'Tabled' 200-acre Promenade retail project back on table

Posted

It’s back, after all.

A proposed 200-acre Castle Rock retail project that would be next to — mainly north of — the Outlets at Castle Rock and potentially twice as big, up to 900,000 square feet, will be on the town council’s agenda later this month.

This after the city council, a couple months ago, decided to table the project indefinitely after negotiations between the developer and town didn’t result in an agreement — on such issues as economic incentives for the developer, public improvement fees and metropolitan district issues.

Information wasn’t available on what changed to make the project possible again, something that the council would consider. But Karen McGrath, town spokeswoman, indicated this would be a long process of “many pieces.”

She did say that the project — called Promenade by the developer, Greenwood Village-based Alberta Development Partners LLC — hasn’t changed in scope and size.

It was in July when the town council gave 7-0 approval to a proposed private/public partnership with Alberta — a company that has created projects in Denver and elsewhere, including the Streets at Southglenn in Centennial.

In that vote, councilmembers 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 from the Promenade for up to 25 years. It was proposed that the 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 continued — and at a Sept. 10 town council meeting Castle Rock Town Manager Mark Stevens said that continuing the meeting, again, instead of tabling it, could “mislead the public” that something was happening with the project.

It was explained that one of the sticking points at that time 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.

No comments on this story | Add your comment
Please log in or register to add your comment