My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
RM 06-07-74
sbend
>
Public
>
Redevelopment Commission
>
Minutes
>
1970-1979
>
1974
>
RM 06-07-74
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/6/2012 10:11:30 AM
Creation date
9/20/2012 12:26:31 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
5. <br />No. 1 <br />attor <br />Const <br />J. BL <br />the C <br />lativ <br />room. <br />tion <br />Mr. <br />basi <br />an i <br />that <br />ite <br />ten <br />all <br />LD BUSINESS (Con V <br />George 'H. and'Ella Pope,:re Rehabilitation, Parcel <br />3 -8; R =57: Mr. Lennon.advised Mr. George H. Pope., his <br />ney Mr. Timothy J. Walsh, Mr. Frank Fahey with the Abar <br />ruction Company, our Commission Legal Counsel Mr. Kevin <br />tier, and Mr. William C. Ellison, Assistant Director of <br />perations Division, are discussing additional costs re- <br />e to Mr. Pope's rehabilitation work in an adjoining <br />The results of the meeting and the legal recommenda- <br />are: <br />evin J. Butler, Commission Legal Counsel, said that <br />ally the parties- -the home owner and contractor- -are at <br />passe for the work that remains to be done. The home <br />had made a list of the items (fifty -seven in number) <br />they contend remain to be done under the contract and /or <br />ctions to be made. Disagreement is on ten (10) of the <br />. The contractor, Abar Construction Company, said the <br />10) were not included in the original contract and that <br />he work was done properly by the contractor. <br />Basically there is $5,000 in an escrow account, remaining money <br />borrowed by the Popes, and that interest is continually being <br />paid on it and setting in the account. He said the previous <br />reasons for recommending the money be paid to the mortgagee <br />was to reduce the balance of the original loan. <br />Mr. limothy J. Walsh, attorney representing Mr. George H. <br />Pope and Mrs. Ella Pope, said that his understanding, based <br />on tie conversation, is that they are at a point in which it <br />must be resolved for the reason that this money will be applied <br />on tie balance of the mortage or applied against the price for <br />whici a new contractor would complete the work. The counsellor <br />requ sted the opportunity to consider both of the possibilities <br />to enable Mr. & Mrs. Pope to get another contractor - -as they <br />have not made an attempt - -and that he would like to leave an <br />amicable solution to this settlement with a continuation of <br />resu is to thoroughly discuss and reconsider, and the possi- <br />bility of getting another contractor to complete the work <br />pursuant thereto, which is their commitment. <br />Mr. Kevin Butler recommended a motion to this point by the <br />Commission which in effect would state that the home owners <br />have two (2) weeks from today in which to obtain a contractor <br />who is satisfactory to the Department of Redevelopment staff <br />and who is agreeable to complete the work within the remaining <br />dollars that we have in the escrow account, or if the cost <br />is going to be beyond that amount, the home owners are agree- <br />able to cover the difference. If the matter is'not closed in <br />two weeks, the staff is authorized to process that repayment <br />of le monies in the escrow account to mortgagee, so we will <br />not eed to come back to the Redevelopment Commission. <br />s:� <br />GEORGE.H. & ELLA <br />POPE, REHABILITATION, <br />R -57 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.