My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
RM 03-20-81
sbend
>
Public
>
Redevelopment Commission
>
Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
1981
>
RM 03-20-81
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/5/2012 4:05:24 PM
Creation date
9/26/2012 12:26:43 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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
South Bend Redevelopment Commission <br />Regular Me ting March 20, 1981 <br />5. PUBLIC HEARING continued <br />Mr. West said he felt that by taking out 70 homes, which <br />is approximately one -third of the homes in the area, in <br />a sense would be the same as chopping of one -third of <br />his body. Mr. West said he feels that the Monroe- Sample <br />Street area needs some attention and 'needs some attention <br />immediately, but that he does not want that attention to <br />be at he expense of his business as it is stated now <br />withou any ifs, ands or buts about it. The loss of <br />one-third of the homes is going to affect the business at <br />Max's Grocery. <br />Mr. West went on to say that if consideration had been <br />given to the businesses that exist in that area at the <br />time of developing this plan, he felt quite sure that <br />consideration would have been given to acquiring the <br />additional land which would have amounted to one block <br />coming up in that area. He further said that he did <br />not want the City of South Bend to benefit because of <br />Silas West or Max's Grocery store, and would like for <br />everything to be on an even - steven basis. He continued <br />by say ng that he cannot exist in business in that area <br />if the Redevelopment Department passes the resolution <br />today nd will give him some consideration after the <br />resolu ion is passed. <br />Mr. We t said he did not feel that there was consideration <br />given n taking out the 70 homes in the area and how it <br />is goirig to affect his business in the years to come. He <br />was aware about the things that were coming back into the <br />neighborhood, and will go along with that, but wanted to <br />know that he would do for the next two years until those <br />things do come back into the neighborhood. He said the <br />Department had made promises in all of the other redevelop- <br />ment areas and have not fulfilled those promises and that <br />he cou dn't believe that the City was going to fulfill <br />that promise to where, for the next two or three, four or <br />five years, his business would still be a viable business <br />in that area, and once again asked the Commission to con- <br />sider tiot passing this resolution until such time that the <br />busine s of Max's Grocery is discussed by the Commisiion. <br />Mr. Ni <br />gentl ei <br />we f or, <br />quest <br />provid <br />fore. <br />itz explained that he and Mr. McMahon met with these <br />ien yesterday and recommends to the Commissioners that <br />lard their letter to HUD because it is an unusual re <br />that they be acquired and secondly, that they be <br />!d with other benefits which we have never done be- <br />Mr. Nimtz said that he would go over this with Mr. <br />20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.