Anderson Redevelopment Commission

MINUTES ANDERSON REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION April 7, 2015 There was also a reimbursement to Mrs. Phillips for PUBLIC MEETING recording fees for Resolution #ARC03-15, invoices for 4:30 p.m. appraisal fees for The Farm property, and an ED Conference Room #1 environmental assessment for former Plant 18. The 120 East 8th Street total from Star Financial Bank was $605,364.59. The Anderson, IN 46016 total from Key Bank was $22.82. MEMBERS PRESENT Mr. Sulc moved to approve the invoices as presented. Carolyn Scott, President Mr. Orcutt seconded. Motion passed unanimously; 5 Kevin Sulc, Vice President yes, 0 no. Ben Orcutt, Secretary BUSINESS MEMBERS ABSENT Joe Royer, Member GM Property Mowing Contract Justin Puckett, Member Mr. McKinney explained the mowing contract was Roger Clark, Non-Voting Member emailed to the members. He recommended approval of the contract with Select Lawn LLC. STAFF PRESENT Ann Marie Bauer, Attorney Mr. Sulc moved to approve the contract with Select Greg Winkler, Director Lawn for the mowing of GM properties for 2015. Mr. Michael Frischkorn, Deputy Director Orcutt seconded. Motion passed unanimously; 3 yes, April Phillips, Financial Specialist 0 no. Gary McKinney, Environmental/Brownfield Specialist Purdue College of Technology / Flagship Makers Space Project OTHERS PRESENT Mr. Winkler presented an aerial of the proposed new Mike Spyers, City Engineer location along with a rendering of the facility. He also Jason Fenwick, City Controller presented a street view of the former Plant 18 site Jason Streeter, Deputy City Controller and the proposed new location. The new location has Corey Sharp, Purdue University been discussed with the design team, Purdue Ken de la Bastide, Herald-Bulletin University, and the Flagship Enterprise Center. The site is easy to miss; however, there is 150 ft. of ROLL CALL AND DECLARATION OF frontage. The City has tried to negotiate with Mr. Lay QUORUM regarding Plant 18 for more than 18 months. It has Mrs. Scott called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. reached a point where they felt like it was futile to and declared a quorum with three (3) members move forward with the eminent domain process. present. Promises have been made that have not happened. A legal resolution through eminent domain appears to MINUTES be rather lengthy. The plant 18 site could take Mr. Sulc moved to approve the March 3, 2015, another six months before construction could minutes as received. Mr. Orcutt seconded. Motion hopefully begin. Purdue needs to be ready in 2016. passed unanimously; 3 yes, 0 no. A discussion was held on the new location which is INVOICES the former Plant 3 site on the west side of Scatterfield Mrs. Phillips mentioned the invoices submitted were Road. under contract or had been previously discussed. Mr. Sulc asked if there was a possibility of CSX Mr. Winkler answered yes. The design must stay reopening the abandoned rail line. within the budget. There is still the potential of receiving CRED tax credits. This could add another Mr. Winkler did not believe there was any realistic $2,000,000 to the project. Mr. Chuck Staley, Flagship consideration of that. The City will pursue a rails to Enterprise Center, is talking with the EDA about trails pedestrian linkage that would take someone into committing funds to the project. Purdue University is Downtown or Mounds Park. busy fundraising for the purchase of equipment. Mr. Orcutt thought there was a unique opportunity to Mr. Sulc asked if there would need to be a change to redevelop this unusual site. the Redevelopment Plan. The discussion continued including a “viewshed.” Mrs. Bauer answered no. The project was not specific. Mr. Corey Sharp, Purdue University, stated they are Mr. Sulc asked what action the Commission needed to excited about the project. They are growing. It is take. imperative that they do this. This seems to be a great opportunity to grow and expand. There is support Mrs. Bauer suggested a motion to support moving the from the University’s leadership. Moving the facility project location. The project and financial assistance across the street does not hinder the project. If have already been approved. anything, it accelerates the process because the property is already owned by the Commission. It is Mrs. Scott asked if supporting the relocation also imperative they move forward as quickly as they can. removed support of the Plant 18 project. Mrs. Bauer explained this project did not have a Mr. Orcutt asked about the unobstructed green zone. specific geography. The same resolution