My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
RM 09-20-96
sbend
>
Public
>
Redevelopment Commission
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
RM 09-20-96
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/2/2012 3:31:48 PM
Creation date
10/8/2012 3:45:06 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
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 20, 1996 <br />6. NEW BUSINESS (Cont.) <br />e. continued.... <br />Social Security Administration, which the <br />representative hoped to have by <br />September 13, 1996. GSA would then <br />go out with the request for proposals. <br />GSA hopes to have a decision by mid - <br />December. <br />Mrs. Kolata noted that neither SSP <br />Properties nor BCP Partnership met the <br />minimum bid price that the Commission <br />could accept at this point. SSP <br />Properties has a bid price of $150,000, <br />they would require the Commission to <br />have the building torn down and to <br />complete any environmental remediation <br />that is required. The staff estimate on the <br />environmental investigation (not including <br />remediation) is approximately $15,000. <br />The staff anticipates that the $150,000 <br />purchase price from SSP Properties <br />would cover any environmental <br />remediation and the demolition of the <br />building. <br />Mrs. Kolata noted that if the building was <br />to be torn down, the staff has serious <br />concerns about the style of building that <br />is suggested by SSP Properties. There <br />was no site plan or design for a new <br />building on this lot, instead photographs <br />of other buildings that SSP Properties has <br />constructed in other cities were <br />submitted. These buildings were <br />suburban type, single -story buildings <br />which is not exactly what is desired on <br />the site. The staffs other concern <br />C, consisted of the experiences that they had <br />-14- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.