HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-03-06 Redevelopment Commission MinutesSOUTH BEND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
March 3, 2006
10:00 a.m. 227 West Jefferson Boulevard
Presiding: Marcia I. Jones, President South Bend, Indiana
1. ROLL CALL
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Legal Counsel:
Ms. Marcia Jones, President
Mr. Karl King, Vice President
Mr. Hardie B lake, Jr.
Mr. William Hojnacki
Mr. Greg Downes, Secretary
Mr. Shawn Peterson, Esq.
Redevelopment Staff: Mr. Don Inks, Director
Mrs. Cheryl Phipps, Recording Secretary
Mr. Robert Mathia, Assistant Director
Mr. Bill Schalliol, Economic Development Specialist
Mr. Timothy Williams, Economic Development Specialist
Mr. Andrew Laurent, Economic Development Specialist
Ms. Jennifer Laurent, Economic Development Specialist
Mr. Nicholas Witwer, Economic Development Specialist
Others Present: Ms. Pam Paluszewski, Legal Dept.
Ms. Jamie Loo, South Bend Tribune
Mr. John Phair, Holladay Corporation
Mr. Paul Phair, Holladay Corporation
Mr. Frank Perri, Holladay Corporation
Ms. Charlotte Sobel, South Bend Heritage Foundation
Ms. Mariam Malkovsky, Bombay Boutique
Mr. Malkovsky
Ms. Christine Tirotta
Mr. Joshua Huen
Mr. King noted a Revised Agenda for the March 3, 2006
meeting. The Revised Agenda differs from the original
Agenda by the addition of Item 2.C., Minutes of the
February 17, 2006 meeting, and Item 6.F.(1), related to
appraisal proposals in the South Side Development
Area.
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
1. ROLL CALL (CONT.)
Mr. King made a motion that the Revised Agenda be
accepted and approved. Mr. Hojnacki seconded the
motion and the Commission approved the Revised
Agenda dated March 3, 2006.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Approval of Minutes of the Regular Meeting of
Friday, January 20, 2006.
Upon a motion by Mr. King, seconded by Mr.
Hojnacki and unanimously carried, the
Commission approved the Minutes of the Regular
Meeting of Friday, January 20, 2006.
B. Approval of Minutes of the Regular Meeting of
Friday, February 3, 2006.
Upon a motion by Mr. King, seconded by Mr.
Hojnacki and unanimously carried, the
Commission approved the Minutes of the Regular
Meeting of Friday, February 3, 2006.
C. Approval of Minutes of the Regular Meeting of
Friday, February 17, 2006.
Upon a motion by Mr. King, seconded by Mr.
Hojnacki and unanimously carried, the
Commission approved the Minutes of the Regular
Meeting of Friday, February 17, 2006.
3. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS
COMMISSION APPROVED THE REVISED
AGENDA DATED MARCH 3, 2006
COMMISSION APPROVED THE MINUTES OF THE
REGULAR MEETING OF FRIDAY, JANUARY 20,
2006
COMMISSION APPROVED THE MINUTES OF THE
REGULAR MEETING OF FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 3,
2006
COMMISSION APPROVED THE MINUTES OF THE
REGULAR MEETING OF FRIDAY, FEBRUARY I7,
2006
Redevelopment Commission Claims submitted March 3, 2006 for approval.
FUND 305 SBCDA 2003 BOND
Jerome E. Michaels $ 1,000.00
414 SAMPLE-EWING GENERAL
Hull & Associates, Inc. 66.00
2
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
3. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS (CONT.)
420 FUND TIF DISTRICT-SBCDA GENERAL
CB Richard Ellis
Rose Pest Solutions
422 FUND WEST WASHINGTON
South Bend Heritage Foundation
424 FUND TIF SBCDA -BUILDING OPERATIONS
Ampco Parking Systems
NIPSCO
CB Richard Ellis
428 FUND AIRPORT 2003 BOND
DLZ
Upon a motion by Mr. Hojnacki, seconded by Mr. Blake
and unanimously carried, the Commission approved the
Claims submitted March 3, 2006, and ordered checks to
be released.
4. COMMUNICATIONS
A. Communication from Robert Asplund related
to disposition of the Rink Riverside site.
Mr. Inks read into the record the Communication
from Robert Asplund.
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
1200 County-City Building
227 W. Jefferson Blvd.
South Bend, IN 46601
I read with interest the article in the Ti^ibune on
Jan. 21 on the proposals for the Rink site. As a
retired teacher of Environmental Sciences, I was
especially enamored by the proposal of the Eco-
492.42
87.00
74,502.45
13,410.51
358.60
667.05
3,024.00
$ 93,608.03
COMMISSION APPROVED THE CLAIMS
SUBMITTED MARCH 3, 2006, AND ORDERED THE
CHECKS TO BE RELEASED
3
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
4. COMMUNICATIONS (CONT.)
A. Communication from Robert Asplund
continue ...
Urban Collaborative. Many of the features of that
proposal were consistent with some of my readings
on the necessary future directions of urban
renewal.
