techniques or materials

37:23and then um who knows possibly

37:25approaching the city for additional city

37:28contribution

37:29um you know through possibly the general

37:32fund or who knows maybe some sales and

37:35use tax or something like that. Next

37:38slide.

37:40I don't know if you'd like to have

37:41discussion points at each one of these

37:44or continue.

37:49>> All done with the presentations outside

37:50the house.

37:51>> Uh that was just I don't know if you

37:52want me to keep going all through the

37:54whole thing or

37:55>> you know let's let's stop right there at

37:57that point because uh any any questions

37:59at this point from the the board? Board

38:02member Carlson.

38:04>> Um I've got a couple questions. I'm

38:07noticing that on um page 10 of the uh

38:11transmitt that was sent over, it said

38:13the gap was 730,000, but I saw in these

38:16documents the gap is 824,000

38:19or 820ish,000.

38:22So, I wanted to understand what was the

38:24the difference in the numbers that we

38:26were seeing.

38:28>> Oh, I apologize. I have to go back and

38:29look at that. I don't have that pulled

38:31up. Okay.

38:32>> Um we did when we initially

38:35um

38:37were putting these numbers together, we

38:40actually we got some additional

38:42information a little later and that had

38:43to do with electrical infrastructure. So

38:46I don't think that got all the way, you

38:47know, into these numbers.

38:49>> Okay.

38:49>> Um and so that's where that addiction

38:52additional uh cost basically came from

38:55is that we ended up putting in that

38:57electrical infrastructure money.

38:59>> Okay. Okay. So, we're now it's a gap of

39:01about 820,000 or so.

39:04>> Yeah. And this again, this based on 40%

39:06design, so we know we're early in that

39:07process.

39:08>> Okay.

39:08>> Yep.

39:09>> Um the next question I had is um

39:14thinking about um USA climbing as an

39:17anchor tenant um for the Rio Grand um

39:21district. And I'm wondering if we've got

39:23any updates on how, you know,

39:25fundraising is going for them, any

39:27updates about um how they're progressing

39:29on on that timeline.

39:32>> Yeah, we we meet with USA climbing about

39:35every 3 weeks or so. Um they are

39:38actively pursuing funding. They're not

39:40quite there yet. Um as far as exact

39:43numbers, I'm not sure. We um we

39:47sometimes get some general ideas, but um

39:51but as far as them continuing to move

39:54forward, they are very serious about

39:56moving forward. They have active

39:57building permit plans in now. Um they're

40:00going through the building permit review

40:02process and we're hoping that, you know,

40:04they'll be able to actually pull their

40:06building permit. This is a bit of a

40:09guess because I'm kind of working on

40:10some other things with that with our

40:12public improvements, but hopefully in

40:14the next month um which is actually a

40:17pretty critical step because for them

40:20that also helps in their fundraising um

40:23where they can show that they have an

40:25active building permit ready to roll. So

40:29um they are actively pursuing and and

40:32moving as fast as they they can.

40:34>> Okay.

40:36And then just sorry one more question.

40:38Um looking at uh going back to the the

40:41gap just you know surfacing you're going

40:44to hear me council members talk about

40:46when we've got a gap and we've got to

40:47fill from fund balance just the reality

40:51that based on the last budget amendment

40:53we received our general fund balance was

40:55at 11.14%.

40:57And so as we think about moving through

40:59the year and think about creative ways

41:01to fill the gaps it's helpful for us to

41:03keep that in mind. Thank you.

41:06former pui.

41:08>> Yeah. Uh thank you. I you know on US USA

41:13climbing do we have any estimated

41:16timeline from the process? I know that

41:18that's hard to commit to something but

41:19like it will be nice for for us on the

41:22community also to know what what are we

41:24aiming what what is the wish there as

41:27far as when they can break ground. So

41:30their their wish to break ground would

41:33be spring of next year.

41:35>> Okay. Okay. So

41:37>> um that's what we're actually all

41:38working towards is to try to get to that

41:40point.

41:41>> That's helpful.

41:42>> Yeah.

41:42>> Uh now I I see the renderings that you

41:45have about the street typology and how

41:48we envision this area to be a festival

41:51uh street and uh that's great. Um I do

41:57um some of them are just I mean in some

42:00ways basic I'm not saying that as a

42:02negative thing. I'm saying that that's

42:03expected from an area that doesn't have

42:06any infrastructure right now. We have no

42:08curbon or gutter nothing. So this is

42:11good. Uh basic is good in this case. Uh

42:13you know the the the festival street

42:17that you envisioned that has this uh

42:20share the road the cool plaza to drive

42:22on area. Um, I love the concept as you

42:27it's presented. I Is that a plaza that

42:30is expected for drivers to use when

42:33there is no festivals or anything like

42:34that to use on a constant basis?

42:37>> Correct.

42:38>> Okay.

42:38>> And by the concept I love, but when we

42:43all share the road, um, you know,

42:45usually cars take over and and I'm not

42:48saying that they just take over. they

42:51you know when you don't know when people

42:52are expected to cross or where bikes

42:54supposed to be and cars supposed to stay

42:57I worry that we're going to have a lot

42:58of conflict between those three and

43:00there is um I'm have legitimate concerns

43:04about public safety um you know ensuring

43:07that we um that the the concept plans

43:12match with vision zero as we have it you

43:14know as a call in the city that that we

43:16have uh you know all the bike safety

43:19improve improvements that we made that

43:20there is some level of

43:23uh coordination with those goals. So

43:26then we're not creating a street that

43:28very beautiful but potentially could

43:30create you know a lot of damage to

43:33individuals or um put a lot of people in

43:36pain. Um so and then the so just a

43:40thought um certainly the the architects

43:42and the designers will have to review

43:45that. Um, but there's two buildings in

43:48the immediate area that are key to this

43:50district in so many ways to me. Uh,

43:52that's the Rio Grand depot. Um, and the

43:55central station. Um, and not that we

43:58need them to to be anything but what

44:01they are right now or what they are

44:02planned to be because we are, you know,

44:05we have a clean slate pretty much in

44:07this area as it is. And we are, you

44:10know, putting a lot of things in here,

44:11you know, anchor, housing, you know,

44:14commercial, hotels potentially. I mean,

44:16like parking. I mean, there's a lot of

44:17pieces that are going to be in this

44:19district that in some ways is going to

44:21be a mini city, right? Um, but to me,

44:24the success of this area too goes

44:27handinhand with what this the state is

44:30thinking about the central station and

44:31how that talks to this area. uh as

44:34people move through uh the station and

44:37onto the station and also what the state

44:40is thinking about the Rio Grand depot

44:42because you know those are key pieces of

44:45this neighborhood. Um certainly the name

44:47of it right um but have we have

44:50coordination in some ways of like what

44:52or or updates from what both the state

44:56and both of these agencies are doing

44:58with these u buildings. um updates

45:03somewhat. Um so UTA is working on

45:07redevelopment of this the Salt Lake

45:09Central Station area and we have had

45:12conversations with them. We've actually

45:14had our um design team coordinate with

45:18their design team because that's a a

45:20really kind of critical thing we're

45:23trying to achieve is making sure that

45:27our work kind of blends seamlessly with

45:30what they're doing in the future. I

45:32can't really provide an update on

45:35exactly where they are with that, but if

45:38we get to my last slide, I'll I can show

45:40to you how we're trying to continue that

45:42coordination because what we're actually

45:43I'll just say it now. We're um we're

45:45actually looking into

45:48potentially into entering into like a

45:50parking district um shared parking

45:52district with UTA considering they're

45:55doing their development. we're doing

45:56ours instead of looking at this in an

45:58isolated kind of scenario that we work

46:01together to at least kind of try to

46:03solve that parking puzzle. Um so there

46:06is coordination happening there. Um, as

46:08far as the, uh, historic Rio Grand

46:10depot, um, University of Utah is

46:13currently in control of that building

46:15and, um, in meetings that we've been

46:18having with them about some other

46:20property that they own within the

46:22district, um, they have

46:26they would really like to do something

46:28with that building. They're just not

46:30quite sure what that is yet. Um, and

46:33they've, you know, in our discussions

46:35with them, they've even said

46:38help us to try to kind of figure out

46:40what we can do. Um there's some limits.

46:43It's a a historic building and so there

46:46are some limits based on um you know the

46:49historic guidelines. Um and so you know

46:53we hope to continue to try to be a

46:55partner with them and help them try to

46:57find a a a use for that building that

47:00works for that whole area. One of the

47:02critical things, one of the things that

47:03we really want to achieve is getting

47:05permeability through that building so

47:07that we can get 400 West, you can walk

47:10from 400 West into the district.

47:12>> That makes sense.

47:12>> Um, and so, uh, we're going to continue

47:16to try to be a partner with the

47:18University of Utah on on their plans for

47:20that building. Um I mean and we also

47:24have the city's um future investment in

47:28500 West which is also another you know

47:31really critical partnership and we are

47:35we the CRA have been um in conversations

47:39with public lands and those that are

47:41working on that project so we can make

47:43sure that those projects work together.

