My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
RM 04-27-84
sbend
>
Public
>
Redevelopment Commission
>
Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
1984
>
RM 04-27-84
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/5/2012 3:34:33 PM
Creation date
9/28/2012 2:27:48 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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 <br />Regular Me <br />elopment Commission <br />- April 27, 1984 <br />6. NEW BUS$NESS (Cont.) <br />g. Continued... <br />loaition within the City bringing six jobs to <br />the area immediately and a total of <br />approximately 28 jobs by the time the building <br />is omplete. The total cost of their project <br />is approximately $445,000. <br />The second proposal was received from the 23 <br />North Partnership. They are proposing to <br />build a 30,000 square foot building that would <br />be leased out to approximately four to six <br />temints. They proposed the building to be <br />used for warehousing facilities and showrooms <br />for contractor supply firms. Construction <br />wou d begin within a six month period with <br />co letion approximately four months after <br />beginning construction. 23 North Partnership <br />bid the minimum bid price of $17,900. They <br />rep esented that they would have approximately <br />50 jobs when the project is completed. <br />Mr. Hunt stated that the Commission was <br />pleased to have received two proposals from <br />local developers and that they were both good <br />pro ects. The Commission considered these <br />prorosals in executive session yesterday and <br />listened to presentations by each of the <br />developers at that time. He stated that the <br />CoimLission looks at a number of factors when <br />considering a project. These include the <br />pro ect construction schedule, start and <br />corqdetion date, firmness of financing <br />counLitment, whether public assistance is <br />needed in the project or financing, the <br />purchase price, whether tax abatement is <br />requested, the developer's ability to complete <br />the project, project size, type of use, number <br />of ' obs created or retained, the quality of <br />desgn, proposed building occupancy and market <br />fea ibility. <br />Mr. <br />the <br />was <br />f in <br />1 <br />aunt then gave a brief comparision of both <br />)sals indicating that the Commission felt <br />)roposal from Panzica Development Company <br />Stronger in several areas. Their <br />icing is in place, they indicated they <br />I not seek tax abatement, the Commission <br />the larger landscaped area between the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.