With all indications pointing to severe energy
shortages in the near future, ideas which address
that in different ways should receive our highest
attention, even at the expense of short term dollar
issues if necessary. Pedestrian related issues will
become most important. I remember a comment by
a large city mayor in which he said that "cities
that are most friendly to cars are least friendly to
people. " Also, in a previous meeting with Mayor
Luecke on a different issue, while looking out of his
office window at the number of energy absorbing
flat black roofs, I commented on the need for a
program that would addNess rooftop gardens.
Both of these issues are addressed in the above
mentioned proposal.
1 urge you to give these ideas a priority in your
decisions.
Robert Asplund
32732 Early Rd.
New Carlisle, IN 46552
5. OLD BUSINESS
There was no Old Business.
THERE WAS NO OLD BUSINESS
4
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS
A. South Bend Central Development Area
(1) Staff report on disposition of property in
the South Bend Central Development
Area. (Rink Riverside site)
Mr. King asked that Item 6.A.(1) be moved
to the end of New Business so as to not
unnecessarily delay those in attendance for
the other New Business items. There was no
objection and Item 6.A.(1) was so moved.
(2) Commission approval requested for
Commercial Lease for 119 S. Michigan St.
in the South Bend Central Development
Area. (Bombay Boutique)
Mr. Williams noted that the Commission
approved a Letter of Intent from Bombay
Boutique at its February 17, 2006 meeting.
The terms of that Letter of Intent are
proposed to be revised to account for a larger
rental space than previous estimates had
indicated. The proposed terms are reflected
in the lease presented to the Commission.
The lease rents 1209 sft of the Michigan
Street Shops at 119 S. Michigan St. to
Bombay Boutique for a term of five years.
The rent will start at $830/mo. + CAM for
the first two and a half years and then go up
to $1,159/mo. + CAM for the remaining two
and a half years.
Mr. King asked about the time table to divide
the space. Mr. Williams responded that the
bids for the work will go out today and
should be opened at a Board of Public Works
meeting on March 13. The demising wall
should installed and the build-out complete
by the end of March.
5
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
continue ...
Mr. King asked Ms. Malkovsky when
Bombay Boutique could be ready to open if
it received the space by March 31. Ms.
Malkovsky indicated it could be ready to
open by mid May.
Mr. Peterson noted that the Commission
needs to authorize the Board of Public Works
to act as its agent to request and receive
quotes for the construction work and to
award the work to the lowest responsive and
responsible bidder in an amount not to
exceed $35,000.
Upon a motion by Mr. Hojnacki, seconded
by Mr. King and unanimously carried, the
Commission authorized the Board of Public
Works to act as its agent in requesting,
receiving and awarding quotes for
preparation of the retail space at 119 S.
Michigan St. in an amount not to exceed
$35,000.
Upon a motion by Mr. Hojnacki, seconded
by Mr. Blake and unanimously carried the
Commission approved the Commercial Lease
for 119 S. Michigan St. in the South Bend
Central Development Area to Bombay
Boutique effective upon the Commission's
awarding of the contract to install the
demising wall.
COMMISSION AUTHORIZED THE BOARD OF
PUBLIC WORKS TO ACT AS ITS AGENT IN
REQUESTING, RECEIVING AND AWARDING
QUOTES FOR PREPARATION OF THE RETAIL SPACE
AT 119 S. MICHIGAN ST. IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $35,000.
COMMISSION APPROVED THE COMMERCIAL
LEASE FOR 119 S.MICHIGAN ST. IN THE SOUTH
BEND CENTRAL DEVELOPMENT AREA TO
BOMBAY BOUTIQUE EFFECTIVE UPON THE
COMMISSION'S AWARDING OF THE CONTRACT TO
INSTALL THE DEMISING WALL
6
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
B. Sample-Ewing Development Area
(1) Commission approval requested for
Resolution No. 2229 related to acquisition
of property in the Sample-Ewing
Development Area by eminent domain.
(Underground Pipe & Valve,1100 Prairie
Ave.)
Mr. Laurent noted that Resolution No. 2229
authorizes staff to send a purchase offer in
the amount of $10 to 1100 Corporation for
the Underground Pipe & Valve property.
This property is a large portion of the
Studebaker Area A and its acquisition is
necessary to complete the goals of the
Studebaker/Oliver Plow Works
Redevelopment Strategy. The buildings are
outmoded, dinosaur industrial buildings.
Staff has met with the owner who is
expecting this purchase offer. The price of
$10.00 was established based on the average
of two MAI-certified appraisals which take
into account the environmental condition of
the property. Resolution No. 2229 also
authorizes the use of eminent domain if
agreement on the sale cannot be reached
within 30 days of receipt of the purchase
offer.
Upon a motion by Mr. King, seconded by
Mr. Hojnacki and unanimously carried, the
Commission approved Resolution No. 2229
related to acquisition of property in the
Sample-Ewing Development Area by
eminent domain. (Underground Pipe &
Valve, 1100 Prairie Ave.)
