- I'd like to welcome you all to the City of Bloomington Redevelopment Commission meeting for Monday,
- April 20th, 2026. We can start with meeting with a roll call, please. Laura McRobbie, present. Steve
- Scamigler, present. John West, here. Deborah Meyerson, here. Not in attendance is Mr. Cassidy.
- First item, and staff present, please. Hannah Tillian-Hansen, Housing and Neighborhood Development.
- Christina Thinley, Hand Department. Kami Casper, Hand Department.
- Jeff McKibben, city controller. Kendall Kenoki, engineering department. Dana Kerr, legal. Thank you.
- First item on the agenda is the minutes from April 6, 2026. Any questions or comments from commissioners?
- If not, I'll entertain a motion. So moved. Second. We have a first and a second. All in favor say aye.
- Aye. I am abstaining. I was absent for that meeting.
- Motion passes unanimously for the minutes. Next item on the agenda is the claims registers from both
- March 27, 2026 and April 10 of the same year. Any questions or comments from commissioners on either
- of these items? I've got a comment. On the March 27 claim, page six, we're issuing payment to American
- Structure Point.
- They've been on board for a while, and we've spent a lot of money on reports, and we haven't seen. Well,
- that's a little problematic. Correct. They know my understanding, and I did get a driver's wrench.
- Yeah, she is really the project lead on that particular item. The last time I checked with her, they
- were working on getting us a draft report. That was a couple weeks ago. I haven't seen anything. So
- I'm not sure if she's since received anything. But my understanding is no. Have we paid them anything
- to date? Yes. We've paid a couple different claim cycles, which we can look up. Well, I guess.
- For some reason, I mean, do you think they're dragging their feet where they're not a priority? Part
- of me is suggesting that we hold payment until we see some evidence of some work. Okay. I think there's
- about three, so here's another piece of information for you.
- I do believe that their contract is now expired. And there's, I believe, a balance on the contract right
- now. So I know that Anna was working to bring forward the contract renewals so that they can finish
- out the dollar amount. But that hasn't come before you yet, likely coming in the next few weeks.
- The person of the hour just walked into the room, Anna Dragich. Hey, Anna, there's a question on the
- claims register related to the American Structure Point contract and whether we've received that draft
- final report yet or not. Sorry, hot spot. OK, great.
- No, I'm really glad my colleague Nick was listening online, and he told me to come in here.
- So Anna Dragovich, capital projects manager. I think we're definitely near the end. They're in the process
- of putting together the final draft. Last I heard, the end of last week, it was going through their
- communications team to put the final,
- touches on it, but I really think it's a future conversation for an executive session to kind of run
- through those details and what they discovered. Well, my question was not what they discovered. Sorry.
- It was that we haven't seen anything from them, and we're into them for three payments, and then we're
- here to collect another check, and we're no further along. Right. They may be. We just don't know it.
- We just keep writing checks. Right.
- I apologize. I'm not quite sure how to answer that question. If that's on me as a project manager and
- not looping in the RDC for those conversations, I apologize. But I do think we're getting close to a
- time for when communication with you does need to happen. Does that help? So it looks like they've expensed
- $54,926.18 out of a $58,250 contract, so there's only
- about $3,300 left on their contract, right? That's after this claim. So is the check in this claim,
- is it going out? Yeah. Well, my comment's not relevant. Well, we could certainly hold. And we actually
- have to now that the contract has expired as well. OK. Well, thank you for the additional information
- about that question.
- Any other questions or comments from commissioners on the claims registers from March 27 or April 10,
- 2026? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Move to approve the claims register for March 14 to 27. There's
- actually two claims registers, unless we want to separate them. One is the one for the period ending
- March 27, and the other is for the period ending April 10.
- Sorry. I'll move approval for both. Second. Got a first and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye.
- Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Next item of the agenda are two payroll registers from April
- 2nd and April 17th, 2026. Any questions or comments on either of those? Move for approval. Second. Got
- a first and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you.
- We'll move on to reports. Do we have a director's report? No formal report. I do just want to report
- out that we did have a productive work session last week. I felt like we are on the agenda for council
- for Wednesday for Hopewell South. So we'll see what transpires at that time. But I do think that we
- had a productive session with council last week. So thank you for those that could attend. That was great.
- add my thanks to council for the opportunity for that work session. I felt like a joint work session
- was the direction we needed to go in, and I appreciated that everybody could be there, and I felt like
- it was a good discussion. So thank you. Do we have a legal report? I just want to give you an update
- on the summit residential TIF. It's progressing very well. We have filed for the council meeting, and
- it will be on the April 22, so in two days. It will be at their regular meeting.
- And that is just a resolution of their approval. And then after that, it will come back here on May
- 4th for the actual public hearing on it and a confirmatory resolution that you will consider at that
- time. It did go through the planning commission on April 13th and received their approval.
- Notice of the hearing was published in the ATHT. It showed up today, so it's well in advance. The impact
- analysis statements that needed to go out to the other taxing authorities has gone out. Those were mailed
- out by Regio Financial this morning. So those have gone out. So we got the council meeting and then
- the meeting here on May 4th.
- And those are the last steps in getting the Senate TIF residential TIF done. So we're looking forward
- to finally getting one of those completes. And it's actually been a very fast process and appreciate
- all the entities that's been involved with this. Thank you for that report. We have a treasurer's report.
- Nothing to report. Business development update.
- Nothing major, I'll just, I know we have CIB on the, we'll pop up on our agenda later today, but I wanted
- to point out that CIB is collecting public feedback for the four finalists for the Convention Center
- of Public Art. They circulated a press release that had a link in it, and I will push that out on the
- Arts Commission socials and can share that with commissioners, but we want the public to complete the
- survey, check it out, and say what you like. This is your big opportunity.
- very much. Do we have an engineering update? Yes, Kendall Kenoki, engineering department. And I've been
- tasked with managing the Hopewell South contract. And you had requested regular updates. So just wanted
- to kind of update on where we're at. Hopefully this will pop up here in a sec. Yep. So the first thing
- is we were doing a lot line adjustment of, it's shown up as two lots on GIS, but it's actually three.
