Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCRC-08-13-02CRC Meeting, August 13, 2002 1 CARMEL REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Meeting Tuesday, August 13, 2002 President Rick Roesch called the meeting to order at 5:56 p.m. Commission members present were Luci Snyder, Edmund Burke, and John R. Koven constituting a quorum. Also present were Mayor Brainard, Karl Haas, Les Olds, Steve Engelking, Wayne Wilson, Kate Weese, Lance Stahley, Kelli Lawrence, Sherry Mielke, Todd Miller, Gerald Kosene, Steve Sturtz, Bruce Cordingly, and Kara Salge from the Indianapolis Star. Phyllis Morrissey as support staff. Approval of Minutes Mr. Koven moved the minutes of July 9, 2002, be approved. Following a second by Ms. Snyder, the motion was unanimously approved. Mr. Koven moved for approval of the minutes of the meeting of July 16, 2002, and the memos of the two executive sessions on that date. Following a second by Ms. Snyder, the motion was unanimously approved. Financial Report Ms. Mielke reported the July 31 balance was $147,435. A fax was received from Congressman Burton stating funding has been approved for the parks project (which includes the reflecting pond). The wire transfer should be received some time in the next few days. The first transfer will be for $433,000. The balance will be later. Approval of Invoices The invoices presented total $447,519.60. Mr. Roesch said the CRC cannot legally approve invoices without adequate funds, but regular operating expenses can be paid. Mr. Roesch asked for a motion to approve payment of the invoices subject to receipt of money, either from the insurance settlement or the grant funds. Mr. Koven moved the approval of invoices be tabled until our next meeting which is anticipated in two weeks. Following a second by Ms. Snyder, the motion was unanimously approved. Cordingly/Kosene Agreements A letter was received earlier this afternoon from Mr. Cordingly. The issues raised were discussed in the Executive Session just prior to this meeting. Mr. Roesch asked Mr. Cordingly to address these issues at this time. Mr. Cordingly: The first office building will be my company headquarters. I have sent a letter to the Mayor proposing that building #2 house the Parks Department and the Utilities Department. We’re hopeful that will work. In the third building, I’ve contacted financial institutions, all that have been brought to my attention. I have two restauranteurs interested, depending on if a liquor license is available for one of them. Mr. Cordingly expressed concern about the reflecting pond issues, timing, pricing, paving materials and some other details. Mr. Kosene echoed the concerns. CRC Meeting, August 13, 2002 2 Mr. Cordingly projected starting his second building June 30, 2004, and the third one eighteen months after that. Mr. Roesch noted Mr. Haas will have Mr. Olds, DOCS, the CRC architectural review committee, and Ms. Weese meet to study the project, so “we can get moving as quickly as possible” and address the issues. Mr. Kosene noted his and Mr. Cordingly’s requested curb cut locations are very important to the overall feasibility of their project because they determine the placement and number of buildings. He also requested help with landscaping and fencing the south side of his parcel. He asked if the lighting scheme for common areas was going to be standardized and said they would like to work with the CRC on this. He said they are also looking into the elevators as requested. They will have both inside and outside garage units. Mayor Brainard had nothing to report. Clerk-Treasurer Cordray had delivered a financial report for the City of Carmel. Report from the Director Mr. Engelking filed notice to participate in claims settlement for six different properties which adjoin the Monon in CRC property. Settlement on these claims will mean income for the CRC. Mr. Engelking will write and deliver a letter to the owners of Pizza King, who are on a month-to-month lease, to advise them of what the future might bring to their location. Report from Ms. Lawrence Ms. Lawrence asked if a member of the CRC could be at the next Plan Commission meeting to answer any questions about the proposed expansion of the CRC areas. Mr. Roesch will plan to attend. He asked Mr. Olds to update him on the long term concepts so he can show everybody what the possibilities are. Ms. Lawrence said the AMLI Old Towne review was held this afternoon and went very well. She will notify everyone when the ADLS hearing is scheduled. Mr. Roesch asked if the City Engineer, DOCS and the architectural committee were all “in sync” on this. Ms. Lawrence said all their [DOCS] issues had been addressed. Ms. Weese said she still needed the latest plans. There is at least one more Board of Works’ approval needed which is for curb cuts. There seems to be some question on the number and location of the curb cuts requested. Report from Ms. Weese CRC Meeting, August 13, 2002 3 Ms. Weese reported AMLI Old Town might be dedicating a couple strips of right-of-way and we’re waiting for documentation on that. She expects to have the Cinergy agreement on the Board of Works next week, but Cinergy is going to start the project next Tuesday or Wednesday. She is waiting for an answer to whether Time Warner can be in our Monon right-of-way for their relocation. Cripe is staying on top of North American Construction who got one quote for electrical for $30,000 which both Cripe and Ms. Weese think is exorbitant. So they are getting some other estimates from electrical contractors. These are electrical lines that come off of Main Street to the power source for all the street lights so that needs to be relocated off that property, too. We did get about 500 cubic yards of dirt from Weihe Construction last week. We have a dirt plan from CSO, where we should put