COMMISSION APPROVED RESOLUTION N0.2229
RELATED TO ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY IN THE
SAMPLE-SWING DEVELOPMENT AREA BY
EMINENT DOMAIN. UNDERGROUND PIPE &
VALVE, I l OO PRAIRIE AVE.)
7
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
B. Sample-Ewing Development Area
(2) Commission approval requested for
proposal for professional services in the
Sample-Ewing Development Area.
(Architectural, Oliver Plow Ct. and
Chapin St.)
Mr. Laurent noted that staff solicited a
proposal for an additional scope of services
for streetscape design on Oliver Plow Court
and Chapin Street. The Commission initially
approved an $8,500 proposal from Forum
Architects on July 17, 2006 to design and
publicly bid installation of entrance signage
for the Oliver Industrial Park. The work was
postponed when the bids came in on
demolition of the Stamping Plant. Now that
we've received some additional project
financing, we are ready to move forward on
the entrance sign. However, we would like to
expand the scope of services to include
design and bidding of sidewalk and tree
plantings along Oliver Plow Court and the
west side of Chapin St. Forum Architects
would also design a landscape buffer along
Arnold St. to soften the appearance of the
industrial park from the nearby St. Casimir
residential neighborhood. The cost of the
additional services is $6,800. Staff
recommends accepting the proposal.
Upon a motion by Mr. Hojnacki, seconded
by Mr. King and unanimously carried, the
Commission approved the request for
proposal for professional services and
accepted the proposal from Forum Architects
for the additional services the fee proposed.
COMMISSION APPROVED THE REQUEST FOR
PROPOSAL FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AND
ACCEPTED THE PROPOSAL FROM FORUM
ARCHITECTS FOR THE ADDITIONAL SERVICES AT
THE FEE PROPOSED
8
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
C. Airport Economic Development Area
(1) Commission approval requested for
proposals for professional services in the
Airport Economic Development Area.
(Appraisals, right of way acquisition at
Bendix &Voorde)
Mr. VUitwer noted that staff requested four
proposals for appraisals for acquisition of
right of way at Bendix and Voorde Drives.
The proposal from Ralph Lauver was in the
amount of $1,500; the proposal from R.E.
McCloskey was in the amount of $2,600; the
proposal from Jerome E. Michaels was in the
amount of $1,500; and the proposal from
R.E. Pitts was in the amount of $3,200. Two
proposals are required for acquisition. Staff
recommends accepting the proposals from
Ralph Lauver and Jerome E. Michaels.
Upon a motion by Mr. King, seconded by
Mr. Hojnacki and unanimously carried, the
Commission approved the request for
proposals for professional services in the
Airport Economic Development Area and
accepted the proposals from Ralph Lauver
and Jerome E. Michaels for the scope of
services and fee proposed.
D. South Bend Medical Services District
There was no business in the South Bend Medical
Services District
E. West Washington-Chapin Development Area
(1) Commission approval requested for
Change Order to Demolition Contracts
with Ritschard Bros. and Grauvogel &
COMMISSION APPROVED THE REQUEST FOR
PROPOSALS FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES IN THE
AIRPORT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AREA AND
ACCEPTED THE PROPOSALS FROM RALPH
LAUVER AND JEROME E. MICHAELS FOR THE
SCOPE OF SERVICES AND FEE PROPOSED
9
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
E. West Washington/Chapin Development Area
() continued...
Assoc. in the West Washington/Chapin
Development Area. (Basic Machine)
Mr. Schalliol noted that at its February 3,
2006 meeting the Commission approved an
agreement with South Bend Heritage
Foundation that, among other items, outlined
a budget for the use of the ~Uest
Washington/Chapinbevelopment Area TIF
funds. The purpose of this agenda item is to
reallocate a portion of the funding within the
budget to cover some unforeseen expenses
related to demolition of the Basic Machine
property at LaSalle and William Streets.
During demolition and clearance, the
following conditions were found on the site,
which could not reasonably be foreseen at the
time of the contract: (1) A large concrete
vault under the sidewalk on the LaSalle St.
side of the property. The vault must be
removed, filled and compacted, and the
sidewalk and street sections repaired or
replaced. (2) A concrete sump pump and
five hydraulic car lift cylinders were found.
These must be removed, environmentally
tested and the area filled and compacted. (3)
A section of the east-west alley that runs
parallel to the site needs to be widened and
improved to a 14' width along the length of
the project site. The quotes for the additional
work are as follows:
Grauvogel & Assoc. $4,337.50
SBH Fee (10%) 434.00
Ritschard Brothers 37,077.00
SBH Fee (10%) 3,707.00
Total X45,555.50
10
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
E. West Washington/Chapin Development Area
() continued...
Funds to pay for the additional Basic
Machine demolition will be diverted from the
funds previously allocated for the Martin
Luther King Dr. improvements, and the 2006
carryover funding will be eliminated. Staff
recommends approving amended contracts.
Mr. King asked if the alley is still a public
alley. Mr. Schalliol responded that it is.
