HomeMy WebLinkAbout93-21 RESOLUTION113 West Mountain Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
(479) 575-8323
Resolution: 93-21
File Number: 2020-0943
RFQ-19-01 OLSSON , INC. AMENDMENT #2:
A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE PROFESSIONAL,
ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH OLSSON, INC., PURSUANT TO RFQ
#19-01, IN THE AMOUNT OF $154,900.00 FOR THE REMAINING ARCHITECTURAL
SERVICES RELATED TO THE REPLACEMENT PARKING DECK FOR THE CULTURAL
ARTS CORRIDOR PROJECT, AND TO APPROVE A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT - 2019
CULTURAL ARTS CORRIDOR BOND PROJECT
WHEREAS, on January 21, 2020, the City Council passed Resolution 32-20 to approve a
professional engineering services agreement with Olsson, Inc. for engineering services related to the
replacement parking deck; and
WHEREAS, on June 22, 2020, Amendment No. 1 was approved to include architectural services for
the schematic design phase; and
WHEREAS, Amendment No. 2 includes the balance of the architectural services for the architectural
elements of the replacement parking deck and West Avenue Police Department sub -station including
design development, survey and platting, construction drawings, bidding and negotiation, and
construction administration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves Amendment
No. 2 to the professional engineering services agreement with Olsson, Inc., pursuant to RFQ #19-01,
in the amount of $154,900.00 for the remaining architectural services related to the replacement
Page 1 Printed on 3117121
Resolution: 93-21
File Number.' 2020-0943
parking deck for the Cultural Arts Corridor Project.
Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves a budget
adjustment, a copy of which is attached to this Resolution.
PASSED and APPROVED on 3/16/2021
Attest:
``���tii►rrrtrr��
ER K / -
Kara Paxton, City Clerk TreasLaer: FAYF7?EVILLE
"i;''G �0Nr � Q %i%%%%%N
Page 2 Printed on 3/17/21
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas 113 West Mountain Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
. I
(479) 575-8323
Text File
File Number: 2020-0943
Agenda Date: 3/16/2021 Version: 1 Status: Passed
In Control: City Council Meeting File Type: Resolution
Agenda Number: 13.3
RFQ-19-01 OLSSON , INC. AMENDMENT 42:
A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING
SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH OLSSON, INC., PURSUANT TO RFQ #19-01, IN THE AMOUNT
OF $154,900.00 FOR THE REMAINING ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES RELATED TO THE
REPLACEMENT PARKING DECK FOR THE CULTURAL ARTS CORRIDOR PROJECT, AND TO
APPROVE A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT - 2019 CULTURAL ARTS CORRIDOR BOND PROJECT
WHEREAS, on January 21, 2020, the City Council passed Resolution 32-20 to approve a professional
engineering services agreement with Olsson, Inc. for engineering services related to the replacement parking
deck; and
WHEREAS, on June 22, 2020, Amendment No. 1 was approved to include architectural services for the
schematic design phase; and
WHEREAS, Amendment No. 2 includes the balance of the architectural services for the architectural elements
of the replacement parking deck and West Avenue Police Department substation including design development,
survey and platting, construction drawings, bidding and negotiation, and construction admir_istration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves Amendment No. 2 to
the professional engineering services agreement with Olsson, Inc., pursuant to RFQ # 19-01, in the amount of
$154,900.00 for the remaining architectural services related to the replacement parking deck. for the Cultural
Arts Corridor Project.
Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves a bud;et adjustment, a
copy of which is attached to this Resolution.
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Page 1 Printed on 311712021
City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form
2020-0943
Legistar File ID
11/17/2020
City Council Meeting Date - Agenda Item Only
N/A for Non -Agenda Item
Wade Abernathy 11/28/2020 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT (140)
Submitted By Submitted Date Division / Department
Action Recommendation:
Approval of an amendment #2 to rfq 10-01 with Olsson Inc. for the Remaining architectural services for the
replacement parking deck and the West Ave. PD Substation in the amount of $154,900.00, and approval of a
budget adjustment. This is a Phase 1 bond project.
4608.860.7820-5860.02
Account Number
46080.7820
Project Number
Budgeted Item? Yes
Does item have a cost? Yes
Budget Adjustment Attached? Yes
Budget Impact:
4608 - Arts Corridor 2019 Bonds
Fund
Arts Corridor - Parking
Project —itle
Current Budget
Funds Obligated
Current Balance
Item Cost
Budget Adjustment
Remaining Budget
$ 698,100.00
$ 661,820.00
$ 36,280.00
$ 154,900.00
$ 154,900.00
$ 36,280.00
V20180321
Purchase Order Number: 2020-00000355 Previous Ordinance or Resolution # 32-20
Ciange Order Number: 2
Original Contract Number: 2020-0000014
Comments:
Approval Date:
CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 2020
TO: Mayor and City Council
THRU: Susan Norton, Chief of Staff
Paul Becker, Chief Financial Officer
CITY COUNCIL MEMO
FROM: Wade Abernathy, Director Bond and Construction Projects
DATE: 11 /28/2020
SUBJECT: Amendment #2 to RFQ 19-01 with Olsson Engineering, Inc on the Cultural
Arts Corridor Replacement Parking Deck.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of an amendment #2 to RFQ-19-01, for professional engineering
services agreement with Olsson Inc. to include the Balance of the Architectural Services for the
Cultural Arts Corridor Replacement Parking Deck and West Ave. Police Substation AND
property surveys in the amount of $154,900.
