2009-02-02

Minutes
Call to Order

   1) Roll Call—Matt Souza, George Van Horn, Tom Vujovich, Rich Stenner, Jim Lienhoop
   2) Absent—Steve Champion
   3) Guests—Sharon Renfro, Paul Minnis, DaveHayward, Mayor Armstrong, Terry Coriden, Ann DeVore, Kristi Belcher
Action Items
   4) Approval of Minutes – Motion was made by Matt Souza and seconded by Rich Stenner. The motion was approved.
        a. 1-5-09
   5) Selection of Owners Rep for Commons Project – We got three proposals for owners rep. One is from CPS, second from ROI, and the third from Taylor Brothers. We interviewed each late Friday afternoon. Asking the commission to table it until next meeting to give enough time to review the proposals, get additional information, and then come back with a recommendation at the next meeting. Motion is to continue this to the next commission meeting was made by Rich Stenner and seconded by George Van Horn. Motion is continued.
   6) Claims – The claim for the Bartholomew County Treasurer for the second street garage site. We agreed to pay the property taxes on that block as part of getting that property. They are already assessed. We are not paying property taxes prior to the assessment. The market study is the piece where our part is $3,500 and then $3,000 is from the foundation with the remaining coming from the developer. This is for the grocery store. The $6,500 is the total between the commission and the foundation. The bulk of Patriot’s work is not completed yet. They will continue to look at the soil and then go into testing the concrete and steel as it goes into the project. They will continue their testing until the month after the last concrete pour. The reports go to the contractor, the commission, and code enforcement. If anyone saw anything unusual, the protocol is to notify the contractor immediately. Motion is to approve was made by George Van Horn and seconded by Jim Leinhoop. Claims are approved.
Discussion Items
   7) Riverfront District – We had a public meeting last Monda where about 20-25 people showed up. We showed them a powerpoint that showed them what our goals were from a strategic standpoint, where we are with all of our projects, identifying what we saw in terms of developing the riverfront district. We then went through a number of communities within Indiana who has an established riverfront district to show what issues other communities have had, how they have dealt with them, what they would have done differently. Most have had much success. Some people have raised questions and concerns about the district but I think a large number of people are interested in seeing more activity in the downtown area and doing what we need to do that. There is a question of if it’s possible for someone with an existing 3-way liquor license to exchange that for a riverfront district 3-way liquor license. We have received an email back from one of the commissioners at the State on the Alcohol and Tobacco Commission responding to a number of questions we have about the district. Providing that the commission is in favor in moving forward with this we would be in the position to make a recommendation to the City Council at their meeting on the 17th in terms of establishing a riverfront district and what the rule would be for the district. We would ask City Council to adopt an ordinance or a resolution to establish to district and approve the rules that would go with that. The senior center should be listed on the project list for appeal reasons. Motion to recommend moving this ahead. It is a broad definition of a riverfront district. It will be up to City Council to determine what the boundaries and the rules are for the district. We are proposing the creation of this district. Motion was made by Matt Souza and seconded by George Van Horn. Motion was approved.
Information Items
   8) Staff Report – We are continuing to move forward with the second street garage. They have columns coming up and they will be pouring slab on grade within the next couple of weeks. Shortly after that we will begin to see the different decks. We went to City Council for the bond and we will be going back to them for the second reading for that ordinance. We will be finding out shortly if there will be a petition against that project. We are continuing to work on the indoor sports complex. We will be going to the Planning Commission for rezoning a piece of property that is critical to that piece. It is the Rhino Lining property. It is to make it consistent with the rest of the zoning of the property. We are working with the environmental consultant on the piece of property with the environmental concerns. Expecting to meet with IDEM within the next week or two about that particular piece of it. We continue to meet with the developer about the housing and we are working on an agreement with them. It is still in the draft stages at this point. We continue to have people who are interested in developing within Columbus even with the economy in a slump.
Sharon stated that Wilhelm is coming down to look at the cracks in the elevator booth. Doesn’t look like it’s a serious problem. We are moving forward in the security with the garage. Having problem with people who do not know where to park or are parking in the wrong spot. Most people are supportive with the security. Most of the problem comes from those who have reserved parking on the top level who don’t want to make to walk. We are contracted with CDI on the cost of security. The cost is around $2,200 up front. After that it is 4 hours a day employee time. Most of it will be done with the maintenance for the garage. It would cost about $100,000 - $150,000. Some of the expense will be for the software. The new garage will have the controls because of the tenants.

©2014 City of Columbus Indiana | Contact Us | Site Map | Website Credits