-
GOSHEN REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
OF OCTOBER 14, 2014
The Goshen Redevelopment Commission will meet on October 14,
2014 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Court Room/Council Chambers at the
Goshen Police & Court Building, 111 East Jefferson Street,
Goshen, Indiana. 1. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Regular Meeting Minutes of September 9, 2014
3. APPROVAL OF REGISTER OF CLAIMS Register of Claims for October
14, 2014
4. PRESENTATIONS Goshen Pond Dredging Presentation Bill Rieth,
ERRA Goshen Historical Society Powerhouse Exhibit John Hertzler,
Historical Society
5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Resolution 103-2014 Approve Funding
Commitment for Ninth Street Trail from College Avenue to Purl
Street b. Resolution 104-2014 Authorize Issuance of RFP for 324
S. Fifth Street, 211 E. Madison Street and
323 S. Sixth Street c. Discussion Railroad Crossing Safety
Improvements Funding d. Discussion Northwest Bike Trail Route
Options e. Discussion 405 S. Third Street Status f. Discussion
Electrical Service Extension at 315 W. Washington Street
6. NEW BUSINESS a. Resolution 105-2014 Authorize Negotiation and
Execution of a Contract for Asbestos Assessment
with TecServ Environmental, Inc. for 301, 303, 305 & 307 S.
Third Street b. Resolution 106-2014 Approve and Authorize Execution
of a Bridge and MSE Wall Location Memo of
Understanding (MOU) between INDOT, Norfolk Southern Railways and
the City of Goshen for the Marion Branch Curve Realignment
Project
c. Resolution 107-2014 Authorize Negotiation and Execution of an
Agreement with Aquatic Weed Control for Millrace Canal Vegetation
Maintenance
d. Resolution 108-2014 Consent to Assignment of Agreement for
the Lease and Development of Real Estate at 315 W. Washington
Street by Goshen Brewing Company to 1st Source Bank
e. Discussion - Updated Consolidated River Race / US 33 TIF 5
Year Plan f. Discussion Updated Consolidated Southeast TIF 5 Year
Plan g. Discussion Federal Funding Opportunities
7. MONTHLY REDEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT
8. OPEN FORUM The open forum is for the general discussion of
items that are not otherwise on the agenda. The public will also be
given the opportunity at this time to present or comment on items
that are not on the agenda.
9. ANNOUNCEMENTS
a. Next Regular Meeting WEDNESDAY, November 12, 2014 at 4:00
p.m.
-
1
GOSHEN REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 9, 2014
CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL The Goshen Redevelopment Commission met
in a regular meeting on September 9, 2014 at 4:00 p.m. in the City
Court Room/Council Chambers at the Goshen Police & Court
Building, 111 East Jefferson Street, Goshen, Indiana. The meeting
was called to order by President Thomas Stump. On call of the roll,
the following members of the Goshen Redevelopment Commission were
shown to be present or absent as follows: Present: Laura Coyne,
Cathie Cripe, Thomas Stump, Vince Turner and Brett Weddell Absent:
Jeremy Stutsman APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion was made by
Commissioner Coyne and seconded by Commissioner Weddell to approve
the minutes of the August 12, 2014 regular meeting. The motion was
adopted unanimously. APPROVAL OF REGISTER OF CLAIMS A motion was
made by Commissioner Turner and seconded by Commissioner Coyne to
approve payment of the Register of Claims totaling $568,441.87. The
motion was adopted unanimously. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a. Resolution 93-2014 Approving a Major Moves Construction Fund
Loan from City of Goshen
Larry Barkes, City Attorney, informed the Commission that the
Common Council had agreed to make the loan as requested by the
Redevelopment Commission and this was on the Agenda today for the
Commissions acceptance of the loan. Mr. Barkes reiterated the terms
of the loan and offered to answer any questions the Commission may
have. There were no questions. A motion was made by Commissioner
Weddell and seconded by Commissioner Coyne to approve Resolution
93-2014. The motion passed unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS a. Resolution 94-2014 Dedication of Public
Right-of-Way
Larry Barkes informed the Commission that the City is preparing
the sell the property in question that is partially owned by
Redevelopment. A motion was made by Commissioner Coyne and seconded
by Commissioner Weddell to approve Resolution 94-2014. The motion
passed unanimously.
-
2
b. Resolution 95-2014 Ratification of Lease Agreement with
Downtown Goshen, Inc. for the Use of the
Powerhouse for the Maple City Walk A motion was made by
Commissioner Turner and seconded by Commissioner Coyne to approve
Resolution 95-2014. The motion passed unanimously.
c. Resolution 96-2014 Approve and Authorize the Execution of a
Purchase Agreement with J.C. and Katharine
Schrock for 313 S. Third Street Larry Barkes informed the
Commission this is a request to sell the property located at 313 S.
Third Street to J.C. and Katharine Schrock. J. C. Schrock, 63838 CR
21, Goshen, Indiana. Mr. Schrock informed the Commission he is in
agreement with the Contract. He inquired if the five houses to the
north of this property were to be demolished, if he could salvage
the door hardware from those houses. Larry Barkes stated that in
the past, the demolition contractors contact information has been
provided to people inquiring about salvage. A motion was made by
Commissioner Weddell and seconded by Commissioner Turner to approve
Resolution 96-2014. The motion passed unanimously.
d. Resolution 97-2014 Approve and Authorize Execution of
Agreement with Rita Ann Gabriel & Associates, Inc. for
Appraisal Review Services for the Right of Way Acquisition of
117 & 119 S. 9th Street for the Marion Line Curve Realignment
Project Mary Cripe, City Civil Engineer, informed the Commission
the next four resolutions relate to the curve realignment project
that the City, INDOT and Norfolk Southern have been discussing.
Since there are federal funds available, the same acquisition
format must be followed as has in the past with federal funds. An
agreement with INDOT has not yet been finalized, but once that
happens and the notice to proceed is given, these services will
begin. A motion was made by Commissioner Coyne and seconded by
Commissioner Weddell to approve Resolution 97-2014. The motion
passed unanimously.
e. Resolution 98-2014 Approve and Authorize Execution of
Agreement with Linda F. Russell, d/b/a Russell
Appraisal Services for Appraisal Services for the Right of Way
Acquisition of 117 & 119 S. 9th Street for the Marion Line
Curve Realignment Project A motion was made by Commissioner Turner
and seconded by Commissioner Coyne to approve Resolution 98-2014.
The motion passed unanimously.
f. Resolution 99-2014 Approve and Authorize Execution of
Agreement with Right of Way Jones, Inc. for Buying
Agent Services for the Right of Way Acquisition of 117 & 119
S. 9th Street for the Marion Line Curve Realignment Project A
motion was made by Commissioner Weddell and seconded by
Commissioner Coyne to approve Resolution 99-2014. The motion passed
unanimously.
g. Resolution 100-2014 Approve and Authorize Execution of
Agreement with Stankoven and Company, Inc. for
Relocation Services for the Right of Way Acquisition of 117
& 119 S. 9th Street for the Marion Line Curve Realignment
Project A motion was made by Commissioner Coyne and seconded by
Commissioner Turner to approve Resolution 100-2014. The motion
passed unanimously.
-
3
h. Resolution 101-2014 Authorize Negotiation of an Agreement for
the 9th Street Trail Mary Cripe requested permission from the
Commission to start negotiations for the design engineering of this
project once INDOT responds to the Citys recommendation. A motion
was made by Commissioner Weddell and seconded by Commissioner Coyne
to approve Resolution 101-2014. The motion passed unanimously.
i. Resolution 102-2014 Approve and Authorize Execution of
Agreement with INDOT LPA for the Railroad
Crossing Safety Improvements at College Avenue and Jefferson
Street Mary Cripe informed the Commission that federal funds have
been received for this project and the preliminary estimate for the
project is $1.2 million dollars for design and construction. Local
share would be approximately $128,888. A motion was made by
Commissioner Turner and seconded by Commissioner Coyne to approve
Resolution 102-2014. The motion passed unanimously.
j. Discussion River Race Drive Long Term Parking Project
Planning Committee
Larry Barkes indicated the projects being done in the area of
canal may lead to long term parking issues in this area. He
solicited volunteers for a committee to explore the parking
possibilities and discuss funding issues, particularly
Redevelopments involvement in the funding. Tom Stump and Brett
Weddell volunteered.
