HomeMy WebLinkAboutCRC-01-10-01CARMEL`REDEVELOPMENT CONSESSION
Wednesday,, Januay 10,2001
Caucus Rooms, Carmel City Hall
7:00 p.m.
AGENDA
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of Minutes from December 20, 2000 and December'20:'Executive.Session, 2000.
3. Election of Officers
4. Bid Opening for Parcel #3, Site Preparation & :Improvements'
5. Report from Mayor
6. Report from.Director
T Financial' Report
8. Report from Attorney
9. Report from Architect
10. Reports from CRC Members
it. Approval of Invoices (Included in packet)
12. OUBusiness
A. Declaratory:Resolution
13. New Business
14. Sigrimgof Documents (if any)
15. Schedule Next Meeting (February -14, 7-p.m., Catieus.Room)
16. Adjournment
Z7\vedevcomm12001 Jan 10 Agenda
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CARMEL REDEVELOPMENT CONIIISSION Meeting, Wednesday, January 10,
2001.
The meeting was called to order by President Rick Roesch of 7:04 p.m. Commission
members Amy Boldt, John R. Koven and Ron Carter were present representing a
quorum.
Also present were Mayor Brainard, Karl Haas, Buddy Downs and Lisa Lee from Ice
Miller, Loren Matthes and Kathy Raver from H.J. Umbaugh, Mike Shaver from Wabash
Scientific, Inc., Les Olds, Chris Seger and Bob Falk from Duke Weeks, Pete Miller from
McHale, Cook & Welch, Ernie Reno from Avator Comm. Group, Councilor Norm
Rundle, Stu Hirsch, from Indianapolis Star, Patti Horrigan from. College Commons and
two citizens: Mark Ratterman and Pam Lambert. Sherry Mielke present as support staff.
Mr. Roesch asked for a motion to amend the order of the agenda because Commission
member Luci Snyder was in another meeting and would be arriving late.
Mr. Koven moved the Election of Officers and Approval of Minutes be postponed until
later in the meeting and the bid opening for site preparation and improvements on Parcel
0 be moved to the first item on the agenda. Following a second by Ms. Boldt the motion
was unanimously approved.
Bid Opening
The bids were opened at 7:05 p.m.
Mr. Olds explained the bids received. The bid is a. base bid along with a series of
alternate bids, 2 through 5. The bidders were Eden Enterprises, CMA Corporation,
Smock Fansler, Trisler Construction, and Miller & Sons.
Min Olds and City Engineer Weese will go through the bids and determine the low
bidder.
Mr. Roesch thanked the bidders.
Report from the Mayor
Mayor Brainard met today with a real estate group interested in negotiating for the
property at the northwest comer of City Center Drive and Third Avenue. This group was
interested before the parcel was broken apart but was not comfortable bidding on the
entire parcel since they had no interest in the town home portion to the west.
After square footage is determined the real estate group will put together a purchase
offer.
Mr. Koven asked if the CRC needed to seek bids on that.
Mr. Roesch: I don't believe so because we already had bids. [Inaudible]
UNOFFICIAL NINUTES
Mr. Haas confirmed.
Mr. Roesch announced there would be no report from the Director since Mr. Staehler
recently had surgery.
Financial Report
Ms. Mielke reported there were no modifications to the report which was mailed last
week.
Report from Attornev
Mr. Haas: At the.last meeting there was a resolution approving Mr. Roesch signing a
letter of intent with Ryland Homes contingent upon Ryland submitting a check for
525,000 eamest.money. Ryland has done that so we'll be able to have that letter of intent
signed. We're now working on a project agreement. I'm hoping we'll have it ready for
submission next month. Ryland's due diligence period ends January 20h so at that point
their contingencies ought to all be set. The project agreement requires them to pay cash at
closing.
There's nothing to report on the Sherwin Williams litigation.
On the Old Town we've gotten an initial response from AMLI on a project agreement but
we're still waiting for more detailed comments on that document.
On Huffer acquisition, I've had a number of conversations with his counsel and-we've
tentatively worked out a possible procedure for resolving the difference in purchase price.
