Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRM 09-19-80SOUTH BEND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING September 19, 1980 10:00 A.M. Presiding fficer: Mr. F. Jay Nimtz, President 1. ROLL Membe s Present: Mr. Mr. Mr. Ms. Membe s Absent: Mr. Legal Counsel: Mr. News 9 1200 County -City Bldg. 227 W. Jefferson Blvd. South Bend, IN. 46601 F. Jay Nimtz, President A. Peter Donaldson, Secretary Robert Cira, Assistant Secretary Paula N. Auburn, Member Lloyd E. Robinson, Sr., Vice President Kevin J. Butler lopment Staff: Mr. Carl Ellison, Executive Director Mrs. Ann Kolata, Deputy Director Mr. Kevin Horton, Assistant Director Ms. Ann Bathon, Acquisition Specialist Mr. Bill Fox, Relocation Specialist Mr. Paul Falduto, Employment Targeting Asst. Mrs. Jane Zimmerman, Executive Secretary Mrs. Hedy Robinson, Secretary edia: Mr. Larry Ford, Reporter, WSJV -TV Mr. John Winey, Photographer, WSJV -TV Mr. Joseph L. Matthews, Architect Mr. Jack Troeger, Troeger Sheet Metal Mr. Jeff Troeger, Troeger Sheet Metal Mr. Brian Schuster, Attorney at Law Mr. Ron Jaicomo, Attorney at Law Mr. Robert Hepler, Hepler Construction Co. OF MINUTES On motion by Mr. Donaldson, seconded by Ms. Auburn, and unanimously carried, the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of Septeffber 5, 1980 were approved. 3. APPROIVAL OF CLAIMS There were no claims to present to the Commission. MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBERS; 1980 WERE APPROVED THERE WERE NO CLAIMS TO PRESENT TO THE COMMISSION South Bend Redevelopment Commission Regular eting September 19, 1980 4. CO ICATIONS There were no communications to nr sent to the Commission. S. OLD BUSINESS Therelwas no Old Business to present to th6 Commission. 6. NEW a. T02S abatement request from V. Robert Homer relative to ah'area commonly . Ellison read the memorandum as llows: Human Reis o uAce s and Economic Deve eo pment Committee o4 the Common Councit CM: Redevelopment Commission Repotrt on Tax Abatement Petition of V. RobeAt Heptetz, 2222 W. Washington TE : SeptembeA 17, 1980 On August 22, 1980, a petition �o& tax a atement eonz.idetati.on 4o& treat ptcopetrty rated at 2222 W. Ways h.ingto n was 4.i t ed with t"te City Cte k by pupnty owner. V. RobeAt Hepten. P uant to ChapteA 2, Atr,#,i.ete 6, Section 2-77 o6 tie muwicipa2 Code og the City o4 South Bend, the a onementioned petition was tce4med to the R development Commission 4o& putcpozes o4 investi- gition and pt epaA #.i.on o j a tcepotxt de teAm in ing w etheiL the area qua,P.i jies as an Urban Deve.2op- m nt area undetc T ndia.na Cade 6-1.1-12. The Redevelopment Commission hays undetc -- en its ,investigation o4 this area which is e paAt i.cuta t y dens n b ed as jotEows : 2 THERE WERE NO COMMUNICATIONS TO PRESENT TO THE COMMISSION THERE WAS NO OLD BUSINESS TO PRESENT TO THE COM- MISSION South Beno Redevelopment Commission Regular M eting - September 19, 1980 6. NEW a abatement report continued... A pateet o6 tand in the Nottheatst 2uatrtetc o4 Section 10, Township 37 Natrth, Range 2 East, (mown as Atno.Ld's Fixst Addition (tots 1-44J. Vacated AUe.ys and Streets) to the City o6 South Bend, St. Joseph County, Indiana mote pact i.cu-aAt y: Beginning at the .intet s ect i.o n o f the West tight-o6-way tine o6 Grant StAeet and the South tine o4 Wetst Washington Avenue; thence S 0--03' 08" W a distance o4 514.92 $eel to the .intern eation o J the Notr th tight-o4-way tine o � the Penn Cent at Rai tkoad; thence N 64 39' 26" W on and atong the Notrth Aight -o4 -way tine a4 ,said tail oad a distance o4 1194.77 fleet to the .intetus ecti,on o4 the Notr th tight- 04-way tine o6 said tai2tcoad and the East tr igh o � -way tine o4 Ot ive St eet; thence N 82' 43" E a distance o4 74.33 fleet to a point on the South tight-off -way tine of Washington Avenue West; thence S 89 39' 53" E on and along the South fright -vi -way o4 ,said avenue a distance o4 1006.55 feet to the ptace o4 beginning containing (283,072 ,sq. 4t.) 6.50 actce�s mote of te&s subject to at f- t egat eats emends . EXCEPTING: A pancet o J .land beginning at a point to cated on the Southeast eotneA o6 Lot No. 44 in Atrnotd',s Furst Addition to the City o6 South Bend; thence NoAth 514', mote of tetsz, to the Notrtheast comet ob Lot No. 1 in said Addition; thence Wetst 2001, mote of test, to the NoAthwelst comet of Lot No. 5 in said Addition; then South. 