Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCRC-04-10-02CRC Meeting, April 10, 2002 1 CARMEL REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Meeting Wednesday, April 10, 2002 President Rick Roesch called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m. (late, due to a tape recorder malfunction). Commission members present, constituting a quorum, were Luci Snyder, Ron Carter, John Koven, and Ed Burke. Also present were Mayor Brainard, Wayne Wilson, Kate Weese, Karl Haas, Les Olds, Steve Engelking, Sherry Mielke, Mike Hollibaugh, Lance Stahley, Trent Newport, Jim Thomas, Ken Cave, Joe Downs, David Valinetz, Gregg Romaine, Scott Mullin, James Bryan, Gary Stevenson, Cathy Kightlinger, and Jerry O’Callaghan from IDEM. Phyllis Morrissey as support staff. Approval of Minutes Ms. Snyder moved the minutes from the meeting of March 13, 2002, be approved. Following a second by Mr. Carter, the motion was unanimously approved. Report from SESCO Jim Bryan was accompanied by David Valinetz, Garry Stevenson, and Gregg Romaine from SESCO, Scott Mullin from Regenesis, and Jerry O’Callaghan from IDEM. Mr. Bryan explained the conclusions of their study for the contamination and remediation. A site plan noting the contamination areas was distributed. The CRC is the responsible party and there are three mandates. 1. Need to actively investigate and need to actively remediate. 2. Need to meet development timelines. 3. Maximize re-saleability of property, protect value of property. What prospective buyers will want is a letter of approval from IDEM stating the remediation is complete and no further action is necessary. The proposed remediation plan which meets the three mandates and which has been approved by IDEM is the excavation of source materials above the groundwater and HRC (bioremediation) treatment of impacted groundwater. The estimated cost to do this is $286,002.18. This quote does not include quarterly groundwater monitoring which must be done for one year or water management during excavation. It does include fees for the work SESCO is doing. Estimated cost for the required quarterly testing of eight wells is $4,000-$6,000 each time. Cost for water management during excavation is not known because the extent of the water is unknown at this time. Further explanation of the proposal was given. About 2,000 cubic yards of soil will be removed and taken to different disposal sites depending on the soil’s contamination level. Mr. Bryan noted the total cost is less than what was originally projected because the contamination is not as widespread as expected and some of the more expensive long- term remediation methods therefore are not as extensive. Goal for completion of the remediation is mid May. CRC Meeting, April 10, 2002 2 Mr. Roesch asked what the hourly rate would be for SESCO to pursue a grant for the remediation. Mr. Bryant said a cap could be put on any agreement so the number of hours doesn’t exceed what is agreed upon. Mr. Roesch said we should go ahead and approve this tonight. Mr. Haas: I think we should approve this form of remediation but postpone authorizing them to proceed. I think our chances of getting the insurance company to pay for this as we proceed is enhanced if we have an approved plan that we present to them. This is not to suggest in any way that I don’t want SESCO to do this. I like the proposal but before we authorize them to proceed, I want to take it to their insurance company and tell them this is what is approved and this is your opportunity to step up now. The odds of getting them to fund this are greatly enhanced by doing it this way. I think we ought to be able to get this accomplished in the time it takes SESCO to mobilize. Mr. Bryant said it would probably take less than a week to get ready. Mr. Haas: The way the resolution ought to work is that we approve this as a remediation plan and then give Rick [Roesch] authorization to [get it started] after we’ve had an opportunity to present it to their carrier. Mr. Koven: Do we have any idea what percentage of this you would expect to recover? Mr. Haas: The evidence we’ve seen of coverage is $500,000. It’s impossible at this point to tell if that’s an annual amount or whether that was a total amount. I still expect to recover all of this, but I would prefer to have the insurance company pay for it up front rather than have to pursue them. Mr. Koven expressed concern about the funds the CRC has and the timing of recovery from the insurance company. Mr. Romaine: One important thing you need to be aware of, the cement area over one of the contamination hotspots has cracked and broken up in numerous places because of the demolition equipment. This means the source of the contamination is exposed to the rain, so it is not as perfectly stable as we would like. Any