- And that is currently, it's been submitted to planning for kind of final review. But by the end of the
- week, we'll have, you can see there, two new lots and then the remainders in the third lot. But this
- will allow us to build three buildings, which is four units early under current zoning. So once this
- is approved by the end of the week, Flintlock range is going to submit for building permits. That goes
- through the class two structure process. So in two weeks, those will be ready.
- Whenever you're ready, basically to pick up. I think the building department will just hold them until
- you can select a builder or someone's identified. They can go pick up those permits and we can get some
- construction started on the Hopewell South property. So that's really exciting. That's something that
- we were able to get moving. The other item I wanted to show was
- We filed initially for Plan Commission, and this is kind of just an overall view of the development.
- Of course, we're on pause right now. We're waiting for City Council to kind of do a final zoning approval,
- and then as soon as they do, we'll pick back up and whatever changes we need to make, we'll make and
- then we'll file for the next Plan Commission meeting. So we're kind of just holding at that point, but
- we are continuing to work on things that affect
- the property no matter what is decided to be built there. So things like detention, the design of the
- new water main that has to happen, things like that. So later in the meeting today, I'll be asking for
- a contract amendment to talk about some additional funding we'll need. But I'll talk about that during
- that time. So that's kind of the update. Is there any questions on hopeful? Just could you point out
- on the map the two, three replanted pieces where they are? Yes.
- Right up here, it's one, two, three. So there's three buildings. This one's going to be a kind of a
- duplex shared wall. So once the full subdivision is approved, they'll split that lot into two lots.
- These are the first three. Those are the ones. So four units, three buildings. Thank you very much.
- Yep. OK. Any other comments, questions?
- We are going to move to our first item of business, which is resolution 2626, the approval of a notice
- of offering for College Square located at 200-226 South College Avenue. Who would like to speak to that?
- I'm happy to speak to that. So as you know, we've been dealing with this site for a number of years.
- It is currently sitting vacant, except for Weddle Brothers, who's using it as a construction office
- to manage the Convention Center expansion project. As you heard earlier this year, we have a letter
- from eight of nine council members that would like
- us to receive the full value of what they paid for the land out of it.
- Yeah, so at the same time, this has been out there for some time that we were working on an offering.
- And so the CIB at their last meeting did send us an email and asked us to hold this offering for 30
- days to consider a potential land swap. So you all have been in receipt of that email. And so at this
- point, you guys can either move to table this for 30 days or move forward with the public offering.
- The offering will not exclude them from responding.
- So they very much can respond if they choose to do so. But really, truly on you guys to decide how you
- want to move forward with this, we did receive two appraisals. One was less than $7 million,
- but one was more. There are some environmental conditions that are on the property. So there is some
- additional work that's going to be needed at the site. So the average of those two appraisals, though,
- ended up being $7.59.
- And I'm not sure that the appraisal that was over the $7 million mark fully considered the environmental
- conditions that were present. But these are the average of two. This is what we're statutorily required
- to do. So if you do move forward with the offering, for the first 30 days, you are not allowed to accept
- any offerings that are less than that 759 number.
- The RDC has a different statutory authority than other governmental entities in that you have put a
- lot of criteria in the offering of what it is you want to see in a project. And that is how you can
- evaluate the project. It is not based on money. It's not like the highest bid for the buy of the property,
- like other
- public entities would have to do, you're able to select what project you would like to see at that property.
- So, you know, I heard somebody had concerns that, well, if somebody came in and bid a lot of money for
- the project, they would, you know, for the property, they'd be able to take it. Well, not necessarily,
- because money wasn't necessarily the criteria. There's a whole large list of criteria.
- that will be evaluated to determine the best project here. So I just wanted to put that out there that
- it's not based on the money offered necessarily. That's a factor. But it's based on the quality of the
- project. Thank you. OK. Well, with that presentation, I will open this to questions or comments from
- commissioners for Resolution 26-26. And that will include both the offering as well as
- Request for negotiations, that's part of the packet under this item. Question. I've got the same email
- that you did. I don't know what's going to happen in 30 days. Is there any other discussion as to what
- actually will occur specifically?
- Are they going to do appraisals and provide them, or are we going to get anything in 30 days? You mean
- if you chose to pause the offering for 30 days? I did inquire as to whether there was a current appraisal
- of the south parcels to consider for the swap. To my knowledge, there is not one currently. We also
- don't have any information on the environmentals of the property or the current condition or the rent
- roll. So we don't have quite a bit of information that we would normally want to see.
- to discern. It's hard to know if that particular property is also worth $7 million. There are several
- buildings there, two of which are historic. So that may require us to cooperate with the Historic
- Preservation Commission and possibly a demolition delay. So we really don't know at this time what would
- be needed. So typically, appraisals take at least 30 days.
- I have not heard that they are able to provide that within 30 days. So we'd wind up essentially where
- we are right now in 30 days without knowing really what we would be swapping? Potentially, yes. What's
- the timeline if the proposal goes out for how long respondents have to respond to the RFP?
- So just backing up, typically it would be really hard for anyone responding to an offering like this
- to respond within 30 days. I mean, I think typically we would want to put it out there for 60 to 90
- days. So we have a statutory requirement to publish this offering in the paper. And of course,
- right now, it takes some time, even if I called today. So what we were anticipating is that if you did
- vote to approve the offering, it would be published on April 27.
- And we would be collecting offerings until July 20. We would open those on our regularly scheduled July
- 20 meeting date. That's 84 days. So that would be enough time to get appraisals or anything of the like
- for us to consider a trader offering. But at that 84-day mark, we would then try to sort through them
- and make some decisions.
- It's probably going to take 30 days at least after that to really know what we're dealing with based
- upon. We don't know how many we'll receive. We don't know if we'll receive. We have no idea. $7 million
- is a lot of money for that kind of property. And we have specifically excluded student-centric developments
- that are rent bedroom by bedroom as something that the RDC does not want to see in any public offerings.