47:45>> Yeah. that that that that to me is

47:47essential. And there's a lot of people

47:49walking towards Central Station right

47:52now on the side of the road and a gravel

47:54little pit between the road and the

47:57chain link fans and on the other side

47:59there is barely sidewalks and you know I

48:03think like how people move in the area

48:04is essential for the success of our you

48:07know piece of land personally to the

48:09state as well. So thank you.

48:11>> Thank you board.

48:14Um, okay. Thanks. Um, I see here that

48:18you are planning to use a bond in the

48:21amount of a little over $7 million.

48:24Um, I'm assuming that's a revenue bond

48:27that the tax increment will be used to

48:29pay back.

48:32>> Correct.

48:33>> And so then on the next slide, it says

48:36that you're looking at increasing bond

48:38capacity. So the number that you have

48:40there, the 7.6, 6 was that arrived at

48:44because that maximizes the bond capacity

48:48that we have for what we project to

48:51build there.

48:52>> Correct. Based on um our HTRZ tax

48:55increment projections

48:57and what we we expect to collect that is

49:01um an amount that's sustainable given

49:04all the constraints with revenue bonds

49:06are a little riskier. So underwriters

49:08require a little more coverage which

49:10means you have to you know generate a

49:11little more increment. Um

49:14>> so is that at the is that at the top of

49:15what you would consider prudent to

49:18pursue or are we well within I as I'm

49:21looking this is uh phase one

49:25design. I I'm looking ahead to phase two

49:29in the pictures and it looks like we

49:30have a lot of public investment there as

49:33well. And so if all of our tax increment

49:36is being used to pay back a bond here,

49:39then

49:41and we have close to a $1 million gap

49:44already. Phase two presents nothing but

49:48an additional gap.

49:49>> Yeah. Our HRZ has two phases. So we kind

49:53of tied phase one tax increment to phase

49:56one public improvements. And then um

49:58this analysis did not consider

50:01additional revenue like if we were to

50:02contribute a portion of future ground

50:04lease revenue that could help.

50:06>> So this is a prudent this is a prudent

50:08amount to be pursuing in a bond. This is

50:10in no way maximizing our bond capacity

50:13and phase 2 will open up other

50:16opportunities because that has not yet

50:18been accounted for.

50:20>> Correct. And uh phase 2 design is not at

50:22the point where we know how much it

50:24costs. So, we're just taking it.

50:26>> Okay. Thank you for that clarification.

50:28Um, the only other comment I have is

50:30when we talk about passive walkthrough

50:32places, especially in this geography, I

50:35also hear that we are tacitly complying

50:38with the need to address homelessness in

50:41meaningful ways because it becomes the

50:44next battleground if we do not have

50:46meaningful ways to mitigate the number

50:49of people relying on currently land to

50:53sustain their own lives. And I don't

50:55really love the idea of just gentrifying

50:58people out. This is a tacit agreement

51:01that we are partners in fixing

51:03homelessness.

51:06>> Thank you for neighbor Pierce.

51:10>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um just building

51:12on some of the questions that my

51:14colleagues had. Um, can you just walk me

51:17through the thinking of why you want

51:19cars and bikes and pedestrians on this

51:23road? Your book ended with the Rio Grand

51:26depot and the train station. Why not

51:29just go fullon pedestrian?

51:33>> That's a great question. That was

51:34something that we batted around a lot.

51:37Um, and I I think uh our design team

51:41made some really good points in that it

51:44is going to take some time for this

51:46district to be fully activated. And so

51:49we're going to want development to come

51:51in in phases. And as that development

51:54comes in, especially uh as we start to

51:57get

51:59um our ground lease commercial uses, um

52:03they like to see that there's activity

52:05on the street and having those

52:08automobiles

52:09go up and down the street um will kind

52:12of give that visual presence and the

52:15activation. So, you know, we we looked

52:18at all kinds of things. We looked at,

52:19okay, what if we just close down half

52:22the street to automobiles and what if we

52:25um you know, close it down completely

52:27and how does that work? You know, we

52:29also have a situation where while we

52:32don't want this street to be considered

52:35um this kind of fast pass through

52:37street, we do want to make sure that

52:39we're not inhibiting mobility um and

52:43circulation anymore than than it might

52:46be. I mean, these are going to be, you

52:48know, one one lane each direction. There

52:50are going to be high capacity streets.

52:52Cars are going to have to travel slowly.

52:54So, we wanted people and can still

52:57circulate throughout the district.

52:59I guess the only other question I had

53:02was just on sequencing and I don't know

53:04how development works. So you're waiting

53:08for USA climbing

53:10to build up. You're doing the

53:14development of the streetcape in tandem

53:16with that or Okay.

53:18>> Correct. Yeah. We um you know that's one

53:21thing that we don't want to do is is

53:23invest and put all these improvements in

53:26um and have it a big dead space. But we

53:29do want to make sure that we are working

53:31together with USA Climbing and we meet

53:33we're going to be coordinating our

53:35construction schedules. There's going to

53:36be a sequencing. We want to make sure

53:38that you know as far as just what we're

53:41looking at is when USA Climbing starts

53:43to put a shovel in the ground, we're

53:45starting to put utilities in the

53:46roadway. And then as you climbing

53:50continues to get built up, when it gets

53:52to the point where they're not doesn't

53:54look like they're going to really damage

53:56any surface improvements anymore with

53:58their construction, we'll start on the

54:00surface improvements. So we're starting

54:01to to coordinate that. Um so with we get

54:05all the sequencing in place.

54:06>> And what is the next anchor in that

54:10development? So, we have um like I

54:14mentioned earlier, we have 11 acres. Um

54:18we have our development sites solicited

54:22by letters. So, we have three

54:26development sites that we're will be

54:29getting ready um to solicit for

54:31development. Um we call those CD and E.

54:34And basically one is the blue warehouse

54:36site which is just to the south of USA

54:40climbing site on the other side of

54:42Market Street. Um and then the other two

54:45are on the north block sites DNE.

54:48>> Sorry.

54:48>> Wait, I think we we just lost audio on

54:50Zoom. So we need to take a pause here

54:53for a second.

54:53>> Pause just to make sure we're complying

54:55with the Open Meetings Act since that's

54:57the publicly noticed site. So, I'm going

55:00to rely on our tech friends to hopefully

55:03save us. Just a sec.

55:06>> Sorry about that. Thanks.

55:09[music]

55:14[music]

55:29>> [music]

55:34[music]

55:47>> Hey. Hey. Hey.

55:51Hey. Hey. Hey. [music]

55:58[music]

56:08[music]

56:14[music]

56:19[music]

56:31>> [music]

56:34>> Heat. Heat.

56:38[music]

56:54>> [music]

57:02>> Heat. Hey, Heat.

57:05[music]

57:14>> [music]

57:26[music]

57:31[music]

57:54>> Are you serious?

58:17>> [music]

58:26[music]

58:30>> We're back

58:34>> and board member neighbor Pierce, do you

58:36want to reiterate your questions to

58:38Wayne or Rain? Were you in the middle of

58:39the answering your her last statement?

58:45>> I forgot what I asked. Does something

58:47>> remind me what I was saying? Yeah,

58:49[laughter]

58:50>> I I I guess my underlying um question is

58:54are we are we being mindful in how we're

58:59developing along with what we hope the

59:02tenants will come, you know, I just want

59:05to make sure that we're being wise

59:07stewards of those resources.

59:09>> Yes. And that now I remember what we

59:11were talking about is our our future

59:13development phasing. And and so we have

59:15two development and we actually have

59:16three development sites on the north

59:18block which is all part of the phase

59:20two. Um and we will um we're going to

59:24start hopefully solisting

59:27uh for development for two of those

59:29sites. Um

59:32hopefully within the next couple of

59:33months so we can at least start the

59:35conversations with developers. We know

59:38we have some more work to do on the

59:39public improvement design um on that

59:42north block. So um but yeah, we we are

59:46we are thinking ahead all the way to

59:48full buildout of this district.

59:50>> I just don't want to build streets to

59:53nowhere.

59:53>> That's right. Yeah.

59:56Thank you.

59:57I appreciate the questions and uh the

59:59comments and you know it goes back to

1:00:02money uh and board member Carlson made

1:00:06up the point at the very beginning about

1:00:08our fund balance and you know the

1:00:11million dollar $800,000 gap that we show

1:00:13in the beginning but then we have the

1:00:15fundings for you know the annual

1:00:17maintenance

1:00:18uh

1:00:21security

1:00:23infrastructure all those costs wrapped

1:00:25up into

1:00:26new area and uh it brings me back to the

1:00:31point when we were at Detroit and they

1:00:34have gone through multiple uh financial

1:00:37crisis for over the last couple decades

1:00:40and they they uh have seemed to be able

1:00:43to be creative in some of their funding.