BACKGROUND:
In April 2019, Fayetteville voters approved question 8 on the bond initiative for the new cultural
arts corridor. The mayor and council committed that replacement parking would be included as
a part of that project, and such parking would be completed prior to the commencement of the
phase 2 civic plaza.
Phase 1 Bonds allocated $20,016,970 for the CAC and replacement parking.
In January 2020, Council passed resolution 32-20 for approval of a contract with Olsson, Inc. for
Engineering Services for the replacement parking deck.
In June 2020, amendment #1 was approved to include Schematic Design Architectural Services
for the Architectural Elements of the Deck, and the West Avenue Police Substation.
DISCUSSION:
This amendment includes the Balance of the Architectural Services for the Architectural
Elements of the Deck and West Avenue Police Substation including Design Development,
Construction Drawings, Bidding and Negotiation, and Construction Administration. It also
includes the structural Design of the Colonnade, Survey and platting.
BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT:
A Budget Adjustment will move funds from the Phase 1 Bond 4608.860.7999.00 Unallocated
Budget to the Parking Engineering/Architectural Budget 4608.860.7820-5860.02
Attachments:
Amendment #2
Mailing Address:
113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov
Fayetteville, AR 72701
AMENDMENT NO. 2
To
CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW DOWNTOWN PARKING DECK
Between
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
And
OLSSON, Inc.
WHEREAS, on January 21, 2020, the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas (CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE) and
Olsson, Inc. of Fayetteville, Arkansas (ENGINEER) entered into an Agreement for professional
engineering services in connection with the New Downtown Parking Deck (the "Project'); and
WHEREAS, on June 22, 2020, the Agreement was amended to include architectural services for the
Schematic Design phase; and
WHEREAS, the scope of the current contract excludes architectural services for phases other than
Schematic Design, and the CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE now wishes to increase the scope of work to
include architectural services for Development Design and Construction Documents through a
subconsultant to the ENGINEER; and
WHEREAS, the CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE has requested additional structural er-gineering services for
a colonnade and surveying services necessary to assist with agreements between th,- city and landowners
at the project site; and
WHEREAS, the current Agreement must now be amended to provide the additional scope and amount of
compensation to the ENGINEER for the additional work; and
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and Agreements herein contained, CITY
OF FAYETTEVILLE and the ENGINEER., the parties hereto, stipulate and agree that the Contract for
Professional Engineering Services dated January 21, 2020, and amended on June 22, 2020, is hereby
amended in the following particulars:
SECTION 4 — FEES, EXPENSES and PAYMENTS
Delete the first sentence of paragraph a and replace with the following:
a. The maximum not -to -exceed amount authorized for this agreement is $816.500.00, which
includes the reimbursable allocation shown below.
For clarification, Amendment No. 2 increases the total project fee by S 154.900.00, Itemized as follows:
• Architectural Design Development and Construction Documents
$138,100
• Structural Design of Colonnade (via subconsultant Walker Consultants)
$ 5,000
• Additional Surveying and Platting for Property South of Dickson
S 9,700
• Surveying Expenses (Title Searches) for 7 parcels at $300 per parcel
$ 2,100
APPENDIX A — SCOPE OF SERVICES
Proiect Information & Requirements
020-0275 Amendment No.2 Page 1
On Page 2, delete Paragraph 3.c.i. and replace with the following:
Architect Services: MBL Architecture
4. Scope of Work
On Page 7, Section 4.c.iii, add the following to the end of the section:
The scope of work shall include architectural design of the parking deck elements
required for municipal use. Elements considered to be necessary or desired for
commercial or other private uses (e.g. retail spaces, connections to adjacent retail
buildings, accommodation for a future 6`h and 7' floor mixed -use space, etc.) will be
designed under a separate agreement. ENGINEER shall have no liability under this
agreement for elements designed under the separate agreement for commercial or
private uses.
On Page 11, Section 4.c.xi, add the following:
5. Architectural Design Development Drawings
a. Olsson shall utilize MBL Architecture as a sub -consultant to provide architectural Design
Development drawings.
b. Based on the CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE's approval of and/or comments on the
Schematic Design Documents, Design Development documents will be prepared. The
Design Development documents shall illustrate and describe the development of the
approved Schematic Design Documents and shall consist of drawings and other
documents including plans, sections, elevations, typical construction details, preliminary
layouts of building systems, and outline specifications that identify major materials and
systems to establish general quality levels.
On Page 13, Section 4.d.ii, add the following:
7. Architectural Construction Documents
a. Olsson shall utilize MBL Architecture as a sub -consultant to provide architectural
Construction Document drawings.
