Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCRC-10-10-01 CARMEL REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Meeting, Wednesday, October 10, 2001 President Rick Roesch called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Commission members Luci Snyder and John Koven were present, constituting a quorum. Ron Carter arrived at 7:11 p.m. Others present were Wayne Wilson, Jim Thomas, Phil Dunlap, Paul Reis, Steve Engelking, Les Olds, Eric Filipow, Bill Kincius, Kevin Foster, David Belloli, Jim Kraft, Linda Clark, Cheryl Crooks, R. Renkin, Erik S. Mroz, Betty and Jim Huffer. Karl Haas arrived at 7:11 p.m. also. Opening of Bids Mr. Olds opened and read the bids for the streetscape and the reflecting pond. Six bids were received for the streetscape and three for the pond, which include several alternates. Mr. Olds recommended the bids be taken under advisement until they can be examined in detail. He will report back to the Commission. Mr. Roesch thanked the bidders, noting their interest in the City was appreciated. Approval of Minutes Mr. Koven moved the CRC approve the September 12, 2001, minutes as mailed. Following a second by Ms. Snyder, the motion was unanimously approved. Mr. Roesch noted that tonight's meeting should be completed at 8:30 p.m. Mayor's Report Mayor Brainard had no report. Director's Report Mr. Engelking distributed a detailed written report to the Commission members. Mr. Engelking introduced Mr. Jim Kraft, director of the Casas de Amore project, who thanked the CRC for allowing them to use their property. Mr. Kraft reported there were over 700 people who participated, representing twenty -two different churches. Next year they plan to partner with Habitat for Humanity and build houses for Hamilton County residents. Mr. Kraft gave "Bridge Builder Award" certificates to each Commission member. Mr. Engelking continued with his report. Demolition costs for the Herrigan property are estimated at $75,000. 1 Eviction notices for the Herrigan property were sent to Kestner and Long. Mr. Long will be out by October 21. Mr. Kestner has requested an extension to November 4. CRC members agreed to this extension. SESCO was awarded the bid to continue the work to determine the magnitude of contamination on the Herrigan property. They plan to do borings on October 15 and 16, with results available around November 2. They will also try to determine whether the parcels Mr. Shapiro is interested in can be "separated out" from the contaminated area. An additional charge of up to $1,000 was approved for this. Demolition specifications are complete for the Kroger and Herrigan property. Cripe Engineering will have the specifications for Parcel #8 ready by October 15, so we can advertise the demo packages for bid on October 16, with a bid opening at the November 14 meeting. Mr. Snyder moved the CRC approved proceeding with the demolition RFPs. Following a second by Mr. Carter, the motion was unanimously approved. Mr. Engelking will keep the CRC members informed. John Duffy, Utility Director, informed Mr. Engelking that there are utility costs of approximately $200 per year associated with the operation of the Rotary Plaza fountain. What entity will pay these costs? No decision is needed immediately, but it should be considered. Mr. Engelking will do some further research. The estimated cost to do the Phase II Environmental assessment of the Huffer property is $7,295. This would include thirteen borings, some inside and some outside. Asbestos investigation would be an additional $250. Further research would be needed prior to demolition to determine if that is necessary. Mr. Haas recommended Mr. Engelking contact August Mack to see if they are able to keep their bid firm at that amount at least until the next meeting. Mr. Engelking will try to get them to hold their bid for sixty days. He will send confirmation in writing. [On October 12, Mr. Engelking received confirmation from Mike Casper of August Mack that their quote is valid for six months.] Mr. Carter asked if the Huffer property was part of Parcel 5 or 8. Mr. Engelking replied that it is not and since we do not own it yet, he did not ask for any bids for demolition of it. Mr. Olds confirmed that the environmental studies on the Kroger property found no contamination. Mr. Koven asked how much money was being spent to develop specifications for demolition of all the properties. Mr. Olds said the cost for the Kroger specifications was 2 about $5,000. They are very complicated because the original plan to tear down the center left the Sherwin Williams section standing and some of the parking lot in place. Ms. Snyder: Under ordinary circumstances to tear down that building, would we have to do a bid package? Mr. Koven: No. I have a set of proposals here to tear down all those buildings with no costs developed to do it. They are from an experienced demolition company. Discussion followed. Mr. Olds pointed out the demolition sites have to be completed in different ways, some with topsoil and reseeding, some left as empty pads, and some can just be left with the hole in the ground after the foundation is removed. Mr. Koven noted the quotes he has received could also include breaking up the concrete but leaving it on site to go under roads. He expressed a concern that in developing several sets of specifications the demolition costs will be