SM 05-09-75 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

9. DOW TOWN REDEVELOPMENT (Cont`d development, and that specifies the project and the timing on the conveyance of the property, along with the commencement and the completion dates of the project. Along with that then is submitted a'Performance Bond, and, of ourse;`at that point, the.Performance Bond takes the place of the Bid Bond. Then the deeding of the property,, the actual physical redevelopment of the property, and then when that°is completed, the Certificate of Completion. If it' is not completed properly, then, of course, the Perfor- mance Bond is the only guarantee that we have'at that point. Bas cally, the reason that the question concerning the Associates' Letter of Credit was not answered as directly perhaps as it might have been at the last meeting,: was because I didn't understand, or didn't appreciate the fact that there was a misunderstanding concerning this. I subsequently did talk to Dan Caesar, and to Jeanne Derbeck. When I`was talking with Dan Caesar immediately after the meeting,. then it became very clear to me the a was a misunderstanding. Jeanne Derbeck called the next day and I talked wit her. Add tionally, I had intended when we met the next day with the representatives of Associates and of the River Bend Development group to make a recommendation that there be no assignment of Associates' bid and that there be no new Letter of Credit coming from the new developer -- the.joint venturer- -and the reasoning for that was because I think we are at a point now where we really are looking at an ntirely new plan - -a new concept- -and we are going to have to, at the appro- pri to time, rebid this property. The next point I would like to make, covers my basic recommendation to the Commission. First of all in regard to the appraisal of the proposed plan of the developer, I think it is a good plan. I think a lot of work has already been done by Associates and by Hal Imus, who is one of the new persons in the Joint venture. The Development Commission is not a developer. This has been a problem, I think, with many developments in downtown areas throughout the country. We don't have the specific expertise. We don't have developers on the staff and it is 'damn' expensive to pay developers. I think that theoreti- cally, at least, a large development like this which will redevelop a signifi- can portion, or area, of the downtown, as well as the Block 6 type of re- dev lopment, is the most appropriate, if, in fact, we can get something going. The River Bend Development. group, in my meetings with the individuals, is, I thi k, an excellent team - -an action team - -and I think we are going to see and hea something. They are going to be acting and moving quickly. In 3oing back to the original Associates' proposal, I recall that that pro- posal called for the start of their actual physical redevelopment by the end of the third year. It was submitted in February, 1973, and I.think that the stage at which the River Bend' Development group takes plans over is t such an advanced stage with respect to the development and marketing tha three -year period is still "a very."possible" goal. I think that the Com issioners should cooperate fully with this group= -with the Joint Venturer- - wit view to an early submission of a proposal and with the understanding tha when they are ready with their plans, that it is going to have to be re- bid - 34 -