1:00:47And I look at our slides here and like

1:00:51uh we always like consider options

1:00:53considering additional city funding.

1:00:57Well, we keep on going to optional

1:00:59additional city funding.

1:01:01We look at bonds, taxpayer money. We

1:01:04look at the uh you know our fund balance

1:01:07that's coming from us and we need to

1:01:10maybe explore other options and other

1:01:13partnerships and other maybe uh ways to

1:01:17bring in funding from outside sources

1:01:19and bring in support from outside

1:01:20sources that will also be be benefiting

1:01:22from that because they'll be generating

1:01:25business for themselves and we will also

1:01:27gain from that because we'll be

1:01:28generating sales tax revenue from that.

1:01:31So, how do we look outside the city's

1:01:34pocketbook and other places pocketbook

1:01:36and other places uh uh assets to fund

1:01:41these

1:01:43great places? This festival street is is

1:01:45a beautiful idea. It shouldn't just

1:01:47always just rest on the city's uh

1:01:50shoulders to support it all. How do we

1:01:53get the support from those local

1:01:55businesses, philanthropists, other other

1:01:57entities? And so I'm kind of uh giving

1:02:01you the opportunity to look outside of

1:02:04what we normally look at for funding on

1:02:06these type of projects and uh love to

1:02:09for you to come back with some ideas on

1:02:11that. This is a great starting point

1:02:12here, but it also shows that we have

1:02:14gaps and we we can probably fund them in

1:02:17other ways that we don't normally do at

1:02:20the present moment because we've always

1:02:21looked at the city to do all that

1:02:23funding or I should say the city meaning

1:02:26the city's residents because what we're

1:02:29the taxpayers.

1:02:30So

1:02:32if there's no other further discussion

1:02:34on this one, do you have any other

1:02:37>> I I can just sum up kind of the

1:02:39remainder of the presentation because it

1:02:42all does come down to money. And the

1:02:43one, you know, thing is with with us

1:02:46owning as much property as we do in this

1:02:48district. As you know, some of the other

1:02:51things in the report discuss, we we're

1:02:54not planning on selling our property,

1:02:56but entering into ground lease uh with

1:02:58developers, which um allows us to

1:03:01actually potentially take that money and

1:03:03put it right back into the district for

1:03:05management and maintenance. Um and um we

1:03:10also plan on collecting district

1:03:12management fees which is similar to like

1:03:14a CAM fee situation which then goes back

1:03:17into with board approval back into the

1:03:20district. So we are looking at all of

1:03:22these funding mechanisms to help put the

1:03:25money back into the district to take

1:03:26care of the district.

1:03:28>> All right. Thank you. And the next item

1:03:30on the topic is the Perry block which is

1:03:33also part of the funding stream for this

1:03:36this area right here too. So it it's

1:03:39they're all they're tied together. So

1:03:42thanks a lot Wayne. Appreciate it.

1:03:43>> Thank you

1:03:44>> Marcus. Thanks.

1:03:46And now we'll move on to item number six

1:03:50resolution the real property disposition

1:03:52for the Perry block. We got Kate, we

1:03:55have Christina, and we have Austin.

1:04:02Okay,

1:04:07great. The board will receive a briefing

1:04:09about the terms of the disposition to

1:04:11Ulysesy's development for the CRA owned

1:04:14property at 100 South between 600 West

1:04:17and Danzy Drive. The developer proposal

1:04:21requests a discounted land sale price at

1:04:24the Perry block to support the creation

1:04:26of home ownership, affordable housing,

1:04:29urban farming, and artist space. There

1:04:32are several policy items for the board

1:04:34to consider here due to the the

1:04:38significant decrease in price that the

1:04:41developer is requesting. Um, the board

1:04:43may wish to discuss whether the

1:04:45development qualifies for the property

1:04:47price discount greater than 10% per the

1:04:50real property disposition policy.

1:04:53Additionally, the board may discuss what

1:04:55safeguards you would like the CRA to per

1:04:58to include or impose if granted the the

1:05:03proposed project or excuse me to um

1:05:08ensure that the pro proposed project

1:05:10elements are included. If the land

1:05:13disposition price is is um approved, um

1:05:18the CRA board has the option to take

1:05:21action action at its discretion, not

1:05:24take a action or to propose amend terms

1:05:28if if they would like to. With that,

1:05:30I'll turn it over to the CRA staff.

1:05:33Okay. Thanks, Kate. Um you can go ahead

1:05:36and go to the next slide. Thank you.

1:05:38Okay, so hi everyone. Um, so on March

1:05:4217th, the CRA issued a request for

1:05:44proposals for 2.33 acres of CRA owned

1:05:47property in the depot district project

1:05:49area, which we are calling the Perry

1:05:51block. Um, we received two responses and

1:05:54we are here to request consideration of

1:05:57a resolution for the CRA to sell this

1:06:00property to Ulyses Development Group for

1:06:02$2.5 million.

1:06:04And um in accordance with our CRA

1:06:07disposition policy, the board must

1:06:09approve sales that are discounted

1:06:10greater than 10% of appraised value.

1:06:13Next slide, please.

1:06:16Um so here is an image of the the

1:06:19property as it is today. Next slide,

1:06:21please.

1:06:24So like I mentioned, um this is in the

1:06:26depot district area. It's located on 100

1:06:28South. Um it's 2.33 acres, an assemblage

1:06:32of uh four parcels. It's currently being

1:06:35used for vacant land, but there is also

1:06:37um some occupied self- storage and the

1:06:40zoning is gateway mixed use. Um it's

1:06:42directly adjacent to the Utah Arts

1:06:45Alliance and the Metro Music Hall. Next

1:06:48slide, please.

1:06:50So, this particular property has had a

1:06:52long history of past planning and

1:06:54visioning efforts starting back in 1998

1:06:57with the depot district project area

1:06:59plan. Um it was also part of the

1:07:01downtown master plan in 2016. uh the

1:07:04station the Salt Lake Central station

1:07:06area plan in 2019 and most recently it

1:07:09was included in Salt Lake Central's HTRZ

1:07:11application. It had a separate design

1:07:14workshop um uh for the 100 South design

1:07:17workshop in 2024. And so as part of all

1:07:21of these planning efforts, there were

1:07:22certain um goals and visions for this

1:07:25area of the depot district. And this

1:07:27included um affordable housing and um

1:07:31accentuating the adjacent artist

1:07:32community as well as um sort of

1:07:35accentuating the urban farming that was

1:07:37currently existing there with Wasatch

1:07:38Community Gardens.

1:07:40Next slide please.

1:07:43So um we took all of these sort these

1:07:45visions and we put them into the RFP

1:07:47that was released back in March and um

1:07:50this is showing here the requirements

1:07:52and the preferences that we had put in

1:07:54the RFP that included a minimum of 116

1:07:58homes. Um we required that half of those

1:08:01would be for sale that there would also

1:08:03be artist space um that they complied

1:08:06with the sustainability policy. There

1:08:08was art installations, an elevated

1:08:10design, and a reduced parking strategy.

1:08:13We also um added preference points for

1:08:16urban gardening, um family-sized homes,

1:08:19starter home pricing, live work homes,

1:08:21timeliness, and also increased

1:08:23sustainability.

1:08:25Next slide, please. Thank you. Um so,

1:08:28like I said, the RFP had been released

1:08:30in March. Um then then there was a staff

1:08:32review as well as an advisory committee

1:08:35evaluation and ranking. Um there was a

1:08:37recommendation for one of the proposals

1:08:39and that was forwarded on to the

1:08:41executive director.

1:08:43Next slide, please. So I'll have Austin

1:08:46um talk about the proposal that was

1:08:49ranked highest. Thank you.

1:08:51>> All right. So like Christina said, I'm

1:08:53going to talk about the proposal that we

1:08:55forwarded to you the board members. The

1:08:58this was proposal was ranked highest out

1:09:00of two proposals. So here's an image, a

1:09:03rendering of this proposal for the

1:09:05development of the Perry block by Ulysus

1:09:07Development Company. This proposal has

1:09:11two main structures. The first one is a

1:09:14multif family building of seven stories

1:09:17that's on the western part of the block.

1:09:19And then the second is town homes on the

1:09:22eastern part of the block. Next slide,

1:09:24please. Here's a rendering from the

1:09:28ground level of what the multif family

1:09:30building looks like. Next slide.

1:09:34And some facads, some elevations. Next

1:09:38slide.

1:09:41And the site plan.

1:09:44And I won't go into too much detail.

1:09:46Next slide.

1:09:48So here's the proposal in numbers.

1:09:50Here's the critical points.

1:09:52So the the applicant came to us with the

1:09:55proposal of 116 homes, which was our

1:09:58minimum, 58 of them being for sale,

1:10:01which again is our minimum, 34 of them

1:10:04being familysized.

