City’s commitment to redevelopment tested

Erin Neff

Thursday, Jan. 4, 2001 | 11:03 a.m.

Spending

Here is how the Las Vegas City Council voted Wednesday to spend taxpayer money:

To fund a cost increase in construction of Washington Avenue and Martin Luther King Boulevard to Interstate 15.

For city's share of a cooperative agreement with the Nevada Department of Transportation for construction of sound walls on the west side of I-15 south of Sahara Avenue.

To Nevada Linen Supply for inmate linen services.

To Bingham Construction Inc. for construction of an addition to the Charleston Heights Art Center.

To Colorado Time Systems for an aquatic sports timing system for the Municipal Pool.

Redeveloping downtown Las Vegas remains a top priority in the city.

But just how much should the city contribute to make a private venture successful?

That unanswered question stalled a proposed office tower Wednesday and led a residential developer to question the city's motives.

The law firm of Barker, Brown, Busby and Sutherland wants to develop Redevelopment Agency land on the south side of Clark Avenue between Las Vegas Boulevard and Sixth Street for a proposed 88,000 square-foot office tower.

The location, just north of the new federal courthouse, makes the property perfect for the planned law offices with a dash of retail.

But the same courthouse also spiked land values, leaving the developers asking for $4.6 million from the city.

At the same time, Real Property Services Corp. is proposing using private funds to build market-rate housing at the same location with virtually no city incentives.

That leaves the council, which serves as the city's Redevelopment Agency, with big questions about how to proceed.

On Wednesday the council unanimously voted to grant the law firm an exclusive 30-day negotiation period on the site in an effort to reduce the city's share of the project.

Under the proposal presented Wednesday, the city would pay for about 20 percent of the project.

The city owns one acre of land split by an alley. An appraiser estimates the land is worth $2.1 million. The proposal calls for the city to swap that site for one-third acre at Third Street and Hoover Avenue, valued at $301,000.

The city would thus contribute $1,799,000 in land for the building. But the city is also being asked to chip in $300,000 in improvements and to waive 10 years worth of the building's annual tax increment -- a $1.3 million value.

The law firm also is asking the city to build a parking garage, which would be operated by the law firms, thus leaving the city without any revenue from the garage.

Lesa Coder, the city's director of Business Development, said the building would house four different law firms, which otherwise might leave the downtown area.

"They have a strong desire to stay in the downtown area," Coder said. "We would essentially like to stop the bleeding."

But downtown also needs housing, and attorney James Salo, who represents Real Property Services, said he was concerned the housing proposal was being shelved.

"The other applicants are asking for incentives," Salo said. "We're going to build a public parking garage and build the project at our cost."

City Councilman Gary Reese said he thought the site needed the commercial and office component more than it did new housing. He suggested that Real Property meet with him about property elsewhere downtown, perhaps on East Fremont Street.

"Not every location in the downtown area is suitable to market rate housing," said Margaret Polley. "Not just any vacant site would work for this project."

Polley, a longtime downtown advocate and landowner, said encouraging people to move from the suburbs to downtown would require a unique project in a specific location.

"The issue ... comes back to what will be the city's participation?" Councilwoman Lynette Boggs McDonald said.

Boggs McDonald said successful redevelopment projects in major cities nationwide usually have a maximum city investment of 10 percent.

archive