further delay does present some concerns. Mr. Carter asked if SESCO had investigated sources of cleanup loans. Mr. Valinetz said it would probably take three to four months to get a loan. Mr. O’Callaghan [from IDEM]: Obviously we are not concerned with how you get your financing. If you present this to the insurance company it’s got to be clear, adamant, that there will be no deviation from this plan at all. It has been approved by IDEM. There are other areas that could be brought in to this. CRC Meeting, April 10, 2002 3 Ms. Snyder asked Mr. O’Callaghan if he could write a letter which states, ‘By the way, if you don’t do this, this next thing that’s going to happen will be much more extensive and much more expensive.’ So that when Mr. Haas mentions that if you alter this plan there will be more dire consequences which will result in higher costs.” Mr. O’Callaghan: As the agency we can’t dictate what the remediation plan will be. We can say we disagree and we won’t allow a certain remediation plan to go forward because it’s not feasible or it won’t work. What we can do, with the soil still there, you have a source, just like you have an open can dripping into the ground. That has to be removed. Obviously we prefer sooner rather than later and if it’s just a matter of an insurance company dragging their feet because they don’t want to spend the money, that’s unacceptable. We have a remediation. We know it’s feasible. And we know the groundwater has been impacted. Once we’re made known, then we have to take action to remediate that. Ms. Snyder: If you could possibly put that in a letter and we carry it over to them, I think it would be… Further discussion followed. Mr. Haas: Time is critical. I want to give the insurance company a short window of opportunity to join in. We can tell the insurance company tomorrow that they have one week to respond. Mr. Bryant: We need to start getting materials ordered, get equipment on site, make arrangements with, and provide samples to the landfill companies. Mr. Carter moved the CRC approve the remediation plan, take the information to the insurance company and give them a short time, as quickly as possible, to respond, and empower Mr. Roesch to move ahead on this in conjunction with what Mr. Haas finds out from the insurance company. Mr. Burke seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Koven asked what if the insurance company says they want to investigate this. “Are we moving forward? Or are we going to hold off until we have a resolution? We cannot afford to pay for this ourselves.” Mr. Burke: I would suggest that at that point our President would come back to us or at least talk with us individually. The motion was amended to state that Mr. Roesch give the “go ahead” if the insurance company agrees to pay for it, otherwise he will come back to the CRC members. With the amendment, the motion was unanimously approved. CRC Meeting, April 10, 2002 4 Mr. Roesch asked Mr. Valinetz what amount of a bridge loan the CRC could get and what would SESCO charge to do that process. Mr. Valinetz: I believe you could get the full amount. I’ll have to go back and look at the fees. The loan could be 10% cap of the available balance in the fund. This is a one time loan to an entity. We can find out the amount tomorrow and get back with you. Mr. Roesch: We will have to do some strategizing. Give me a call and let me know. Thank you, gentlemen, and IDEM for working with us. We appreciate it. Presentation by Joe Downs and Ken Cave from Lauth Property Group. Mr. Cave distributed some information on the company. Details of their proposal were sent with the CRC packets last week. Mr. Downs presented their proposal for residential and retail for some of the property at City Center. He expressed a concern about the lack of parking proximity, noting this is a major issue. He noted his proposal had peak period parking noted which would need to be taken into consideration. There were no questions for Mr. Downs at this time. Mr. Roesch said the CRC would discuss the proposal during Executive Session and thanked Mr. Downs for their interest. Report from the Mayor Mayor Brainard is meeting with Cinergy next week. He noted he is continuing to show the City Center Master Plan to many people. Ryland has sold eight of the townhomes as of today. Report from the Director Mr. Engelking reported the AMLI Old Town site demolition is progressing well, hoping to finish by April 20. The street bisecting the site is included in the demolition. City staff members plan to meet each month about two weeks prior to the CRC meetings. Mr. Olds is brought in as needed. This group meets to determine the status of any action items still outstanding. [The group includes DOCS staff, the City Engineer, Mr. Engelking and any others as needed.] Mr. Roesch