Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSM 04-29-75SOUTH BEND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING April 29, 1975 1200 County -City Building 10:00 A.M. 227 W. Jefferson Boulevard Presiding Officer: Mr. F. Jay Nimtz, South Bend, IN 46601 President 1. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Mr. F. Jay Nimtz, President Mr. John E. Chenney, Vice President Mr. Donald A. Wiggins, Secretary Mr. B. L. Wade, Assistant Secretary Mr. A. Peter Donaldson, Member Legal Counsel: Mr. News Media: Ms. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Kevin J. Butler Jeanne Derbeck, South Bend Tribune Reporter Dan Caesar, WSBT -TV Reporter Steve Neher, WSBT -TV Photographer Dave Anderson, WNDU -TV, Reporter Jim Marchelewicz, WNDU -TV, Photographer Others Present: Mr. Joel Bullard, Interested Citizen Mr. Gene Evans, South Bend Civic Planning Assoc. Mr. Thomas Gibson, Interested Citizen Mr. H. Edward Glaser, Interested Citizen Mr. H. F. Glaser, Interested Citizen Mr. John R. Kagel, Executive Director, Downtown South Bend Council Mr. Eli D. Miller, Chamber of Commerce Mr. Terry Miller, Common Council Mr. Allen E. Schrager, Interested Citizen Mr. Bill Slabaugh, Dept. of Public Works Mr. Edward F. Soltesz, Chairman, Governmental Coordination Committee of River Bend Plaza Advisory Committee Mr. Edward E. Wertheimer, Redevelopment Trustee LPA Staff: Mr. C. Wayne Brownell Mr. W. J. Parrish Mrs. Dolores Crynes Mr. Louis N. Wilcox 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. F. Jay Nimtz, President, stated we will dispense with any reading of the previous meeting's minutes until the regularly scheduled meeting on May 9, 1975. 3. OLD BUSINESS (a) Associates /First Bank: Mr. Kevin J. Butler, Legal Counsel, advised the Commission that he has not yet met with Mr. McGill, represent- ing the Joint Venture. Associates intends to assign its interest in its bid to the Joint Venture and I believe the Commission at this point should receive the requested assignment and that assignment should be reviewed in due course by Mr. Brownell and of course by Legal Counsel. The original bid provided the ac- companying documentation including Indiana State Form 96A, which in effect is a rather detailed financial statement and as a matter of formality we will have to obtain such a form from both entities of the Joint Venture for re- view. This then will have to be submitted to HUD for their review and approval. The action that the Commission takes today should be re- ceipt of the requested assignment from Associates to the Joint Venture. IND. R -66 DISPOSITION PARCELS 2 -13, 4 -32, 4-31, 4 -30, 4 -42 Mr. Nimtz stated the chair will entertain a motion, if that's the will of the Commission, to receive the request for assignment to the Joint Venture and at the same time it will be referred to Legal Counsel and the Executive Director for review and recommen- dation and report back to the Commission. Motion was made by Mr. Wiggins, seconded by Mr. Chenney and carried. Mr. Nimtz further stated, "I know this is going to take a lot of time so I'm directing Kevin (Butler) and Mr. Brownell to sit down with the respective Legal Counsel and all the parties involved and, if possible, report back to the Commission for the May 9th meeting; if not, report back to the May 23rd meeting. (b) Replat of Streets: Mr. Brownell presented a petition to replat the streets downtown which will have to be submitted to the Board of Public Works. We origin- IND.R -66 ally considered this in 1974. We've had prints made REPLAT OF and we've gone over them with the Area Plan and we STREETS have signed the original prints. In addition, we 3. OLD BUSINESS (Cont'd) are going to have original prints made for the State Highway people. I sent them out to Clyde Williams Associates this morning. I would like to suggest to you, if you find it agreeable, authorize the petition and have the President and Secretary sign it. Mr. Wiggins stated that the purpose of this petition was to get it to the Board of Public Works and to get the new streets that we have created officially dedicated and turned over to the State Highway. Motion was made by Mr. Wiggins that this petition be approved by the Commission, turned over to the Board of Public Works and submitted to the State Highway. Seconded by Mr. Wade and carried. Ms. Jeanne Derbeck asked what streets were in- volved because the petition is in plat numbers. Mr. Brownell replied that after the meeting, he would show the Blue Line prints to her and Mr. Kagel and any other interested party. 