HomeMy WebLinkAboutRM 10-26-90October 26,
10:00 a.m.
Presiding O
Because of
Board of Put
1. ROLL CA]
• : �I WN N ' I2 •• 1 •
%V DA I UGN V 1
1990 1200 County -City Building
227 W. Jefferson Boulevard
ficer: Ms. Paula Auburn South Bend, Indiana 46601
Vice President
large number of people attending the meeting, the meeting was moved to the
lic Works Meeting Room on the 13th Floor of the County -City Building.
Members Tresent:
Members Absent:
Legal Counsel:
Redevelopment Staff:
Bureau f Housing Staff:
News M 'a:
Others:
Ms. Paula Auburn, Vice President
Mr. Raman J. Piasecki, Secretary
Mr. Sandy Combs, Assistant Secretary
Mr. Michael Donoho
Mr. F. Jay Nimtz, President
Ms. Sandra Boyd
Mrs. Ann Kolata, Director
Mrs. Esther Deak
Ms. Hedy Robinson, Economic Dev. Specialist
Mr. K.C. Pocius, Economic Dev. Specialist
Mr., Ted Leverman, Assistant Director
Mr. Don Porter, South Bend Tribune
Mr. Thom Howell, U93
Mr. David Scott, Ch. 28
Mr. Bill Ruminski, Michiana Business Journal
Mr.
Robert Gorny
Mr.
Homer J. Baird
Ms.
Leslie J. Daniel
Mr.
Clayton Lang
Mr.
William Jenkins
Mr.
Phillip Hunter
Ms.
Diane Ernsberger
Mr.
Hobert Shelton
Ms.
Early Shelton
Mr.
Bernie Thomas
Ms.
Ruth Lewis
*sir.
Ed Richardson
Mr.
J. Pallatin
-1-
South Bend
Regular Me
1.
Ms. Auburn
continued f<
2.
3.
,relopment Cannission
- October 26, 1990
(Cont.)
Ms. Rebecca Neiswender
Mr. Mitchell Heppenheimer
Mr. Harold Morgan
Mr. Bill Furry
Mr. Paul White
Mr. Ben Ziolkowski
Mr. R. F. McGinty
Mr. James Carr
Mr. B. Doshi
Mr. S. Blenki
Mr. Howard Goodhew
Mr. Ralph Ran wl
Mr. Jim Eckenberger
Mr. Calvin Murdock
Mr. Jerry Neff
Mrs. Debbie Neff
Mr. Otto Szucs
Ms. Helen Sutton
Mr. F. Fuller
.that the Executive Session held prior to the meeting would be
adjourrmient of the Regular Meeting.
Upon a notion made by Mr. Piasecki, seconded
by Mr. rondho and unanimously carried, the
minutes of the Regular Meeting of Friday,
October 26, 1990, were approved.
•• I Rf tj Kel A N =411VEN 1 Ion z 101 MAN
• i • �r ICI 1 • - •
Ccuputea
s Assoc.
$ 84.00
MACOG
15.00
P.D.H.
5.73
South Bend
Drafting Supply
15.00
South Bend
Tribune
74.88
St. JOSEph
County Surveyor
4.00
Tri Cour
ty News
62.62
Equipmert
Services
278.05
Abstract
and Title
130.00
Petty Ca
sh Reimbursement
8.00
OTAL $ 632.28
-2-
South Bend edevelopment Commission
Regular Mee ing - October 26, 1990
0
Abstract
& Title Corporation
Baker &
Daniels
Booher,
Gussie
Cole Associates
Fuller,
Charlene
Horka,
Thomas
Lauver,
Ralph
McClosl<ey
& Associates
Moore,
ene
Powell,
Carol
Shelton
Hobert & Early
St. Joseph
Treasurer
St. Joseph
Title
Baker &
Daniels
Forrest
Peggy
Grove,
iri & Linda
Horka,
omas
Petty Cash
Reimbursement
R. McClcskey
& Assoc.
Powell,
Carol & 1st Source
Powell,
Carol
St. Jos
1oh. Treasurer
Upon a
Mr. Col
ordered
26, 199
Dtion made by Mr. Donoho, seconded by
s and unanimously carried, the
:)n formally approved the claims
d October 15 and October 22, 1990 and
Necks dated October 19 and October
to be released.
-3-
$ 270.00
5,169.28
7,681.87
10,729.78
30,506.35
7,650.00
3,850.00
7,700.00
850.00
9,496.44
950.00
840.34
50.00
1,734.93
1,070.00
5,648.64
3,500.00
69.00
15,000.00
22,500.00
950.00
351.36
$136,567.99
$137,200.27
South Bend Fedevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting - October 26, 1990
4. CONMUNICATIONS
5.
6.
Ms. Kol
to said the communications we have
received.
are related to the public hearing
and we'll
introduce them at that point.
Mrs. Kol
ata stated there was an item to be
added tc
i the agenda concerning a proposal
from Walker
Parking Consultants for
preparation
of a maintenance manual for the
Wayne/St
. Joseph garage. Hearing no
objections,
Ms. Auburn added this to the
agenda Is
item 6h.
There wa[s no old business.
a.
MCM
1. An
2. An
Marl
the
►uburn stated that Substitute
.ution #962 amends the Studebaker
dor Development Plan and adds some
:ional properties to be acquired to
was originally in our Studebaker
.dor Development Plan.
:e beginning the Public Hearing Mrs.
:a introduced the following docLmients
the record:
:iginal of the "Notice of Hearing on
hment to the Studebaker Corridor
.opment Plan".
'fidavit of Carol Smith, Classified
Fer of the South Bend Tribune, that
notice of Hearing was published in
daily newspaper on October 12, 1990.
-4-
NO OLD BUSINESS
South Bend Redevelopment Commission
Regular Mee ing - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUS S (Con't)
a. con lnuea...
3. An ffidavit of Cherie Jolly, managing
edi or of the Tri- County News, that the
Not ce of Hearing was published in that
weekly newspaper on October 12, 1990.
4. Projerty owners listed on Substitute Res.
No. 962 were sent a copy of the Notice of
Hearing on October 12, 1990.
5. A list of neighborhood associations who
previously registered with the
Redevelopment Conmlission concerning the
Studebaker Corridor Development Area.
Thesse neighborhood associations were sent
a copy of the Notice of Hearing on
October 12, 1990.
6. A capy of Substitute Resolution No. 962
which is the subject of the public
hearing.
7. As of 10:00 a.m. on October 26, 1990, 5
written remonstrances were received.
