04/29/86 Board of Public Works Minutes

Home Browse Search

�I REGULAR MEETING APREL 29, 1986 QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS REGARDING CONSTRUCTION OF SANITARY SEWER ALONG RIVERSIDE DRIVE AND RIVERSIDE PLACE Mr. Wayne Werts, 1889 Riverside Drive, South Bend, Indiana, was present and inquired of the Board whether they received any further information regarding the above referred to matter. Mr. Leszczynski advised him that the Board continues to review this matter and has discussed other options. He further advised Mr. Werts that the Board's decision on this matter will be based on sound technical knowledge with that aecision to be made within two (2) weeks. Mr. Joseph Klebosits; 1905 Riverside Drive, South Bend, Indiana, was present and advised the Board that he would like to clarify a point made in the Soils Evaluation Report which Dr. Plain submitted to the Common Council in reference to the area flooding in the Fall and Spring. He stated that that reference is incorrect. Further, a major flood which occurred in 1942 was the first flood in fifty (50) years. Additionally, there were minor floods in 1982 and 1985 but flooding does not occur each spring and fall as stated in the report. He stated that his property is at the lowest level in that area but he was never asked if and when flooding occurs in the area. Mr. David Canfield, 1891 Riverside Drive, South Bend, Indiana, inquired if litigation pending on the installation of the sewers would delay the award of the bid. Boara Attorney Thomas Bodnar indicated that he would have to know what type of litigation before that question could be answered. Mr. Leszczynski reminded the residents that were present that the City has been mandated by the County Health Officer to install the sewers and to date that mandate has not changed. Mr. Werts advised that at the present time no health hazard exists as was originally the case when the mandate was issued. Mr. Canfield additionally inquired it the residents filed a lawsuit against the County Health Officer would that hold up the project. Board Attorney Thomas Bodnar stated that he could not answer that question until he knew what type of lawsuit would be filed. Mr. Joseph Guentert inquired what would happen should the Board decide not to proceed with the project at this time despite the mandate to do so. He was advised that the project has been delayed as long as possible at this time and any further delay could possibly result in a lawsuit being filed against the City mandating the installation of the sewers as well as the possible assessment of a daily penalty for delay. Mr. Leszczynski reiterated that the City has stretched its ability as far as it can and has been trying to work with the neighbors. In response, Mr. Werts stated that it appears that the Board would need something from the County Health Officer in order to stop work at this point. Mr. Leszczynski advised him that that assessment is correct. Mr. Canfield inquired of the Board what they would need to have to stop action on the project as far as litigation and asked what would have to be filed in order to do so. Board Attorney Thomas Bodnar stated that a Court Order could enjoin the City or the County Health Officer could rescind the previous Order. Mr. Werts advised that the possibility exists that the residents will either file a lawsuit for declaratory relief and seek rescission of the mandate, file a lawsuit enjoining construction or ask for a legal and administrative review by the Courts. Ms. Barnard reiterated Mr. Leszczynski's prior statement that the City would not be proceeding with this project had the County Health Officer not mandated the installation of the sewers.