Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSM 04-23-76April 23, 10:00 A. Presiding 1. ROLL SOUTH BEND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING HELD IN LIEU OF REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 16, 1976 1976 1200 County -City Building Officer: Mr. F. Jay Nimtz, 217 West Jefferson Blvd. President South Bend, Indiana 46601 CALL Commissioners Mr. Present: Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Legal. Counsel: Mr. Mr. News Media: Ms. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Others Present: Mrs Mr. Mr. Commu epment Mr. Devel Mr. Staff: Mr. F. Jay Nimtz, President Donald A. Wiggins, Vice President A. Peter Donaldson, Secretary Robert J. Cira, Assistant Secretary Lloyd E. Robinson, Sr., Member Kevin J. Butler George T. Patton Jeanne Derbeck, South Bend Tribune Reporter Lou Tutino, WNDU -TV Reporter James L. Marchelewicz, WNDU -TV Photographer Dan Caesar, WSBT -TV Reporter Larry Ford, WSJV -TV Reporter Bill Cressler, WSJV -TV Photographer Janet S. Allen, Interested Citizen John R. Kagel, Executive Director, Downtown South Bend Council John V. Lindstaedt, Fair Tax Association Keith P. Crighton James L. Johnson, Jr. Kenneth J. Schaller LPA Staff: Mr. C. Wayne Brownell Ms. Helen S. King Mr. Edwin R. Bauer 2. APPRO AL OF MINUTES On mo ion by Mr. Wiggins, seconded by Mr. Cira and carried, the Minut s of the Regular Meeting of April 2, 1976, were approved as maile and /or distributed. - 1 - MINUTES APPROVED 3. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS On motion by Mr. Wiggins, seconded by Mr. Robinson and carried, the claim3 were approved, as submitted, and allowed and ordered to be paid--totalling $80,748.86., The authorized claims are: PROJECT EXPENDITURES ACCOUNT, INDIANA A -10 Relocation Payments Emma 3ufford Mable Hall Willi Bee Horton Redev lopment District Capital Fund Redev lopment District Capital Fund Total PROJECT EXPENDITURES ACCOUNT, INDIANA R -5 Kevin J. Butler Richa d E. Hummer Total PROJECT EXPENDITURES ACCOUNT, INDIANA R -66 Real state Purchase Estate of Benjamin Brown, Parcel #22 -5A Kevin J. Butler Rober Foegley Landscape, Inc. Nauti us Construction Co. Total BUREAU OF HOUSING E -7 Area Services, Inc. Barany Sheet Metal & Heating Kevin J. Butler Ted Combs Decorating & Construction Company Madison Builders, Inc. Slati a Roofing &Sheet Metal Co. Total :LOPMENT REVOLVING FUND s Pe yrol1: March 20 to April 2, 1976 Amoco Oil Company Credit Bureau South Bend- Mishawaka I.B.M. Corporation C. E. Lee Company Muszy ski Insurance Agency, Inc. Singer General Tire, Inc. Xerox Corporation Total - 2 - GRAND TOTAL CLAIMS APPROVED $ 2.50 430.00 43.95 146.50 2,000.00 2,622.95 $ 96.00 109.00 $ 205.00 $ 16,000.00 920.00 2,306.70 9,760.60 28,987.30 $ 8,030.32 18,383.00 216.00 2,883.49 6,408.00 6,475.00 $ 5,893.98 45.96 5.00 445.99 23.73 100.00 14.45 8.69 $ 6,537.80 $ 80,748, 86 3. APP IAL OF CLAIMS (Cont'd REIMBURSEMENT TO REVOLVING FUND Project Expenditures Account, Indiana R -57 Project Expenditures Account, Indiana R -66 Total 4. COMMUNICATION a. UD letter dated April 16, 1976: This letter, over the signa ure of Mr. Stephen J. Havens, Director, Community Planning and Development Division; advises our business relocation claim from Indiana and Michigan Electric Company for moving and related xpenses, in amount of $370,444.00, has been reviewed and they are unable to concur in payment of this claim without proper ocumentation prepared by the L.P.A. hey also suggest that.we avail ourselves of the services of a onsultant capable of preparing the claim for submission to the UD Area Office for concurrence, since the L.P.A. has no busi- ess relocation person on staff. he letter also states that our entire claim is being returned, nd that upon completion of the claim preparation by our consul - ant the claim.with all new documentation be resubmitted for urther handling. $ 1,439.75 6,390.10 7,829.85 BUSINESS RELO- CATION CLAIM, INDIANA & MICHIGAN ELEC- TRIC CO., R -66 . C. Wayne Brownell, Executive Director, Department of Redevelop - nt, advised the claim amount in the HUD letter is in error and e correct amount should be: $379,444.00; also, that we did not ceive any enclosures with the letter. r. F. Jay Nimtz, President, Redevelopment Commission, stated nless there is some objection from the Commission, the Chair ill direct this be given to our legal counsel, Mr. Kevin J. Butler, or.discussion with Mr. Warren McGill, counsel representing Indiana nd Michigan Electric Company, for re- preparation of the claim. here being no objections, i:t was so ordered. 