- And typically, those income producing properties would be
- the ones that would maybe consider a purchase price of that sort. So. Thank you. Any other questions
- or comments from commissioners on this resolution before we open it for public comment? Just to follow
- up on your statement, the CIB would, whether we delay or don't delay the public offering, the CIB would
- be welcome to respond just like anyone else, correct? Correct. And is there anything different about
- what they would propose
- Is there anything different or different obligations that they would have in responding based on a proposed
- land swap as opposed to anything else? I don't think so. OK. They'd be evaluated side by side with anything
- else. Correct. OK. Thank you. And we do have language in the offering as well that says that if we get
- any responses for a host hotel, that it would be on the respondent to get the necessary approvals from the CIB.
- as a condition of the offering. Thank you. Thank you. I'll rip the Band-Aid off. I don't think the land
- swap as proposed is a good opportunity or even a good deal for the city. I remind the commissioners
- that when we all got together,
- a year and a half ago or whenever we started. Our mission was to do two things. One is finish projects
- that we already had underway that we have a really hard time getting finished, well-being one. The second
- was that we have a lot of land inventory. And it's off the tax roll, not on the tax roll.
- And we've been land banking for years and years and years, and we really have no business doing that
- either. So this swap ends up being contrary to those two things. Not to mention that at the end of the
- day, it's my opinion, I've never appraised it, but I don't think you're going to see equal value. So
- I don't know how we get to the,
- to 7.5 million. But almost as importantly is that, unfortunately, the buildings that are on site have
- not been maintained. And there's a lot of deferred maintenance that somebody's going to have to pay
- for. Somebody's going to have to bring them up to some kind of standard, because I'm not even sure if
- they would meet today's hand inspections. I don't know for sure.
- I would guess it'd be some problems. So it's not only taking on buildings and land. We also have to
- pile a bunch of money into preserving buildings that are not meeting current rent rates. I know the
- commercial tenants are, at least the ones that I know, are leaving. So we'll have a lot of vacancy.
- I just don't see an opportunity there that would make any sense. Our role is not as developers. That
- may be a good property for a seasoned developer to take on, but that's not what we do. And we've kind
- of proven it by taking us along with Hopewell. We're struggling. We've been down several different,
- past to get that accomplished. Hopefully we're on the right one now. But taking on more ground requiring
- development that we have no idea how we're going to make it productive and get it back on the rent rolls
- is probably not in our best interest or the city's best interest. So I will be voting for a resolution
- to move our offering forward and not considering a land swap.
- And I just wanted to clarify, as it's stated in the RFP, it looks at how the RDC seeks transformative
- mixed-use redevelopment project, and the offering is intended to catalyze the long-term private investment,
- enhance downtown vitality, and advance the RDC's economic development objectives. So just trying to
- confirm that kind of ties in with Mr. Kerr's
- in terms of how the RDC can look at responses to this proposal, to this RFP, in the sense of that the
- goal of selecting and evaluating responses is really based on the RDC's economic development objectives
- and not on, you know, again, highest and best use, or it's really just based on the mission of the RDC.
- Okay. Anything else before we open it for public comment?
- We will open it for public comment. We're going to alternate between in-person and online, but we can
- start with in-person. Hi. I'm standing in for John Weichart today. I'm Jim Whitlash. I'm the attorney
- for the CIB, and I appreciate your time. And I have a statement that John prepared that I'll read to
- you. The Capital Improvement Board is hopeful that you will respond favorably to begin negotiations
- for a land exchange of your College Square parcels.
- for the parcels south of the current convention center approved for transfer from the county to the
- CIB last week. This past December, after 14 months of effort to reach a deal for the College Square
- site with Dora Hospitality, the RDC considered but amended a resolution to make the site available for
- free or at a nominal cost for a host hotel. The initial draft appeared to have the support of the Thompson
- administration, but members of the city council expressed their opposition
- although publicly identifying a land exchange as one possible alternative. The CIB was later notified
- that month by Dora and the city that there was not a path forward in your discussions. This was followed
- in January by mayor Thompson stated intent to develop a plan for a public officer in of the site, which
- brings us to this evening and the CIB request for negotiations in response to the CIB's request.
- Communications from President Meyerson and Executive Director Killian Hansen this past week identified
- a current appraisal of the South Parcels as a condition of any negotiations. There is no appraisal of
- the South Parcels since their acquisition, but to our knowledge, they were purchased by the Convention
- and Visitors Commission with in-keepers tax revenues and two separate 2010 transactions for approximately
- $3.2 million.
- Your proposed public offering identifies for potential bidders a college square price to $7.6 million.
- If the CIV offer of land exchange consideration is viewed simply through the lens of a cost benefit
- analysis of a transactional real estate swap for equal valued properties, then on the surface, the CIV
- does not have that to offer in a negotiation. What we propose is that prior to your public offering,
- you consider a different cost benefit analysis.
- one of opportunity for the public good, rather than simply a transactional one based on cash value.
- Perhaps there is a different return on investment to consider. We each have parcels of lands that may
- have equal public value if the cost-benefit analysis is re-envisioned around achieving stated community
- goals rather than cash transactions.
- The College Square site has never been identified by the administration as appropriate for affordable
- housing development, and the CIB South parcels are not a better site option for a host hotel than College
- Square. Analyzed together, there may be opportunities in a land exchange to achieve both the economic
- development goals generated by a host hotel and the public goals shared by many for affordable housing
- development in the core downtown area.
- The 30 day period the CIB proposes can allow us to demonstrate to Bloomington that two public bodies
- have the capacity to meet and perhaps come to agreement on a proposal that both supports our downtown
- businesses and local economy and addresses one of our most critical community issues. The CIB is willing
- to pause in our next step for a host hotel for that period if you are willing to pause as well. The
- Sea of Bloomington has a history over different administrations of acquiring property
- seeing that as an investment for development for the public good rather than an expense to be recovered.
- The selection of the Convention Center Host Hotel on the site is the duty of the CIB. We all recognize
- how much time has already been lost. If you decide tonight to release your public offering and invite
- the CIB to throw its hat in the ring with other potential suitors, if there are any, then the CIB
- will meet to decide if instead we reengage immediately in hotel development for the south and west properties
- we now have to offer. Further delay of more months with the possibility that primary consideration may
- ultimately be the best cash offer transaction for reimbursement is not in the best interest of our project.
