News-Press DCCR 9-19-2013
Castle Rock
Douglas County, Colorado • Volume 11, Issue 26
September 19, 2013
Free
A Colorado Community Media Publication
ourcastlerocknews.com
Retail project tabled Proposed ‘Promenade’ development next to Outlets doesn’t survive discussions By Virginia Grantier
vgrantier@ourcoloradonews.com
Francis Liedle, 25, left, and Jacob Liedle, 23, brothers and members of the Castle Rock-based Chalet Dancers, were able to perform before the rain stopped the town’s Oktoberfest and drove the dancers into a local coffee shop.
Beer-ly underway It was several hours into Castle Rock’s annual Oktoberfest on Sept. 14, in the middle of live music, Bavarian dancing demonstrations and beer tasting, when Mother Nature stepped in and watered it down. Too much lightning, followed by sheets of rain, put an end about 4 p.m. to the Castle Rock Downtown Alliance’s free event in the Festival Park area, around Second and Perry and Wilcox streets. Vendors from the local area and out of town, offering beer and other products, had to disassemble tents and load equipment in a rain that soaked them almost immediately. They got the party started, but then Oktoberfest vendors had to call it a day as rain and lightning moved into Castle Rock on the afternoon of Sept. 14.
PhotoS by Virginia grantier
Displaced animals sheltered at fairgrounds Horses, others brought in from Commerce City area By Virginia Grantier
vgrantier@ourcoloradonews.com Douglas County Fairgrounds opened its gates to the homeless during last week’s flooding —and in flowed 32 horses, 38 goats, seven sheep and one llama. Douglas County and its fairgrounds, generally sopping wet but OK, made room for displaced animals that were from hardhit areas. The animals, some of them, anyway, were from northeast of Commerce City and possibly other locations, a fairgrounds spokeswoman said Sept. 13. Animals continues on Page 33
The retention pond across the street from Castle Rock Middle School in The Meadows served its purpose during the heavy rains on Sept. 12, but wound up catching quite a bit more water than it was designed to hold. Photo by Ryan Boldrey
A proposed 200-acre Castle Rock retail project that would be located next to the Outlets at Castle Rock, and at up to 900,000 square feet, would be twice as large as the outlet mall, is no longer a possibility — for the time being, anyway. “There’s always hope,” said Castle Rock Town Manager Mark Stevens in response to a councilmember’s query on whether there is any hope for a future agreement with the developer, the Greenwood Village-based Albert Development Partners LLC. But not much hope, currently. The town staff and attorney recommended tabling the project indefinitely, explaining, among other things, the lack of an agreement after negotiations this summer that centered on such issues as economic incentives for the developer, public improvement fees and metropolitan district issues. And the council agreed, voting 6-0 to “table indefinitely.” Councilmember Chip Wilson was absent. The town began negotiating with Alberta — a company that has created various projects in Denver and elsewhere, including The Streets at SouthGlenn in Centennial — after the town Ok’d unanimously, 7-0, in early July to give initial approval to a proposed private/public partnership with Alberta. The council’s July vote approved the conceptual financial structure and preparation of financial agreements. In that vote, they were approving a conceptual structure in which Alberta “would be responsible for all private costs and financial risk and would be responsible for implementing the project.” The town, in that conceptual deal, would have shared 27.5 percent of its sales tax revenues for up to 25 years. It was proposed that that revenue as well as fees imposed on retail customers would have been used to pay off a bond issue to be levied on the property’s metropolitan district to fund the project’s infrastructure costs. The council at that time also set a special meeting for Aug. 27 to consider final approval. But that meeting was continued as negotiations went on — and at the Sept. 10 meeting, Stevens said that continuing it again, instead of tabling it, could “mislead the public” that something was happening with the project. One of the sticking points apparently was that the town had a deadline to get the bond issue on the ballot and without an agreement with the developer, who was hard to reach lately, that deadline couldn’t be met. Since the council tabled the issue, instead of continuing it, if Alberta wants to proceed with the project, would be required to start all over again as far as the public notification process and public hearing process, staff explained to the council.