Based on the CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE's approval of and/or comments on the Design
Development Documents, Construction Documents will be prepared. The Construction
Documents shall illustrate and describe the further development of the approved Design
Development Documents and shall consist of drawings and specifications setting forth in
detail the quality levels of materials and systems and other requirements for the
construction of the work.
On Page 15, add the following Section 4.d.xvi::
1. Platting and Legal Descriptions for Property South of Dickson Street
a. Boundary Survey: Olsson shall perform boundary surveys of the seven parcels that
comprise the City of Fayetteville parking lot, located at the Southwest Corner of Dickson
Street and West Avenue, sufficient for platting purposes, in accordance with Arkansas
020-0275 Amendment No.2 Page 2
Minimum Standards for Property Boundary Surveys. Survey is for platting purposes
only; no deliverable will be provided.
b. Platting: Olsson shall prepare an administrative subdivision of the above properties, to
create the parcel to be conveyed to the Depot and the remaining parcel, including any
required easements or cross access easements. Should additional parcels need to be
platted, additional fees may apply. Property pins shall be set at all property comers, in
accordance with Arkansas Minimum Standards for Property Boundary Surveys.
Title Search: Unless provided to Olsson, title searches will be ordered for use in
surveying and platting the properties.
All other provisions of the original Agreement remain in full force and effect
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS by and through its Mayor, and
Wby its authorizcd officer have caused this Amendment to be duly executed this �_ day of
rY l , 2AU,
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE. ARKANSAS OLSSON, INC.
B a�r,
Bv:
ioneld Jord Brad Hammond, P.E.; Office Leader
```����tiir►►►�,��
ATTEST: ���� 0�... /
By: :� BY:
r-n
'Q!
City Clerk = E7?�VILL f • �= Sterlmg Cxami6r, P.E.; Senior Vice President
%;s •N&O
S MENT NO.2 TO
CONTRACT iONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
020-0275 Amendment No.2 Page 3
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas - Budget Adjustment Form (Legistar)
Budget Year Division FACILITIES MANAGEMENT (140) Adjustment Number
2020 /Org2
Requestor: W. Abernathy
BUDGET ADJUSTMENT DESCRIPTION / JUSTIFICATION:
Approval of an amendment #2 to rfq 10-01 with Olsson Inc. for the Remaining architectural services for the replacement
parking deck and the West Ave. PD Substation in the amount of $154,900.00, and approval of a budget adjustment. This
is a Phase 1 bond project.
COUNCIL DATE: 1 1 /1 7/2020
LEGISTAR FILE ID#: 2020-0943
Matthew M addoy.1
1012712020 7:56 AM
Budget Director Date
TYPE: D - (City Council)
JOURNAL #:
GLDATE: 11/17/2020
RESOLUTION/ORDINANCE CHKD/POSTED:
TOTAL - -
v.20200820
Increase / (Decrease) Proiect.Sub#
Account Number Expense Revenue Project Sub.Detl AT Account Name
4608.860.7820-5860.02 154,900 - 46080 7820 EX Capital Prof Svcs - Engineering/Architects
4608.860.7999-5899.00 (154,900) - 46080 7999 EX Unallocated - Budget
H:\Budget Adjustments\2020_Budget\City Council\ 11-1 7-2020\2020-0943 BA Parking Deck Architecturcl Services 1 of 1
CityClerk
From: dede peters <dedepictures@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2020 5:01 PM
To: Marsh, Sarah; Gutierrez, Sonia; Bunch, Sarah; Smith, Kyle;. Turk, Teresa; Kinion, Mark;
Petty, Matthew; Scroggin, Sloan; Mayor
Cc: CityClerk; Williams, Kit
Subject: Concerns regarding CAC land swap and parking structure
Attachments: ULI Report -Fayetteville AR_031720 FINAL.pdf
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Fayetteville. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize
the sender and know the content is safe.
Dear City Council and Mayor,
I'd like to relay a few important concerns I have regarding negotiations for the possible civic plaza land swap and parking
structure as part of the Cultural Arts Corridor Project.
I applaud efforts of City staff, the Mayor, Kit Williams, and City Council who have worked for months on this contract. I
know it has not been easy.
This is a legacy project. This project will have a profound influence on our community and economy for the next two
generations. Mistakes or rushed decisions made now will only be compounded in the future. There is just one
opportunity to get this project right. There should be no doubts and few concessions.
First, I bring these concerns as a resident and former downtown business owner (ddp gallery) who spent significant time
serving the community and working toward the Cultural Arts Corridor project. I've been participating since 2004 with the
Dover Kohl Downtown Master Plan process, I served on the inaugural Fayetteville Arts Council, I started First Thursday, I
was selected by Fayetteville Downtown Partners as a stakeholder for developing the Cultural Arts District zoning, and I
was appointed by Mayor Jordan as the arts and culture rep for his 2008 transition team. Since 2012, I've worked as a city
employee.
Here are my concerns.
*Lack of RFP
In March 2016, City Council passed a resolution of intent to explore development possibilities for the West Avenue lot.
The staff memo recommends developing an RFP with questions to be answered such as proof of financial feasibility,
management, lease proposals, etc.