- Thank you for time and consideration. We hope you'll agree to a brief pause for discussions. Thank you.
- Thank you.
- I'm going to, again, alternate between in-person and online. Is there somebody who's online who is here
- for public comment on resolution 26-26? OK, so not seeing any hands raised. I beg your pardon? OK, so
- not seeing anybody online. We'll just continue with our in-person, but please let me know if anybody
- does raise their hand online. Thank you. Hi. Courtney Daly, member of Common Council.
- here to ask you to please postpone the resolution for the 30 days as requested by the CIB. I am the
- holdout from the letter who did not ask for the full $7 million in exchange for the property. So this
- is my moment to speak then, I guess. I basically want to reiterate everything that Mr. Whitlatch said.
- I think that there is no better
- place for a host hotel. It doesn't make sense to put a host hotel for the convention center down on
- that South property. It is simply too far away. I would love support and cooperation in trying to get
- the host hotel closer back up where we had been looking at the Bunker Robertson property. The South
- property, while it may not be worth as much, I think is respectfully disagree that it's not an opportunity.
- I think it is actually a great opportunity for the city. It is so close to Hopewell.
- We're out looking for more affordable housing. We could do something wonderful with that land, if not
- putting in more affordable housing, more amenities for Hopewell. I think we can really revitalize that
- entire block area if we can pull off that land swap. So I really hope that you will please consider
- doing the land swap. Thank you. Thank you. Next, for public comment. Would you like us to speak to the
- microphone or just? Yes, just come speak to the microphone. Please sit that way.
- Hello, my name's Barry Herbers. I live down the street from the South Parcel. Bloomington is in sort
- of an affordable housing crisis, not just of market rate housing, but particularly of prices below the
- average, which an average is, of course, made of things above and below it. Seminary Point, the South
- property, represents 30 odd units of super affordable housing. I've got a few friends living at Seminary
- Point right now. One of them is actually here. And I live down the street from there.
- And having Friendly Beast in walking distance, which is one of the commercial space attendants, has
- been wonderful for engendering a sense of community in my neighborhood. And as a nearby resident, I'm
- overjoyed at the prospect of more community infrastructure and small businesses being integrated there.
- And when I was first told about the idea of the land swap, what really got me interested is that sense
- of neighborliness that's down there. It's there, but it's lacking in some ways at the moment.
- And I've been hearing a lot of older folks lately talking about preserving the spirit of old Bloomington.
- Now, I'm a bit of a transplant. When I moved here, one of the first things that happened is a bunch
- of my new friends showed me that movie, Breaking Away. I'm sure you've all seen it. It's sort of like
- about that tension between the city slickers at the university and the rough and tumble kids down who
- just want to ride their bikes and are probably going to be cutting limestone someday. Now, things aren't
- the same as they always were, but one of the friends I do have living at Seminary Point, he's not able
- to make it today.
- He works in construction. And he was actually laid off recently. And that apartment has been a lifeline
- for him and his second baby that's on the way with his partner. And we just, it would make me, it hurts
- me to imagine him getting displaced, even if he can find a place of similar price, like far off, like
- in that downtown area, it's really the only option for someone like him. And to speak to that Bloomington
- spirit as I understand it,
- It's communal and it's also working class. And to me, that's what this is sort of all about. It's a
- promise to Bloomington's working class that we can preserve that lower bracket of super affordable housing
- that gets people on their feet alongside building these new single-family homes, perhaps in Hopewell,
- that people can get to once they've gotten stabilized with their families and such. And the CIB has
- made it sort of clear that they can't maintain the affordable housing at that place. We've talked to
- them a fair amount.
- They might not even be legally allowed to, it's unclear. And what they can do though is swap it for
- land that's perfectly suited to their purpose, their legal purpose, which is to help the convention
- center with a new hotel. So I want to come out in favor of delaying this process so that the CIB has
- an opportunity to make their case heard and that organizations like the RDC will have an opportunity
- if they take that land to
- steward it into some sort of grassroots organization. Like maybe I've heard people talk about a community
- land trust and to like build permanently, well not build, but build and maintain permanently affordable
- housing for Bloomington's working class. And I hear rumblings that they're actually working on a presentation
- as we speak. So hopefully that comes by soon. Thank you. Thank you very much. Is there someone else
- who would like to present for public comment at this time?
- Don't hurt yourself. Don't hurt yourself. This is the cost of public civic engagement. Busted elbows.
- Hi, I'm Bryce Green. I've been living in Bloomington for around a decade now. And I'm in favor of you
- guys delaying this offering because, well, like what everyone else has been saying, there is a lot of
- value in what this land can offer the community beyond the monetary value of the land.
- seems to be no reason that it can't go forward that it can't that this land swap can't go forward other
- than a confusion about what that would mean for the city. I know you and your comments mentioned that
- like this would take a lot of city resources to develop and to maintain and there's been a lot of deferred
- maintenance and that's all you know I think valid concerns but I think what the
- the residents of the Seminary Point apartments and what community members have come together and really
- been working hard on is a plan that doesn't involve too much more resources from the city that actually
- builds off of existing models of affordable housing of cooperative ownership that exists in the city
- already. Right now there are a very small number of super affordable
- housing units in the city. I mean these are the units that are standing in between someone and being
- homeless and almost all of them are offered under cooperative structures and the fact that we have people
- in the room today in the community now who are willing to put in the time and effort to develop that
- I think that should be taken into account because these this property can be a lot more than you know
- either a hotel or even a standard addition to
- what Hopewell could be. It could be something a lot more. It could be something that is a fixture of
- the community on the beeline, you know, has friendly beasts, all this nice stuff. And it can be one
- of those fixtures of Bloomington that makes it unique and a really lovely place to be. So I think that
- take time to consider this, look over the details. You know, if this whole thing is stupid and we're
- stupid, then, you know, we can
- We might be able to figure that out. But I don't think we are. And I think this is worth at least taking
- 30 days to look at. Thank you. Thank you very much. Any others who would like to speak for further comment,
- please move forward. Anyone online? Come forward, please. Thank you. Yes, absolutely. Thank you. My
- name is Matthew Joseph.