REPORTS a. Redevelopment Report Mark Brinson, Community
Development Director
Mark Brinson informed the Commission that Goshen Brewing Company
has obtained their building permits, demolition is well underway
and the construction crew is busy. Commission President Stump
inquired about a completion date for the Brewery. Mark indicated
the date fluctuates, but estimated around Spring, 2015.
Commissioner Coyne asked if Goshen has a legacy TIF that is
affected by the new legislation. Larry Barkes indicated Goshen does
not have a legacy TIF and stated that we were not really affected
by the new legislation because most of the things they were asking
for we are already doing. One major change is when we sell property
now, we have to take it to Council for approval, whereas we did not
have to in the past.
OPEN FORUM
No one from the Commission or the public spoke during the open
forum. ANNOUNCEMENTS
It was announced that the next regular meeting is scheduled for
October 14, 2014 at 4:00 pm. ADJOURNMENT
The regular meeting was adjourned at 4:25 p.m. APPROVED on
October 14, 2014.
Goshen Redevelopment Commission
_______________________________________ Thomas W. Stump, President
_______________________________________ Jeremy P. Stutsman,
Secretary
-
GOSHEN REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
October 14, 2014 Register of Claims The Goshen Redevelopment
Commission has examined the entries listed on the following
Expenditure Report for claims entered from September 5, 2014
through October 9, 2014
and finds that such entries are allowed in the total amount of
$561,999.05.
APPROVED on October 14, 2014.
Goshen Redevelopment Commission Laura Coyne Thomas W. Stump
Jeremy Stutsman Vince Turner Brett Weddell
-
GOSHEN REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONItemized Expenditure Report
Claims from 9/5/14 through 10/9/14
Invoice Date Payee Description Line Number AmountClaim #
406-560-00-429.0002 $38.929/5/2014 Lake City Bank VISA Books -
Community Economic Survival Guide & The Co 1548
473-560-00-441.0000 $135,352.009/8/2014 Barkes, Kolbus, Rife
& Shuler-FIDUCIARY ACCT 0 Property Acquisition - South Link
Road (Calderon) 1539
473-560-00-441.0000 $925.009/11/2014 Keith E. Adams and Cathy A.
Adams Property Acquisition - South Link Road 1543
473-560-00-441.0000 $1,025.009/11/2014 Leonard D. Livengood
Property Acquisition - South Link Road 1542
473-560-00-441.0000 $2,750.009/11/2014 Octavio Ramos and
Van-Lendy Ramos Property Acquisition - South Link Road 1540
473-560-00-441.0000 $3,070.009/11/2014 Wayne Strong and Virginia
C. Strong Property Acquisition - South Link Road 1565
473-560-00-441.0000 $400.009/11/2014 Robert A. Zook and Carolyn
J. Zook Property Acquisition - South Link Road 1541
480-560-00-431.0502 $500.009/12/2014 Herring Appraisals
(0207808) Appraisal - 211 E. Madison Street 1547
480-560-00-431.0502 $500.009/12/2014 Herring Appraisals
(0207808) Appraisal - 323 S. 6th Street 1547
324-560-00-438.0300 $750.009/16/2014 Bank of New York Mellon
Trust Company, NA (053 Paying Agent Fees - Redevelopment District
Bonds of 1545
473-560-00-441.0000 $9,100.009/18/2014 Bethany Christian
Schools, Inc. Property Acquisition - South Link Road 1553
473-560-00-441.0000 $1,200.009/18/2014 GSCK Properties, LLC
Property Acquisition - South Link Road 1550
473-560-00-441.0000 $400.009/18/2014 Edward Moore and Laverne J.
Moore Property Acquisition - South Link Road 1551
406-560-00-413.0100 $351.719/18/2014 Goshen, City of (for
Redevelopment Payroll) FICA 1544
406-560-00-413.0501 $1,310.009/18/2014 Goshen, City of (for
Redevelopment Payroll) Health Insurance 1544
406-560-00-413.0200 $82.259/18/2014 Goshen, City of (for
Redevelopment Payroll) Medicare 1544
406-560-00-413.0300 $635.359/18/2014 Goshen, City of (for
Redevelopment Payroll) PERF 1544
406-560-00-411.0130 $5,672.739/18/2014 Goshen, City of (for
Redevelopment Payroll) Wages 1544
473-560-00-441.0000 $1,475.009/22/2014 Gabriela Garcia Property
Acquisition - South Link Road 1566
480-560-00-439.0930 $15.259/22/2014 Goshen Water & Sewer
(0204286) 211 E. Madison Utilities 1546
473-560-00-441.0000 $125,352.009/24/2014 Barkes, Kolbus, Rife
& Shuler-FIDUCIARY ACCT 0 Property Acquisition - South Link
Road (Weaver) 1549
473-560-00-441.0000 $5,025.009/24/2014 Byron J. Yoder and
Rebecca L. Yoder Property Acquisition - South Link Road 1567
480-560-00-431.0502 $950.009/26/2014 Abonmarche (05859) Right of
Way and Easement Survey - River Race Drive 1561
480-560-00-431.0502 $6,100.009/26/2014 Abonmarche (05859) Steury
Avenue/Lincoln Avenue Roadway Reconstructio 1564
480-560-00-439.0930 $58.509/26/2014 NIPSCO (02-00014) Utilities
- 211 E. Madison Street 1572
406-560-00-439.0930 $129.009/29/2014 Ball State
University-Building Better Communities Primacy of Place Conference
Registration 1560
473-560-00-441.0000 $385.009/30/2014 Mario Calderon and Leticia
Calderon Property Acquisition - South Link Road (Calderon Relo
1556
Thursday, October 9, 2014 Page 1 of 2
-
Invoice Date Payee Description Line Number AmountClaim #
473-560-00-441.0000 $3,900.009/30/2014 Mario Calderon and
Leticia Calderon Property Acquisition - South Link Road (Calderon
Relo 1557
480-560-00-442.0000 $161,777.799/30/2014 C & E Excavating
(00631) River Race Drive Construction 1568
473-560-00-441.0000 $27,012.409/30/2014 Stewart Title Company
Property Acquisition - South Link Road (Calderon Relo 1555
480-560-00-439.0930 $362.0010/1/2014 Elkhart County Recorder
(11130) Recording Fees for Envrionmental Restrictive Covenan
1559
480-560-00-442.0000 $2,169.6910/1/2014 Elkhart County Landfill
River Race Drive Construction 1571
480-560-00-431.0502 $1,769.8310/1/2014 Stiver's Lawn Care
(02-06577) Redevelopment Property Mowing 1563
480-560-00-439.0930 $104.6110/2/2014 NIPSCO (02-00014) Utilities
- 324 W. Washington Street 1572
406-560-00-413.0100 $353.2610/2/2014 Goshen, City of (for
Redevelopment Payroll) FICA 1562
406-560-00-413.0501 $1,310.0010/2/2014 Goshen, City of (for
Redevelopment Payroll) Health Insurance 1562
406-560-00-413.0200 $82.6210/2/2014 Goshen, City of (for
Redevelopment Payroll) Medicare 1562
406-560-00-413.0300 $638.1510/2/2014 Goshen, City of (for
Redevelopment Payroll) PERF 1562
406-560-00-411.0130 $5,697.7310/2/2014 Goshen, City of (for
Redevelopment Payroll) Wages 1562
480-560-00-439.0930 $10.0010/6/2014 Barkes, Kolbus, Rife &
Shuler, LLP (00311) 617 S. Third Street - Sales Disclosure Filing
Fee 1569
473-560-00-439.0930 $50.0010/6/2014 Barkes, Kolbus, Rife &
Shuler, LLP (00311) 65753 SR 15 - Closing Fees for Rescheduled
Hearing 1569
473-560-00-439.0930 $40.0010/6/2014 Barkes, Kolbus, Rife &
Shuler, LLP (00311) 65753 SR 15 - Wire Transfer Fees 1569
473-560-00-431.0502 $6,500.0010/6/2014 Jones Petrie Rafinski
Corp. Waterford Mills Parkway - Additional Design Engineerin
1570
473-560-00-431.0502 $43,798.7610/6/2014 Jones Petrie Rafinski
Corp. Waterford Mills Parkway - Land Acquisition Services &
1570
473-560-00-431.0502 $2,869.5010/6/2014 Jones Petrie Rafinski
Corp. Waterford Mills Parkway - Re-Acquire Existing Right of
1570
Total: $561,999.05
Thursday, October 9, 2014 Page 2 of 2
-
124 S. Main StreetGoshen, Indiana 46526
[email protected]
www.goshenhistorical.org
September 29, 2014
Mark Brinson, DirectorCommunity Development DepartmentCity of
Goshen204 EJefferson StGoshen, IN 46528
Goshen's hydraulic canal and the original industrial development
along that power source is afascinating and important piece of
Goshen's past.