4241, mote of terns, to the Notrthwetst eotnet o4 Lot No. 43 in said Addition; thence Southeast a distance o4 204.7' , mote of terns, to the ptaee of beginning. Based on its investigation, the Redevetopment 6,sion hereby tepoU6 ,c ts Jinding: 3 South Be #d Redevelopment Commission Regular Oeeting - September 19, 1980 6. NEW BUSINESS a. tax abatement report continued.... The atr.ea oua.e U.ies a-s an Utzban Develooment .u. c7-i. i -►z Ao& zne 6ozzouxng tceasonz: 1) Conditions exist on the atiea in question which cannot be cotUcected by the tcegutatan y ptcocas otc the atcd.ina&y opetcati.on aj ptc i.vate entenpAt6 e without tees otr t i,ng to tax abatement. 2) The area in question has been undetut Q.ized due to economic c iAcum-stances which have deteltAed notunal development. 3) The atcea in quetstion has become undm>itcable 4o& otc impozzible o4, nakma.2 development and occupancy because o4 tack o4 development, cusati.on a4 growth, and other 4actou which have impai&ed values and ptcevented a normal development o f the ptcope,�ty o& uze a4 the ptco petrty. 4) Thus e cond,it ions neca s.i tated ownetus h.ip o4 the pt opexty in question by the Model Cities Economic Development CotcpoAation and the Depatrtment a4 Redevelopment. Explanation The area in question is patt o4 the Jo&me4 ny Avenue Redevelopment Area which wars putcchased June o4 1979 by V. Robetrt Hepletc 4twm the Depattment Redevelopment. Wtc. Heplea. zotd 2.15 acAes a4 this peAty (at no pt of t) to Robetct Batteast. He tceta ined remaining 4.35 aches. The Metvcy Avenue area was dec eatced a Redevelopment tea by the Redevelopment Commission puvsuant to Resotu ion o. 417 passed on August 18, i'972. The Redevelopment DepaAt- ent acted on behalf o4 the Model C%ti u and MetkopoZ tan evelopment Act o4 1'966. Aequist:ion, relocation and clearance ctiviti,e/s were completed in 1974 and the atLea was vacant nt-it July 1, 1979 when Mt. Hepler' s project commenced oivstruction. The bui,eding is used as a warehouse and o64.ice ac c e ity Oar Mt. Hepler' z construction equipment bus.inuz . he dtructur.e contains a total zquaAe 600tage of 10,800. he estimated value of impravement6 is $365,000. 4 South Bed Redevelopment Commission Regualr eeting - September 19, 1980 6. NEW BUSINESS a. tax abatement report continued... We betieve there is ample evidence to suppoftt contention that the area has been underuti.2ized. eed, despite extensive e44oAt oven a number o4 tus to market the atcea 4otc tight .industr>ia2 use, buyer was found. F inatty, a4ter 4.iv e yeats , Hepter putcchazed the propetrty. Besides being ant 4or an extensive petri.od o6 time, this property o wars the subject o4 a tong t.ist o4 envitonmentat Att City ut it i a are pies ent and the atea is zoned "D ", tight .indurtniat. Supptementat Observations This petition presents a ptobtem. Construction is c mpteted on the project. Thous, ' it is impoz s.i.bte to say at the ptcajeet woutd not have occwviced without tax abate- ment. It has occwrtced. Like the Habt.in Company case, however, this ,us a ,soeciat one. Mr. Hepter, through his eounset, attempted tq 4ite 4ot abatement consideration 4tom June o4 1979 to D cember o4 1979. Because the taw had been changed, Mt. H2.pZeA could not appty 4ot the 4.ive year abatement. yet, t ere ex bsted no 4orma.e ized pnocess 4o& 4.i e i.ng 4or consider- on o4 the ten yeah abatement. At the Redevelopment C mm.us.5.ion meeting o4 December 7, 1979, the Commission ,stated .c is po-6iti.on that no petitions woutd be accepted untit tocat pnoeedwr.es were estabt.ushed. These procedures w e not 4onmaZi.zed by the Common Council untie Apra 14, 1 80. Because o4 buz.ine/ss tequiAements o4 M. Hepter and tie de/s,itce o4 the Commu z ion to proceed with .imptovements it this area, construction occwviced during the summer and o4 1979. Mt. Hepter's eounset /states that he (Mr. Hepter) as cognizant at att times o4 the tax abatement ptocezz