There would be two appraisers selected by the CRC. Mr. Huffer would review those
selected and make sure they're qualified and impartial. Then we would get new updated
appraisals on the property. The appraisals would not be binding but would serve as a
basis for negotiation.
One of the actions Mr. Haas would like the CRC to take tonight is an authorization to
engage appraisers to go ahead and appraise the Huffer property.
So moved by Mr. Carter. Seconded by Ms. Boldt. Brief discussion followed about the
cost of the appraisals. The motion was then unanimously approved.
Mr. Haas distributed two proposed resolutions. The first designates the president of the
CRC as purchasing. agent (in compliance with Indiana Code 5-22). The second resolution
would authorize the purchasing agent for contracts subject to 5-22 and for contracts not
subject to 5-22 to execute change orders on behalf of the CRC so,long as the change
orders being executed do not individually or collectively increase the compensation level
of pay to the contractor by more than 5%.
Mr. Carter moved both resolutions be approved. Mr. Koven asked to see the resolutions
first. Discussion followed. Mr. Koven asked if either resolution needed to make reference
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
to the citation to this in the Carmel City Code. He said he did not want to sign one of
these and have it supercede what is already in the Carmel City Code. Mr. Haas said it
wouldn't supercede what is in the Carmel City Code and it can't supercede what's
provided by State Law. "This can only supplement what's in 5-22-or in the Carmel
Code."
Ms. Boldt: In the minutes from the last meeting it says that Mr. Staeher said we needed
to appoint a purchasing agent. We suggested that ivbe Mr. Staehler and that was
seconded and voted on and passed. That was the end of last year. Are we changing the
purchasing agent for this year?
Mr. Haas: Yes, we would be.
Mr. Koven: In light of our situation with Mr. Staehler, what if something happened to the
president of the CRC, whoever that might be, and our president becomes incapacitated,
do we have to meet and pass a resolution? How do we go on without having a deputy?
Mr. Haas: Most of the purchases you'll be making aren't subject to I.C. 5-22. Most of the
purchases being made are either from bond proceeds, which are excepted from I.C. 5-22
or they'll be service contracts for which you can set your own procedure. The number of
purchases that the Commission is likely to make which are subject to I.C. 5-22 are pretty
small. In regard to change orders, that could come up with some regularity. As these
resolutions stand now, you can handle that in either one of two ways, both of which
would require a meeting. You can, of course, conduct business as a commission, and as a
commission you could approve change orders, for example. Or alternatively, you would
need a temporary or a successor, purchasing agent.
Mr. Haas continued: There's nothing wrong with amending the resolution to provide
"and in the absence of the president, the purchasing agent shall be the vice president". Or
the'director.
Mr. Koven: I'd like to move to.table these till the next meeting. I'd like to have you [Mr.
Haas] make that change but I'd like to see it ahead of the meeting instead of here. But I'd
like to give you the authorization to go ahead with what we already did on the purchasing
agent.
Mr. Carter: I'm not going to withdraw the motion. There's no need to table these. There's
no need to go into these with such a fine tooth comb. If we want to put a deputy in, I'd be
amenable to that, but there's no need to table these, rather just get on with-the business.
Ms. Boldt seconded the motion on the floor. There being no other discussion, the motion
was brought to a vote and passed with three ayes,.Mr. Koven opposed.
Renort from the Architect
Mr. Olds reported: With regard to Ryland Homes, they are in the process of doing their
due diligence and have requested information from us. We have been supplying them
3
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
with everything that we have including the environmental review that was carried out as
well as the subsurface soil boring investigation that was done on the site earlier in the
year. They indicated they needed to have those reports updated. I checked with Karl and
according to their agreement it is their responsibility to pay for updating of those reports.
We only agreed to give them the old reports. I put them in contact with the various firms
and they are making arrangements to have the reports updated which they need as part of
their due diligence.
Mr. Roesch: Have they changed their interest in that parcel?
