Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRM 06-27-90June 27, 19 0 4:00 p.m. Presiding Off 1. Members News 1019 MT-W-M 121 �s V ar s) W.11 ' 121 Mr. F. Jay Nimtz President 1200 County-City Building 227 W. Jefferson Boulevard South Bend, Indiana 46601 Present: Mr. F. Jay Nimtz, President Mr. Roman J. Piasecki, Secretary Mr. Sandy Combs, Assistant Secretary Mr. Michael Doncho Absent: Ms. Paula N. Auburn, Vice President Ms. Carolyn Pfotenhauer Staff: Mrs. Ann Kolata, Director Mrs. Cheryl Phipps, Office Manager Mr. K. C. Pocius, Economic Dev. Specialist Ms. Hedy Robinson, Economic Dev. Specialist Mr. David Norris, Economic Dev. Specialist Mr. Terry McFadden, WSBT Mr. Tom Ceasar, WSBT Mr. Bill Ruminski, Michiana Business Journal Ms. Jeanine Gozdecki, WNDU Mr. Tim Collins, MW Mr. Carter Wolf, Center City Associates Mr. Hobert Shelton Ms. Early Shelton Mr. Clayton Dailey Mr. Richard Hamilton Mr. Milton A. Hunter Ms. Ruth Lewis Ms. Mable Harris, R.L. Mr. Jim D. Eckenberger Mr. Frank Mattei Ms. Diane Ernsberger Mr. Thomas J. Pallotin Mr. Glenn W. Zubler Mr. George Herendeen Mr. George N. Hertz Mr. Andrew Theus Mr. Frank Fuller Ms. JoAnn Harm Ms. Naomi Sylvester Ms. Evelyn Moore -1- South Bend evelopment Commission Rescheduled I Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 1. ROLL CAIL (Cont.) Mrs. Gordon E. Ball Ms. Judith Haines Mr. Albert Brown Mr. Andrew Roberts Mr. James Crank Mr. Boba Tharbs Ms. Yvonne Tharbs Ms. Evelyn Brown Ms. Ersaline Davis Mr. N' z announced that the Executive Session held prior to the meeting would be continued following adjourrment of the Regular Meeting. 2. APPRO OF MINUTES Upon a motion made by Mr. Piasecki, seconded COMMISSION APPROVED THE MINUTES OF by Mr. Qmft and unanimously carried, the THE REGULAR MEETING OF FRIDAY, minutes of the Regular Meeting of Friday, JUNE 8, 1990 June 8, 1990, were approved. 3. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS ADMIN 1990 Chicago Tribune (Advertising) $ 84.77 General Fund 94.56 Indiana lis Commercial 137.22 John (Petty Cash) 81.50 Petrolem Traders 38.19 Business Systems 9.60 South Tribune 130.46 Spe -Dee Print 17.90 Tri ty News 162.94 United Parcel Service 17.00 Total = 1990 $ 744.14 GRAND $ 744.14 Upon a motion made by Mr. Combs, seconded by COMMISSION APPROVED THE CLAIMS Mr. Don ho and unanimously carried, the SUBMITTED JUNE 11, JUNE 18, AND Commission formally approved the claims JUNE 25, 1990 AND ORDERED CHECKS submit June 11, June 18, and June 25, 1990 DATED JUNE 15, JUNE 22, AND JUNE and Ordered checks dated June 15, June 22, 29, 1990 TO BE RELEASED and Jun* 29, 1990 to be released. -2- South Bend edevelcpment Commission Rescheduled I Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 4. 5. 6. Mrs. Ko ata noted that the only comuunication is in nnection with an agenda item and will be deal with at that time. There wis no old business. a. Kolata asked that the following ibms for public hearing be entered into the record: 1) an original of the "Notice of Public Hearing on Amendment to the Studebaker Corridor Development Plan;" 2) an affidavit of Carol Smith, Classified Manager of the South Bend Tribune, that the Notice of Hearing was p lished in that daily newspaper on Jinie 15, 1990; 3) an affidavit of Cherie Jolly, Managing Editor of the Tri- County News, that the Notice of Hearing was p lished in that weekly newspaper on June 15, 1990; 4) a copy of the mailing 1 is for property owners affected by Resolution No. 937. These property am ers were sent a copy of the Notice of Hearing on June 15, 1990. 5) a list of ne yhborhood associations who previously registered with the Redevelopment Cm.mission concerning the Studebaker Co idor Development Area. These ne ghborhood associations were sent a copy of the Notice of Hearing on June 15 1990. 6) a copy of Resolution No. 93 which is the subject of the public hearirxj. Mrs. Kolata noted that as of 4:00 p.m. on June 27, 1990, 1 written remonstrance was received, reciardinq the Policemen's Federal Credit Kolata asked that the Commission isider Substitute Resolution No. 937. ;. Kolata noted that the changes that -3- COMMUNICATION WILL BE DEALT WITH IN CONNECTION WITH AGENDA ITEM THERE WAS NO OLD BUSINESS South Bend edevelopment Commission Rescheduled Regular Meeting June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSI:NFSS (Cont.) •��•r•7i114aITOKoi I :made to the resolution were not tantive in nature. They were the ection of a couple of typographical rs and the inclusion of a paragraph h had been omitted giving the reason the establishment of a Design Review Littee. Mr Nimtz asked if there was any ob ection to the consideration of stitute Resolution No. 937. There was no objection and the Commission cohsidered Substitute Resolution No 937. Mr Nimtz asked if there was any objection to entering the items for lic hearing into the record. There no objection and the items were en ed into the record. Mrs. Kolata explained that Resolution No 937 amends the Development Plan in ways. The first change is the acklition of an acquisition list. When the development area was established, we did not list any properties on our acquisition list. We are proposing to add approximately 35 properties to the list. They are primarily residential p perties south of Sample Street, the A ti building, the Borden building, th Policemen's Federal Credit Union b lding, and a lot used by Hamilton Shop for storage of vehicles. Kolata noted that this is not a caiplete list of all property we intend to acquire in the area. other properties to be added to the accpisition list will be considered at a la time. second change to the Development i is to establish a Design Review Littee which would review all plans exterior improvements within the -4- South Bend " evelopment Commission Rescheduled I Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSnNESS (Cont.) a. comtinuea... Studebaker Corridor Development Area. The purpose of the committee is to assure that, as new developments occur, they meet a desired level of design and qLutlity. We are asking that this review be part of the responsibilities of the present Design Review Cm ittee for the South Bend Central Development Area ch was established by the Redevelopiient Commission and the South BeixI Com mn Council. We have filed an oxxUxiance with the Co mnon Council to the committee from seven to nine Mrs. Kolata noted that we will be bringing Design Guidelines for the Studebaker Corridor before the Coibmission at a future date. Mr. Nimtz opened the Public Hearing for an one who desired to be heard regarding SListitute Resolution No. 937. George Herendeen: I am here on behalf of Policemen's Federal Credit Union. I have presented to you, pursuant to the notice that was given, a letter of remonstrance in which I have included eleven items (a copy of the letter is attached to these minutes). I will not dwell at any length on them because of the number of folks here. The concern of the Policemen's Federal Credit Union is this: First of all, we are not op to the Studebaker Corridor Dorelopment. Our concern is that only a couple of years ago, in 1986, when we decided to relocate and expand our business, we, very