My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/25/82 Board of Public Works Minutes
sbend
>
Public
>
Public Works
>
Minutes
>
1982
>
10/25/82 Board of Public Works Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/16/2024 2:37:59 PM
Creation date
10/31/2016 11:16:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board of Public Works
Document Type
Minutes
Document Date
10/25/1982
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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
i 9 <br />REGULAR MEETING <br />OCTOBER 25, 1982 <br />There was discussion on the apparent confusion caused to the <br />bidders on the professional testing services for police <br />recruits and the psychological testing of police officer <br />candidates in utilizing the formalized bidding process. <br />Mr. lernan suggested that the formal bidding process not <br />be used for professional testing services and,psychological <br />testing. He stated that he was concerned about the procedure <br />to be used in submitting proposals for such services in view <br />of the need to reject a number of bids because the proper <br />bid form was not used or not filled in correctly, or the <br />proper bid security as required not submitted. Mrs. Pfotenhauer <br />stated that the procedure outlined in the statutes relative to <br />the formalized bid process was followed even though Form 96 <br />and 96A were not completely applicable to the services. Mrs. <br />Pfotenhauer advised that, in using the formalized bidding <br />procedure, no other forms were available as approved by the <br />State Board of. Accounts for bids concerning professional <br />services to be furnished. <br />PUBLIC HEARING ON HOUSE MOVE (112 E. NAVARRE TO 322 W. MARION <br />Mr. Leszczynski noted that Southhold Restoration, Inc., owner <br />of a 28' by 45' flat -roofed structure at 112 East Navarre <br />Street, was requesting permission to have Lykowski Construction <br />Company move the building to 322 West Marion Street utilizing <br />Navarre west to Lafayette; thence south on Lafayette to Marion <br />and west on Marion to its destination. It was noted that the <br />Building Department and the Bureau of Traffic and Lighting <br />had no objections to the proposed house move. It was also <br />noted that all adjacent property owners had been notified of <br />the move. Mr. Charles H. Beutter, residing at 2324 Homewood <br />Avenue, Mishawaka, and owner of property next to 322 West <br />Marion Street, stated that he and his sister who resided at <br />318 W. Marion had no objection to the house being moved by <br />Southhold but objected to the type and style of the flat - <br />roofed structure in the neighborhood. He felt itwouldnot <br />conform to the neighborhood and would reduce the current <br />values of the properties in the immediate vicinity. Mr. <br />John Oxian, President of Southhold Restoration, explained <br />that the house was saved from demolition by his organization, <br />and, with the assistance of $8,120.00 from the Housing <br />Authority, and the further expenditure of approximately <br />$50,000.00 of Southhold's funds, the house would be moved <br />to a permanent location on the lot owned by Southhold at <br />322 W. Marion. He stated that he felt the house should <br />remain in the neighborhood and, as an Italinate-style <br />structure, was listed as a historically significant house <br />in the records of the Historic Preservation Commission. <br />He advised that the ground would be elevated so the one- <br />story structure would be approximately the same height as <br />the home on its left. lie stated that he felt the flat roof <br />made the house unusual and rare. He advised that the houses <br />west of 322 West Marion were one-story homes, and the houses <br />east were two-story homes. He did not feel objection should <br />be raised because the home was a one-story building when other <br />one-story buildings were in the immediate vicinity. He <br />advised that there were no set standards on how high houses <br />should be and what type of roof is required. He explained <br />that considerable amount of money would be spent on the <br />restoration of the building which would include outside <br />repairs, after which Southhold would attempt to sell the <br />structure. He submitted a rendering of the home as it would <br />look in its permanent location with the horses on either side <br />of it. Residents in the immediate vicinity objected to the <br />rendering, stating that it was not drawn accurately. One <br />woman objected to the way the house looked on the outside <br />and felt that taxpayers' money should not be used to renovate <br />it. Mr. Oxian stated that the home would be restored to its <br />original condition and shape using $50,000.00 of Southhold's <br />private funds and $8,000.00 from the federal government. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.