Ms. Kolata introduced the following
letters into the record:
October 25, 1990
Redevelopment Commission of the
City of South Bend
Department of Redevelopment
1200 County -City Bldg.
227 W. Jefferson Blvd.
South Bend, IN 46601
RE: Substitution Resolution No. 962
Studebaker Corridor Development
Plan
Ben Ziolkowski - Block 3 - Parcels
15,16,17,18,21,22,23,24 and 25
Ziolkowski Construction Company -
Block 3, Parcel 20
-5-
South Bend
Regular Me
elopment Commission
- October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUMMSS (Cont.)
a. conitznuea...
Gentlemen:
On behalf of Ben Ziolkowski and
Ziolkowski Construction Company, we
hereby file a written remonstrance to the
proposed amendment to the Studebaker
Corridor Development Plan, which proposed
ame dment will be heard at 10:00 a.m.,
Fri ay, October 26, 1990.
Ziolkowski Construction Company is an
Indiana Corporation which was formed in
1974, and since the date of incorporation
has been continually engaged in the
construction business. Ziolkowski
Construction Company has undertaken
numerous contracts in the South Bend area
for construction purposes, and continues
do so.
During 1978, the Company purchased the
property at 1005 South Lafayette
Boulevard, South Bend, for the purpose of
constructing its Company buildings to
house its operations. This was
undertaken at considerable cost to the
Company, but was done to promote the use
of the land in a manner to best serve the
interests of the City of South Bend, as
well as the Company. Since that time,
the Company has continued to upgrade the
area, including its parking area.
Subsequently, the Company decided to
expand its operations and proceeded with
the purchase of several parcels during
1982 and 1983. At that time, these
parcels were in a blighted condition and,
agai ' at Company expense, the parcels
were upgraded and became an integral part
of t e overall Company operations. In
particular, these parcels were used for
South Bend
Regular Meg
elopment commission
- October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSMS (Cont.)
a. conitinuect...
yard and equipment storage, and a
building also was constructed on Block 3,
Parcel 17, for vehicle, equipment and
inventory storage. Substitute Resolution
No. 962 amends the Studebaker Corridor
Dev lopment Plan by adding these parcels
use by the Company for yard and
equipment storage, as well as vehicles
and inventory storage.
This letter is being written on behalf of
Ben V oLkowski and 2iolkowski
Construction Company as their written
objection to the adding of the above
numbered parcels to the Studebaker
Corridor Development Plan. The
objections are as follows.
l) Since the early 1980's, the Company
has purchased the parcels involved in the
Substitute Resolution, many parcels of
which were in a blighted condition, and
has spent considerable monies to upgrade
these parcels. The incorporation of
these parcels in the Development Plan
would have a severe economic impact on
the existing construction business.
2) The Company presently employs
approximately 250 people, with an
estimated weekly payroll of $125,000.
The incorporation of these parcels, which
are an integral part of the Company
operation, could result in a loss of
employment, and even have a direct impact
on the future of the Company's
construction operation.
3) The parcels of land sought to be
adde to the Development Plan are not
blig ted areas within the meaning of
36- 7.14 -1, et. seq.
I.C.
-7-
South Bend ]
Regular Meei
6. NEW BUS-
a. coni
elopment Commission
- October 26, 1990
(Cont.)
4) The Company will continue to promote
the use of the land sought to be added to
the Development Plan in the best interest
of the City of South Bend and its
citizens, at no expense to the City or
its taxpayers.
5) The inherent costs involved in
adding these parcels to the Development
Plan and subsequent acquisition would
exceed the benefits and goals of the
Department of Redevelopment and the City
of South Bend.
6) The decision to add these parcels
to the Development Plan is unreasonable
and is an unnecessary action.
Resplectfully submitted
Kenneth P. Fedder
Suite 300, First Bank Bldg.
205 W. Jefferson Blvd.
South Bend, IN 46601
Telephone: (2l9) 234 -6061
Attorney for Ben Ziolkowski and
Ziolkowski Construction Co.
Ben Ziolkowski, Individually and as
President of Ziolkowski Construction Co.
October 16, 1990
City of South Bend
Department of Redevelopment
1200 County -City Building
Sout Bend, IN 46601
Attn: Ann olata
Dear
Mrs. Kolata:
South Bend I
Regular Meet
6. NEW BUS]
a. cons
elopment Commission
- October 26, 1990
(Cont.)
4) The Company will continue to promote
the use of the land sought to be added to
the Development Plan in the best interest
of the City of South Bend and its
citizens, at no expense to the City or
its taxpayers.
5) The inherent costs involved in
adding these parcels to the Development
Pla and subsequent acquisition would
exc ed the benefits and goals of the
Department of Redevelopment and the City
of South Bend.
6) The decision to add these parcels
to the Development Plan is unreasonable
and is an unnecessary action.
Respectfully submitted
Kenneth P. Fedder
Suite 300, First Bank Bldg.
205 W. Jefferson Blvd.
South Bend, IN 46601
Telephone: (2l9) 234 -6061
Att rney for Ben Ziolkowski and
Ziolkowski Construction Co.
Ben Ziolkowski, Individually and as
President of Ziolkowski Construction Co.
October 16, 1990
City of South Bend
Department of Redevelopment
1200 County -City Building
South Bend, IN 46601
Attn: Ann Kolata
Dear Mrs. Kolata:
�Z
South Bend
Regular Mee
6. NEW BUS
elopment Commission
- October 26, 1990
(Cont.)
a. conttinuect...
I arr the owner of parcels 12 and 13 that
Redevelopment has listed in resolution
962 to be acquired.
I also own two lots immediately north and
two lots east on Michigan Street.
This property is all used by my business,
Edward J. White, Inc.. We are a
plumbing, heating and air conditioning
contractor and have been at this South
Michigan address since 1927.
The parcels in question on Main Street
are part of our storage yard and are an
essential part of our business.
I am therefore requesting that parcels 12
and 13 be deleted from resolution 962.
Sincerely,
Edward J. White, Inc.
Paul J. White
October 26, 1990
City of So th Bend, Indiana
Redevelopm nt Commission
County -Cit Building
South Bend, Indiana 46601
ATTN: Ms. Ann E. Kolata
SUBJECT: Substitute Resolution
No. 962 Amending the
Studebaker Corridor
Development Plan
Gentry:
Please accept this as our official
remonstrance to the above action. our
-10-
South Bend I
Regular Meei
6. NEW BUST
a. cons
elopment Ccm ission
- October 26, 1990
(Cont.)
specific objections are the inclusion of
parcel number 13 -Block 4, parcel numbers
5,7,8,14,15,16, 18 -26 of Block 5. As
stated it is our present intention to
expand our existing operation, therefore
req iring assistance in the acquisition
of those parcels required for the
successful completion of our project per
the attached master plan marked Exhibit
"A ". Thank you for your consideration of
this request.
Respectfully,
Murdock & Sons Construction, Inc.
