5 Avenue City Council Workshop - Daily Herald · The Water Tower is currently ... apartments or...

5th Avenue City Council Workshop

August 28, 2017

Tonight’s Agenda

Visit the project Web site at www.naperville.il.us/projects-in-naperville/fifth-avenue-redevelopment/

Background & Project Overview• 5th Avenue Opportunity Sites • Land Use Considerations• Traffic and Parking• Transit• Utility Considerations

RFQ Process & Recommendation• RFQ Submittal Concepts by Site

Criteria Moving Forward and Next Steps

Fifth Avenue Area – What’s Been Done?


• Department of Public Works vacates Water Tower West (2008)• Fifth Avenue Study approved (2009)• Post Fifth Avenue improvements

• On‐Street Parking Modification 5th & North Avenue (2010)• Fifth Avenue Study Height Overlay (2011)• City‐initiated rezoning certain properties from B5 (Secondary Commercial) to B1

(Neighborhood Commercial) (2011)

• City buys DuPage Children's Museum property and lease executed (2010)

• Bus Depot and Commuter Access Feasibility Study (2012) • Boecker property acquired (2017)

Project Overview – Major Steps (As Approved by City Council 2/21/17)

Visit the project Web site at www.naperville.il.us/projects-in-naperville/fifth-aenue-redevelopment/

1. RFQ ‐ To Select Community Partner

2. Community Engagement & Concept Creation• Fact Based (traffic, market conditions, demographics,

environmental conditions, financial costs)• Multiple Opportunities for Public Input to have

meaningful impact on concept creation• Workshops• Surveys• Open Houses• Coffees, Small Gatherings, etc.

3. Contracts & Entitlement• Zoning Approvals• Development Agreements

4. Construction

RFQ Community Engagement & Concept Creation Contracts & Entitlement Construction

5th Avenue Opportunity Sites


Existing Land Use Existing Plans

Next 9 Slides from Scoring Committee Kick‐Off Meeting held May 1, 2017.Meeting purpose was to provide committee relevant baseline information

about the area and procurement policy requirements.

Existing Land Use


8 PropertiesTotal Acres: 13.35Total # Parking Spaces: 1,515

NOTE: City and BNSF – Not Currently Generating Property Taxes

Land Use Overview

Land Use Overview


• Study Process Very Contentious• Does Not Provide Vision for Area, Rather Re‐Use of

Certain Properties• Reflects Pre‐Recession Market Considerations• Does Not Include Land Use Recommendations for

Children’s Museum Property or Existing Commuter Parking Lots

• Completed Prior to Downtown 2030 Plan• Does Not Consider Upcoming Changes Expected in

Transportation Industry• Traffic and Recommended Roadway Improvements

Findings Still Valuable

Utility Considerations


All City Services (water, sewer, sanitary, electric) are available to serve the area.

Some upgrades may be necessary depending on the uses proposed given existing capacities and age of infrastructure.

The Water Tower is currently in service, but it can be replaced/relocated.

Transit Information - Metra/BNSF


Service OfferingsRidership

Transit Information - PACE


Service OfferingsPACE RequirementsFuture Consolidated Transit Center/Depot

Traffic


Multi‐modal approach – vehicles, pedestrians and bicycles need access and accommodations

Traffic impacts associated with land use changes should be evaluated

Relocation of commuter parking should consider impact of high‐intensity, short‐duration egress patterns during PM and overall commute times

Parking


Commuter parking operated by the City with input from Metra/BNSF

1,515 spaces – mix of permit and daily spaces

Commuter use from 6 AM to 6 PM – Available for other uses after 6 PM and on weekends

RFQ Process to Date


Timeline (7 Months)• February 2017 – City Council

Approval & Release of RFQ for 90 Days

• May 2017 – RFQ Responses Due

• June 2017 –Committee Review & Short List

• July 2017 – Interviews

• August 2017 – Recommendation to City Council / Workshop

Why RFQ?– To Find Qualified Partner (1 or

more) based on Experience, Capacity, and References

– To Begin to Understand Market Potential, Interest, Timing and Approach


RFQ Scope

Visit the project Web site at www.naperville.il.us/projects-in-naperville/fifth-aenue-redevelopment/

From RFQ 17‐036…

Solicit response from developers that are qualified and capable of redeveloping the subject properties with a high‐quality project that reflects market conditions, economic realities, and supports commuter access to the train station within the context of the community and neighborhood settings.


