[0:55] 26. Madam clerk or Ms. Secretary will you please call the roll? Everyone as I call

[1:04] roll if you could just please confirm your attendance. Chip Collins. Present. Andy

[1:08] Bowman. Here. Tasha Battle. Absent. Hardy Dorsey. Present. Joe Housman. Here. Sonny Park.

[1:16] Here. Ed O'Connor. Absent. We have a quorum. Great. I need a motion to approve

[1:22] the meeting agenda, which is in front of you.

[1:29] Moved. I have a second. Second. Moved by Mr. Park,

[1:33] seconded by Mr. Housman to approve the meeting agenda on favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? The motion

[1:41] passes. I need a motion to approve the meeting minutes from last meeting. Are those in front of

[1:54] Yes.

[1:55] So moved.

[2:02] I have a second.

[2:05] All right.

[2:06] Moved by Mr. Dorsey.

[2:07] Seconded by Mr. Hausman for approval of the meeting.

[2:11] Meeting minutes all in favor say aye.

[2:13] Aye.

[2:13] Opposed?

[2:17] Motion passes.

[2:19] We'll now move to the next agenda item.

[2:22] New business.

[2:23] We have the introduction of a new staff member apparently.

[2:26] Yes, we do.

[2:28] We'd like to introduce you to Mary Adkins.

[2:30] Mary joined us in January after three, three and a half years with the Georgia

[2:36] State Senate as a policy writer in economic development and regulated

[2:40] industries, attended law school at the University of Kentucky and has been a

[2:45] great addition to our team and doing great work for us. And so you will see

[2:50] Mary's face around frequently. We've sort of splitting duties to some degree.

[2:55] We've got so much real estate work that we're doing in the city right now

[2:59] that I spend a lot of my time on real estate initiatives and Mary is spending

[3:02] her time on corporate recruitment and retention and servicing our business

[3:08] community of close to 6,000 businesses strong here in the city. So, welcome, Mary.

[3:14] Welcome, Mary. Glad to have you. Chip, I would also like to, of course, Jim Woodward,

[3:20] our council is here with us from Pope and Flynn. We all know Jim and I

[3:24] I would like to introduce Patrick Cason and Brett Bowden from Woodfield Development.

[3:30] They're going to be joining us today and they attended also our City Council meeting last

[3:36] Tuesday and we'll be talking about their project today on the North River Shopping Center site.

[3:43] Welcome, gentlemen.

[3:45] We're glad you're here.

[3:46] We look forward to hearing more about your project.

[3:50] Before we get to that, we have to elect our development authority officers for 2026.

[3:58] This is the first meeting we've had in 2026, so we have to do that.

[4:04] I have served as chair.

[4:06] Mr. Bowman has served as vice chair.

[4:08] I believe we're both willing to serve again, but I opened it up for nominations.

[4:13] Let's vote for vice chair first.

[4:16] I have a nomination for vice chair.

[4:19] Nominate Andy Baumann. Okay, I don't have a second of that nomination. We've got a nomination from Mr.

[4:26] Houseman, seconded by Mr. Dorsey for Andy Baumann as vice chair. Are there any other nominations?

[4:36] All in favor of Andy Baumann as vice chair, say aye. Opposed? All right, Andy, congratulations.

[4:42] Thank you. Now we need to nominate a chair for 2026. Is there a nomination? Yes, a current

[4:54] chair. Okay. And a second of that. Second. All right. Mr. Dorsey nominates some character

[5:02] named Chip Collins. Houseman seconds. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? All right.

[5:10] For the record, I don't think there was any other mayors.

[5:13] I will remain. Oh, yeah, I didn't ask for any of a self-serving or were there any other

[5:18] nominations? No. Okay. All right. Well, I'm sure Mr.

[5:23] Bellman is happy to serve as vice chair and thank you for reallecting me to this position.

[5:31] Okay. Now we get to the meat of the meeting. And let's see. Well, first, before we

[5:39] Before we get to the real meat, I asked Chris to remind us of, since we haven't had a meeting

[5:47] in so long, to remind us of our mission statement.

[5:50] You will recall, I think we all know that we're authorized by a Statstorey authority

[5:56] from the state, but within that authority, we also, a few years ago, worked hard and

[6:02] developed a mission statement so that we have something to internally guide us.

[6:06] I mean, our first question is always, do we have the statutory authority to take whatever

[6:12] measure we're doing?

[6:13] But then second, the mission statement should be sort of our guide as to, you know, whether

[6:20] we want to vote in favor of something or not.

[6:22] So I'll just read it.

[6:23] The primary mission of our authority is to support city sponsored projects, redevelopment

[6:28] initiatives, economic development goals, educational institutions, and other nonprofit

[6:34] organizations within the city that's already accomplished it accomplishes this

[6:38] by providing taxable and tax exempt bond financing opportunities and other

[6:43] incentives pursuant to the Georgia Development Authority's law of where

[6:47] everybody's seen that mission statement but it's always good to reread it and

[6:51] remind ourselves especially since we're about to hear something in real

[6:55] time of what we're here for. Is there a discussion about I don't think it's

[7:02] It's an action item, but is there any discussion, is everybody pleased with the way the mission

[7:07] statement currently reads anything that jumps out to anyone that might need changing?