5. OLD BUSI None 6. NEW 3USINESS a. 4mendment to Relocation Assistance Contract with S. M. Dix & ssociates, Inc., Project Indiana R -66: Mr. Brownell advised hat he has talked to Mr. Warren McGill concerning the above IUD letter we received on the business relocation claim from ndiana & Michigan Electric Company, and also discussed the etter from S. M. Dix & Associates, Inc., with whom we have a ontract. This firm is a recognized consultant in this field nd HUD has recommended via phone that we use S. M. Dix & Asso- iates, Inc. for this matter. We would need an amendment to heir contract for additional services. - 3 - AMENDMENT TO RELOCATION ASSISTANCE CONTRACT WITH S. M. DIX & ASSOCIATES, INC. APPROVED, R -66 6. NEW BUSINESS (Cont'd Tie Contract with S. M. Dix & Associates, Inc., for professional carried, aid technical services, was executed on the 22nd day of January, with the contractor's request. 1)72, and amended on the 16th day of November, 1973, to revise Option tie rate of Contractor compensation and to extend the time of in acquisition amount of $16,000.00., Project Indiana APPROVED, p rformance. The request today before the Commission is the a proval for the time performance extension to December 31, is the East 26 feet of Lots Numbered Twenty -nine (29) and R -66 1)76, and the rate of compensation to be revised to $28.25 per to e gineer hour, or $225.00 per engineer day, whichever is less, p us necessary and reasonable travel expenses. Commissioner Wiggins advised that he recommends the approval; the f rm is reputable and their performance has been satisfactory. Mr. Dan Caesar, WSBT -TV reporter, asked what the total amount o the amendment is and whether or not we have any idea how long ft will take? Commissioner Wiggins advised it is on a per diem b sis and we do not know how long it will take. Motion was made by Mr. Wiggins, seconded by Mr. Cira and carried, for the approval of the Amendment to Relocation Assistance Con- tract with S. M. Dix & Associates, Inc., with time performance arid rate of compensation as noted above, Project Indiana R -66. b. Paving Bricks: Mr. C. Wayne Brownell read the letter received SALVAGE f om Mr. Robert R. Lee, dated April 1, 1976, in which he respect- PAVING f lly submits a request to purchase, salvage half- pieces of paving BRICKS RE- bricks, and enclosed a check in amount of $10.00.` QUEST DE- CLINED, My. Brownell advised his recommendation at this time is that the R -66 Commission not approve this request, as he has talked with the contractor, Nautilus Construction Corporation, working in the a ea and they would not like to have anyone coming in to pick u pieces of bricks while they are digging up whole bricks for the p ving work. The recommendation is that consideration of the b icks be delayed to a later time. Motion was made by Mr. Wiggins, seconded by Mr. Robinson and carried, that the above request be declined at this time, in accordance with the contractor's request. c. 0 tion Agreement, R -66: Commission approval was requested for OPTION Option Agreement, on Parcel No. 22 -5A, located on South Main AGREEMENT Street, in acquisition amount of $16,000.00., Project Indiana APPROVED, R -66, and the President and Secretary authorized to execute. PARCEL NO. 22 -5A, This is the East 26 feet of Lots Numbered Twenty -nine (29) and R -66 Thirty (30) as shown on the recorded Plat of Martin's Addition to the City of South Bend. Mr. Brownell advised this is the 26 foot strip back of Inwoods. Co missioner Wiggins added this is part of the original plan, anl is the additional land required to extend the service drive 40 feet - -the service access area behind the building. Tha arrangements.have been negotiated with Frederick K. Baer, attorney for the heirs of Sam Brown and as attorney for the estate of Benjamin Brown. -4- 6. NEW (BUSINESS (Cont'd otion was made by Mr. Wiggins, seconded by Mr. Donaldson and arried for the approval of the above Option Agreement, and he President and Secretary be authorized to execute the arePmant_ d. Besolution No. 521: This Resolution authorizes the execution RESOLUTION f the Redevelopment Agreement for the disposition of land and NO. 521 he execution of Quit -Claim Deeds for the transfer of title ADOPTED, hereto in connection with land to be disposed of in the La- R -57 Salle