Mr. Olds: No, they have not discussed that with me. The last layout resulted in forty-one
sites. They have committed to buy forty-two sites. As I understand it, they are going to
honor the commitment and pay for forty-two sites even though they're only going to get
forty-one. That was their decision to open up space between several of the buildings.
Mr. Roesch asked Mr. Haas: Do we have any idea where this is going to put us on a
closing date?
Mr. Haas: June would be a very conservative date. With their due diligence ending on
January 26, there's no reason why they couldn't close very quickly after the project
agreement is approved.
Mr. Olds: We [CSO] have our contract modified and it was submitted to you in your
packets. Mr. Haas prepared the document which is an amendment to the original contract
with the Board of Public Works. Along with that document was the balance of the fees
and projects that yet need to be completed. Included with it was also a reference map of
the various parcels which we use for our reference purposes whenever we're discussing
any parts of the project.
Mr. Roesch: This really is a revision of the uncompleted existing contracts and the
addition of other things that we have asked you to do.
Mr. Olds confirmed and noted, "We will always supply you with an updated, ongoing
list so at any time you're always aware of what we're working on."
Mr. Haas: The rationale of this kind of agreement is that CSO has a contract in place with
the Board of Public Works. And instead of canceling part of that contract, and'then
entering into a new long contract, it seemed to be most expedient to break that contract in
two by this agreement which is, in effect, an amendment, which leaves the terms in place
and splits the work between the two parties. This way we can avoid duplicating all the
work that was done in negotiating that original contract. All that having been said, for
work that CSO performs not listed here under these particular contract numbers, the
Commission ought to have a separate contract. I don't know of any reason why the form
normally used by the Board of Public Works wouldn't be fine for that. This contract is
designed to address the items CSO already has contracted with the Board of Public
Works.
4
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
Mr. Roesch: These are contracts prior to us passing a resolution that all these come before
the Redevelopment Commission. Even though the work was done benefiting the projects,
it was authorized by the Board of Public Works.
Mr. Olds: That is correct. Each item was authorized.by a purchase order.
Mr. Roesch: That was actually prior to us having any [inaudible]. Is that correct? Are
there any questions on the CSO contract?
Mr. Carter asked how the performing arts center was being handled under this contract.
Mr. Olds: We've pulled it from this contract, listed it only as an alternative at the bottom.
If at any point the Commission would desire to see action, the basic amount is in there. It
stays in place but is at the calling of the commission.
Mr. Roesch: If the scope of that changed slightly, or there were modifications to that, is
that still covered in the existing contract?
Mr. Olds: Yes.
Mr. Carter: What does the 54% cover and what is left to be done?
Mr. Olds: The 54% covered the whole programming portion of it; all the work from
Artec, all the site design work, which included the series of alternatives, the basic
building footprint and components and the exterior concepts. Parts of it you have been
using in your presentations of City Center, not all of it.
Mr. Carter: Is that enough so that we have presentation materials that are sufficient to be
included in research?
Mr. Olds: Yes. What's left to be done is the actual final design configuration which
would be based on the total seating capacity and whether or not you would have that
series of options which would include a performance hall, theater portion of it with
different elements. At some point the Commission would have to decide what is most
appropriate, what do they want to do and we would take those pieces that we have and
make adjustments to complete the final design package, which would be your design
package for selling to the community. That would be the model, computer video of the
project that you could walk your way through it. That would be your total package when
you're done.
Mr. Carter: But we're really at a stage where we have enough material that we could do
the surveys that we talked about last summer. But it's not cast in stone so that we could
present alternatives as far as configuration to the community and we have leeway to
determine from what the community says what the rest of the design would look like.
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
Mr. Roesch: So this alternative contract is kind of on hold, we're not spending anything
with you until we decide through surveys what needs to be done.