it. I met with the Street Department and we are going to clean up the dirt areas, grade the dirt into gentle slopes so weed control can be handled. Brief discussion about possibility of a fence around the dirt areas. Ms. Weese said this is really too large an area to do that. Signs will be posted which state “no dumping”. Discussion followed about the dirt control and the removal of the rest of the asphalt. Mr. Roesch: There is a potential that we will be approached soon by Shapiro to start construction of Phase II of his parcel. That is going to cause an enormous amount of [parking] pressure on that site and we already have a lot of pressure especially when we were working on remediation at the same time as Shapiro’s building was going on and Muldoon’s is trying to be in the restaurant business. When Shapiro’s next building is under construction, there will be quite a slope down into the existing parking lot. We have a parking problem. With the construction and trying to accommodate Muldoon’s in this whole thing, I’m very concerned about the parking for everybody. In retrospect, I wish we hadn’t torn up any of the blacktop because I think we need it. I was going to propose tonight that we level the fill dirt [north of Muldoon’s], grade it out, and put gravel on top of it. This would give us some parking during the transition period. In response to a question from Ms. Snyder, Mr. Olds said there was some dirt on the Pedcor site which at one time AMLI had planned to use in their final grading. The Commission may be obligated to remove the two dirt piles. When Pedcor starts their project they would have a foot of topsoil to remove. We would have places it could be put in other areas of City Center. This can probably be worked out but the topsoil can’t be used in the parking lot because it doesn’t compact right. However, we have an additional problem. They are requesting a staging area, east of Third Avenue. CRC Meeting, August 13, 2002 4 Ms. Weese said the work can probably be done by Street Department using rented equipment. The soil would have to be compacted before it would be suitable for a parking lot. Discussion followed about location of parking, streets, underground sewer lines, retention of stormwater in the area. Mr. Koven asked about the possibility of removing part of the Muldoon’s building. Further discussion followed. The grade by the dumpster building is too steep right now, until the other buildings are removed. Cool Beans is on a month to month lease. Mr. Olds was asked to get a cost for gravel for a parking area. Ms. Weese noted a sign has been installed reading “Do Not Enter, Emergency Vehicles Only” near Shapiro’s parking area. She has been asked by Mr. Shapiro about having some of the curbs painted yellow. Mr. Engelking pointed out the streetscape in that area has not been completed. Ms. Weese asked about the pole which will have the camera mounted on top. The pole needs to be replaced. She asked who will be paying for this? Mr. Roesch said he would sign a change order for half the cost. Ms. Weese will follow up. The landscape boxes in front of Shapiro’s were modified and trees have been selected. The forester recommended each block have different trees, so if a blight does happen, the whole street won’t be affected. The estimate is $5,000-$7,000 for a warning flasher for the southbound traffic where emergency vehicles would exist onto Range Line Road. This would be a single pole with a flashing yellow light which would be triggered when fire vehicles are exiting. Mayor Brainard said the City could fund that. Report from Attorney Mr. Haas said we have a proposed settlement from Indiana Insurance with respect to the Village Cleaners and the Renken matter. “The amount proposed is $470,000. We could expect that money within seven days presuming in that time we have signed a joint mutual release of all claims. I propose Mr. Roesch be authorized to sign that settlement agreement as long as it is consistent with those things.” So moved by Ms. Snyder. Seconded by Mr. Burke. Mr. Koven asked if that covered our expenses. He was told it did cover the CRC’s direct expenses; it does not cover many of the things we consider indirect expenses. Both parties agree the matter is settled and we’re not going to be “throwing anything at either side any more”. The motion was unanimously approved. CRC Meeting, August 13, 2002 5 Report from Architect Mr. Olds said the reflecting pond will not be 100% complete until September. “The contractor has requested 30 days additional beyond the August 30 date for completion. He has used a whole list of why he has his problem, many of which we disregard, but we have to bring his request before the Commission. I don’t know what steps we could take to punish him beyond August 30. I’ve warned him repeatedly and they are trying, working on weekends, to get ahead of the game.” “We’ve been trying to resolve the right of way issue with Cinergy. They have not provided permanent service because we have not granted the easement to them. Part of the reason is because we’ve been having a great deal of discussion where the transformer and service is because every time they move it, it costs the Commission more money in terms of runs and distance. We currently have an understanding that the transformer will be located along Third Avenue in the right of way on the west side. We want to make sure this location does not impede the future park that will be located on the retention area and the sidewalks that we anticipate being extended from the reflecting pond out to Third Avenue.” “We are wrapping up the work on Shapiro’s. The issue on the sidewalk area: samples have been placed outside. The surface texture is very, very rough which is disappointing. The samples don’t seem to be satisfactory for what we thought we were going to get, so we’ll