Concrete from the Basic Machine property
extended into the alley and when that was
removed, the alley was only 8ft. The City
Engineer instructed South Bend Heritage to
restore it since Basic Machine was
responsible for deterioration to the original
alley.
Upon a motion by Mr. King, seconded by
Mr. Hojnacki and unanimously carried, the
Commission approved the Change Order to
Demolition Contracts with Ritschard Bros.
and Grauvogel & Assoc. in the West
Washington/Chapin Devebpment Area.
(Basic Machine)
F. South Side Development Area
(1) Commission approval requested for
proposal for professional services in the
South Side Development Area.
(Appraisals, NE corner Ireland ~ Fellows)
Mr. Schalliol noted that the appraisals are
necessary to determine the value of land at
the northeast corner of Ireland Road and
Fellows Street for future disposition. R.E.
COMMISSION APPROVED THE CHANGE ORDER TO
DEMOLITION CONTRACTS WITH RITSCHARD
BROS. AND GRAUVOGEL & ASSOC. IN THE WEST
WASHINGTONICHAPINbEVELOPMENT AREA.
(BASIC MACHINE)
11
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
F. South Side Development Area
() continued...
Pitts' proposal is in the amount of $2,400.
Jerome Michaels' proposal is in the amount
of $1,975. Two proposals are required to
determine reuse value. Staff recommends
accepting both proposals.
Upon a motion by Mr. Hojnacki, seconded
by Mr. Blake and unanimously carried, the
Commission approved the request for
proposal for professional services in the
South Side Development Area and accepted
the proposal from Jerome E. Michaels and
R.E. Pitts for the scope of services and fee
proposed. (Appraislas, NE corner Ireland &
Fellows)
G. Northeast Neighborhood Development Area
There was no business in the Northeast
Neighborhood Development Area.
H. Douglas Road Economic Development Area
There was no business in the Douglas Road
Economic Development Area.
A. South Bend Central Development Area
(1) Staff report on disposition of property in
the South Bend Central Development
Area. (Rink Riverside site)
Ms. Laurent noted that on January 20, 2006
the Commission received bids for
development of the former Rink Riverside
site. Two developers submitted proposals,
COMMISSION APPROVED THE REQUEST FOR
PROPOSAL FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES IN THE
SOUTH SIDE DEVELOPMENT AREA AND
ACCEPTED THE PROPOSAL FROM JEROME E.
MICHAELS AND R.E. PITTS FOR THE SCOPE OF
SERVICES AND FEE PROPOSED. (APPRAISLAS, NE
CORNER IRELAND & FELLOWS)
12
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
() continued...
both of which were determined to be non-
conforming based on not meeting the
offering price. No action can be taken to
accept anon-conforming bid until thirty days
after receipt of bids. Staff and
Commissioners have begun evaluating the
proposals and have invited both developers
to attend a public meeting to answer
questions about their proposals. The
questions were given to the developers ahead
of time so they would be prepared with their
responses. The Ralph Jones Drive
Partnership is present today to answer
questions. The Eco-Urban Collaborative was
expected at this meeting, but is not present.
They will need to be rescheduled at a later
meeting.
Mr. Peterson noted that the information
presented today in no way amends or
supplements the bids. It simply clarifies
issues raised with respect to the bids.
1. Purchase.. Price offered by Applicant
Advance Question 1 a) In the "Application
To Commission" you submitted on
January 20, the purchase price stated is
$30,000. Please confirm that $30,000 is the
correct purchase price you are offering for
the Rink Site.
Answer: Holladay Properties is $300,000 for
the Rink S ite. We submitted a performance
guaranty of 10% ($30,000) to the City, and
simply made a mistake on the RFP response.
13
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
(} continued...
Advance Question lb) In your proposal, you
state "In our site plan, for East Gateway, we
have included pieces that are placed on
parcels currently owned by the
Redevelopment Commission. Holladay
Properties would like to enter into an Option
to Purchase agreement, at five (5) dollars per
square foot, with the Redevelopment
Commission." Is "five (5) dollars per square
foot" (i} the amount you are willing to pay
for an option to purchase the parcels, or (ii)
the amount you are willing to pay to actually
purchase the parcels if you exercise the
option at a later time?
Answer: Five (5) dollars is the amount that
we are willing to pay to actually purchase the
parcels if we exercise the options at a later
time.
2. Proposed Site purchase -all 0.83 acres
Advance Question 2a) You state "In our site
plan... we have included pieces that are
placed on parcels currently owned by the
Redevelopment Commission." For the
avoidance of doubt, we would like to know
by Property Key Number the parcels you are
referring to. Please refer to the diagram titled
"Redevelopment Commission Owned
Properties" in the Request For Proposals and
tell us specifically the key number of each
parcel you are referring to.
14
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
() continued...
Answer: Holladay Properties is seeking to
purchase lots that are currently owned by the
Redevelopment Commission and lots that
would be purchased by the Redevelopment
Commission. In addition to the Rink Site,
those lots include: 18-5003-0049,18-5003-
0048,18-5003-0047,18-5003-005903,18-
5003-005902,18-5003-005901,18-5003-
0059,18-5003-0060, and 18-5003-006001.