honestly, came to you fo Jcs and told you what we were in erested in doing and sought your co)peration and assistance, in even site se-ection. As you know, the Policemen's Fe teral Credit Union building is really the only new, improved, parcel in the Corridor, at least the major portion of the Corridor. We went out on a limb, if yott please, and made a serious capital -5- i : � 'Lid i1` • ` i :L i South Bend edevelcpment Commission Rescheduled Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSnTESS (Cont.) a. continued... stment to improve and construct a building, with, indirectly, the lance and assistance of this fission, with all of the other City ,s who we had to seek permits from get plans approved by, and those Is of things. Wh the Studebaker Corridor development p jest got under way, it was our urxierstanding that it was going to be sort of in two phases. We were pleased by that because we thought we were going to be included in phase two-- -the ex lanation for that being that, in view of the fact that we have a new, be utiful building, and were within the co idor, and, perhaps not inconsistent wi the eventual plan of redevelopment, we thought it was going to be developed in such a way that we would be let set, so that if we fit where we belong within th redevelopment plan, it would be a to and a shame to tear down a $300, 000 building (including acquisition cost and the like) and find out that we have to rebuild it or move it to a lcxmtion very close to ours. I point out to you, for example, one of the relocation sites was across the street, 35 feet from our property line. All of the wisdom in the world would suggest to me that that probably ought to be thought out pretty carefully before that acidon was taken. I think another thing that is worthy of your consideration, in peXhaps excluding our property for now, if it's eventually found that it is going to have to be relocated, I think yo know the anticipated expense of t. I think it's worth your of >ther feature of our concern about .ocation now, is that we are just now .overing from the capital investment about three or four years ago and we South Bend edevelopment Commission Rescheduled Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSMS (Cont.) 1114B101011=aml ha ire just now gotten over the hump with the federal examiners and the regulatory authorities who I have suggested to you arxi who were in last week, just prior to the letter, (I refer you to paragraph 11 of my written objection) they are very concerned that to have the credit union incur substantial additional capital is going to have a serious a&rerse effect upon our ability to maintain the standards that we are directed to maintain in the operation of the credit union as to operation, size, profitability, service to membership and all the other things. You know, Mr. N' z, that those folks are pretty picky ut compliance. So we feel that the things that I have en ted for you, and I will just maition the topics without going into the substance of each of those, because I trust that each of you will have an opportunity to adequately evaluate the points of the objection we made. We've given you a little bit of our history, we ve been here and stayed here, we had lwid acquisition in 1986 with your assistance. We thought that we, very hoi iestly, were the pioneer in the re levelcpment of that Corridor by ba lding that new building there and aa piring that property. We've been there, and I've referred to tenure, we had tax abatement, we've talked to you ab)ut the corridor plan and that was railly the phase one, phase two feature thit I called to your attention. Item se ren is the cost of that acquisition, an I I'll not enumerate all the things th it go into cost. Land acquisition is on y one of them. From that to business in Dern4ption, to loss of business, and yo i name it. The corridor plan itself, wi us being zoned the way we are, we re illy fit where we are and we think th t we probably fit well into the new -7- South Bend evelopment Commission Rescheduled Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BLJSnNESS (Cont.) a. continues... plan. Nine is the credit union estment, that's the capital estment that I've talked to you ah)ut. Ten is the adverse effect -- -that raLIly is an adverse effect that we have s ggled with ever since we've tried to wo k with Ann Kolata and Mr. Hunt and tr ed to figure out where we're go ---we have withheld some rovement to the building that we are in we've withheld the possibility of ion, even to the tune of a sa llite office at another location in the county. And then, the regulatory authorities is item number 11 on the agenda. I ask you and encourage you to d, please, carefully, those items becmuse I have only synopsized them for you, but I think that if you read them ycxi will see that it probably is well thit the property of the Policemen's Federal Credit Union be excluded from the acquisition plan today, even though thit may well happen down the road aways. So for those reasons, we ask t the property owned by Policemen's F eral Credit Union be excluded from lution No. 937 on the present a 'sition list. Mr�Nimtz : Does anybody have any qu ticns to ask Mr. Herendeen? were no questions for Mr. Mr. Nimtz: Mrs. Kolata, if we so de.sire, could we pass Substitute Resolution No. 937 and eventually work out a plan or some arrangement to leave th Policemen's Credit Union in place? Ms Pfotenhauer: You can adopt the resolution today and amend it in the future if you wish. CM South Bend edevelopment Commission Rescheduled Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSINESS (Cont.) a. comtinuea... Kolata: I would point out that, this may apply to more people in the i than Mr. Herendeen' the action y puts properties on the acquisition .. It does not authorize a purchase r being sent. It is a two step ess. The first step says, "Yes, we nd to acquire this property." We d come back at another point, ably, on some of the properties, in next month or so, and authorize the hase offers. But it doesn't matically follow that the purchase r would came immediately following , action. Mr Herendeen: I realize that. My only concern is that in view of that building what it looks like and what it is, I j t think good judgement says that it oucot to be let set like it is. I would rather not see it on the printed aafaisition list, because I think that puts it too closely in the flow of th-xigs without attending to the fact that it is there and it's there with y help. Kolata: I would point out that the jor objection that we have and the tson for acquiring the Policemen's adit Union is not the use and it is the building. It is its location, :rounded by vacant land. In order to ;emble the largest quantity of land Lilable for reuse, the building is Iht smack in the middle of it. You i see it on the map- -the large yellow as is the Avanti building and they are >t south of that. But almost xything else is vacant and when the anti building is taken down, there il.d be, between the two of them, woximately five and one half acres of d, between the Avanti building, the .icemen's Credit Union and the other �perty that is not here but is