In the summer of 2016, Council
Member Petty brought forward a potential development for the south side of the civic plaza. Once the information
became public - more investors came forward expressing interest. Paraphrasing from meeting minutes, Chief of Staff
Don Marr relayed that people want the City Council to list development priorities in an RFP so the process would be
open and transparent. Unfortunately, the RFP was never developed and thus the questions recommended in the
resolution have not been asked and therefore not answered.
Currently, Little Rock is seeking requests of interest for redevelopment of its River Market Hall. This RA provides an
example of what the City might seek for in a public private partner. This is what I wish was required for this land deal.
Link: https://www.littlerock.com/docs/default-source/rfp-rfq-bids/request-for-interest/rfi---river-market-
20200714 6 small.pdf?sfvrsn=2b1460b7 2
Food Hall parcel
This parcel is extremely valuable in terms of development potential and experience. It's value needs to be quantified.
For the Cultural Arts Corridor project, the city and Experience Fayettevillle are researching how the public spaces will be
maintained and operated. The experience a visitor has in the civic plaza and Fay Jones Woods will most likely include a
visit to the food and beverage establishment at the north end of the plaza. Will the experience at the food hall
compliment or detract? What research has been conducted into feasibility of a food hall? There are conflicting reports,
especially since the pandemic, questioning food halls as the future solution or a dead end concept. If the concept needs
to be adjusted, will the structure be able to accommodate new models for successful hospitality experiences? New
York's High Line Park has been used as a comparison to Fayetteville's Cultural Arts Corridor project. The High Line,
owned by NYC but operated by the High Line Conservancy, understands the need for an "experience." It is a major
tourist attraction but also used daily by neighbors. The High Line Conversancy's food vendor and cafe RFP is an example
of how to ensure vendors fulfill the experience. Since the food hall will be operating independently, the managing
entity/City loses the ability to ensure quality and consistency. See the link for the thoroughness of the High Line vendor
RFP for a cafe and food vendors.
Link: https://kkandp.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/High-Line-RFP-Coach-Passage-The-Porch.pdf
Urban Land Institute (ULI) Workshop Report
On the morning of December 15, 1 received a copy of the report (attached) about a meeting between city staff and the
developers with ULI staff. After reading the report, I have asked staff to please answer how the city has addressed
recommendations from ULI such as "Hire an Outside Consultant to Evaluate the Partnership" and 21 other points for
consideration.
Thank your for your time,
Dede Peters
Ward 2; Washington Willow neighborhood resident
Sent from my iPhone
f r���IJLI L.�YJUU "
March 18, 2020
Peter Nierengarten, PE
Environmental Director
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
113 West Mountain Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
RE: Cultural Arts Corridor Parking Deck — Public/Private Partnership Review
Dear Mr. Nierengarten,
Please accept this letter report summarizing the special Project Analysis Session for the City of
Fayetteville ("City") regarding the proposed Cultural Arts Corridor parking deck and public/private
partnership ("partnership").
ULI Advisory Services — Special Project Analysis Session
The goal of the ULI Advisory Services program is to bring the finest expertise in the real estate field to
bear on complex land use planning and development projects, programs, and policies. Since 1947, this
program has assembled well over 700 ULI-member teams to help sponsors find creative, practical
solutions for issues such as downtown redevelopment, land management strategies, evaluation of
development potential, growth management, community revitalization, brownfield redevelopment,
military base reuse, provision of low-cost and affordable housing, and asset management strategies,
among other matters. A wide variety of public, private, and nonprofit organizations have contracted for
ULI's advisory services. Each panel team is composed of highly qualified professionals who volunteer
their time to ULI. They are chosen for their knowledge of the panel topic and are screened to ensure
their objectivity.
The City of Fayetteville, AR, engaged with the ULI Advisory Services program to conduct a special Project
Analysis Session over a video conference call on February 26, 2020. This special session was
approximately three hours long and allowed the ULI panelists to engage with representatives of the City
of Fayetteville in a concentrated effort to provide recommendations on key questions proposed by the
City. ULI brought together four panelists for the session including, Richard Perlmutter (Chair), Tom
Murphy, Dan Anderton, and Paul Bernard. The biographies of the panelists are attached. ULI Advisory
Services staff included Tom Eitler and Kelsey Steffen.
Participants in attendance at the invitation of the City of Fayetteville included:
Peter Nierengarten - Environmental Director, City of Fayetteville
Greg House - Houses Inc and Depot LLC (Development Team)
Ted Belden — Old Buildings LLC (Development Team)
Susan Norton — Chief of Staff, City of Fayetteville
Lioneld Jordan — Mayor, City of Fayetteville
Wade Abernathy — Bond Construction Projects Manager, City of Fayetteville
Ryan Hale — Northwest Arkansas ULI Chapter, Board Member
Molly Rawn — Experience, Fayetteville, CEO
Sterling Hamilton — Sage Partners, Broker (Development Team)
Audy Lack — Miller Boskus Lack, Architect (Development Team)
Rob Sharp — Rob Sharp Architect (Development Team)
The Assignment
The City of Fayetteville presented the following questions to the ULI Advisory Services special Project
Analysis Session panelists:
1. What do you see as key contractual elements to ensure that this specific project is successful?
2. What are the key elements to ensure that this project can be a model for future Public -Private
Partnerships in Fayetteville?