[7:15] Yeah, we worked hard on it, and I think this pretty much covers everything.

[7:19] All right, with that, let's move to the next agenda item.

[7:23] And that is a review of the tax abatement proposal for Woodfield Development in North

[7:30] River Apartments.

[7:31] And Chris Burnett, I believe, is going to make that presentation.

[7:38] Okay.

[7:51] And I'll acknowledge for the record that Tasha Paddle has just entered the meeting and

[7:57] we can record her as present.

[8:00] Welcome.

[8:02] So we are going to talk today about a project in terms of fulfilling the mission of our

[8:08] body here, the Development Authority, and how that correlates to initiative of

[8:13] the city.

[8:13] and this is sort of the epitome of one of those projects. The North River

[8:18] redevelopment, which is in North Sandy Springs. We're going to start out with a

[8:25] little history lesson. Andy will remember this, but going back as far as I

[8:30] believe it was 2016-2017, City Council appointed a North End task force to

[8:38] evaluate ways to stimulate growth in the North End of the city, which had

[8:42] been a number of years without any new projects done. That was followed later on

[8:49] by an engagement with a group called TSW, architectural and engineering firm,

[8:54] design firm that focused on four shopping centers in the north end of the

[8:58] city that are fairly old and were large enough sized pieces of land that

[9:05] could be ripe for redevelopment. So TS study did a study of those four

[9:10] properties including some concept designs for potential site work and let's look at North River

[9:17] in particular. So this is the property roughly, well not quite because some of it's been demoed,

[9:22] but this was the property at the time of the study. This was an image that was in TSW's report.

[9:28] This is a total of 13 acres of land to get your bearings. This is Roswell Road,

[9:33] Dunwoody Place comes in right here and just north of this site is the river. So this

[9:39] This is very close to the most northern point on Rosalind Road in terms of being in the

[9:44] city of Sandy Springs.

[9:47] I'm sure you've driven by this center plenty of times.

[9:49] It's currently anchored by a dollar general store.

[9:52] Sumat's restaurant, for those of you who might know that, has also been in there

[9:56] for a number of years.

[9:58] So let's look at the next.

[10:00] So with this piece of land, basically a rectangular piece of land, these were

[10:04] the ideas presented in TSW's study that was done in 2021. It calls for a variety of mixed

[10:12] uses, food hall with restaurants, multi-family, retail stores, basically anchored around a

[10:20] public park in the center of the property. Also some townhomes, some live work units.

[10:29] were all part of this concept drawing that they did.

[10:33] I don't think we'll see this, but this was the idea of the park

[10:36] and some of the buildings surrounding at this park

[10:38] fronting Roswell Road.

[10:41] So fast forward to concepts of group random.

[10:45] What we looked at was in 2021.

[10:47] In 2026, February of this year,

[10:50] we met with Mayor and Council on our retreat.

[10:52] And these were some concept drawings

[10:54] that were shared with them.

[10:55] So let's look at the next slide.

[10:57] First of all, this was a tactic you all may remember this site. This was the

[11:02] original site design once Woodfield got engaged in this project. The original

[11:08] fault was that multifamily would be on this portion of the property. This would

[11:12] be the southern section of the property. Orthale townhome units would be on the

[11:17] northern part and this was basically leaving the old retail that's there

[11:22] And it's been there for decades, including a dollar general store, which was in this

[11:28] center part of retail.

[11:30] And Patrick, it was 23,000 square feet, roughly, of retail that would have remained under this

[11:35] original plan.

[11:37] And it was like this in large part because the belief was that the retailers were there,

[11:43] that were there were going to stay for perpetuity.

[11:46] And to make a broader project work, he really had to take down all of the retail, meaning

[11:53] you had to buy out all of the leases that were there.

[11:56] And so it was believed that that was going to be very difficult and expensive to do,

[12:02] so this was the first concept drawing.

[12:04] Next slide will show what Matthew Amsbach, our city senior planner, conceived if we

[12:11] We could dream big enough to say, okay, if we could scrape the whole site, meaning the

[12:16] tenants that are there left, what could be done in place of the old retail that was originally

[12:21] drawn on?

[12:23] Incorporating the city park that had been designed in the TSW study in 2021.

[12:28] Doing retail, some jewel box restaurants here, some retail here as well.

[12:33] So that was Matthew's concept.

