Charlotte City Council
Housing and Neighborhood Development
Committee
Summary Minutes
August 31, 2006
COMMITTEE AGENDA TOPICS
I.
Subject:
Kroc Center Proposal
The Committee took no action on the Kroc Center proposal. Staff will continue
working to provide the requested information and continue the discussion at the
September 7th meeting.
COMMITTEE INFORMATION
Present: Council members Michael Barnes, Susan Burgess, Nancy Carter, Anthony Foxx, Patsy Kinsey,
Don Lochman and Pat Mumford
Staff:
Julie Burch, Debra Campbell, Tom Flynn, Jim Schumacher and Pam Syfert
Others: Major Todd Smith, Salvation Army
Rick Gaskins, Salvation Army
Blaine Gregory, Mecklenburg County Parks and Recreation Department
Time: 2:00 PM – 4:00 PM
Housing and Neighborhood Development Committee
Meeting Summary for August 31, 2006
Page 2
DISCUSSION HIGHLIGHTS
I. Kroc Center Proposal
Council member Pat Mumford began the meeting by asking for clarification on what the Committee
is being asked to do regarding the Kroc Center.
Questions/Answers/Comments:
Syfert:
Initially the Salvation Army informed the City of the opportunity to receive a Kroc
Center and asked the City to identify land for the center in the Belmont Community. As
the Salvation Army learned more about the requirements for a Kroc Center, they asked
for the City’s financial participation in addition to helping identify a site for the center.
The question to the Committee is, are you willing to identify resources to help fund the
Kroc Center at either the Belmont or the Independence sites and if so which of the two
sites do you think is the best location for the Kroc Center.
Foxx:
Has Mecklenburg County been asked to participate in the Kroc Center?
Gaskins:
Yes, they have been asked to help through Parks and Recreation. They’ve been asked to
build the athletic fields using land owned by Parks and Recreation. We have also had
some initial discussions about the possibility of them operating programs out of the Kroc
Center, but again that will be based on where the center is located.
Woodyard: Additionally, the County has designated $1 million to help build the community center
as a part of the HOPE VI project, so if the Kroc Center is located on the Belmont site,
that money can be used for the Kroc Center.
Gaskins: The other government partner is Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools. They have expressed
interest in operating some pre-K programs out of the Kroc Center.
Tom Flynn informed the Committee that staff will respond to some of the issues raised at the last
meeting, review the pro’s and con’s associated with the potential Kroc Center sites, receive additional
information on the potential Craighead site for the relocation of the Light Vehicle Maintenance
facility and discuss some of the Solid Waste relocation issues.
Mr. Flynn reviewed the criteria for a Kroc Center. He reminded the Committee that the potential
elements of a Kroc Center include a 100,000 to 145,000 square foot building, an outdoor
playground, a 50 meter indoor pool and athletic fields. He also reminded the Committee of the
Salvation Army’s site selection criteria which includes but is not limited to information like diversity
in the area, visibility and support from governmental agencies. Mr. Flynn further explained that staff
used the criteria to look at potential locations for the Kroc Center.
Mr. Flynn reviewed the pros and cons associated with the Belmont Site. He explained that some of
the pros associated with the Belmont site are:
Housing and Neighborhood Development Committee
Meeting Summary for August 31, 2006
Page 3
•
•
•
•
•
•
63% of the households within a 1 mile radius have an annual incomes of less that $50,000
68% of the population within 1 mile are African-America, Asian or Hispanic
The site has good pedestrian access and is served by several local bus routes
The site is visible from I-277 and is the closest site to downtown
The Salvation believes that fundraising will be easier at this site
This site supports the Hope VI project and builds on existing Salvation Army programs in the
community.
Foxx:
Why does the Salvation Army believe it would be easier to raise the additional money for
the Kroc Center if it is located on the Belmont site?