Mr. Olds: Last year when Artec came to town, they had a two part arrangement. The first
part was all the programming, meeting With all the organizations, meeting with
everybody to determine exactly all the pieces, everything that people would like to see,
that would be using the facility, for developing the programming. Willem's comment
when he was here was that we need to develop a survey of the community on their wants,
needs, desires, and-their level of support. On facilities of this type, their experience is
there are always people who would step up with large donations for naming rights. His
experience, working in the Indianapolis area, was that the test of the community (finding
out their support) and the fundraising all went together in a package. The Commission
looked at possibly retaining them to do that, they submitted a proposal, so you could once
and for all determine the size of the facility and the anticipated use of the facility.
Mr. Carter: When we last talked about thisi there were two things. One was did the
community want this and two, could we survey it at the time. We did not have the funds
at that time to do that. It was our intent at that time to do that survey and I don't want to
belabor it now because we don't have it on the agenda. I'd like to have it on the agenda
for the next meeting so we can see where we're going, so we can either. fulfill the original
vision or make alternative arrangements. I still think we should get the survey done.
Mr. Roesch: We did put in the projections, S85,000 for surveys and studies
Mr. Roesch continued: Mr. Olds, the contract is intact and if we gave you the go ahead on
this then you would resume and at this point it would cost us an additional $119,600.
Mr. Olds: That's correct.
Mr: Olds noted that before too much else is in place the exact location of the proposed
performing arts center needs to be determined.
Mr. Roesch asked if there was any other discussion about the CSO contract.
Mr. Koven: I'm not comfortable with the way this.whole thing's put together in that
we're basically signing off and accepting responsibility for projects that were approved
by the Board of Public Works and we don't really have any description [tape gap].
Mr. Olds: The Board of Public Works, on each one of those, there's a complete outline of
what happens in each one of those projects. For example, it explains exactly what the
scope of work is, what it covers, so every one of them is defined.
Mr. Koven: I don't question that. I just think that ought to all be attached to this. I don't
want to have to go to the Board of Public Works to find out what this contract originally
was supposed to be.
. UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
Mr. Olds: My suggestion- would be to take the original BPW contract and just pull it all
together with its pieces and attach it as an exhibit to the contract and it would cover all
the scopes of work.
Mr. Carter: How soon could that be in the hands of the Commission members?
Mr. Olds: All we have to do is pull it out of our files. The City would also already have
copies.
Mr. Carter: Is this something we need to vote on this evening or can we get the
information in hand this next week and then pick it up at the next meeting after we've
had a chance to review those documents?
Mr. Roesch: 1-think they do need to be attached. I'm comfortable that the City Engineer
has reviewed all of these contracts. I'm not sure I have that expertise...
Mr. Koven: I'm not saying I want to review them either. I'm just saying they ought to be
in the nunutes of this Commission and not referred to the BP W if someone from the
public wants to come and see what we've discussed they've got to go somewhere else.
Before we approve this, we ought to know what we're approving and we don't.
Mr. Roesch: Absolutely. I agree.
Mr. Koven: l don't have a problem with anything that's on here, but there should be
something here to support this.
Ms. Boldt moved the contract be tabled until the next meeting. Following-a second by
Mr. Koven, the motion was approved with three ayes. Mr. Carter voted nay.
Approval of Invoices
Ms. Mielke noted there were no changes since the packets were mailed and that.she has
copies of purchase orders (which were submitted to the Clerk Treasurer's office) for both
invoices.
Mr. Roesch said these invoices come out of two different funds. The legal bill comes out
of the Merchants Square fund and the others come out of the general CRC funds.
Mr. Koven made a motion that the CRC approve the two invoices submitted, the Bose
McKinney and Evans invoice for $3,500.00 and the Nations Rent invoice for $26.64.
Following a second by Ms. Boldt the motion was unanimously approved.
Reports from CRC Members
Mr. Koven: We brought up in our last meeting the question about the lease the City had
entered into for the yellow building downtown. The City entered into a contract with the
previous owner, then it transferred with the property. We all got the memo from Mr. Haas
stating we needed to terminate or continue the lease.
v?NQFFICIAL MINUTES
Mr. Koven moved the CRC terminate the lease with Beverage on the property [in Old
Town] that was between the City of Carmel and Beverage which was transferred to the
CRC when we took ownership. Following a second by Mr. Carter the motion was
unanimously approved.