1:10:06The proposal projects home sale prices

1:10:08of 365,000 to 440,000 and those come in

1:10:12both stacked flat condo and town home

1:10:15form from 2 to three bedrooms.

1:10:18The apartment rents are projected to be

1:10:20between 12250 to,900 for studio to

1:10:24three-bedroom apartments. There is

1:10:2610,000 square ft of artist space

1:10:28proposed, which is again a minimum.

1:10:31There's community gardens proposed and

1:10:34two prospective tenants that are on

1:10:36board, Utah Arts Alliance and Wasach

1:10:39Community Gardens. and the developer

1:10:41proposes a sale price of 2.5 million and

1:10:45no additional financial requests from

1:10:48the CRA. Next slide.

1:10:51All right, so let's talk about the

1:10:53offer.

1:10:54This piece of land appraised for a

1:10:57little over $12 million in January of

1:10:59this year or $120 per square foot. The

1:11:03developer is asking to purchase it for

1:11:052.5 million. So that's why we're

1:11:08bringing this proposal to you. Next

1:11:10slide.

1:11:13These are the reasons why the developer

1:11:16believes it can only afford 2.5 million.

1:11:19So the first is the state of the multif

1:11:21family market. You are all very aware

1:11:24that rents have dropped, vacancy rates

1:11:26are up, and people are not starting

1:11:29multif family developments like they

1:11:31used to be. you know, we're we're seeing

1:11:33student housing, maybe a few multif

1:11:36family deals uh around the city, but

1:11:39it's just not going gang busters like it

1:11:41was years ago.

1:11:43The second reason they're proposing a

1:11:45lower price is the RFP priorities. So,

1:11:48first of all, we're requiring housing in

1:11:50a time when people don't want to build

1:11:52housing.

1:11:54We are requiring condos when people

1:11:57don't want to build condos. And then we

1:11:59also uh we also had a preference for

1:12:02things like urban gardening which takes

1:12:04space and doesn't produce revenue. So

1:12:07all of those things really brought down

1:12:09the sales price. Um the third one is

1:12:12access limitations. If you look at the

1:12:14Perry Block site, there used to be a

1:12:17street on the north side, Danzy Drive,

1:12:20that Rocky Mountain Power purchased and

1:12:22closed down. And so now developers have

1:12:25to build a street um on that north side

1:12:28to access the the full potential of the

1:12:31block for fire access. So that eats up

1:12:34developable space.

1:12:36And then the the fourth reason they're

1:12:40they think they need this discount is

1:12:42because of density restrictions. So they

1:12:45chose to build some of those condo units

1:12:47in town home form, which is a lower

1:12:50density product in this neighborhood. So

1:12:52that that eats up buildable land. And

1:12:55then they would rely on a low-inccome

1:12:57housing tax credit award to build the

1:12:59multif family units which has a dollar

1:13:02amount cap with the 9% LITC. So there's

1:13:06a lot of reasons here why why they're

1:13:09proposing this lower sales price. Those

1:13:11are the main ones.

1:13:13Next slide.

1:13:16And so we're simply bringing it to you

1:13:19as the board to make this decision. if

1:13:22you want to go ahead with this sale or

1:13:24if you want to deny the sale and then we

1:13:28can talk about how we would reissue this

1:13:30RFP in a different form to yield a

1:13:32different result.

1:13:35Next slide.

1:13:37So, let's talk about it. Thanks.

1:13:39>> Thank you, Austin. Thank you, Christina.

1:13:41Bo,

1:13:43>> thank you. This certainly offers a lot

1:13:46and saying an outright no to it would be

1:13:49pretty difficult. Um, but a $10 million

1:13:54reduction also is a ridiculous. So, is

1:13:57there a possibility that instead of

1:14:00relinquishing or essentially gifting $10

1:14:02million that we could become a joint

1:14:04venture and have 10 million in equity as

1:14:07part of the cash stack?

1:14:10>> Yeah, there's certainly potential we

1:14:12could ask that of the developer. That

1:14:14would entirely be my preference and that

1:14:16when it starts to generate revenue then

1:14:18the city would be able to draw

1:14:19unrestricted funds as in direct

1:14:21proportion to that investment as a

1:14:24proportion of the total cash stack

1:14:25investment

1:14:30>> young.

1:14:32So, in building on board member Petro's

1:14:36um request, I think one of the things

1:14:38that I'm missing is how each of those

1:14:43pressures translates to a $10 million

1:14:47incentive. Like I I'm very clear that

1:14:50it's like yes, those are challenges. Um

1:14:53but how that the math works to get

1:14:56there, that's what I'm struggling with.

1:14:59And so without like additional

1:15:02information within that space um to me

1:15:06like it's interesting um you as part of

1:15:09the presentation I heard the word

1:15:11discount and I'm like whoa this is this

1:15:14is way more than a discount um just in

1:15:16terms of you know looking at it from

1:15:19market viability that was scoped in

1:15:22January to where we are today. Um so

1:15:24without additional like numbers where

1:15:28there is a clear breakdown of like here

1:15:30is how that pencils into the total

1:15:33project I I can't stand behind like that

1:15:37huge of a of a decrease um based on the

1:15:41information that we have.

1:15:45>> Yeah. And I can speak to the numbers

1:15:47whenever you want to talk about that

1:15:52if it's good. So, so, so the let's go

1:15:55back a couple slides if we can, please.

1:16:05Yeah. So, so the the biggest the biggest

1:16:08reason why um the the the bids came in

1:16:12where they did is because how few units

1:16:15people can build on this site. So, if

1:16:17you look at the per unit offer for this

1:16:20land, these guys are offering about I

1:16:23think it was like 23,000 per unit. Um,

1:16:26if you look at all the multifamily deals

1:16:29that we've lent on for the past 5 years,

1:16:31I just did this this morning, on

1:16:33average, developers were spending

1:16:35$29,000 per unit in land. And so, that

1:16:39the per unit offer is not unreasonable.

1:16:42It's just unfortunately

1:16:45this plan

1:16:47>> just doesn't build a lot of units and

1:16:49and if they were able to increase

1:16:51density maybe they could afford more.

1:16:54>> Can I ask a followup? So that's helpful.

1:16:57I guess then my my disconnect is how is

1:17:00it valued at a $12 million property

1:17:06>> if that constraint

1:17:09is the key factor? Like that's where I'm

1:17:12I'm just I I again I can't get there

1:17:16from a numerical standpoint.

1:17:19>> Yeah. And the way that the property is

1:17:20valued is through an appraisal using

1:17:23sales comps. And what they're looking at

1:17:26is not how many units can you fit in the

1:17:28land. They're looking at what's the size

1:17:30of the parcel and what zoning is it

1:17:33under

1:17:34>> and what has similar land sold for. And

1:17:37so that they're not looking at like, oh,

1:17:39Danzy Drive is sold and they have to

1:17:41create an access point. Um, and so

1:17:44that's how the that's how the appraisers

1:17:46came up with the $120 per square foot

1:17:49price, which when you look at comparable

1:17:52land is what it's been listing and

1:17:55trading for, but it it just the

1:17:57appraisal didn't factor in, you know,

1:17:59the street and and these RFP

1:18:02requirements that we placed on the land.

1:18:04I I think a good point to look at here

1:18:06is the highest and best use isn't

1:18:09necessarily what the C CRA requested in

1:18:12their RFP. They were looking for some

1:18:15public benefits. So potentially if the

1:18:19board wanted to see a more realistic for

1:18:23what we're asking for with the RFP um

1:18:28proposal would be an updated appraisal.

1:18:31that would be an option to see what it

1:18:34would be valued at.

1:18:35>> And honestly, like that that would help

1:18:38me because and even if that appraisal

1:18:41was able to take in some of those

1:18:43variables you just outlined into

1:18:45consideration. Um it's it's the large

1:18:49differential that I'm I'm struggling

1:18:52with. And to be really transparent that

1:18:55when asked by residents like why I I am

1:19:00not able to currently explain and I I

1:19:03just feel like I would need again

1:19:05additional like you know information or

1:19:08a more updated appraisal with which to

1:19:10be able to to kind of draw to that

1:19:13middle ground where in looking at all of

1:19:17the constraints that we're facing

1:19:19related to the market factors that

1:19:20you've outlined as well as the community

1:19:23benefits that were able to kind of pull

1:19:25those pieces together into a package

1:19:28that that makes sense and that I I could

1:19:31rationalize for folks who had questions.

1:19:34>> Yeah, I personally I agree, Mr. Chair.

1:19:36Thank you for the quick question there.