South Bend evelcpment Commission Rescheduled Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSVESS (Cont.) Elam« �iliOai -KL OR currently being appraised and we expect wi 1 be added to the acquisition list at a later time. So, that is the reason. It is not because of the condition of their building or the use, but because of the way this building is situated, su#ounded by vacant land. Mr Nimtz: George, when was this b lding erected, 1986? Mr. Herendeen: 1987. We've been in there two and a half years. The site se ection was made in 1986, really. We bought, the land in 1987. I think we closed it in 187. We bought it from DONOHO: How big a piece of land is Mrj Herendeen: 80' front, 250' deep. Th�ee quarters of an acre, rounded. . Kolata: It's 20,000 square feet. t under one half an acre. Mr Nimtz: George, let me say this: We want to be good administrators and ne ghbors, too. I hope that we can work s thing out to the satisfaction of all concerned. I make no promises at s time, but I think the Commission has the reputation of being level h ded. We'll consider the Policemen's Cr 't Union's request. I don't know t the Commission will do, but I asc.ure you we'll not be roughshod and no consider your wishes in location. Mr Herendeen: I would only close by to ling you also that a number of the of the board of directors of Po icemen's Federal Credit Union are h as well as its chief operating of icer. I don't know if they want to ad4 anything. -10- South Bend evelcpment Commission Rescheduled I Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSVESS (Cont.) a. comLlnuea... We Ire aware of the fact that the lcxmtion of that parcel is in a larger but I don't know that that jiistifies adding it for now. If you f ii id somebody who is going to buy that hu a parcel, I suspect we became more le to a move and I think we can wo k that out. We want no warfare at all, either, as you know. But I don't it's necessary in the preliminary actuisition. Thank you. Mr Nimtz: Is there anyone else who d ires to be heard? Mr. Fuller: My name is Frank Fuller, 1125 Lafayette. I represent my mother, Charlene. She's a senior citizen. And the house needs repairs on it. Before we put any money in it, I'd like to know h long it will be before the purchase offer comes through. Kolata: At the moment we have hi ed someone to do what is called a p liminary environmental assessment. Th y have to look at the whole area. Th se reports should be coming back willum the next two weeks. Once we get those reports, we will look at the information. If there are no ironmental problems on property, and we are assuming the residential p perties will not have environmental p lems, then we will be coming back to the Commission for authorizing purchase of ers. That could be as soon as the middle of July. It might be later than t, depending on what the reports sa . our intention is that if the 'Commission adopts this today, that we wa Lld move forward with the residential offers as soon as possible. We also have an obligation, if we acquire a piece of property, to handle relocation, both for tenants and for owner ts. We would deal on an -11- South Bend evelopment Commission Rescheduled filar Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSINESS (Cont.) a. comtinuea... irAividual basis with everyone who is living in the area as well as the businesses in the area. So, I can't give you an exact timetable, but it cotild be as soon as two and one half to thtee weeks from now. z Dailey: May I follow up on this, ase? A couple of years ago, were se properties already appraised? Mr-s. Kolata: They were appraised early last year, I believe. We have gone back to the appraisers and asked them to re ook at their numbers. That's another thing that we are having done now. So, yes, we have appraisals on all of this p perty. We have asked them to re-examine the numbers and make sure they are still valid before we send an offer. Mr Dailey: Was anything given out to th property owners about the value the Ci had stated on it? . Kolata: No. Mrs Dailey: What was the reason for . Kolata: Because until the mission authorizes a purchase offer, value has not been set. Mr Dailey: So we're sitting in limbo saying here, "We do not know 'X' number of dollars your property will bring." . Kolata: Correct. Mr� Dailey: Thank you. Mr. Piasecki: I think this gentleman's concern might be with Code Enforcement. A condition that needs repair. -12- South Bend edevelopment Commission Rescheduled I Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSINESS (Cont.) a. comzinuea... . Kolata: Yes, we didn't address yogr concern as to whether your mother should put some money into the property or not. Is it from a Code Enforcement Mr; Fuller: No, just routine. Kolata: We should be able to give yai a better answer on when the purchase offers will come as soon as we get the irornmental reports. I'm hoping we'll be able to set prices at our next meeting, which is July 13th. That would be an offering price. Again, the Canmission takes the information from the appraisers and sets a price and authorizes the staff to send a purchase offer. You can accept that, you can re ect it, or you can come back with a ter offer, in which case we n otiate. That is independent from the re ocation. The relocation is handled by a certain set of rules as to what people are eligible for and they differ as to whether you are a tenant or an omier occupant. We treat them sqkirately. So, no matter what you se tle on the purchase price, the reLocation is handled separately. If we do i 't come to an agreement, we would se id it to the court and the court would fi a what is called condemnation and the cotrt would decide what is the fair Mr Dailey: May I get away from the Pr ce for a second? Say that you're the property owner and his is a rental p perty. Does the Commission, etc., do they find a place to relocate these people? Or do the people have to do it on their own. of c. Kolata: Both. We will assist >ple. And we have to let people know places that are available. We are -13- South Bend evelcpment CaTmiission Rescheduled Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSLNESS (Cont.) a. continuect... go to be asking everyone who is li ring in the area to be in contact with us on a one to one basis where our re ocation person, Hedy Robinson, will meet with everyone. She will find out Wh it size units people need, whether th y want to rent, whether they want to what they can afford, what they ha re right now, and provide them in ormation on what are called ccxparable properties. But, sometimes people go totally out on their own, say, " here it is, this is what I want," and we just file the claims. Other people need a lot more assistance. Sometimes they don't have cars in which to visit properties, and Hedy will take them around. We'll work through it as best we can to make it go as smoothly as Mr; Dailey: That's good. 