[12:36] We showed that to Mayor and Council in February and talked about if they would empower

[12:40] staff to move forward working with Insignia, the current landowner, and with

[12:45] Woodfield to determine can we get to a bigger vision than just leaving the old

[12:51] retail place. Next slide please. So let's look at what has transpired since the

[12:57] retreat in February of this year. This is probably one of the, if not the

[13:03] most recent, certainly a current design. What you see shaded here is now

[13:08] This contemplates the whole site being scraped. So all of the tenants moving out

[13:15] Everything coming down the whole 13 acres being scraped. This would be a city park

[13:19] This is shaded in sort of pinkish or mob. These are new retail buildings or restaurants

[13:27] These are the now the apartments so they stretch more into a little more of an L-shaped building

[13:32] these are still the town homes as was originally contemplated. So this is

[13:37] basically the center of sight this is an existing curb cut already on Roswell

[13:41] Road in there. So very much you know similar to what was designed back in

[13:47] 2021 by TSW. Let's look at another image of that. You can see here the green

[13:52] space playground areas here. This is an outdoor pavilion with public

[13:57] restaurants, a jewel box restaurant here, additional retail and restaurant

[14:01] space there. These are the apartments with their swimming pool and common

[14:07] areas in the center and then these are the for sale town home units on the

[14:12] north end of the property. And the park itself would be the piece we looked at

[14:18] here is about 0.71 acres of land area but when you take into

[14:23] consideration the right of way which will also be heavily streetscaped it

[14:27] It ends up being close to about one acre in total.

[14:30] All right, next slide will show us

[14:33] what the development would look like under this scenario.

[14:36] Woodfield, WF would be the site developer.

[14:39] They would build and own the apartment units.

[14:42] There will be separate builders

[14:43] for the construction of the town homes and the retail.

[14:47] The tenant leases will need to terminate.

[14:49] All tenant leases will need to terminate.

[14:52] And the overall 13 acre site would be totally scraped

[14:55] prepped for new construction including the park project. So what would be

[15:00] Our proposed is Woodfield building 336 traditional stack-flight multifamily units. There were before

[15:07] sale product here. These simple townhomes, 85 units. We're not ready to talk about who

[15:13] the builder is yet. They've asked that we keep that quiet while they're continuing to work

[15:18] through a few issues. But it is, we know who it is, and it's definitely a builder who

[15:23] can deliver. They absolutely have the financial capacity and history to build the units

[15:28] if they proceed. Restaurants in retail space about 10,000 square feet of retail. I mentioned

[15:36] the outdoor covered pavilion and some bathroom space that would be built kind of overlooking

[15:41] the park area. As I mentioned the 0.71 acre park that would be built and funded by Woodfield

[15:46] and then deeded to the city after completion of the park. And Woodfield would also include

[15:52] 70 public parking spaces there would be basically an inter-party agreement so the

[15:58] public parking would be available for patrons to the retail stores patrons to

[16:03] the park as well and we would have once the city took ownership of the park

[16:10] once it was deeded and conveyed to us and the city would manage and program

[16:15] the park from that point going forward so it would be our park would feel

[16:19] would build it and then deed it to us. Next slide will show us the estimated

[16:25] budget. It's about a six and a half million dollar project that includes

[16:29] hard cost of 3.9 million which there are budgeted items for playground

[16:34] equipment. It's also full architectural and signage and anything related to

[16:38] actually building the park. We've also estimated about 2.1 million in land

[16:43] value for that portion of the park, the land that would be deeded to the

[16:48] city post completion. And finally we've prorated the 70 public parking spaces

[16:54] because you'll park what about four spaces per thousand so you're gonna need

[16:59] about 40 parking spaces just to comfortably park the retail which would

[17:04] leave roughly between 25 and 30 spaces that would be more public in nature

[17:08] for park events. So while the parking is a good bit more expensive for 70

[17:13] spaces we said about 35% of the parking spaces would be some sort of

[17:18] earmark as available for park and public usage related to the city park. So we

[17:23] allocated $525,000 for that component. To incentivize Woodfield, compensate them

[17:32] for this project, which is to build the cost, I'm sorry, to build the park at

[17:36] their expense, buy the land at their expense, and then donate it to the

[17:40] city post completion. We're proposing really two different incentive

[17:45] makes this one is our traditional 10-year tax abatement. It would be only

[17:49] apartments only, would not include the retail, and cannot include the

[17:53] residential. Those are not eligible. The for sale

[17:57] residential are not eligible for abatements. The value of that on a net

[18:02] present value discounted basis is about 2.5 million dollars.

[18:07] City Council voted last Tuesday to also approve a waiver

[18:10] or a credit for what we call impact fees, which is about $4,400 per apartment unit.

[18:17] That total is about $1,525 in credit towards recreation impact fee waivers plus building

[18:24] permit fee waivers that are valued at about another $250,000.

[18:28] So when you put the total package together, it's on a net present value basis.

[18:35] It's about $4.3 million against a $6.5 million project.

[18:39] In real dollars, it's probably about $5.3 to $5.5 million in undiscounted dollars, but

[18:45] we discount it because those tax savings occur over a 10-year period.

[18:50] So they have to earn those out over the decade term of five months.

[18:55] The estimated net positive impact to the city, and this is net of the waiver of

[19:01] permitting and impact fees, is about $6.7 million.

[19:05] dollars. And the reason for that is right now this property is over a 10-year

[19:11] term if nothing were done on this site the city's portion of the taxes would be

[19:16] about 182,000 over a 10-year term. So that's not per year that's over the

[19:22] full duration of 10 years. Under this with the value of what will be on the

[19:27] site it's about a 200 million dollar total anticipated to praise value for

[19:32] the assets to be built on the site, the city's portion of the tax is over the next 10 years.

