Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCRC-05-10-00CARMEL REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Wednesday, May 10, 2000 DOCS Conference Room 6:00 p.m. AGENDA Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes, 4/25/2000 Meeting 3. Financial Report 4. Old Business A. Discussion about organization and resolutions about payment of invoices and approval of contracts B. Discussion about Community Survey Proposal C. Discussion about ARTEC ProposaVAgreement D. Estimate in the amount of $8,500 for dumpster.used during razing four buildings in Old Town E. Letter from Mayor Brainard, nominating Joseph Staehler as head of the Department of Redevelopment 5. New Business A. Opening of Bids for Private Redevelopment of Redevelopment Parcel No. 1 A, Carmel City Center B. Approval of Invoices 1. Baker & Daniels, Inv. 159955,11/10198 $ 26.95 2. Baker & Daniels, Inv. 159956, 2125/99 $7,132.96- 3. Baker & Daniels, Inv. 163806, 5119/99 $ 250.56 S3 ' 4. Barnes & Thomburg, Inv. 579351, 12/22/99 $1,407.00 20? ' 5. Wallack Somers & Haas, Inv. 4675, 12/23/99 $5,250.00 6. Wallack Somers & Haas. Inv. 4673, 12/23/99 $5,373.25 7. August Mack Environmental, Inc., Inv. 0011651 $1,300.00 8. Daily Ledger $ 59.28 9. Indianapolis Newspapers S 68.13 10. tkfeid Compton Realty Co, 3/13/00 $ 750.00 11. Property Analysts, Inc., Ref #00-008, 3/14/00 $ 750.00 Total $22,368.13 These invoices are to be paid from the 1998 City Center Bond: 6. Discussion of draft of REP from CSO for Parcels 2 and 6. 7. Signing of Documents (if any) 8. Schedule Next Meeting (June 14) 9. Adjournment Z:kedevconunt2000 May 10 Agenda CARMEL REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Meeting, Wednesday, May 10, 2000 The meeting was called to order by President Rick Roesch at 6:01 p.m. Other Commission members present were John R. Koven, Amy Boldt, and Susan Westermeier, constituting a quorum. Also present were Robert Doster and Les Olds from CSO, Mayor Jim Brainard, City Councilor Wayne Wilson, Joe Staehler, Phil Dunlap from Metro North, and four bidders: Thomas Dapp, Gradeax, David Belloli, Milestone, Richard Fletcher, Smock Fansler„and one other who arrived late did not sign in. Phyllis Morrissey as support staff. Commission member Ron Carter arrived at 6:06 p.m. Mr. Koven moved we proceed immediately to the bid opening. Ms. Boldt seconded the motion and it was unanimously approved. OOpenin¢ of Bids for the site preparation and improvements of City Center, Phase I. The bids were: Gradex $698,900.00 Kreager Brothers Excavating, Inc. $691,317.26 Fox Contractors Corp. $693,194.63 Trotter Construction, Inc. $802,703.22 Smock Fansler Corporation $843,346.61 Poindexter Excavating, Inc. $679,019.00 Central Indiana Contracting, Inc. $819,366.40 Atlas Excavating, Inc. $809,832.90 Milestone•Contractors, L.P. $788,000.00 Trainee, Inc. $846,081.00 Site Services and Underground, Inc. $826,817.50 The bids will be reviewed by the City Engineer and a recommendation will be brought to the next Redevelopment Commission meeting on Wednesday, June 14. Approval of Minutes Ms. Boldt made a motion to approve.the minutes of the April 25, 2000, meeting. Following a second by Mr. Carter the minutes were unanimously approved. Financial Report The report was distributed by Mayor Brainard and he explained some details, noting the bids just received were less than we had projected. Mayor Brainard noted we were obligated to pay property takes in arrears on some of the properties we have recently purchased. Mayor Brainard: On AMLI, there were three things which needed to happen before we could close. The first thing we needed-was a permit from the Indiana Department of Environmental Management for our wetlands mitigation. That permit has now been received. I don't have it in hand, but received a call two days ago from our attorneys, Baker and Daniels, and they have been notified by IDEM that the permit had been granted. They do not yet have it in hand either, but they've been notified it's available. The second thing that had to happen was the City Council had to approve the zoning.for the City Center site and that's now taken place. The third thing that has to happen is that we need a permit-from the Army Corps of Engineers. We have now been promised we will receive it by June 30`h. I'd like to see it sooner, but at least we've been given a date for the first time. The question revolves around whether we're subject to their jurisdiction or not. Mayor Brainard was asked if we would be able to award before we actually get that permit. He responded, "Legally, we can't obligate ourselves until we have the money freed up. We can probably award conditional upon getting it out of escrow." Discussion followed. Bids hold for at least 60 days. Mr. Roesch noted if we run into a problem we could get with the lowest bidder and ask for an extension. Mr. Roesch: Of the cash we have right now, S 150,000 is from the Build Indiana Fund. Can that be usedfor general purposes? Mayor Brainard said, "Yes, anything dealing with the City Center." Mr. Koven: According to what I inquired about today, we have $187,000 in cash. I don't know where we got the $262,000. Mayor Brainard: Clerk Treasurer