The Goshen Historical Society would like to start a conversation
with you about installing a permanentexhibit of this history in the
power plant at the foot of the canal. We understand that the
building willnormally be locked but will be available for public
use.
With a green light fr.om you we can develop a working document
that will protect both the city and ourgroup. We will then develop
an idea of what we think the exhibit would look like, and with
yourapproval of a basic plan, we'd work up a grant proposal for
securing funds to develop this exhibit.
I could go on and on, but let's await that until we have a
formal response from your department.
John M HertzlerOffice Manager and B"e
-
MEMORANDUM
TO: Redevelopment Commission FROM: Mary Cripe, P.E. RE: NINTH
STREET TRAIL FROM COLLEGE AVENUE TO PURL STREET PROJECT NO.
2011-0052 DATE: October 1, 2014 The City received grant funding for
the design, right-of-way, construction and construction inspection,
with 80% Federal funding and 20% local funding. With the grant
funding, the Redevelopment Commission would be required to pay 100%
of the design, right-of-way, and construction inspection to the
specific entity (like the design consultant), and then submit an
INDOT-LPA Claim Voucher to INDOT for reimbursement of the 80%
Federal funds. We are invoiced for the 20% of the construction
costs, once the project is bid. Please see the table below with the
preliminary estimates for each phase of the Ninth Street Trail
project.
Phase Total CostFederal Funds (80%)
Local Funds (20%)
Comments
Design Engineering $190,000 $152,000 $38,000City pays 100%
upfront, then reimbursed 80%.
Right-of-Way $50,000 $40,000 $10,000City pays 100% upfront, then
reimbursed 80%.
Construction $910,000 $728,000 $182,000 City pays 20%.
Construction Inspection $90,000 $72,000 $18,000City pays 100%
upfront, then reimbursed 80%.
TOTAL $1,240,000 $992,000 $248,000 At this time, the
Redevelopment Commission needs to determine whether or not to
commit to paying for 100% of the local costs associated with this
Ninth Street Trail project. The various Civil City budget lines are
tied up with various projects associated with the US 33 North
Connector Route, US 33 from the Elkhart River to Third Street,
Kercher Road from the Railroad to Dierdorff Road and the Wilden
Avenue Reconstruction from the Rock Run Creek Bridge to Sixth
Street, and Civil City does not have any additional funds to assist
with this project at this time.
-
RESOLUTION 103-2014
Commitment to Fund Local Share Ninth Street Trail from College
Avenue to Purl Street
WHEREAS the City of Goshen received grant funding for the
design, right-of-way, construction and construction inspection for
the Ninth Street Trail from College Avenue to Purl Street; and
WHEREAS the grant funding provides for 80% federal funding and 20%
local funding, however, the City must pay 100% of the design,
right-of-way and construction inspection direct, then submit a
claim voucher for reimbursement of the 80% federal funding; and
WHEREAS the preliminary estimates for the 20% local funds total
$248,000. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Goshen
Redevelopment Commission commits to fund the local share of the
Ninth Street Trail from College Avenue to Purl Street project.
PASSED and ADOPTED on October 14, 2014. GOSHEN REDEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION Thomas W. Stump, President Jeremy P. Stutsman,
Secretary
-
RESOLUTION 104-2014
Authorize Issuance of Request for Proposals to Purchase for 324
S. Fifth Street, 211 E. Madison Street and 323 S. Sixth Street,
Goshen, Indiana
WHEREAS the Goshen Redevelopment Commission is interested in
requesting proposals for the purchase of the real estate at 324 S.
Fifth Street, 211 E. Madison Street and 323 S. Sixth Street,
Goshen, Indiana; and WHEREAS a copy of a Request for Proposals to
Purchase the above real estate is attached to and made a part of
this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Goshen
Redevelopment Commission that the Redevelopment Commission
authorizes the issuance of a Request for Proposals to Purchase the
real estate at 324 S. Fifth Street, 211 E. Madison Street and 323
S. Sixth Street, Goshen, Indiana, to be opened at a subsequent
meeting of the Redevelopment Commission. PASSED and ADOPTED on
October 14, 2014. Goshen Redevelopment Commission Thomas W. Stump,
President Jeremy P. Stutsman, Secretary
-
1
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS TO PURCHASE
The City of Goshen, through its Redevelopment Commission
(Redevelopment) is requesting proposals to purchase three parcels
of real estate north of Madison Street (U.S. 33) and east of Main
Street (S.R. 15) in Goshen, Indiana. Proposals may be submitted to
purchase all three parcels, any one of the parcels or any
combination of the parcels. The three parcels offered to be
purchase are the following:
324 S. FIFTH STREET (FIFTH STREET BUILDING)
1) The Fifth Street Building is a building approximately two
thousand nine hundred eighty (2,980)
square feet located east of Main Street (S.R. 15) and north of
Madison Street (U.S. 33), as depicted on the map attached to this
Request for Proposals as Exhibit A.
2) The legal description for the Fifth Street Building is as
follows:
Lot Numbered Forty-three (43) as said lot is known and
designated on the recorded Plat of Second South Addition, sometimes
known as Barnes Second South Addition to Goshen; said Plat being
recorded in Deed Record 15, page 489 in the Office of the Recorder
of Elkhart County, Indiana.
3) The Fifth Street Building is located on the south edge of the
Goshen downtown area. The building
has been used as a residence, but Redevelopment would consider a
commercial use (subject to zoning approval) if such use is
compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
4) The Fifth Street Building does not now meet the requirements
of the Citys Neighborhood
Preservation Ordinance. A purchaser must bring the building into
compliance with the Citys Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance
before the building is occupied. Redevelopment expects that the
building will be occupied with nine (9) months of transferring
title to the Purchaser. The sale of real estate to any Purchaser
will be in the real estates present condition, AS IS, and without
any warranty of habitability.
5) A proposal to purchase the Fifth Street Building should
explain all structural improvements that the
Purchaser intends to make to the building. 6) The Purchaser must
make the following repairs or improvements to the real estate
within nine (9)
months of the closing:
1. Roof a. The improperly installed roof shingles must be
removed and replaced. b. The roof turret valley must be properly
flashed. c. A large hole in the roof presently filled with tar must
be properly repaired and shingled. d. The roof over the rear porch
must be properly repaired and re-shingled.
-
2
2. Foundation The foundation supporting the rear porch must be
properly repaired or replaced.
