Figure 1: 70 ft of big-box retail store side wall. Regency has proposed a 360 ft side wall of Target facing Northwest Blvd.

Kingsdale represents one of the largest commercial sites in Upper Arlington - 38 acres close to the geographic center of the City --- and accounts for over 10% of all commerial real estate in UA.

Responsible economic development is the key to enabling Upper Arlington to maintain its high standards of service and keeping our community a wonderful place to live. But UA faces some challenges common to other “First Ring” suburbs:

• Built out – no room to grow
• Aging infrastructure
• Limited commercial base
• Declining federal & state support

Especially acute among these is UA's very limited commercial base (see Figure 2). With fewer UA-based businesses and fewer workers paying income taxes, UA relies more heavily on property taxes, than surrounding suburbs (see Figure 4).

So how commercial properties such as Kingsdale get redeveloped is critical to economic development.

Regency, the corporation that owns the Kingsdale property and 400 others like it, has submitted its first development plan since they purchased the property nearly 10 years ago. They have proposed what we call "McKingsdale" --- a big-box Target store and strip centers surrounded by a sea of asphalt.

City staff has identified three key challenges with Regency's proposal:

1. a 300-foot side-building wall of a big-box Target store facing directly onto Northwest Blvd and homes on the east side of the street (see Figure 1)
2. no appreciable change in UA's property or income tax base from Kingsdale and would include little or no strategic office or residential space
3. by remaining a purely retail center, the potential for increasing income tax revenues to shore up City funds is lost. For example, a 7,000 square foot office project currently under development in Upper Arlington stands to generate about $40,000 in annual income taxes. The proposed 130,000 square foot big box retail development would generate about $55,000 per year.

Analysis and Opinion

Kingsdale is bounded by three of the City’s most well traveled streets and therefore is highly visible. Imagine a 300 foot side-building wall of a big-box Target store along Northwest Blvd. Clearly, Regency didn't even try to meet the City half way on the mixed use or aesthetic requirements set out in the Master Plan for Kingsdale (see Figure 3). Regency has stonewalled us for way too many years and a short-sighted “quick fix” is not enough for this critical space.

Figure 3: UA Master Plan's view of Kingsdale as a town center with a mix of uses: office, retail, residential and
civic. The City’s central gathering place --- home to community events and traditions. Click on the image for full size view.

So much more is possible. There are numerous great examples of public/private partnerships around Central Ohio, Gahanna Creekside being the most recent example. Some images captured from the Creekside site are below. UA's own Master Plan has a portion dedicated to Kingsdale. Here's an aerial view and ground view of how Kingsdale could be.

We need Council members committed to forging these public/private partnerships, not ones that walk away from the negotiating table letting the "market dictate" our community's future. There are many options that both make economic sense for a development corporation and make better use of the property. But Council candidates Leslie Heath and Dan McCormick both want the City to set aside the Master Plan and to stand down on our zoning code to accommodate Regency. Obviously the market will drive development as no one is going to develop a site unless it makes economic sense. The implication, however, is that the city should not expend any of its resources or otherwise stand in the way of whatever it is that Regency might want to undertake at Kingsdale.

UA Mayor Ed Seidel had this to say in a recent Council candidate forum:

"Kingsdale is the elephant in the room. We do have an interest in seeing how Kingsdale is developed. We cannot let the redevelopment of Kingsdale completely go with market forces. If we did and if we do, we'll lose office, we'll lose residential, we won't be able to do what you want to do [pointing to Leslie Heath], we'll lose a lot of stuff. We have to negotiate with Regency, with other owners of commercial sites, with other redevelopment [efforts]. And we have to hold the line tough. But it is a negotiation and we have to do the best that we can."

Both Ed and Mary Ann Krauss are committed to a tough, win-win negotiation with Regency.

UA needs to be willing to examine efficiencies that can be gained from working with our regional neighbors and Council needs to investigate options like joint economic districts and joint recreation districts with neighboring communities.

If governmental minimalists are in charge, none of that will happen and the rest of the world will move on without us. Tim Rankin has said on more than one occasion that he does not really care what happens outside of Upper Arlington as a consideration for his decision making within Upper Arlington.

Dan McCormick and Leslie Heath follow in Rankin's minimalist government footsteps.

Regency has no particular connection with UA, so it is Council's responsibility to negotiate with Regency to ensure that Kingsdale is developed in ways that both benefit our community and make economic sense.

We will be living with the Kingsdale decision for decades to come, so we need to elect Council members who will choose wisely.

Imagine a mixed use Kingsdale. If Gahanna can do it, can Upper Arlington?