told me that regarding the proceeds in the non-bond account, some of it's invested and some of it's in cash. The $180,000 is in cash. The other is in a CD or something; but still available. Discussion followed Mayor Brainard noted the figures on the financial report are net today prior to the invoices listed on tonight's agenda. Mr. Koven: One of the critical things that I think everyone on the Commission should be aware of is that our bond fund balance as of today is $23,619. When we pay these invoices totaling $22,368.13, out of the original bond money we're going to have $1,251.00 remaining. It is correct that the money in the Build Indiana Fund can be used for anything to do with City Center, but because that's a regular City fund anything we pass as an expenditure is still subject to City Council approval prior to checks being issued. The point I'm trying to make is that we're down to $1,251 in bond money which we had the latitude to do with what we wanted. With the other money we still have the latitude to do what we want, but the City Council has final say approving those claims. Mayor Brainard: I asked the Clerk-Treasurer about that, too,, and she thought the Build Indiana Fund was subject to City Council claims process but not anything else. Mr. Koven: I don't think that's correct. Any checks that the City writes that are not coming from a bond issue have to go through the City Council for approval before they can be issued. She's still receipting money from rents and paying utility expenses and then she paid 512,000 in property taxes out of there. And she's going to have a fall installment of that to pay, too. Mr. Brainard: No, I don't think so. I believe we're set with the property taxes now as a result of the closings. Mr. Koven: That was only the spring installment. Are we free for the fall one? Mayor Brainard: It depends on each individual deal. We'd have to go back and look at them. I think we're at the end of our obligation to pay the arrearage taxes. Mr. Roesch: As I recall we paid taxes last fall and most of the property was closed prior to last fall... Mayor Brainard: Once the City closes, our obligation Mr. Koven: That may be the case but I don't know how it could be that way. We're talking about the two properties on Main Street and we didn't close on those until this year. The contracts negotiated said we would pay the property taxes due and payable in 2000. Mr. Roesch: I would guess we'd have to pay the full takes. It was noted it will beat July I" before we'll have the AMLI escrow released. Discussion followed about the financial situation and invoices due. It was noted that some of the items listed on the financial report would not be completed and invoiced until next month or even later. Old Business Mr. Roesch: First item is discussion about organization and resolutions about payment of invoices, approval of contracts, appointment or confiiming.a director if this resolution is passed. Questions or suggestions? [Mr. Haas arrived at 6:35 p.m.] Discussion on Resolution 99-2000 followed. Ms. Boldt: If the director is appointed to provide the services, do we feel comfortable that we've fixed the problem that we identified to start the ball rolling and that we're not putting ourselves in the position where the same set of occurrences could happen again only with this director being questioned? Have we in fact laid out the authority and the specific recommendations we have for him at this particular time? Mr. Roesch: I can address that on my behalf. I think just having a written procedure, (basically policies are included as well) forms a reference point, something for us to point to and say, "This is the way it's supposed to work," for. everybody involved. We did not have anything like that before. It makes us all accountable for what our roles are. If it doesn't work then we modify this. Will it do what we want it to do? Only time will tell, but I do feel more comfortable that there is something for all of us (the Commission, the City Departments)... this can be communicated, this is-the procedure that we go by, this is the accountability. Ms. Westermeier: We'll now have a department, and a person, someone that when we leave these meetings, we'll not be wondering what's supposed.to happen. There is accountability. There is someone that's taking'information from these meetings [inaudible] and reporting back. I like that. Mr. Koven: I.don't mind the director's part; I don't mind the department's part. I still think there are loopholes in here that allow a director, whoever that person may be, to incur expenditures, get appraisals and all kinds of things with regard to the acquisition or disposition of property prior to ever discussing it with the CRC. I think that's part of the biggest problem why we got where we are. Mr. Haas: What this says is that you agree on the budget amount. Assuming that Joe [Staehler] is confirmed as the director, there is an amount which you can set at one dollar, a thousand dollars or a hundred thousand dollars, from which Joe can draw to make some preliminary inquiries about property. Because to bring a proposal to the commission for you to evaluate whether you want to