HomeMy WebLinkAboutWaiving Conditions to Tax Abatement - SBL Buildings Co. LLC 212 E. LaSalle St. (6 Year Real Property)Attest:
RESOLUTION
3087 -02
Passed by the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana
April 22, 20 02,
Presented by me to the Mayor of the City of South Bend, Indiana
April 23. 20 02
City Clerk
President of Common Council
Approved and signed by me
April 23,
20 02 .
City Clerk
LM
RESOLUTION NO.
3031 -oz
A RESOLUTION WAIVING CONDITIONS PRECEDENT
TO THE ADOPTION OF A DECLARATORY
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CERTAIN AREAS WITHIN THE CITY OF
SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, COMMONLY KNOWN AS
212 E. LASALLE STREET, SOUTH BEND, INDIANA
TO BE AN ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA FOR
PURPOSES OF A SIX (6) YEAR REAL
PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT FOR
SBL BUILDING CO., LLC
WHEREAS, SBL Building Co., LLC, an Indiana limited liability company (the
"Petitioner") filed a petition for real property tax abatement (the "Petition") and a Form SB -1
statement of benefits with the South Bend City Clerk on February 5, 2002 [the Petition was
refiled by the South Bend Department of Community and Economic Development on February
19, 2002] for consideration by the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana (the
"Common Council "), requesting that the area commonly known as 212 E. LaSalle Street, South
Bend, Indiana, and which has the parcel key number 18 -5003 -0041 (the "Property"), be
designated as an economic revitalization area under the provisions of Indiana Code sections
6 -1.1 12.1 -1 et seo., and South Bend Municipal Code sections 2 -76 et seq.; and
WHEREAS, the Petitioner's contractor began preliminary demolition of the interior of
the Property on February 4, 2002 in preparation for the rehabilitation of the Property; and
WHEREAS, the Petitioner's contractor obtained a building permit on February 8, 2002,
and began rehabilitation (as defined by Indiana Code section 6- 1.1- 12.1 -1(6)) of the Property on
or about February 13, 2002; and
WHEREAS, the Common Council has adopted a policy requiring that petitioners for tax
abatement wait until after the Common Council has adopted a declaratory resolution in
accordance with Indiana Code section 6- 1.1- 12.1- 2.5(b), before obtaining a building permit and
before initiating redevelopment or rehabilitation of real property, absent circumstances that
compel a petitioner to initiate such activities before such declaratory resolution has been
adopted; and
WHEREAS, the Petitioner has presented substantial evidence to the Common Council
that exigent circumstances existed requiring the Petitioner to obtain a building permit and to
initiate rehabilitation of the Property before the Common Council had adopted a declaratory
resolution, and the Common Council has concluded that such circumstances present a
compelling reason to waive the Common Council's policy;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of South
Bend, Indiana, as follows:
SECTION I. The Petitioner has presented testimonial and documentary evidence of the
following facts and the Common Council hereby makes the following findings of fact in support
of this resolution:
A. The tenants of the Property and the owners of the Petitioner are two
law firms, Tuesley & Hall and Konopa, Reagan & Kenyon, that have made a
long -term commitment to maintaining offices in downtown South Bend, and
whose partners have made significant contributions for many years to the
improvement of the economic and cultural vitality of the City of South Bend.
B. The Property stood vacant and in an increasing state of disrepair for
approximately two years, before the Petitioner stepped forward with a plan to
purchase, rehabilitate and occupy the Property at enormous cost to the Petitioner.
C. The Petitioner made inquiry into the availability of tax abatement on
the increase in assessed value of the Property that will result from its
rehabilitation, as early as November of 2001, but was informed erroneously that
the Property was not in an area that would qualify for tax abatement or that would
be given favorable consideration for tax abatement.
D. The Property is in fact located within the East Bank Development
Area, an area within the City of South Bend that has been targeted by the
Common Council for favorable consideration of tax abatement for redevelopment
and rehabilitation of office space, under section 2- 78.1(c)(6) of the South Bend
Municipal Code.
E. The fact that the Property is located within the East Bank Development
Area was not made known to the Petitioner until late January of 2002. The
Petitioner contacted the South Bend Department of Community and Economic
Development and initiated the completion of the tax abatement petition and
statement of benefits promptly upon learning of this status.
