My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
RM 09-04-92
sbend
>
Public
>
Redevelopment Commission
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1992
>
RM 09-04-92
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/2/2012 4:31:43 PM
Creation date
10/5/2012 2:19:31 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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 Redevelopment Commission <br />Regular Meeting - September 4, 1992 <br />6. NEW BUSINESS (Cont.) <br />g. continued... <br />Upon a motion by Ms. Huddleston, seconded COMMISSION APPROVED THE THIRD <br />by Mr. Faccenda and unanimously carried, ADDENDUM TO LEASE WITH THE SOUTH <br />the Commission approved the Third BEND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY. <br />Addendum to Lease with the South Bend (1990 SOUTH BEND PUBLIC <br />Redevelopment Authority (SBCDA Public IMPROVEMENT PROJECT) <br />Improvement Project) <br />h. Commission approval requested for <br />proposals for appraisal services in the <br />Studebaker Corridor Development Area. <br />Mr. Pocius noted that we asked several <br />appraisers to send proposals to provide <br />disposition appraisals for the remaining <br />parcels in Studebaker Corridor. After <br />reviewing the proposals, the staff <br />recommended hiring Richard McCloskey for <br />a fee of $18,000 and Huntington <br />Associates for a cost of $7,500. An <br />important consideration in the selection <br />was that the appraisals be completed by <br />the end of September. <br />Mr. Donoho asked the amount of the other <br />appraisals. Mrs. Kolata responded that <br />Doug Carpenter proposed to do the work <br />for $8,000. The remaining quotes were <br />higher since they were from MAI <br />appraisers. <br />Mr. Pocius commented that the staff <br />recommendation was based on having one <br />MAI appraiser and one non -MAI appraiser. <br />Mrs. Kolata indicated that we could be <br />satisfied with two non -MAI appraisers. <br />Mr. Donoho indicated that he wished to <br />pay the least amount to get the highest <br />quality. <br />Ms. Manier noted that since these <br />appraisals are for disposition, we will <br />not be going to court to prove the value <br />and may not need the MAI designation. <br />-11- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.