proceed, any further, you need to know something about the property. Actually I don't think this authorizes anyone to obtain appraisals but it would authorize someone to obtain valuations. The reason for that is if there is a proposal to acquire some property the first question asked will be, "What's the property worth?". And it's hard to address a proposal in a vacuum. Before I authorized someone to do a lot of work on some property, I'd want to know some parameters, such as, who owns the property, about what is the property worth. In selling property, maybe there's a proposal to dispose of property for a purpose, your question would be, "About how much money can we expect to get from it?". So that when a proposal is brought to you there is some baseline information upon which you can make a decision whether to continue exploring the idea. Mr. Koven: Let me give you an example. We were saddled with appraisal costs on a property here on Rangeline Road that was not even discussed with the commission any interest in purchasing this property. What 'I would rather see happen, and maybe this does it, is before we develop a budget we approve the interest in going forward with a project in the first place. What I don't want is someone going out and getting appraisals and then coming back to us and saying, "Look we found a piece of property here. Let's go out and buy it." Ms. Westermeier: But Karl is saying we can set it so that no appraisal can be done because we put a limit on it. Mr. Koven: But it doesn't say we have to approve the project before we approve the budget. It doesn't require our approval to approve a project before we can spend money under the way this is written. Mr. Haas explained in detail how getting initial proposals would work. He noted the CRC can set the amount the director can spend at whatever level they feel comfortable. It can be set so the director would have to come back to the CRC fairly frequently to obtain more money. If the CRC doesn't approve of the way the money is being spent, the amount can beset at zero. "This doesn't set a budget tonight. That would have to be done at some later date." Mr. Koven: I don't have a problem with approving a budget for a project, but I want to approve a project before the budget. If I understand what this says, the director can go spend money and then bring the project to us. I don't want to see that. I don't want the director out fishing around for projects for us and bringing them to us along with expenses just because he has a budget to go out and fish. I'd rather he come to us with a project and say this is something we need to do because it's in line with what we're doing and I need a budget to work with to get to a point where I bring back a proposal. That, to me, is the way it's should work. Mr. Haas: This resolution is set up so you have a basis for setting the economic parameters on what the director can do. Ms. Westermeier: What you're trying to say, John, is that you don't the director doing anything without us knowing about it first. That's really the.bottom line, it's not the dollar. It's the idea. Because in the past you perceive that there's been things done without us knowing about them. Ms: Boldt: We could authorize the director to get an estimate. Mr. Carter: I would just make two comments. First, the thought that this group did not know anything about the Main Street projects is absolutely not true. We passed a resolution showing interest on it in a public meeting. Secondly, I think we're probably being foolish by looking at constraining the director, whoever it might be, from spending any money to look at projects ahead of time. And the reason I say that, once the City started looking at a project, that particular building up there [by Main Street] went up in value dramatically because the City was looking at it. I think, frankly, it's probably appropriate for us to be able as a Commission to quietly look at things in the community to see if they're appropriate for this Commission to work with and do it from a standpoint of not raising the price artificially. I don't see anything wrong with having a director go out and bring feasible projects to us. If the intention is to slow the Commission down to a crawl, we have the power to do that. We can say you can't do anything until we say, "Here are the things that you can do." Or we can put some confidence into whoever that director may be and say, "Here's a budget; here are the guidelines we think this ought to be utilized with." And go ahead and look at that from a standpoint of letting that person bring to us appropriate projects that we think can be accomplished within the budget constraints that we've set forth and the budget constraints that we have. So I'm not as concerned about looking at projects right from the start and saying, "Okay„ go ahead." I think we ought to have some feasibility built into this at the beginning so that we don't waste our time looking at projects that are not feasible for us to do. Mr. Roesch: If the way this thing works, I guess I'm not too uncomfortable with this as long as we have the ability to limit this. But I also think having the director at every meeting, one