and cons-idered it e zentiat to the ptann.ing and putchase o subject propW y. " Given Mt. Hepter' �s e44oh t6 in attempting to 4ite 4ot abatement, we concuA with thus -state - m nt. Cowsequentty, the department wars 4oreed to make a bjecti.ve judgement o4 the condition o4 the ptoperty ptri,ot t the time -imptovements were ptaeed on it. Thus judgement was not d.i6jicutt since this /site was nt of an otd Redevelopment Area and thus vetcy 4amit iaA us. Because of conditions that ptev,iousty existed, as we t?,ined above, the department bet.ieves Mt. Hepter de/setves x abatement and shoutd not be un4aiAty punished by the n4u6ion caused .by the change in the taw. South Bed Redevelopment Commission Regular Meeting - September 19, 1980 6. NEW BUSINESS a. jax abatement report continued.... The Redevetopment Comm.izzion hays xamined the cost o6 the abatement and tcov.ida the 6ottowing in4onmation: A/s sumption: 121,700 - asz es/s ed va2uat i.on and a tax hate o4 10.463 Jo& ten Yews. Without Abatement: $127,330 With Abatement : $ 64,304 Amount Abated : $ 63,026 he Chair recognized Mr. Ron Jaicomo, ttorney for Mr. Robert Hepler. [r. Jaicomo: Thank you Mr. Chairman. would like to make a couple of comments ust to recap the sequence of events so that 'ou might understand what happened. Negotia- ions began for the acquisition of this property .n late 1978. At that time the abatement tatute provided for five years of tax batement. When the acquisition was completed .n June, 1979, the legislature had enacted . change in the tax abatement statute which ctually increased the incentive to construct n these types of lands. But the law did not ecome effective until July 1, which was after e had acquired the property. At the same time t was retroactive to January 1, to the time e acquired the property. We were caught n the middle in terms of the dates. Mr. Hepler ad just started his new business and needed a lace to operate. He wanted to get construction one prior to the time cold weather would set n. Because of this and the fact that we were omitted under our redevelopment agreement to edevelop the property as soon as possible, ithin a-six month period, construction began mmediately. Shortly thereafter the Common ouncil declared a moratorium on declaring areas s Urban Development areas because it had to stablish procedures. By the time those proced- res were decided upon our construction had been ompleted and we no longer complied with those rocedures which required a petition prior to he time we began our development. South Be *d Redevelopment Commission Regular eeting - September 19, 1980 6. NEW a. Mr. Jaicomo continues... o, we are really caught in a problem f timing in this situation. We would ike to think that the change in, the statute as meant to provide additional incentive, of to deprive people of any incentive at 11. Because of this, we would like to ask hat you declare the area an Urban Develop - ent area. In our discussion with the ounty Auditor he explained the five year tatute has been eliminated and replaced otally by the new statute, that there ould be no possibility for abatement unless his area is declared an Urban Development rea, so we think we have complied with the erms of the redevelopment requirement which s to develop the property. We have done so, nd we ask for your favorable recommendation oday. My associate Brian Schuster and r. Hepler will answer any questions you ight have. . Nimtz: Mr. Hepler we will be pleased recognize you if you have any thing to . Hepler: I have nothing to add other in if some one has a question I will glad to answer it. . Nimtz: I go past the installation out ere at least once a week, it looks very good. r. Hepler: We are trying to keep it on ::hedule. We have a grass. and landscaping ituation which we are going to take care of in ie Spring. Basically, right no', the whole jilding complex is completed. fr. Cira made a motion that the South Bend : edevelopment Commission recommend to the :ity Council, that the tax abatement request )f V. Robert Hepler, relative to an area :ommonly referred to as 2222 W. Washington, >e approved and granted, seconded by Ms. Auburn