My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
RM 02-07-75
sbend
>
Public
>
Redevelopment Commission
>
Minutes
>
1970-1979
>
1975
>
RM 02-07-75
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/6/2012 9:51:52 AM
Creation date
9/20/2012 2:31:07 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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. OLD BUSINESS (Cont'd) <br />1904. There are pilings shown on the drawings. Some things <br />cannot be determined beforehand. Based on their experience <br />with the South Bend Dam construction, which was constructed <br />about the same time, their judgment would be that the pilings <br />are in excellent condition, as the timbers in the Dam were <br />superior for the length of time they have been in. This is <br />a judgment decision to be faced between them and the State <br />Highway Department. They have to agree with us before this <br />work can begin. Lawson Associates have been in touch with <br />them. <br />Ms. Jeanne Derbeck, South Bend Tribune reporter, asked why <br />it has been called the Bicentennial Park; yet in the beauti- <br />fication plan it is called a Centennial Park. She said she <br />has heard it called both ways and wondered which is correct? <br />Mr. Fisher said that it is called the "Bicentennial Park." <br />In the original report Lawson Associates had done, they <br />called it the "Centennial Park" (probably looking at 100 <br />years in the future). However, it was officially changed to: <br />"Bicentennial Park." <br />On motion by Mr. Chenney, seconded by Mr. Wiggins and carried, <br />the above update of the Colfax /Pier Park Dredging and Rip -Rap <br />Contract was approved, subject to HUD and Legal Counsel ap- <br />proval. This motion also includes authorization to approve <br />the advertising with the Board of Works for a construction <br />contract, after receiving approval from HUD and Legal <br />Counsel. <br />b Dainty Maid Bake Shop Sign: Mr. Brownell advised we have a DAINTY MAID <br />letter from Mr. David L. Hab, Dainty Maid Bake Shop, inform BAKE SHOP <br />ing us they have decided to reinstall their sign approxi- SIGN, R -66 <br />mately 30" higher than it was. North American Signs, Inc. <br />will install this sign for $995.00. Because of the benefits <br />of the canopy which rendered the previous location of the <br />sign, Dainty Maid will accept the Department of Redevelop- <br />ment's offer of $540.00. This constitutes the labor only <br />for rehanging the sign. The difference between the two <br />figures is the modification of the bracket to hold the <br />sign. <br />Mr. Brownell advised our obligation was not to redo Dainty <br />Maid's sign and raise it, but just to put it back, and this <br />charge would have been $540.00. The amount is the differ- <br />ence between just putting it back and putting it back the <br />way Dainty Maid wants it. <br />Commissioner Wiggins advised that Mr. Hab had been in some- <br />time prior (Commission Meeting of October 4, 1974) and this <br />was discussed. Five (5) quotations received were discussed <br />at the time, and we had stated that all we would be respon- <br />sible for would be the cost to reinstall the sign. The Com- <br />missioners had requested the total costs be prorated. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.