said he appreciated everyone getting together and organizing this. It is especially important with so much going on and the potential of more happening. Report from City Engineer Ms. Weese met with Kent Ward, from Hamilton County Surveyor’s office. He will let her determine what release rate can be put into the storm sewer in the AMLI Old Town site, depending on whatever the pipe going into that inlet will take. Ms. Weese talked to AMLI’s engineer and they will put in the minimum they need to and AMLI will pay their CRC Meeting, April 10, 2002 5 portion. CRC will pay whatever is left over from that. The exact figures haven’t been determined. Ms. Weese met with Cinergy about moving their utility lines. Their costs are still estimated at $70,532+ and they can do it quickly. June or July is probably realistic. Time Warner also has a major cable line on Cinergy’s poles. Ms. Weese said she didn’t know how it breaks down as to their legal right to be on the poles, and who would have to pay for the lines to be moved. Ms. Weese and Karl will look into that. “We’re going to try to have Cinergy be responsible for getting Time Warner off their poles.” The power source that feeds our streetlights on Main Street has to be relocated. Cinergy has told us that it is the City’s private line and it is our responsibility to have it relocated. The cost for this would be $5,000-$10,000. Fire Department Exit to the Street by Shapiro’s. Ms. Weese said they are looking at an alternative of having the fire trucks exit north of Shapiro’s on what will be Monon Green Drive opposite Winona Drive. Whatever decision is made, we are three to four months from getting a signal installed. Good temporary controls will be put in place once Shapiro’s opens to alert motorists about emergency vehicles. Shapiro’s Drainage Issue The Hamilton County Surveyor’s requirements are much more stringent than the City’s in this case. They want a smaller pipe used to drain the area than Ms. Weese feels is feasible. She will be discussing this with them and hopes to receive permission to proceed as planned. The Street Department is ready to do the work. Grant Application Status Mr. Roesch asked Mr. Engelking how the grant application was going. Mr. Engelking said it was on schedule, “While the money is earmarked for us, there is a process to go through HUD to get the money allocated to us, an application format. The Mayor’s consulting firm in Washington was the one that assisted us in getting that grant. They are also doing some due diligence for the application process with HUD so that when the application goes in, they won’t kick it back. HUD wants detail on the money and how it will be spent. They want to know how much labor is involved, how much material, what kind of material, design engineering costs. Essentially what they are doing is paving the way, making sure we don’t put something in there that is incorrect.” Mayor Brainard: We are showing them drafts, getting comments back. Once the application is submitted, it is “set in stone” and certain things are reimbursable and others aren’t. We’re trying to maximize the potential. Mr. Koven asked when we would see a check. Mayor Brainard said he was told 60-90 days. Mr. Koven pointed out this would likely make it at least the end of July if the application hasn’t been turned in yet. He expressed a concern about the lag in receiving the money and when the invoices would be due for the reflecting pond. CRC Meeting, April 10, 2002 6 Brief discussion followed. Mr. Engelking: One more point on the application. We cannot submit on the application a one point nine million cost for this project. We have to stratify to no greater amount than that which the grant exhibits. So I have to pick a million dollars out of that thing and hope that the million dollars that I picked will fly. And if I make a poor judgment call in that, then the application gets slowed down even further. Financial Report An updated financial report was distributed. Drainage cost estimates were discussed. Some of the reimbursement costs [from the City] are reflected in the miscellaneous reimbursements. These items are shown as disbursements and receipts. Discussion followed about the report. Mr. Koven suggested another column be added between December and End of year to list some costs which are anticipated but for which the timing is unknown. Agreed. Report from Attorney Huffer/Goodyear Condemnation There is a hearing on Monday at which time any objections have to be filed and we expect it to be transferred out of Judge Proffitt’s court. Alcoholic Beverage Permit Approval Mr. Haas asked Mr. Roesch to report on this: Mr. Roesch reported the CRC approval was tabled until July. The vote was two to two which is a no vote. “The board feels we are warehousing the permit until we get