[19:37] Even netting out the abated piece is approximately $2 million.

[19:41] So it's about a 10-fold increase over the next 10 years of what we would currently

[19:46] receive if nothing were done on the site.

[19:49] Next slide will show us the spreadsheet.

[19:56] We ran our own spreadsheet as well.

[19:58] We're actually both very close.

[20:00] this is Ryan tax services which would field use and their calculations we

[20:05] have an in-house model they were very very close you'll see because of the way

[20:09] our tax abatement burns down you running this can you recording there's no way

[20:14] to make it bigger larger yeah this is probably a little tough I mean I'm not

[20:22] 2020 let's see if we could blow that if you can't well so you know the way

[20:31] the tax abatement works is you start out once the project is completed and it's

[20:35] reached its basis, then in your taxes are sort of at full value at that point.

[20:40] Then in your first year, there's a 50% reduction in property taxes. In year two,

[20:46] it goes to 45%. In year three, it goes to 40%, and etc. It declines by 5% a

[20:52] year, burning to zero at the end of the 10th year. So it's going to be

[20:57] front-enloaded, obviously your greatest tax savings is going to be in your first

[21:01] full year. That's a $551,000 tax savings and you can see it stepping down

[21:07] each year because of the burn-off of the percentage. We ran into a net 7% net

[21:15] present value discount, about $2,530ish to $2,550ish on the net present value,

[21:21] again about 3.3 millionish if you don't do any discount and that's over

[21:26] with a 10 year charge.

[21:29] Any questions on that before we move on?

[21:32] So great to see that brighten up that notice in.

[21:38] Have you all done any estimate

[21:41] at the traffic count before and after the project?

[21:46] Sonny, I'm honestly, Chris,

[21:48] and I don't know if we did any evaluation.

[21:50] Roswell Rowe's got some pretty hefty traffic counts

[21:52] already, certainly this will add more population density,

[21:57] No doubt about it, but I don't know you all were not required to do traffic study in this site

[22:02] But sunny, I think given the size of Roswell Road, you know, it's four lanes right there with center-turn lanes

[22:08] If you're requiring about a traffic impact, I really think it's it's going to be relatively minimal because you've got such a large road already there

[22:17] Well, I'll go ahead

[22:19] I was going to ask if

[22:21] for the apartments and the townhomes. Are you thinking that it'll be residents

[22:28] that are already here maybe relocating or is that to bring in new residents into

[22:34] the city? So I think it will likely be a combination of the two.

[22:40] The town, well

[22:42] let's jump ahead then and then we may be able to talk a little further. Before we

[22:47] move before we move through. I've got two just two questions and then we can you

[22:52] know kind of break it up a little bit.

[22:56] Two things when I was looking at the

[22:58] PowerPoint before I came here, two things popped out. First the construction

[23:04] costs of the park $3.9 million for a less than an acre park seems really

[23:11] high. Where did that number come from? Are we in that number? So our parks and

[23:16] Director Brent Walker has been working with Woodfield's architectural team on the

[23:21] park design. One of the things you've got some site challenges, you know, this

[23:25] falls off pretty sharply from Roswell Road to you can have a series of

[23:28] retaining walls. They will be fairly sizable areas of playground space. We

[23:32] use probably the best materials available for building playgrounds. It's

[23:37] the rubber-sympathic material that you use, safer for kids if they fall.

[23:46] I

[23:46] equipment play equipment within the playgrounds. Heavy landscaping so but

[23:53] those numbers have been provided by Woodfields GC and you guys want to

[23:59] speak to this you're welcome to. I think Brent has felt like they are

[24:02] reflective of what it would cost us if we were going to build it as a city.

[24:07] And then the next question you had the net positive impact of the city at

[24:13] 6.7 million dollars but you said that includes the park which you valued at

[24:20] 6. something so is it fair to say most of the net impact value in the first ten

[24:24] years comes from that park not cash into the city? It is Chip yeah we talked

[24:29] about the benefits to the city from a tax perspective were about 10 about 2

[24:33] million dollars over the next 10 years and the cost of our waivers on the

[24:39] front-end or million 775. So a high percentage. The good news is, is that the

[24:45] increase in tax value and the revenue the city will receive, only slightly, but

[24:51] does exceed the value of the fees given up today. So, but it really is in the cost

[24:58] of having the park. And I don't think the addition of a new park is anything

[25:02] to sniff that. I mean I think it's a great thing. So, but I just wanted to

[25:05] I'm sure everybody was clear on that.

[25:08] And you had something?

[25:08] Yeah, so I appreciate Sonny's question on traffic.

[25:12] But would it also be fair to say that this is a less intense

[25:16] use than 100% retail, which it could otherwise?

[25:19] I mean, if this had been fully renovated retail,

[25:25] more of a hundred and something thousand square feet,

[25:28] which I'm just in round, it was somewhere between 100

[25:30] and 200,000 square feet if I had to guess.

[25:33] Yeah, I don't recall.

[25:34] I mean, you had the bowling alley, you had all that other stuff there that a residential,

[25:38] which is going to be an 85% residential use or more, is actually a lower intensity of

[25:46] use than a retail with lots of curb cuts, a vibrant retail with groceries and all that

[25:52] other thing.