'Thank you. Mrs. Kolata: If you're a landlord, one of the things that we frequently have difficulty with is getting the names of all of the tenants in the buildings. If you can provide us with a list of the of your tenants, then we can work with them. Mr. Dailey: That's the reason for my question there in the beginning, because the news will travel that the properties were appraised and yet, you, as the p perty owner, nothing came back to you saying, "here you set a date for an appraisal, a time for an appraisal to go out, the owner was not (myself, especially) contacted, period, that that person will be there on such a day. I thyk when a property is appraised there sh uld be a property owner with them. Kolata: You should have had that tunity. The appraiser should have cted you. We'll talk to you tely after this meeting. -14- South Bend evelcpment Commission Rescheduled Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSU S (Cont.) a. conzinuea... Lewis: Ruth Lewis, 1113 ette. Did I understand you to say the relocation fee and the assessed are the same? Kolata: No. I said that the acpusition price and the relocation are two separate things. They are two separate things. The appraised value is what we will be offering for the property. That's different than what it is assessed for for taxes. It's not the But relocation is totally separate. In his case, he has a building, he owns it, we deal with him to buy the building. But we will deal wi his tenants to relocate them. Every one of his tenants, if there are fair tenants or two tenants, will be re orated by us. The amount of re ovation differs. If you're an owner li ring in a building you get the po tial for more money to help you buy a eplacement building. Mr Dailey: Is it a set amount? Kolata: No, it is not a set unt. There is a maximum amount, but it is based on what is the value of your p perty and what it will cost you to bqr a comparable property. If there's a difference, it's to help you make up the difference. Plus, there are moving costs that are paid for. That depends on how big a house you have, how many r of furniture, and so on. There are options. We'll have to work through it and Hedy works through it with evcmybody that is living in the area. Ms Lewis: I didn't get my letter coocerning my two vacant lots. c. Kolata: The reason that we are y doing part of the properties at -15- South Bend edevelcpment Commission Rescheduledl Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSDNESS (Cont.) a. continuea... th Ls time is that in order to hire the ap raisers we had to have a certain am unt of money last year. We got a lo m from the City to do some of the ap raisals but could not do all of them. We are currently having the vacant lots appraised, as well as some of the co mnexcial properties south of Smople Street. We will be coming back later this sLmmier or early this fall wi the second phase of acquisition. is why you didn't get anything on th vacant lots. Mss Lewis: Will they be in the purchase Kolata: No, what you will get an r for now will be just the one erty. The only thing we are getting y to add to the list is this list of erty which I think you were all There will still be other erties. The vacant lots and these r properties, we will come back r this year. I think it will be st or September, depending on when appraisers are finished. rt Shelton: We had a carport put on of our empty lots. . Kolata: We'll have to look at that to see whether it's included with your otlier property. Mr Shelton: They looked at it when they appraised it before. Because I in ed about it and they said it was appraised. Now, according to this, you o y appraised my home and that's all. Mr, >. Kolata: What is your name? Shelton: Hobert Shelton. -16- South Bend edevelopment Cmmission Rescheduled I Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSMESS (Cont.) a. comtinuea... . Kolata: And your address? Mrs Shelton: 1116 S. Lafayette. . Kolata: We'll check that. . Lewis: You didn't get mine. I own 3 S. Lafayette and the lots on each e. I am the representative for my her who is an invalid, 1101 - 1103 S. ayette, Mabel Harris. . Kolata: Obviously, an offer has to 1 you what you're being sent an offer Mr. Dailey: I still want to clarify, frxin the past appraisal that was posed to have been done, will that still hold up, that appraisal at that t' , or the new appraisal if it is do e. You know how real estate goes up and down? Mrs. Kolata: We've asked for all of the old appraisals be looked at by the a raisers. Do they want to adjust any of their values? We have gotten a nse back from one, but have not gotten a response back from the other. Mr. Dailey: Wouldn't it be fair, though, for the property owner to go out to your property where the appraisal so, therefore, if they come out with a new one ... then, if you want to co test it, or anything in that respect? Kolata: It's your right to have opportunity to meet with the )raiser, but they generally only ask 'ormation and don't tell you the )raisal value. -17- South Bend evelopment Commission Rescheduled I Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSVESS (Cont.) a. conrinuea... Lewis: I don't want to wait until last minute to start looking for ething. I have a number of people t depend on me to find the right se, at the right location, at the ht price. How wrong would I be to rt out looking for something now and ting earnest money down? Mrs. Kolata: We can't guarantee when we ar going to send the offer. If you wa t to risk it, you have to make that de ision. To look is not bad. If you wa it to spend time looking, I don't know if that property will still be there at i ater point or not. You may just want to wait a couple more weeks. Mrik. Lewis: All I want to know is if s is a certain thing or not? Is it fo certain before I put my earnest mo ev down? •3;d Kolata: I wouldn't put earnest down at this point because we l't sent you an offer. Until we you an offer it is not a sure f. We now have the money to do this ct but, until we send an offer, you no guarantee that it's coming. lith Haynes: I also am like him. I ►e not ever heard of anything on the >raisal of the home. I also have a her who lives there so I have to be icerned. She's seventy six years 1. I have a niece that's upstairs, that's not important. We can always something there. But I am quite icerned with her.. You know how the lerly are. They hate to be moved from air homes. So, I have to be quite icerned that I can get an adequate n for her, that she likes. And I had rer heard anything about the amount, even been contacted. -18- South Bend edevelopment Commission Rescheduled Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSVESS (Cont.) ���y_i7!lamaON�;Qkl . Kolata: We'll check into that on h of them. Mr Nimtz: Anybody else desire to be h on the Studebaker Corridor? Mr. Hamilton: I'm Rick Hamilton, Hanilton's Body Shop. I guess I've got thB property that they may move the Cr 't Union onto. My main concern is thit I've got eighty cars, and semi - ilers, on the ground. I've got ovexhead cranes in the building. I've go cranes in the building and big wreckers in the building. one concern is finding a place. Another concern - we've been there since 1938 - we're di iding a family business. one of my concerns is if we take property north, the one we're talking about, how long un it you want the rest of our business saith of Sample Street. In other words, we Ire dividing a 1927 business in two, use when I move that building, unless it's awfully close, I have to hal re people down at the other yard to let insurance adjusters in. li of of We . Kolata: We are having properties raised south of Sample Street right i. In fact, most all of these people e south of Sample Street. We are not ing your principal business appraised th of Sample. Our intention is that ial /industrial properties south Sample will stay there. There are a ber of properties similar to yours in it they have outside storage and rage yards. We would like to work the businesses on how they are eened, what they look like and a ieral exterior clean up of the edges that. But we don't have plans at s time to acquire that property. re looking primarily at a number of 4-vacant lots that are scattered and through the area. -19- South Bend edevelopment Commission Rescheduled Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BITS NESS (Cont.) a. continued... 