Mr. Carter asked that Mr. Staehler be asked to keep an eye on the used car sales in front
of the Sitzmark building.
Old Business
Mr. Roesch: We have before us tonight a Declaratory Resolution. We have our team
members who have worked on this particular project. On this resolution before us we
might have some questions for Ice Miller who authored this. This is the first part of the
process to embark upon the study and negotiation on behalf of the Commission of this
project. This portion of it is allowing us to capture the tax increment by declaring this an
economic development area prior to some time constraints they have. This is not a final
approval in any way. This does not mean we are endorsing this project. It also allows us
to capture the TIF this year for this project or any other project that we decide might go in
this area. If we choose and if it passes and there are a lot of other hurdles that this project,
that's been controversial, has to go through. There are a lot of things that we as a
Commission are going to have to look at and decide. Things like what's the scope of
improvements, what is and is not going to be included. What economically is the size of
the TIF? There-are numerous things to be decided. We looked at a proposed timetable for
creation of the economic development area.
If the Declaratory Resolution before us tonight is adopted tonight then it goes to the Plan
Commission which would have to adopt an order approving a Declaratory Resolution and
whether the economic development area meets the criterion set forth-in the
Comprehensive Plan. From there this would go to the Common Council where it would
be introduced as a resolution approving the Plan Commission order. It would then have to
go to another Common Council meeting for approval. If this schedule is followed there
would then be a notice of public hearing delivered to the Daily Ledger and the
Noblesville Times ten days prior to public hearing. Then we would hold a public hearing
for this project (in whatever form) at which time we would hear from the public. If we
would adopt the Confirmatory Resolution at that time it would go back to the Common
Council approving the establishment of the economic development area. After the
following meeting of the Common Council to actually adopt it, these things would have
to be filed with the [Hamilton County] Recorder and a notice delivered to the County
Auditor and State Board of Tax Commissioners. So there are many, many hurdles beyond
this Declaratory Resolution. We have the flexibility that if this is indeed adopted by us
tonight we don't necessarily have to apply the TIF'to this particular project. It could be
for other.projects as well.
Ms. Lee: As long as they're benefitting [inaudible].
8
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
Mr. Roesch: Even after that bonds would not have to be issued unless we decided for
them to be..
Mr. Seger: That is entirely up to the processes, depending upon the financing structure.
This in no way locks you in to issuing the bonds. This is kind of a living document. You
can change it before the confirmatory stage, in the confirmatory stage, or the statutes
have plenty of processes by which you can amend it from time to time as things evolve,
which they will.
Mr. Roesch: So there is total •flexibility until the confirmatory resolution, and even after
that, subject to amendment.
Mr. Koven asked about the accuracy of the numbers.
Mr. Seger: It's all speculative at this time. They are all judgements based upon the facts
as presented at this time. Before you would ever spend any tax increment bond proceeds
you would have to have completely firm numbers. And also make a policy decision about
what improvements, if any, you want to fund and those numbers would be based upon
what policy decision you made.
Mr. Koven: The first thing that popped out at me was the number of job opportunities
projected. We don't really know that. We're guessing.
Mr. Seger: There should be job growth in this area., This sentence is [inaudible] Duke
Weeks has a particular project under consideration which would bring approximately
1500-2000 new job opportunities. Most every redevelopment commission in the state is
estimating, speculating, doing the same thing on projects. In fact, you don't know how
many jobs were created until years after the improvements came and the projects were
completed.
Mr. Koven: What if it ends up only being 1100 or 1200 jobs? Are we in violation of
something here?
The answer was no.
Mr. Carter: On page 15 of Mr. Shaver's report, "While there could potentially be some
argument over precisely how many new jobs would be created, as opposed to relocated
jobs, we find this distinction to be fundamentally academic in this case. In the opinion of
Wabash Scientific, Inc., any development proposal which conforms to the designated
commercial land use for the ED Area will certainly generate more jobs than the ones that
currently exist in the undeveloped portions of the ED Area."
