My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
RM 11-16-79
sbend
>
Public
>
Redevelopment Commission
>
Minutes
>
1970-1979
>
1979
>
RM 11-16-79
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/5/2012 4:45:00 PM
Creation date
9/25/2012 1:13:14 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
47
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 BendlRedevelopment Commission <br />Regular Me ting - November 16, 1979 <br />7. PROGRE$S REPORTS <br />a. Msl Auburn continues... <br />company that will quote a bond with zero percent equity. <br />The American Development Corp. has a 32 percent equity <br />ratio, which is very low. The National Mobile Concrete <br />bid has a 21 percent equity ratio, which is high enough <br />that I believe that they could receive bonding, based on <br />t4 t. <br />I also have a question on the American Development Corp. <br />proposal because I came up with a $27 sq. ft. amount in <br />their perspective and Jannotta has come up with $52 sq. ft. <br />So there appears to be a discrepence there. Neither the <br />American Development Corp. nor the 100 Center dealt with <br />the exterior east and south walls at all and if you go and <br />look at the east and south facing walls, something must be <br />do he to those walls and that's not built into the cost. I. <br />have a question as to whether we're talking about Class A <br />space. I believe that the period of time that this comes <br />on the market it will be on at a range that puts it directly <br />in Class B and not Class A. So the proposals are talking <br />about one thing, I think the market is going to dictate <br />another when we get it there. It appears to me that the <br />time lines set forth in the proposals are far too short be- <br />cause it will take at least three months to put together <br />the bonding requirements and usually another 12 to 18. <br />mo the on top of that as a rehab time so we're talking about <br />a or 22 year time limit, not the year or year and a half <br />th t we've been talkina about. <br />I have a question as to whether the developers can buy the <br />Odd Fellows Building and sit on it and wait until the land <br />value appreciates and then simply turn around and sell the <br />la d, for which most of them have bid almost nothing for <br />and capitalize on that as far as speculative financing. I'm <br />no sure, and maybe Mr. Miller can answer this question for <br />me they did do the debt coverage ratios but that varies <br />very widely from industry.to industry and I'm interested on <br />what is the normal debt ratio for the kind of analysis that <br />we're looking at. I'd be interested in knowing if anyone <br />ha come.up with firm bond commitments based upon the pro- <br />posal, and I'd also be interested in knowing what charac- <br />teristics distinguish Class A from Class B from Class C <br />of ice space, because I think that's a key issue in the Odd <br />Fellows Building. I'd like to end.my remarks by saying I'm <br />no of the bulldozer mentality, I don't think. I've lived <br />in the West Washington district prior to the time that it <br />wa fashionable and stuck it out through a period of time <br />wh n everyone was leaving and not moving in. I've been in- <br />vo ved with Tippecanoe and enjoy living next door to that <br />-22 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.