somebody to use it. They don’t want to set a precedent for other developers. I told them we are different because we are in the redevelopment business. They would like us to develop what our restaurant criterion is going to be or come up with a specific restaurant. If the permit is still not approved in July, we could go to the State and the indications are that they would support this.” Muldoon’s Mr. Haas reported he had made numerous requests to Muldoon’s counsel, Charlie Frankenberger, to set up a meeting, but has had no response, probably because the principals of Muldoon’s don’t really know what they want to do. Closings As you all know, the Shapiro’s closing occurred. The AMLI closing is scheduled for one week from today. I expect that will go off without a hitch. Jim Thomas has offered, to move things along, that once he and Ms. Weese have agreed to a drainage plan, AMLI will perform the work and AMLI will “eat” its share of the cost relative to the additional water that it’s going to add to the system and any additional amount will be added to AMLI’s preference under our project agreement and lease with AMLI. As you may recall, up front AMLI pays $600,000 and then the CRC gets a share of the profits from CRC Meeting, April 10, 2002 7 the project after AMLI recovers its costs. And AMLI has offered to put that in as part of its costs. Mr. Roesch: That is very generous, Jim. It helps our cash flow. We appreciate it. Expansion of Redevelopment Area Mr. Haas: I’d like to give some attention to considering an expansion of the redevelopment area that would connect the City Center to Old Town. This might include an area that is a block east of Range Line, a block north of Main Street, and a block west of Third Avenue SW [City Center on the south]. No decision needs to be made on what the actual area would be this evening. I think it’s appropriate to consider an expansion of some area that connects the two. I’d like to have an authorization to engage Bingham McHale (Matt Price) to prepare a proposal to bring back to you. I think as we move through some of these projects, in particular, things that impact both the projects, we may want to have the flexibility of undertaking projects in that area. It doesn’t obligate the Commission to undertake any projects but it gives you the flexibility to do that. Mr. Roesch: In our strategic planning session we had a consensus agreement that we needed to expand our areas of influence. It was noted this was the same area as suggested in the strategic planning session. Mr. Wilson cautioned the CRC about the Range Line merchants who have been told there were no grandiose plans to redo all those areas. When you start to make this a redevelopment area you could be starting a panic among those merchants. Discussion followed. Mr. Hollibaugh: It was our [DOCS] intent to re-initiate some sort of process that would involve some of the people who have been involved before and expand that circle to get some sort of consensus. That process could include CRC members or at least some representatives you think should be involved. Ms. Snyder: I know we talked about this. But why are you bringing this up, Karl? Mr. Haas: As we are looking at possible relocation of businesses, there may be some sites that are suitable within that area. We would have a lot more authority with respect to those sorts of relocations if we were relocating within an area that is itself a redevelopment area. Ms. Snyder: Does this have to do with one of our lawsuits and should we be discussing this in Executive Session? Because I’m not really prepared to do this unless I have a really good reason. CRC Meeting, April 10, 2002 8 Ms. Haas: Yes. Okay. Mr. Koven: If we decide we’re going to do this, I don’t want to vote on this and then go talk to those people. I don’t want them to read about it in the paper and we’ve already done it and then have to go try to pacify them. Mr. Hollibaugh: The Department has a good handle of which people are concerned. Conflict of Interest Policy Mr. Haas said one of the CRC members had asked for clarification on conflict of interest as it relates to owning stock in publicly traded companies. Mr. Haas distributed a proposed policy, noting statutory provisions are not very clear. They speak to the aspect of having an ascertainable pecuniary interest. We contacted the legal counsel for the State Board of Accounts. They said it was unlikely if someone owned stock in a publicly traded company that it would in and of itself be a conflict of interest. Unfortunately, if you do have a conflict of interest, it’s a Class D felony. In order to protect yourselves, because due to mutual fund investments you’ve made, you might not realize you have an ownership interests, I’m proposing this policy to protect you. I can’t guarantee it’s a