10 C. Mr. Nimtz: Anybody else? There being no one else to speak, the chair concludes the public hearing on the S debaker Corridor Development Plan. The hearing is concluded for whatever action the commission desires to take. Up)n a motion by Mr. Combs, seconded by Mr. Donoho and unanimously carried, the Carmission approved Substitute Resolution No. 937 amending the Stodebaker Corridor Development Plan. Kolata asked that the following items for public hearing be entered into the record: 1) an original of the Notice of Public Hearing of the Airport Economic Development Area; 2) an Affidavit of Carol Smith, Classified Manager of the South Bend Tribune, that Notice of Public Hearing was published in that daily newspaper on June 15, 1990; 3) an Affidavit of Cherie Jolly, Maraging Editor of the Tri- County News, that Notice of Public Hearing was pLtdished in that weekly newspaper on June 15, 1990; 4) an Affidavit of Martha Iantz that a Notice of Public Hearing was delivered to Mr. Dick Johnson of the Area Plan Commission, to Ms. Sandy Pa.imerlee of the Board of Public Works, to Ms. Karen Lower of the Board of Zoning Appeals and South Bend Building Department, and to Ms. Betsy Harriman of tho Park Department on June 14, 1990, -20- ffFMIDTION NO. 937 AMENDING THE STUDEBAKER CORRIDOR DEVELDP i�Tl . :V South Bend evelopment Commission Rescheduled Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSDMS (Cont.) C. cons- 1nuea... that a copy of the Notice was posted on the 12th Floor of the County -City Bti'lding on June 14, 1990; 5) a copy of th Area Plan Commission's Resolution No 114, which deals with the subject of the Public Hearing; 6) a certified copy of Resolution No. 1794 -90 of the Commn Ca=il of the City of South Bend re ative to the subject of the Public H ing; and, 7) a copy of Resolution No 919 of the Redevelopment Commission. Mrs. Kolata noted that as of 4:00 p.m. on June 27, 1990, 0 written remonstrances were received. Mr. Nimtz asked if there were any ob ections to the items for public hearing being entered into the record. There was no objection and the items w e entered into the record. Mr Pocius explained that the Airport 20-0 project consists of 2,300 acres, 1 ted in the northwest part of the Ci . It is bounded by the U.S. 31 on the west, new Cleveland Road on the north, Bendix Drive on the east, ano Lincolnway West on the south. Mr. Pocius noted that most of the area is zoned D and E, heavy and light irxlustrial, with a small patch of residential in the southeast corner. The area is mostly unimproved. Mr ci Pocius noted that in order to make area more easy to develop, it will I several public improvements, uding the extension of utilities and construction of new primary and rior access roads. The City feels the development of this area will g overall economic vitality to the as a whole and to this area. We cipate that the development of this will bring approximately 4700 new to the city and will result in a -21- South Bend evelopment Commission Rescheduled Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSnMS (Cont.) C. continuea... 1 private investment of more than ,000,000 in this project area which add approximately $86,000,000 to assessed value of the City of South A major stumbling block to this lopment is that the area lacks wav access and utilities. Mrs Nintz opened the public hearing. Mr. Cronk: I have a question about the boimdaries. In the past, the City, in the area north of the new Cleveland Raid, has provided sewer and water, yet it refuses to annex that property. When aro you going to do it? . Kolata: Obviously, the planning a is larger than the economic elopment area. You are right, there properties north of Cleveland Road t the City has extended utilities to they are areas we are looking to ex. That is part of the master ming and we are looking at exation for portions outside of the rent city boundaries. Mr Crank: Because the western boundary does not go to Olive Road as that map shows, correct? . Kolata: That goes beyond Olive 3. It goes west of Olive Road to Mrs Cronk: This boundary here. . Kolata: That is a planning rndarv. Mrs Cronk: It's not the city boundary. . Kolata: It's not the city right. -22- South Bend edevelopment Commission Rescheduled I Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 2F C. e. (Cont.) Mr Cronk: My question is, if this is a plinudng boundary, for taxation and fimancing, then it should include those irxhistrial areas north of new Cleveland. . Kolata: That is part of the area we are looking at and looking at an aniexation plan for that. I think gradually and eventually, it will grow in o the city limits. but they are not th a now. We will be coming back a li tle bit later this year with some elation recommendations. Mr. Nimtz: There being no one else to the chair concludes the Public Hearing concerning the Airport Economic Development Area for whatever action the 'ssion desires to take. Ms Pfotenhauer noted that the Findings of Fact should be adopted prior to the adoption of Resolution No. 938. Up)n a motion by Mr. Piasecki, seconded COMMISSION ADOPTED THE FINDINGS by Mr. Combs and unanimously carried, OF FACT RELATIVE TO THE AIRPORT the Commission adopted the Findings of ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AREA Fact relative to the Airport Economic Development Area. These Findings of FaOt are attached to Resolution No. 938. Up)n a motion by Mr. Donoho, seconded by Mr. Piasecki and unanimously carried, the Commission adopted Resolution No 938 designating and declaring the rt Economic Development Area, a roving an Economic Development Plan arxi establishing an allocation area for purposes of tax increment financing. -23- COMMISSION ADO= RESOLUTION NO. 938 DESIGNATING AND DECLARING THE AIRPORT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AREA, APPROVING AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND ESTABLISHING AN ALIOCATION AREA FOR PURPOSES OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING South Bend edevelopment Commission Rescheduled Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSULESS (Cont.) Lz�yll ft* Ik Le-09 � f. . Kolata noted that we had a contract wi the Airport Authority earlier this year for a number of relocation