Advance Question 2b) It appears from your
site plan that Sycamore Street between
LaSalle and Colfax is vacated. Is this your
intent? If yes, do you expect to be granted
ownership of the vacated Sycamore Street
right-of-way?
Answer: Holladay Properties intends to
vacate Sycamore Street in order to eliminate
through traffic. Sycamore Street would
remain open to service the Maennerchor
Club and the new parking garage. Holladay
Properties would request ownership of the
right-of way to the extent necessary to
complete the corporate office building and
public plaza located on the Rink Site.
3. Description of proposed development -
square footage of improvements
Advance Question 3a) It appears you
propose to build only a "corporate office"
building of 75,000 square feet on the Rink
Site per se. Is this correct?
15
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
() continued...
Answer: Yes, but the final size of the
building could vary. For a corporate
headquarters, the square footage could vary
±25,000 square feet from the 75,000. We
would request some leaway for 50,000 to
100,000 square feet.
Advance Question 3b) As part of your
proposal you submitted an architect's
rendering of the 75,000 office building. Is
the design illustrated in that architect's
rendering an accurate depiction of what you
actually expect to build on the site?
Answer: The architectural rendering that
was provided was meant to be conceptual
only, for marketing purposes as well as to
determine how much space could be fit onto
the site. The final design will dictate the
construction materials and style used for the
final product. However, the design and
construction will be of a very high quality
that will complement the view across the St.
Joseph River from the Century Center.
Mr. King: So, the ultimate design would be
determined by the tenant? Or interaction
between your company and the tenant?
Answer: Hopefully, it would be interaction
between ourselves, the tenant, the City, and
all the players involved in the master
planning effort.
16
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
() continued...
4. Description of proposed development -
private investment
Advance Question 4) It appears that your
private investment for development on the
Rink Site per se would be $30,000 for the
land and approximately $10,000,000 for the
75,000 square foot corporate office building.
Is this correct?
Answer: As stated in the answer to question
one, Holladay Properties is offering to
purchase the land for three hundred thousand
dollars ($300,000), and thirty thousand
dollars ($30,000) was an error on the
application. However, the ten million dollar
($10,000,000} investment in the corporate
office building is an estimate based on the
building being 75,000 square feet. The range
would likely be between $8,000,000 and
$15,000,000.
5. Description of proposed development -
jobs to be created or retained as the result of
improvements on the Site
Advance Question 5) What is your estimate
of new jobs that would be created and
existing jobs that would be retained as the
result of your proposed development on the
Rink Site? Would "existing jobs that would
be retained" be lost if your development does
not proceed?
17
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
() continued...
Answer: Holladay Properties is estimating
that the Rink Site project alone would
provide 280-350 jobs. The adjacent uses,
particularly the Wharf Site, will provide
several hundred more jobs.
6. Description of proposed development -
whether the Property,.. when improved, will
be sold or' rented;.. proposed buyers and/or
tenants
Advance Question 6a) Would the Rink Site
and the 75,000 corporate office building be
sold or rented?
Answer: Holladay Properties will be
developing the project, and beyond that we
cannot yet say that the property will be sold
or rented, after construction, with 100%
certainty. Or there may be a joint venture
with a financial party.
Advance Question 6b) Can you demonstrate
demand for a complex such as this?
Answer: Holladay Properties has been in
contact with several different users with
interest in the project. Five years ago there
did not seem to be excess demand for Class
A office space in downtown South Bend.
Current occupancy in the Class A office
space in downtown South Bend is over 90%.
The market for office space in downtown
South Bend is the strongest it's been in ten
years.
18
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
() continued...
Advance Question 6c) Please list, or give
examples of, the type of business you expect
would buy or rent the developed property.
Answer: Holladay Properties envisions a
financial, legal, communications, or
insurance firm to locate at this project.
Mr. King: This could be either a single
tenant ormulti-tenant building?
Answer: That is correct. Holladay
Corporation originally started working on a
development concept for this site almost a
year ago, before the site was put up for bid.
We have two users we are negotiating with.
Both are still interested. Either of those
would occupy 100% of the building. If not a
single tenant, we'd expect a dominant tenant
with some additional multi-tenant space.
Mr. Hojnacki: Are those tenants under time
constraints?
Answer: One of them wants to begin
occupancy January 1, 2008.
7. Description of proposed development -
timeline outlining when major development
actions will occur.
Advance Question 7a) Please provide a
timeline for the major development actions
you intend for the Rink Site.
19
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
(} continued...
Answer: The timeline submitted with the
proposal was outdated, having been prepared
almost a year ago. This is an updated
timeline.
Fall 2005: Sale ofNiles/Colfax Building to
PeopleLink. Completed.
Spring 2006: Completion of Washington
Street improvements. Almost complete.
Spring 2006: City negotiations with
Commerce Center on parking structure.