1:19:38I I think that maybe the appraisal is a

1:19:42fictional number that really, you know,

1:19:44doesn't match with the reality of what

1:19:46we see in this block. Um I I'm very

1:19:50curious about the access the fire access

1:19:51because that changes you know that

1:19:53changes the development even if it was

1:19:56you know if we we ask a developer build

1:19:58whatever you can build give me a

1:20:00proposal that will influence how many

1:20:02units they can stack in there um I I do

1:20:07want something that it's more um more

1:20:09accurate to decide if this discount uh

1:20:13if a discount is appropriate. I I do um

1:20:16but you know I think the the to the

1:20:19conversation the amenities that we're

1:20:21asking 10,000 square foot of art space

1:20:23you know like you know I want to like

1:20:26dig into the numbers if the gap is this

1:20:28big right like is that something that we

1:20:30may be willing to compromise for example

1:20:32and what would that give us uh are we

1:20:34are we willing to change some of this

1:20:36this equation between house ownership

1:20:39and rent you know and what would that

1:20:40give us uh but certainly I think the the

1:20:43starting question miss the the appraisal

1:20:45for me. So, I'm not ready to move

1:20:46forward with with this discount.

1:20:49>> Thank you, Peter. One last comment.

1:20:52>> What does it do to comps in the area

1:20:55when we reduce the cost of the land? Are

1:20:58the other parcels in the area then

1:21:00devalued comparably in accordance with

1:21:03what we've sold it for?

1:21:05>> That's that's a good question. So, our

1:21:07our sales, I don't know if they'd be

1:21:09considered an an armslength transaction.

1:21:11When you're looking at appraisals and

1:21:13they're looking at sales comps, they

1:21:16look to see whether there are any weird

1:21:17conditions associated with the sale. And

1:21:20certainly, our land sales include weird

1:21:22conditions which change the pricing

1:21:24wildly. So, I don't know if this would

1:21:27devalue land. Most likely not. Okay.

1:21:32appreciate that everyone's comments and

1:21:34uh I think we're all kind of in

1:21:35agreement that the the delta between the

1:21:3712 and the 2.5 is is is kind of too

1:21:39great to say we want to move forward

1:21:41with this. Uh and I I think we also back

1:21:46to my earlier conversation about uh you

1:21:48know stretching our imagination and

1:21:50different things here. We've we set

1:21:52because the board we set the priorities

1:21:53here. We wanted home ownership. We

1:21:56wanted uh this art space, the land and

1:21:58everything else. And we kind of set our

1:22:00position of what we could build on this

1:22:02property because we didn't want high

1:22:03density a big apartment building was

1:22:06studios and onebs. But we also were

1:22:09looking at the home ownership. But with

1:22:10that, you know, I look at this location

1:22:13and go, is that really a great place for

1:22:15home ownership? Back to your point about

1:22:17Danzy and the railroad tracks right

1:22:18there. You're basically uh 80% of your

1:22:22360° is blocked from a railroad track to

1:22:25to to any access anywhere else. And I

1:22:27look at this saying, is this more of a

1:22:29place where uh we could also uh look at

1:22:32our wealth building? We've talked about

1:22:34wealth building is also an avenue for

1:22:36people to

1:22:38we can help them out, save money so that

1:22:40they can't actually afford a place

1:22:42because these these homes even though uh

1:22:46they're half of what our current

1:22:49average in our average home price is,

1:22:52it's still an expensive house. and to

1:22:54buy that there. How about we look at

1:22:56different avenues to maybe boost up that

1:22:59sale price from 2.5 million to somewhere

1:23:01else and look at the mixture of homes

1:23:03from home ownership to maybe wealth

1:23:06building and looking at the the model

1:23:08that the give group we've used for the

1:23:10good group on that mixture of uh units

1:23:13there. I'm not going to say that I would

1:23:17agree with uh would change anything

1:23:18else, but I would I'd like to see the

1:23:20mixture of the the our priorities and

1:23:22see how that would change that price

1:23:24that we could get out of them.

1:23:26>> Again, taking it back to allowing you to

1:23:28take it back to the drawing board on on

1:23:30that those priorities and that the

1:23:32requirements.

1:23:33>> Yeah. And and just out of anticipation,

1:23:36we came up with three ways we think we

1:23:38could increase the sales price on a new

1:23:40RFP. And if you could pull up the last

1:23:43slide, please. It's after the questions

1:23:45one. Um, we'd like to run these past you

1:23:48and just get your feedback

1:23:51if we're to re-release this RFP.

1:23:59So, here here are three main ways we

1:24:01think we could increase the sales price.

1:24:02So, the first is if we eliminate public

1:24:04benefits. The forale housing one was a

1:24:07big sticking point with a lot of

1:24:08developers. You know, there there's a

1:24:10lot of reasons why people aren't

1:24:12building condos and don't want to build

1:24:13condos. If we eliminated that, we we'd

1:24:17have more offers, higher sales price.

1:24:19Um, if we eliminated housing requirement

1:24:21altogether, you it's a tough time to

1:24:23build housing, we could get higher

1:24:25offers. Um, if we just held it for

1:24:28stronger market conditions, who knows

1:24:30how many years, but we we could we might

1:24:33get a stronger offer there, too. So,

1:24:35it'd be good to get your feedback on

1:24:36what you think.

1:24:37>> You know what? We're gonna have to delay

1:24:39on our feedback there. But you you have

1:24:41our initial feedback is we're not going

1:24:43to approve it at this point.

1:24:45>> So that's the that's the initial

1:24:47feedback. We'll have to come back to And

1:24:49the only reason I say that because we

1:24:50got we're on a time.

1:24:51>> Can we just ask what's what's the

1:24:53timeline though? This offer doesn't

1:24:55exist forever. No developer just sits

1:24:58here with this offer. What's the

1:24:59timeline that you're working with?

1:25:02We have to

1:25:03>> I don't know if there's a timeline where

1:25:04we have to say yes or no, but um it

1:25:06would be good to know if we should

1:25:08re-release this.

1:25:10>> Yeah, we we'll have to have another uh

1:25:12conversation. We can have a CRA meeting

1:25:14in in a board meeting also in a city

1:25:17council meeting. We just need to move on

1:25:19to our next uh bill item. So,

1:25:22>> Mr. Chair, can we like a prop proposal

1:25:24to bring this this back to the next

1:25:25meeting and hopefully may maybe as

1:25:27before the next month, but

1:25:29>> could we do on it? Yeah, let's do that

1:25:32>> if possible. Uh, you know, the next

1:25:34meeting.

1:25:35>> Yes. Can we do that? Danny's shaking his

1:25:37head. Yes.

1:25:39>> Sure.

1:25:39>> Perfect. Put him on the spot. Thanks,

1:25:42guys. Thanks for seeing it. Thanks,

1:25:43Austin.

1:25:44>> Okay.

1:25:44>> I would like to smoke.

1:25:46>> All right. We have uh the crunch time

1:25:48here. So, we're going to move on to the

1:25:50other next item, which is the

1:25:51resolution, the commercial development

1:25:52loan program funding allocations. We got

1:25:5710 minutes or so. This will be a speed

1:25:59rush.

1:26:00At the table we have Allison. Oh,

1:26:02Austin, you're staying up here with us.

1:26:05>> Yeah.

1:26:06>> And I think the administration is

1:26:08looking for approval on this item.

1:26:10>> Yes.

1:26:11>> Ty and Hayden.

1:26:13I will uh cut back my introduction to

1:26:17just say uh repeat what you said which

1:26:19is basically that this is the board's

1:26:21opportunity to review the proposal

1:26:22submitted to the CRA's notice of funding

1:26:24availability or NOA for gap financing

1:26:27awards offered through the commercial

1:26:28development loan program. These loans

1:26:30are available to commercial and mixeduse

1:26:32developments within CRA project areas.

1:26:34And now I'll turn it over to Taylor so

1:26:36she can go through the rest.

1:26:39>> Thanks Allison. Can you all hear me?

1:26:41>> Yes.

1:26:42I'll make it super fast.

1:26:43>> No pressure.

1:26:46>> Guess what? I'm bringing another loan

1:26:48for your consideration today, but this

1:26:50time there's seven. So, let's get into

1:26:53it. Um, today I'm presenting the 2026

1:26:57competitive notice of funding

1:26:59availability for the commercial

1:27:01development loan program and the funding

1:27:03recommendations from the CRA finance

1:27:05committee. The purpose of the commercial

1:27:08development loan program is to provide

1:27:10critical financing for commercial and

1:27:13mixeduse developments to support the

1:27:15project area objectives, strengthen our

1:27:17neighborhood economies, and create

1:27:19commercial opportunities.

1:27:22Today, we're asking the board to

1:27:23consider and approve the proposed

1:27:25funding allocations for seven eligible

1:27:29projects recommended by the CRA finance

1:27:31committee. Next slide, please.

