My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
RM 08-28-81
sbend
>
Public
>
Redevelopment Commission
>
Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
1981
>
RM 08-28-81
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/5/2012 4:02:50 PM
Creation date
9/26/2012 1:32:44 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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 edevelopment Commission <br />Rescheduled Regular Meeting - August.28, 1981 <br />7. NEW BUSINESS (continued) <br />a. continued... <br />Mr. Primus stated that the area is a depressed area, <br />gre tly needing development.. Whatever development <br />has been done is wonderful, but a great deal more <br />actually needs to be done. We have to talk in terms <br />of vhat is being done, and not what the hopes are for <br />the future. For every building in this area, there <br />is zt least one, possibly more, that is not in good <br />condition, in fact, particularly off of Colfax Street, <br />dil pidated. Around the block are structures in a <br />condition where reconstruction or restoration is very <br />difficult. Dr. Primus is the only buyer in this area <br />and is the only person coming in to develop property. <br />The ye are different kinds of medical buildings. Dr. <br />Primus is a sole practitioner with a current staff of <br />ninE people, with possibly two more full -time people <br />add Ed at a later date. That is out of proportion <br />wher you compare other single practitioners with <br />staffs of two to four full -time people. Dr. Primus' <br />pra`tice requires a larger building, larger payroll, <br />and need for more parking space. My suspicion is <br />that had owners of other medical buildings been aware <br />of tax abatement, they too would have petitioned, and <br />would have deserved it in consideration of the old <br />buildings. It seems to me that the point here is <br />com aring this building and medical practice to other <br />small offices in the area, the nature of the medical <br />cli ic. There is no incentive right now for doctors <br />to build on their own. <br />Dr. Primus proposes to do what is envisioned in <br />redevelopment, to pull down the eyesores and redevelop <br />the area. <br />Mr. <br />reci <br />the <br />go i <br />for <br />sioi <br />is <br />an <br />par - <br />the <br />assn <br />St. <br />borl <br />McMahon assured the Commission that this petition <br />ived a great deal of attention - improvement to <br />general neighborhood is something that does not <br />nnoticed, and Dr.: Primus should be complimented <br />that. The issue that the Redevelopment Commis - <br />should consider is the same issue the Council <br />oing to focus on - is tax abatement necessary as <br />ncentive to have someone build an office building, <br />icularly a doctor's office, in this area, or is <br />proximity to the hospital and all the other factors <br />ciated with being near a medical center, such as <br />Joseph, sufficient. The track record in the nef.gh- <br />ood, from the staffs' viewpoint, was sufficient <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.