[25:52] I have to say that wouldn't be one is an inferior, but I think there's less intense

[25:58] traffic use as a result of the substantial residential component as opposed to

[26:04] fully a retail deal here. I mean I'm hoping that, I mean we're hoping that

[26:10] people don't, people can drive to the park but we're hoping that people in

[26:13] this area are walking to the park and walking to the retail. I mean that's

[26:17] sort of the hope. Well certainly the residents, the apartment residents,

[26:22] but this to be very clear is a public park. This is not just for those

[26:25] residents. That's correct. It's fully public. One of the things I know that we've talked about

[26:30] with Brent and his team in Rec and Park is programming the park and you know we'll be doing what's

[26:37] Kristen a night market because that's sort of testing the waters on events but you know the

[26:44] key to not just having a place to go but for place making is our team the Parks and Rec team

[26:51] needs to evaluate how to utilize this park to really attract the community

[26:57] here, not just the residents that are living in development. The people that

[27:00] are, you know, all the residents, there's a lot of people that live in the

[27:03] North End. How do we get them into this park? Because right now, if they're

[27:08] going to a park, they may be going down to Morgan Falls, but in terms of

[27:13] having a place right there in the North End, this will sort of become

[27:17] the signature park I think. What can you do on 0.7 acres? What kind of activities could the city

[27:25] have? So that's a great question. I unfortunately don't know the size of the green. Kristen,

[27:29] you might. So one of the things that we looked at with Woodfield was programming that park,

[27:34] as Chris said. So first of all, there will be, we're looking at sort of like two contiguous

[27:41] playgrounds there. So that in and of itself is a big activity and then you have a smaller

[27:45] green space that will be adjacent to the retail there so folks can have their kids out playing

[27:50] while they're waiting or while they're eating or whatever that looks like but we've also looked at

[27:54] what this can look like if we want to do something like a market or a festival there.

[28:00] Something smaller it's not huge but it's enough space to do something like we're doing in the

[28:04] north end with that night market we can move that there once we own this space

[28:09] so that we have the we will have the room there to program that sort of thing as well.

[28:14] But we want, I mean, and I think Chip's question is the right one, a question.

[28:20] We actually, as the economic development authority, we want to place into consideration the conditions

[28:25] to support the retail and restaurants that are going in there, right?

[28:28] Like, I mean, I know that I go over to the perimeter area on the Dunwoody side.

[28:33] They literally took away some parking lot and put in a little center green around

[28:39] those superacus there and jennies and a couple of those restaurants and they're playing cornhole

[28:46] so it attracts people to the businesses that are going in there and that's what I saw as the value

[28:51] here was this is a way to support successful business in the north end. Certainly a component

[28:59] and you do see it in downtown Alpharetta when that was developed and Park was put with

[29:05] dual box restaurants around it, same as the case in downtown Woodstock, the

[29:10] Ashford Lane, which is where the Super League is now. Right, that green space with

[29:15] cornhole there. So it's being done in other places successfully and this

[29:20] would certainly help to engage and probably better promote the success

[29:27] of the restaurants that go in because it is especially being downgrade a bit

[29:32] from Roswell Road, it's still a busy road, but because you're below grades, I think it's

[29:37] going to feel safer.

[29:38] It's going to feel a little more renewed.

[29:40] It is below street level before the parking lot.

[29:44] Who's going to pay?

[29:45] Who's going to pay for the maintenance of the park on going?

[29:47] The city.

[29:48] The city will pay for the maintenance.

[29:50] No cost sharing with the common area in terms of the retail that their customers

[29:58] are going to be waiting in this park, which is...

[30:00] Fine, but the city is undertaking. We'll have the D to this space.

[30:04] Correct.

[30:06] Any more questions on what has covered so far? Sorry.

[30:10] Okay, keep going.

[30:12] Let's go to the next slide.

[30:17] All right, so we're going to touch on sort of the job and financial calculations for this project.

[30:22] In years one through three, an estimate of approximately 700 construction jobs on the project.

[30:29] But that's really related, I think, to apartments only, right?

[30:34] The townhomes will have a different set of contractors because that will be a different

[30:39] development group.

[30:41] Upon completion of the apartments, Woodpeel would expect to employ about seven to ten

[30:45] people there.

[30:46] And then this is a rough estimate on the restaurants in retail, 25 to 35 additional

[30:51] jobs there.

[30:52] So you're talking about conceivably between 40 and 50 jobs that would be their long

[30:56] term after construction is completed. Total project value expected at about 200 million

[31:03] at completion. Over the next 10 years the city's property tax collections as I mentioned

[31:09] are expected to exceed two million dollars and that's net of the tax abatement we're

[31:14] considering today. Upon completion the city would be deeded to park with Woodfield

[31:20] about 6.5 million in and that would include title to the land that we would take our ship off.

[31:26] So the summary is net of the million 775 and city fee waivers projected net positive impact to the city,

[31:36] mostly chipped through the park itself, and the value is about 6.7 million dollars.