Lnd the motion was unanimously carried 7 COMVJSSION RECOMMENDS URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA DESIGNATION FOR PROPERTY AT 2222 W. WASHINGTON FOR PURPOSES OF TAX ABATEMENT South Be Regular 6. NEW b. nd Redevelopment Commission Meeting - September 19, 1980 SINESS Commission approval requested for execution of an agreement for "Professional & Technic, ervices" between the Cif. of South Bend, Department of Redevelopment, and S.M. Dix, Fe: Actual Immovable Fixture Appraisals fo'. East Bank Pro erties. Ellison: What the staff is requesting ere flows from an agreement the Commission proved at our last regular meeting for .M. Dix to provide some estimates for businesses and billboards that may need to e relocated for the East Bank Project. Toi e are asking the Commission to authorize t execution of an estimated contract for $15, ich will give us a capacity to ask S.M. D to specifically provide us with the documen or the immovable fixture appraisals of pra -ohich may be included in the acquisition li . From my understanding a determination has n made as to which properties that.may be but reed immovable fixture appraisals some time e future. So it's my understanding it is reasonable to have the authority to proceed et S.M. Dix to do these appraisals at the appropriate time. Mr. Cira: Is this the total cost? Mr. Ellison: $15,000.00 is an estimate. I ossible that if the number of businesses w to exceed twelve (12) then we would likely to come back and ask that this contract be ended to add time and dollars. Mr. Cira: What is the minimum? Mr. Ellison: The minimum is dependent upon any businesses we actually ask, them to d he immovable fixture appraisals on. Mr. Cira: How many are down there right no would you say? Mr. Ellison: Fourteen. They are also tied his contract in a way. Mr. Cira: In other words anything over 12 have to come back to the Commission and ame contract? 8 rl lay ie )00.00 Lx -ati.on )erties ;t. )t been we will in I ` to is ,re lave how v, to Tou wi11 id the South Be d Redevelopment Commission Regular eeting - September 19, 1980 6. NEW b. continues... Kolata: Anything over $15,000.00 . Cira: This is something you have to ve done before you can proceed any further? Ellison: It is a necessary part of the uisition process. We need those numbers order to know what the acquisition and ocation costs will be. rs. Kolata: We don't want to get ourselves n a position where we are saying that we want welve businesses appraised when really we may my be acquiring .two, three, or four in the irst phase and we don't want appraisals for uildings we are not going to acquire. Yet t the same time we don't want to have to come ack every single time we add a business to the ist. . Ellison: �Fe pay them an hourly rate and the ick is to monitor how many hours they charge verus how much work we ask them to do. . Cira: With fourteen businesses--down- there is couldn't be the total cost on the project? . Ellison: It could be. The difficulty is at the plan has not been decided at staff level the point where we can recommend it to the mission and it has not been confirmed by Tmmity Development, the Mayor or anyone else we don't know which businesses might be involved the potential acquisition. We do know that if are going to proceed to the declaratory we are ing to have to make a determination and have the praisal before the Commission can began its acess. What we are trying to do is eliminate impediment that would slow down the process to t the declaratory started. Auburn made a motion to authorize the President Secretary of the Redevelopment Commission to cute the Agreement for Professional & Technical vices between the City of South Bend, Department Redevelopment, and S.M. Dix, Re: East Bank, onded by Mr. Donaldson, and the motion was nimously carried. 