- Um, I've been a resident of Bloomington for about six years. Um, I'm also in favor of the delay, um,
- and starting negotiations with the CIB. I think like the question that starts for me is like, is there
- a world where we can build out a hotel for the convention center and save precious affordable housing
- in Bloomington? Pleasing like both future tourists and existing Bloomington community.
- A negotiation between the CIB and the RDC gives us all the chance to answer that question and to see
- what that world could look like, to explore what that world could look like and, I mean, give us a chance
- to dream a little. I mean, get a little creative. This is what we're here to do as community members.
- And it's all of us to see as a community how we can build a win-win for the city and its residents,
- for the future of it and the current maintenance of it and the flourishing of it.
- And I want you to know, I don't think you'll be alone in this process. It might feel like the weight
- of it is gonna be on you, but I think what Bryce said, there is organizations that exist to solve problems
- like this and to build up flourishing communities like this. Bloomington Cooperative Living, actually
- the housing that I'm myself a part of, and Avalon Land Trust, as well as others, are some of the biggest
- and most successful affordable housing initiatives in Bloomington.
- And they have built projects like this and we're already like we're working with them already to build
- plan pulling from evidence based models from different states of how they've done similar things with
- similar types of projects pulling specifically from a city within Michigan that had.
- in a similar way maybe affordable housing that needs some revitalization and then turn it into something
- that was really incredible for the city and actually became one of an incredible hot spot for that city
- not just like affordable housing right that maybe we might have that idea and also like please like
- I really mean it's like don't be convinced that this is like a dump I know like this is how we kind
- of the society looks at affordable housing it's like oh it must be some
- First of all, please don't let that bias take over because it's actually something that might surprise
- you. We actually saw Randy from the RDC. I think he's an electrician or something. And we showed him
- around the space. We happened to walk into him. We showed him the commercial spaces. We showed him a
- unit, actually. He was very surprised and honestly amazed
- Of course, it's not perfect. I'm not saying not a dollar is gonna get spent on it, but it's more like,
- oh, am I going over time? Okay, I'm sorry, forgive me. I haven't done this a lot. This is just something
- I'm passionate about. But yeah, in general, this gives us the time to take this seriously, get creative,
- see what we can do as a community, and engage our organizations that are already doing stuff like this.
- And the last thing I'll say is I think what makes a good city is not always what is
- perfect on the income statement or some perfect equal transaction. Although I think this plan could
- be something that flourishes that area, but it's something that's good for its people. And I think this
- 30 days will allow us to explore that more. Thank you. Thank you for speaking. Will the next public
- speaker please move forward to the hot spot. My name is Audrey Smith.
- Some of you might recognize me because I spoke in December against transferring this land for nothing.
- You might remember that I really hate public speaking. I didn't have the opportunity today to prepare
- exactly what I wanted to say and I came in a little bit late so I haven't heard everything that's been
- discussed. But I heard a little bit about
- the cost benefit analysis being considered and different ways to look at that and the highest and best
- use of different properties. One thing that I wanted to note is that it's just difficult to calculate
- the economic benefit of the hotel being located in its ideal location. The whole point of the convention
- center is for economic development.
- and that hotel is intended to support that. So I'm sure there are people who are better at analyzing
- that than I am, but I think that's something that's important to consider. And I think it's also important
- to consider that having housing available for people that is affordable near where they want to work
- or where they're able to work is really important to economic development as well. The last thing I want to,
- add is just that in the grand scheme of how long things take, a month is not very long. So I want to
- encourage you all to just take the time to weigh the options and figure out what is best for this property.
- Delaying for one month is really not going to make a big difference in how long it takes to build whatever
- ends up on that property. So thank you.
- Are there any others who would like to be part of the public speaking on resolution 26-26? Hi, my name
- is Sarah Mosier, and I wanted to echo what my neighbors have said about approving the land swap for
- the two properties, the north and south. I live right up the hill from the south property.
- I go down there all the time to Friendly Beast, but also to talk to the folks that live around there.
- And I actually took a cost benefit analysis course in my MPA here at IU. And so I remember one thing
- that they don't take into account when we're doing those calculations is the kind of very long-term
- impacts that can happen from individual people. And there's families that live in those apartments now
- that could be
- starting small businesses or bringing all kinds of other development to the city in the future, they
- won't get a chance if they get kicked out and have no place to live and have to move out to the county,
- move out to other cities that are more affordable than Bloomington. So approving the land swap would
- just give them a little bit more of a chance. And that's all I wanted to say. Thank you. Thank you for
- coming to speak tonight. Anyone else who would like to be part of the public comment on resolution 26-26?
- Seeing none, we are going back to the commissioners. Any comments or questions from commissioners based
- on the public comment or anything further that would be worthwhile to discuss on Revolution 26-26? Point
- of clarification, because I just don't remember, is it the case currently that the current tenants
- have leases that expire in July? Is that correct? And have we, I don't believe, have talked about how
- any kind of land swap would affect that date. But perhaps that's intended to be part of the discussion.
- My understanding is that the leases are not being renewed as of July 7. So we would not have any say
- over those leases right now.
- this board. So it would be really up to the CID to manage the leases in terms of any further discussion
- about a land swap or other considerations? Correct. At this time, my understanding is that the Monroe
- County Partnering Association has worked with the remaining 15 tenants to try and find suitable or similar
- housing. I'm not sure exactly what the current status is. I just know that what has been communicated
- to me from Mr. Weichart is that
- As of July 7, there will not be any remaining tenants unless they choose to extend the leases or something
- to that effect, which we have not had any discussions about. OK. Thank you. Other questions or comments
- from commissioners on resolution 26-26? Yeah, I can't reward. I have no further comments. OK. Thank you.
- and members of the public who have offered comments. I appreciate it. And to those representing the
- CIB as well, whenever I listen to public comment or to a proposal, I tend to think in terms of compelling
- arguments and less compelling arguments or not compelling arguments. And there are several things that
- I find very compelling.
- One is the caution and statement that we receive from most council members, council member Daley accepted,
- stating that we not undervalue this land when engaging in a transaction with that. I hear that, and
- I find that a compelling statement on behalf of our city council. I also find it compelling that 30
- days is not a long time. 30 days.