The Commerce Center has a new owner
who has a parking problem since the
parking garage is closed.
Summer 2006: Master Plan of East Bank
community is completed.
Summer 2006: Redevelopment completes
purchase of properties and enters into
contract with Holladay Properties for the
Rink land.
Spring 2007: AM General addition
completed
Spring 2007: Colfax Bridge improvements
completed
Spring 2008: Waters Edge Condo/Hotel and
Plaza completed
Summer 2008: Pedestrian bridge to Century
Center completed
Summer 2008: Parking structure completed
Fall 2008: Corporate office building on Rink
Site completed
20
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
() continued...
Advance Question 7b) Please provide a
timeline for the major development actions
you intend for the additional parcels named
in your answer to question 2a above.
Answer:
Summer 2006: Redevelopment completes
purchase of properties and enters into
contract with Holladay Properties for the
purchased land.
Spring 2008: Waters Edge CondHotel and
Plaza completed
Summer 2008: Parking structure completed
Mr. Hojnacki: How does the Waters Edge
Condo/Hotel project fit with the proposed
Gameday Centers project. Are you
worried about excess capacity?
Answer: Our project is not intended to be a
"for sale" project. I think their project has to
be presold. Ours is not contingent upon
presale. It will be a conventional hotel on the
lower floors with condos on the top only.
Mr. Hojnacki: Presumably, they' 11 have a
year's jump on you.
Answer: We'd like to think not. We're
going to do something with the Wharf site, if
not hoteUcondominiums. I'd be we'll be out
of the ground first.
21
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
(} continued...
8. Ability of the Applicant to finance and
complete the development as proposed
Advance Question 8) Would you be willing
to provide the city a performance and
payment bond to assure that the development
can be financed and completed?
Answer: Yes, Holladay Properties would
provide the City with a performance and
payment bond within certain parameters.
9. Public improvements or investments that
may be requested of the City of South Bend
and/or the South Bend Redevelopment
Commission
Advance Question 9a)Your proposal appears
to state that you would like the City of South
Bend to do the following:
• Grant you an option to purchase the
parcels named in your answer to
question 2a above
Answer: Yes
• Complete a master plan for the area
commonly known as the "East Bank"
Answer: No, Holladay would like to lead
the effort (not control it) and is
willing to share 50% of the expense.
We are proposing a design charrette
similar to the one we used for the
Portage Prairie development, bringing
all intere steel partie s into the
discussion of what the overall
22
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
() continued...
development should contain. An outside
consultant facilitated it. It was
very helpful and successful at achieving
buy-in. Development of the Rink site
isn't worth doing, for us, unless it
becomes part of something much larger.
This has to be a catalyst for something
bigger. Holladay Corporation paid
entirely for the Portage Prairie charrette.
Since development of the Rink site is of
more public interest and since the City is
the current owner, we propose sharing the
cost of the charrette. The FireArts studio
is an example of the public interest about
what happens in that whole area. A
couple of the Holladay Corporation
partners were involved in getting it
settled into that location. We knew it
was only temporary, though. Just
because we didn't include them in our
proposal doesn't mean we want them
thrown out. We have to find a place for
them in this process, and clearly we will.
The cost of the Portage Prairie charrette
was $165,000. This proposed charrette
should be less expensive, probably in the
neighborhood of $100,000. The area is
smaller and there are some "givens"
already.
• Vacate Sycamore Street between
LaSalle and Colfax
Answer: Yes, see response to question
2B
23
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
() continued...
• Build an "East Race Parking
Structure" to house 400 cars
Answer: Yes, to provide parking for
several office and commercial structures
on the East Race
• Build additional improvements to
Washington Street
Answer: That is not something that is a
part of the Ralph Jones Drive proposal.
That is something we picked up off of
earlier discussions when we were
planning the AM General addition. It is
not a critical element to our proposal;
rather, an accommodation of what we
understood to be City plans.
• Provide improvements to the Colfax
Bridge, including "overhead lighting
features, pavement upgrades, and side
bridge bump-outs"
Answer: Yes. Everything here is
cosmetic. Thankfully, the bridge has
been recently upgraded.
• Build a "Colfax Plaza... in
conjunction with the Corporate
Client's Headquarters, Retail Offices
and Waters Edge"
Answer: Yes. We hope to take a portion
of Sycamore Street and have a public
plaza there.
Mr. King: Are you expecting the City of
South Bend to build that plaza?
24
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
() continued...
Answer: Yes.
• Contribute $1,400,000 toward the
$1,600,000 cost of building of "anew
pedestrian skyway system...to
interconnect the new buildings along
the St. Joseph River with the new
East Race Parking Structure and
Century Center"
Answer: Yes
• "Construct a new East Bank Gateway
Park at the current parking lot south
of AM General"
Answer: Not required. ~Ue included it
because we had picked up that
redevelopment wanted that done.
• Grant a 10-year tax abatement on
improvements to the Rink Site
Answer: Yes
• Grant a 10-year tax abatement on
improvements to property owned by
Holladay called the "Waters Edge"
Answer: Maybe. It really depends on
how the parking situation works out.