Park Project, Indiana R -57, Parcel Nos. 11 -5 and 11 -6, n amount of $384.00, to Mr. Robert N. Chambliss. This is some of the unbuildable land in the LaSalle Park area- -muck. 14r. Wiggins moved for the adoption of Resolution No. 521, seconded by Mr. Cira and carried. e. ontracts -with RENEW, INC.: Per recommendations of the South- FOUR (4) ast Advisory Committee, Commission approval was requested to CONTRACTS pprove fund allocation for non- profit groups, in amount of WITH RENEW, 5,000 each, for the following rehabilitation, and, if approved, INC. APPROVED, authorization to enter into contracts with RENEW, Inc. and the CD PROGRAM edevelopment Commission: 1) 830 East Calvert RENEW, Inc. - Southeast Division 213 East Dayton RENEW, Inc. - Southeast Division 120 Garfield RENEW, Inc. - St. Augustine Divsion 2310 Kenwood RENEW, Inc. - St. Augustine Division Mr. Keith P. Crighton, Director, Bureau of Housing, advised his is a continuation of RENEW, Inca's involvement which are non- profit rehabilitation programs. Motion was made by Mr. Wiggins, seconded by Mr. Robinson and carried, for the approval of the fund allocation for the non- profit groups, and the authorization to enter into contracts with RENEW, Inc., as noted above, in amounts of $5,000.00 for each contract, Community Development Program. f. Can e Order No. l to Rehabilitation Contract No. 20, Southeast P oject E -7: Commission approval was requested of Change Order N . 1 to Rehabilitation Contract No. 20, with Ted Combs Decor - a ing & Construction Company, for an increase in contract amount o $69.00, (Contract: $6,421.75), or an amended contract total o : $6,490.75, for rehabilitation work at: 116 East Braodway. S reet, Southeast Project E -7. Tie specifications called for cleaning the furnace and all ducts, aid installing an aluminum storm combination in the second floor west bedroom. During the course of the contract, the contractor fund that the furnace did not need to be cleaned, nor did the s orm window need to be replaced. This work is being requested to be deleted, and in lieu thereof, move a hot air duct in the kitchen which is presently behind the washer and unhooked, and connect it to the furnace. For the storm window, the contractor w-11 reglaze and rescreen the existing frame. The deleted items -5 C. 0. NO. 1 TO CONTRACT NO. 20 AP- PROVED, SOUTHEAST E -7 NEW OUSINESS (Cont'd) r. John V. Lindstaedt, Fair Tax Association, advised the question e wants to ask probably pertains to 90% of these change orders. e notices that some of these contracts cost $8,000 or close to hat, and is there any indication here that the valuation of that roperty will go up? The Chair advised that Mr. Crighton has nswered that question before at previous meetings here. It is of so much what the valuation of the property is, what the concern ere is that if you tear the house down, you have lost the housing nd no one else builds there. It is a matter of keeping housing o that somebody lives in it. r. Lindstaedt advised of the discussion he had with personnel in he Building Department, Substandard Division, that there have een over 150 houses so far this year that have been demolished nd 10 rehabilitated. Mr. Lindstaedt said he is wondering if ome of these are in the locations as a condition of the area in he neighborhood, or whether or not we are just trying to stall off ore blight. Commissioner Wiggins stated the whole object of this peration is to prevent blight, or restore the housing to City code. he number of houses that he is referring to that were torn down- - he 150--are good examples of this. These turn out to be vacant mount to $103.50, the additional work totals $172.50,. with a net difference of $69.00, which would be an increase to the contract mount, or an amended contract total of $6,490.75. otion was made by Mr. Wiggins, seconded by Mr. Robinson and carried, for the approval of Change Order No.] to Rehabilita- tion Contract No. 20, with Ted Combs Decorating `& Construction Company, for an increase in contract amount of`$69.00, with an mended contract total of $6,490.75, Southeast Project E -7. g. han a Order'N6. 