- The notion that a great deal can change in 30 days isn't compelling to me. I don't see how an appraisal
- can be done, environmentalists can be done. I don't see how that can possibly get done. So the notion
- that 30 days will make a significant difference in negotiations without all of that critical information
- that we are obligated to pay attention to.
- I don't find that a compelling argument. I also don't find it compelling to argue that the CIB is at
- an inherent disadvantage compared to deeper pocket developers. That's my expression. We are not obligated
- to only look at the finances of this. And we've said that many, many times in this meeting. So we can
- look at the whole of a project and the whole of its potential.
- and indeed are expected to do so. So I find that very compelling. So I am actually going to move forward
- and support the issuance of this offering. Thank you. Any other? I want to make a couple of clarifications.
- There's nothing in the offering that will prohibit a hotelier from making a proposal. So that, just
- because we don't
- If we don't do the land swap, it doesn't make that College Square site off the table for a hotel. I
- agree with Sue Scambaleri. 30 days is not going to get us much further than we are now. So we're just
- kind of kicking the can down the road. There's also a misnomer, I think, that this body, the RDC, our
- builders and developers, we're not. It's not what we do.
- That's not what we use taxpayer money for. We do infrastructure, but somebody else has to build it and
- manage it. We're not landlords. So if we take over existing facilities or buildings that have tenants,
- we don't have managers, we don't have a landlord, we don't even have a way to collect rent. I mean,
- that's not what we do.
- So I just want to make it clear that we're not incredibly sensitive to the position that the residential
- folks are in. And in a best world, we could find a third party to take those properties and do something
- real positive with them. But this isn't the body.
- And so we have to move on and do what we're charged to do. And it's just not taking on properties and
- being a landlord. So I just kind of want to make that clear. Thank you. Can I add one more thing, too?
- And I should have said this earlier. I also want to extend my gratitude to everyone who took the time
- to come and speak. And I agree with my fellow commissioner that
- Much of what you said, all of it was compelling and heartfelt, and I think we do definitely take it
- seriously. I think trying to find a solution that allows us to do the best we can with both parcels
- of land in cooperation with the CIB is in everyone's interest. And I agree, though, as well with my
- fellow commissioners that 30 days is not going to change anything.
- And that in a sense, moving forward as quickly as we can actually starts to open up some other possibilities
- and opportunities that may not be evident to us because we haven't been clear about what our vision
- is for College Square, haven't perhaps explored enough about what the options are with some mythical
- but hopefully not too mythical third party who could come in and help us think about
- what could happen south of the convention center. So my own feeling as well is that we need to start
- bringing some other players into the picture because I think that's going to help us find the best outcome
- for both College Square and for the property south of the current convention center. Thank you. I will
- add my own final comments. I do appreciate the public speakers tonight.
- appreciate when there are voices there for housing visions for the community because we definitely need
- that. I do feel, as I've heard from my colleagues on the commission, that I feel that the advantage
- of voting yes on the offering for the College Square property tonight for resolution 26 actually offers
- an advantage of time for both what the CIB could bring
- for what potential hoteliers could bring, as well as for coming to an efficient end to what happens
- with the color square property. In addition to looking more creatively at, again, at visions for the
- southern properties, it just may not be the RDC's vision. It may need to be of other parties in the
- community. So it's not at all rejecting the ideas of what we've heard. It's just finding the right channel
- for that initiative.
- So again, I appreciate the voices and hearing that and looking at the way to move forward on that.
- With that, I think we are ready for a vote. I'll move approval of resolution 2626. Second. Move a first
- and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you all.
- We are now on to the next item on our agenda, which is resolution 26-27, the approval of first addendum
- to the preliminary design contract for Hopel South. Who would like to speak to that? Kendall Kenoki,
- engineering department. I'll speak to that. So in front of you is a contract amendment to our Hopel
- South design contract. There are two items that came up as additional
- design services that we needed for this project, one of which right here is the additional survey that's
- required for some offsite utilities that are required for CBU. This is, regardless of what you do with
- the property, these things are required. So one of them is the water main. I think I've mentioned this
- to you before, but a new water main from Rogers all the way to about halfway down Wiley.
- This is replacing, I believe it's a 1927 water main. No matter what you did on the property, this is
- something that CBU would require. This was not included in the initial CEC survey that we used just
- because they were only surveying the Hopewell South property. This would be additional topographic survey
- that we'd have to do. The other item is detention for the west portion of Hopewell South. So this all
- drains this way. Our detention basin is here.
- This all drains this way. We were initially asking CBU if we could over detain this area to accommodate
- this area. They said, no, they're splitting issues down here. We really want you to do something. And
- we have a right of way along Wiley where you can do something. So they have asked us to do some detention
- somewhere along here in this existing right of way along Wiley. Basically, Wiley, for some reason, was
- built west of the initial dedicated right of way. And then that was dedicated later.
- It's actually a really wide right of way here. So we already have a property. But we need to go in and
- survey and get the utilities located and figure out where we can do detention. We also have to get our
- storm sewer over there. So it kind of just becomes this whole lump. And we may actually run it down
- the platted alley, too. So we're kind of just picking it all up so we can do a full design of this area.
- Our consultant actually did not give us an increase in their design fee for
- the design of the detention in the water main. They just had kind of assumed that they would have to
- do a certain level of detention design. So there's no additional cost for that. But this is really all
- for topographic survey. And then the other item is for geotechnical exploration. So we were going out
- and doing pavement design, geotech work for the entire Hopewell South development. We were already doing
- a lot of exploratory borings on the 714 South Rogers.
- building, and American Structure Point was doing their study. And we just reached out and asked, we're
- already going out there. What kind of geotechnical testing do you need to make a really good decision
- about whether or not you can use that property? What can be done there? And so they gave us some geotechnical
- tests that they wanted to do, that when combined with our already going out there, scope of work would
- be a lot cheaper. So the other part of this is additional geotechnical testing for the 714 South Rogers.
- And these are the tests that were requested or recommended by American Structure Point for that. So
- those are the two items in front of you. They are defined in exhibit A is where the cost is.