3. Windows / Doors
a. The rear entry door must be replaced. b. The northwest front
window frames, sashes, cornices, soffits, support pillars and
wall
studs need to be replaced.
4. Stairs and Porches a. The rear porch must be property
repaired. b. The rear porch steps must be replaced. c. The porch
bricks must be replaced and tucked pointed. d. The cistern in the
center of the brick pad on the south side of the house must be
filled.
5. Chipping and Peeling Paint
The peeling paint and fading plaster must be removed and
replaced. The entire interior of the house must be painted.
6. Furnace
The furnace needs to be replaced.
7. Electric System The electric system needs to be replaced with
a system meeting current residential codes.
8. Exterior Bricks
All exterior bricks that have fallen out or have been damaged
must be replaced. 7) The asking price for the Fifth Street Building
is Sixty Three Thousand Dollars ($63,000.00).
8) Redevelopment will retain a mortgage on the Fifth Street
Building in the amount of the estimated
cost of the required repairs. Redevelopment will release the
mortgage once the required repairs have been made. Redevelopment
will subrogate this mortgage to permit the Purchaser to obtain
financing for the purchase price and/or for the required
repairs.
211 EAST MADISON STREET (MADISON STREET BUILDING)
1) The Madison Street building is a building approximately 1,690
square feet. The building is
immediate east of the Fifth Street Building as depicted on the
map attached to this Request for Proposals as Exhibit A. The lot is
approximately one tenth (1/10) of an acre.
2) The legal description for the Madison Street building is as
follows: Sixty feet (60) off and from the West end of Lot Numbered
Thirty-eight (38) as said lot is known and designated on the
recorded Plat of Second South Addition, sometimes known as Barnes
Second South Addition to Goshen; said Plat being recorded in Deed
Record 15, page 489 in the Office of the Recorder of Elkhart
County, Indiana.
-
3
3) The building has been used as a dentist office, a screen
printing business and other commercial uses. However, the real
estate is zoned R-1. Previous variances permitted certain limited
commercial uses.
4) The building will be sold in the real estates present
condition, AS IS, and without any warranty of habitability. The
Commission expects that the building will be occupied within nine
(9) months of transferring title to the Purchaser.
5) A proposal to purchase the Madison Street Building should
include all structural improvements that the Purchaser intends to
make to the building.
6) The asking price for the Madison Street Building is Ninety
Thousand Dollars ($90,000.00).
323 S. SIXTH STREET (SIXTH STREET BUILDING)
1) The Sixth Street Building is a residential two unit rental,
although the building is zoned R-1. The building is immediately
west of 211 East Madison as depicted on the map attached to this
Request for Proposals as Exhibit A. The lot is approximately 66 by
105.
2) The legal description for the Sixth Street Building is as
follows:
Lot Numbered Thirty-eight (38), less and excepting the West
sixty feet (60) thereof, as said lot is known and designated on the
recorded Plat of Second South Addition, sometimes known as Barnes
Second South Addition to Goshen; said Plat being recorded in Deed
Record 15, page 489 in the Office of the Recorder of Elkhart
County, Indiana.
3) The Sixth Street Building is located near the Goshen downtown
area. The building has been used for residential purposes but
Redevelopment would consider a commercial use (subject to zoning
approval) if such use is compatible with the surrounding
neighborhood.
4) The sale of the Sixth Street Building to any Purchaser will
be in the real estates present condition, AS IS, and without any
warranty of habitability or fitness for any particular purpose.
5) Redevelopment expects the building will be occupied within
nine (9) months of transferring title to Purchaser.
6) A proposal to purchase the Sixth Street Building should
explain all structural improvements that the Purchaser intends to
make to the building.
7) The asking price for the Sixth Street Building is Seventy
Thousand Dollars ($70,000.00).
TERMS AND CONDITIONS TO BE ADDRESSED OR ACCEPTED BY PROPOSAL USE
OF PREMISES A. The real estate parcels must be used by Purchaser in
conformity with all applicable laws and
regulations of any government entity or public authority.
-
4
B. The real estate parcels must be used in a manner that would
not be reasonably offensive to the
owners or users of adjoining real estate or would tend to create
a nuisance. C. Proposer may seek a use variance or rezoning to
permit additional uses of the real estate parcels.
A proposal may be conditioned on receiving the variance or
rezoning. CONDITIONS OF SALE A. Purchase Price
The purchase price shall be tendered in cash or in other
functionally equivalent form at the closing.
B. Proposals Submitted by a Trust
Any proposal submitted by a trust must identify each beneficiary
of the trust and whether the settler is empowered to revoke or
modify the trust.
C. Agreement
The entity submitting the selected proposal will be required to
enter into a purchase agreement incorporating the terms of this
Request for Proposals, the terms included in the successful
proposal and other provisions negotiated by Redevelopment and the
entity submitting the proposal.
D. Risk of Loss
Purchaser shall be responsible for loss to the real estate
beginning on the date of closing.
SELECTION PROCESS AND SCHEDULE
A. The proposals will be opened by the Goshen Redevelopment
Commission at the Commissions meeting on December 9, 2014 at 4:00
p.m. in the Goshen City Court Room/Council Chambers at 111 East
Jefferson Street, Goshen, Indiana.
B. The proposals will be considered by Redevelopment.
Redevelopment reserves the right to refer the
proposals received to Mark Brinson, Community Development
Director, and such other Redevelopment staff as Redevelopment deems
appropriate to review the proposals and make recommendations.
Redevelopment reserves the right to interview the parties
submitting proposals or to request the parties submitting proposals
to provide supplemental information.
C. Redevelopment reserves the right to accept or reject any or
all proposals. If Redevelopment
selects a proposal, it will select the highest and best
proposal. Redevelopment may then enter into negotiations for a
purchase agreement with the entity submitting the highest and best
proposal.
-
5
D. In determining which proposal is the highest and best
proposal, Redevelopment will consider the
following: 1. Purchasers proposed purchase price. 2. The plans
and financial ability of Purchaser to purchase and improve the real
estate with
reasonable promptness. 3. The character of the improvements
proposed to be made by Purchaser within nine (9)
months of the closing. 4. Whether the proposed use is compatible
with the neighborhood. 5. Whether the proposed use is consistent
with uses proposed for the other parcels offered
for purchase if the proposals is for less than all three
parcels. 6. Whether Purchaser is a trust which did not identify all
its beneficiaries and whether the
settler is empowered to revoke or modify the trust. 7. Whether
the proposed purchase will serve the interest of the community.
E. In the event no proposal or set of proposals are received
that meets or exceeds the purchase price
established for each of the three parcels of real estate, the
Redevelopment Commission may select a proposal offering less than
the established purchase price of all or any of the real estate
parcels, but only after Redevelopment accepts additional proposals
until at least January 12, 2015. After accepting proposals for the
additional period, Redevelopment may select the highest and best
proposal using the criteria set forth in this section with no
minimum price.
SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS
A. Proposals to purchase any or all of the real estate parcels
shall be submitted to Mark Brinson, Goshen City Community
Development Director, 204 East Jefferson Street, Goshen, Indiana
46528, no later than 12:00 p.m. on December 9, 2014. Mark Brinson
may be contacted to answer any questions. Any oral communication
will be considered unofficial and non-binding.
B. The proposal shall address all issues contained in the
Request for Proposals. Any exceptions to the terms of the Request
for Proposals should be clearly noted.
C. Redevelopment reserves the right to waive informalities or
irregularities in the selection process. This Request for Proposals
does not commit Redevelopment to sell all or any of the real estate
parcels. Redevelopment reserves the right to accept or reject any
or all proposals received, to negotiate with qualified persons or
entities who submit a proposal, or to cancel the Request.
Redevelopment may require a person or entity submitting a proposal
to submit any additional data or information Redevelopment deems
necessary.