shield, but I think if there were ever any questions from the state, if you say, “We had our counsel request of your counsel some clarification and based on that clarification we adopted a policy.” With that policy, it’s hard to imagine it would ever be pursued. Under this policy you do not have a conflict of interest if you own less than one half of a percent of the shares of stock in a publicly traded stock or the stock you own in the publicly traded company is 5% or less of your portfolio. So it addresses on both sides that it’s not a significant portion of your assets, and that you don’t own a significant portion of a corporation. Mayor Brainard: In 1996, the Board of Public Works and Safety asked the same question. The answer we received from several lawyers advised so long as there was no ascertainable change occurring to your shares, in other words the share price didn’t change, or the return on that share didn’t change, as a result of the BPW’s contract with that company, it met the test. Mr. Haas: I’m not proposing any action on this this evening. Give it some consideration. Report from Architect Reflecting Pond Mr. Olds said the reflecting pond construction is behind schedule because in March there were 26 bad weather days. The contractor has been instructed that he has to accelerate now that the weather is more favorable. CRC Meeting, April 10, 2002 9 We are having a difficult time finding brick for the pavilions which matches AMLI’s, so we may have to just use some that is similar but not an exact match. Theirs is a jumbo size and the matching regular size is only made a few times a year. Mr. Olds showed paver designs for walkways around the pond. These will be paver lock bricks, two colors. The recommended colors are the same as what was used in the street intersection at City Center Drive and Range Line. Mr. Olds also recommended some of these same elements be considered for the streetscapes to tie it all together. Consensus was favorable. Parcel #5 Demolition In the packets there is a diagram of the parking lot. We have requested a quote from Brandenburg for removing all but the absolute minimum by Goodyear. Direct access is also being left in place. Brandenburg said the additional cost would be $60,000. This cost is higher than expected because the depth of the asphalt is 16”, twice the estimated depth when the original bids were submitted. Mr. Olds said Mr. Haas is pretty sure there is no cross easement agreement, but he is going to make one final check. Mr. Olds then asked North American to quote the same job. He is hoping to have a price from them by the next meeting. Goal is to have the work completed by mid-June. Discussion followed. An aerial photograph shows that the Goodyear parking area has been resealed. This is the area that would be left after the additional parking lot removal. The assumption is made that this is their property. Ms. Snyder asked if our case would be jeopardized if we did that. Mr. Haas: I don’t think it has any affect on the condemnation case. If it turns out they have some right to that, and last time I looked there’s no exception for it, as I recall, on the title policy for the acquisition of the Kroger Center. If they had a right, we would have a claim under the title policy. That’s unless in connection with the Range Line widening or some other City action they were granted an easement, or…, but I’m not aware of that. Ms. Snyder: Unless we get a bid from some other construction company that was a lot lower than $60,000, there would be no benefit, and it might just make us look bad in court. Mr. Engelking said North American picked up the bid packet yesterday and he asked them to expedite it. Ms. Snyder: If they come back at $40,000 and we can save $20,000 by doing it now… CRC Meeting, April 10, 2002 10 Ms. Weese: I remember when we did City Center Drive, I seem to recall there was a little parking area easement along the west side of their property. I don’t remember whether it was temporary, so I’d like to look into that. After further discussion, Mr. Koven made a motion Mr. Roesch be given authority to okay the removal of the parking lot if the bid is no more than $45,000. Following a second by Ms. Snyder, the motion was unanimously approved. Construction Documents for CRC Work, Parcel #5, Shapiro’s Area Mr. Olds noted there has been a change in what is needed for Shapiro’s. There no longer needs to be an area for the contamination pumphouse section which means there will just be a two unit dumpster building. He will be preparing the specifications for bids and asked for agreement to include in the requests, the pylon sign at City Center Drive and Range Line Road and the work behind the fire station (which the Fire Department will pay for). Mr. Burke moved the CRC authorize Mr. Olds to get bids