Related document
Proposed Airport Business Park Infrastructure Cost Estimates and Financing Status ( .PDF )
Two key numbers have emerged for developers who hope to build a new business park near the Lawrence Municipal Airport: $8 million and four votes.
City Manager David Corliss said Thursday that his staff has determined that it will take $8 million in off-site infrastructure improvements to develop a 144-acre site near the intersection of U.S. Highway 24-40 and North Seventh Street. Developers have asked for public financing to help pay for those improvements, which include road, sewer, water and stormwater projects.
City Hall leaders also announced that valid protest petitions have been filed by neighboring property owners, which means it will take four out of the five city commissioners approving the project before it can move forward.
"We're to the point where we really need additional commission direction," Corliss said. "The city needs to talk about incentive policies in these types of situations and whether it is appropriate to have the city pay for infrastructure in order to get industrial type of uses."
That could be a hefty debate. Lawrence businessman Jes Santaularia - who leads the development team proposing the project - says it would be a good investment for the city. He says the site - which is adjacent to Interstate 70 - has good potential to attract warehouses, manufacturers and other businesses. In total, his studies project the site could ultimately attract 1,600 employees and pay more than $54 million in fees, taxes and other revenue to local governments in a 20-year period.
"Lawrence really has no available industrial space," Santaularia said. "It creates an opportunity for Lawrence to bring in major employers and increase its commercial tax base."
But already, opponents of the project say the public's investment would be too high, especially since there are no major companies that have committed to come to the park.
"It strikes me as an awful lot of money to pay for private enterprise when the city already doesn't have much money to spend," said Nancy Thellman, who leads an opposition group called Citizens for Responsible Planning.
Santaularia, though, said he's not sure the public understands what he is proposing. He said heplans to pay for all infrastructure improvements that would happen on the site. But he wants city assistance in improving the roads, sewers and other needed infrastructure leading up to the site. He said some of the improvements - such as adding a turn lane to the intersection of U.S. Highway 24-40 and North Seventh Street - are needed regardless of whether his project happens.
He also said Thursday that his development group is willing to pay back the city - perhaps up to 80 percent - for many of the offsite improvements. But he wants the city to finance the improvements. The city would be paid back through special assessment fees that wouldn't be collected until after the property was developed.
But even under that scenario, the city still would have to figure out how to come up with the upfront cash to pay for the improvements. For the water and sewer line improvements, city staff members are estimating that they'll require slight increases in rates. Water rates would need to increase by 0.7 percent and sewer rates by 0.4 percent to pay for the projects.
Santaularia, though, said he wants city staff members to re-examine all the costs. He said the city has factored in a 20 percent contingency on many of the projects, which he said artificially inflates the prices.
City commissioners haven't yet weighed in on whether they support the project, or whether they would be willing to provide public financing. But several commissioners have said they want to weigh the airport project against a potential redevelopment of the former Farmland Industries site. City leaders are working to buy that 400-plus acre site on the east edge of Lawrence. It is expected to require infrastructure improvements, and commissioners have said they aren't sure whether the city can afford both projects.
Commissioners are tentatively scheduled to discuss the Airport Business Park at their Dec. 4 meeting.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
dragonwagon2 (anonymous) says…
I hope the city commissioners consider this carefully. Farmland ground is already an eyesore and essentially wasted ground. It seems to me that cleaning up that area would allow for REAL industrial development that truly would be an asset to the city. The proposed business park (which is just south of our airport now) is not large enough to provide any large industry with proper support. Mr. Santaularia himself says that the rest of the ground around his proposed site "just isn't available for purchase" and yet his first dream was a huge business park.
I think applying city money (translate that - taxpayer's money) to a site that has real potential for expansion and NEEDS cleaning up makes much more sense.
Develop the old Farmland Industries area, the return on investment will be much greater there.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
"He said the city has factored in a 20 percent contingency on many of the projects, which he said artificially inflates the prices."
No, this is actually pretty standard in projects like this, and is likely quite conservative, given the uncertainty of exactly what infrastructure improvements would likely be required.
JOEHAWK (anonymous) says…
Unless we finish the SLT, farmland is not good for industrial developement. Trucks from the existing plants out there have no good way to come and go from the west. They have to drive down 23rd st. or 31st. That is not good. Why is the City responsible for the Farmland site? Don't they have fund that is supposed to clean up the site?
I would rather build industrial in North Lawrence, if they can get the infrastructure worked out. It sounds like the developer is willing to pay back the city, isn't that what bonds are for?
toefungus (anonymous) says…
Higher water and sewer rates to pay for their development? No way. My water bill is becoming ugly! No commitments to the "park", and we have one commissioner that believes laborers are unwanted anyway. If Santaularia wants this project, he can get his own financing for the improvements and the tenants of the "park" can pay for it.
Centrist (anonymous) says…
Another empty business park??
How about attracting tenants to those White elephants north and west of downtown?
Or finally bulldozing Farmland?
I smell a rat ...er ... "targeted" business deal.
jrlii (anonymous) says…
Why is a flood plane earmarked for industrial development anyway?
It is stupid to build on land which has been under water as many times in a century as the Pine's place has been.
That place was severely flooded at least three times in the twentieth century, maybe more.
kmat (anonymous) says…
Until they can fill up what used to be Tanger and can fill the new space built on N. 2nd, why build more crap that will sit empty?
And I drive that route everyday and a turn lane isn't needed. Traffic isn't very heavy and there is plenty of room for others to go around the car waiting to turn (the rare times it happens).
And the comment about needing the SLT in order to do something with Farmland. What??? See, the smart thing is to clean up that land and build the SLT around the east side of town and connect I-70 that way and avoid the whole wetland mess. But that just makes to much sense, doesn't it. Wouldn't want to hook up I-70 with the East Hills Park and a new business park, would we? This is Lawrence after all and nothing done here ever makes sense, only lines someone's pocketbook.
Godot (anonymous) says…
How much debt does the city have now? How much additional debt (bonds) can the city handle? What is the bond rating for the City of Lawrence now, and what will additional debt do to that rating?
Godot (anonymous) says…
It may not be so easy to get a bond issue going:
"Credit Pressure Filters down to Muni Market"
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB11951...
mskeys (anonymous) says…
Once they pave the best soil in America it will be ruined forever...put in an agricultural reservation/conservation area now!!! There are rocky areas north of the airport..why not use them?? We need to take a look at who is behind this idea too
snowWI (anonymous) says…
mskeys,
I doubt the land north of the airport will ever be developed. I think the University of Kansas owns some land north of the airport as well.