of the things we should charge the director with, within the constraints that we lay out, is to report to us what he is looking at so we can give him direction. Mr. Staehler: It seems to me that if there is concern about controlling the director, if I'm the director, I would certainly consult with the chairman of the CRC before I would spend any money. Mr. Roesch: We all know the concerns we have and the organization that we're trying to put in place and also the spirit of what we're trying to do. For myself, I'm inclined to see how it works. Ms. Boldt: If we decide to assign this seed money, what would the City Council's authority be over that amount of money? I realize the CRC would not have authority over the expenditure of that money. Would that also mean that the Council would have the authority? I'm assuming that would have to be unencumbered cash. Mr. Roesch: That budget has to be approved by the City Council just like all departments do. Mayor Brainard: That wasn't the advice we received. Not that it might not be a good idea but that wasn't the advice we received. This is an independent commission. It was noted there is still the $75,000 limit for which expenditures (for certain things only) over that amount need Council approval. Mr. Koven asked if that wasn't changed now that we actually have a City department. Mayor Brainard: I can ask Neil Steinbart to put something in writing how he thinks the law works on that. I can have that done by the next meeting. That has more to do with the budget process than this particular resolution. Mr. Carter noted this Commission is akin to an adolescent at this point in time. He noted we've got to be in a mode that we make decisions to move. forward, get things done, but do them in a prudent manner. "Putting a director in place, and a department in place is certainly appropriate. Having that person report back to us on a monthly basis, having that person available to report to us as needed when we have questions or concerns in between meetings." There being no further questions about the proposed resolution, Amy Boldt made a motion to approve Resolution [This will be number 9-2000 per Clerk-Treasurer.] to create the director for the CRC; the resolution we've been discussing. Mt. Haas: Then you need to supercede #6. Following a second by Ms. Westermeier, the motion was approved unanimously. Discussion of the Community Survey Proposal and Discussion of the Artec Proposal Cost of the Community Survey Proposal, will be approximately $12,800. This study will survey the community and the results will show what the constituency wants and what type of facility they will support. The Artec Proposal, a marketing.proposal looking more at the economic feasibility of the project, will be S60,000 plus $16,000-$18,000 for expenses. These figures sound high but there are multi-million dollar projects so it is prudent to do the studies beforehand. Mr. Roesch suggested we move forward with both of these when we have the money. He said it's something we need to do before we spend money issuing bonds. Mr. Koven: I agree 100% that we need to do both, of these but I think the time to do them is not now. They should be tabled until we get our money released from the AMLI project. I think for the community survey we're looking at September now because they're already scheduled for the summer. In order to build these projects it's going to require a bond issue to do it. Until we have some kind of outcome the status of those business entities that are within our TIF district, where that money's going to.come from, .I'd be nervous about getting involved in a bond issue until we have some kind of clear vision what's going to happen there. I don't want to spend the money on these two proposals and then find out we can't afford to build the center in the first place. So I think these should be.put on the back burner until we have the funds. I want to build a performing arts center but I don't want to build it and then have to find alternative ways to pay for it. The CRC and Mayor Brainard were all in agreement.. Mr. Carter cautioned that.the community survey not do the polling with a pre-conceived notion about what will be built. He suggested the Artec study.be done first because possibly the performing arts center or museum building may not be an economically feasible approach for this community to take. "If not, since we've still got land here that we need to develop, what other product do we put on that?" He suggested we develop the thought of a product or two product, alternatives by doing the Artec study fast and then giving that item to the IUPUI people so they can present tangible concrete alternatives and survey towards that. Discussion followed. Ms. Boldt noted the importance of identifying the user groups first. She also said she hoped a survey would be mailed to the community (like the one done prior to the Farmers' Market). Direct feedback from this would be a good addition to the rest of the information gathered. After more discussion, Mr. Koven moved the final decision on the surveys be tabled until the July meeting. Following a second by Mr. Carter, the motion was unanimously