Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Finmar Project Draws topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Anderson redevelopment commission approves two draws for Finmar project amid continuing construction delays
Summary
The Anderson Redevelopment Commission approved two payments covering soft costs and construction draws for the Finmar (Bingham/Madison) redevelopment project while commissioners pressed the developer for clearer timelines after being told the site is 34% complete.
The Anderson Redevelopment Commission on Sept. 9 approved two payments for the Finmar redevelopment project and heard extended discussion about construction delays and the project timeline.
Commissioners voted to approve the city’s portion of Draw 18 — $588,808 — and to pay soft costs from Draw 14 totaling $26,583.70, actions the commission chair said were supported by monthly certification from the project’s design reviewer. Both votes passed unanimously, 5-0.
The commission’s staff and consultants updated members on the construction schedule. The construction manager reported ACE Hardware work was being installed this week and next, and gave a projected soft opening date for ACE of Oct. 13. Staff said the grocery operator’s grand opening was expected in late January, but cautioned that punch-list work, equipment installation, health inspections and corporate coordination could extend that timeline.
Commissioners pressed for more detail. One commissioner said the project currently shows 34% complete and asked whether the remaining work could reasonably be finished in three to four months. Staff and the construction reviewer said percent-complete assessments are certified monthly and recommended commissioners continue to monitor progress through the monthly draw and certification process.
Questions at the meeting focused on what leverage the city has if the developer misses contractual completion dates. City staff said the redevelopment agreement contains completion dates and clawback provisions for longer-term breaches but that routine monthly payments are based on percent-complete certifications; withholding payment beyond the contractually allowed processes would be an escalation the commission had not yet invoked.
Commissioners requested that staff provide (1) an update after the bankruptcy-sale-related deadline on Sept. 24 (which affects a separate property discussed at the meeting), (2) a clearer snapshot of percent complete vs. total project scope so commissioners can see what portion of work remains, and (3) regular updates when future draws are requested.
The commission’s action on the two draws followed a line-by-line review of the pay application that included reductions labeled as construction-period interest and other deducts; staff explained those credits reduced the city’s net obligation. The commission approved the two draws by separate motions: Draw 18 and the soft-cost portion of Draw 14.
The commission did not change project incentives at the meeting. Commissioners discussed withholding retainage or invoking breach remedies only if contractual completion milestones are missed and said they prefer continued monitoring while the developer continues construction.
Future meetings will include updated percent-complete certifications and, if warranted, staff recommendations about enforcement of contract deadlines.