F. The Petitioner gave express instructions to its contractor not to allow
demolition of the interior of the Property to begin until such time as the statement
of benefits had been filed with the South Bend City Clerk, as filing agent for the
Common Council.
G. Notwithstanding these instructions, the contractor began such
demolition on February 4, 2002. The statement of benefits and tax abatement
petition were first filed with the City Clerk the next day, February 5, 2002. The
tax abatement petition was filed again by the South Bend Department of
Community and Economic Development on February 19, 2002, as noted in the
first prefatory recital of this Resolution.
H. Although demolition was initiated on February 4, 2002, without the
Petitioner's knowledge or consent, before the statement of benefits was filed,
there was no remodeling, repair, betterment, enlargement or extension of the
Property (collectively, "Rehabilitation" as defined in section 6- 1.1- 12.1 -1(6) of
the Indiana Code) that would have given rise to an increase in assessed valuation
of the Property until after February 5, 2002, the date on which the statement of
benefits was first filed in accordance with the requirements of section 6- 1.1 -12.1-
3 of the Indiana Code.
I. The Petitioner acknowledges and respects the long - standing policy of
the Common Council to require that the economic revitalization area declaratory
resolution be adopted by the Common Council before a building permit is
obtained and before rehabilitation begins.
J. The Petitioner's contractor obtained a building permit on or about
February 8, 2002, and initiated rehabilitation activities soon after demolition of
the interior of the Property was completed. The building permit and the initiation
of rehabilitation activities took place before the Common Council had adopted a
declaratory resolution, in violation of the Common Council's policy.
K. If the Petitioner had received correct information concerning the
location of the Property within the East Bank Development Area when it first
made inquiry in November or December of 2001, there would have been more
than adequate time for the Petitioner to have completed the tax abatement petition
process, and for the Common Council to have heard the petition and to have acted
on the declaratory resolution, well before a building permit had to be obtained and
well before any rehabilitation activities had begun.
L. By the time the Petitioner learned that the Property was located within
the East Bank Development Area and that the rehabilitation of the Property
qualified for tax abatement, in late January of 2002, the rehabilitation of the
Property nevertheless had to be expedited to assure that the second floor tenant,
Konopa, Reagan & Kenyon, would have office space available no later than April
30, 2002, when its existing lease for other office space located within the City of
South Bend will expire;
M. At all times throughout these proceedings, the Petitioner has acted in
good faith, has promptly cooperated with all requests of the Common Council and
the South Bend Department of Community and Economic Development, and has
made every effort to comply, to the best of its ability, with the requirements of
law and the policies of the Common Council.
N. Because of the unusual and adverse circumstances described herein,
the Petitioner was forced by the exigencies of the situation to proceed with
rehabilitation of the Property without first receiving adoption of a declaratory
resolution by the Common Council.
SECTION II. The foregoing facts, taken together, lead the Common Council to conclude that
compelling reasons exist to waive noncompliance by the Petitioner with certain conditions
precedent to rehabilitation of the Property, in accordance with Indiana Code section 6- 1.1 -12.1-
11.3.
SECTION III. The Common Council hereby waives such noncompliance, for the purpose of
permitting the Council to proceed with consideration of the Petition on its merits.
SECTION IV. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption by the
Common Council and approval by the Mayor.
Me ber of the Common Coi&cil
PRESENTEd �'?�Z 0 Z k S J U1 1a \ k kt3J
NOT APPROVED t D��
ADOPTED `E-",oL 0.S Sl,l(oS �C-"1
Filed in Clerk's Office
APR 1 � 2002
LCREirAJ. DUDA
CITY CLERV, SO. SEND. IN.
COMMITTEE REPORT
TO THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND:
Your Committee of the Whole, to whom was referred:
BILL NO.
02 -35 A RESOLUTION WAIVING CONDITIONS PRECEDENT TO THE
ADOPTION OF A DECLARATORY RESOLUTION DESIGNATING
CERTAIN AREAS WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA,
COMMONLY KNOWN AS 212 E. LASALLE STREET, SOUTH BEND,
INDIANA TO BE AN ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA FOR
PURPOSES OF A SIX (6) YEAR REAL PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT
FOR SBL BUILDING CO., LLC
Respectfully report that they have examined the matter and that in their opinion, this bill
is being recommended to the full Council with a favorable recommendation as
substituted.
Karl King
Chairman