- So it's $20,000 for the additional topographic survey, 19,000 for the additional geotechnical work,
- additional 39,000. So this will be ultimately, you know, this will get added to the entire contract and
- You know, once everything is completed, that'll add on to the final contract amount. So this is stuff
- that, you know, it's going to have to happen either way, is my understanding. And I wanted to go ahead
- and get the survey, you know, undergoing and the geotechnical work since it's all, it's both kind of
- preliminary works. That's why it's in front of you right now, even though we're on pause for former
- rezone approval.
- So happy to answer any questions. I think that. This is really a little off the wall. But if you were
- to guess, since some of that geotech work is going to be contributed to the 714 property, what percentage
- of the 39,000 would be
- be used by them and not by StructurePoint and not necessarily have anything to do with the Hopewell
- sub the PUD? It is $19,000 because we already had it. Yeah, this is this is solely for that 714 project.
- Any other questions from commissioners on
- Resolution 26-27 and the scope of the topos or the geotechnical? Yeah, I'm going to continue my thought
- What concerns me about that portion is that I'm getting a sense because we're not getting really good
- feedback from structure point that I don't know what we're going to see when we get it back and whether
- project that's planned for that property is doable. And we're going to spend another $19,000 on top
- of it, which would be useless if we can't use the building the way we want to. So I'm throwing it out
- there. I just don't know. I'm a little tired to continue to spend money on something that it's a flyer
- right now.
- I'm just going to ask some clarification, and maybe this is what you're going to provide. But just if
- the structure point study will be available, and if that would be of available use before the expense
- for this additional engineering work is needed. So would that be a decision point of whatever's in that
- report would then inform the scope of work?
- Forgive me if I'm incorrect here, Kendall, but it was my understanding that these borings were being
- done in the current parking lot, which is where the potential stormwater detention would go. And so
- they overlap a little bit in that way. So it's in the 714 parking lot currently, but those projects
- overlap. And so the expense for one project is a little bit blurry versus the expense for the other project.
- Yeah, I mean, I don't we're already drilling. So this is just additional testing that they were going
- to do with those. I don't know exactly how it works, but you're already you have the equipment out there.
- You're doing a big boring. They're running additional tests and they might be sampling additional material.
- But when you think about they're already out there, that's why we were kind of asking the question.
- Well, what do we really need to know for the 714 building to help with the evaluation of that?
- So the 19,000 truly is the additional
- Testing that and I was trying to find the email where they they were specifying what testing they they
- needed to help in the evaluation Yeah, I mean It would certainly cost more if if you no matter who you
- approached if they asked for these tests You'd have to then have someone go back out and do it Additionally
- if you'll recall we don't have construction plans for that building so it makes it difficult to
- to understand the building fully. And so doing these borings underground will help us know what that
- building is capable of housing. So instead of structure point informing this, this may be informing
- structure point? Is that what you're saying? Yes. And it could inform this group on whatever goes there.
- Because that information will be good to know. OK. So I believe this is additional work. This was not included.
- in their original scope of work. That's correct. This is additional work for additional information.
- I understand that part. OK. That's not a question. It was more just trying to determine if the pending
- report from StructurePoint would inform the scope or not. And it sounds like this will. I don't want
- to put good money on bad. Yeah. That's what I'm talking about. And to that point, there's sort of,
- I mean, so the sequence here, the borings before we see something back from StructurePoint, is that
- what I'm understanding?
- Yes, I think it will reinforce what path we're possibly already going down. Does that make sense? Yeah.
- I'm trying to be diplomatic and neutral and OK. Well, and I guess what I'm asking, too, is then I will
- ask the question about length of time. So we earlier talked about,
- getting more information from StructurePoint. It sounded like that was imminent, maybe, or should be
- imminent. This is going to delay that further, maybe appropriately. I'm just trying to get a sense of
- what the timing is now, if that makes sense. So this work is going to go forward. So are we going to
- see something from StructurePoint before the testing happens? Well, I mean, if this isn't approved tonight,
- we will pull it from Patriots.
- scope, but they're already scheduled to go out there. So that's another advantage we have. Yeah. I'm
- not objecting to that. I'm just trying to understand. I'm trying to set our expectations for when we're
- going to get information that we've been waiting for. The report from structural point is not contingent
- on the study. But the study can help them hone in better in the report.
- potentially a good thing, I understand that. I'm just trying to get a sense of the timing. Yeah. Some
- of the options that they're looking at may be looking at the parking lot or at least the portions of
- the parking lot a little differently than parking lot. And so this would provide them information if
- that would be suitable. So this would be variations of how to use the property and whether that particular
- variation might be
- might work. So, it's looking at one of the alternatives that will be discussed. Is that a way to put
- it, Anna? Are you asking when will the RDC receive information on what Structural Point has found? Yes.
- Okay, to be clear. I think that there are a couple of things
- Well, I guess I'm not sure. I'm not quite sure how scheduling or how coordination for the RDC works.
- Forgive me if we're not doing. But I think I would expect something coming soon. But given that internally
- there are still some questions that we want to run by various departments just to make sure that we've
- kind of thought some things through before we presented to you. Sort of anticipating questions from you
- So I don't know, I don't always like to attach a timeline on things when I don't exactly know, but as
- the project manager, I would hope soon. What a great political answer. Yeah, I mean, that's fine.
- I really, I just, as I say, going off the earlier discussion where there were concerns raised about
- the time that's elapsed already. I'm just trying to get a sense of us. So it sounds like we're maybe
- still yet to spring. Is that a fair statement? This spring? This spring. All right. Well, by the year.
- I think that's reasonable. Is that reasonable? I think it's reasonable that we will have some ideas
- in the near future. Yeah. OK. All right. I think that is as good as we can get right now. Thank you.
- And I did want to add, I found the email, the big thing was performing a shear wave velocity test, which
- is a critical first step in determining next steps in the structural evaluation of the building. Oh,
- I understand that. I don't know if that's helpful or not. It sounds very official and important. It
- sounds like to me it's something that anyone who wanted to do something at that site would want.
- Yeah, I will not dispute the value of the information. OK. Well, I hope that explains most any other
- questions or comments from commissioners. If not, I'll entertain a motion on resolution 26-27. I'll
- move approval of resolution 26-27. Second. First and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed?