9 COMMISSION AUTHORIZES PRESIDENT AND SECRETARY TO EXECUTE CONTRACT WITH S.M. DIX South Bed Redevelopment Commission Regular Meeting - September 19, 1980 6. NEW OUSINESS c. Commission t ted for . Butler reads resolution as follows: Retsetution #625 WHEREAS, Ptcegtce5Z and achievement in pub t i.c agency ate mecus uned not in dt amat%c nouneements etc times o6 ctr i ,bs but in the y to day ei4o is ob competent peopte who: - itd cate6utty and wett; and WHEREAS, the City o� South Bend has eneJ tied 4nom the good o46ices o4 such a an who has dedicated hip to Bents to the im- tcovement o6 the quatity of Zi Je 4otc aU itts iti.zents; and WHEREAS, thin dedication has .i.nvotved a eommittment on the paAt e4 this man; and WHEREAS, he hats te4t his .cmptc i.nt on the edevetopmevrt of the City o4 South Mend as weU 6 on the ttiva o4 its' kesident6 4etc whom hips etcvice wars o44etced; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the -i ty of South Send Redevelopment Comm.izzion in a eeting astsembted on this nineteeth day of Septembers, 980, hereby eommenctz out Executive D.useetotc Ca,ct tUzon 4otc mete i totuou3 sexvice and exptce&ses euA tat.itu.de 4ote a fob we22 done. TTEST: F. Jay Nimtz., Ate/sident on, r. Donaldson made a motion to approve Resolution 625, seconded by Ms. Auburn and the motion was nanimously carried. . Nimtz: Carl, we certainly wish you well in your a endeavors and we are very, very sorry to see a leave. You and I have had a good relationship re and I think you and the commission have had a Dd relationship and think we have got a lot done. 10 RESOLUTION #625 PASSED South Bed Redevelopment Commission Regular eeting - September 19, 1980 6. NEW c. Mr. Nimtz continues... City of South Bend is grateful to for what you have done and as I say, we ainly wish you well in your future avors in Washington and in the field are going to enter. . Ellison: Jay, thank you. It has been quick two years since I started here September 1978. The two years have gone very quickly d I think we have seen some things happen. I appreciate the support the Commission has ven me, its a very easy body to work with and at's not often the case where a staff has to rk with citizen volunteers. I do appreciate erything. Thank you. 7. PROGRESS REPORTS r. Nimtz: The chair recognizes Mr. Matthews, rchitect, representing Troeger Sheet Metal. r. Matthews: Thank you Jay. I'd like to ntroduce Mr. Jack Troeger from Troeger Sheet etal and Mr. Jeff Troeger. Jeff is an attorney nd the son of Earl Troeger who everyome here knows. e are here basically to observe. We are also nterested in knowing the plans of you people f there are plans to acquire our property. You ight recommend to us who we might talk to on your taff. r. Nimtz: When John Ford called- me the other day immediately called Carl and Ann, they looked t the master list, as I understand, that property s not on the list. rs. Kolata: We have not yet decided exactly hat properties are to be acquired. We don't expect roeger � to be one of the properties that will be cquired as the building is in keeping with the type f development we want to see over there and the use f the building is not incompatiable. with what we want o see. r. Nimtz: It creates traffic, people go in and out f there. Kolata: Obviously our plan may affect you in some just because the character of the area is going to changing, so it will definitely have an impact on you. 11 South Be Redevelopment Commission Regular Meeting - September 19, 1980 7. PROGRESS REPORTS . Kolata continues... It may be small but it will be an impact. e are just starting now to go out and meet ith a-lot of the businesses in the East Bank, getting iin�u t from them on what their problems re, what their needs are, and what their thoughts are concerning this particular project. As far as when we will be hearing more about the plan, e had originally expected to declare a Redevelop - ent Area at this meeting today. We are not ite prepared, we expect to pass the declaratory resolution at our regular meeting on October 3. ly postponing it two weeks it does not set us back y in our timetable to have it a redevelopment area by the end of the year. Mr. Nimtz: Do you have a public hearing following hat? Mrs. Kolata: The public hearing on it would not e until December. It takes that long to go through he Area Plan Commission and the Common Council and hen to come back here and that is the timetable we are looking at. If we put it off beyond the October Area Plan