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

574.975.0033museum@goshenhistorical.org

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: markbrinson@goshencity.com 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) 534-3185engineering@goshencity.com. 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,-:_-----