Laserfiche WebLink
South Bend Redevelopment Commission Meeting Minutes <br />Page Three <br />December 2, 1977 <br />4. COMMUNICATIONS <br />a. Letter received November 28, 1977 from Norman D. <br />Clifton, Acting Director Community Planning & <br />Development Division of HUD in Indianapolis, <br />Indiana re: Urban Renewal Project R -66, Disposition <br />of Parcel 6 -1A and the remaining balance of Parcel 6 -1B. <br />Mr. Brownell indicated that this letter confirmed <br />receipt of our notification of disposition for the <br />above parcels and it has been filed appropriately with <br />HUD. Mr. Nimtz directed that this be received and placed <br />on file. <br />5. 1 OLD BUSINESS <br />a. In the case of Edith Hawley and Angela D. Berg vs. . <br />South Bend Department of Redevelopment and South Bend <br />Redevelopment Commission - Cause No. H -7875; in the <br />St. Joseph Superior Court, an order entered November <br />30, 1977 by Robert L. Miller, Judge of St. Joseph <br />Superior Court, which confirms the final action of <br />the defendants on Resolution 540 and 542. <br />Mr. Brownell indicated that in his 16 page opinion on this <br />case Judge Miller confirmed the final action of the <br />defendants South Bend Department of Redevelopment and <br />South Bend Redevelopment Commission on Resolutions 540 and <br />542 on the 30th day of November 1977. Mr. Nimtz directed <br />that this be received and placed on file. <br />6. NEW BUSINESS <br />a. Request for Commission approval of Change Order #1 <br />to Contract No. NECD /PR /CS -2/14 with Charles Brown <br />Maintenance Company Inc. for an increase in contract <br />price of 1892.00 for an amended contract total of <br />X42,796.95, as set forth in letter from John E. Davis, <br />Project Director of North Housing Bureau, <br />Mr. Davis indicated that this change order occurred <br />because the contractor had torn . up the old floor for <br />the installation of the sub floor as requested in the <br />original contract. Upon doing so the contractor discovered <br />termite damage and that the rear portion of the house <br />had shifted at least six inches off of the foundation. <br />The front porch rafters and sheathing on the south side <br />of the house had deteriorated to the point that the <br />wood would not hold a nail. This was discovered because <br />in the original inspection the porch was to receive an <br />asphalt shingle roof. Mr. Robinson objected and <br />wondered why the faults could not have been forseen in <br />the original inspection, and why the long delay <br />between the actual inspection and the contractor's <br />