1:27:34In March of 2025,

1:27:36um you all the board adopted the

1:27:38commercial development loan policy which

1:27:40replaced the CRA's previous loan program

1:27:44policy and the granary district adaptive

1:27:46reuse program policy. The updated

1:27:49program um we really just streamlined a

1:27:51lot of things. We standardized the

1:27:53underwrited pro underwriting process. We

1:27:55made the loan terms more consistent and

1:27:57we made it a competitive application

1:27:59process to help ensure that our funding

1:28:02is being directed to projects um that

1:28:04meet our goals and really demonstrate a

1:28:06financial need for the project to um

1:28:09proceed. We can give up to $2 million

1:28:12for these loans either as gap financing

1:28:14or when appropriate it can be primary

1:28:17financing. Um, but ultimately our goal

1:28:19is to uh use these funds strategically

1:28:22to help commercial properties um and

1:28:24projects move forward while still

1:28:26leveraging other sources of investment.

1:28:29Next slide, please.

1:28:32All right. So, we released the notice of

1:28:34funding availability in April of this

1:28:36year. We had approximately $10 million

1:28:39available at the time. Um, this was

1:28:41prior to the adoption of our fiscal year

1:28:432027 budget. Um, following the adoption

1:28:47of the budget, we now have $16.65

1:28:49million available. Um, and we'll use the

1:28:52leftover fund um, for any future

1:28:55application rounds that we administer.

1:28:59Um, we received a total of eight

1:29:01applications. One of them was considered

1:29:03ineligible and that left us with seven

1:29:06eligible applications totaling a request

1:29:09of $9,30,51.

1:29:13Next slide, please.

1:29:16I'll skim through this one super fast,

1:29:18but what you really need to know is um

1:29:20all of the applications are required to

1:29:22meet all of our eligibility

1:29:24requirements. Um these are pretty basic

1:29:26like being in a CRA project area,

1:29:28aligning with our project area

1:29:30objectives, demonstrating that financial

1:29:33need, and being ready to start

1:29:35construction within 12 months of the

1:29:37board's approval. Um the applicants also

1:29:40have to show that they have site

1:29:41control, the ability to compete complete

1:29:43their projects and you know be in uh

1:29:46compliance with all the city and CRA

1:29:49requirements. Um this just determines

1:29:52that they're eligible, but it doesn't

1:29:54guarantee any funding. So we do this

1:29:56initial eligibility check before we move

1:29:58applications along to the next phase.

1:30:01Next slide, please.

1:30:04All right, this part can be a little

1:30:05confusing, so I'm going to try my best

1:30:07to describe it. So, community benefits

1:30:09are really um it's a part of it's the

1:30:11way that we encourage projects to

1:30:14deliver um beyond deliver value beyond

1:30:18the construction or the creation of a

1:30:20commercial space. So, what is this

1:30:21project going to do for the community um

1:30:24besides just building the space? So,

1:30:26every project is required to do at least

1:30:28two of the required community benefits.

1:30:31It's this top row up here. Anything that

1:30:34they provide. Um, well, let me back up.

1:30:36So, required community benefits, there's

1:30:38four options. There's job creation,

1:30:40commercial vitality, ownership,

1:30:44or leveraging. Um, mixeduse projects. We

1:30:47had a couple of mixeduse projects apply.

1:30:50They can also select a housing priority

1:30:52um to meet one of those. So, such as a

1:30:55deeply affordable housing or family

1:30:57housing. So, for each required community

1:31:00benefit that an applicant provides, um,

1:31:03they got five bonus points in their

1:31:06scoring criteria, and I'll show you

1:31:07that, but the thing you guys will

1:31:09probably care about the most is they

1:31:10receive a one percentage point reduction

1:31:13on their interest rate. So, if uh if a

1:31:16project's proposing to do four community

1:31:19required community benefits, they would

1:31:22two of those are required. So, those

1:31:23additional two would give them a 2%

1:31:25interest rate reduction.

1:31:27Um the second category is the

1:31:29incentivized community benefits and

1:31:31these are optional. Uh examples of this

1:31:34are public art, neighborhood safety,

1:31:36walkability, building preservation for

1:31:38each one of these benefits that a

1:31:40project proposes to meet. Um they also

1:31:44get bonus points in their scoring and

1:31:45then they get a half a percentage point

1:31:47reduction in the interest rate. So all

1:31:50that to be said, just know that the any

1:31:52uh project's interest rate can't go

1:31:54below 3%. So that's kind of the floor

1:31:57and then any commitments that they're

1:31:59making to these community benefits are u

1:32:01memorialized in various loan agreements

1:32:05um covenants anything that can be

1:32:08there's various legal agreements that we

1:32:10can do but and those obligations may

1:32:12extend uh beyond the loan term. So it

1:32:14just depends on what the benefit is and

1:32:16it's kind of a case by case basis. Next

1:32:18slide please.

1:32:21Okay, I'll you guys don't really need to

1:32:23know a lot about this, but know that the

1:32:25standard loan terms for the commercial

1:32:28loans, it's a five years, five-year loan

1:32:30term, it can be extended up to 10 years

1:32:33with your approval. And we did have a

1:32:34couple applicants request that. It's in

1:32:37the board packet. Um, typically with the

1:32:3910-year loans, it'll be a 2% interest

1:32:43increase starting at year six. Um, the

1:32:45amortization is up to 20 years and

1:32:48balloon at maturity. And then the

1:32:50interest rate kind of the base before

1:32:52any deductions. It's the Treasury yield

1:32:54curve rate plus 3% and then we do any of

1:32:58those community benefit deductions after

1:33:00that.

1:33:02Next slide please.

1:33:05Scoring criteria. So um this is really

1:33:10how we're ensuring that projects align

1:33:12with the goals of the program. And so

1:33:15some of the components we looked at um

1:33:18application completeness and quality,

1:33:20applicant experience, the the financial

1:33:22need of the project, but really the most

1:33:24important ones were the contribution to

1:33:26the commercial ecosystem and the market

1:33:29feasibility and activation. So we did

1:33:31score all of the projects. There was a

1:33:33total of 55 points possible. We did kind

1:33:36of set like a minimum threshold to

1:33:37ensure we're getting high quality

1:33:39applications and all of the applicants

1:33:41met that. So and then they would get

1:33:42five bonus points for each community

1:33:45benefit provided in addition to that.

1:33:48So after all of that um the finance

1:33:51committee reviewed all of these reviewed

1:33:53the financial feasibility of each

1:33:55project and whether our propo the

1:33:58proposed financing was appropriately

1:34:00sized and necessary and the finance

1:34:03committee re u recommended all seven

1:34:05projects move forward for recommen for

1:34:08funding. So next slide please. Here's

1:34:12a summary of the um loan applications

1:34:15and I'll just breeze through these. The

1:34:17first one is 1345 South Jefferson. This

1:34:20is a 122 unit mixeduse development with

1:34:234,000 square ft of commercial space. 321

1:34:27Main Street. You've previously heard of

1:34:29this one. This was a U redevelopment of

1:34:32the fire damaged Main Street property um

1:34:34that's going to be built into a

1:34:36multi-level commercial building. 956

1:34:39South Edison is a mixeduse project with

1:34:42one commercial unit and five town homes,

1:34:45two of which um there's a commitment to

1:34:47sell to income qualified buyers at 120%

1:34:51of AMI.

1:34:53Archie Archeletta Square is a new

1:34:55crosswords crossroads urban center

1:34:58facility incorporating a thrift store, a

1:35:01food pantry, an additional commercial

1:35:03space for local businesses and a

1:35:05community courtyard. the Kramer House,

1:35:08which is uh a rehabilitation and a

1:35:10buildout of a historic building downtown

1:35:12for commercial use. Um on a side note

1:35:15with this application, we recently

1:35:17received verification that this project

1:35:19is eligible for um the building

1:35:22preservation and rehabilitation.

1:35:25And that's loan forgiveness of up to

1:35:27$200,000 on that loan. So that we didn't

1:35:30have that information when we went to

1:35:32finance committee, but we did want to

1:35:34make sure it's documented on the record

1:35:36um that that project is eligible to

1:35:37receive that loan forgiveness and it

1:35:39will be $200,000.

1:35:42And then the second to last one is

1:35:44Raora, which is a buildout of a

1:35:46commercial building for a new bar. And

1:35:48the last one is Central 9inth Market and

1:35:50One OneEyed Dog Pizza, which is build

1:35:53out of ground floor commercial space and

1:35:55a restaurant and catering kitchen. So

1:35:58you can see we have a wide range of

1:36:00different projects that are being

1:36:02proposed. It's new development,

1:36:03preservation, tenantled investment, some

1:36:06nonprofits,

1:36:08um all supporting different priorities

1:36:09in the community. Um if you want more

1:36:12information on an individual project,

1:36:14there's project summary sheets in the U

1:36:16memo the packet. Next slide, please.

1:36:20We're almost done. Okay, here's the

1:36:23maps. Uh we only had three project areas

1:36:25with loan applications in them. Central

1:36:28business district, State Street, and

1:36:30Nineline. Um this map is showing Neline,

1:36:34State Street, and I'll show you a map of

1:36:35CBD after, but the Nineline one you can

1:36:38see is off of um Indiana and about 14th

1:36:40West. The State Street locations, we

1:36:44have one um kind of right across the

1:36:46street from the ballpark. That's the

1:36:481345 South Jefferson. And then the 956

1:36:51Edison is kind of over there in central

1:36:539inth. Um, next slide, please.