more. Mr. Olds noted the CRC has requested wage rates from the unions on various parcels so the spec book has the wage rages in it also which the CRC has agreed to. "There is no question that doing it the way we are is going to cost more money. That's the cost of doing public work. Half the spec book is basically the City rules and regulations that they require." Mr. Roesch said there is a lot of discussion needed on this issue between vendors and experts. He thanked Mr. Koven for bringing this to the CRC's attention. He noted all CRC members are interested in saving money and controlling the cash flow. Mr. Koven will ask his vendor to pick up a bid packet. Financial Report Mr. Engelking noted the reports were distributed with the packets. He reported that Ms. Mielke verified that the $20,000 entry that had been on the previous report as having been received from Rotary has not been received and has now been removed from the spreadsheet. Ms. Mielke also verified with the Clerk- Treasurer the information on the TIF revenue and the TIF uses /expenditures as being accurate. Mr. Carter asked if Rotary has been billed. [Mr. Engelking later reported Ms. Mielke will bill them on Thursday, October 111 Mr. Koven asked why the Old Towne closing is set for December. Mr. Roesch reported this would be addressed later tonight. Report from Attorney AMLI Old Town Project.: Mr. Haas reported we are moving forward with the project agreement. He expects it will be ready for approval at the next regular meeting and also 3 at that time be prepared for an escrow closing. After a month or two, we should close out of escrow. He noted Jim Thomas is here tonight to give an update on the project. Mr. Thomas: As has been reported, we have acquired the Lumberyard Mall just south of Parcel #8 and have redesigned the project to now incorporate both those parcels. That has been finally identified as the total largest scope of the project that would be included so we can move toward final drawings with that plan. That has allowed the project agreement to reach a degree of specificity that it can be wrapped up. Pending reviews of Karl's latest "redlines" that we completed yesterday. We think we're there. Obviously, we just have to get one last look at Karl's mark -ups from our meeting yesterday. That would allow an escrow closing, an assumed closing, thereafter. What is not yet done and we've had discussions with Paul Cripe regarding the scope of the demolition and utility relocation work and we have not seen Cripe's, there were a substantial number of corrections on that. It's probably not been picked up since March -May, 2000. So we're anxious to get those proofed out to make sure we're communicating well there. What we've committed to the tenants of the Lumberyard Mall is that they can have through January. Mr. Thomas said they will probably have a spring start, once the weather allows soil compaction. Mr. Roesch noted it serves our interest since we are partnering to make sure the costs are "just so -so This [Lumberyard Mall area] is part of the project, also, since the two level parking area was deleted. Mr. Thomas: That probably answers why a holdup on the mall would hold up Parcel 8 because we did want to co -own those so there's not some goofy misalignment of interest. Mr. Haas: As you may recall, the deal with AMLI requires a $600,000 cash payment at closing and then rent payments over time which are intended to have a present value of $600,000 which recoups for the City the million two which was invested in purchasing the property. Because the project now extends off the site which the City originally acquired, the rent that's paid for the site being leased to AMLI is actually from the net proceeds, not only of the apartment unit and the retail that's on the site which we are leasing to AMLI, but it's also from the net proceeds of the apartment units that are on the site of the Lumberyard Mall. Discussion followed about the timing of the demolition. Because of the public bidding process, it is expected the demolitions will be completed sometime after the first of the year. AMLI will be tearing down the Lumber yard Mall. Mr. Thomas noted most of the apartment units will run along the Monon Trail. The house east of Lumberyard Mall is not for sale. 4 Mr. Carter reminded the Commission that there would be less disruption to Monon Trail users if the Printsley buildings were torn down in the winter. Mr. Thomas said their west building line was about 15 -20 feet east of the Monon Trail. Huffer /Goodyear Litigation Ms. Haas reported Goodyear has moved to intervene in the zoning case and this motion was granted. "Goodyear so far has not or will not agree to be part of the inverse condemnation case. The approval by the CRC of the settlement with the Huffers was contingent upon certain items. There was conditional approval in one of those items was making sure that in the either inverse condemnation or the condemnation case we had both the landowner and the tenant. And consequently, as I understand it, the litigation on the zoning matter is going forward and until the parties are able to figure out how to turn it into either a condemnation case or an inverse condemnation case, the CRC must sit tight. The good news is it's $700,000 saved until the City, the Huffers and Goodyear can come to some agreement." Mr. Roesch: There was subject to this