Laserfiche WebLink
South Bend edevelopment Commission <br />Regular Mee ing - September 27, 1991 <br />4. COMMUNISATIONS (Cont.) <br />a. continued... <br />Mrs. Kolata noted that the staff has had <br />a number of conversations with both <br />developers and recommends that Monroe <br />Park Associates be released from their <br />obl'gation under the bid for Parcels <br />M9-L, M9 -2, M9 -3, M9 -4, M9 -5, M9 -6, M9 -7, <br />M9-3, M9 -9, M9 -10, M9 -11, M9 -12, M9 -13, <br />M9-L4, M9 -16, M9 -17, M9 -18 in the South <br />BenJ Central Development Area and that <br />the Commission return the performance <br />dep sit that was submitted with the bid. <br />The staff also recommends that we work <br />witi Briarwood Development to make their <br />des'gn and site plan conform to the <br />sta dards the Commission has for the <br />par els. <br />`Ms. Auburn noted that the Commission is <br />disappointed that the market study did <br />not support market rate development in <br />that area at this time. She said that <br />when the Commission awarded the land, we <br />werO aware that the recession might make <br />it Oifficult for the project to succeed. <br />Ms. Auburn expressed appreciation that <br />Bri rwood Development was still <br />int rested in the property for affordable <br />Mr. Piasecki suggested that it would be a <br />good idea if developers did a market <br />study prior to submitting their bids. <br />Mrs Kolata noted that we give the <br />developer very little time to come up <br />with a proposal and ask them to go to <br />significant expense developing that <br />proposal without knowing that they will <br />be the successful bidder. <br />Ms. Auburn stated that if economic <br />con itions had been a little stronger, <br />the market study might have turned out <br />dif erently. <br />-5- <br />