[31:41] And finally, and very importantly, first major development project in the north end of the decade.

[31:48] And we believe that this could be catalytic to the redevelopment of the water.

[31:54] It is at the gateway, really, as you come down from Roswell across the river.

[32:00] It's going to be the first major project you see as you come into the north end of Sandy Springs.

[32:06] And this has been a target asset for us for a number of years.

[32:10] We've been through sort of starts and stops at times with a previous owner.

[32:15] and now with Woodfield coming in the future looks extremely bright but we've

[32:22] got someone's got to be the first kid in the pool as I use the analogy somebody's

[32:25] got to get it started in the North End and they have stepped up and we're

[32:29] working together to make that happen so we do believe this will be a catalyst

[32:32] for more projects to come in the North End and then finally final slide we'll

[32:39] look at, going back to what we read earlier in the mission statement, your

[32:45] charge as development authority members to support the city-sponsored

[32:49] development projects through taxable and tax-exempt bond financing, which we're

[32:54] discussing today, and that is deemed, projects that are deemed to be in the

[32:58] public good of the citizens the same experience. We believe that the

[33:01] construction of the park, its conveyance to the city upon completion

[33:05] and the catalytic impact that this project should have in the North and the

[33:09] city are the epitome of public good. While it will unquestionably be enjoyed by

[33:15] the residents of the North River project, we think it will be enjoyed by a lot

[33:19] more than just that. This could become, should become a gathering point for

[33:24] many of the residents of North River. So finally, as our recommendation that we,

[33:28] to Chip's point, we believe the transaction is legally meets the

[33:32] statutory requirements of the Development Authority and its mission in

[33:35] intent and we recommend the request of debate that's on the table today.

[33:41] Now

[33:42] we'll open it for more Q&A. All right does anybody have any additional

[33:48] questions? We'll get a motion and we'll have a discussion on the motion I think

[33:52] that's how we're supposed to do it but you can certainly ask questions if

[33:56] you want to gather. If you want to do Robert's Rules we'll do a motion in a

[34:00] second, then we can open the forward question. Yeah, but we can ask questions now and then

[34:04] we can have discussions. With regards to the builder, you said that they have the capacity

[34:11] to do this. Did they go out to bid? You said somebody has the capacity. Did you have a

[34:19] bid process to see who would be eligible and was there other potential capacity people

[34:25] that could actually do the same work?

[34:27] So the city is not driving this process at all in terms of the construction of

[34:32] the apartments, the retail for the town homes. So it really is, it's a public

[34:39] private partnership but we're relying a lot more on the private, meaning that

[34:43] Woodfield, which has secured their debt and equity for the apartment piece of

[34:47] this, they're gonna do the site work on the overall 13 acres. I don't think

[34:52] you all will pull utilities to the town home sites with you, but you'll

[34:56] basically get it. You'll get it scraped and then whoever the builder ultimately

[35:02] is will come in and they'll pull the utilities to the 85 count home sites

[35:07] will be there. But Woodfield has assured us that they've secured their financing

[35:12] capacity to close on the land in October. The goal would be to close the

[35:17] abatement simultaneous with their land closing. Demo has actually already

[35:22] begun on some portion of the retail and the demo would be completed on the

[35:27] overall site when the last of the tenants moves out we expect by November

[35:32] end of November November and so all of the retail would then come down after

[35:37] that and site work would begin they would then do construction of the

[35:41] apartments I guess you all had the retail site here right while you're

[35:44] building the park you get it pad ready but they will not build the retail

[35:49] Those will likely be built by another retail specialist.

[35:54] So they have, they've demonstrated to us they have the capacity and then if I mentioned

[36:00] the home builder name, people would go, yeah, they're the real deal.

[36:05] Public company with very deep name.

[36:08] Thanks.

[36:11] Questions.

[36:14] And I suppose gentlemen from Whitfield might be able to answer a field of question if

[36:19] if anybody had one specific to them.

[36:21] If not, then requests of some sort.

[36:30] Anybody would like to make one.

[36:32] And then we'll have a discussion.

[36:34] And then we'll put it.

[36:35] I think it is a good opportunity for city

[36:37] to brighten up that North End

[36:39] and not give my motion to approve.

[36:43] Okay, and before that, our attorney wants to say something.

[36:48] And regardless of what you want to say,

[36:50] one thing I want you to weigh in on is that first threshold question of is this something that is

[36:56] within our statutory authority? It is, yes. So, and this is something similar to what this

[37:01] developer has done in the past. There's a lot of ways, similar to the Tremel Crow project

[37:06] that we met on last year and approved. A similar project is economic development in nature and

[37:12] we're doing a very similar tax incentive that we've done for several other deals,

[37:16] whether it's apartment homes or other type of projects in the city in the past. So,

[37:20] Is there anything else you wanted to add?

[37:23] So the motion, if you do want to move forward with the tax incentive, what we have in front

[37:27] of you today is a bond resolution, which is your official action to approve all the taxes

[37:32] in the documents.

[37:33] What that includes is a document called the Memorand of Understanding, which is the

[37:37] agreement that covers the tax incentive, but also the other incentives for providing

[37:41] for this project.

