NEW YORK AVENUE CORRIDOR STRATEGY
market analysis illustrated that there is a market for new products and combinations of products, however, to-date this type of development has chosen to go elsewhere. With the City’ s involvement and commitment to eliminating barriers, it is highly likely that new investment(“ right” investment or in other words investment that is desired), will begin occurring within the Study Area sooner rather than later. Without the City’ s involvement, it is highly unlikely that investment consistent with the vision will occur in any reasonable period of time, if ever. Rather, market share will continue to be lost to other locations that are simply easier, less expensive and / or actively being promoted, targeted or incentivized.
Promoting Investment( in Opportunity Sites)
A critical step in moving the Strategy forward will be defining the methods by which the City is willing to actively participate in advancing catalyst investment. Within the discussion which follows, several issues are raised for consideration.
As explained earlier, the City has the largest and longest-term interest in the Study Area. To this end, it must be involved in advancing the vision for the area and where appropriate, participate in new investment and reinvestment. The method by which a City participates can be simple or complex ranging from marketing and promotion to financing and development.
Possible approaches identified for the City of Arlington to promote and / or pursue possible investment partners include:
1) packaging the market information prepared as part of this effort and making it available when interested parties approach the City regarding opportunities in the area; and
2) packaging the market information prepared as part of this effort and making it part of a developer request( open or targeted) to solicit their interest in identifying potential investment opportunities in the area.
As described, the first approach would involve developing marketing and promotion materials( essentially re-packaging information provided as part of the planning effort), yet rely on interested parties to contact the City and complete their own due diligence to determine if a local partnering opportunity exists. This type of approach is less costly, uses fewer public resources, and generally produces results more slowly and over a protracted period of time. The second approach would also involve preparing marketing materials that describe the community vision and opportunities that exist, yet also include packaging these materials in a developer request designed to recruit those developers willing and able to advance the desired type of investment. Through this approach the City would proactively engage potential development partners and possibly facilitate partnership discussions with local private, public, institutional and non-profit partners.
Under the latter scenario, the City could also elect to retain the services of a real estate expert with established developer relationships to assist in preparing promotional materials, preparing developer solicitations, recruiting potential developer interests, addressing select due diligence issues and potentially representing the City in negotiations related to project incentives. Regardless of which approach the City chooses to pursue or promote investment, it must first determine the following:
85
FINAL REPORT | SEPTEMBER 2013