Smith:
The further the Kroc Center is away from downtown the more difficult it becomes to get
people to use the center because it has to be located in a perceived safe environment. We
also need those people who can pay for the services to be able to access the center to make
up the difference for those who cannot pay for the services. Therefore, by moving further
away from downtown we lose the possibility of attracting individuals who can actually
afford the service.
Foxx:
Wouldn’t you need to raise the money for the facility before it is actually built?
Smith:
Yes.
Foxx:
Have you done a study that says it will be easier to raise money if the Center is in Belmont
as opposed to another location?
Smith:
We have completed a program study and are in the process of starting a feasibility study,
which is the fundraising aspect of the study. We did include a question in the program
study that addressed potential financial support and the Belmont site received the
strongest support.
Some of the cons associated with the Belmont site are:
•
The requirement and costs of moving the Light Vehicle Maintenance Facility and Sanitation
office
•
This site has limited opportunity for future expansion
•
This site requires the city-owned land at the Alexander Street Center
•
This site competes with existing similar programs at the YMCA, Saint Paul’s Church and several
Parks and Recreation facilities.
•
The City has already improved a $38 million investment in the Belmont HOPE VI project.
Mumford: I think it’s also important to look at what the Kroc Center might do to the market based
competition for other surrounding facilities. It’s feasible to think that customers who are
currently using the YMCAs might move to the Kroc Center.
Flynn:
We’d have to do a market study to get that type of information.
Housing and Neighborhood Development Committee
Meeting Summary for August 31, 2006
Page 4
Syfert:
Perhaps the way to obtain that information is to ask the YMCA.
Burgess:
It would also be good to know what other comparable services that will be available at the
Kroc Center are currently available at existing sites.
Mr. Flynn elaborated on the City’s $38 million investment in the Belmont Hope VI project. He
explained that this includes $600,000 in land, $8.8 million in infrastructure, $5 million in Housing
Trust Fund investments and $23.6 million in the Central Yard facility.
Foxx:
How much of that money has already been spent?
Flynn:
All of the money for the land has been spent.
Watkins:
All of the infrastructure funds have been obligated. Additionally, the Charlotte
Housing Authority has already accessed $3.5 million of the Housing Trust Fund
dollars and has come forward for the remaining $1.5 million.
Schumacher:
We’ve spent about $12 million of the funds designated for the Central Yard.
Burgess:
What would be the expected City’s contribution for the Kroc Center on the
Belmont site?
Flynn:
Approximately $3 to $4 million dollars. This would include the donation of the
land to the County, buffering from the existing residential community and costs
associated with redesign of the light maintenance vehicle facility.
Kinsey:
Does the donation of land include the land that CATS is interested in for the STS
site?
Flynn:
Yes. If we donated the land to the County, CATS would have to find another site.
Flynn:
The $3 to $4 million is a reduction compared to what was presented at the last
meeting because it does not include the costs for a parking deck for the sanitation
employees.
Schumacher:
As we drilled down, we realized that we would need to build a parking deck at some
point, with or without the Kroc Center, due to the growth of the City and the
expansion of Solid Waste services fleet. However, this action does not trigger the
need for a parking deck.
Mr. Flynn gave an overview of the Independence Boulevard site. He explained that this site will
require land acquisition from J.N. Pease and other private developers. He also explained that some
of the pros associated with the Independence site are:
Housing and Neighborhood Development Committee
Meeting Summary for August 31, 2006
Page 5
•
68.5% of the households within a 1 mile radius have an annual incomes less that $50,000
•
76% of the population within 1 mile is African-America, Asian or Hispanic. This site is more
diverse than the Belmont site.
More people live within 5 miles of this site compared to the Belmont site
This site has high traffic counts and great visibility from Independence Boulevard
Has no impact on the City Yard
Promotes the redevelopment of Independence Boulevard
Has fewer recreation facilities compared to Belmont in a 3 mile radius
•
•
•
•
•
Some of the cons associated with the Independence site are:
•
The tight site due to existing buffers and setbacks
•
CHA will need to build a separate community center
•
The Salvation Army would request the City to contribute an additional $6 million because the
site is more expensive.