4. NEW BUSINESS Architect's Rendering for Plaza: The following statement, taken from'Mayor Miller's announce- ment of April 23, 1975, was read by Mr. Nimtz: "With today's positive announcement we are now able to proceed with the construction of the Plaza between Jefferson and the North edge of the Office Engineers Building and I am asking the Redevelopment Commission to begin immediately to accomplish this." Well, fortunately, we are somewhat ahead of the Mayor. Mr. Nimtz called on Mr. Brownell to ex- plain the drawings of alternate plans for the developing of the River Bend Plaza which were submitted by the architects. Mr. Nimtz empha- sized that these drawings were not final...... just suggestions. Mr. Brownell displayed three alternate plans for the block North of Jefferson. One plan - 2 - IND. R -66 ALTERNATE PLANS FOR BUILDING PLAZA 4. NEW BUSINESS (Cont'd was similar to the already the plaza and included two plan included a stage that on hydraulic lifts and the cluded an amphitheater typ in the street. completed part of stages. Another could be raised third plan in- e stage and seating Much discussion followed regarding at least temporary parking for customers, not employees, on the plaza. It was again stated by Mr. Soltesz, "that the whole concept and philosophy behind the River Bend Plaza was to make it a "People Place" not a parking place for automobiles. It was for activities within the community and that was the reasoning for the stage and all these items. Mr. Terry Miller agreed with the "People Place,, but people also want free parking. Mr. Wade stated, "not free parking but controlled parking because the merchants should pay for it, either directly or indirectly ". Mr. Nimtz stated that it was not under the jurisdiction of the Com- mission to provide parking space, this is handled by the Board of Public Works. Mr. Wiggins stated that this department has made available some sev- eral tracts of land at an annual fee of $10 a year which the city rents out for long term parking at a substantial figure; the money then being applied towards bonds at the parking garages. The parking garages are a continuing responsibility and one which the City must address itself to in terms of any and all variations of parking because you can find yourself taking it out of one pocket and not having anything to put in the other pocket and pretty soon you have nothing but empty pockets. Mr. Brownell suggested that Mr. Tom Osterling of Clyde Williams Associates present these drawings to the public at the Plaza Office next week. Motion was made by Mr. Nimtz that Mr. Brownell have these drawings taken to the Plaza Advisory Committee at the Plaza office and Tom Osterling of Clyde Williams will be there to explain them and listen to public suggestion. Seconded by Mr. Donaldson and carried. At this point, Mr. Kagel suggested that the Re- development Commission consider that Mr. Soltesz and his group be invited to sit down and discuss this subject of the stage. - 3 - 4. NEW BUSINESS (Cont' d) Mr. Schrager stated he would like some general information on Item #3, Associates /First Bank. Does the Commission plan to have any hearing and get some input from property owners, in- terested persons and tax payers and I specific- ally would like to know what is going to happen to the letter of credit from Associates and if this new group is going to have to put up any kind of money or are they going to get a free ride. Mr. Nimtz stated this is what we have directed the Legal Counsel to do. We have directed the Legal Counsel to sit down with the Counsel from both organizations and work out the legalistics and report back to us, we hope by May 9th and if not, by the May 23rd meeting. Mr. Nimtz called upon Mr. Soltesz regarding the parking. Mr. Soltesz in turn, yielded to Mr. Wilcox, Director of the River Bend Plaza, for his views as to why this has been deemed necessary so far as the Advisory Committee and so far as his activities on the Plaza. Mr. Wilcox replied, "the charge from the City Ad- ministration to the River Bend Plaza, and specific- ally through my office, was to make it a "People Place: and that has been our objective and aim; sometimes well accomplished, sometimes not as well as we would like but it is our continuing aim and we, I think, have rather comprehensive plans for this summer which entail the use of both of those lots at various times beginning very, very shortly now. I sympathize certainly with my good friends, I am a retailer at heart and I always will be as you know. I sympathize with my good friends, par- ticularly as Mr. Wertheimer points out to the people on the North end of the Plaza who do have a problem; but I do not think that the answer is parking. I think its some other method of us attracting people down there in substantial numbers and I think I can tell you without fear of contradiction that we plan to do that this summer. Hopefully, we'll continue until that space is taken up with a permanent structure." Mr. Nimtz again stated that we should ask the River Bend Plaza Advisory Committee for a recommendation on this. Mr. Nimtz asked Mr. Brownell to set this up. Mr. Chenney again said, "we must do something to help out the merchants ". !i= 4. NEW BUSINESS (Cont' d) Mr. Soltesz mentioned that when the Civic Center starts the construction phase this area is going to be relieved of any area to park anything with the exception of the construction equipment that is going to be necessary to make the facility available for construction, so that is going to be wiped out in its entirety. A lengthy discussion ensued on the letter of credit from Associates. Mr. Schrager wanted to know the specifics. Was Associates going to have to forfeit this letter. The letter of credit expires April 30, 1975. Mr. Butler stated that he was going to meet with the developers or their representatives. By developers, I mean Associates now who submitted the original bid and the Joint Venture to whom Associates is assigning their bid. Mr. Brownell and Mr. Butler will meet with them tomorrow to discuss the letter of credit with the Assignors and the Assignees. The