services at $500 per relocation. They have since purchased an additional two residential p perties and have asked us to enter in a new contract to handle that re ovation for them. The terms of the co itract are virtually identical to the ter Vitus Contract. Mr Piasecki asked how the $500 charge set. Mrs. Kolata responded that we es imated the number of hours it would tace and added cost and overhead. Up)n a motion by Mr. Piasecki, seconded by Mr. Combs and unanimously carried, the Commission approved the contract wi the St. Joseph County Airport Au ority for relocation services. Mr. Kolata noted that we have received co ter offers on four parcels from th-ee owners in the West Washington - pin Development Area which we would like the Commission to consider today: WITH THE •ti E1'' • AIRPORT AU.PHOP= FOR RELOCATION SERVICES 37, W58 -38 Dispensational Church of Jesus Christ $20,500 12 William Toles $ 8,000 Delores Butler $ 5,500 Kolata noted that the staff mends accepting these counter S. -24- South Bend ledevelopment Commission Rescheduledl Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSMESS (Cont.) f. cofitinued... a Up)n a motion by Mr. Donoho, seconded by Mr. Piasecki and unanimously carried, the Commission accepted the counter offer of $20,500 for parcels W58 -37 and LTp)n a motion by Mr. Combs, seconded by Mr Doncho and unanimously carried, the Ccinmission accepted the counter offer of $8,000 for parcel W37 -12. LTp)n a motion by Mr. Donoho, seconded by Mr. Combs and unanimously carried, the Camission accepted the counter offer of $5,500 for parcel W58 -26. Mrs. Kolata noted that items 6.g., 6.h., 6.1., 6j., and 6.k. are similar. They are resolutions for each of our tax allocation areas for tax increment fiioncing. They authorize notifying the co mty auditor that we do not have any eximss tax increment. The increment is n ed for redevelopment activities, ei er through bond obligations, other ob i_gations, or anticipated projects. We are required to notify the auditor by J y 15 of each year if tax increment wi 1 be available for other budgets. Upon a motion by Mr. Donoho, seconded by Mr. Combs and unanimously carried, the Ccxmission approved Resolution No. 939 determining tax increment needed to satisfy obligations of the Commission r the West Washington - Chapin Al ovation Area (West Washington - Chapin No. 1A). -25- COMMISSION ACCEPTED THE COUNTER OFFER OF $20,500 FOR PARCELS W58 -37 AND W58 -38 CESSION ACCEPTED THE COUNTER OFFER OF $5,500 FOR PARCEL W58 -26 COMMISSION APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. 939 DETERMINING TAX INCREMENT NEEDED TO SATISFY OBLIGATIONS OF THE COMMISSION REGARDING THE WEST VSHINGTON- MAPIN ALLOCATION AREA (WEST W?0=GT0N- CHAPIN ALLOCATION AREA NO. 1A) South Bend edevelopment Commission Rescheduled Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 N rev i. J• (Cont.) Up)n a motion by Mr. Piasecki, seconded by Mr. Combs and unanimously carried, the Commission approved Resolution No 940 determining tax increment needed to satisfy obligations of the Commission re#arding the Rtun Village Industrial Z k Allocation Area (South Bend Al ocation Area No. 4.) Up)n a motion by Mr. Combs, seconded by Mr Donoho and unanimously carried, the Caamission approved Resolution No. 941 detexmining tax increment needed to sa isfy obligations of the Commission re(' the South Bend Central Al ovation Area (South Bend Central Allocation Area No. 1A.) -26- COMMISSION APPROVED RESOLUTION . NO. 940 DETERMINING TAX INCREMENT NEEDED TO SATISFY OBLIGATIONS OF THE COMMISSION REGARDING TBE RUM VIT T AGE INDUSTRIAL PARK ALLOCATION AREA (SOUTH BEND ALLOCATION AREA NO. 4) COMMISSION APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. 941 DETERMINING TAX INCRII"= NEEDED TO SATISFY OBLIGATIONS OF THE COMMISSION REGARDING THE SOUTH BEND COAL, ALLOCATION AREA (SOUTH BEND ALUrMTION AREA NO. 1A) South Bend pedevelopment Commission Rescheduled Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 RE (Cont.) j. co *tinued... k. 1. Up)n a motion by Mr. Piasecki, seconded by Mr. Donoho and unanimously carried, the Commission approved Resolution No 942 determining tax increment needed to satisfy obligations of the Commission r the Studebaker Corridor Al ocation Area (South Bend Allocation Ar No. 6). Up)n a motion by Mr. Combs, seconded by Mr. Donoho and unanimously carried, the Camassion approved Resolution No. 943 de tax increment needed to satisfy obligations of the Commission reprding the Airport Economic Development Area, Allocation Area No. 1. Mrs. Kolata explained that the Commission agreed previously to hire Coe Associates to write the sp�cifications for asbestos removal, hazardous materials removal, and depolition of all or part of the Ttanswestern building. The commission authorized the attorney to negotiate the contract with Cole Associates and bring it to the Commission for approval. contract provides for a lump sum ent of $22,570 for which Cole will orm the examination and rmination of asbestos and hazardous rials that need to be removed, write ifications for those activities -27- COMMISSION A'•'• E• RESO=ON NO. 942 DETE144INING TAX DSTCREMENT NEEDED TO SATISFY OBUGATIONS OF THE COMMISSION PEGARDING THE AREA (SOUIH BEND ALLOCATION AREA • DIDNI DID • • • • • Isolag I Igo • -m x'11 z 4 I 11 • • • MW South Bend edevelopment Commission Rescheduled Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSMESS (Cont.) 1. cofitinued... M. monitor the asbestos removal. The rdous waste removal and building ,lition will be monitored by the City neering Department. The writing of ifications is to be completed within y -five days. Up)n a motion by Mr. Piasecki, seconded CODMUSSION APPROVED CONTRACT WITH by Mr. Doncho and unanimously carried, COLS ASSOCIATES FOR PROFESSIONAL the Commission approved the contract SERVICES IN THE STUDEBAKER wi Cole Associates for professional CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT AREA services in the Studebaker Corridor De elopment Area. Mrs. Kolata explained that the lease tai Catering by Billie for one of the re it spaces in the St. Joseph/Wayne king Garage is nearly complete. We have a letter of intent from Billie Duilap, president of Catering by Billie, stiting that she is in agreement with the current terms and rental rates we bare been negotiating. Those terms are a ee year lease with two one year options. The first six months would be rait free. Year one would be at a rate of $7.00 per square foot. Year two woiild be at a rate of $7.50 per square foot. The third year would be at a rate of $8.00 per square foot. If they d ide to exercise the one year options we would negotiate a market rent at that Kolata noted that a construction has been awarded for ccmpletion of rental space. Xa;. Kolata noted that Billie has made it known all along that she would like to receive tax abatement. As owners of tlxb property, the Commission must apply for the abatement. -28- South Bend edevelcpment Commission Rescheduled Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUSINESS (Cont.) M. continuea... n. RE Up)n a motion by Mr. Combs, seconded by COMMISSION AUTHORIZED FILING FOR Mr. Donoho and unanimously carried, the