- Motion passes unanimously.
- Thank you. The next item on our agenda is resolution 26-28, which is the approval of a first amendment
- to the agreement with Mother Nature Landscaping, Incorporated for the Landscaping Services at the Trades
- District and Trades District Garage. Would you like to speak to that? Yes. Nick Blanford, Economic and
- Sustainable Development. We have discovered that trees are growing into the tree grates throughout the
- Trades District. This will cause harm for future growth. It's already
- damaged electrical boxes that are contained within those tree grates. We've consulted Haskell Smith,
- our urban forester here with the city. Mother Nature Landscaping is capable of doing this work. They've
- given us an estimate of $20,850.70. And we simply need to amend their service agreement to work within
- this scope and not to exceed the quota figure. I'm trying to share right now a picture, and it is
- It was up at one point, but it is not anymore. I do have some photos of those electrical boxes that
- are going into the trees right now. For some reason, technology is not helping. So if I can get it up,
- I'll try to while you discuss. Thank you. Just a point of clarification. And I may not be reading this
- properly, but in the
- Third, whereas, it mentions a bid that came in from Mother Nature at $19,275,000. In the fifth, whereas,
- it's proposing that the agreement be made for $20,850.70, just trying to understand the difference between
- those two numbers. 2590 was for 19,275. That was the base contract.
- That's what I missed. That's what I missed. Sorry. This is an amendment. Yeah. And this is an amendment,
- too. So we're in that right. Because it's in place and adding this to it to deal with the tree grades.
- Yeah. Thank you. I missed the beginning of that sentence. I do have an image up if you guys want to
- take a look, but there's a little box in there. So, Nick, have we learned anything in future development?
- Well, the good news is that these grades are designed to be expanded.
- So it's not a matter of completely ripping them up, it's a matter of removing the pavers there and basically
- cutting into the grates as designed. So the lesson is to do this sooner.
- Here's a place where code could be very helpful. Well actually the reason for that is when you have
- a larger opening and a lot of space in between that and the tree itself it creates a trip hazard so
- that's why they're designed to be opened but even though not all are overgrown there are 41 I believe
- trees in the district we are going to go ahead and expand all of them so we don't have to go a second
- round on this.
- So would there typically in the future be some kind of schedule for, like, plant the trees, have the
- tree great so it's not too big so it doesn't make a trip hazard, but then, like, every, I don't know,
- two years, look at it, enlarge it? Like, what's the expected protocol and how does that differ from
- what the current protocol is? That's an excellent question. I don't know that there is an established
- protocol right now. So, yeah, I think we should, I think, yeah, an examination every year or two would be wise.
- Okay. I assume that this is within the purview of the RDC and that's the responsibility. Yes, it is.
- Those right of ways have not been accepted into the city. So it's still owned by the RDC. And so this
- would fall under the good old 2602 maintenance coming out of the 251 thing. One just additional question.
- I understand that the original base contractor was awarded the lowest responsive or responsible bidder
- when there's an amendment such as this. Is that not subject for additional bidding? Because this is
- basically more than the original contract. It is not because it's professional. It's a services agreement,
- which is different than a purchase agreement. So you can select whomever you choose for services agreement.
- They did a bidding process because
- They felt that that was the best way to select initially. But since they built a relationship with them,
- they can continue to service them. So they didn't have to the first time, but they did. And then the
- second time, they didn't have to and they didn't. Well, the first time, they didn't have to and they
- did. That's what I said. Yes, yes. OK. Exactly. I'm trying to follow you. Yes. OK. Well, thank you for
- that clarification. Any other questions? I see we have some interest in public comment. Just want to
- make sure commissioners are
- I'm a member of the Tree Commission. Just introduce yourself by name, please. George Higaman.
- Thank you. And Hapskell-Smith has a two-year cycle of reinspecting tree grades with respect
- to the possibility of their need for renovation and enlargement. So there is a policy in place. I don't
- know how it's funded. I think there are different sources of funding depending on where the site is.
- It's different from around the square than in other areas, but it's complicated. OK. But it's a common
- practice. Yes. OK. Thank you for that additional information. I didn't do that. Yeah, me neither. OK.
- Anything else before we move for a vote? And we'll look at the motion, please. I'll move approval of
- resolution 2628. Second.
- For the first and the second, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion for 2628 passes unanimously.
- Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. The last item on our agenda this evening is resolution 2629,
- which is the approval of a first amendment to the agreement for public art in Hopewell East.
- And we have Ms. Dragovich to speak to that. Thank you. Yes.
- This is for an extension of the agreement between the RDC and Bunyama, the artist John Racic, who is
- fabricating and installing the Hopewell public art called Andulet. The contract and the resolution have
- both expired, and so this is an extension of those dates.
- The resolution would be extended to this year, December 31st. And then the contract would be extended
- to September 1st of this year. We worked with the artists to find that date, and we think that it can
- be achieved. They have the piece fabricated. It's really at this point finding a concrete contractor
- to lay the foundation
- um, letting the concrete cure for a month and then installing the fabricated art pieces. So we're really
- close to the finish line. And, um, like I said, we worked with the artists to come up with that timeline
- and, and we think that it's achievable. So, yeah. Any questions or comments from commissioners on resolution
- 2629? Well, we certainly haven't been on.
- time with everything else we've done, so I think it's a perfectly good request. And there's nothing
- in the discussions about possible modifications to the design of Hopewell that will change the location?
- Oh, no. I don't know. Yeah. No. I wasn't here for the original resolution, so I'm not sure what this
- looks like or where it's supposed to go. It's in the common area. In the commons area. In the commons
- area west of
- I always get Madison and Maple mixed up. Yeah. Don't ask me. That's fine. That was all, again, not having
- had the background. Any other questions, comments from commissioners? Otherwise, I'll open it for public
- comment. I don't see anybody online or in person except the motion on resolution 2629. Move approval
- of resolution 2629.
- Second. First and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously.
- Thank you. We are now towards the end of our new business. Anything else further before we adjourn?
- Seeing none, I will accept a motion to adjourn. So moved. Thank you all. Appreciate your time this evening.