3. What common legal barriers are common for public/private partnerships and should be
considered as part of contract negotiations.
4. What contractual provisions should be included in the contract language to protect the City in
the event of default or neglect associated with the building on the north end of the civic plaza
and the commercial space under the parking deck.
5. How do we ensure an equitable transaction between the City and the Development Team?
6. How do we clearly and simply communicate to elected officials and the public an equitable
transaction for all parties?
7. Taking into consideration trading the developer's currently entitled development rights due
to the use of the developable area consumed by the public parking deck, plus the air rights over
preserved buildings. This is in addition to the value to the community in preserving historic
structures and the sacrifice of the developer by conserving these buildings.
8. What are some strategies for reclaiming public support for the vision and purpose of this
partnership amidst a controversial community narrative?
Key Observations and Recommendations
Given the City's need to build the garage, the ULI panel agrees with the.City in their pursuit of this
public/private partnership. Through this partnership, the City can not only deliver the needed parking
but also use the garage to leverage redevelopment of additional commercial and mixed -use (proposed
hotel) on this site. This site has the potential to be a catalyst for the development and the realization of
the City's vision for the Cultural Arts Corridor.
In order to achieve its vision, the City needs to shift the existing narrative from a partnership to develop
a single use parking structure to a shared placemaking redevelopment which has the potential to unlock
economic development for the area. The City should also look to attract outside funding sources to
preserve municipal dollars and improve public perception of this endeavor. The City should show extra
care in the selection of a private partner and in the drafting of all binding agreements so as to reinforce
trust and transparency, ensure equitable outcomes, and increase the probability that the project meets
and/or exceeds community expectations.
Recommendations
During the Project Analysis Session, the panelists discussed and provided answers and
recommendations to the questions asked by the City of Fayetteville. Through this discussion of the
questions posed by the City, three major topic areas emerged in which the panel provided more specific
recommendations. These recommendations are weaved amongst the various questions but ultimately
Video Project Analysis Session — Fayetteville, AR
provide guidance to the City of Fayetteville on how to create a clear, fair, and mutually beneficial
development partnership with a private entity or entities, what legal barriers or other provisions to be
mindful of, and how to improve public perception of this partnership throughout the process of this
project. The recommendations are detailed in the section below.
Public/Private Partnership Agreement Elements (Addresses questions 1,2,4,5)
This section provides recommendations related to the contractual elements that will ensure the
project's success, that it can be used as a model for future public/private partnerhips, and that will be
equitable and protect the City in the event that the developer doesn't fulfill their contractual
obligations.
Detailed Contract — First and foremost the contract that is drawn up for the partnership needs
to clearly delineate roles and responsibilities, project scope, milestone and performance
metrics/requirements, as well as other standard guarantees, remedies, representations and
reversionary clauses if appropriate. The contract must also include some of the elements
described below, including, what the agreed -upon long-term vision of the project will be, such
as what programming elements are expected or should occur on -site and what the quality
should be of the buildings and open space of the site. All phases of the project should also be
included as part of the contract. The contract should also include an agreed upon contingency
plan for the City in the event their development partner fails to uphold their portion of the
contract.
Phase the Project — Given the deadline to build the parking structure the panel recommends the
City break the project into three digestible phases, the first being the garage. As the City doesn't
have its development partner in place for the future hotel (or other use) Building, breaking this
project into multiple phases allows Fayetteville to focus on the garage building while continuing
to work out the details of the remaining site. If the liner building needs tc be built with the
garage, the developer will need to prepare to fund its development and negotiate the leasing
terms of the commercial space.
Create an Unwind and Mutual Release Agreement — Creating an Unwinc and Mutual Release
Agreement will ensure that there is a contingency plan agreed upon by both parties that
explores "what happens if' scenarios. For example, if the economy slows down. Can the garage
stand on its own? What is the developer still responsible for a given condition where
redevelopment of the other portions of the site is not possible? Whatever this plan is, make sure
it's clear and captured as part of the detailed contract.
Long Term Vision — Fayetteville needs to iron out the details of the long-term vision of this
entire site. The panelists stated that the City needs to think about the prcgramming of the site
as well as the quality of the project. This needs to be figured out early on so that the
programming isn't thrown together or just passive. These elements should be reflected in the
contract in some capacity to ensure that the City and the developer(s) hare clear expectations
about the desired product.
o Programming -Reach out the community for recommendations on what they would like
to see. This element can also be included in the RFP to help ident.fy potential
development partners that have ideas. It's also worth considering early on what will
Video Project Analysis Session — Fayetteville, AR
become of the garage as parking needs decrease with the continued development of
autonomous vehicles.
o Quality - This part of the project needs to be momentous and memorable as the rest of
the Cultural Arts Corridor. Use this as an opportunity to establish clear expectations on
quality at the beginning of the process and ensure a development partner can achieve
that quality.
• Vertical Condo Negotiation — The garage and liner building will likely need a vertical condo
regime that sets out priorities and responsibilities with respect to condemnation and casualty
loss.