•
Required road connection to the neighborhood and the costs
Mr. Flynn gave an overview of the Monroe site. He stated that this site would only be considered if
the Belmont and the Independence sites do not work out. Some of the pros associated with this site
are:
•
The high level of diversity within a 5 mile radius
•
This is the largest site with the most room for expansion
•
It is easily accessible by car
•
It is adjacent to a school and has joint use potential
•
There are no YMCA’s within a 3 mile radius
Some of the cons are:
The surrounding neighborhood is stable and less diverse than the other sites
It is the furthest from downtown
It is inconsistent with the adopted plan. The plan calls for an industrial use
•
•
•
Mr. Flynn also informed the Committee of Citiline’s offer to purchase the Central Yard property.
He explained that Citiline has made an offer to purchase +/-5 acres for $7.4 million which would
almost cover the entire costs of relocating the Light Maintenance Vehicle facility.
Foxx:
Why do we continue looking at purchasing market rate land for the relocation of these
facilities when the airport has a lot of land that the City already owns?
Syfert: There’s a Federal Airport Administration requirement that says if the land was purchased
with federal money, the City would have to buy it back.
Foxx:
Is there other City-owned land in other parts of the city that could be used?
Syfert: As a result of the study we did several years ago, we are not aware of any city-owned land.
Housing and Neighborhood Development Committee
Meeting Summary for August 31, 2006
Page 6
Any land we choose would have to be purchased. We don’t have any other I-2 zoned land.
Mr. Flynn provided the Committee with additional information on the Craighead site. He explained
to the Committee that it would take 3 to 6 months to complete the necessary due diligence on the
site. He also informed the Committee that the Phase I environmental study did not indicate any
environmental concerns.
Burgess:
When will the Salvation Army complete their feasibility study?
Gaskins:
The study should be complete between late December and mid January, assuming we
have a site for the center.
Foxx:
I’m having trouble with this because we’re being asked to contribute money without a
feasibility study. This is a tough position and I’m not ready to make a decision today.
Woodyard: The issue for the Charlotte Housing Authority (CHA) is we have a tax credit issue related
to the HOPE VI grant; therefore we need to know where the center will be by the end of
September.
Lochman: Where would the $6 million come from for the road on the Independence site?
Flynn:
At this point, we don’t know because we’ve just learned of the need.
Mumford: Approximately 3 to 4 years ago we decided to support redevelopment in Belmont.
What’s driving the Council to support the Kroc Center? I think we should decide what
we should be supporting in Belmont, if anything. We also need to take a broad look at
the Kroc Center to determine what it brings to the City. We need to figure out what our
role is as policy makers related to this issue.
Lochman: I agree with Council member Mumford but we need more time to do this.
Mr. Flynn reviewed the options for Committee recommendation. He explained that Option 1 is to
move the Light Vehicle Maintenance facility to accommodate the Kroc Center if the City is kept
whole. He further explained the consequences associated with option 1 are:
•
The potentially limited public participation may jeopardize chances of approval by the South East
Regional Office of Salvation Army
•
The Kroc Foundation would need to provide an estimated $3 million in additional funding.
Mumford: Is it possible for the Salvation Army to receive credit for the current city investments in
the Belmont community?
Gaskins:
We could try that, but I’m not sure if we would be successful because other cities are
putting cash into the projects. For example, the City of Norfolk is providing $10 million
Housing and Neighborhood Development Committee
Meeting Summary for August 31, 2006
Page 7
dollars. The Salvation Army is more willing to choose a City that is willing to invest
cash.
Lochman: I appreciate your explanation. However, I’m confused as to how the City was originally a
bystander and now we’re being asked to contribute money. It would have been helpful if
we had known about this while we were going through the budget cycle.
Burgess:
Do other cities contribute through their Parks and Recreation Departments?
