Laserfiche WebLink
South Bend Redevelopment Ccmmlission <br />Regular ting - July 14, 1989 <br />6. NEW BUSINESS (Cont.) <br />f . cofitinued.. . <br />Ms Auburn asked if the project needed to <br />go before the Design Review Ca mnittee for <br />approval. Mr. Elliott responded that the <br />or ginal configuration of the building is <br />not being changed. <br />Ms Auburn asked if Mr. Elliott could <br />make a gentleman's agreement that the <br />bid1ding would be nice looking when it is <br />leted. Mr. Elliott responded that <br />the building was originally brick on the <br />sides and stucco on the front. It was <br />cxnrered with an inexpensive, durable <br />material. They have removed that <br />' <br />Bring and exposed the original <br />walidows. It had an overhead door at the <br />f nt of the building. <br />Ms Auburn pointed out that Valley <br />Dorelopment would not want to adversely <br />affect the condominiums they are building <br />by creating an unattractive building in <br />the neighborhood. Mr. Elliott agreed <br />tbat they would not. He answered Ms. <br />A 's question by saying that they <br />cotLld have a gentleman's agreement about <br />the appearance of the building. <br />Mr Wolf asked if the gentleman's <br />agreement meant that the project would <br />carve before design review. Mrs. Kolata <br />responded that they would bring the plans <br />to the next Design Review Committee <br />ting and the committee would review <br />th . Mr. Elliott indicated that the <br />wok is basically Clete. <br />Mr Wolf asked if Orkin is the kind of <br />tenant we want to encourage in that area <br />of nice hotels, restaurants, and <br />corKlaminiums or would it be better suited <br />to the Studebaker Corridor. Mrs. Kolata <br />reEponded that it is probably not our <br />f1i st choice for the area, but it <br />qualifies under the zoning and under the <br />abatement guidelines. <br />-16- <br />