Laserfiche WebLink
Reimbursement to Revolving Fund for Month of November, 1967 <br />From Project Expenditures Account R -56 $ 835.67 <br />tt tt tt it R -57 7,332.71 <br />tt tt it it R -66 2,075.87 <br />it Urba Redevelopment Fund 962.61 <br />Total $11,206.86 <br />4. <br />Dore Wrecking Co.'s letter of December 13, 1967 to <br />Redevelopment Dept. requests an extension of time for <br />demolition of buildings already released under current <br />contract until about January 8, 1968, because of two <br />reasons: (1) the inclement weather along with the hol- <br />iday season, and (2) the simultaneous excavation work <br />has made the demolition work very difficult. The Com- <br />mission gave approval for the extension of time upon <br />motion by Mr. Kompar, seconded by Rev. Kirk. <br />S. OLD BUSINESS <br />Upon staff <br />recommendation, the Commission voted to <br />COMMISSION TO <br />readvertise <br />for the pedestrian overpass site improve- <br />READVERTISE FOR <br />ment work <br />within the Chapin Street Project, R -29, sub- <br />SITE IMPROVEMENT <br />ject to HUD <br />approval, and to personally invite the <br />OF PEDESTRIAN <br />same three <br />bidders to submit bids again with instruc- <br />OVERPASS, CHAPIN <br />tions in the <br />bid documents to be followed thoroughly, <br />STREET, PROJECT, R -29 <br />upon motion <br />by Mr. Chenney, seconded by Rev. Kirk. <br />The three <br />bidders were (1) Canonie Construction- <br />Com-pany, who <br />failed to submit the Form 96A, (2) Hickey <br />Constructi <br />n Company, who did not submit an alternate <br />bid which <br />was specifically called for, and (3) Dowell <br />Construction <br />Company, which was the only complete bid <br />received. <br />Furthermore, all bids submitted exceeded <br />the engineer's <br />estimate by 10 %. <br />6. NEW B <br />a. Mr. <br />Kapisak, representing Raitt Corporation <br />SITE PLANS FOR <br />who are developers <br />for Parcel 2(b) in.the Sample Street <br />REMAINING PORTION <br />Project, R-7, <br />submitted site plans for the remaining <br />OF PARCEL 2(b), <br />portion of <br />subject parcel, and asked for Commission <br />RAITT CORP., <br />approval to <br />extend the deadline for 60 days for begin- <br />SAMPLE STREET <br />ning construction, <br />which is now February 1, 1968. The <br />PROJECT, R -7 <br />staff acce <br />ted the plans conditionally, subject to <br />evaluation, <br />but the 60 day extension cannot be granted <br />because fr <br />m the legal standpoint an extension of time <br />is not pos <br />ible. This means that by February 1, 1968, <br />a preconst <br />uction conference would have been held with <br />the contra <br />tors selected to build the building, and <br />eonstructi <br />n would be underway by that date. Therefore, <br />the Commis <br />ion approved the motion by Mr. Kompar, se- <br />conded by <br />4r. Chenney, that the plans be accepted as <br />-2- <br />