Ome a Properties
W.H. Calvin Murdock
W.H. Calvin Murdock
President
October 23, 1990
Redevelopment Commission
of the City of South Bend
Department of Redevelopment
County -City Building
227 W. Jefferson Blvd.
South Bend, IN 46601
RE: Substitute Resolution No. 962
Gentlemen:
I wish to object to the acquisition of
parcels 3,4, and 25 on block number 10.
-11-
I
South Bend ]
Regular Meet
elopment Connission
- October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSS (Cont.)
a. con,�inuea...
This land is used for employee parking
and is also the only access to our truck
Loading dock. Acquisition of this land
will result in severe damage to the
operations of the Ridge Company.
Sincerely,
Howard R. Goodhew
Chairman of the Board
October 25, 1990
Ann E. Kol to
Director
Department of Redevelopment
City of South Bend
Stu ebaker Corridor Development
P an
Dearl Ann:
I received your notice of the hearing to
be held on Friday October 26 concerning
the parcels within the Studebaker
Corridor that the city would like to
acquire.
As you are aware, I am the owner of a
building within the Corridor. Parcels
#1, 2, 3,5, 6, 7, 8, 10 of Block #12 that
are listed for acquisition are of concern
to me. Some of these parcels make up the
paved parking area for my building. The
remaining parcels were purchased with the
idea of expanding the parking, they are
now unpaved and are used as employee
parking. Since the construction of my
-12-
South Bend
Regular Me
elopment Commission
- October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSn ESS (Cont.)
a. conitinuect...
building in 1982, my business, Joe's
Liquor has doubled its retail sales. The
other retail businesses have also
increased sales. I was advised in early
198S not to pave the remaining area until
fin l decisions were made regarding
acq isitions. Therefore I would request
tha ownership of these parcels remain
the same.
Sincerely,
Jos ph A. Gorny
Joe's Liquor Store
111 South Main St.
South Bend, IN 46618
Ms. Kolata said these are the
reannstxances that have been received at
this point.
Ms. Kolata asked Mr. Pocius to briefly
outline those areas that are being
suggested to add to the acquisition list.
The Commission earlier this year added a
nuiter of parcels to their acquisition
list. With this resolution we would add
the remainder of the property that we
intend to acquire in the Studebaker
Corridor Development Area.
Mr. Pocius outlined the Studebaker
Co idor Area on the map. The purpose of
all this is to assemble land in the
Studebaker Corridor area. Specifically,
we are adding properties south of Sample
St. for assemblage and ultimate
di ition in order to redevelop the
are4 as a light industrial park. This is
-13-
South Bend edevelcpment Commission
Regular Meeting - October 25, 1990
6. NEW BUSINESS Cont.)
a. conttinuect...
the first step in the process in adding
several properties to the acquisition
list and these are the properties that
are contained in the yellow areas.
Ms. Auburn asked if there was any
objection to any of the information being
entxxed into the record. There being no
objection the information will be entered
into the record of the public hearing.
Mr. F asked if the objections are
for the people or the staff.
Ms. Kolata stated that this is to see if
theie are objections to submitting the
information I've mentioned so far. Then
we'll get to the public hearing where the
public will have the right to object to
the resolution.
Ms. Auburn asked if there were any
obj ions to the letters that have been
submLitted from those parties or any
obj ions to the fact that the legal
notices have been appropriately run
within the newspapers. Hearing no
objections, the items were entered into
the record. We will now open it up to
the public for the public hearing portion
to hear what the public has to say about
our plan and the resolution.
Ms.
say.
uburn stated that this is now the
c portion of this hearing and this
e time when it's appropriate for
e that have come to this meeting to
some kind of statement about the
sition of the property or the
opment of the Studebaker Corridor.
is the appropriate time to make
statements, so that the
ssioners can hear what you have to
-14-
South Bend gedevelopient Commission
Regular Mee ing - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSUIESS (Cont.)
a. conttinuea...
Mr. Kenneth Fedder, practicing attorney
at 300 First Bank Bldg, in South Bend
stated that I'm hear on behalf of Ben
Zidkowski individually and Ziolkowski
Construction Co. since you are proposing
to take property that belongs to either
Ben individually or the Corporation I'm
go' to leave with you a series of
photographs that I've taken that could be
attached to my letter. I think what you
are attempting to do might have good
neri t insofar as the City and the
'ssion's goals are and I will tell
you the Ziolkowski Construction company
has undertaken the same project back in
the areas of 1978 to 1983. That was, we
tho ght a depressed area somewhat
blighted and we moved in there with
kn ledge of the City and developed the
You have now chosen to take one half of
my property. I own about a block of land
and you are choosing to take one half of
the block and are leaving me the other
hal . On the half you are going to leave
me have already constructed my new
ccq any buildings, new parking area and
havo t upgraded at a considerable expense.
As i n integral part that you're leaving
me s that we purchased all of the
dilapidated old homes on the areas on
Block 3 that you might call parcels
16, 7,18,20, 21 and demolished those at
the expense of my client and we built our
stomage garage there for our vehicles,
for our inventory and for our equipment.
We think that it would be like you
chocsing to condemn or take a lumber
saying you may keep the company
office but you can't keep your yard.
Th e's no way that the company can
-15-
South Bend evelcpment Commission
Regular Mee ing - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSTCMSS (Cont.)
a. conuinuea...
o to without our yard, our inventory
and our storage area. You would have an
economic adverse affect, devastating
financial affects to the company.
We Employ approximately 230 people, many
of those would have to be laid off if
this was done. We have a payroll of
abo t $125,000 a week which would be
materially affected. I suppose you could
take the entire block and move us and
give, us a block of land in an industrial
park and build a similar building for us,
and give us a yard for the equipment. But
you're not doing that. You're taking
half' of my operation and leaving me with
the remaining half which is completely
unfeasible. I think it's an unreasonable
request. I think those portions of the
landthat you are proposing to take
shoild be exempted and taken out of this
red velopment amendment plan. We have
ked, and continue to do so, on a
proc ram to do what we think promotes the
best, interest in the city and
neicibborhood. and we continue to upgrade
it. You should not do that or propose to
do that because it is not only to the
detaiment of my client but at the expense
of the citizens of South Bend and the
tzoZeyers- Why should the taxpayers do
and pay for what we are willing to do
and are doing ourselves. So at this
t think that you should amend the
plan. I'm making a request that the
pro ies that are involved with Mr.
Ziolkowski and Ziolkowski Construction
Co. be removed from the amended
Ms. uburn asked if there was anyone else
tho would like to speak.
-16-
South Bend edevelcpment Commission
Regular Meeting - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSVESS (Cont.)
a. continued...