• Eight Responses Received– Flaherty and Collins ‐ Indianapolis– Hamilton Partners ‐ Itasca– Intercontinental Real Estate and Development‐ Oak Park– Lincoln Property Companies ‐ Chicago– Marquette/Next Gen Dev., LLC‐ Naperville/Wheaton– Morningside‐ Chicago – Renaissance/Condor –New York/Chicago– Ryan Companies‐ Naperville


Qualifications

• Scoring Committee Reviewed Each Response• 50% Qualifications

• Project team• Financial capacity• Comparable project experience

• 25% Suitability and Quality of Development Concept• Initial general development concept statement

• 25% Achievement of Outcomes• Consideration of character of the community• Supporting Ends Policies and Principles • Commuter parking, transportation and transit


Review of Submittals

• Five shortlisted firms– Hamilton Partners ‐ Itasca– Lincoln Properties ‐ Oak Brook– Marquette/Next Gen Dev., LLC ‐ Naperville/Wheaton– Renaissance/Condor – New York/Chicago– Ryan Companies ‐ Naperville

• Three firms not shortlisted– Incomplete submittals– Limited to no comparable experience


Shortlisting to Five

*The top five submittals moved on to the interview process.Proposer Total Weighted Score Rating Rank

Ryan Companies* 87.5 Outstanding 1

Proposer A* 81.75 Good 2

Proposer B* 80.75 Good 3

Proposer C* 77 Good 4

Proposer D* 76 Good 5

Proposer E 65.5 Acceptable 6

Proposer F 37.5 Unacceptable 7

Proposer G Incomplete Unacceptable NA


RFQ Submittal Scores and Rankings

• Supplement, not repeat the RFQ submittals• Two hour interview process

– One hour dedicated to presentation– One hour dedicated to questions

• How the development team approaches projects• How the proposed team has worked together in the past• Discuss similar projects they have completed (from a development and financial perspective)

• Typical community engagement process and how this would be similar/different

• Walk through the potential development concept‐ including mix of uses, theme and character, bulk, target markets, parking

• Discuss potential development schedule• Discuss ownership options, anticipated public/private costs and financing concepts


Interviews

• Helped define the scope of the sample projects listed in their response

• Helped define the current status of referenced developments in other communities

• Clearly defined what role the respondent played in referenced project examples– Responsible for community engagement– Creation of development concept– Development approvals– Negotiation of public/private partnership terms– General contractor

• Understand the working relationship with the community and proposer


Reference Checks

Proposer Total Weighted Score Rating Rank

Ryan Companies 92.5 Outstanding 1

Proposer C 77 Good 2

Proposer A 67 Acceptable 3

Proposer B 67 Acceptable 3

Proposer D 62.5 Acceptable 5


Scores and Rankings Post Interview

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION


SCORING COMMITTEE:Area Property Owners:Brian GurleyJohn KorandaTerry OppermannJason Welch

Community Stakeholders:Dan Bridges (SD203)Michael Hudson (NCC)Christine Jeffries (NDP)Ray McGury (NPD)Sarah Orleans (DCM)Nicki Anderson (NACC)

City Staff Experts:Marcie Schatz Rachel Mayer Allison LaffMichael DiSanto

Councilwoman Brodhead – Non‐Voting Member

• Recommendation to move forward with Ryan Companies to:• Facilitate a community engagement

process• Complete market and technical

studies• Development of a land use concept• Development of a financial plan

• Experience with complicated developments involving many stakeholders and diverse land uses

• Firm experience in completing all phases of development projects

• Financial capability to take on the entire project• Depth of municipal experience and strong community engagement

• Proven team experience• Local presence


Ryan Companies Qualifications that Stood Out

• Specialization in a singular land use• Teams that have not partnered together previously• Limited to no experience in a project of this complexity or scale

• Experience included limited amounts of projects constructed (Example projects still in planning, entitlement, or awaiting construction)

• Lack of understanding of community and Naperville brand

• Financial feasibility of concepts


Concerns With Others …

CONCEPT IDEASWhat Was Presented During the RFQ Process?

The following slides provide a summary of various ideas discussed by the five short‐listed firms that participated in interviews. These slides represent only possibilities. No commitment has been made to any development concept.


COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

• Compliment not compete with or recreate the downtown

• Building and land uses relate to surrounding neighborhood

• Connectivity to the downtown• Service and retail spaces supporting the neighborhood and development

• Commuters are important• Traffic will be a constraining factor• Public funding participation on public improvements


Consistent Themes

DuPage Children’s Museum Property


• 5‐story 240 unit residential apartment building with single story of subgrade parking

• 5‐6 story senior residential housing

• Mixed use building with ground floor retail, structured parking, upper level apartments and condos (5‐6 stories)

• Children’s Museum with parking structure including rooftop playground feature

Parkview Lot


• 100 Residential unit apartment building with parking

• Office space with single story subgrade parking

• Mixed use including ground floor retail, structured parking, apartments or condos

• Transit Center with canopy structure

• 4‐story apartment building

Upper Burlington Lot


• Surface parking• Metra parking/PACE Hub• Transit plaza with pedestrian

bridge connection to Naperville Station. Potential dual use at non‐peak times as farmers market/festival space.

• 5‐story residential apartment building (est. 340 units) and single level of parking

Lower Burlington Lot


• Mixed use with apartments, retail, and office featuring a landmark corner sculpture feature.

• Mixed use development including:– 3‐story townhomes parallel to 5th

Avenue– 5‐6 story office/ground floor

retail/structured parking building on south end of site

• 5‐story residential and commercial building

• 4‐6 story mixed use development with a combination of hotel, restaurant, multiple family residential, children’s museum, general office uses and plaza feature.

190 E. 5th Avenue


• 4‐level parking structure • 4‐6 story mixed use development

with a combination of hotel, restaurant, multiple family residential, children’s museum, general office uses and plaza feature.

• Mixed use development including:– 3‐story townhomes parallel to 5th

Avenue– 5‐6 story office/ground floor

retail/structured parking building on south end of site

• Mixed use with apartments, retail and office. Site to include public plaza with water feature adjacent to 5th Avenue.

Kroehler Lot


• Townhomes with rear loaded parking• 2‐3 story residential mix of row

homes, townhomes and single family residential

• 3‐story townhomes with garden pathway

• 3‐story townhomes build in rows (approx. 50 units)

Water Tower West


• Relocated DuPage Children’s Museum with adaptive use of building; water tower repurposed as landmark; on‐site parking

• 5‐level commuter parking garage including 1,650 spaces

• 4‐story apartment building with Fountain Feature

• 3‐story senior memory care apartments (approx. 200 units)

Next Steps


• September 5, 2017 City Council Meeting– Action on Committee Recommendation for RFQ 17‐036

• Move Forward with Ryan Companies YES or NO– Does NOT Approve a Concept – Does NOT Establish a Contract

RFQ

Next Steps




RFQ Community Engagement & Concept Creation

• FUTURE STEPS (Timing TBD)– Community Engagement & Concept Creation Led by Consultant

• Stakeholder Meetings, Community Workshops, Open Houses, Surveys, Etc.• Market Study• Traffic & Parking Study• Environmental Analysis• Financial Feasibility Analysis

– Concept Validation

Next Steps






– Concept Validation

– Development Contracts & Entitlements (zoning approvals)

RFQ Community Engagement & Concept Creation Contracts & Entitlement

Next Steps






– Concept Validation – Development Contracts & Entitlements (zoning approvals)

– Construction


Community Engagement

Neighborhood – Community At‐Large – Commuters –Community Partners

Financial & Market FeasibilityConsiderations

CONCEPT

• Multimodal commuter access (bikes, pedestrians, buses)• Traffic management• Commuter parking management• Fulfilling an unmet need or land use in the

community (millennial, senior housing)• Ability to improve linkages within the

neighborhood, to the downtown (pedestrian/school walk routes)

• Addresses known infrastructure issues (stormwater) • Capitalize on partnerships with DCM, Park District,

North Central College, BNSF, Metra, PACE• Site new or improved community amenities

(walkways, parks, etc.)• Consideration of character of the community• Supporting Strategic Ends Policies and Principals


Considerations


Ryan Companies Remarks

Ryan Companies Remarks

Jim McDonald

Next Steps






– Concept Validation– Development Contracts & Entitlements (zoning approvals)– Construction


Date post:	07-Oct-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

5 Avenue City Council Workshop - Daily Herald · The Water Tower is currently ... apartments or...

Documents