be going back to them and asking them to redo the samples. The surface is so mottled that a woman in high heels could not stand up on it, and it would be too rough for pushing a stroller.” Mr. Olds continued: There is also a problem with a sidewalk which has already been poured along Fire Department Drive that will have to be replaced, because it is banked too steeply at the end. He will contact them about it. Mr. Koven asked Mr. Olds if the CRC needed to do anything about the request for time extension on the reflecting pond construction. Mr. Olds said he was only bringing it to the Commission’s attention since the contractor hasn’t requested it in writing. “We are in the discussion mode right now and encouraging them at the same time on the construction.” Mr. Roesch: We’re well beyond our contractual agreement for AMLI so they’ll have to have some good reasons for taking the pressure off. We’re being pressured as well. Mr. Olds: And we’re reminding them of that. Discussion followed. Mr. Olds said if it’s still not completed August 31st, then it becomes a legal issue and the attorney may have to step in. Their contract does have a penalty clause in it. CRC Meeting, August 13, 2002 6 Mr. Olds: the next issue is Parcel #2 and the exhibits. “I plead with all the Commission Members to look at the exhibits, the CSO exhibits, as well as the exhibits by both parties, please call me with any comments or notes or anything that needs to be changed.” One thing that’s not on the agenda is a request for the CRC to grant them staging area during construction. The CRC agreed that they can have a staging area east of Third Street, but they have to be accountable for any damage. Question was asked whether they needed to post a bond. Ms. Weese said photos would document any damage and a $2,000 bond is normally posted. Underground Stormwater Detention, Parcel #2 Mr. Olds: There are three options: Concrete vaults and foundations, solid walls with aluminized steel pipes, or solid walls with bundled solid PVC pipes or $1,000,000 [for the first] versus $500,000 [for the second or third]. Ms. Weese explained the different materials and said this will belong to the City and we will have to maintain it. One of the issues that has not been tested is long term sediment buildup and how it can be removed. Discussion followed. [Portions inaudible because of several people speaking at once in separate conversations.] It was noted Parcel #5 detention will need to be addressed, too, now that Mr. Shapiro is planning to start the next building. Mr. Olds: Parcel#5 detention could be handled by expanding the present detention area, digging a temporary hold to drain water into on a temporary basis. On Parcel #2 at some point that’s an amenity that is part of your project agreement. Mr. Roesch expressed a concern about the cash flow. Mayor Brainard said we should have enough from the federal grant to handle the detention on Parcel #2. Mr. Koven asked Mr. Haas if Parcel #9 would close in September. Mr. Haas confirmed that. Mr. Olds asked about going ahead and getting the request for bid “out on the street”. Mayor Brainard cautioned the CRC not to sign any project agreements until the money has actually been received from HUD, so as not to jeopardize the grant. Reports from CRC Members Ms. Snyder said she was hoping Mr. McComas would be here tonight so she could apologize for an intemperate email she sent him last week. She went on to say there had been lots of difficulties over the past two and a half weeks about signage and awnings which caused time responding to Brian Shapiro. “So before CRC Meeting, August 13, 2002 7 we go on,” Ms. Snyder said, “we need to ascertain or restate exactly what the process is here, make sure we all understand it, the role of the architectural committee (if we want to have one), do we reaffirm it, do we get rid of it, what DOCS says if a complaint comes in about what we are allowing in City Center. I think it’s time for an open discussion on this so we have everything and we all understand it.” Mayor Brainard, after explaining the ordinance, emphasized the importance of getting all the City staff involved at the earliest opportunity when project plans are presented, so if there are any problems, they are addressed early in the project. Mr. Roesch said the redevelopment process can’t be hampered by the bureaucracy of the City. “We’re creating a look that doesn’t apply to other parts of the City. Some things that we are going to require are going to be much more expensive than we would require in other parts of the City. Some of the things we look at are creating a new urban landscape and an ambiance that goes with that, signage, awnings, to get that look.” Discussion followed at length. Ms. Snyder said the response to questions from others in the community is, “This is in City Center and the architectural standards are so unique and really onerous financially that we allow or create new signage. And anybody who wants a building like that is welcome to come here and negotiate for a piece of land and put up with the rest of it. I think the lead person here is the architect for the City Center project.” Ms. Snyder continued: We have to get these things figured out, put up a united front, and get these through this process quickly so once they’re out of here we don’t have any of these things going on. Mr. Haas: The C-1 zoning ordinance has a few very specific requirements on the height, lot frontage. Generally speaking, the review by Mike Hollibaugh [DOCS Director] on architectural design is to make sure that what is proposed is in accordance with the adopted architectural style, the materials, palette, established for the City Center by the Redevelopment Commission. So in effect, with regard to architectural standards, Mike is checking to make sure you’re following your own