Mr. Paul White, Edward J. White Plumbing
and Heating. I own property on Main
Street. My father started the business
in that location in 1927 on Michigan St.
and over the years we have acquired
adjoining property across the alley on
Main St. I own a total of 4 lots on Main
St. for storage. You want to buy half of
that. If you buy half of my yard in
effe,at you put me out of business. I
don t think it's fair Iand I'm not going
to sit still and see it be done. I would
like my property removed fram, the list of
acchisitions.
Calvin Murdock with Murdock & Sons
Construction as well as Calvin Murdock
personally and Omega Properties. I have
had numerous hearings with Economic
Development with regards to our own
proposed development on Lafayette and
F!rwiklin St. I am confused as to why
those properties that we have acquired at
scmn cost are on the list. We have been
told that what we are proposing is
consistent with Economic Development's
aim to develop the area. We are indeed
anx ous to see those efforts continue,
particularly with those parcels we have
sated that we need some assistance in
acciairing in order that we can control
enot gh of the property. I think there are
3 or 4 parcels that we do need in order
to J ulfill the master plan of our
pro ect. We can see that we have an
extianeous tract of land dawn in the 1100
block that is not contiguous with any of
the other properties that I certainly see
will, be consistent to relinquish that.
But I don't see the merit particularly
wi the effort and considerable dollars
the we've already invested in our
-17-
South Bend euelopment Commission
Regular Meeting - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSVESS (Cont.)
a. cominuea...
pro ect in seeing our properties listed
on 1he list of acquisitions so I
certainly would not like the Can ission
to pontinue with those properties that we
have possession and ownership of listed
as Ootential acquisitions on the list.
Mr.
Rid
are
lis
25
thi
rig]
rev
at
by
bui
to
whe
S. ]
wer
bec
sem
the
the
Bec
peq
new
bui:
thr
15'
is ,
dam
wit
an i
Howard Goodhew, representing the
e Company at 1535 S. Main St. You
interested in purchasing properties
ed as block No. 10, parcels 3,4, and
ind I've spoken to the staff about
. The parcels were formerly the
t-of- -way for the railroad and
to us under easement reversion
he time the railroad tracks were
oned. The parcels no. 3 & 25 are
for employee parking. We have 60
oyees at this location and without
ing we have no place to park those
le. Parcel no. 4 is a triangular
ed piece of property which was owned
as long as we've owned our
ding. That is being used as access
ur truck loading docks. Formerly,
we purchased our building at 1535
in St., we had loading docks that
entered from Main St. This then
me a state highway. And these larger
s, in order to get into our docks,
would have to go up on the curb of
UAW hall and caused damage there.
use of the complaints of these
le, which were justified, we built
loading docks on the west side of our
ding which are accessible only
ugh this parcel no. 4. We have about
o 20 trucks a day. If this property
cquired it will result in substantial
ges to our property. I verified this
appraisers that you would be paying
xtremely high price for a rather
1 parcel of land.
-18-
South Bend edevelopment Coamission
Regular Mee ing - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSANESS (Cont.)
a. continues ...
Mr. Bill Furry asked what the procedure
wou. d be to obj eat to our property being
tak . Is this it?
Ms. Kolata said this would be the best
time. ' After the public hearing we have
scheduled action, whatever action the
'ssion desires to take on the
lution. The resolution says that all
of these properties that were in the
leg&l notice are to be added to the
accitLisition list. The Commission can
approve the resolution they can modify it
or they could disapprove it whatever
action they care to take. That is
scheduled following this public hearing.
If iL property is added to the acquisition
list the next step is for the staff to
come forward to the Commission, probably,
in this case, on a piecemeal basis with
the authorization to send purchase
offers. So your best opportunity to
speak would be today..
MY rame is Bill Furry, Universal Paint at
131S S.ILafayette. We have property there
which is not marked for development. This
piece of property is a 30 foot lot
adj Z cent to our parking lot that we use
for storage. We have a corner piece of
pro , basically it's a square piece
of property. I see no reason why they
wo d want 30 feet in the middle of the
lock adjacent to ours. Basically I
obj to it, its expenditure of the city
whidh is unnecessary. We were relocated
abot it 4 years ago from where the ball
park. is and spent a considerable amount
of i tonev.
-19-
South Bend edevelcpment Commission
Regular Mee ing - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUS= S (Cont.)
a. con-¢inuea...
Mr. Greg Walz with J.E. Walz at 1202 S.
Laf yette. I have a question as to the
tinu.ng of this acquisition. When do we
hav to vacate and when would this take
pla ? I have a 40,000 sq. ft warehouse
and a lot of merchandise.
Ms. olata said that we are having
appmaisals done and we are also looking
at scme of the errviromental conditions
in the area. As we get that work
caq)leted we would came back to the
'Commission and say we are now ready to
p with this component of
aczILLisition. We've already sent out a
n of purchase offers to property
owners in the corridor but those are
pr' ily the residential units. As the
bacl.ground work is completed we will came
fonrard to the Commission. The timetable
for that would be over the next few
months. Once we send an offer there is
certainly time to negotiate and time to
discuss how long it would take to vacate
the property. We usually give at least
90 clays to move and that can be extended
if there are extenuating circumstances.
James Carr represents South Bend Lathe.
South Bend Lathe has two lots on Franklin
St. which are improved. They're paved, we
put in storm sewers, and fencing to
create parking space. This parking space
is essential to Corridor properties
continued renting of the parking spaces.
South Bend. Lathe further owns lots 22 -
25 an the corner of Lafayette and Sample
and I object to the acquisition of those
projerties without reason. I have a copy
of the Studebaker Corridor Project as it
was originally conceived and want to know
why it has been changed and what is the
rationale for the checkerboard
acq4isition of properties.
-20-
South Bend ]Redevelopment Commission
Regular Mee ing - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSMFSS (Cont.)
a. continued...
Ms. Kolata said that our concept for the
arat has not changed. When we adopted
the official redevelopment plan no
properties were scheduled for acquisition
in the official plan as it was originally
adopted. That was back several years ago.
Them we came fon4ar. in July and approved
a resolution that added approximately 30
p ies to the acquisition list. What
this resolution is doing is amending the
pl by adding additional properties to
the list. The concept of the plan has
never changed. The concept of the plan
has always been to clear out the
bli ting and unrelated use properties.
For example, the residential properties
and the vacant lots. A lot of the
discmssion today is focused around the
parlang lots and storage yards. We are
proposing to clean out and remove the
properties that have not been utilized to
their fullest. Whether or not a
construction yawl is a utilization to the
fullest is something that the Commission
is croirxj to discuss. There are merits to
the arguments presented both today and in
the past. We are not trying to do harm
to any existing business in the
co idor. What we are trying to do is
rexKve those properties that are not
coiqatible or not in good condition and
then to make that land available for new
ial and light industrial
I
J
nk the Commission and the staff
I be very willing to discuss, on an
Idual basis, each of the
instances that are being brought up
Generally our purpose is to create
and provide land for development.
