My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SM 12-17-75
sbend
>
Public
>
Redevelopment Commission
>
Minutes
>
1970-1979
>
1975
>
SM 12-17-75
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/6/2012 9:29:04 AM
Creation date
9/20/2012 4:47:59 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
6. NEW BUSINESS (Cont'd <br />Mrs. Allen asked, "In spending the urban redevelopment funds, <br />under the stature or whatever it was, Urban Redevelopment would <br />pay the City a certain amount - -a percentage - -in lieu of the <br />taxes that the City lost from the properties that were torn <br />down, have you, at any time, ever paid the City any of these ?" <br />Mr. Brownell answered, "As far as I know, we have not. We have, <br />however, allowed the City to use our land for parking purposes <br />and other purposes and let them collect the fees and keep the <br />fees. It is not the same thing at all; it is probably an off - <br />set." Commissioner Wiggins added that as a result of the acti- <br />vities of this Department, the amount of taxable base that has <br />been generated within this community, has far more than offset <br />whatever loss there was in terms of taxes on the property pre - <br />viously. Had it not been for the proposed redevelopment of the <br />downtown, the developers of the downtown buildings would not <br />have made that investment. <br />Mrs. Allen said what she is really asking is if the rules set <br />down in the Urban Renewal Plan in the first place, if those <br />rules are being followed, or have been followed? Mr. Lloyd S. <br />Taylor, asked the Chair if he may respond to that as he is <br />aware of what Mrs. Allen is referring to, (as a former Executive <br />Director of the Department of Redevelopment), and that Mrs. <br />Allen is referring to the R -66 plan and he does not know of any <br />real deviations from the basic plan. Maybe the basic plan kind <br />of painted a higher density development of the downtown then <br />ultimately what we are going to see, but that he thinks that <br />is just a change of our economic situation. Commissioner <br />Wiggins stated, "Frankly, what the downtown of South Bend needs <br />are boosters and positive attitudes. We have been deluved and <br />beset for years with all kinds of complaints and 'knitpicking' <br />that have created more problems then they have solved and we <br />have all the problems we need." <br />Mrs. Allen said she just wanted to bring this up before Urban <br />Redevelopment is completely phased out. <br />b. Quit -Claim Deed, Southeast Neighborhood No. 1, NDP Project A -10 <br />Authorization was requested for the President and Secretary to <br />execute the Quit -Claim Deed, in which the City of South Bend, <br />Indiana, Department of Redevelopment, releases and quit - claims <br />to the City of South Bend, a Municipal Corporation of the State <br />of Indiana, for the use and benefit of its Board of Park Com- <br />missioners, for and in consideration of $37,564.28, for the <br />real estate as stated on Exhibit A. <br />Mr. Brownell advised we had previously deeded by Quit -Claim <br />Deed, this property to the City for the Park Department, and <br />the reason for another deed is that some of the titles were <br />not complete at that time and the Quit -Claim Deed didn't <br />furnish all of the titles of the real estate in order to make <br />that correction and we had another Quit -Claim Deed prepared, <br />and are requesting authorization for execution of that now. <br />QUIT -CLAIM <br />DEED, SE <br />#1, NDP <br />PROJECT <br />A -10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.