Goodyear thing, Huffers and the CRC were in agreement. [Mr. Haas affirmed this.] So this is just Goodyear and is not the Huffer side of the transaction which is... Mr. Haas: That's correct. The Huffers, so far as I know, have not changed their position. The initial lawsuit was brought by the Huffers against the City. Goodyear on its own moved to intervene and then Goodyear is taking the position that they don't want to be part of that settlement or an inverse condemnation action. Mr. Roesch asked what Goodyear's course of action was at this point. Mr. Haas: Their course of action is to continue the zoning litigation which, now that they have intervened as a party, they can continue even if the Huffers wanted to drop the zoning litigation. John Molitor is representing the City and I guess they're prepared to continue litigating whether or not the zoning permits the operation of a Goodyear store on that site. Goodyear is using Bill Wendling [as their attorney]. Mr. Carter asked if the CRC should pursue condemnation of any of Goodyear's leasehold concerns as far as that property is concerned. Mr. Haas: We could do that. We could, on our own, bring a condemnation action against both the Huffers and Goodyear. Now the Huffers have agreed that the amount you would have to deposit with the court would be $700,000. Goodyear, not being a party to that agreement, could argue that more is required. They could require some court appointed appraisers. We might find that the amount deposited in the court is twice that amount, or half that amount. 5 Mr. Roesch: So if we continue our present course, basically sitting tight, what you're doing is monitoring the Goodyear zoning case against the City at this point and if you think we need to take another suggested action, you will let us know quickly. Mr. Haas: Yes. But of course, none of this precludes a negotiated settlement for acquisition by the CRC. Mr. Carter: In your opinion, Karl, what is Goodyear trying to do? Mr. Haas: Their stated objective, which must in fact be their objective, is to establish that they are "grandfathered" and that the zoning permits the operation of a store there and they want to reopen. I don't understand that objective. I had a discussion with Bill Wendling where I explained to Bill that the CRC had that property targeted on an acquisition list and intended to acquire it. Aside from the settlement with the Huffers, we had no particular time frame attached to when we would either condemn or make sure we'd reached an agreement for acquisition. Goodyear has told me in the past to make it economically feasible to reopen a store, they need to be sure they can operate there for two years. Of course, if they win their zoning case they can operate there indefinitely, subject to the CRC deciding at any time that it wants to bring a condemnation action. That's a long way of saying, I don't understand why they're doing what they're doing, because even if they prevail on their claim that the zoning permits the operation of a Goodyear store, they have no way of knowing whether or not it will be two days, two years, or longer before we need to bring a condemnation action to acquire that property. Mayor Brainard: If they do prevail on that claim, isn't their leasehold interest worth more when we condemn it than it is if they don't prevail? Mr. Haas: The value of the leasehold interest ought to be measured by the difference in rent that they'd be paying in one location against another and I guess the answer is yes. Mr. Roesch: I wouldn't perceive it to be an extraordinary amount. Mr. Wilson asked what the disadvantage would be in starting the condemnation process other than putting the money in escrow. Mr. Haas: The disadvantage of bringing condemnation action now is that we would be in a position where we would have to deposit with the court an unknown settlement. Mr. Wilson: But that might get Goodyear off the idea of ever even wanting to reopen the store and they might take a look at what it's going to cost them legally and everybody might come to the table and settle the thing. Mr. Haas acknowledged both statements were true. Mr. Carter: For the record, I would also point out that while yes we have had some unfortunate experiences with court appointed appraisers, we've also had some very 6 favorable situations, including along through here, with court appointed appraisers. On the Monon, both commercial and residential properties, where folks got between a third and a half of what they were asking, or what they thought their properties were worth. So I think we have to take that into consideration also. Mr. Roesch: They have not ever proposed a figure, though. They simply want to reopen. Mr. Haas: Goodyear has not proposed a figure. In my conversation with Bill Wendling I told him we were certainly open to entertaining proposals from them. Mr. Carter: I'm not understanding this from a business perspective on Goodyear's part. If this is such a fine market, it would seem that Goodyear would have gotten on with life some time ago and established a location and be doing the type of retail business that apparently they must think is available here. Mr. Haas: I agree. It appears Goodyear is acting at cross purposes with its own self interest. Renken Cleaners Item Mr. Haas reported a lease default notice to the cleaners. We had two capacities here. One is as Redevelopment