1:36:58And then here are the central business

1:37:00district locations. Uh, the one on Main

1:37:02Street from the fire uh or is the

1:37:06building that had the disaster earlier

1:37:08this year. And then the other three are

1:37:10over close to the Edison block.

1:37:15Next slide, please.

1:37:17Okay, this is the last slide. Finally, I

1:37:20want to explain how the proposed

1:37:21allocations work across the different

1:37:23funding sources. So, although the CRA

1:37:26has 16 point approximately 16.6 million

1:37:30in CDLP, funding is tied to specific

1:37:34project areas. So, that means um having

1:37:37sufficient funds like we have 16.5 and

1:37:40our requests are nine, but it doesn't

1:37:42necessarily mean there's enough in each

1:37:44project area to cover the loan requests.

1:37:47For example, uh, in CBD, it has about

1:37:50$1.5 million available, but we received

1:37:52requests totaling $3.2 million in

1:37:54requests. So, to address these

1:37:57shortfalls in the project areas, we're

1:37:59requesting to use 3.182,

1:38:03sorry, 3,182,517

1:38:07in nonpro area funds.

1:38:10These non-p project area funds are gener

1:38:13they were generated from previous

1:38:15commercial loan proceeds that go back

1:38:18into the CDLP program and they're not

1:38:21designated to a project area so that

1:38:22after we do like a release of funding we

1:38:25can see where those shortfalls all and

1:38:27then we can um put the funding where

1:38:29needed. So they are already in um it's

1:38:32called CDLP non-project area. So it is

1:38:36previous commercial loan pre proceeds

1:38:38that go back into the commercial pool.

1:38:41It's kind of like the revolving loan. Um

1:38:44this so I think that okay so after

1:38:50using that funding this allows us to

1:38:51meet all seven of the funding requests

1:38:54and if approved the total recommended

1:38:57allocation is $9 million $9,30,51

1:39:02leaving approximately $7.6 $6 million

1:39:05available for a future funding round.

1:39:10Okay. The finance committee, last slide,

1:39:13please.

1:39:15The finance committee reviewed the

1:39:16applications and re recommended all

1:39:18seven projects for funding. With the

1:39:21board's approval, CRA staff would like

1:39:23to issue award letters and work with the

1:39:25city attorneys and applicants to

1:39:27finalize loan documents and satisfy

1:39:30closing conditions. Today we're asking

1:39:32the board to approve the resolution

1:39:34adopting the recommended CDLP funding

1:39:36allocations.

1:39:38This concludes my presentation. Sorry it

1:39:41was so fast, but happy to answer any

1:39:42questions.

1:39:43>> Thank you very much. Board member

1:39:44Carlson.

1:39:47>> Oh, board member Young, I know she had a

1:39:49question before, so board member Young,

1:39:51go ahead.

1:39:52>> Mine is not a question. Mine is a move

1:39:55for action. So I would defer to board

1:39:57member Carlson first.

1:39:58>> Thank you. Um, I've got a a few

1:40:01questions. Um, I'm curious, what are the

1:40:03restrictions or the guidelines on the

1:40:05use of non uh project area funds? And

1:40:08what's behind my question is that

1:40:10anytime we're using non-p project area

1:40:12funds, we're facing a trade-off, right?

1:40:14We're deciding to use these funds to

1:40:16fund something really important now, but

1:40:18what might be future uses that we would

1:40:20need to allocate for in in non-project

1:40:23area funds that could come before this

1:40:25board?

1:40:31feel like this is bringing in a subpar

1:40:34middle or lever pitcher in exchange for

1:40:37the the ace starting pitcher. Um, two

1:40:40two answers to that question. Number

1:40:42one, as it relates to the commercial

1:40:44development loan program, the funds that

1:40:46are identified as non-project area

1:40:48funds, those are the funds that we have

1:40:49received back from repayment of

1:40:51commercial loans. So, those go into what

1:40:54has been historically called our

1:40:55revolving loan fund within our program

1:40:57income fund. The intent of those funds

1:40:59is to bring them back in and put them

1:41:01right back out in commercial loans. So,

1:41:03they are eligible to be used across all

1:41:05project areas and their intended use is

1:41:07exactly what's proposed here, which is

1:41:09if you don't have enough within the

1:41:11specific project area funds, you can

1:41:13then utilize these to kind of spend

1:41:15accordingly and fill the request. You'll

1:41:17recall that as a board when we came and

1:41:19allocated the funds, the 10 million for

1:41:21the CDLP program, that included taking

1:41:24these non-p project area funds,

1:41:25approving them to put out as part of the

1:41:27CDL. So,

1:41:30>> thank you for um that explanation. Uh I

1:41:32have a another question about one of the

1:41:35uh projects recommended for um funding,

1:41:38which is LLC. Um, as it was noted that

1:41:42this received two million in disaster

1:41:44relief um, loan funds and now the

1:41:47additional request is another two

1:41:48million. When I was looking through the

1:41:50notes, it said it it appears that the

1:41:53CRA would then be almost represented 53%

1:41:56in the capital stack of this project.

1:41:58And I think it's worth kind of asking

1:42:00the question, what are the pros and cons

1:42:02of almost being a majority

1:42:05stakeholder in this particular project?

1:42:08Yeah. So the CR the CDLP program wasn't

1:42:12its original you know the main primary

1:42:15goal is to be a GAP financer but when

1:42:18appropriate we can be a primary lender

1:42:21on projects. When the disaster relief

1:42:24loan program was created you know it was

1:42:26created out of necessity to get

1:42:28immediate funds out the door. Um neither

1:42:32one of the program policies or

1:42:33guidelines prohibit um an applicant from

1:42:37utilizing both funding sources. The only

1:42:39thing in the CRA that does do that is a

1:42:41tier the tier up. You can't use a TRA

1:42:44and get a a commercial development loan.

1:42:47Um but I don't foresee

1:42:51um this happening very often because the

1:42:54disaster relief loan program was kind of

1:42:56a one-off and we it for emergency

1:42:59situations. But it's not prohibited to

1:43:02stack those funding sources.

1:43:06I don't know if any other uh board

1:43:08members have questions about um the CRA

1:43:11representation in the capital stack.

1:43:14I you've spurred a question from me. Uh

1:43:18since we are designed to be gap even

1:43:20though we can extend and thank you for

1:43:22this catch. It's very good. Um,

1:43:25is there any due diligence that we do to

1:43:27make sure that other it feels very

1:43:30inequitable

1:43:32to

1:43:33have this become a standard or a

1:43:36precedent that we've inadvertently set.

1:43:38Is there any other due diligence that

1:43:40we've done to make sure that other

1:43:41financing is being pursued and secured?

1:43:44I understand that these are extenduating

1:43:45circumstances that have caused them to

1:43:47have to pursue funding. So, I don't want

1:43:49to be unnecessarily obstructionist, but

1:43:51it does feel like this is a very, very

1:43:53good precedent that you're catching and

1:43:55we should be requiring evidence that we

1:43:59are not being over relied upon um

1:44:03because of those extenduating

1:44:04circumstances when we've very clearly

1:44:07articulated to the rest of the economy

1:44:08that that's not a status that we intend

1:44:11to uphold.

1:44:12>> Yeah, that's a great question. And then

1:44:14um in our application we do ask them to

1:44:17describe um the efforts taken and to

1:44:21secure additional funding sources. So we

1:44:25do have that as part of our eligibility

1:44:27review and the underwriting process.

1:44:30From what I understand from um this

1:44:33application in particular is that it was

1:44:36really hard to secure private financing

1:44:38when you don't have the tenants secured

1:44:41up front. So, and I I've actually heard

1:44:44that from a few tenants

1:44:47>> or from a few applicants.