There was an MOU entered into in 2002
for that site. It involved a TIF district for
just that site. If that plan is used, there
could be no tax abatement for the Waters
Edge project.
25
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
() continued...
Would you proceed with your
development only if the city agrees to
all of the above? If no, please state
which of the above you would not
require.
Anwer: Stated in the direct response to
individual questions. We came up with
our best guesses here. We expect the
design charrette to achieve buy-in from
everyone on what gets done and who
pays for what.
Mr. Hojnacki: Are you saying there is
room for discussion, considerable room
for discussion, or...
Answer: I don't think there's any
question about that. This is a big project.
There are a lot of public pieces to it. I
don't want to imply that you don't have
to participate in it in a significant way,
because I think you do.
Mr. Hojnacki: My own opinion: we as a
public body have a responsibility to the
taxpayers, that we don't spend more
taxpayer dollars than we have to. At the
same time we understand that if anything
is going to happen, we're going to have
to pull the trigger on it. I probably am
more willing to spend money than others
on the Commission are.
Answer: We will do something,
someday, on the Wharf site, no matter
26
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
() continued...
what the City does. It just isn't going to
be the catalytic type of project that we
want it to be. The same is true here on
the Rink site. We could have sold the
~Uharf site and made a nice profit on it
and walked away. We didn't do that.
~Ve don't want to do that. And we
wouldn't do that here, either. But, in the
long run, if the City has no interest in
participating in a master planning effort,
that's what would happen.
Mr. King: John, this question wasn't
given to you in advance, but maybe you
can answer it anyway. If I understand
the area you' 11 develop as retail/office,
there's a cell phone tower there that
would have to be moved. Are you
expecting you would do that, or the City?
Answer: We would hope it would be
moved. We would expect the City to
buy it and do whatever necessary to
move it and then sell the land to
Holladay at the same $5/sft price w'd
pay for any other additional land.
Advance Question 9b) Why do you feel the
return to the public warrants the amount of
public funds you are requesting? (See
attached table.)
Answer: Holladay Properties feels that this
is a major project that would create jobs and
downtown residences. This is the type of
project that could be a catalyst for downtown
27
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
() continued...
South Bend and the East Bank area. A good
portion of the public funds would be spent on
projects that would directly benefit the
residents of South Bend, and not only the
residents and employees of this project.
10. Plans must meet current code and zoning
requ~ernents
Advance Question 10) Would your site plan
for the Rink Site require any variances from
current code and zoning requirements? If
yes, please describe each such variance.
Answer: Holladay Properties has not yet
determined if any changes are going to be
required. VUe don't think the actual building
would require any variances. We don't know
about the overhead walkway.
11. Project proposal considers the
immediately surrounding East Bank area and
gives evidence of how development of the Site
fits with either existing conditions or future
planned or phased development
Advance Question l la) In your proposal
you say you would like to develop a master
plan for the area. What specifically would
that master plan consist of?
Answer: The master plan should have a
primary and secondary planning area. The
primary area would consist of the site and the
area surrounding the site bounded,
hypothetically, by Jefferson Blvd. on the
south, Hill St. on the east, LaSalle St.
28
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
() continued...
(including frontage on both sides) on the
north and, of course, the river on the west.
The secondary planning area extends outside
the primary area to an indeterminate distance,
with the objective to identify factors (road
improvements, developments, etc.) that may
significantly affect the primary planning
area.
The reason to develop a project within a
large planned area is that no project, even a
major project as proposed, is developed - or
is perceived - in a vacuum. Whether the
project is residential or commercial, the
appeal depends as much on the "context" as
on the project itself. It has been our
experience that perceived and actual
"momentum" in a project area is very
important.
When completed, a master plan allows a
more refined approach to decision making in
the planned area and results in a more
cohesive, orderly growth that raises the
development potential and value.
to the East Bank. Apart from design issues
which are always in order, the fact to
remember is that positive energy, activity and
sheer numbers of people are critical to
continued improvement in the East Bank
neighborhood.
29
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
() continued...
This question also relates to the previous
question concerning planning. Residential
growth must be encouraged in the East Bank
and environs. But so must density and as
much "24/7" activity as possible. In that
sense there is a desirable and necessary role
for office and retail activity in the East Bank.
Proximity to jobs and entertainment are
critical to a healthy urban residential
environment.
With respect to the race or riverfront, the
issue in our judgment is not the use. Rather it
is the quality of planning and design. For
example, whatever use fronts the riverbank,
an appealing public space must be preserved.
Residential use as much as any other use can
impair that if not properly designed.
Our plan contemplates a clear and inviting
public presence along the riverbank and
enhances that potential dramatically with the
proposed pedestrian bridge across the river
and pedestrian-friendly enhancements to the
Colfax Bridge.
Our proposed buildings are fairly large in
scale, but scale within reason is not a
negative if the buildings and sites are
designed to be inviting to people who work,
shop - or live - in the space. Such design
details as setbacks, view sheds, use of
materials worked out within a basic respect
for the character and "bones" of the site will
result in a wonderful addition to both skyline
and riverfront.