D. Redevelopment may also require a person or entity submitting
a proposal to revise one or more elements of its proposal in
accordance with contract negotiations. Redevelopment reserves the
right to evaluate proposals for a period of sixty (60) days before
deciding which proposal, if any, to accept. The terms of any
proposal shall be maintained through the evaluation period.
E. All proposals shall be submitted in a sealed envelope. The
envelope must be labeled with the submitting person or entitys
name, address and telephone number. The proposal must be clearly
marked as a Redevelopment Building Proposal.
-
6
F. If a proposal is sent through the mail or other delivery
system, the sealed envelope shall be enclosed in a separate
envelope with the notation PROPOSAL ENCLOSED on the face of the
outer envelope.
G. All proposals submitted become the property of the City and
are a matter of public record. H. The City of Goshen is not
responsible for late or lost proposals due to mail service
inadequacies,
traffic or other similar reasons. Proposals received after the
designated time will not be considered in the selection process
unless no set of proposals is received offering to purchase the
real estate parcels for the price established for each of the three
parcels of real estate.
I. Any modifications made to a proposal before submission must
be initialed in ink by the submitting entitys authorized
representative. A submitting entity may, upon written request,
modify or withdraw their proposal at any time prior to the opening
date and time. A request to modify or withdraw a proposal must be
signed by the same person who signed the original proposal
submitted. No proposal may be modified or withdrawn after the
opening of the proposals.
J. Redevelopment may not accept a bid from a person who owes
delinquent taxes, special assessments, penalties, interest or costs
directly attributable to a prior tax sale or to an agent of such a
person.
K. All requests for clarification to this solicitation must be
received at least one (1) week before the opening date to allow for
the issuance of any addendums determined by the City to be
necessary. A Proposer shall rely only on written addenda issued by
Mark Brinson, Community Development Director. Requests shall be
made in writing and may be directed to:
Mark Brinson, Community Development Director
City of Goshen Redevelopment Commission 204 East Jefferson
Street, Suite 2
Goshen, Indiana 46528 Telephone: (574) 537-3824
E-Mail: [email protected] L. Interpretations or
clarifications determined necessary by the City will be issued by
addenda mailed,
faxed or otherwise delivered to all parties recorded by the City
as having received the proposal documents. Only questions answered
by formal written addenda will be binding. Oral and other
interpretations or clarifications will be without legal effect.
M. Each proposal must include a cover letter signed by a person
authorized to submit and sign the proposal. The cover letter shall
include the following:
a. The person or entitys name, address, and telephone number; b.
The name of the person authorized to submit/sign the proposal,
his/her title,
telephone number and e-mail address; and c. The person or
entitys Federal ID number or last four digits of the social
security
number.
N. A conceptual explanation of proposed repairs and
improvements, if any, including a plan with as much detail as
possible.
-
7
O. The person or entity submitting the proposal shall provide a
financial statement that is specific enough so that a proper
determination can be made of the person or entitys financial
capability to fulfill the financial obligations of the proposal.
The proposal must include financial information demonstrating the
financial ability to carry out proposal.
Estimate of Cost to Bring Real Estate into Compliance
Each proposal for the Fifth Street Building shall provide an
estimate of the cost that will be incurred to bring the premises
into compliance with Goshens Neighborhood Preservation
Ordinance.
GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
A. CONFLICT OF INTEREST / NON-COLLUSION
1. All submitting entities must certify that the entity has not
entered into a combination or agreement relative to the price to be
proposed nor taken any action to prevent a person from submitting a
proposal; or to induce a person to refrain from submitting a
proposal. The submitting entitys proposal is made without reference
to any other proposal unless specifically so indicated.
2. All submitting entities certify that they are not in a
situation where the submitting entitys private interest would
interfere with its loyalty or responsibilities to the City of
Goshen or raise questions about such interference. The submitting
entity agrees not to accept work, enter into a contract, accept an
obligation or engage in any activity, paid or unpaid, that is
inconsistent or incompatible with the submitting entitys
obligations, or the scope of services to be rendered to the
Redevelopment Commission. The submitting entity shall warrant that,
to the best of their knowledge, there is no other contract or duty
on the submitting entitys part that conflicts with or is
inconsistent with the services sought to be provided to the
Redevelopment Commission.
3. The submitting entity if selected must sign and have
notarized the Conflict of Interest / Non-Collusion Affidavit.
B. APPLICABLE LAWS
Any contract resulting from a proposal submitted will be
construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State
of Indiana.
C. COSTS FOR SUBMITTING PROPOSAL
The City of Goshen or its Redevelopment Commission will not be
liable for any costs incurred by the respondents in replying to
this Request for Proposals. The City of Goshen or its Redevelopment
Commission are not liable for any costs for work or services
performed by the selected Proposer prior to the award of a
contract.
D. AUTHORITY TO BIND SUBMITTING ENTITY
The signatory for the entity submitting a proposal represents
that he or she has been duly authorized to execute the proposal
documents on behalf of the submitting entity and has obtained all
necessary or applicable approvals to make this submission on behalf
of entity before affixing his or her signature to the proposal.
-
8
EXHIBIT A
THREE PARCELS OF REAL ESTATE
-
F:\Redevelopment\2 - 2014 Meetings\(2014) 10-14 October\2014 10
01 Memo to Redevelopment re HSIP Phase 2 - Additional
funding.doc
MEMORANDUM
TO: Goshen Redevelopment Commission FROM: Mary Cripe, P.E. RE:
TWO RAILROAD CROSSING SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS DES. NO. 1400714 GOSHEN
PROJECT NO. 2009-0046 DATE: October 1, 2014 The INDOT-LPA Agreement
for the Railroad Crossing Safety Improvement Phase 2 - Installation
of Grade Crossing Warning Devices at College Avenue and Jefferson
Street was presented and approved at the September 2014
Redevelopment Commission meeting. The Redevelopment Commission
budgeted $200,000.00 towards Phase 1 of this project in the 2014
budget, and included an additional $75,000.00 towards Phase 2 in
the 2015 budget for a total of $275,000.00. So far, the
Redevelopment Commission has spent $177,226.48 on Phase 1, and in
worst case scenario, there could potentially be up to an additional
$5,000.00 needed towards Phase 1. $275,000.00 Total amount budgeted
in 2014/2015
- $182,226.48 Total amount spent for Phase 1 $ 92,773.52 Total
amount remaining for Phase 2 In the Highway Safety Improvement
Project grant application, the Engineering Department applied for
funding to improve three (3) crossings: Kercher Road, College
Avenue and Jefferson Street. Since the application, we have decided
to only do two (2) of the crossings, but the Federal funding
allocated to the project was not reduced. The preliminary engineers
estimate is $1,282,222.00 for the design engineering and
construction. So, the 10% local share will be $128,222.00. This
would be the most we would have to contribute and we anticipate
that the actual cost will be less. $128,222.00 Estimated 10% Local
Match for Design and Construction of Phase 2
- $ 92,773.52 Amount of Funding Available for Phase 2 $
35,448.48 Additional Funding Needed Today, we are requesting
consideration and approval from the Redevelopment Commission for
the additional $35,448.52. This would increase the total funding by
the Redevelopment Commission to $310,448.48 for eight (8) railroad
crossing safety improvements. The total amount of Federal funds
currently allocated to the two projects is $2,749,038.32.
-
GosHenTHE MAPLE CITY
'.
Engineering DepartmentCITY OF GOSHEN204 East Jefferson Street,
Suite I Goshen, IN 46528-3405
Phone (574) 534-220 I Fax (574) 533-8626. TDD (574)
[email protected]. www.goshenindiana.org
MEMORANDUMTO: Redevelopment Commission
FROM: Mary Cripe, P.E.