Commission, the other is landlord under their lease. And the lease required that the premises be maintained in a safe manner and in compliance with law. They have a ten day cure period under their lease. The default notice has been delivered. I've not yet received a response. I believe the ten day period will expire Friday. [If we do not get a response] we are free to terminate the lease. Then we bring an action [inaudible]. Ms. Snyder: Sixty days? Mr. Haas: Probably. Mr. Koven: Do we need to authorize you to do that tonight? Mr. Haas: That's a good point, John. Brief discussion followed. Mr. Koven moved if we don't get a response that Karl Haas pursue whatever action is necessary to remove the cleaners from the Herrigan property. Following a second by Ms. Snyder, the motion was unanimously approved. Liquor License Mr. Haas stated Mr. Koven was successful in obtaining one of the three -way liquor licenses for the price of $16,000. There is a purchase agreement which Mr. Koven signed. There is also an application that needs to be signed and a $16,000 check to be delivered. 7 Mr. Snyder moved Mr. Roesch sign the application and tender the $16,000 check. Following a second by Mr. Koven, the motion was unanimously approved. Mr. Koven noted the contract is with the attorney at Ice Miller. Mr. Roesch complimented Mr. Koven on his success at the auction. Prices and the number of different liquor licenses around the state were discussed. Shapiro Project Agreement Mr. Haas reported we are proceeding with setting the terms of the project agreement except for the holdup with some of the final terms until we determine the extent of the environmental problems. Jennifer's Beauty Salon Mr. Haas reported we were still negotiating with the owners of Jennifer's for a settlement in exchange for early termination of their lease. They started out at $100,000 We have offered them $5,000. Mr. Roesch met with them (without attorneys) last week to discuss the settlement. They have spent $600 on a study by Tucker which was recommended by their attorneys. They are willing now to settle for $5,600 (which includes what they spent on the study). Discussion followed. Mr. Haas verified their list of moving expenses did add up to $5,000. It was noted they appear to have benefited from the move to different quarters. Mr. Snyder moved the CRC pay $5,000 moving costs for settlement to Jennifer's owners, subject to verification they did not contribute to the environmental problems on the site. Following a second by Mr. Carter, the motion was approved with four votes, Mr. Koven abstaining. Report from Architect Mr. Olds had a written report which was sent out earlier. Mr. Kroger reported on the Carmel Rotary Plaza. "We're still waiting for the three plaques to arrive and still have to do the complete punch list on the project." Carmel Redevelopment Commission Members' Reports Mr. Carter said members of the CRC should be receiving invitations to the Monon Grand Opening on October 27. It begins at 1 p.m. at the Plaza, and lasts until 3 p.m. with the actual ceremony taking place at 1:30 p.m. Also the Rotary Plaza dedication has been scheduled for noon that same day. Mr. Carter noted the importance of having everything done prior to that date. Mr. Olds will follow up. 8 Approval of Invoices Mr. Roesch asked if the Poindexter invoice had been approved by the City Engineer. Mr. Engelking responded the memorandum from Ms. Weese, detailing the project history, would serve as her approval. Mr. Olds noted CSO is guaranteeing the $31,000 toward the Poindexter charges, and plans to be reimbursed by the surveyor. Mr. Koven moved the CRC pay all invoices as submitted. Following a second by Ms. Snyder the motion was unanimously approved. TIF District Updates Ms. Kelli Hahn, from the Depailment of Community Development, gave a brief update on possible TIF districts. She indicated on maps an area by 96 Street and Gray Road which could possibly finance improvements on Gray Road and possibly improvements at the intersection of 106 and Gray. Mayor Brainard: The intent was not to fund particular projects but to capture the TIF before that comes up. It has to be done before March 1 If we choose not to use it at some point, we can get rid of the TIF, but we can never go back in time to re- establish it after that March 1 st deadline. He noted the funding at this point is not for any particular improvements. The second possible district would be at the northwest corner of 131 Street and US 31 (the Regan property). At this time we're hoping for initial feedback about these two districts. Mr. Roesch: I think we could be asked to participate in some funding for some of these things. It's critical to know what's going to happen, to go ahead and capture the TIF. Mayor Brainard suggested Mr. Haas be authorized to start the paperwork with the March 1 deadline. Mr. Roesch agreed but noted we should get an estimate on what the fees would be. Mr. Haas recommended the CRC hire a firm that normally does bond work to do this, noting they would be more efficient than he would be doing that. Mr. Roesch authorized Mr. Haas to get some costs from law firms to present at the next CRC meeting. Adjournment Mr. Carter moved the meeting be adjourned. Following a second by Ms. Snyder, the motion was unanimously approved and the meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m. 9