30
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
() continued...
In addition, highest and best use dictates that
the greatest number of people who can
benefit from the `improvements' be served in
a given site. The best sites, in effect, create
the largest demand and deserve the greatest
densities.
There's a walking bridge down in Lafayette
that the City put across the river. It sits
behind The Landing shopping center. They
made it wide enough, with punch-outs---it's
become a very popular place for people to
enjoy on nice days. It isn't nearly as nice a
view as the St. Joseph River downtown.
Mr. Perri: It's like sitting on the wall at
Century Center and looking at the cascading
water. From the other side, we've taken
pictures from a bucket truck that show a
beautiful view from the Wharf site. It's a
vision that we can have here. The aesthetics
are there.
12. Improvements to the Site will enhance,
rather than detract from, both the public
views of the river and access to the river via
the East Race walkway currently in place
Advance Question 12a) Address the concern
that East Gateway would privatize or
otherwise lessen public access to and
enjoyment of the river.
31
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
() continued...
Answer: Responses to Question 11
addressed this issue. The only comments to
underscore are that the planning process
should take as a given that the continued
enhancement of access to the riverbank area
is a must. We have zero intention of making
access to the riverfront any less public than it
is today. That is an absolute necessity to the
success of any East Bank development.
This must be tempered with the other very
important requirements to create a vibrant
East Bank "district" with commercial and
residential activity in a network of public
spaces and places. The ultimate dedication to
public space would be for Holladay's wharf
site and the "Rink" site to simply be parks.
That would not achieve the diverse goals
which we believe have been established for
the East Bank.
13. Applicant is willing to accept
responsibility for knowing and meeting all
environmental standards
Advance Question 13) Are you willing to
accept responsibility for knowing and
meeting all environmental standards and
paying any related costs?
Answer: Holladay Properties is not exactly
clear on how this question fits into our
current discussion. We've already spent a lot
on cleaning out the other riverfront locations.
We expect to do similarly for this one.
32
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.)
A. South Bend Central Development Area
(} continued...
Mr. King thanked Mr. Phair and Mr. Perri for
their time and thoughtful answers. The
answers were very helpful in clarifying the
questions the Commissioners and staff had
after reviewing the Ralph Jones Drive
Partnership's proposal for the Rink site. Mr.
King asked if Mr. Phair had anything he
wanted to add that he thought had not been
expressed.
Mr. Phair said he wished the Commissioners
could review booklet prepared following the
Portage Prairie charrette. He has given Ms.
Laurent the remaining two extra copies he
had. Ms. Laurent indicated she will see that
the Commissioners are offered a copy.
Mr. Perri stated that he appreciated the
opportunity for give-and-take. It enabled
them to give thoughtful consideration to the
significant questions brought up by the
Commission.
Mr. Phair asked what the Commission's time
line is for awarding the Rink Riverside site.
Commissioners agreed that they did not want
the process to drag. Mr. Phair noted that the
new owners of the Commerce Center are not
local. He suggested it might be a good idea
if staff made arrangements to meet with them
some time when they are to be in town to
discuss their needs, especially for a parking
garage.
33
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
7. PROGRESS REPORTS
Mr. Inks reported that we are pushing ahead with the PROGRESS REPORTS
improvements to West Ireland Road and Michigan
Street next to the Erskine Commons site. Some
construction is already proceeding on West Ireland. We
have an obligation to complete that in the fourth quarter
of this year. ~Ue expect to see development on that site
as well later this year.
Mr. Laurent reported that staff closed on the Huckins
property last week. We are already working with
Engineering to get the demolition specifications written
so we can have the building demolished as quickly as
possible.
Mr. Laurent also noted that on February 24 we had the
kickoff of the Stamping Plant demolition. There were
about 90 people there. Congressmen were there. The
building they started on is already gone.
Mr. Williams reported on the progress on the Main and
Colfax parking garage. There are to be four phases in
the rehabilitation. At the northeast entrance near the
Palms Royale, all the concrete work is done. The
pedestrian access that leads to the elevator is finished.
They are now working on the northwest corner. They
are making a pedestrian ramp to keep pedestrians out of
the driving ramp. They are at least on schedule, maybe
a little ahead of schedule. They are to be substantially
completed by August 16, fully complete by
September 1, 2006.
Mr. Inks noted the great job that has been done
matching the new work with the existing building. It's
hard to tell where the old leaves off and the new begins.
8. NEXT COMMISSION MEETING
The next meeting of the Redevelopment Commission is NEXT COMMISSION MEETING
a Rescheduled Regular Meeting on Friday, March 10,
2006 at 10:00 a.m.
34
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting -March 3, 2006
9. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the ADJOURNN~NT
Redevelopment Commission, Mr. King made a motion
that the meeting be adjourned. Mr. Blake seconded the
motion and the meeting was adjourned at 11:22 a.m.
Donald E. Inks, Director Marcia I. Jones, President
35