• Trust (City and Developer(s)) —There needs to be a strong sense of City and their development
partner. The partnership needs to be fair and transparent between both parties and detailed in
a way that ensures that both parties have a shared responsibility in the success of this project.
• Trust (City and the Public) — Another important element is the trust between the public and the
City (discussed in more detail below). By incorporating many of the elements described
throughout this section, the City can regain faith and credit from the community by
demonstrating how they have reduced potential risks associated with a partnership.
• Hire Outside Consultant to Evaluate the Partnership — The panelists recommend that the City
engage a third -party consultant to evaluate the proposed partnership terms as they related to
land economics and equity. Some companies with land economics expertise include RCLCO Real
Estate Advisors, HR&A Advisors, Inc., and JLL. This evaluation can review the existing terms and
take into consideration the air rights and potential future land use/zoning conditions of the site.
Not only would this evaluation provide the City with peace of mind, but this information could
be used to provide peace of mind to the public that has concerns over the equity of the
proposed partnership.
Use Outside Funding Sources — The panel strongly recommends Fayetteville pursue additional
funding beyond their General Obligation Bonding capacity. There are multiple funding sources
that this project could qualify for, possibly reducing the City's direct contribution for this project.
Preserving City funding is also an excellent talking point for City officials regarding this project.
The panel recommended the City explore the following funding sources:
o Local and Federal Historic Tax Credits
o New Market Tax Credits
o Transportation Infrastructure Finance Innovation Act Credits (TIFIA) or Railroad
Rehabilitation & Improvement Financing (RRIF)
■ Union Station in Denver, CO was able to get TIFIA funds and is similarly located
adjacent to a privately owned railroad. Consider contacting Christine Barnet,
who was instrumental in helping Denver get these funds.
o Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program
o Federal/State Small Business Grant/Loan Programs
o Other Federal Tax Credit Programs
• Leasing Strategies — Consider alternative leasing strategies
Video Project Analysis Session — Fayetteville, AR
4
o Reverse Ground Lease - This could be structured to provide an incentive to the
developer to hold the asset for a long time. For example, a ground lease could be
bought out by the developer starting at FMV in year one anc declining by 10% per year
until it reaches $1 in year 10.
o Pre — Leasing - The city could require 35% pre -leasing requirement before building
permits are released.
• Review Similar Projects — Greenville, SC is a very successful city of about 100,000. Through a
very creative public/private partnership and great design the City wZs able to revitalize its
Downtown. It is, along with Lancaster, PA and Loveland, CO models for Fayetteville's proposed
Cultural Corridor Developments. In each case the City had a clear strategic vision about what
they wanted to happen and how it might catalyze additional investrrent.
The financing in the three cities was multilayered with funds coming from private, public, and
philanthropic sources. In each place the quality of the design of the development was very high
and seen as important for the success of the development. In each city the relationship
between the developer and public officials was characterized by trust and strong confidence.
In Greenville, SC the City partnered with a developer on a vacant pie_e of property along the
Reedy River in Downtown. The development known as RiverPlace is a mixed -use development
of offices, condo, artist studios, and retail. About 20 percent of the cost of the development
was public funds, much of which was invested into public space.
In Loveland, CO, the City created a public/private partnership with a!local foundation, which
provided the seed funds, to restore and expand a vacant theater in cowntown. The restoration
and expansion of the theater, catalyzed hundreds of millions of dollars in additional investment
in the city.
In Lancaster, PA the revitalization of the old Farmer's Market using public funds and a
public/private partnership that restored surrounding buildings has IEd to millions of additional
private investments and a very vibrant downtown.
ULI is in the process of developing a report that includes case studies on the three cities
mentioned above. This report is expected to be published in May 20.20. ULI will share this report
with the sponsor once the report is finalized.
Legal Considerations (addresses Question 3)
The panel made the following recommendations to the City of Fayetteville related to potential legal
conditions that could complicate the public/private partnership or other contractual elements the City
should be aware of in order to avoid risk with the partnership.
• Bond Type — There could be private use limitations on the garage depending on the type of
bond issued for financing (taxable v. tax-exempt). For example, the I-otel may not be able to
secure spaces in the garage as envisioned by the agreement, because the bond was tax-exempt.
The panel recommends that the City investigate this limitation and consult with a public finance
advisor to help determine if the proposed hotel use triggers any private activity bond issue. If it
Video Project Analysis Session — Fayetteville, AR
does, and the City wishes to move forward, the consultant should be able to advise on possible
refunding/restructuring options or other remedies. Given the current interest rate environment,
it's likely the taxable bond rate isn't much more than the tax-exempt rate.
Stick to Your Role —The panel stated that the greatest conflicts arise when the public entity ties
the hands of the developer. The best strategy is for the City to set up the agreement that is clear
on the role of the City and the role of the developer(s). Good partnerships happen when the
roles of the City and the developer(s) are agreed upon from the get -go and everyone sticks to
their role. If the developer can do their job, then the City has set the stage right and has done its
job. However, the City should feel empowered to establish performance criteria for the
developer(s) with penalties for not reaching milestones included in the agreement.