following statement was made by Mr. Soltesz: "I don't want to express my empathy here but I asked a question of Mr. Butler, being the attorney for the Redevelopment Department, he answered in the affirmative; and I am not going to be in a position to sit here as one individual that's purely my conviction, of taking the negotiating power away from anybody sitting down to negotiate. This is what this whole thing is about and Mr. Butler has indicated that he and Mr. Brownell are going to be sitting down with these people today or tomorrow, before the 30th and the expiration date is there. Now, to go on a witch hunt here and to exploit everything out in the open I think is ridiculous and I said this is my opinion and I am ready to defend it also. If we hire people to do a job and there is a five letter word, T R U S T, and its TRUST. Now I do have a little trust in people and I would hope after asking a man publicly a ques- tion of what he's going to do and Mr. Butler has responded to the question, I think that this is the time that we proceed on further with the business at hand; that is, get to the people that are going to make the development, or are not, and I'm sure the litigations and I said before and I prefixed my statement, I was not an attorney, this is an area for attorneys to solve if something goes default." Mr. Schrager expressed an opinion that if this Commission desires to give them additional time, would you please consider the alternative of not giving the developer additional time without putting - 5 - 4. NEW BUSINESS (Cont'd up a specific letter of credit for a specific amount of money so therefore, if they do not perform we, at least the City, get something for tying up the land all this time. Not to be in a position where we've been 2 1/2 years nothing's happened, another year and then they say, well we need another year. In the meantime its all well and good but the merchants are going out of business and the people that do own property here are suffering. Mr. Glaser stated, "in addition to that, I feel if you would consider possibly that as a strength to your negotiators in this situation that you should consider the possibility of the original plans of going ahead with the mall all the way down and completing it and opening this up for other bids. I know the first thing we'll hear is, we don't have another bidder in mind. The reason as you know no one is going to come in and try to duplicate what Associates tried to tackle other than the First Bank has the expertise to cope with it and I think you should remember you might be amazed how soon that would fill in. How people would go in and develop but not the whole thing. Before you give them another year or so, take this into consideration; deal from a strength and not a weakness ". Mr. Butler's reply to Mr. Schrager and Mr. Glaser was, "I think when you said the property has been tied up, the property downtown, it has been to this extent, that the assumption has been that the Assoc- iates project was the most practicable project that had been presented to the Commission by anybody ex- pressing interest in that area. I think we had one other bidder at the time, Mr. King, on Parcel 4 -30, he wanted a rehab on that lot. No one has been dis- couraged to express interest in that property other than perhaps the fact that it was assumed that the Associates proposal was the most viable, the most workable, the most practicable for renewing a major segment of the downtown area." Mr. Schrager interjected with, 'IT think its a wonder- ful thing for Associates or the Fi.,rst Bank and we should all cooperate and work in any way possible but cooperation should be a two -way street and per haps if the project is too big for then to put over they should be willing to admit It and go ahead with a smaller project. But, let's all get our shoulder behind the wheel and move forward. - 6 - 4. 5. NEW BUSINESS (Cont'd) Mr. Butler replied, "that's what we intend to do and that's certainly what Mr. Brownell and the Commission have done for the past two years. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, motion was made by Mr. Donaldson, seconded by Mr. Wiggins and the meeting adjourned at 11:20 a.m. (Seal) 7 - NIMTZ, PRESIDEN r block n r • n l i to , s -f 7, By JEANN DERBECK Brownell said, a number of Associates' letter of credit objectors feel that something Tribune toff writer merchants and downtown which was supposed to show more solid than " potential se- Chancesare slim that any property owners have visited ` "good faith" during the two-,,.. curity should be required major ' decisions about Super the redevelopment office with year wait. Apparently Asso- first. Block will be aired at the Re objections and questions about ciates will not have to forfeit The redevelopment dilem- development Commissioners' Super Block. the $160,000. Attorney Butler ma, however, is that no other meeting at 10 A.m. Friday. The Many expressed fears that 'recently called the letter. major.projects that could meeting is open to the, public. "' Wayne Brownell, redevelop- their buildings or businesses "potential security, which ,solve the problem of empty m W ne B said redevelop- would be "swallowed up, con- never became binding because spaces . downtown have been and t director, for his depart- demned and demolished to Associates' bid