Gaskins:
It varies depending on the city. Some cities have had land that is used for the project. In
most cases the City sold the land to the Salvation Army for the fair market value. The
City has then donated the land value back to the Salvation Army to receive triple credit.
It’s that value that the Salvation Army is looking at.
Mumford: We didn’t ask for the Kroc Center. I feel like its being brought to us after the fact and as
a result we’re trying to figure out how to make it fit. It would have been helpful to have
this included in our policy objectives three years ago.
Lochman: Could someone assist with my confusion with respect to how we started and where we are
now?
Syfert:
I don’t have exact dates but the Salvation Army presented the opportunity to receive a
Kroc grant. Later we learned in a meeting with the developer that we needed Central
Yard Land for the Kroc Center. We were asked to look at relocating the Light Vehicle
Maintenance facility for the Kroc Center. As we worked through the process we learned
that the requirements for a Kroc Center were becoming more competitive and other cities
were contributing cash to assist with obtaining a Kroc Center. We’ve worked on the cost
of moving the Light Vehicle Maintenance facility and reported this to the Kroc
Foundation. The circumstances have changed as we’ve learned more about the Kroc
Center grant requirements. This happens on a lot of projects, so it’s not unusual.
Perhaps one of the questions is what is the drop dead date for a decision from City
Council.
Mr. Flynn explained the 2nd option. This option includes acceptance of CHA’s offer of $2.1 million
for the Light Vehicle Maintenance facility to allow for the Kroc Center at Belmont. The
consequences associated with this option are:
•
The need for $3 to 4 million unfunded additional costs to the City
•
Transfer of 3 acres of land to the County for $540,000
Barnes:
Is the $2.1 million in option 2 fair market value?
Syfert:
It is fair market value as much as a true fair market value can established for this property.
Housing and Neighborhood Development Committee
Meeting Summary for August 31, 2006
Page 8
Barnes:
If we had known about this during the budget discussions we could have done something
about it. I’m not sure what we’re being asked to do.
Barnes: The only I-2 land that might be suitable for the Light Vehicle Maintenance facility is on
Craighead Road and the only other options for the Solid Waste facilities is to leave them
where they are or relocate them to Craighead Road?
Mr. Flynn reviewed Option 3. This option involves Council’s preference for the Independence site
for the Kroc Center. The consequences associated with this option are:
• The inclusion of $4 million of Neighborhood Improvement Bond funds for road construction
• The Salvation Army may reject the site because it is too expensive
• The site is contingent on land assembly
Burgess: If a site is chosen, when will the money be needed?
Smith:
We would need a pledge of support next year.
Foxx:
I think we have a failure to communicate. I’m wrestling with the process for decision
making because I don’t have a way to analyze this. Therefore, my suggestion is to schedule
an additional meeting to continue working on this.
Gaskins: The longer the Council waits to make a decision, the less money we have to apply for.
Foxx:
I’m committed enough to schedule additional meetings to try to make this work. What
information can we have at the next meeting that will help us with the decision? I need to
know the time frame between the time we make a decision and the time the Center is
built?
Syfert:
First, the Council needs to decide if it wants to invest in the Kroc Center. If so, the
Council then needs to decide if the Kroc Center should be located on either the Belmont
or the Independence site.
Mumford: Perhaps the full Council needs to first decide if it wants to invest and if the answer is yes,
then the Committee can do more analysis on the location.
Lochman: I’m hesitant to go back to the full Council without at least a recommendation.
Mr. Flynn reviewed Options 4. This option is to dispose of the light vehicle land through private sale
to Citiline.
Foxx:
Where can we find a location to make a minimal investment and locate the Kroc Center
where we don’t have to do a lot of moving facilities?
Housing and Neighborhood Development Committee
Meeting Summary for August 31, 2006
Page 9
Flynn:
Options 1 and 2 require additional time for due diligence. My projection is that we will
need until mid January to do the necessary due diligence and at the end of that time the
Salvation Army should have completed their feasibility study so that they can begin
raising money.
