City Council held a first reading Aug. 18 of Ordinance 28-2025, the development-agreement package that would clear the way for National Church Residences (NCR) to redevelop its Northbank Drive campus with a corporate office and two age-restricted senior-housing buildings. The ordinance is limited to the economic incentives and the commitments between the city and the developer; BZAP and the school board will separately review land-use and design matters.

James Russell, a city staff member presenting the economics, summarized the incentives: the agreement would set up a parcel-by-parcel 30-year tax-increment financing (TIF) district, provide a $1,000,000 economic-development grant at certificate of occupancy, and use incremental tax revenues to help finance about $11.3 million in site-development costs. Russell said the TIF structure is effectively a 40–44% diversion of the increment to bondpaying infrastructure, and that the project is expected to generate additional revenue for Upper Arlington schools ($6.4 million over the TIF life) and the city ($2.6 million) that would not otherwise exist. “This project will generate additional revenue for UA schools and the city that would not have otherwise been realized without this project proceeding,” Russell said.

Russell described the developer’s payroll commitments included in the agreement: a requirement that NCR retain $21,200,000 in annual payroll subject to city income tax for 12 years after certificate of occupancy, plus a further requirement beginning in year five through year 12 to reach an additional $5,250,000 in annual payroll beyond that baseline. The agreement would also require NCR to grade and convey a parcel north of the lake to accommodate a future shared-use path and to make service payments to Upper Arlington Schools equal to the 2024 property taxes to “keep the schools whole” during the TIF.

The development is planned in three phases: a phase-1 office building (about $16.5 million, ~57,000 sq. ft., target 2028), a phase-2 senior-living building (about $18 million, ~80 units, target 2029), and a tentative phase-3 senior building (about $34 million, ~120 units, target 2031), with a third-party developer anticipated for the office building. Russell said additional legislation will be required later to create the TIF and finalize details.

Neighbors and other residents used the public-comment period to press council to delay approval of the development agreement until design and construction issues are resolved. Dozens of speakers raised design, privacy, traffic and construction-access concerns specific to Concord Village and the narrow east end of the adjacent lake. “This redevelopment plan as is does not fit our area,” resident Tricia Miranda said, urging council to “halt any movement with the redevelopment proposal as is.” Several speakers asked that the office building be moved farther from the lake, reduced in height, or reconfigured with greater setbacks and more landscaping.

Specific concerns raised by residents included:
- Building height and proximity to single-family homes across a narrow section of the lake; several speakers asked for 2–3 story limits along the shared shoreline rather than the taller buildings proposed.
- A proposed shared-use path on the north side of the lake they said would run close to backyards and invite through traffic and noise. Some residents asked that the path be rerouted or eliminated where the lake is narrow.
- Construction traffic and staging on Arlington Center Boulevard, the sole access for much of the Concord Village east area; residents requested alternatives such as a temporary service road to limit construction traffic on neighborhood streets.

City staff and NCR representatives said multiple community meetings have taken place and stressed that the development agreement under council consideration is separate from the Board of Zoning and Planning (BZAP) site-plan review. City Manager Shoney and Planning Director Chad Gibson reminded speakers that BZAP will review the major site plan in upcoming sessions (a BZAP work session was scheduled Sept. 3 with a formal BZAP meeting set for Sept. 17 at the time of the presentation) and that the school board will consider the agreement on Sept. 9. Shoney said staff would provide the BZAP members with the recording of the Aug. 18 council meeting and the public comments for their packet.

No final action was taken on the development agreement at first reading. Russell and City Manager Shoney said additional legislation (including the formal TIF creation) will return to council later if the project proceeds. Residents were told that an appeal of a major site plan decision would be the mechanism to bring development-plan issues to council if an appeal is filed after BZAP acts. Several residents asked council to withhold approval of the development-agreement ordinance until the community’s concerns about building placement, path alignment, landscaping, privacy and construction access are more fully evaluated.