Laserfiche WebLink
South Bend Redevelopment Commission <br />Ce,gular Meeting - February 4, 1994 <br />6. NEW BUSINESS (Cont.) <br />c. continued... <br />that site. We will have to see if the <br />Parkview project can be accommodated <br />without this property. <br />Mrs. Kolata also responded to Mr. Masters' <br />charge that property owners were not notified <br />of the Public Hearing, but public agencies <br />were notified. We followed the state law to <br />the letter. There is no requirement to notify <br />property owners in the area. <br />Ms. Auburn noted that the interest of the <br />juvenile center and the interest of IVY Tech <br />fit well with the Commission's overall plan. <br />The Commission will not guarantee that the <br />Polack property will not be put on the agenda <br />for acquisition at a later time. <br />Mrs. Polack was concerned that this action <br />was only putting them off temporarily. Ms. <br />Auburn expressed the Commission's intent to <br />act in good faith, but would not promise that <br />the development and the plan could be <br />achieved without the Polack property. If the <br />Polack property was taken off the acquisition <br />list today, any action to put the property back <br />on the acquisition list would require an <br />amendment to the Development Plan and <br />another Public Hearing. <br />Mr. Masters inquired how there could be any <br />"plans" for development of this land when <br />there are no signed contracts or deeds <br />between the City of South Bend and St. <br />Joseph County for this property. <br />No <br />