• Uncomplicate the Deal — Keeping the deal as simple as possible will help avoid potential legal or
contractual complications that could hold the project up. The panel's general feedback was that
the deal is too complicated in terms of ownership. Less complication will also about the City to
know how efficiently unwind a transaction in the event of an issue with the partnership.
Building the Garage First — As mentioned above, if the City needs to meet its deadline for
building the garage and the parking is needed then they should move forward with getting all
the pieces in place to accomplish this. With this strategy, however, the developer needs to be
held accountable for their portion of the parking in the garage in the event they do not
immediately deliver their portion of the project by providing a performance guaranty or by
posting a performance bond for their obligation. The City should require the developer to get an
insurance policy for their cut of the parking so that they can pay their fair share of the bond
back.
Improving Public Perception and Support for Public/Private Partnerships (addressed Questions 6,7)
Much of the panel discussion focused on the public perception issue with this type of partnership. The
panel offered the following recommendations to try and shift this perception and communicate the
benefits of the City entering this type of partnership.
Change the Narrative — Rather than focusing on the public/private partnership the City should
change the narrative of this project. The City should communicate to the public that this project
is an economic catalyst for the rest of the Cultural Arts Corridor. One way to get the public's
support in this is to utilize an economic opportunity index. Enterprise Community Partners
offers this type of assessment and could provide the City with the information to explain to the
community how this investment will impact the community positively.
Clearly Show the Phases — As mentioned above, breaking this entire project into three distinct
phases creates an easier explanation of the planned execution of the project for the public.
Especially given that the developer who will ultimately have to deliver isn't currently at the table
the conversation with the public needs to be simplified and start with this first phase, involving
the garage. This will help the City clearly articulate what everyone is putting on the table and
here is what the City anticipates getting. The rest of this conversation should focus on the
ultimate quality of the project and what the City is aspiring to accomplish.
Video Project Analysis Session — Fayetteville, AR
Site Design Considerations
Throughout the panel session, the following design recommendations were made.
• Consider looking at the block as an urban city block and focusing circulation on the outside v.
the inside. The shared alley concept could be limiting what design options could exist on the
block. If the City were to need to build the garage independently, this solution could give the
City a way to create more space on the block for other future buildings.
• Most of the open spaces in the Cultural Arts Corridor appear to be predominantly passive. This
site is an opportunity to create an activated northern anchor to compliment some of the passive
spaces including maker & creative innovation activity spaces.
• Focus on the available transit elements and make sure they all tie together as part of the block
design. This is a great opportunity to create a good node to tie all the transportation modes
together in this area.
• Don't block W. Watson Street with buildings or parking so as not to limit the possibility for a
creative use of the triangular parking area along the tracks to the north of the site.
• The Design alternative shown below reflects the idea that the parking garage could be an
independent prestressed concrete span parking garage and have an external liner. This would
allow for a less expensive initial garage construction but would limit habitable construction on
top of the garage.
Video Project Analysis Session — Fayetteville, AR
Potential Design Alternative
RETAIL IST QM - 93L0 5f
INNUADIN &T ICE ti Ib,OXSF
}idiEL: IOD'�1N1S
INCU8fiT1D
RETAIL
IS21J 9F �
RBY MATS, vSSAIZS
l ST RbM 1�E7AlL
MT. BLL1G ISM sf
iRAC'ICi INOVAlIDA MVE A96YC
RAZASiVAN Sub :% / FM
FUE SUNDI
/) o SiKUCTUP.t< _kz 1ST RbM MAIL A,
}= S.S LEVELS MAO SF
100 STAGES HOTEL AWK
I I � kAR,ll� ENTICY
EXISS SL9Lt f.ST f1bbT. NAIL
fV&ITMNL [DWtRETG
PARKIN& SiR1lCRJR HCML6R.OF Vra
eAMIN& IETAI L
'[-CTIJN A -A*
Credit: Dan Anderton, Dewberry, February 26, 2020
Video Project Analysis Session — Fayetteville, AR
8
I
Conclusion
In conclusion, we hope these suggestions will help you as you move forward'with the development of
the Cultural Arts Corridor parking deck. It's clear that the City has been diligent and attentive in
approaching this effort as a mutually beneficial undertaking with the private {sector; an approach that
has long been encouraged by the Urban Land Institute.
Please let us know if there is anything we can do to be of assistance.
Sincerely
l
Thomas Eitler
Senior Vice President
The Urban Land Institute
Video Project Analysis Session — Fayetteville, AR
I
i
7
being marketable for both public and/or private developers. He takes care to ensure that a conceptual
design's integrity, density, and sense of place is maintained through the planning process. By carefully
planning FAR and densities, providing for a mix of diverse building and product types and phasing, and by
incorporating traditional and neo-traditional design styles, his community developments are poised to
fulfill the needs of the market and a wide cross section of prospective renters, buyers, visitors and shop
owners.
