Anderson Redevelopment Commission

MINUTES ANDERSON REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION June 2, 2015 Mr. Royer moved to approve the May 26, 2015, PUBLIC MEETING minutes as received. Mr. Orcutt seconded. Motion 4:30 p.m. passed unanimously; 3 yes, 0 no. ED Conference Room #1 120 East 8th Street Anderson, IN 46016 INVOICES Mr. Sulc mentioned the invoices were emailed to the MEMBERS PRESENT members as well as the fund balances. Kevin Sulc, Vice President Joe Royer, Secretary Mrs. Phillips stated the invoices submitted were under Ben Orcutt, Member contract or had been previously discussed. MEMBERS ABSENT Mr. Orcutt moved to approve the invoices as Carolyn Scott, President presented. Mr. Royer seconded. Motion passed Justin Puckett, Member unanimously; 3 yes, 0 no. Roger Clark, Non-Voting Member BUSINESS STAFF PRESENT Ann Marie Bauer, Attorney Resolution #ARC06-15 Resolution of the City of Greg Winkler, Director Anderson Redevelopment Commission 2016 Michael Frischkorn, Deputy Director Budget Year Determination for TIF Revenues April Phillips, Financial Specialist Mr. Sulc mentioned that Mrs. Bauer emailed the Gary McKinney, Environmental/Brownfield Specialist resolution and comments to the members. OTHERS PRESENT Mrs. Bauer stated that the Commission is required on Mike Spyers, City Engineer an annual basis to notify the Madison County Auditor Ken de la Bastide, Herald-Bulletin as to whether the Commission intends to capture all Ross Nixon, American Structurepoint of the assessed value that generates increment. Anthony Bibbs, City Councilman There were changes to the reporting laws last year. If the capture would result in more than 200% coverage for debt and anticipated expenditures, than ROLL CALL AND DECLARATION OF it would have to be reported to the City Council. A QUORUM copy of this will go to the City Council; however, if the Mr. Sulc called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. and capture was anticipated to be more than 200% then declared a quorum with three (3) members present. the City Council could then amend the letter to the Auditor. Based on the information received from the MINUTES financial consultant on existing bond coverage, the Mr. Sulc explained the May 7, 2015, minutes that anticipated bonds, and the project work on the Plant 3 were mailed had the incorrect date as April 7. The site the coverage was well less than 200%. The letter date has been corrected. Mr. Royer moved to will stand and will be forwarded to the City Council. approve the May 7, 2015, minutes as amended. Mr. Orcutt seconded. Motion passed unanimously; 3 yes, Mr. Sulc asked if the resolution basically states the 0 no. intent to capture 100% of the increment. Mrs. Bauer answered yes. As stated in the email, the estimated of expenditures on Scatterfield West was very conservative. She is comfortable with the Mr. Sulc stated this is a decrease from the last Commission using this as the basic number. contract presented at the previous meeting. Mr. Royer moved to adopt Resolution ARC06-15. Mr. Mr. Spyers explained the contract is for the roadway Orcutt seconded. Motion passed unanimously; 3 yes, design of approximately 1,100 ft. which will come off 0 no. of Scatterfield Road. There will need to be some work for turn lanes on Scatterfield Road. There will be Walker Restoration Consultants Construction: boulevard that comes down adjacent to the Purdue Change Directive for Parking Garage project. This contract includes a retention pond and Mr. Sulc requested the parking garage update be grading and landscaping around the retention pond. given as part of this item. Mr. Sulc asked if this was design work only. Mr. Spyers stated a final walk through of the parking garage will be next Monday. Approximately three Mr. Spyers answered yes. weeks after that, the final billing should be done and brought to the Commission for payment within the Mr. Royer moved to approve the StructurePoint next couple of months. Last year he discussed with contract for the P3 Project roadway and infrastructure the Commission the possibility of using LED lights in for $279,300. Mr. Orcutt seconded. Motion passed the parking garage. Three quotes were received. If a unanimously; 3 yes, 0 no. 20 year live is ran on these, the quote in the middle is the low bidder. The bids were: $93,500, $96,008, Amended StructurePoint Contract for P3 and $113,300. Even though the $96,008 is not the Project: Purdue Site lowest bid, if a 20 year life is ran, it does become the Mr. Spyers explained that at the last meeting the lowest overall cost of $148,640 which is about Commission approved amending the contract to add $40,000 less than the lowest bide based on a 20 year the replat into contract. The additional $5,000 has pay back. been added into the contract. Mr. Sulc asked what the basis of the 20 years is. Mr. Royer moved to approve the amended Structurepoint contract for the P3 project at the Mr. Spyers explained that the estimated life of an LED Purdue Site. Mr. Orcutt seconded. Motion passed light is typically 10 years. unanimously; 3 yes, 0 no. Mr. Orcutt stated these will be a more efficient LED? GRW Engineering, Inc. for Contract Modification Four: 59th/60th Street Round-A- Mr. Spyers answered yes. His original request was not Bout to exceed $84,000. He is seeking to amend that to Mr. Sulc requested the update be included. award the quote of $96,008. Mr. Spyers explained he has had a final walk through Mr. Orcutt moved to approve the change order to of the project. He is waiting on Municipal Light and $96,008. Mr. Royer seconded. Motion passed Power to get a permit to install the meter to check the unanimously; 3 yes, 0 no. lights. Once the lights are checked, the project is basically completed. A ribbon cutting will be held StructurePoint Contract for P3 Project: within the next two to three weeks. There is