REAL PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT FOR Carmission authorized the filing for THE RETAIL SPACE LOCATED IN THE real property tax abatement for the ST. JOSEPH/WAYNE PARKING GARAGE re it space located in the St. J ph/Wayne Parking Garage. Kolata explained that Resolution No 944 adds eighteen properties in the Mo Park portion of the South Bend Ceptral Development Area to the aapisition list. This is Phase Two of the acquisition in Monroe Park. The lic Hearing would be set for July 13, 1990, at 10:00 a.m., with the legal notice to be published July 6th. Upon a motion by Mr. Piasecki, seconded COMMISSION ACCEPTED RESOLUTION by Mr. Combs and unanimously carried, NO. 944 FOR FILING AND SET JULY the Commission accepted Resolution No. 13, 1990, AT 10:00 A.M. FOR A 944 for filing and set July 13, 1990, at PUBLIC HEARING ON RESOLUTION NO. 10:00 a.m. for a Public Hearing on 944 R lution No. 944. Mr Norris noted that we sent a request proposals to Ken Herceg and ciates and to Cole Associates to ect for asbestos and prepare ,lition specifications for the dings we are acquiring in the West m —tgton area. Ken Herceg submitted a osal for $51,800. Cole Associates fitted a proposal for $48,080. These approximate since there will be burnable expenses and other -29- South Bend edevelopment Commission Rescheduled Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 3 I (Cont.) bles. Mr. Norris noted that the sals were reviewed by the City eering Department. Both are table proposals and are for the scope of services. Kolata noted that the staff imiendation is to award the work to Herceg and Associates. She noted . both firms assumed that all the would be done at one time. They been informed that they will be g it as we get ownership of the erties. We think that Ken Herceg a more flexible schedule to mmK)date that work plan. Mrs. Kolata noted that we have been giving a of business to Cole Associates ntly and we like to spread our work Mr Combs conmlented that $3,000 is $3,000 and asked if Ken Herceg would do the work for $48,080. Mr. Norris ra,,ponded that he felt that, given the sille of the contract, Ken Herceg would do the work for the lower amount and he W1 d discuss that with him. Mr Mr n a motion by Mr. Donoho, seconded by Combs and unanimously approved, the mission accepted the proposal from Herceg and Associates for inspection vices and preparation of demolition cifications in the West Washington - pin Development Area, contingent upon Herceg's agreeing to do the work for ,080. -30- (Wil-L-SSI01-1 ACCEPTED THE PROPOSAL FROM KEN HMCEG AND ASSOCIATES e • INSPECTION Et- PREPARATION OF DEMOLITION SPECIFICATIONS IN W%SB1NGI0N-<1IAPIN DEVELOPMENT CONTINGENT -• i- •• $48,080 South Bend edevelopment commission Rescheduledl Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUMESS (Cont.) P. coPtinued... Kolata noted that Resolution No 945 stipulates the following: 1) th bonds must not exceed $950,000; 2) tha interest rate must not exceed 8 %; 3) tha maximum date they may be outstanding is August 1, 1997; and, 4) they may be releemed at any time prior to August 1, 1997. The purpose of the bond issue is to pay for a number of up front costs re.Lated to the development we are expecting in the Airport Economic De elopment Area. These expenses would lude title work, survey work, a raisals for right- of-way acquisition, acluisition for right -of -way, and en.jineering design for public uq)rovements. We have requested api.,woximately $12,000,000 from the State of Indiana from the Toll Road and the Transportation Improvement Fund for this prx ject. However, the State has irx1icated that they will not pay for d iqn work. Mrs. Kolata noted that our intention is t1kit, if the project moves along as we it to, we would issue a larger bond for the actual construction of an ini ernal road system (not the same roads we ve asked for Toll Road funds for) and th it bond would pay off this one. She no ed that, except for prepayment from a la,ger bond, this bond would be repaid so ely from tax increment from the bba;. Kolata noted that Resolution No 945 also stipulates that a 10% debt service reserve be established and that the first payment be interest only, be�ause we will not have increment until 19 1. -31- South Bend Pzdevelopment Commission Rescheduled Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 6. NEW BUS. p. co UP Mr q• No bo: We re an th 10 UP Mr Col fo! ao Re: Pill He r. Cal (Cont.) a motion by Mr. Donoho, seconded by Combs and unanimously carried, the fission approved Resolution No. 945 orizing the issuance of Tax ement Revenue Bonds of the South Redevelopment District for the ose of raising money for property isition and redevelopment in the ort Economic Development Area, cation Area No. 1. ;. Kolata explained that Resolution 946 appropriates the money from the d authorized by Resolution No. 945. are not asking for approval of this solution today, we are only filing it requesting that a Public Hearing on Resolution be set for July 13 at 00 a.m. � a motion by Mr. Donoho, seconded by Combs and unanimously carried, the fission accepted Resolution No. 946 filing, set July 13, 1990, at 10:00 as the Public Hearing for lution No. 946, and authorized ication of the Notice of Public -32- •• i � • . • •.• alp - • • • � �- � ICI � :• •. • 1 001 • ' ' • • ' .9i'd PAWC 8 a 6:1 M M rol Z 1b .D1 zolakl • • • CESSION ACCEPTED RESOIDTION NO. 946 FOR FILING AND SET JULY 13, 1990, AT 10:00 A.M. FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON RESOLUTION NO. 946 AND AUTHORIZED PUBLICATION OF THE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING South Bend edevelopment Commission Rescheduled Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 5.9 7. r. Mr Mr. to his Mr. Mr. Cr tenant Mrs. we a does the (Cont.) Kolata explained that Resolution 947 authorizes reimbursement for ay spent before bond proceeds are ilable for the same kinds of expenses bond would be used for. a motion by Mr. Combs, seconded by Donoho and unanimously carried, the fission approved Resolution No. 947 Lorizing the reimbursement of the cession and the City for payments of ssary preliminary expenses actually erred preliminary to the issuance of vvelopment District Tax Increment nue Bonds out of the proceeds of the • 94 RES0=CN OF i SOUTH BEND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION ADT•- I 1 REIMBURSEMENT OF I COMMISSION • • THE CITY FOR PAYVENTS OF NECESSARY PRELIMINARY EXP ACTUALLY INCURRED -' Ei III /• ' • THE ISSUANCE OF REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT TAX INCRIH11ENT REVENUE :• I. OUT OF i PROCEEDS OF i BONDS k commented on item 6.1. which PROGRESS REPORT'S as the demolition of the Transwestern . Mr. Cronk is interested in ng the Transwestern building for his business. He has not had a response : indicated that he has a bid to the wooden part of the Transwestern at a reasonable cost. also noted that he has a potential r the remainder of the Transwestern and would like to proceed with n on developing the building. L responded that the contract that to Cole Associates is not for but for writing the demolition ons. She stated that the contract eclude that one