Mr. Anderton has been involved with, and completed, hundreds of projects involving direct interaction
with citizens, developers, architects, planning boards, County Councils, Mayors, public utilities,
Transportation officials, and other involved parties. The juggling of everyone's interests throughout the
completion of a plan or project is extremely important. The desire being to go through the design and
planning process with the majority of stakeholders feeling as though they have succeeded in having their
personal vision incorporated into the community.
Mr. Anderton graduated with a Bachelor of Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning from
Utah State University in 1983 and with a Masters of Landscape Architecture from the University of Illinois
in 1985 with an emphasis on Behavioral Design and Placemaking.
Dan is currently employed by Dewberry, a national planning, engineering, and architectural firm, and is
responsible for Community Planning and Urban Design within the company. He has worked for architects,
engineers, landscape architects, and horticulturalists throughout his career giving him a unique and
holistic perspective of community planning, urban design and Landscape Architecture.
Tom Murphy
Senior Resident Fellow, ULI/Klingbeil Family Chair for Urban Development
ULI —the Urban Land Institute
Washington, D.C.
Tom Murphy is Senior Resident Fellow, ULI/Klingbeil Family Chair for Urban Development. Murphy,
former mayor of Pittsburgh, joins other ULI senior resident fellows who specialize in public policy,
retail/urban entertainment, transportation/infrastructure, housing, real estate finance and
environmental issues. His extensive experience in urban revitalization -what drives investment, what
ensures long-lasting commitment -is a key addition to the senior resident fellows' areas of expertise.
Prior to his appointment as senior resident fellow, Murphy had served as ULI's Gulf Coast liaison, helping
to coordinate with the leadership of New Orleans and the public to advance the implementation of
rebuilding recommendations made by ULI's Advisory Services panel. In addition, he worked with
Louisiana state leadership, as well as with leadership in hurricane -impacted areas in Mississippi,
Alabama and Florida to identify areas appropriate for ULI involvement.
Prior to his service as the ULI Gulf Coast liaison, Murphy served three terms as the mayor of Pittsburgh,
from January 1994 through December 2005. During that time, he initiated a public -private partnership
strategy that leveraged more than $4.5 billion in economic development in Pittsburgh. Murphy led
efforts to secure and oversee $1 billion in funding for the development of two professional sports
facilities, and a new convention center that is the largest certified green building in the United States. He
Video Project Analysis Session - Fayetteville, AR
12
developed strategic partnerships to transform more than 1,000 acres of blighted, abandoned industrial
properties into new commercial, residential, retail and public uses; and he oversaw the development of
more than 25 miles of new riverfront trails and urban green space.
From 1979 through 1993, Murphy served eight terms in the Pennsylvania State General Assembly House
of Representatives. He focused legislative activities on changing Western Pennsylvania's economy from
industrial to entrepreneurial, and authored legislation requiring the Commonwealt) of Pennsylvania
pension fund to invest in venture capital. In addition, he authored legislation creati-ng the Ben Franklin
Technology Partnership, which is dedicated to advancing Pennsylvania's focus on technology in the
economy; and he authored legislation to encourage industrial land reuse and to transform abandoned
rail right-of-ways into trails and green space.
Murphy served in the Peace Corps in Paraguay from 1970 through 1972. He is a 19-93 graduate of the
New Mayors Program offered by Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government. He holds a
Master of Science degree in Urban Studies from Hunter College, and a Bachelor of science degree in
Biology and Chemistry from John Carroll University.
He is an honorary member of the American Society of Landscape Architects; a board member of the
Pennsylvania League of Cities and Municipalities; and a board member of the National Rails to Trails
Conservancy. He received the 2002 Outstanding Achievement of City Livability Award from the U.S.
Conference of Mayors and was awarded the 2001 Pittsburgh Man of the Year Award by Vectors
Pittsburgh.
Paul Bernard
Executive Vice President, Advisory Services
ULI —the Urban Land Institute
Washington, D.C.
Paul is an Executive Vice President for the Urban Land Institute (ULI), a nonprofit education and research
institute that focuses on issues of land use, real estate and urban development. The mission of the
Institute is to provide leadership in the responsible use of land and in creating and sustaining thriving
communities worldwide. Mr. Bernard recently joined ULI and manages the Advisory Services, Urban Plan,
Professional Development and the Awards programs.
Prior to joining ULI, Mr. Bernard served as Vice President at Enterprise Community Partners, Inc., where
he led the organization's national public -sector and community development advisory
practice. Previously, Paul held several senior roles in government and the private sector, including Senior
Vice President at Walker & Dunlop (NYSE: WD) where he led the company's Investment Advisory
practice. He was also a Principal and Division Head at MunieMae (NYSE: MMA), managing the growth and
operations for approximately $1.0 billion in institutional capital. Mr. Bernard also held senior positions at
the City of Detroit, where he was appointed by Mayor Dennis Archer as the Director of Planning and
Development and a Member of the Economic Development Cabinet, and at Public Financial Management
(PFM), where he was a Senior Managing Consultant for federal, state and local municipalities and public
authorities on traditional and alternative financing initiatives. Mr. Bernard holds a master's in Public Policy
from Harvard University, an MBA and a bachelor's degree in Foreign Service from Geo:getown University.
Video Project Analysis Session - Fayetteville, AR
13
