My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
RM 10-20-95
sbend
>
Public
>
Redevelopment Commission
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
RM 10-20-95
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/2/2012 3:41:29 PM
Creation date
10/8/2012 1:54:54 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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 - October 20, 1995 <br />6. NEW BUSINESS (Cont.) <br />a. continued... <br />They propose to construct a 5,000 square foot <br />building that has 8'2" block walls with an <br />offsetting metal panel. They expect to build a <br />second 5,000 square foot building in about one <br />year. Practico Development has also asked <br />that the Commission repair and clean up the <br />alleys, clean any miscellaneous rubble and <br />debris that is on the site, and repair and <br />replace the sidewalks. The staff does not <br />believe it is necessary to excavate the entire <br />site, but is recommending that the Commission <br />pay up to $5000 of the cost of removing old <br />foundations, etc., from under the portion of <br />the property where the building will be built. <br />The staff recommends that the developer be <br />responsible for sidewalks and curbs, to the <br />extent they are needed. <br />Mrs. Kolata noted that both developers had <br />planned to use what they thought was an alley <br />between their properties. That is actually a <br />vacated alley. The staff recommends that the <br />developers improve that as a drive to their <br />projects and bear the cost of improvements <br />themselves. <br />Both developers objected to the prospect of <br />having to pay for curbs themselves. <br />Ms. Auburn noted that the Commission did <br />not realize there were still outstanding issues. <br />She asked that the proposals be referred back <br />to the staff for resolution of these issues. <br />Upon a motion by Mr. Hunt, seconded by Mr. <br />Donoho and unanimously carried, the <br />0 <br />COMMISSION REFERRED THE PROPOSALS <br />TO STAFF FOR RESOLUTION OF <br />OUTSTANDING ISSUES <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.