meeting then everything is put back about one month. Anyone who wants to come in and find out more information is welcome to do so, that goes for blic as well as the Commission members although we eally have not reached some hard decisions that have to be made. "Specifically what is going to be acquired "? at decision is coming soon. . Ellison: I might supplement that by saying that e process of doing a redevelopment plan is one that st does not have a road map. There are things.you ve to do by law and then there are a lot of details volved and there is no specific way you have to go out orchestrating them. You can talk to ten different ople and probably get ten different versions of a plan at is similar and essentially that is where we have been ternally. The Redevelopment staff and Community velopment staff and the Mayor's office and others have 1 pretty much agreed that the area should be pedestrian Tented should contain some compatible residential and mmercial uses. The next step is to decide details. expect the process of declaring the East Bank to go ry smoothly because there will not be any proposed quisitions that are not logical in our timing. 12 South B nd Redevelopment Commission Regular Meeting - September 19, 1980 7. . Ellison continues... doubt there will be opposition from either e business community or general public for at will be proposed in terms of acquisitions that particular area. [r. Nimtz: I am sure all of us recognize that .fter the Mayor's announcement yesterday about he Studebaker complex, he is very actively ursuing economic development here in the city articularly in the central downtown or near owntown. I believe this was actively started y Mayor Nemeth. In discussing this whole thing ith me prior to his inauguration, the Mayor said e hoped to push the economic development of South end and this was one of the fields of endeavor he as gradually getting Carl into. I think now that ome of the organizational problems of the City re over with, the Mayor will push both the East ank project and Monroe - Sample as well as this new ne he announced yesterday (Studebaker Complex). o you have anything else you want to add to that arl ? [r. Ellison: Yes. Obviously what is happening s that the economic interest of the city is ,ecoming more diverse. We have typically been 'ery retail oriented but have not, in my opinion, een cognizant of the needs of the business ommunity, particularly the industrial community. learly the effort to begin to look at the Studebaker orridor reflects the current city need to try to romote income producing jobs wherever possible. hat is really our way to salvation more then any - hing else. The Studebaker complex is a logical lace to start but_ it is more significant for what t suggests in terms of overall city direction. he public sector is now getting to the point where t wants to have a closer relationship with the rivate sector. We are now beginning a period where he city will be involved more up front. . Nimtz: In a leadership role. r. Ellison: In a leadership role, to be in greater ialogue with the business community in general rid to try to encourage more cooperative efforts produce new job creations and business expansion Bich results in new job creation, which then pro - ices income to the community. 13 South Be4d Redevelopment Commission Regular Meeting - September 19, 1980 7. PROGRESS REPORTS Mr. Matthews: This is a very opportune time for s. It opens up a lot with us when working with clients. We have two or three clients who are very interested in this. We have had three or four calls ust this week in reference to the Mayor's announce- nt. We appreciate you taking the time to talk to We will miss you Carl. 8. NEXTICOMMISSION MEETING I a The egular Meeting of the South Bend Redevelopment Commission will be held on October 3, 1980 at 10:00 A.M. bef am was adj o being no further business to come e the Commission Mr. Donaldson made ion that the meeting be adjourned, Jed by Ms. Auburn, and the motion nanimously carried. The meeting was rned at 10:30 A.M. , President 14 51 NEXT COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNMENT rec