Laserfiche WebLink
• The South Bend Redevelopment Authority <br />May 3, 2006 Meeting Minutes <br />remove the deck for any reason and rebuild it, it could be a problem. Mr. Alvarez <br />asked the cost of rerouting the pipeline, and Mr. Peterson said Marathon is not <br />concerned about the cost of moving the pipeline but just want the easement to be <br />able to do it. The odds of Marathon moving the pipeline are slim, but the risks for <br />the City are greater. The City needs the improvements on Lot 3A to proceed so <br />that the hotel can be built. In building the golf course, calculations were not quite <br />correct on where the pipeline was actually located with respect to the easement <br />granted. It appears that a green, several tees, and a bunker may be jeopardized if <br />Marathon digs up the pipeline: Marathon presently has a 6" pipeline, but if it <br />wants to dig that up in the future and perhaps put in a 40" pipeline, then Marathon <br />could cause a tremendous amount of damage to the golf course. Ms. Pfotenhauer <br />asked Mr. Peterson to confirm that he was recommending that the Authority grant <br />Marathon an additional easement of 20' on either side all the way through the golf <br />course, and Mr. Peterson said that was correct: Mr. Inks said the easement is not a <br />full easement, it has limitations. Mr. Peterson said what Marathon is looking for is <br />enforceability. Under Federal law you can't build 50' from a pipeline. Under <br />ordinance, you can't build within 50' of a pipeline. They want a private right of <br />action so that if someone builds something within 50' feet of the pipeline, <br />Marathon can force them to remove it. This original deal was struck in the late <br />90's. Marathon is not allowed to cut trees in that additional 20' so it is a limited <br />. easement. Mr. Inks said the additional 20' of easement will not affect the golf <br />course since Marathon is not able to cut down trees and the City doesn't have any <br />plans to construct buildings on the golf course. <br />Mr. Alvarez asked about the possibility of Marathon perhaps building a bigger <br />pipeline. Mr. Peterson said the local Marathon people don't seem to care about <br />this, only the attorney. There is now an ability to bore underneath the existing <br />pipeline rather than using a backhoe. Mr. Alvarez asked if we give Marathon the <br />additional 20' easement and the small piece of property should a deal be able to be <br />struck, and Mr. Peterson said that was correct, unless Marathon's attorney <br />continues to be unreasonable.. Ms. Greene said Mr. Peterson has been able to <br />work closer to an agreement than any of the other attorneys have over the course <br />of several years. <br />Ms. Pfotenhauer asked if the. pipeline ran through anything besides the golf <br />course, and Ms. Greene said the .only building sites impacted by the pipeline are <br />the hotel site, the Blue Heron site, and the driveway located on the property that <br />the City owns. Mr. Peterson said these sites could be replatted and the club house <br />moved over if necessary for development. <br />Mr. Peterson said the City is not willing to give more than what he has stated, and <br />will not grant Marathon the additional easement area unless it agrees to the City's <br />requests. These include the develoCper's request to have an inspection of the <br />H:\WPDATAWUTHORTY\050306.M1N.DOC C <br />