a request Roadway and Infrastructure for a contract modification. It is for the inspection Mr. Sulc gave his appreciation to StructurePoint in work. The contractor worked a lot of overtime on the working with Commission on changes. These are project. The contract is not to exceed $3,600. The amendments that were discussed at the last meeting. contractor will be charged back for this. The contract does provide specifications that the City can charge Mr. Spyers stated the contract before the Commission back for any overtime inspections. The costs will be is a revised contract which results in a change to an recouped. The Commission is modifying the original overall cost of $279,300. inspection contract that was signed. This is for additional costs for overtime not to exceed $3,600. Anderson Redevelopment Commission: June 2, 2015 Page 2 Mr. Royer moved to approve the GRW Engineering very familiar with the sampling work that was done Inc. Contract modification four. Mr. Orcutt seconded. before. He feels very comfortable with this. Motion passed unanimously; 3 yes, 0 no. A discussion was held on ERH and other properties. Mr. de la Bastide asked who was paying for this. St. John Mittelhauser & Associates (SM&A): Mr. McKinney explained that it would be paid from the Contract for Management of RFP & Contractor trust fund that the EPA set aside for the City of Selection for Former GM Plant 7, Area 7, Anderson. Mediation Project Mr. Sulc requested the EPA update be given. Mrs. Bauer mentioned the funds would be reimbursed to the Commission. Mr. McKinney stated last year excavation and hauling at the Plant 7 site was being considered as the Mr. de la Bastide asked if MLP would be asked to method of remediation clean up. After going through donate the electricity. the RFP process and meetings, it is extremely difficult to determine how much soil would need to be Mr. McKinney stated no. removed and how much would be considered as hazardous waste and be hauled away as such. This is Mr. Orcutt moved to approve the SM&A contract for extremely expensive. They came to realize not management of RFP and the contractor selection for enough funding was in place to go through the the former GM Plant 7 remediation for $28,676. Mr. excavation method. They also felt it was more difficult Royer seconded. Motion passed unanimously; 3 yes, to clean up the property to the level EPA wanted. On 0 no. May 15, USEPA issued a new Statement of Basis for the property. They have determined that Electric St. John Mittelhauser & Associates (SM&A): Resistance Heating (ERH) will be the new clean up Contract for Project Management for Former method for this property. It will fit within the budget GM Plant 7, Area 7, Remediation Project for cleanup. ERH is fairly new, but is determined to be Mr. McKinney explained this contract is for oversight quick and efficient. It cleans up all pollutants in all of the remediation project through closure and types of soil. Basically electrodes are put in the working with the contractor. There is a lot of sampling ground approximately 12 to 22 ft. apart. The and analysis to make sure EPA’s objectives are met. electrodes can go down to any depth. The electrodes The ERH contractor may take the samples; however, will heat up the ground to the boiling point of water. they do not read or analyze the samples. The The containments turn to steam or a vapor which is consultant will also develop the ERH system along collected and removed. There is small collection with the contractor. The consultant will look at the building that is put in place to handle this. It is a safe property and determine all the areas of contamination method. It can be used next to or under an existing and ensure the electrodes get placed where they need building and where people work. In order to do this, it to be. The contract cost is $54,618. This price could has been determined that a consultant with expertise go up because they do not know what EPA will should be hired to handle the RFP and the contractor require at the end of the project as far as sampling. selection process. He recommended SM&A to be the EPA could say two years or ten years of sampling. consultant. The total quote was $28,676. There are They will not know until the ERH process is complete. only four or five ERH contractors in the United States. The electrodes heat up for approximately a month. The process will run for about a year. Mr. Orcutt asked where the company was based. Mr. Sulc asked the size of Plant 7. Mr. McKinney stated SM&A was based in Chicago, but Mr. McKinney believed the Plant 7 site was about an has an office in Indianapolis. One of the vice acre. The slurry wall may be a little larger of the presidents of the company was involved on the Plant containment area. 7 property in the very beginning. He worked for the Clayton Group who worked for General Motors. He is Anderson Redevelopment Commission: June 2, 2015 Page 3 Mr. Royer moved approved SM&A Contract for project liquor store, pawn shop, and vacant buildings need management for former GM Plant 7 remediation cleaned up. If the Commission could gain control of project. Mr. Orcutt seconded. Motion passed the Speedway and the Carneal property, then some unanimously; 3 yes, 0 no. sort of solution could be created for the rest of the properties. He thought the next step was ensuring Discussion of Possible Uses for Edgewood Plaza the Speedway and Carneal properties were Mr. Sulc requested an updated on Edgewood Plaza environmentally clean and then see if there is some redevelopment. way to acquire them. Once that happens, then the staff could approach the other property owners. Mr. McKinney is looking into hiring a contractor to do Mrs. Bauer stated any acquisition of property would the mowing on the property. He is requesting quotes have to be added to the Redevelopment Plan. and will bring