Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Smith Hill Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves amended term sheet for Smith Hill housing project, clarifies phase one and funding match
Summary
After extended discussion about unit counts, funding sources and procedural steps, the Richmond Redevelopment Commission approved Resolution 6 (2026) as amended to accept a substantially final forgivable‑loan term sheet for the Smith Hill development, clarifying that phase one consists of roughly 40 single‑family lots and that the Ready grant match includes $3.22M in TIF plus a $1.1M land donation.
Get email alerts on the Smith Hill Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Richmond Redevelopment Commission on June 16 approved a revised, substantially final forgivable‑loan term sheet for the Smith Hill residential development and asked staff to return a redlined copy reflecting clarifications before final execution.
Chris Ham, the developer’s representative, said survey stakes are in place, traffic counts were underway and the developer aims to submit the subdivision plat by Aug. 1, 2026. He said heavy infrastructure work could begin late in 2026 or in spring 2027, with a target to complete the first phase by the end of 2028 depending on permitting and construction timing.
Lisa Lee of Ice Miller, serving as special counsel on the project, told the commission the Indiana Economic Development Corp. (IEDC) has awarded a Ready grant of $4.33 million for infrastructure tied to the housing project; that grant requires a public match. Lee said the proposed local match consists of roughly $3.22 million in TIF cash plus a $1.1 million land donation from Reed Hospital, which the developer has agreed to value at $1.1 million to meet the match requirement.
Several commissioners called out inconsistent language across documents: the resolution text referenced an approximately 286‑unit full buildout, while the term sheet described phase one as “up to approximately 40 single‑family lots,” and other passages mentioned 60 or 100 units in different contexts. Kathy Lucid and other commissioners said the resolution should explicitly define that the commission’s present approval funds phase one (the roughly 40‑lot infrastructure element) and not the full 286‑unit buildout.
Lee and the developer explained that 286 (sometimes transcribed as 286/287) describes the full buildout across about 80 acres, while the Ready grant and the present request are tied to phase one (the immediate infrastructure). Counsel and the developer agreed to amend the resolution language on the floor to state that the commission is approving the term sheet in substantially final form for phase one of the development (approximately 40 single‑family units) and authorized the president to execute the term sheet after staff circulates redlines and clarifying edits. The commission approved the amended resolution on a unanimous roll call.
The project concept described a mix of housing types across full buildout — single‑family detached homes, townhomes (possibly up to ~100), and courtyard homes — with price points spanning from around $300,000 for starter homes to higher‑end custom homes in the $800,000–$850,000 range for certain lots. Staff and developers said final counts and product mix will be confirmed by the plat and engineering work; the commission directed staff to provide the revised term sheet and proposed draw schedule for the city’s $3.22M TIF match before formal council/EDC actions.
Counsel described the next procedural steps: the economic development commission will publish notice and hold a public hearing on the project report, then make a recommendation to the common council, which is scheduled to introduce a loan ordinance in July with final council action anticipated in August. If the council adopts the loan ordinance, the city and developer will execute a loan agreement and promissory note with forgiveness conditioned on acceptance of completed infrastructure by the city.