standards. Now that’s not true necessarily for some of the other items. Landscaping in general is set up the same way, so the Redevelopment Commission establishes the standards and Mike checks to make sure you follow those standards, with the exception of trees in the right-of-way, where that’s to follow the standards of the City. And on signage, the CRC can set standards for the placement and number of the signs and then the review makes sure it’s following those standards. But with regard to the design and construction of those signs, there’s to be a separately adopted style of materials palette established for the City Center by the City. Ms. Snyder: Well, I think that’s a problem because I think each of these buildings may be very unique and so it can’t be a standard for the whole center. CRC Meeting, August 13, 2002 8 Mr. Haas: That may be a problem in the ordinance. With regard to all these other matters, I think we can make Mike’s review simple by having Les provide him the standards because on most matters it’s either these minimal requirements in here or making sure that the standards are being met that we’ve set for ourselves. Ms. Snyder: Les, do you think the signage should be set not for the City Center, but for each project or building, depending on its use or style? What do you think? Mr. Olds: “There’s no question and you made an excellent point. These buildings are going to all be unique and some of the signs will be cast in stone, and go on the buildings which is different from what ordinances are used to looking at.” He agreed there will be many unique signage designs and listed several different possibilities, noting many of these are counter to the current sign ordinance. Ms. Lawrence: The problem isn’t whether I personally like or dislike whatever signs you approve, or Mike does; that isn’t the issue. My issue is we need to have in our files the documentation that shows exactly what you approved so that when we do that check against what the CRC has approved, we have everything. That was the problem with Shapiro’s. We did not have the documentation that showed signs on an awning. We had something that showed an awning but no signs. That’s what the issue is, making sure we get all the documents. Mayor Brainard: That was eventually produced, right, Kelli? The document? Ms. Lawrence: No, we don’t have it. Discussion followed about whether the awnings with signage were presented and approved at a CRC meeting. Mayor Brainard suggested Mr. Olds list the sign standards on a separate sheet, along with each of the things listing what’s been approved and get that to the Commission. Ms. Lawrence: That would be great. Mr. Olds: I think that’s what’s going to happen. If you’ll notice in my packets you receive before every meeting, it will have signs and things in those which become an exhibit and go into the permanent record of the CRC. Part of the process will be having everyone get their stuff in to you as an exhibit so you can review it. Further discussion followed. The importance of having project agreements which are “tight as a drum” was emphasized. CRC Meeting, August 13, 2002 9 Mr. Carter asked what the role and scope of the architectural committee was. He questioned, for instance, the architectural committee being asked to review curb cuts for AMLI. He expressed a concern about the possibility that we are training the developers to bypass the bureaucrats. The bureaucrats aren’t having to learn this new; they’ve been doing this for some time. He recommended the role be better defined. Ms. Weese reminded the CRC that the Board of Public Works and Safety grants curb cuts. She can recommend them, but it is the Board’s decision. Mr. Haas said the project agreements say that after receiving approvals from the CRC then the developer is responsible for obtaining all other permits of any nature, but that the CRC will support them. Mr. Roesch said he felt the architectural review committee needed to maintain control over the design standards. We don’t want to have the whole Commission have to meet every week to hash out designs. Mayor Brainard suggested Mr. Olds, Mr. Haas and Mike Hollibaugh and his staff to work out the details of how this ordinance works. Agreed by the CRC. Mr. Haas: The architectural review committee does not have to be set up as a standing committee. Mr. Roesch suggested it be like a standing committee, but the members can rotate. General agreement. Correspondence Mr. Roesch suggested the CRC have Umbaugh give an assessment of the financial impact of the changes to the tax reform on existing TIFS. Report from Mayor Mayor Brainard said he did want to mention that Clarian is interested in a hospital at the site of the Unisys building east of Wyndham Gardens Hotel, possibly razing that building and putting up a six or seven story building. We might want to do some road work in that area and to take advantage of the old TIF laws, we would need to establish a TIF district in that area prior to January 1, 2003. It was noted that Clarian is a for profit hospital. New Business None. Mr. Roesch said Mr. Olds is working on designs for a potential “service area” for businesses in the future. He suggested members get with him to see the designs. Next Meeting There will be a special meeting on Wednesday, August 28, 5 p.m. (beginning with an executive session and also with one following). CRC Meeting, August 13, 2002 10 The next regular meeting will be on September 18, at 5 p.m. (again with executive sessions). Discussion followed about changing the regular standing meeting. No decision was made. Mr. Roesch asked everyone to think about it, and it could be discussed later. Adjournment Tonight’s second Executive Session was cancelled. Mr. Koven moved the meeting be adjourned. Following a second by Mr. Carter, the meeting was adjourned at 8:32 p.m.