My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
RM 02-04-77
sbend
>
Public
>
Redevelopment Commission
>
Minutes
>
1970-1979
>
1977
>
RM 02-04-77
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/5/2012 5:15:06 PM
Creation date
9/24/2012 12:25:00 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
6. NEW BUSINESS <br />9. <br />h. <br />Continued <br />Mr. Crighton. No, they have to qualify -- to meet the guidelines, etc. <br />Mr. Robinson: That percentage of these requests does this group take <br />care of? <br />Mr. Crichton: Keeping in mind that our programs are all concentrated <br />in areas of low to moderate incomes under the Community Development <br />Regulations, we are approving, I would say, between 65% and 70% of all <br />people who request assistance. This is from all projects. The remain- <br />der either have an income that is too high, or they have an adequate <br />income to make repairs to their home . . for any number of reasons <br />they do not qualify, or they are renters, for instance. The primary <br />thin is that we are reaching at least 70% of those people who do live <br />in t ese areas. The new development of Community Development is to <br />concentrate not only in areas that are severely blighted, but in <br />areas that could go either way, transitional areas. The idea being <br />the City is receiving less Community Development funds year after <br />year so the City has to concentrate in areas that will cost less money <br />per house. This is what the planning department is trying to do. I <br />don't imagine the regulations will change any, but I imagine the per- <br />cent ge of approval will remain approximately the same. <br />Mr. rownell: In the last meeting we approved seven and rejected <br />seve . <br />Chan (e Order No. 1 to Contract SECD /PR /CS -5/38 for increase in APPROVAL OF <br />contract amount of $719.00 . for an amended contract total of CHANGE ORDER <br />7,9 3.00. This Change Order covers installation of underlayment 1, CONTRACT <br />and lile in the living room, two aluminum storm combination windows SECD /PR /CS- <br />on t o (2) north windows in the living room, installation of under - 5 -38 FOR <br />laym nt and tile in the dining room, installation of door jamb and CONTRACT <br />casi g plus paint or stain and varnish two coats, repairs to bath- TOTAL OF <br />room floor and replacement of cap on tub trap. Approval of Change $7,943.00 <br />Order recommended by Mr. Johnson, Chief Inspector for Southeast AT 1312 <br />Development Project. Dwelling location: 1312 Marietta Street. MARIETTA ST. <br />Mr. How long was it between the initial inspection and <br />when Jobinson: <br />you came back and decided this extra work needed to be done? <br />[1r. �johnson: Approximately four months. They were revised the end <br />of the summer, somewhere between August and September. <br />The chair: Here are two rooms that required underlayment. <br />Mr. Johnson: Under normal circumstances, we would not have in- <br />cluded those two rooms. This house is a little.below normal. <br />Under normal circumstances, unless a floor is completely deteriorated <br />in another part of the house, we won't touch it. except in the <br />kitchens and bathrooms. This particular house . we have had a <br />major problem. Actually, they had to wait several months so they <br />coul clean up the debris around the house so they could participate <br />in o r program. <br />-13- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.