or both ends of g will stay up. Cole Associates -33- South Bend Pedevelopment Commission Rescheduled Regular Meeting - June 27, 1990 fflm�.W.431­ 5 • 8. a will do two sets of specifications, one for taking the whole building dawn and one for leaving either end up. Mrs. Kolata noted that when the specifications are written we will e a decision about what portion(s) of the building will be demolished. She indicabd that she would have K. C. Focius contact Mr. Crank about the Transwestern build' . Mr. Cronk will need to submit a proposai indicating what he would do with the buildirxj and how he would finance his project We want to be sure that a proposal is capable of becoming a completed project before we make the decision to leave any of the building standing. She also pointed out that we've never received a written offer from Mr. Cronk for the Transwestern building. The n Regular Meeting of the Redevelopment NEXT CCVMSSION MEETING Commission is scheduled for 10:00 a.m., July 13, 199 . There bAng no further business to come ADJOLTFdZ ENT before the Commission, Mr. Donoho made a motion that the meeting be adjourned. Mr. Combs seconded the motion and the meeting was adj at 5:23 p.m. F -34- E. Rolata, Director LLOYD M.ALI KENNETH P. ] GEORGE E. H. ANTHONY D. LARRY L. AM] FRED R. HAiP DAVID M. Mc' ROBERT A. SC MARK S. LEN`. South City o County South Gentl ATTACHMENT TO REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 27, 1990 ALLEN, FEDDER, HERENDEEN & KOWALS ATTORNEYS NOT IN PARTNERSHIP SUITE 300 205 WEST JEFFERSON BLVD. SOUTH BEND, INDIANA 46601 KE end Redevelopment South Bend City Building end, Indiana 46601 June 25, 1990 Commission Studebaker Corridor Project Policemen's Federal Credit Union TELEPHONE (219) 234-6061 FAX NO. (219) 234 -0772 Please accept this letter as the remonstrance of Policemen's Federa Credit Union to resolution number 937 and to the Amendm nt to the Studebaker Corridor Development Plan. The property owned by Policemen's Federal Credit Union is included in the list of property to be acquired and conjunction with the Studebaker Corridor Development Plan. The Credit Union objects to the inclusion of their property in the plan for the following reasons: 1 charte Bend it mo When of the among The Cr commun commun Studeb attemp facili 2 Select: assist purcha: Redeve: The re( future the Cr( HISTORY. Policemen's Federal Credit Union was ed in 1967 and conducted its business at the South olice Department until November of 1987 at which time ed to its new location which is the subject property. site search began to accommodate the expanded needs Credit Union the area which the Credit Union owns was he site selections. dit Union has been in business for many years in this ty and, unlike the many businesses which left our ty and vacated the property which created the ker Corridor, the Credit Union has stayed and has ed to both improve itself and the area of its new y• ACQUISITION. When the Credit Union explored Site _on, it went to the Redevelopment Commission for ince in 1986. The land which the Credit Union ;ed was accomplished with the assistance of the _opment Commission and was done with city approval. levelopment commission knew of the Studebaker Corridor and participated affirmatively and actively to induce edit Union to buy and build on its present location. VOO R, , FEDDER, HERENDEEN 8 KOWALS June 2I5, 1990 Page T o. The Credit Union was constructed only after obtaining permits from the City of South Bend with the knowledge of the Redevelopment Commission with the appropriate inspections, plans and the like. 4. TENURE. After acquisition, the Credit Union moved into its new facility and has been there for two and a half (2 1/2) years. 5. TAX ABATEMENT. As further inducement to the Credit Union, the Credit Union was afforded a three (3) year Tax Abatement Package. 6. CORRIDOR PLAN. Prior to the acquisition of the property by the Credit Union as well as during the time of the reconsideration of the Studebaker Corridor Development the Credit Union has numerous discussions with the director and the staff of the Redevelopment Commission. The Credit Union was advised that the Corridor improvement was going to be a two (2) phase plan with the Credit Union falling into Phase Two (2) which would have excluded it from the present acquisition list. The explanation was that since that was a new building, well located and the first improvement in the Corridlor, it should be given Phase Two (2) Consideration. 7. COST. To include the Credit Union property on the acquisition list would mean the expenditure of a substantial amount of money for the property, together with relocation costs, business interruption expenses, all of which have no foundation in logic. It was proposed that the credit Union moved Thirty -Five (35) feet, namely, across the street. Such e penditures cannot be justified and are not realistic. 8. CORRIDOR PLAN. The property of the Credit Union includ s a new building, Zoned Manufacturing with an improv d lot. The building of the Credit Union was the first investment in the Corridor and the first improvement in the vicinity for many years. It would be the position of the C edit Union that they should be rewarded for its Pionee effort rather than to be included in acquisition and destru tion. VOOR, AL�EN, FEDDER, HERENDEEN & KOWALS June 2 1990 Page T ree 9. CREDIT UNION INVESTMENT. The capital investment of the Credit Union caused serious financial consequences to the Credit Union from which it is just now making its recovery. The Credit Union was willing to gamble by becomi g the first investor in improving the Corridor at its own a ense. 10. ADVERSE AFFECT. The representations of the Redevelopment Commission, the delays and the activity in the Corridor have prevented improvement to the property of the Credit Union, expansion of its facility and growth of its business. Redevelopment normally means the opposite. 1. REGULATORY AUTHORITIES. As a result of a recent audit by the Federal Examiners who oversee the operation of the Credit Union, the Credit Union has been advised that a move which is contemplated by the redevelopment plan would have an adverse Affect on the financial stability of the Credit Union, will result in a loss of profit caused by busin ss interruption and will demand capital expenditures which the Credit Union cannot afford. In addition, the prospective acquisition or merger with another credit Union has teen lost as a result of the uncertainty created by the redev lopment plan in the Studebaker Corridor. CONCLUSION. The Policemen's Federal Credit Union remonstrates against the Redevelopment Commission including their property in the land sought to be acquired in the Stude aker Corridor Development Plan. It is illogical and confiscatory for the Redevelopment Commission to assist and encou age the Credit Union to acquire and build its facility and then to seek to acquire it with relocation consi erations. It it the request of the Policemen's Federal Credit Union that is property be removed from the acquisition list. GEH /j. Respectfully J14--eys— C , submitted, George E. Herendeen Attorney for Policemen's Federal Credit Union