Michigan City Planning Commission recommends Resolution 1-25 to create Triadmeadow TIF, sends measure to City Council

The Michigan City Plan Commission voted unanimously April 22 to approve and certify Resolution 1-25, the declaratory resolution establishing the Triadmeadow economic development area and approving a housing plan and allocation areas for a portion of that area, and forwarded the measure to the Michigan City Common Council with a favorable recommendation.

The resolution would enable two overlapping tax-increment financing districts for the Triadmeadow project: a 20-year housing TIF covering the R2B area and 25-year commercial TIFs covering the R3A areas. Planning staff and redevelopment commission representatives said the TIFs are structured as developer-backed bonds that will pay for new public infrastructure, including city-standard roads, stormwater, water and sanitary improvements, with the developer assuming the financing risk.

Planning staff member Eric York told the commission that the redevelopment commission completed maps and background work and that the item before the plan commission is to confirm that the declaratory resolution conforms to the city’s plan of development. York said the area is currently farmland and that increment would be generated only after vertical improvements are built and taxed at new assessed values. He described the financing as “developer-backed,” saying the developer would use the city’s rating to help sell bonds and the city would not be obligated to pay the debt if the developer did not proceed.

York and redevelopment commission representative Alan Sernak said the bonds would be repaid from captured tax increment: “the increment is the new tax receipts once the properties are built and there’s new tax assessments,” York said during the presentation. Staff said the R2B housing portion would be taxed at a 1 percent increment while the apartment (R3A) portions would yield a 2 percent increment under the proposed caps described in the redevelopment commission materials.

York also said the development agreement includes an affordability commitment by the developer, John Kowchak; York described it as a commitment that “John has agreed to keep 75% of the units at 80% AMI to a 20% AMI” as stated in the project materials presented to the commission. (Transcript text used above is taken from the meeting presentation and reflects the wording used there.)

Attorney Steven Hale advised the commission on procedure, saying the plan commission’s role is to certify the declaratory resolution to the common council with a favorable recommendation. If the council approves the declaratory resolution, staff said the redevelopment commission would later adopt a confirming resolution to finalize the TIF’s establishment.

The commission’s certification does not itself create the TIF; it is a formal planning finding that the redevelopment commission’s declaratory resolution conforms to the city’s plan of development and is the step that moves the item to the common council for final legislative consideration.

Votes at a glance: Resolution 1-25 — approved and certified to the Common Council with a favorable recommendation (roll-call vote recorded during the meeting: Bolling — yes; Connolly — yes; Dabney — aye; Granquist — yes; Hoffman — aye; Clender — yes; Tejeda — yes; Warner — aye).