My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
RM 10-26-90
sbend
>
Public
>
Redevelopment Commission
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1990
>
RM 10-26-90
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/2/2012 4:53:38 PM
Creation date
10/4/2012 4:23:21 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
42
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 Coamission <br />Regular Mee ing - October 26, 1990 <br />6. NEW BUSANESS (Cont.) <br />a. continues ... <br />Mr. Bill Furry asked what the procedure <br />wou. d be to obj eat to our property being <br />tak . Is this it? <br />Ms. Kolata said this would be the best <br />time. ' After the public hearing we have <br />scheduled action, whatever action the <br />'ssion desires to take on the <br />lution. The resolution says that all <br />of these properties that were in the <br />leg&l notice are to be added to the <br />accitLisition list. The Commission can <br />approve the resolution they can modify it <br />or they could disapprove it whatever <br />action they care to take. That is <br />scheduled following this public hearing. <br />If iL property is added to the acquisition <br />list the next step is for the staff to <br />come forward to the Commission, probably, <br />in this case, on a piecemeal basis with <br />the authorization to send purchase <br />offers. So your best opportunity to <br />speak would be today.. <br />MY rame is Bill Furry, Universal Paint at <br />131S S.ILafayette. We have property there <br />which is not marked for development. This <br />piece of property is a 30 foot lot <br />adj Z cent to our parking lot that we use <br />for storage. We have a corner piece of <br />pro , basically it's a square piece <br />of property. I see no reason why they <br />wo d want 30 feet in the middle of the <br />lock adjacent to ours. Basically I <br />obj to it, its expenditure of the city <br />whidh is unnecessary. We were relocated <br />abot it 4 years ago from where the ball <br />park. is and spent a considerable amount <br />of i tonev. <br />-19- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.