1:44:48>> So, I you know I I'm less worried about

1:44:50presence because the the the disaster

1:44:53relief fund was a one-time you know

1:44:55unprecedented situation. But I am

1:44:57worried about uh the the amount of

1:45:01investment we're putting on this one

1:45:03property. When we when we were trying to

1:45:05mitigate with the disaster relief fund

1:45:08uh allocation was for this uh space to

1:45:12be activated again. Um no maximize to

1:45:16the potential dream. You know that's

1:45:19something that we hope developers or wh

1:45:22owners will pursue if they if they think

1:45:24that they can. But why are we then, you

1:45:28know, just stacking more funding on them

1:45:31when they cannot pursue it on the

1:45:33private side? But at the same time, if

1:45:37the the the funding uh if the emergency

1:45:39funding wasn't allocated to them, would

1:45:41I would would I uh approve this uh

1:45:45funding, right? Um, and uh, I I will

1:45:48still have little questions about, you

1:45:50know, this because I'm not sure that

1:45:52they would have gotten to this level of

1:45:54expansion uh, if they didn't have that

1:45:57initial, you know, loan that we made

1:45:59very available to them uh, and that the

1:46:02city mobilized so fast to it. So, I I do

1:46:05have significant questions about that. I

1:46:07think it's a great dream, but I

1:46:09ultimately that is a significant amount

1:46:10of money. We're not a gap. um but not

1:46:14just you know a few hundred,000 that

1:46:16they can now pursue on their capital

1:46:17stack where at this place at at this

1:46:20place like we we're just like might as

1:46:22well just own this place uh right and

1:46:25and I'm not sure that that's really the

1:46:27best use of $2 million from some CRA. So

1:46:31I I generally have no concerns about

1:46:33with the other ones. Certainly I you

1:46:35know I I'm very biased about a project

1:46:37that is happening in my district and I'm

1:46:38looking forward to that. uh uh and the

1:46:42in so many ways and I don't want to

1:46:44compare these things because CRA is

1:46:46meant to do all of these things uh as

1:46:48intended but the amount of good that

1:46:51some of these projects and the positive

1:46:52impact that they are doing to the

1:46:54greater community is so good and so so

1:46:57great. Um and what would this $2 million

1:47:01do to this property? I'm not sure that

1:47:03that I can compare. Um, so I I'm I'm

1:47:07okay with all of them except for the

1:47:08one.

1:47:10>> Jeff, please.

1:47:11>> I guess I'd just like to know more about

1:47:13the committee discussion. Did you guys

1:47:15talk about this um strange dynamic, this

1:47:19unique situation that this uh proposal

1:47:22brought up?

1:47:24>> Yeah, I I was part of the finance

1:47:26committee and we they did talk about it.

1:47:28Um most of the discussion was um yeah

1:47:33like for the for DRLP was um because

1:47:38that the DRLP was um like a single CDLP

1:47:42project. Sorry the DRLP was just for

1:47:45that project and the CDLP was kind of

1:47:47stacking on top of that. Um and there

1:47:50was some concern but at the end like

1:47:51they were mostly asking about like what

1:47:53kind of tenants were going to be in the

1:47:55project. there wasn't necessarily too

1:47:56much concern on like the you know they

1:47:59ended up approving it as well but it was

1:48:01mostly concerned about like what kind of

1:48:03tenants were going to be in the

1:48:04building.

1:48:07>> Um thank you for uh these answers to my

1:48:10questions about you know almost uh the

1:48:13degree of investment in one particular

1:48:14project that the CRA has across its

1:48:16different portfolios. My last question

1:48:18is about the Edison Street um town home

1:48:21project. Um, I know that there is

1:48:23currently a single family house there

1:48:25and I wanted to understand um what might

1:48:29be uh what assistance might be offered

1:48:31if any to the tenant that would be

1:48:34displaced um with this development if

1:48:37there is a tenant and it and if it is

1:48:39occupied.

1:48:40>> Uh yeah, it's currently vacant right

1:48:41now.

1:48:47>> No, Sarah.

1:48:47>> Oh, oh what sorry just one more point.

1:48:50So, you know, we had these are two

1:48:52different one was a disaster relief, one

1:48:55was a set of separate same building and

1:48:58staying on its own the $2 million uh

1:49:02they met all the requirements for that.

1:49:04We did the due diligence for that loan.

1:49:07They just happened to be in a building

1:49:08that was burned down and we gave them

1:49:11loans to rebuild that part. your

1:49:13question about hey this is a uh uh would

1:49:16they have done this in in in uh if they

1:49:19hadn't burned down we don't know and but

1:49:23at the time if you take the 2 million

1:49:26that was done because we gave it to

1:49:28those blocks already this is on top of

1:49:30that so that just brings them back to

1:49:33where they are it they have a new loan

1:49:36they passed it on the on the new loan in

1:49:38this case with all these priorities so

1:49:40we did our due diligence in that case.

1:49:42They just happened to be the the

1:49:44building that

1:49:46had uh poor luck,

1:49:49you know, got burned down. We gave them

1:49:51some help. Now we have another loan. So,

1:49:54uh I I look at them as separately and

1:49:56not so much that uh they're together.

1:49:59They're getting 4 million. Well, yeah,

1:50:00but they had now they get the first 2

1:50:02million and no one would want that. So,

1:50:04I'm I'm looking at separately and I I

1:50:06actually understand it and I I I uh I

1:50:09understand our concerns, but I also

1:50:10understand that they asked for the

1:50:12loans. We they fit it. They're one of

1:50:14the sevens. We give them a loan. So,

1:50:16that's where I stand. But we we all can

1:50:18vote on it and if we want to, we can

1:50:20also say we'll do six out of seven

1:50:21however we want to see. I think we have.

1:50:24>> So I guess my question is since it

1:50:26sounds like there's consensus on the

1:50:29majority of them, it's just like this

1:50:33specific one. Is it possible to vote on

1:50:36them separately?

1:50:38>> Yeah. Yeah.

1:50:39>> So if there's a motion on the table,

1:50:42>> can you can you put the names back up

1:50:44there? I just don't want to call out the

1:50:45wrong one.

1:50:50>> 11

1:50:54Well, that's a different page.

1:51:06>> Yes.

1:51:09>> 321. Mains cho.

1:51:11>> Is it okay if I call callify them? Okay.

1:51:14So, I would propose a motion um to move

1:51:18that the board adopt the resolution

1:51:20approving the 2026 commercial

1:51:23development loan program funding

1:51:25allocations and terms as recommended

1:51:29with the project 321 Main Street

1:51:33exempted from that approval.

1:51:37>> Second.

1:51:38>> I have a motion from board member Young,

1:51:40a second from board member Carlson. Uh

1:51:43any discussion on this item?

1:51:45My one discussion is can we look at this

1:51:48review this in a in a later date?

1:51:51>> Okay.

1:51:52>> Mr. Chair, could I suggest that um maybe

1:51:55the CRA staff could come back with a

1:51:57little bit more of the information that

1:51:59the finance committee was asking about

1:52:01because because they um you explained

1:52:03that they were asking questions about

1:52:05who the potential tenants would be, but

1:52:08we don't know what those responses. I

1:52:10>> I have a point of clarification. So we

1:52:11have a motion on the table. We are not

1:52:13voting no on chancel right now. We're

1:52:15separating them. So So the v the motion

1:52:19says let's approve all of them but that.

1:52:21So can we answer that question? If the

1:52:23if the conversation is not really about

1:52:26that then we should like leave it to the

1:52:28next step.

1:52:29>> Yeah. And I just want to make

1:52:30clarification that we can review that

1:52:31then we're not saying no at that point.

1:52:33>> Okay. I see. So you're asking from staff

1:52:35if staff is okay with that if that will

1:52:37work.

1:52:38>> Yeah. So we can say no to this point. So

1:52:40the motion is that table stands. My

1:52:41clarifications was that we can bring

1:52:43this back to us to to look at it again.

1:52:44>> I understand.

1:52:45>> Yeah. Yeah. So uh any other discussion?

1:52:48See none. Uh all in favor say I.

1:52:50>> I.

1:52:50>> I.

1:52:51>> I mean I opposed.

1:52:53>> That motion passes seven to zero. Thank

1:52:56you very much. This concludes our u CRA

1:53:01meeting. Now we I will look for a motion

1:53:03to move into close session and after the

1:53:05close session we will be adjourning for

1:53:07the work centers.

1:53:09And this would be for uh discussion

1:53:11pending to reasonable intermit

1:53:13litigations and this purchase exchange

1:53:15and lease of real property.

1:53:18I move that we enter into closed meeting

1:53:20for the purpose of real purchased

1:53:24disposition of real property

1:53:28uh advice of council

1:53:31and immin reasonably imminent

1:53:32litigation.

1:53:33>> Yes.

1:53:35>> Second.

1:53:36>> A second. Okay. Board me board member

1:53:39Picho. A second from board member Pui. I

1:53:41will roll call this. Board member Young

1:53:44>> I.

1:53:45>> Board member Carlson

1:53:46>> I.

1:53:47>> Picho

1:53:48>> I.

1:53:49>> May Pierce

1:53:50>> I.

1:53:51>> Wharton

1:53:52>> I.

1:53:52>> Pooie

1:53:53>> I.

1:53:53>> And I'm an I. That passes 70. We're now

1:53:56moving into a closed meeting. And after

1:53:58this closed meeting we'll be adjourning

1:54:00for the CRA and we'll be reconvening as

1:54:02the city council.

1:54:04>> Thank you very much.

1:54:08>> [music]

1:54:15[music]

1:54:18>> How are you?

1:54:24[music]

1:54:44>> [music]

2:04:06[music]

2:04:09>> Hey. Hey. Hey.

2:04:13[music]