-21-
South Bend edevelcpment Cormnission
Regular Meeting - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSINESS (Cont.)
a. continuect...
We inly know that parking is
important for a business, but parking is
not always the highest and best use for a
particular piece of land. We are looking
at ways of consolidating land and maybe
prmriding a different form of access to
the back of that property so that we can
the bigger blocks of land for
devcdcpment and at the same time protect
those businesses that are there. No
single property was targeted for
acquisition. The next step is to sit down
wit1i each of you on an individual basis.
jub Auburn stated that the puipose of the
i
s hearing and the meeting is to get
t ly that kind of input.
Mr. Goodiew wanted to add that Block 10
parcel no. 4, because it's a triangular
piece of land, what we wish to retain is
direct access to loading docks. He has
no objection to squaring off the property
but needs more than just a narrow alley.
Mr. Ed Richardson, American Medical, 228
Broadway wanted to know the time frame
for these acquisitions and whether the
offexs would be to us by the end of the
veax.
MS. Kolata said it could be about the end
of a year or the beginning of next
Mr.
is
YOU
.chardson asked that if everything
eeable then we are relocated, do
ve any assistance in relocation.
-22-
South Bend edevelcpment Conmtission
Regular Meeting - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSnTESS Cont.)
a. continued...
Ms. Kolata said we follow the rules of
the Uniform Act which is the relocation
policy for any projects using federal
money. We are not using federal money but
we choose to follow that same policy. We
give relocation benefits for those who
are tenants of property we buy, and we
have business relocation benefits. They
are based either on what it actually
costs to move or are based on the income
for the business over the last 2 years.
Th e's a formula for calculating what
th benefits would be.
Ms. Kolata stated that we have a staff
pea-son who works with anyone being
relocated and would work with you as
Mr. Buzz Daily, owner of 1107 Lafayette,
stat ed that the board has made an offer
on the property which I rejected. I came
in z nd gave the board what I felt I
n ed to go out and reinvest the money
that,I asked for the property. If I
understand correctly, that was rejected.
I sl ould be entitled to have equal rights
of leing able to go out and purchase
another property of equal value that I'm
having to give up. All I'm asking is to
maintain the same earning. It is an
inccme property for me. The first offer
and second one were both low. At their
las offer I reject it.
Mrs.1 Kolata said that the staff would
disduss his offer with him.
Mr. "lip Hunter. I own the property at
Garst and Franklin Street and for 17
years had a business there. Law and
-23-
South Bend edevelopment Comunission
Regular Meeting - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSnTESS (Cont.)
a. cominuea...
ord broke down in that neighborhood. I
have been robbed 5 or 6 times. Tools
were stolen out of the shop. I tried to
sell the place and couldn't. I had it
loc ed up and barred and braced, to the
po' t where they couldn't break in the
ou ide walls. Then they went up on the
roo and cut holes to get in. Then the
wa came in on the floor, then the
env PO
officer said I'd have to
dawn the building or repair it. So
I t re it dawn. That's why it's a vacant
There must be 8 -10 cars parked on my
lot I had a steel fence built around it
and they tore the concrete posts out, and
still park there. The Enviromiental
people come out and say they can't do
anything about it and they don't. Then
the police come out and they won't even
get the cars off. It went on for about
18 out of the 25 years I was there.
Ms. Auburn stated that time is running
short and asked if there are other
parties to be heard.
Diarte ErnsbeYger, 822 S. Lafayette. I
own the Dew Drop Inn. You stated that
you are going to take Block No. 17,
parcels 19 - 31. At this time my
rest,aurant isn't included but I will need
of these lots for parking. I will
not need all of them but I will need same
of them. If you take all this property
away from me I won't have a restaurant,
because there won't be any place for my
cus omers to park.
-24-
South Bend evelopment Commnission
Regular Mee ing - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSDMS (Cont.)
ailiCC7N �
Ms. Auburn asked if there was anyone else
who wants to speak.
Ro bert Gorny with Gorny Plaza. You are
considering taking 8 parcels of Block
12. Half of them make up our parking
lot the other half are for employee
parlanq and we don't want them taken.
Ms. IAuburn asked Mr. White if he had
another comment.
MrrWhite asked when we would know the
r is of the executive meeting.
Ms. Kolata said the executive meeting is
not discussing this particular issue and
the executive session was dealing with
some other items. There are limited items
that: you can discuss in executive session
and it wasn't this.
Ms. Auburn stated that when the public
heaiing portion is cmplete the
Ccmdssion will take action on the
Resolution which is what everyone here is
tallang about. You will know shortly what
the Commission is going to do, following
the public hearing.
Mr.
Fedder suggested that the Commission
pone or delay any action on the
lution until you meet with the parcel
rs. What I fear is that once you
the resolution and
-25-
South Bend evelopment Commission
Regular Meeting - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSANESS (Cont.)
a. continueca...
add all of these properties in, it seems
more difficult to deal with these. I
thilik you are a little premature. I think
you should postpone the hearing and talk
to the individual people and if no one
has serious objections, put that in.
You should postpone and talk to these
people. Take 15 minutes on a scheduled
basis and then be in a more informed
pos tion as to whether to adopt the
resolution to add all these in.
Ms. Auburn stated that she was going to
close the public hearing portion of the
men ing unless there is someone else that
wou d like to be heard. Seeing no
ind cation I will close the public
hea. ing portion and open it up for
que4tions and discussion among the
Ms. Auburn stated that it might be
helpful to say that we have looked at the
Studebaker Corridor from the perspective
of is been accomplished in the Monroe
Park area. That was the acquisition and
assemblage of property, what were smaller
pieces of property into larger more
devedcpable pieces of property and that
the Monroe Park Area has been very
successful. We have no more land to
devc lop there and yet we still have
inqL.iries as to whether there are other
areas within the city where that kind of
lark. is available for development. There
is riot a lot of that kind of land within
the confines of the City of South Bend
for that kind of development. There is
prorerty outside the limits of South
and while it helps our geographic
am4 develop, it does not help put
a 'tional businesses on the tax rolls
-26-
South Bend evelopment Commission
Regular Meeting - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUS$NESS (Cont.)
a. continuea...
for the City of South Bend per se. From
the Cc mission's perspective we've been
looldng at following the success of
Monroe Park and asking if there was some
way that we could begin to carry that
sua3ess, forward and to help the
Studebaker Corridor Area further develop
in that particular area. The
Coim.ussioner really appreciate everyone's
tine and input. That's why we have a
pub is hearing, so that we can hear from
you and get your input into the decision
making process.
Mr.]Piasecki asked Mr. Fedder how many
enm ovees are affected?