Kinsey:
It would be necessary to build the road on Independence site with or without the Kroc
Center. But we would still need to have the $6 million.
Flynn:
If the Independence site is chosen, it will be harder to raise their money.
Gaskins:
The Salvation Army would like to stay in Belmont because we’ve been there for so long.
We also believe that the people who are currently in our programs would not travel to the
Independence site.
Burgess:
Ms. Kinsey, what is your opinion for where the Kroc Center should be located?
Kinsey:
In my opinion, the Independence site serves the community much better. I’m also
willing to make an investment in the Center if it has the potential of fostering other
economic development activities along Independence Boulevard.
Foxx:
Is there a way to look at a model that relocates the Central Yard and a model that locates
the Kroc Center on Independence Boulevard, which would allow for it to be a catalyst for
other economic development?
Syfert:
We could look at moving the Light Vehicle Maintenance facility over the next two to
three months. If you want to look at moving the entire Central Yard, this is more
difficult and would take more time.
Lochman: This seems like an enormous task.
Foxx:
I don’t think that we’ve looked at all of the possible scenarios. For example, does the
City have to own the land if we relocate the Central Yard or is it possible to lease the
land? I don’t think we’ve explored the issue to the level it could be explored.
Lochman: As a point of clarification, Council member Foxx wants to expand on options 1 and 2.
Foxx:
Yes, that’s correct.
Burgess:
I’m concerned about the Light Vehicle Maintenance facility being relocated in my district
on the Craighead site.
Burgess:
I recommend ruling out the Belmont site and locating the Kroc Center on
Housing and Neighborhood Development Committee
Meeting Summary for August 31, 2006
Page 10
Independence.
Lochman: For the next meeting I recommend the following that staff look at funding options for
the $6 million dollars on the Independence site and funding options for the $3 to $4
million on option 2. Staff should also provide Council member Foxx the data on moving
the entire Central Yard.
Next Steps/Action:
The Committee took no action on the Kroc Center. The Committee will continue discussions at the
next meeting on September 7th. At the next meeting staff will bring back possible funding options
for the $6 million dollars on the Independence site, funding options for the $3 to $4 million on
option 2 and market information from the YMCA. Staff will also provide Council member Foxx the
data on moving the entire Central Yard.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 PM.
City Council
Housing and Neighborhood Development
Committee Meeting
Thursday, August 31, 2006 – 2:00 PM
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Government Center – Room 280
Committee Members:
Susan Burgess, Chair
Anthony Foxx, Vice-Chair
Michael Barnes
Don Lochman
Pat Mumford
Staff Resource:
Julie Burch
AGENDA
ƒ
Kroc Center Proposal – Staff Resources: Tom Flynn, Wayman Pearson, Jim
Schumacher
On July 24, 2006 the City Council received a report on the status of the Salvation
Army/Kroc Center proposal. The Council referred the matter to Committee for
further review and recommendation.
The Committee met on August 21, 2006. At Thursday’s meeting, staff will provide
additional information for consideration in the Committee recommendation to
Council.
ƒ Future Meeting Schedule
________________________
Distribution:
Mayor/Council
Pam Syfert, City Manager
City Leadership Team
Corporate Communications
Debra Campbell - Planning
Stanley Watkins – ND
Richard Woodcock – ND
Stan Wilson – ND
Stephanie Small – ND
Walter Abernethy – ND
Pat Mason – ND
Ruffin Hall – Budget Office
Mike Nail – Budget Office
Rick Gaskins – Moore & Van Allen
Anna Schleunes – City Attorney Office
Housing Trust Fund Advisory Board
Charles Woodyard –CHA
Troy White - CHA
Pat Garrett – CMHP
Dave Stephens – CMPD
Chief Darrel Stephens – CMPD
Bud Cesena - CMPD
Saskia Thompson – Manager’s Office
Neighborhood Leaders
Tom Flynn – ED
AC Shull – ED
Jim Schumacher – Engineering & Property
Management