[37:42] Also, the parameters of the project, their capital investment goal plus the city park,

[37:50] definition of city park, plus they'll provide and maintain bathroom facilities and parking

[37:57] through the park as well.

[37:58] I'll be that part of there.

[37:59] And so we'll be doing separate agreements for the park and those parts and facilities

[38:03] and bathrooms can actually close.

[38:05] But also it attaches the tax agreement that goes before the board of tax accessors

[38:10] which is required for every Fulton County tax incentive deal, that form document as well.

[38:15] We're presenting that to the Board of Tax Accessors, like we do for other tax incentive deals,

[38:19] plus all the tax incentive documents, which is that lease agreement,

[38:22] where the development authority takes title to the apartment homes and leases it to the bond

[38:27] for titles for tax payment deals. Leases it to determine the tax incentive, which would be

[38:32] construction period plus 10 years, and then all the rest of the tax incentive documents,

[38:36] which is Bond Structured Documents, called Fresno Ventures Bond Purchase Agreement,

[38:41] all relate solely to the tax incentive, not regarding financing, you know, obligations

[38:46] to the city or development authority to find this project. Everything else is on the company

[38:51] to build, finance, and do it on their own. And I think that's important for everybody

[38:55] to know because we haven't done that many of these. And I'm sure we all have to sort of

[39:00] remind ourselves of how it all works. And it's that big, big set of documents that Jim does.

[39:05] But at the end of the day, it's just a pass-through mechanism through which a city through an authority

[39:13] can do these tax payments because the city can't just do it directly.

[39:18] And so the authority, you tell me if I'm saying anything wrong, the authority will

[39:22] take title to this property, but everything's a pass-through, either the city nor the

[39:27] authority nor anybody sitting in this room has any risk or exposure.

[39:31] the risk and exposure remains with the owners and farmers but Jim if for

[39:38] purposes of a motion can you boil down what you just said to one sentence we

[39:43] would be moving to approve the bottom resolution okay in connection with the

[39:48] ad no we have an agenda item sufficient to I think so yeah move that

[39:53] agenda item okay bottom resolution that's what we'll need all right so the

[39:58] The motion and Mr. Park, I believe you were about to make one.

[40:03] If you wanted to approve it, then the motion would be for approval of the bond resolution

[40:08] as presented by Mr. Burnett and staff.

[40:11] So do we have a motion?

[40:14] So moved.

[40:15] I'll second that due to the appropriate sign-offs that have already taken place.

[40:20] Okay.

[40:20] Second by Mr. Dorsey.

[40:24] I'll open it up for discussion.

[40:26] I would first like to take my Chairman's prerogative and just frame it a little bit.

[40:36] First, we've already talked about a reminder of what we are and what we have the authority to do.

[40:41] We're not a zoning board, so it's not up to us to debate whether or not this is the proper land use that has already been decided.

[40:49] It's not up to us to debate whether this project fits the parameters in the city code.

[40:56] that's up for city staff to do in the permitting process. Our job is to evaluate this project

[41:03] in light of our statutory authority and our mission statement of which I think the three

[41:08] that apply would be city sponsored project because the city is by granting and approving

[41:16] the incentives that it can. They've already shown they've the city councils voted

[41:21] signalling the city is in favor of this project. It's clearly a redevelopment

[41:27] initiative. We're scraping and we're building something new and it fits our

[41:31] economic development goal that we've talked about in this group a lot which

[41:35] is we should be incentivizing development and redevelopment where

[41:41] it's not happening as much. So do we need to incentivize development in

[41:46] city springs or inside 25? Maybe not as much but the north end we've all

[41:50] talked about is a great place for us as an authority to focus our efforts.

[41:56] So with that, I'll open it up for anything else anybody else wants to say.

[42:04] Typically we get a fee, so what is the fee for the Economic Development Authority?

[42:10] You want to go through the fee?

[42:12] One-eighth and one-percent of $110 million.

[42:15] So we charge a one-eighth and one-percent fee, do it one time at closing to the Economic

[42:20] Development Authority.

[42:21] to receive. So that would be what? $100,000 or so?

[42:27] $150,000. Okay. All right. Anybody else?

[42:37] All right. We've got a motion on the table for approval of the bond resolution. It's been

[42:41] seconded. All in favor say aye. Opposed? All right. The ayes have it. The motion passes.

[42:50] We look forward to seeing some activity up there on the north end, gentlemen.

[42:56] Mr. Chairman, I just, in fact, if you guys can head out if you'd like.

[42:59] While they're here, I just want to say it's a real pleasure to work with them.

[43:03] They're approved.

[43:04] This has not been an always easily navigatable transaction.

[43:10] You know, there's been some bumps along the road.

[43:13] So, by Dave, Dave just been persistent and we've worked closely with them for a month now.

[43:19] I just want to thank them publicly.

[43:22] And ready for use.

[43:24] Did it close?

[43:25] Thank you guys.

[43:26] I really appreciate it.

[43:27] Thank you.

[43:27] Thank you, Chris.

[43:28] Yeah.

[43:30] Okay.

[43:31] Thank you gentlemen.