approved. Item D, Old Business Brief discussion about the demolition of four buildings in Old Towne. The demolition will be done by the City Street Department employees. Dumpsters will be needed to haul the debris away. The estimated cost for these dumpsters is $8,500, which includes the hauling services. Two buildings are ready to be demolished at this time, so the costs will probably be about half the estimation right now. Mr. Carter moved the CRC approve $8,500 for the dumpsters as needed. Following a second by Ms. Westermeier, the motion was unanimously approved. Item E. Old Business Mayor Brainard has appointed Joe Staehler as director of the CRC. Sue Westermeier moved the CRC confirm Joe Staehler as director of the CRC. Mr. Carter seconded the motion which was then unanimously approved. Approval of Invoices Brief discussion about the invoices as listed by the Clerk-Treasurer. These are all to be paid from the City Center bond. Total to be paid is $22,368.13. Sue Westermeier moved the invoices be approved. Following a second by Ms. Boldt, the motion was unanimously approved. Discussion of the draft of RFPs for Parcel 42 and Parcel #6 Mayor Brainard corrected an earlier statement, noting there is a small piece of wetlands on Parcel #6. The RFP for this parcel notes the wetlands are present and the developer will have to work around them. They are not to be disturbed which is part of the commitment we made in mitigating the larger section.on Parcel 41. Mr. Olds displayed the master plan, showing the "vision" of the larger area. He then displayed the "working map", explaining the different areas. Parcel 92 is an office complex with the possibility of eight separate two-story buildings. Parcel #6 is for sale townhomes and possibly retail on the east end. Mr. Olds noted the RFPs were kept as general as possible but the architectural standards are outlined thoroughly. Bidders will be asked to conform in general to the master plan. "Weary to outline what the City is going to provide and what the developer is going to provide." The project agreement will pin down all these elements in detail. Also in the RFP will be the minimum price for the land. The Commission will have the right to control and approve the final design. The Commission will also set the dates for when the bids are received. Discussion followed. Mr. Haas noted the RFP is designed so the CRC can choose whichever bid they like, even if it's not the lowest one, but is.the design or idea which the CRC likes best. The power lines were discussed and the possibility of having those buried by the utility company. The cost for the reflecting pond is estimated at $1,700,000 which includes the water portion and the walkways around it. The AMLI contract requires the City to build the reflecting pond and walkways but these will also benefit the whole project aesthetically. Mr. Koven asked what the time table was for the reflecting pond's completion. Mr. Haas said there is a time in the agreement but he didn't remember what it was. The bids will be opened at one meeting. Then a.day will be scheduled for the bidders to come before the CRC and make presentations. The CRC can reject any and all bids totally at its discretion. CSO recommended $2,311,000 for Parcel 42. On Parcel,#6, CSO recommended approximately $710,000. Dates for bid openings were discussed. There is a possibility that Ms. Boldt and Mr. Koven will not be at the August 91h meeting. Mayor Brainard noted if a quorum was not going to be present, the CRC could always delegate the President and City Engineer Kate Boyle Weese to open the bids. Mr. Haas said following the presentations by the bidders, approximately 2-3 weeks following the bid opening, the CRC should be able to award the bids in September. The closing would likely be in November. The money would basically come in at the end of the year in November or December. Mr. Olds recommended the completion date be set for-eighteen months from receipt of permits. Mr. Koven moved the minimum bid price for Parcel 92 be set at 52,500,000 and the minimum bid price for Parcel #6 be set at 5750,000. Following a second by Ms. Westermeier, the motion was unanimously approved. Mr. Koven made a motion that the CRC approve the RFPs for Parcels #2 and #6, the date for receiving the bids be set for August 9, 2000, at the regularly scheduled CRC meeting. Following a second by Ms. Westermeier, the motion was unanimously approved. The bids will be received in the Clerk-Treasurer's office. Other Business In response to a question, Mr. Haas verified that Mr. Staehler can be asked to do something [by the CRC] and this can just be reflected in the minutes; it does not need a resolution. 9 Mr. Roesch talked with Tom Stayer, who called recently. Mr. Roesch told Mr. Stayer the CRC did not have the money at this time and did not feel it was fair to ask him to tie up his property at this time. Mr. Roesch said, "I was very noncommittal about when or if anything would happen on this property." Adjournment Ms. Boldt moved the meeting be adjourned. Following a second by Mr. Koven the motion was unanimously approved and the meeting was adjourned. Next meeting will be Wednesday, June 14, 6 p.m. 10