RE: NORTHWEST BIKE TRAILPROJECT NO. 2010-0023
DATE: October 1,2014
After obtaining the topographic survey for the Northwest Bike
Trail along the New CR 17corridor, we discovered some concerns with
regards to the location of the trail in relationship tothe drainage
swales along the new CR 17. With the proposed new trail
construction to be insidethe new CR 17 right-of-way/fence line,
some of the drainage swales would need to be filled in oradditional
right-of-way purchased along with the new fence relocated. Please
see the attachedsummary letter from DLZ.
At this point in time, it would be my recommendation to proceed
with the new trail along theeast side of the old CR 17. Before
proceeding in that direction, we are interested in hearing
thethoughts and ideas of the members of the Redevelopment
Commission.
F:\Projects\2010\201O-0023 _ Northwest Bike Path Phase
2\Correspondance\2014.10.01 Memo to RDC re Trail Route.doc
-
...;~DLZARCHITECTURE' ENGINEERING' PLANNINGSURVEYING'
CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
September 9, 2014
INNOVATIVE IDEASEXCEPTIONAL DESIGNUNMATCHED CLIENT SERVICE
Mrs. Mary M. Cripe, PECity EngineerCity of Goshen204 East
Jefferson Street, Suite 100Goshen, IN 46528
RE: NW Bike Trail- Additional Cost associated with New CR 17
Route
Dear Mrs. Cripe
During the preliminary design of the above referenced trail
along (new) CR 17, DLZ has determined that thereis insufficient
room from the top of the back slope to the Right of Way fence.
Hence, two options for theproposed alignment of the trail exist.
Either acquire additional Right of Way behind the County's
limitedaccess Right of Way, or create an embankment for the
proposed trail by filling in the west ditch of (new) CR17.
Both options have advantages and disadvantages. Obtaining
additional Right of Way from the adjacentproperty owner (Russell
Stark) will be very difficult, he has already indicated at the
public meeting and viawritten comments (see attachment) that he is
very much opposed to this trail along the (new) CR 17. Inaddition,
his farm was bisected by the construction of (new) CR 17 and he has
indicated "We've had enough!This will be the third experience of
government taking charge of our land!" I believe if the City was to
pursuethis option, they would have to obtain the land via
condemnation.
The remaining option of constructing the trail along (new) CR 17
would be to fill in the west ditch. Based onpreliminary discussions
with the Elkhart County Highway Department, they indicated they are
not particularlyfond ofthis option. However, they would consider it
contingent upon a hydraulic study being completed todemonstrate
that the capacity of the ditch is adequate for both facilities
(roadway and trail). To minimize theimpacts to the ditch, it would
be desirable to construct the trail as close to the existing fence
as possible. Inorder to do this, the entire length of the fence
would need to be removed and reset, and Temporary Right ofWay would
need to be acquired from Mr. Stark. Since temporary Right of Way
would be all that is neededfrom MR. Stark, he may be amenable to
the request.
Regardless of which option is pursued along (new) CR 17, there
are costs associated to this route that shouldalso be taken into
consideration. The box culvert for the Huber Powel Ditch will need
to be extended to allowthe trail to traverse the ditch. Also, west
of (Old) CR 17, wetlands exist as indicated from the
delineationreport. To traverse this area without taking substantial
Right of Way from Mr. Stark and to limit the impact tothe wetlands,
a boardwalk will be required.
825 S Barr St, Fort Wayne, IN 46802-2727 I OFFICE 260.420.3114 I
ONLINE WWWDLZ.COM
Akron Arlington Heights Burns Harbor Chicago Cleveland Columbus
Detroit Fort Wayne Frankfort Hammond Indianapolis Joliet Kalamazoo
Lansing LouisvilleMadison Pittsburgh Saint Joseph South Bend
Toledo
-
ARCHITECTURE ENGINEERING" PLANNINGSURVEYING CONSTRUCTION
SERViCES
INNOVATIVE IDEASEXCEPTIONAL DESIGNUNMATCHED CLIENT SERVICE
NW Bike TrailAdditional Cost associated with New CR 17 Route
Page 2 of 2
We have prepared an opinion of probable construction/Right of
Way costs associated with the challengesdescribed above and is
summarized below:
Opinion of Probable Construction/Right of Way Costsfor Trail
Route along (new) CR 17
Alignment Option Perm. Temp. Remove/Reset Borrow Hydraulic Box
Boardwalk TOTALR/W R/W Fence lli!!l Study Culvert Ext.Permanent
Right of $42,000 N/A N/A N/A N/A $16,000 $250,000 $308,000Way
AcquisitionEmbankment /
N/A $10,000 $46,750 $235,000 $20,000 $16,000 $250,000
$577,750Fill Ditch
The costs shown above were not previously identified in the
prior route analysis study/report, since thesurvey and preliminary
design of the trail were not completed at that time. DLZ desires to
provide the bestpossible information to the City of Goshen so that
an informed and responsible decision can be made.
The previous route study indicated that a savings of $143,300
would be obtained from utilizing the (new) CR17 route. However,
this savings is eliminated as result ofthe design constraints due
to permitting,INDOT/FHWA design requirements, and/or
constructability of the trail within existing Right of Way.
Therefore, DLZ recommends that the City of Goshen review the
route along (old) CR 17 and give furtherconsideration to this
option.
If you have any questions or if you would like to discuss this
matter further, please do not hesitate to contactour office.
Sincerely,ti.~~Project Manager
cc: AlG, File
M :\proj\1366\2101\Docs\Letters\2014-09-09 (Cripe) .docx
-
laDLZ~ReHITE'CTUIIE. ENGINEERING. PLAHilllNG5U'RVEyjNG'
.CoNsTRue-rfoM scRvicES
INNOVATIVE IDEASEXCEPTIONAL I;lESIGNUNMATCHED CLIENT
SE;RVICE
Northwest Bike TrailPublic Meeting Comment Form
Wednesday May 21 st, 2014
-
SIGNATURE: -----Je~.{L.. eu.Il/-7 W 4-tJvu,e < l-~ >f,U
roj 'J0d A pu
tLta1dd;~.~ >~dHJL...cLv..O ff2~ P)>~
111 W Columbia SI, Ste 100, Fort Wayne, IN 468021710 I OFFICE
260.420.3114 I ONLINE WWW.DL2.COMAkron Ar1ington Heights Burns
Harbor ChIcago Cleveland Columbus Detroit Fort Wayne Frankfort
Hammond Indianapolis Joliet Kalamazoo lansing Louisvnle
Madison Melvindale Pittsburgh Saint Joseph South Bend Toledo
-
Memorandum
To: Redevelopment Commission From: Becky Hershberger Date:
October 14, 2014 RE: Acceptance of Settlement Offer from Salem
Insurance for Fire Damage at 405 S. 3rd Street
Discussion regarding next steps for the property
In July of this year, the property owned by the Commission at
405 S. 3rd Street was damaged by fire, making the structure
uninhabitable. This property is a two-unit residence that has been
rented continuously since it was acquired (see attached map). The
insurance company has offered a settlement of $80,736.99, providing
the structure will be demolished. The settlement offer would
increase by $16,848.88, for a total settlement of $97,585.87, if
the structure will be restored. This area was identified by the
Millrace Advisory Group as a potential redevelopment area and
marketing is anticipated following the completion of the current
developments in this area. Of the four houses in this half block,
one has already been demolished and it is anticipated that all
houses within this half block would be demolished at the time of
marketing to allow for new construction. The recommendation to the
Commission is to accept the offer of $80,736.99 and demolish the
structure. The insurance company estimated the cost for replacement
to be approximately $107,000.00. Based on an average monthly rental
income of $1,500.00, it would take quite some time to break even on
that investment. With redevelopment planned for this area within
the next few years, investing into the property with such a small
return does not make sense.