Mr. Fedder said that we don't really
know. We have 230 employees and if we
can't use the remaining portions of our
properties Mr. Ziolkowski will have to
make some tough decisions. He cannot
operate Ziolkawski Construction Company
wit1iout, the yarns and the equipment
stomage. The company would have to
totally relocate somewhere else at a
tremendous cost. You could go into
Chapter 11 bankruptcy. You will have
ho endows problems in taking part of the
o tion, it's hard to really diagnose
and digest the impact. But it will be
economically devastating in effect if you
cl him down.
Mr. Piasecki asked Mr. Gorny how much
lar4 is being used for your an personal
Mr.
the
Gorny said approximately 30 feet of
existing parking lot that's paved.
-27-
South Bend edevelopment Commission
Regular Mee ing - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUS�NESS (Cont.)
a. con tinuect.. .
Mr. Piasecki asked Mr. Gorny if he had
any idea of developing the remainder of
that on your own.
Mr. Gorney said that about a year ago
they were going to pave it and were told
to it.
Mr. Piasecki asked how lame of a parcel
is 3femainincr.
Mr. Gorey said that it would be parcels
1, ,3,5,6,7,8 and 10 of Block 12.
Ms. Kolata said that currently 30 feet is
paved and being used and the other 60
fee# is unpaved.
Mr. JGorrry said that their plans were to
mako additional parking which they really
Ms. Kolata stated that she had met with
Mr. Gorny's father and he represented
that. they had thought of expanding the
actual building area as well, not just
the parking area. But he didn't have an
imT4diate timetable and that's something
we pursue.
Mr. Donoho stated that he had no cc ments
but when you need a motion I would like
to make it.
Mr. ICombs had no questions.
Ms. Auburn said that another issue for
that. area is some of the aesthetics, just
what kind of look will some of the
prarerty have. You might want to get
back and talk to Mr. Ziolkowski about
that.
CME
South Bend evelopment Commission
Regular Mee ing - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSINESS (Cont.)
a. continued....
0
Mr. Fedder said that he had recently
spoken with Mr. Ziolkowski and he will
continue to upgrade the areas and he
miglit build some additional buildings to
house some inventory or to put some
pment. Mr. Ziolkowski is spending a
lot of time and money to do something
1' Monroe Sample at his cost and why
should the taxpayers do it.
Ms.I Auburn asked if there were any other
queotions or discussion from the
Ms. Auburn stated that we are closing the
public hearing portion that's item a. and
move! to Item 6b. on the agenda which is
our action on the Resolution.
Mr. Donoho stated that from the insight
and input that's here today I don't feel
comfortable with Substitute Resolution
No. 962. I think our prime motive here
should be continuation of business that
exi is already, with that business
undExstanding that one of the things we
are after is to improve the aesthetics of
all the business in the area. So that
any investment made from this point on is
done in cooperation with existing
business. We don't intend to put anyone
out of business and it appears as though
this resolution may not do that but it
could sure help. With that in mind I
would like to table the matter until the
next, regular scheduled meeting and that
notice be given to all participating
parties that might be concerned with it.
Whether we're legally bound by it or not
-29-
South Bend evelopment Commssion
Rregular M ting - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSPNESS (Cont.)
a. cont=uea...
I'm moving that we do that, so that
everyone that participated today has the
saup ability to participate in any other
futtwe action we have. I would like to
look at amending this list. With that in
I move that we do not pass
titute Resolution No. 962 today, that
it be tabled to the next scheduled
meeting and we take a look at
res cturim it.
Mr. Coombs stated that he is supporting
Mr. DonohoIs motion because I'm concerned
too I think we need to be involved in
the business of trying to enhance
business in that area and not necessarily
doing that may be hasty that may
cause some problems for our businesses.
I'd like to see us move forward and not
shoot ourselves in the foot, and I'll
second the motion to table.
Ms.
and
the
9th
It I
we'-
Auburn said there has been a motion
a second to table this item so that
Conmission can reconsider the
'sition list and that at our
arly scheduled meeting on November
we would acme back and take action.
on't be another public hearing but it
be our action as a result of the
is input from today. We would cam
as a Conmission and take action on
mioer 9th on re- looking at Substitute
lution No. 962 given the input that
e heard today.
-30-
South Bend edevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSANESS (Cont.)
t-IFEELG--re) 1110 1 0' L== R
Mr. Piasecki agreed with the rest of the
Camiission to table Substitute Resolution
No. 962.
Ms. Eblata stated that the staff will
mee with basically everyone here today
and sit down and go over the list again
and come back with some suggested
is to that resolution. What those
amoximents will be, I assume are
reductions from the acquisition list. We
can't legally add anything that isn't on
there already. All we can do is subtract
from the resolution. As the people leave
tocLty, if we have not talked to you
before, we need to sit down with you and
get your name and address and schedule a
meeting within the next couple of weeks.
Ms. Auburn stated that we have the
relevant input and relevant information
from the public hearing. That's the
purpose of the public hearing. The
'ssion's job now is to take the
inp t, weigh that input and come up with
a final decision on what we will do.
Mr.
RO
a motion by Mr. Donoho, seconded by
Combs and unanimously carried, the
Fission tabled Substitute Resolution
962 until the next regularly
duled meeting on November 9th.
-31-
CONM ISSION TABLED SUBSTITUTE
RESOLUTION NO. 962 UNTIL THE NEXT
REGUTARLY SCHEDULED MEETING ON
NOVEMBER 9, 1990.
South Bend edevelopment Ccumission
Regular Mee ing -October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUS S (Cont.)
C.
South Bend Heritage SBH $42,972.00
Fouxidation
416 E. South St.
* includes $4,072.00 contingency
Kern H. and Kenneth H. Miller $36,730.00
Janice R. Miller
717 N. Blaine St.
* #cludes $2,733.38 conting
Ho ing Development
Corporation HDC $69,810.00
422 College St.
* includes $5,270 contingency
Ms. Kolata stated that we have three
rental rehab loans. Ms. Kolata stated
that. there is a mistake on the address,
the loan applicant for South Bend
Heritage Foundation is for property at
416 E. South St. This property currently
has 3 units but will be converted into 2
units. The entire project cost is
approximately $42,000.00. It includes
re-roofing, electrical, gutters,
plimbing, new furnaces, bathrooms and
kitchens. The application is for
$14,000.00 of rental rehab loan. South
Heritage intends to use Community
-32-
$14,000.00 (Public)
$14,472.00 (CDBG)
$14,500.00 (Private)
$16,000.00 (Public)
$20,730.00 (Private)
$26,000.00 (Public)
$43,810.00 (CDBG)
South Bend edevelopment Commission
Regular Mee ing - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSUMS (Cont.)
c. continues...
Development Block Grant and private
fimncing to make up the balance of the
pro eat. Your action is to approve the
$14,000 loan and to approve South Bend
Her tage being the contractor for
$42 972.00.
