RM 12-07-79 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

South Bend Redevelopment Commission Regular Meeting December 7, 1979 6. NEW BUSI Mr. Brademas continues... In conclusion, I think it is buil ing that we don't need buil ing that could provide c "11111 ty. insanity to build a new GSA and tear down an existing many years of service to the Mr. llison: Mr. Chairman, I would like to respond to Mr. rademas' remarks. First, I would like to state that the work of the Jannotta firm was done during a short period of time--a time period considerably shorter than the six (6) mont s Rouse took to do its market study. Therefore, Jer Miller's work on behalf of the Jannotta firm could not nave been as extensive as that of Rouse. I think the Jann tta firm did a credible job given the time available to t em and I believe their analysis was accurate. With respect to the quality of financing aspects of Tom's proposal, I will only note that a firm written commitment to buy EDC bonds may be sufficient for bond authorization but is not sufficient to assure that development will take place. Ult:Lnately, we need evidence of an irrevocable financing commitment to be confident that the rehab of the Odd Fell ws Building will fly. My p rsonal feeling and that of the staff is that.since subs natial rehabilitation is by its nature an inexact science, developers need cushion within their finances to assure that the unexpected can be overcome. Jannotta described all of the proposals as marginal, in part, because of o r inability to find cushion in the numbers. The staff believes that writing down the disposition cost of the building to $1.00 will not be sufficient. We believe additional public sector investment in the form of interest subsidies or loan guarantees or both will be necessary to supply cushion to any of the deals. Rela ive to what the Rouse report indicates regarding the market for additional office space, I note that the report was speaking of new office space. Even with the unexpected addi ion of 35,000 square feet in 1980 as the result of the prof ct on Block 6, the market can still bear additional space in the new GSA building since that space won't be avai able until 1981. Besides, GSA needs cannot, in my opinion, be met'in the Odd Fellows Building. For example, GSA as indicated that the Social Security Administration, because of its clientele needs first floor space. Obviously, this need could not be serviced under Mr. Brademas' proposal sinc he indicated a restaurant use for that floor. We've spent long difficult hours working on the federal building. It is my info tion that GSA has settled on building on a portion of the 45 bus lot.