Mr. Seger said projects throughout the state have shown there could be more jobs created
or there could be fewer.
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
Mr. Carter: One of the things we have to keep in mind is, whatever is developed there,
whether it is this project or the residential project that the remonstrators were proposing
the other night, there are going to have to be infrastructure improvements made one way
or the other in that area. If those infrastructure improvements are going to be made,
they're going to have to be made through a TIF district. I don't really see any other way
that's going to happen with the amount of work.that will need to be done down there.
Mr. Roesch agreed.
Mr. Shaver: I might add, you guys don't have any control over the land use issues. It's
decided at the Plan Commission and.the City Council.
Mr. Shaver continued: According to our analysis, and I will not maintain it is exhausted,
but in the northern half of Indianapolis, that is the busiest intersection that is
undeveloped. It is the front door of your community. You have some sensitivity as to
how you want it developed and what you want it to look like. All of those things should
dispose you to expect it will cost you money to develop it appropriately. It's clearly not
going to remain a bean field.
Mr. Shaver: So what you are called to is the responsibility, if you look in the statute part
of this plan, the statute talks about creation of jobs and economic development over and
over again. You are the economic development agents. You're not the land use agents of
the City. There's a separation of those powers. But as the neighbors remonstrate against it
and reduce the intensity, it simply increases the need, if you want those high level
improvements to be made, for you to invest public funds to get those done. There will be
development of some kind at that location. The demographics simply won't.let it be any
other way. And because of the reduction in intensity, what do you lose? You lose the
capacity for the developer to pay for the improvements that you might have been able to
get in some other way. I'm not saying that you then are obligated to pay for whatever
anybody puts in front of you but I'm saying that you, as the, body that has the ability to
capture this increment, are sitting in a paradoxical situation. People are going to request
that you not approve it. Not because they don't want it to look nice, but because, they just
don't want the development at all and they're willing to fight this battle first and not
worry about what tomorrow's battles are. But by reducing the intensity of the
development you've increased the need for public finance. They're inversely proportional
and there's a constant relationship there as well. The purpose of this plan is to try to get it
in front of the public with the best facts that we have and try to make it as clear as we can
without trying to be argumentative. But to a large extent you should expect opposition.
That's simply because there's opposition to the development over which you have limited
control. The Plan Commission, along with the City Council, is the one that ultimately
approves the development. So you're in a paradoxical situation and this is just starting the
process of trying to resolve those paradoxes.
Brief discussion followed about property taxes and TIF districts.
10
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
Call for the question. Mr. Koven moved the CRC approve Resolution 3-2001, approving
the Declaratory Resolution before the Commission. Following a second by Ms. Snyder,
the motion was unanimously approved.
New Business
Approval of Minutes
Ms. Snyder moved the CRC approve the minutes from the meetings of December 20,
2000. Following a second by Mr. Koven, the minutes were approved with Mr. Carter and
Ms. Boldt abstaining since they were not at the December 20 meetings.
Election of Officers
Ms. Snyder nominated Mr. Roesch for the office of President of the CRC. Following a
second by Mr. Carter, the motion was carried by a vote of four in favor: Mr. Roesch
abstained.
Mr. Koven nominated Ms. Boldt for the office of Vice President of the CRC. Following a
second by Ms. Boldt, the motion was approved.
Discussion followed about the need for a Treasurer of the CRC. It was decided this office
was not needed since all members bear responsibility for overseeing the financial aspects
of the Commission.
Mr. Carter nominated Ms. Snyder for the office of Secretary of the CRC. Following a
second by.Mr. Koven, the motion was unanimously approved.
Next Meeting will be. Wednesday, February 14, 7 p.m., in the Caucus Room.
Oaths of Office were administered to the.members of the CRC, all five of whom have
been reappointed. Mayor Brainard thanked the Commission members for their service.
There being no other business before the Commission, Mr. Carter moved the meeting be
adjourned. Following a second by Mr. Koven, the motion was unanimously approved and
the meeting was adjourned at 8:31 p.m.
11