Second chance attempted for Agnew

Uptown Creston’s Agnew building is getting another chance at life as Heartland Land & Property’s Dustin Rand works with Creston City Council on a possible redevelopment project.

Agnew’s recent history has been fraught with tension, something Rand is well aware of.

“I’m fully aware this is not the first time someone has brought a deal to present here. I’m aware that the last time a deal was brought through, the communication was lacking,” Rand said at a previous meeting. “My partners and I are bringing significant capital to this project, $300,000 between us. We’re also planning to fully guarantee the loan going forward on this. I guess the point we’re trying to make here is, you’re going to see from us, you’re going to hear from us.”

Rand‘s goal is to eventually turn the Agnew building into 12-14 loft-style apartment units, along with two street-level commercial spaces. He further explained his plans to the council at Tuesday’s meeting.

“This isn’t a flip for us, this is a long-term hold. The plan is to get this building done, work on another building and try to make some change downtown,” Rand said. “This is not something where we can just say, we’ll sell it in a few years and make it somebody else’s problem.”

However, Rand said he ran into some problems when doing the due diligence check on the building, finding curb and water intrusion issues. Earlier on Tuesday, Rand took a tour of the building with Creston City Administrator Mike Taylor and building inspector Rich Parker.

“Where we actually had standing water was I think the southwest corner of the building,” Taylor said. “I would say there was probably about an inch or an inch and a half in an area 20x20, probably the lowest point of that building.”

With a disclaimer that none of the three men are engineers, Rand and Taylor cited possible issues with concrete around the building, both the new sidewalk and in the surrounding alleyways.

“Alleys are supposed to kind of feed away from the buildings. They’re not doing that on the east alley, and I don’t think they’re doing that on the west alley,” Rand said. “[The sidewalk also has] a divot so as water pours down towards Montgomery, it’s collecting in this little pocket. You can tell it wasn’t poured correctly.”

While fixing the slanting of the alleys would take a lot of work and money, the city was more hopeful on the sidewalk.

“There’s a two-year warranty on the sidewalk. I can’t say if it was before or after [the waterline replacement], because the sidewalk got replaced on a separate deal out in front of Agnew,” Garden and Associates’ Austin Smith said. “It was unrelated to the water project, so I can take a look back at our records, but I don’t recall there being a low point in front of that building prior to.”

Smith has worked on many projects with the city and was hesitant about what could be done to fix the overall sidewalk issues.

“[If you redo the sidewalk panel], you might create the same issue, just push it over a few feet. Short of replacing the whole sidewalk...” Smith said.

For now, the city’s next step will be looking into the sidewalk panel warranty. However, Rand still has plenty of work cut out for him. Though his group is bringing $300,000 to the project, they are still relying on money and grants discussed with the previous redevelopment group. However, some of the LMI money the group was leaning on has been reallocated.

“LMI money, the same request as the previous attempt, we’ve since developed a CHIP program which we use those funds to help a large number of people fix up their properties,” council member Richard Madison said. “I’m more in tune with that, so is that a dealbreaker for what you’re trying to do?”

While Rand said completely losing out on any of the previous money would lead his group to pull out, he’s confident the money can be found through other programs, such as through IEDA or the Catalyst grant, a state program which helps to redevelop buildings to stimulate economic growth.

Rand has the group’s tentative plan put into two phases. The first would revolve around demo, site work and other structural issues, while the second would be finishing the building and making it a place to live.

The project is still in discussion phases and no action was taken.