-
3RD STR
EET
MADISON STREET
MONROE STREET
MADISON STREET
MONROE STREET
405 S. 3rd StreetFire Damaged Property2013Aerial Photo
0 50 10025
Feet
1 inch = 100 feet
The City of Goshen's Digital Data is the property of the City of
Goshen and Elkhart County, Indiana. All graphic data supplied by
the city and county has been derived from public records that are
constantly undergoing change and is not warranted for content or
accuracy. The city and county do not guarantee the positional or
thematic accuracy of the data. The cartographic digital files are
not a legal representation of any of the features depicted, and the
city and county disclaim any sumption of the legal status they
represent. Any implied warranties, including warranties
ofmerchantability or fitness for a particular purpose, shall be
expressly excluded. The data represents an actual reproduction of
data contained in the city's or county's computer files. This data
may be incomplete or inaccurate, and is subject to modifications
and changes. City of Goshen and Elkhart County cannot be held
liable for errors or omissions in the data. The recipient's use and
reliance upon such data is at the recipient's risk. By using this
data, the recipient agrees to protect, hold harmless and indemnify
the City of Goshen and Elkhart County and its employees and
officers. This indemnity covers reasonable attorney fees and all
court costs associated with the defense of the city and county
arising out of thisdisclaimer.
The City of GoshenDepartment ofCommunity Development
204 East Jefferson Street, Goshen, Indiana 46528Phone:
574-537-3824 Fax: 574-533-8626
beckyhershbergerLine
beckyhershbergerLine
-
Memorandum
To: Redevelopment Commission From: Becky Hershberger Date:
October 14, 2014 RE: Request to approve reimbursement to Goshen
Brewing Company for redevelopment costs
related to utility extensions at 315 W. Washington Street
(NIPSCO Building)
As part of the Lease Agreement for the NIPSCO building at 315 W.
Washington Street with Goshen Brewing Company, Redevelopment
committed to the extension of sewer, water, gas and electric to the
building up to $20,000. During the development of the parking lot,
water and gas were extended to the building site but stubbed just
short of the building. Sewer was extended to the site and a line
was run into the building. Electric was not addressed as part of
the parking lot project. To date, Goshen Brewing Company has spent
$18,066 on costs related to extending the electrical service. These
costs include providing wiring and conduit from the main
distribution panel to the new transformer pad and from the
transformer pad to the NIPSCO pole. The costs also include removal
and replacement of concrete to allow for conduit to be installed to
the building and the costs to grade, form and pour the new
transformer pad that was required. NIPSCO is requiring a $14,928.68
deposit from Goshen Brewing Company which will be returned to them
when the electrical meter is installed and turned on and that cost
is NOT included in the reimbursement request. Goshen Brewing
Company is requesting reimbursement for the $18,066 they have paid
to date related to extending electric to the building and Staff
recommends the Commission approve the reimbursement request.
-
Memorandum
To: Redevelopment Commission From: Becky Hershberger Date:
October 14, 2014 RE: Request to Authorize Negotiation &
Execution of a Contract for Asbestos Assessment with
TecServ Environmental, Inc.
There are four (4) residential homes owned by the Commission
that need to be demolished to allow for the construction of the
parking lot east of the Hawks Building between Madison Street and
Jefferson Street. A map of the properties is attached. All four (4)
homes are currently occupied and will be through December 31st.
During that time, we plan to complete the required asbestos
assessments so that we can proceed with any necessary abatement
after the first of the year. The demolition of the structures is
already part of C&Es contract. We requested three (3) quotes
for the assessment work and they are as follows:
TecServ Environmental, Inc. - $2,520.00 Diamond Environmental
Services, Inc. - $2,700.00 ACM Engineering & Environmental
Services - $4,960.00
We are requesting permission from the Commission to authorize
the negotiation and execution of a contract with TecServ
Environmental, Inc. to complete the assessments at the four (4)
properties per the attached quote with a not-to-exceed price of
$2,520. If approved, we will bring back the executed contract for
ratification at next months meeting.
-
3RD STR
EET
JEFFERSON STREET
301 - 307 S. 3rd StreetProperties Slated for Demolition in
February 20152013Aerial Photo
0 30 6015
Feet
1 inch = 50 feet
The City of Goshen's Digital Data is the property of the City of
Goshen and Elkhart County, Indiana. All graphic data supplied by
the city and county has been derived from public records that are
constantly undergoing change and is not warranted for content or
accuracy. The city and county do not guarantee the positional or
thematic accuracy of the data. The cartographic digital files are
not a legal representation of any of the features depicted, and the
city and county disclaim any sumption of the legal status they
represent. Any implied warranties, including warranties
ofmerchantability or fitness for a particular purpose, shall be
expressly excluded. The data represents an actual reproduction of
data contained in the city's or county's computer files. This data
may be incomplete or inaccurate, and is subject to modifications
and changes. City of Goshen and Elkhart County cannot be held
liable for errors or omissions in the data. The recipient's use and
reliance upon such data is at the recipient's risk. By using this
data, the recipient agrees to protect, hold harmless and indemnify
the City of Goshen and Elkhart County and its employees and
officers. This indemnity covers reasonable attorney fees and all
court costs associated with the defense of the city and county
arising out of thisdisclaimer.
The City of GoshenDepartment ofCommunity Development
204 East Jefferson Street, Goshen, Indiana 46528Phone:
574-537-3824 Fax: 574-533-8626
beckyhershbergerLine
beckyhershbergerLine
-
TecServ ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. Technical Expertise in Environmental
and Safety Services
October 7, 2014
Ms. Becky Hershberger
Brownfield Coordinator
City of Goshen RE: Proposal for Asbestos Inspections
204 E. Jefferson Street, Suite 2 301, 303, 305, and 307 S.
3rd
Street
Goshen, Indiana 46528 Goshen, IN
Dear Ms. Hershberger:
Thank you for allowing TecServ Environmental, Inc. the
opportunity to present another of our environmental
services to you and the City of Goshen. We are pleased to submit
the following proposals. Based upon our
observations at the above referenced locations, our quotation
for the asbestos inspections are as follows:
1. Approximately 65 to 75 individual samples (with mastic on
floor tile) will be taken from throughout the buildings.
2. Approximately one (1) day will be required to gather the
asbestos samples from the buildings. 3. Three (3) to five (5) days
will be required for the laboratory analytical to be completed with
faxed
copies. A written report will be generated to indicate the
materials that contain asbestos and their
location within the buildings.
4. The cost to complete the inspection is as follows:
301 S. 3rd Street $ 580.00
303 S. 3rd Street $ 580.00
305 S. 3rd Street $ 580.00
307 S. 3rd Street $ 780.00 $2,520.00
5. The inspection can be performed with the occupants.
Notification should be made to the current occupants that holes
will be opened in the walls.
6. Inspections can be commenced the week of November 1, 2014. 7.
Point counting lab analysis is $125.00 per sample. This will only
be accomplished with your approval
in advance.
Thank you for the opportunity to present you with this proposal.
Should you have any further questions or if you
would like to meet to review this proposal further, please do
not hesitate to contact me at (574) 259-4022.
Sincerely, Approved by:
TecServ Environmental, Inc.
_________________________________
Position:
Dennis I. Carter _________________________________
Date:_____________________________
.....~..TeeS......r:.~rerv.. ,.
-
RESOLUTION 105-2014
Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Contract for Asbestos
Assessment with TecServ Environmental, Inc. for
301, 303, 305 & 307 S. Third Street, Goshen, Indiana WHEREAS
the Redevelopment Commission owns four residential homes that need
to be demolished to allow for the construction of a parking lot
east of the Hawks Building between Madison Street and Jefferson
Street; and WHEREAS three quotes for asbestos assessment work were
requested and are as follows:
TecServ Environmental, Inc. - $2,520.00; Diamond Environmental
Services, Inc. - $2,700.00; and ACM Engineering & Environmental
Services - $4,960.00.