never was.for- put.forward make way for the giant devel- mally awarded. ment and the developers of the << security'!., — _ opment. Security becomes _ project were to meet some- One of the big questions when bids are awarded, ". But time today. Bit Brownell said many merchants and other ler said. ' there still is onsiderable ne persons want answered is In Associates' case, much of r' gotiating ahead and he did not what method would be used to the property they wanted al expect any i portant public acquire property. There have ready was slated for demoli- report to„ res lt. from _today's been strong objections to tear-, tion whether Associates bid or session. ing down any more buildings not. But the new First Bank At a spec al meeting of without an absolute guarantee version of Super Block calls April 29, the redevelopment. that the developer would buy for demolition of some build commissione s accepted the the property and build on it. Ings that were not definitely new Super Bl ck proposal on a Another question. involves scheduled for removal. Some preli minary b ; isis and instruct- ed their attor iey, Kevin But= ler, to study a proposal and report back or May 9, if possi , ble, or at the day 23 meeting.' As things loo c now, the full . report probably will be de- layed until th May 23 meet- ing. The special April 29 meeting was held a few days after As- sociates Corp. of North Ameri ca announced it was pulling out of its Surer Block down- town development after two years of waiting, and would turn the project over to the First Bank & rust Co. The new pl ns unveiled by First Bank officials sparked controversy. hey. called for an indefinite d lay before con- struction wouil begin and an expanded super-Super Block . that would be suburban -type covered shop ing mall with two department stores and more than 100 Maller.special ty shops. Since the announcement, C rY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY Y April 28, 1975 Mr. F. Jay Nimtz, President Board of Redevelopment Commissioners Departm nt of Redevelopment 1200 County-City Building South Bend, Indiana 46601 Dear Mrs Nimtz: My-associates and I applaud and approve the proposed plans of the River Bend Development Group. Needless to say, we believe and have believed in downtown South Bend and have so expressed our belief by the following concrete developments. 1. Commerce Building 2.. JMS Building 3. JMS Building Annex 4. Washington and Michigan Building 5. 127 North Michigan Street 6. Michigan and Wayne Building We own wo properties that are scheduled to be acquired by your department should the proposed project become a reality, namely, the former American National Bank Building at Michigan and Washington Streets and 127 North Michigan Street. When we.acquired these properties both were completely vacant and in need of extensive remodeling. The former bank building had been vacant for more than two years and the property at 127 North Michigan Street was vacant for over ten years. Neither of these properties were slated for acquisition in your master plan. However, we were still concerned by this possibility and contacted your department on numerous occasions and were assured, verbally, that the properties were not to be acquired. Subsequently, we prepared plans and, specificz,tions for remodeling the properties and submitted the plans for approval both to your department and to the Building Department. The plans were ap roved and building permits were issued. This is a matter of record. JMS Building, South Bend, Indiana 46601 • Phone (219) 234 -2116 0 ' Page wo .Mr. Jay Nimtz April 8, 1975 The buildings were ultimately occupied by four tenants who were candidates to leave the downtown area, but we still have 11, 000 square feet to rent in the building at Michigan and Washington Streets. We have put forth an effort to rent this space and have had plans prepared for remodeling. If you agree to acquire these properties on behalf of the River Bend Develop- ment Qrroup, either verbally or through a written agreement, you, in effect, will he giving them an option on property not owned or controlled by your department and to our detriment. Once the public knows these properties are to be acquired for demolition and redevelopment, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to renew leases or make any further development with the unoccupied space. At best, the -River Bend Development Group proposal is contingent. � This was expressed by pr ncipals of the development firm when they stated many difficulties are invol ed, and no assurance could be given that the project would be a success. Even hough our properties were purchased for long term investment, in order to se e the best interests of downtown South Bend, we would be willing to meet ith the developer and discuss a possible sale. We stre and will sh to cooperate in every fair way, however, cooperation is a two way I know you are aware of the work and commitment our group has made III continue to make to the City of South Bend, and we feel your commission fair after weighing the pertinent information. We request that our two ties not be put on your acquisition list. Very truly yours, CITY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY Allen E.Schrager Partner AES/ mk cc:. John E. Chenney Donald A. Wiggins B. L. Wade q. Wayne Brownell