that Is this part of the design? approved the project also expressed the intention of acquiring property. These were separate activities. Mr. Winkler stated yes. It is something to pursue. There is lingering debt still owed on Plant 18 and They want the building to be seen. other issues with it. The Commission may still pursue acquiring Plant 18. The discussion continued. Mr. Sulc moved to support moving the property Mrs. Scott asked how much this would cost. location to the new site that the Commission owns. Mr. Orcutt seconded. Mr. Winkler mentioned that it would be about the same. There would be some cost savings from not Mr. Ken da la Bastide, Herald Bulletin, asked how acquiring Plant 18, but there would be utility many acres the Commission owned. relocation and burial costs. Purdue University wants the Commission to remove the asphalt and green the Mr. Winkler stated 73 acres in the triangular wedge area. area. Mr. Sulc asked how much funding would be requested Mr. de la Bastide stated the eminent domain process of this Commission and the CRED Commission. was started to acquire Plant 18. Will this be dismissed by the courts? Mr. Winkler stated the project, regardless of location, will consume 100% of the CRED revenue. It may Mrs. Bauer stated it can be. There are more take another $250,000 from TIF also. Purdue discussions needed. University has signed a long term lease. Mr. de la Bastide asked if the City Council needed to Mr. Sulc asked if the money from the TIF and CRED act on this. would take care of all the infrastructure development. Mr. Winkler answered no, not at this time. Anderson Redevelopment Commission: April 7, 2015 Page 2 Mr. de la Bastide asked if Plant 18 would be acquired for another project. Mr. Spyers stated he would proceed with just the decorative lights in-house. Mrs. Bauer stated the Commission had been discussing reacquiring Plant 18 prior to the Purdue project. The building is not in the best of shape, improvements are not being made, and it is fairly empty. Discussions have been held with the owner 67th Street/Enterprise Drive over a long period of time. The owner still owes the Mr. Spyers stated the project was awarded to E&B Commission money. The title work indicates he owes Paving and they should begin by the end of the other entities money as well. They are trying to find a month. beneficial solution that does not involve eminent domain. Amicable resolutions are preferred. Parking Garage Mr. Spyers stated a meeting is scheduled for April 9. Motion passed unanimously; 3 yes, 0 no. The contractor will begin the next phase. UPDATES 59th-60th Street Round-a-Bout Mr. Spyers stated the contractor is working now. 60th Street They have met with Ricker’s Convenience Store as Mr. Spyers stated E&B Paving plans to begin work on they will have to close their driveway for about five April 20. days. It will be re-opened to allow them to refuel their tanks, then it will be closed again for another five EPA: GM Properties days. Everything is proceeding. Mr. McKinney stated the staff is still waiting on documentation from USEPA. When they issue the Fountain at 14th & Main Streets Statement of Basis there will be a 45-day waiting Mr. Spyers explained all the City work is completed. period. They are waiting on the contractor to begin. Greater Edgewood Plaza Redevelopment Jackson Street Beautification Project Mr. McKinney stated the decorative lights will happen Mr. Spyers stated the contractor is finishing up the this summer. east side. The crosswalks are being installed. Mr. Spyers stated INDOT is requiring new standards Mr. Sulc asked if the project stopped at 8th Street. for the decorative traffic signals. INDOT is requiring new wiring, striping, and new foundations. This will Mr. Spyers answered yes. double the cost of the project and extend the project for two years. His recommendation is to cancel the MISCELLANEOUS project and just do the decorative lights in house. Mrs. Scott has heard that the TV advertising has been beautiful and people are impressed with it. Mr. Sulc asked what was originally approved. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Spyers believed the total project cost was Mr. Orcutt moved to adjourn. Mr. Sulc seconded. $290,000. The local share was 20% plus the Meeting adjourned at 5:15 p.m. engineering costs of $65,000. These costs will double or triple due to the traffic signal regulations. Mr. Sulc asked if the Commission needed to take any action. Mrs. Bauer answered no. Mr. Sulc thought the decorative lighting should be installed and hold off on the signals. Anderson Redevelopment Commission: April 7, 2015 Page 3