WHEREAS it is requested that Goshen Redevelopment Commission
authorize City staff to negotiate a Contract with TecServ
Environmental, Inc. for the Asbestos Assessment for 301, 303, 305
& 307 S. Third Street, Goshen, Indiana. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED by the Goshen Redevelopment Commission that: 1. City staff
is authorized to negotiate a Contract on behalf of the City of
Goshen and the Goshen
Redevelopment Commission with TecServ Environmental, Inc. that
is consistent with their quote for a not-to-exceed price of
$2,520.00.
2. The City of Goshen Legal Department shall prepare a written
Contract to be executed by the City of Goshen for these
services.
3. The Contract shall be presented to the Redevelopment
Commission for ratification at a subsequent
Redevelopment Commission meeting.
PASSED and ADOPTED on October 14, 2014. GOSHEN REDEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION Thomas W. Stump, President Jeremy P. Stutsman,
Secretary
-
RESOLUTION 106-2014
Approve and Authorize Execution of the Bridge & MSE Wall
Location Memo of Understanding (MOU) for the US 33 Bypass over
Norfolk South Railways
WHEREAS the State of Indianas Department of Transportation,
Norfolk Southern Railways and the City of Goshen are working
together on the Marion Line Curve Realignment project; and WHEREAS
Redevelopment has agreed to fund the acquisition of 117 and 119
South Ninth Street as part of this project; and WHEREAS the Memo of
Understanding attached to this Resolution sets forth the
partnership between the State of Indianas Department of
Transportation, Norfolk Southern Railways and the City of Goshen
for this portion of the project as well as sets forth the work
items for each entity in Exhibit A. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
by the Goshen Redevelopment Commission that: 1. The terms and
conditions of the Memo of Understanding as attached to this
Resolution are approved. 2. Community Development Director Mark
Brinson is authorized to execute the Memo of Understanding
between the State of Indianas Department of Transportation,
Norfolk Southern Railways and the City of Goshen on behalf of the
City of Goshen and the Goshen Redevelopment Commission.
PASSED and ADOPTED on September 9, 2014. GOSHEN REDEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION Thomas W. Stump, President Jeremy P. Stutsman,
Secretary
-
US 33 Bypass over Norfolk Southern RailwaysBridge & MSE Wall
Location Memo of Understanding (MOU)
(Option GA)This MOU between the State of Indiana's Department of
Transportation (INDOT), Norfolk SouthernRailways, and the City of
Goshen, Indiana is based on the previous teleconference meeting on
May 26,20014, all parties agreed to look into Option 6 again with
some variations. Norfolk Southern agreed toreview these sub-options
and determine the most cost effective approach based on speed (from
acommerce point of view), ROW acquisition, maintenance, and
reduction of the length of the structure.The quantities are based
on the pay items that will be affected due to the
lengthening/shortening of thebridge between US 33 Bypass project
stations 36+50 and 40+00. All differential costs are
establishedfrom Option 4, which was the "base option" used by INDOT
for the funding of the project initially.
The first option, which was proposed by Norfolk Southern
Railways, would change the degree of curvefrom 9 to 10 degrees with
new and future track alignments straddling the base curve. The
second optionwould build the 9 degree curve and call it "the
relocated track" until a future track is needed along theMarion
Line. A concentric or non-concentric track would be built to the
west; this would replace the"relocated track" and the "existing
relocated track" would be reconfigured as the future track, which
inturn, would connect with a future track which parallels the
Chicago Line. This option may save ROWacquisition costs and reduce
the bridge length compared to the previous option, but Norfolk
Southern'scost of reconfiguring the tracks would increase due to a
second track reconfiguration.
Norfolk Southern has reviewed both options and provided Option
6A, which like the second option,would build the relocated track as
a 9 degree curve until a future track is needed along the Marion
Line.Once a future track is required, a non-concentric track would
be built to the east; this would replace therelocated Marion Line
track and the existing relocated track would be reconfigured as the
future track,which in turn, would connect with a future track which
parallels the Chicago Line. This option allows thesame bridge
footprint to be used for the relocated track and the
reconfiguration when the demand for atwo track system along the
Marion Line is required. These options also maintain a 25 foot
offset for therelocated track (initial configuration) as well as
the reconfigured future track alignments (finalconfiguration).
However, the placement of the eastern end bent with respect to the
existing MarionLine track would require Norfolk Southern grant
INDOT an exception that would allow for an offset ofless than 25
feet, if the US 33 bypass project is constructed prior to the
relocation of the Marion Linetrack.
Although Option 6A reduces the length of the bridge by 8 feet,
for a cost reduction of $38,705, theincrease over the initial base
option would still be $548,494.
Under "Code of Federal Regulations (CFRY', Title 23, Chapter 1,
Subchapter G, Part 646, Subpart B,Section 646.212 "Federal Share",
paragraph 3 states that the cost of a grade separation project
shall bebased on the cost to provide horizontal and/or vertical
clearances used by the railroad in its normalpractice subject to
limitations. For Option 6A to be executed, Norfolk Southern
Railways will be requiredto provide a reasonable time table for the
relocation of the Marion Line Branch to show that the lengthof the
bridge and location of the western abutment is mandated.
Based on the City of Goshen's and Norfolk Southern's "Opinion of
Probable Capital Construction Costs"and CFR Title 23, Chapter 1,
Subchapter G, Part 646, Subpart B, Section 646.212 "Federal
Share",
-
paragraph 2 and 3, the table should also include the
differential costs between Option 4 (base option)and Option 6A.
There should also be additional items showing the "long-term" track
maintenance costsavings for the newly aligned track as well as the
costs savings for the closure of two crossings (one onthe mainline
and one on the Marion Branch Line), which may have a life cycle
cost savings in excess ofthe $410,235 initial cost. Furthermore, in
no case shall Norfolk Southern's costs for reconfiguration of atwo
track system along the Marion Line Branch be imposed on either the
State of Indiana or the City ofGoshen.
In summary, this would make the State's costs for the additional
track realignment approximately$548,494 and allow for the
additional costs of the guideway and track elements, under CFR
Title 23,Chapter 1, Subchapter G, Part 646, Subpart B, Section
646.212 "Federal Share", paragraph 1, to bedivided between the City
of Goshen and Norfolk Southern.
Though the amounts may not be equally divided, this MOU shows a
true partnership between all threeentities.
By signing this MOU, all parties are in agreement with Option 6A
for both the footprint of the bridge andlocation of MSE walls and
their clearances associated with existing, relocated, and future
trackconfigurations. In addition, the City of Goshen and Norfolk
Southern Railways agree that all additionalcosts associated with
the "Opinion of Probable Capital Construction Costs", guideway and
trackelements, will be partitioned among themselves and in no way
will the State of Indiana (INDOT) nor theFederal Government (FHWA)
participate in such costs per CFR Title 23, Chapter 1, Subchapter
G, Part646, Subpart B, Section 646.212. Furthermore, Norfolk
Southern Railways agrees to proceed andcomplete the relocation of
the Marion Line Branch either prior to the commencement of
constructionactivities for the US 33 project, Des. No. 9222424,
anticipated to begin on December 1, 2015, or within 2years after
the completion of construction activities for the US 33 project,
anticipated to be December 1,2017, per CFR Title 23, Chapter 1,
Subchapter G, Part 646, Subpart B, Section 646.212 "Federal
Share",paragraph 3, so that all parties can execute Option 6A and
justify the location of the western abutment,MSE walls, and length
of the structure.
-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused these presents to be
executed by theirproper officers thereunto duly authorized.
[City of Goshen
By: _
Printed _
Title _
******************************************************************************ACKNOWLEDGMENT
FOR CITY OF GOSHEN INDIANA
State of , County of _
On this __ day of -',20, I, there appeared before me, a Notary
Public inand for said County, _
who being by me severally duly sworn did say that they are
the
_____________________ of The City of Goshen Indiana, and
that said Agreement was signed and sealed in behalf of said
corporation and acknowledged the
same to be the free act and deed of the said !City of Goshen
Indiana.
IWitness my hand and seal this __ day of , 20,-:_-----