[43:32] Take care.

[43:32] Good luck.

[43:34] Let's see.

[43:35] Now we've got other business open discussion and Q&A.

[43:39] I believe Mr. Bowman did have a question about.

[43:43] No, just Chris, can you update us on the project we approved last year?

[43:48] Yeah, so obviously you can see it's wide open right now.

[43:52] They've started wrapping the garage with the first layer of new apartments

[43:56] and they're already framing the town homes on the western side of the site.

[44:03] They're still targeting a 2027 delivery date.

[44:06] That seems pretty optimistic. It may be Q4 of 27, but you know you think about that still 12 14 months out

[44:14] Yeah, it's it's a big project

[44:17] 19,000 square feet of retail any announcements on the retail yet

[44:21] None that they want to share publicly, but yes, there's some real strong interest in some tenants

[44:27] I think we'd all be pleased to have come there's some good restaurants. Okay

[44:32] One could potentially be a relocation

[44:34] and then others would be new but so that's moving moving ahead well we're

[44:41] funding that project on a percentage of completion basis in fact we got a draw

[44:45] request again today so our inspector Dave Wells and his inspection team they

[44:50] go out they look at the pay request make sure that the work they're getting

[44:56] paid for the work that's already been done comes back it goes through so

[44:59] Tony

[45:00] And so we've got to pay requests by now. So we'll, by the time we fully fund the city's

[45:07] investment, the parking garage should be finished. And of course we'll have 111 spaces that are

[45:13] city-owned spaces that we will own. There is a buyout agreement, if I remember correctly,

[45:20] Jim. They can buy us out of two times cost leave. That sound right?

[45:27] I think they can buy us out if they so choose. I don't think they will. And the there's good

[45:35] probability that they're going to use 12 Oaks parking as their parking service company as

[45:43] well. That's who the city uses here at our facility. They do a good job for us. And

[45:49] And Kristen, hopefully, you feel the same.

[45:53] So they're in those negotiations now.

[45:56] If they do use 12 Oaks, it will make it a little more seamless

[46:00] since 12 Oaks is already doing our parking, probably

[46:03] the same equipment and same revenue oversight

[46:07] that would be done there as well.

[46:11] OK.

[46:12] Chris, how about the movie theater?

[46:18] Parkside.

[46:19] Parkside.

[46:19] So Parkside met with Jamestown just two weeks ago and the the challenge with

[46:28] that plan right now centers around the 80,000 square foot office building that

[46:33] is built into that plan. You all may not remember the conceptual site plan but

[46:38] it included a combination of apartments, townhomes, restaurants, retail, a park,

[46:44] and an office building. And it all has to be built around the theater because the

[46:49] theater has a long-term lease in the theater and has in their lease they have

[46:56] parking space commitments. Obviously you've got to park theater for your

[46:59] patrons. Well most of the potential development would go where the parking

[47:04] spaces are now. The surface asphalt. It's a good

[47:09] complimentary use to have an office building because the theater is

[47:13] filling up at night as the office tenants are leaving. So shared parking

[47:17] between an office building and the theater actually works really well. But

[47:21] it's almost impossible today to get financing until you have at least 50%

[47:26] of your office building pre-leased with credit worthy tenants. And that's a

[47:31] very heavy lift in this market. I mean our rents generally in the downtown

[47:36] office market are in the mid 20s, maybe high 20s of square foot in some

[47:42] of our buildings, but to build a new building today, you need to have rents between $50

[47:47] and $60 square foot to even get close.

[47:51] And when you're in a market of rents in the $25 to $28 range, leasing a building at $50

[47:56] or more square foot is hard to do.

[47:58] So as a result, there are no leases yet for the office building, but once they're

[48:03] able to get to a 50% lease pre-lease mark, I think you'll see that start to get

[48:09] traction to move forward.

[48:10] Great.

[48:10] Does anybody else have any questions for Chris or any of the other staff that's here?

[48:16] That knows all the stuff.

[48:19] No?

[48:20] Okay, well then we will, I'll get a motion to adjourn.

[48:25] But before that, I want to make sure everybody knows we're having our first ever development

[48:31] authority cocktail party downstairs in the city park.

[48:34] Even though our $150,000 fee would buy a lot of booze,

[48:37] We have learned that authority funds cannot be used for such nefarious activities.

[48:43] So, and I have to say this law firm of burn form is happy to be sponsoring this today.

[48:48] I encourage any of the staff and Jim, of course, to come join us.

[48:53] And Mayor Paul will be meeting us there momentarily as well.

[48:56] So please come down.

[48:57] We'll have drinks and snacks in City Bar.

[48:59] And we would have done this after our morning meeting, but that just didn't seem appropriate.

[49:05] But now I do need a motion to adjourn.

[49:10] All right, we've got a motion on favor, aye.

[49:12] Aye.

[49:13] Opposed?

[49:14] Passes.

[49:15] Thank you everybody.

[49:16] Great job.

[49:20] Thank you.

[49:21] Appreciate it.

[49:22] Thank you.

[49:24] Thank you very much.

Sandy Springs Development Authority Special Called Meeting

Transcript