The next rehab loan is for Kenneth H. and
Janice R. Miller at 717 N. Blaine. It is
a 2 unit house. It includes exterior
painting, new furnaces, water heaters,
batImooms, kitchens and re wiring. The
remal rehab loan would be $16,000.00
The - have private financing in the amount
of 20,730.00. You also need to approve
Ken ieth H. Miller as the contractor for
$36 730.00.
The final application is from the Housing
Deveacpment Corporation for property
located at 422 College St. The house has
2 urlits and will be converted to 4 one
units. The project includes
re-roofing, window replacement, addition
of vinyl siding, and then extensive
remdeling of the inside of the property.
The rental rehab loan would be in the
amount of $26,000.00 and you would be
approving the Housing Development
Co ration as the contractor for
$69,810.00.
-33-
South Bend edevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUS124ESS (Cont.)
c. conzinuea...
Mr. Donoho stated that he didn't
understand why 422 College is $69,810.00.
That's approximately $18,000 a unit for a
one bedroom unit to rehab.
Mr. I Ted Leverman said they are going to
be duttim the whole unit.
Ms. Kolata stated that it will be 4 one
units. The rental that will be
Charged on them will be $125.00 a month
for a one bedroom unit.
Ms. Kolata stated that using the
Conuu.mity Development funds and using the
rental rehab funds which are forgiveable
cuts down what has to be repaid through
the private financing. This is
ad essing a segment of the market that
really is not well addressed. The HDC
will. have 4 one bedroom units very much
up to code, available at a very minimal
Mr. Piasecki said that we are going to
redevelop these and then move people in.
Are they going to be a Section 8
1PrO ? .
Mr. Leverman said that they don't have to
be.
Mr. Piasecki said to try and get some
earned dollars into the property rather
thanhaving government money like Section
8.
Ms. Kolata stated that at $125.00 a lot
of people probably wouldn't need the
Section 8 subsidy.
-34-
South Bend
Regular Me
6. NEW BU,
C. col
elopment Cmmiission
- October 26, 1990
(Cont.)
Ms. Kolata stated that we can't turn down
son body who comes in as a Section 8
applicant. We can't say no to them.
Ms. Kolata said that you can't
diR,.riminate against someone because of
where their money comes from, but it
makes it much more affordable. Somebody
who is earning a wage can carne in and
aff rd it.
Ms. Helen Sutton asked how does an area
que4ify for the forgiveable loan.
Ms. Kolata said that the Rental Rehab
progrm is for rental property so that
larrilords or property owners apply for
the funds. There is a geographic
botudary and Mr. Leverman can show you
what: the boundary is. Basically within
that: boundary, to the extent that we have
rental rehab money available, it can go
up to 50% of the cost or $8,500 for a 3
unit. The landlord must bring
the entire property up to code and supply
50% of the cost from other financing.
Upon a motion made by Mr. Piasecki,
seconded by Mr. Combs and unanimously
can-ied, the Commission approved the
Rental Rehab Loan of $14,000 and awarded
the contract to South Bend Heritage in
the amount of $42,972. for property
loc4ted at 416 E. South St.
Upon a motion made by Mr. Donoho seconded
by Dr. Combs and unanimously carried, the
Ccxmission approved the Rental Rehab Loan
of 4,16,000 and awarded the contract to
Kenneth H. Miller in the amount of
$36,730 for property located at 717 N.
Blaine St.
-35-
COMMISSION APPROVED THE RENTAL
REHAB IRAN OF $14,000 AND AWARDED
THE CONTRACT TO SOUTH BEND
HERITAGE IN THE AMOUNT OF $42,972
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 416 E.
SOUTH ST.
COWUSSION APPROVED THE RENTAL
REHAB LOAN OF $16,000 AND AWARDED
THE CONTRACT TO FENNETH H. MIIIIR
IN THE AMOUNT OF $36,730 FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 717 N. BIAINE
ST.
J
South Bend edevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSMS (Cont.)
1�6-r•) -1114 i ilk L=
e.
Upon a motion made by Mr. Combs, seconded
by Mr. Doncho and carried, with Mr.
Piasecki abstaining, the Commission
approved the Rental Rehab Loan of $26,000
and awarded the contract to the Housing
Dev ( ion in the amount of
$69,810 for property located at 422
Col ecfe St.
Ms. Kolata said we have three properties
in the Studebaker Corridor Area where we
would like to accept a counter-offer.
1) arcel 5 -6 at 1214 S. Franklin and the
c o ter-offer is $9,000.
21 5 -2 at 1206 S. Franklin and the
C
ter -offer is $10,000.
3) 1 4 -23 which is 315 -317 W. Stull
and the counter-offer is $30,000. The
sta f would recommend that the Commission
a pt all these counter-offers.
Upon a motion made by Mr. Carobs, seconded
by Mr. Donoho and unanimously carried,
the Commission approved the
counter-offers of Parcel 5 -6 for $9,000;
Parcel 5 -2 for $10,000; and Parcel 4 -23
for $30,000 in the Studebaker Corridor
Devidlorment Area.
Ms.IKolata stated that there is a
-36-
COMMISSION APPROVED THE RENTAL
REHAB LOAN OF $26,000 AND AWARDED
THE CONTRACT TO THE HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION IN THE
AMOUNT OF $69,810 FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 422 COLLEGE ST.
COMMISSION APPROVED THE
COUNTER- OFFERS OF PARCEL 5 -6 FOR
$9,000; PARCEL 5 -2 FOR $10,000;
AND PARCEL 4 -23 for $30,000 IN
THE STUDEBAKER CORRIDOR
DEVELOPMENT AREA.
South Bend edevelopment Commission
Regular Meeting - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSINESS (Cont.)
d. continued...
property at 512 S. Rush. The property
awncx has indicated they intend to
r ilitate the property and move into
it. The staff has looked at the
properties that this owner has previously
renovated and has inspected this property
and would like to recoYmmnd that we
witIldraw our purchase offer and allow the
property owner to redevelop the property,
Pazzel M10 -3. The property owner's name
is Perda and it is listed on our
accr4isition list as the Reiso
Ms. Kolata stated that we sent the
p offer and the owner came back
and said they intended to move into the
house and rehabilitate it and it would be
their residence. They had previously
r ilitated a house in the 900 block of
W. LaSalle. Ms. Robinson and Ms. Hickey
met with Mr. & Mrs. Derda and went
through the house on LaSalle as well as
the house on Rush and it's their
reccmye.ndation that we withdraw the offer
at this time. They intend to start some
of the work imBdiately, and not complete
it before next spring. We intend to
monitor that. They need to do a good
rehobil itation otherwise we would come
ba and ask you to reissue your purchase
off 6r.
wi
a motion made by Mr. Donoho,
ded by Mr. Combs and unanimously
ed, the Commission approved the
rawal of the purchase offer for
rty at 512 S. Rush in the South Bend
al Development Parcel M10 -3.