them back to the Commission at the next meeting. Mr. Winkler stated in the interim a recreational use in cooperation with the City Parks Department could be Mr. Orcutt asked who was mowing it now. done. The question is what can be combined with this to add value. This property has been shopped on Mr. McKinney stated the Street Department, but it is the City’s behalf. The consensus has been that all the too big a job for them to continue doing it. properties need to be acquired from the corner on back (west). Ideally retail would serve the citizens of Mr. Spyers explained the federal project has been the area better than anything else. There could be a cancelled. The street lights will be done locally. significant parks and recreation component to it. There is already a park down the street, Jackson Park. A discussion was held on the cleanup of the The question can is can something be brought that Speedway property and the property to the south will feed off the park traffic and provide traffic for the owned by Mr. Carneal. These properties are very park. important to the redevelopment of the area as well as the other properties in this immediate vicinity. Mr. Sulc did not think they should duplicate Jackson Park. Mr. Winkler mentioned that Mrs. Scott very much wants to see a recreational asset on the property. He Mrs. Bauer stated Mrs. Scott had substantial private thought there would need to be a commercial entity conservations with her about her recreational ideas. involved to help pay for it and generate traffic. How Her thinking was a health or community center type should the properties be acquired? of facility. It was a healthy lifestyles environment for all ages. Mr. Sulc asked what issues dominated the conversation with the community groups. Mr. Orcutt asked if any retail business is interested in the empty property the Commission now owns. Mr. McKinney stated recreational and retail uses. Other items were mentioned such as a water park and Mr. Winkler answered no, not as is. a walking park. Retail is important and it was the biggest issue discussed during the community Mr. Sulc suggested that once the cleanup of the meetings. A hardware store is needed along with Speedway and Carneal properties are verified, then another grocery store. they can have a discussion of acquiring the properties. The Commission cannot force people to buy or sell Mr. Sulc asked what the Commission’s role is. their property. He encouraged staff to continue working with Speedway. He is not against investing Mr. Orcutt asked what authority the Commission has in a little bit of marketing. to attract retail businesses. Mr. Royer stated if the impediments are the eastern Mr. Winkler stated the Commission currently owns boundary, then that is the next logical step to pursue. some property in the area which can be disposed thru an RFP process; however, the staff has heard through the market place that the other properties such as the Anderson Redevelopment Commission: June 2, 2015 Page 4 Mr. Sulc encouraged staff to revitalize conversations The Sirmax ceremonial dedication is set for June 10, on acquiring Speedway and the Carneal property. 2015, at 10:45 a.m. How many additional property owners were there? Appraisals Mr. Frischkorn answered two. Mr. Winkler explained the staff is engaged in Mr. Sulc stated there was a consensus to move negotiations with a company to bring investment and forward on discussions with the property owners jobs to the City. Appraisals are necessary. involved. If the property owners reveal any opportunities, then bring those back to the Mrs. Bauer stated there is a potential of acquiring Commission. Mrs. Scott did want to have this property. The Commission could authorize the staff to discussion again at the next meeting. The procure two appraisals on their behalf. Commission is definitely willing to entertain any ideas or opportunities. At some point, it has to go beyond Mr. Winkler stated statute limits the Commission on an idea. If specifics are not presented, then there is what they can pay for property. The staff needs to not a lot the Commission can do. The Commission make sure they are within that limit before additional needs specific things to act upon. conversations take place with the company. Mr. Winkler stated the staff will have a conversation Mr. Orcutt asked if this process has happened before. with Mr. Carneal and try to have conversations with It seems like this would come up often. the other property owners. Mr. Winkler stated it has happened in various ways UPDATES before. For example, previous properties were owned by the Corporation for Economic Development so that 60th Street saved the Commission from having to go through this Mr. Spyers stated the infrastructure is in place. They step. are getting ready for the roadway part. Mr. Royer moved to authorize staff to order two 67th Street/Enterprise Drive appraisals. Mr. Orcutt seconded. Motion passed Mr. Spyers stated the road is closed between unanimously; 3 yes, 0 no. Ridgeview and MLK. Most of the utilities have been relocated. They are starting some excavation work. Mrs. Bauer stated the invoices would be paid from the Commissions operating account and not TIF. Fountain at 14th & Main Streets Mr. Spyers explained the concrete base has set. The ADJOURNMENT contractor is joining the fountain sections together. Mr. Royer moved to adjourn. Meeting adjourned at The beautification committee has found some money 5:35 p.m. for lights and adding irrigation to the project. Mr. Sulc asked if that meant it would be a donation to the project. Mr. Spyers answered yes. Jackson Street Beautification Project Mr. Spyers stated a final walk through has been completed. There are some areas that need corrections. The ribbon cutting is Thursday at 10:00 a.m. MISCELLANEOUS Sirmax Anderson Redevelopment Commission: June 2, 2015 Page 5