for the site work on Parcel #5. Following a second by Mr. Carter, the motion was unanimously approved. [These bids will be opened on Monday, May 13, 5 p.m.] Retail Development of Parcel #5 Mr. Olds said they had sent out the documents to a number of developers who have expressed interest. Storm Water Detention The design is being completed for Parcels #2 and #5 and it will be approved by City Engineer. When the time comes it will be ready to go out for bid. Report from Department of Community Services Mr. Hollibaugh reported DOCS has been reviewing the book Public Private Partnerships and noted it has a lot of good information which would be applicable to the CRC work. He asked if the CRC would like to purchase the book. The cost is $334.95. Following a brief discussion, Mr. Olds and Mr. Haas volunteered to purchase the book for the CRC. The Redevelopment Petition Process. This was discussed at length. Since this process has not been determined and noting its importance, Mr. Hollibaugh, Mr. Engelking, Mr. Haas, and Ms. Hahn will meet to look at this and make some recommendations. Mr. Haas suggested it be set up as a joint process, in tandem with DOCS and the CRC. Streetscape of Parcel #5 Mr. Olds said he had received input from several people about the proposed streetscape. Mayor Brainard noted this will set the standard for the way Range Line Road looks forever. He asked if Mr. Olds and Ms. Weese were comfortable with the proposal. Mr. CRC Meeting, April 10, 2002 11 Olds said yes, they were comfortable with the design, noting raised planters were the best solution for tree survival. It also important from a safety standpoint to separate the hard surface [sidewalk] from the street. This is done by leaving a two foot strip between the curb and the paved area (or some type of a buffer). Final decision hasn’t been made on the type of buffer. Ms. Weese is concerned about the safety site lines. These can be determined better once the final design is selected. Mr. Olds noted he is also concerned about the pattern of the sidewalks. It all needs to be part of a unified campus. Discussion followed. Mr. Haas pointed out that the CRC has the final decision on the streetscape, noting they are working with Shapiro’s designer. Mr. Hollibaugh said if the CRC wanted to change the overall character of the City Center area, changing it from being dominated by vehicular traffic to become more pedestrian oriented, then the on-street parking would be what would make this happen. Mr. Roesch said in looking at similar things being done all across the country, this is what is being done [on-street parking] unless you’re on a thoroughfare. This is a recurring theme. Mr. Hollibaugh said the on-street parking should be considered one of the most critical components of the overall development plan. Comprehensive Redevelopment Plan Policy Included with Ms. Hahn’s report was a proposed Redevelopment Plan Policy for the CRC members’ review and comment. Ms. Hahn noted in her report that this is designed to apply to the overall area of influence. General consensus was that this is needed, but given the late hour, this discussion will be continued till the next meeting. Land Use for Parcel #2 After review, DOCS’ opinion is that a mixed-use approach would be the most appropriate for this site. This could include high density housing near the interiors of the site with office uses located along City Center Drive and 3rd Avenue SW. Another possibility would be to introduce flex space units, a total integration of office/work space and living space. Mr. Hollibaugh has had a discussion with a developer about this, who expressed a concern about the existing businesses south of the City Center area. C-1 and C-2 Ordinance changes and the Lumber Yard Mall rezone were approved unanimously by the City Council on April 1, 2002. CRC Meeting, April 10, 2002 12 Reports from CRC Members None Approval of Invoices Ms. Snyder questioned an invoice from Lowe, Gray, Steele and Darko. Mr. Haas said it was for work that was done a long time ago. More detail is needed on this invoice so it was rejected until this is provided. Ms. Mielke is going to notify all vendors that any invoices not in by the first of the month, will be considered at the next meeting. General agreement by the CRC members. Mr. Burke moved for approval of the invoices in the amount of $451,991.06, which excludes the Lowe, Gray, Steele and Darko invoice. Following a second by Ms. Snyder, the motion was unanimously approved. Old Business None New Business None Pond Bottom Color Mr. Olds showed the color choices. General consensus was for dark blue. Next Meeting will be May 8, 2002. Adjournment Mr. Burke moved the meeting be adjourned. Following a second by Ms. Snyder, the motion was unanimously approved and the meeting was adjourned.