-37-
CrW4rSSION APPROVED THE
WITHDRANAL OF PURCHASE r` OFFER
FOR PROPERTY AT 512 S. RUSH IN
THE SOUTH :arD CENTRAL
DEVELOPMENT AREA. PARCEL M-10-3.
South Bend evelcpment Commission
Regular Mee ing - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUSANESS (Cont.)
Eip
Ms. Kolata stated that the Commission is
considering, and stated in its lease with
the Redevelopment Authority, that we
would like to acquire 10 pieces of land
in the Airport Economic Development
Area. Nine parcels are in the area of
Old Cleveland Road and one is on Bendix
just: north of Viridian Dr. By law we
mist. have two appraisals of each piece of
prolexty. We have gone to four appraisers
and asked each of them to do five
appraisals. Mr. lauver had a conflict on
one of them and so we took one from Mr.
Lauver and gave it to Mr. Horka. We ended
up with McCloskey and Associates having
five appraisals, Jerry Michaels having
five, Ralph Lauver having four and Tom
Horka having six. This will provide us
wit2L information regarding the value of
the property in the area. Their
pro s range for the type of
projerty. Mr. McCloskey said he will do
the appraisals for $1,500 per improved
pardel and $1,000 per vacant parcel, that
totals $7,000. Mr. Lauver gives specific
n for each parcel and it comes out
to $5,350. Mr. Horka has a range from
$11,650 to $12,100. Mr. Michael's
prorasal adds up to $10,000.
Mr. Donoho stated that at one time we
tallied about the Airport Authority using
our staff for relocation and asked if
this was related.
-38-
South Bend evelopment Cmimission
Regular Mee ing - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUS4NESS (Copt.)
f. continued...
Ms. Kolata stated the we did same
relocations for the Airport Authority
Those properties were south and west of
the airport. Ms. Robinson has nearly
ccupleted those relocations. Almost all
of this is northwest of the airport.
Nine properties are northwest of the
a' rt and one is on Bendix Dr. just
no of Viridian. This is approximately
240 acres. Some of this is vacant land,
is farm land and some is property
wh a people are living.
Ms. Kolata said that Mr. PendlIs and Mr.
Bradford I s property is here. I've met
with the appraisers and relayed the
concerns that the property owners have
expressed to us. Mr. Hunt and I went out
and toured Mr. Pendl's property, went
through his house, across his property
and we relayed those conversations to the
appraisers. We asked them to consider
all of the things that were brought to
our attention. The property owners
indicated to us that if we are going to
buy them they want to get some sense of
what the values are going to be and they
want us to move forward on the
appraisals. They have asked we have all
notifications sent to them by certified
mail. I've relayed that to the
appiaisers and I think that the owners
are not happy that we're looking at their
prqerty, but if we are looking, they
want us to do it. Mr. Pendl has about 15
Ms. Kolata said the appraisals are used
to Establish what the value is and we
would use it for the budget for the bond
-39-
South Bend
Regular Me
6. NEW BU
f. Co
a
elopment Commission
- October 26, 1990
(Cont.)
iss ie. Mr. Pendl said he wants no road
thr)ugh his property just to take it all
if you are going to take it. This is for
tot Ll acquisition. Nothing is being done
sou of the airport.
Ms. Kolata stated that the appraisers
want to get started now that the weather
is still nice because it is quite
beautiful out there now.
Upon a motion made by Mr. Combs, seconded
by Mr. Donoho and unanimously carried,
the Commission approved the proposals
submitted by McCloskey & Associates, Tom
Horka, Jerry Michaels and Ralph Lauver
for appraisals in the Airport Econa is
Dev lolpment Area.
Ms. Kolata stated that Catering by Billie
is a tenant in our retail space in the
parldng garage at Wayne and St. Joseph.
She has gone to lst Source Bank for a
loan related to some equipment she has
put into the building, and 1st Source
has asked that we approve an
ass grmnent of the lease. Ms. Jenny Pitts
'er had suggested that it's
appropriate that we sign it.
Ms. Kolata said that it's basically
subordinating our lease to their loan for
the eauini ent.
a motion made by Mr. Donoho,
ded by Mr. Combs and unanimously
ed, the Commission approved the
rm ent of the lease with Catering by
e, Inc.
-40-
CCRAISSION APPROVED THE POSI
= BY MC CLOSKEY
ASSOCIATES, • • . C JERRY
MICBAELS AND RALPH APPRAISALS i AIRPORT
COMMISSION APPROVED THE
ASSIGNMENT OF LEASE FOR CATERING
BY BILT , INC.
South Bend edevelopment Ccomission
Regular Meeting - October 26, 1990
6. NEW BUS4,ESS (Cont.)
1147
Ms. Kolata stated Walker has outlined the
scope of services as to what would be
inc uded in the maintenance manual. It
wou. d include procedures to take care of
all of the physical features of the
garage, what the maintenance requirements
will be and putting together an estimated
budget for annual maintenance costs for
the next 10 years. Walker would do this
for a lump sum fee of $6,000 plus
re' le expenses that will not go
aver $1,300. They will provide multiple
cop es of this manual so that we can have
one at the garage, one in the City
Eng meer 's office and one in our
de t. We highly reo mnend it.
There is no similar booklet for the other
two garages and that has caused problems
in the past.
Ms. Kolata stated that this will outline
what maintenance should be done and when
so that you don't end up with major
deterioration or problems.
Mr. Donoho asked if that wasn't included
in Walker's earlier contract.
Mrsl Kolata said it wasn't.
Mr. Donoho said it should have been and
suggested we go back to them and see if
they can delete the $1300 reimbursable
a motion made by Mr. Donoho, COMMISSION TABLED TBE PROPOSAL
ded by Mr. Combs and unanimously FROM WALTER ENGINEERING
ed, the Commission tabled the CONCERNING TB E PARING GARAGE
ng Garage Maintenance Manual pending MAINTENANCE MANUAL.
er negotiations with Walker.
-41-
South Bend
Regular Meg
7. PROGRE
8.
9.
There
elopment Commission
- October 26, 1990
no progress reports.
The nex# Regular Meeting of the Redevelopment
Conmiss on is scheduled for November 9, 1990
at 10:0 a.m.
There beirxj
no further business to cane
before the
Redevelopment Camnission, Mr.
Combs iuLde
a motion that the meeting be
adjourned.
Mr. Piasecki seconded the motion
and the
meeting was adjourned at 11:45 a.m.
�iJ, A),
N. Auburn, Vice President
-42-
NEXT OOrM4ISSION MEE= G NOVEMBER
9, 1990.
F 1: Uu��I�Uy
E. Kolata, Director