4't6 Rehabilitation Contraet`No. 28, Southeast C.O. NO. 4 roject E -7: Commission approval was requested of Change Order' TO CONTRACT o. 4 to Rehabilitation Contract No. 28, with`Area Services, NO. 28 AP- Inc., for an increase in contract amount of $63.00 (Contract: PROVED, 7,967.32), or an amended contract total of: $8,030.32, for SOUTHEAST ehabilitation work at: 708 East Broadway` Street, Southeast E -7 roject E -7. he specifications called for repairing leaks in basement plumb - .ing, replacing a faucet on hot water heater, replacing waste and overflow in second -floor bathroom, and repairing tub valve. Dur- ing the performance of this contract,'the homeowners' children were cleaning a fish tank, and by pouring the contents into the second-floor bathtub; they clogged the structure's drain lines. he contractor is requesting an additional $63.00 to clean out he tub drain and sewer line. Staff is recommending this change , order for approval. Motion was made by Mr. Robinson, seconded by Mr. Donaldson and carried, for the approval of Change Order No. 4 to Rehabilita- tion Contract No. 28, with Area Services, Inc., for an increase in contract amount of $63.00, with an amended contract total of: 8,030.32, Southeast Project E -7. r. John V. Lindstaedt, Fair Tax Association, advised the question e wants to ask probably pertains to 90% of these change orders. e notices that some of these contracts cost $8,000 or close to hat, and is there any indication here that the valuation of that roperty will go up? The Chair advised that Mr. Crighton has nswered that question before at previous meetings here. It is of so much what the valuation of the property is, what the concern ere is that if you tear the house down, you have lost the housing nd no one else builds there. It is a matter of keeping housing o that somebody lives in it. r. Lindstaedt advised of the discussion he had with personnel in he Building Department, Substandard Division, that there have een over 150 houses so far this year that have been demolished nd 10 rehabilitated. Mr. Lindstaedt said he is wondering if ome of these are in the locations as a condition of the area in he neighborhood, or whether or not we are just trying to stall off ore blight. Commissioner Wiggins stated the whole object of this peration is to prevent blight, or restore the housing to City code. he number of houses that he is referring to that were torn down- - he 150--are good examples of this. These turn out to be vacant 6. NEW OUSINESS (Cont'd 0 of bi a ai ii t' o' e' louses, and, consequently, get vandalized, get garbage dumped nto them, and by the time you can,.get to.the structure, with :he absentee landlords, to .do anything with it, it is almost an mpossible kind of thing. Now, the houses that are before the :ommission here for rehabilitation, these are houses that people ,re living'in, and they can be rehabilitated to make it at least up. :o Ci °ty Code, and make i't a decent place to live in. Irs. Janet S. Allen, as an interested citizen, referred to the bove statement by Mr. Lindstaedt, and if'the Building Department aid their records indicate 10 houses were rehabilitated, then shy don't they have a record of the ones we are doing? Commissioner iggins advised further that we have had a lot 'more ' than 10 houses ehabilitated` through the Commission, plus all the others. Mr. righton said his division has had 107 houses rehabilitated- -plus he homes that are privately being rehabilitated. Commissioner iggins added that, in all probability; the statement made by the ubstandard Division were the substandard homes that go before the oard of Public Safety for cause- -the owners °must either rehabili- ate or have them demolished- -and that is another story altogether. rs. Allen questioned the $8,000 remodelling jobs- -now becoming a 15,000 house, "I would like to know what the basis of the valuation f this particular house is with the general assumption of what it s worth ?" Mr. Crighton advised, "As I have stated before, we are eally not too concerned with the valuation of these properties; he homes, that we are involved in, are of greater value to the :cupants than they are to the market. The market has certain real that they are involved in, and the rates are based on those )mes that are turning over on that market. These homes don't turn ver on the market, so, therefore, the valuation is either in the ape of neighborhood they are in, or their condition, or the fact iat there is a low turnover in the neighborhood. The value is flatively low, so we are not concerned with the market value; all are.concerned about is the health and safety of the occupant." s. Allen again brought up the assessed valuation and what happens en the assessor comes around - -a $5,000 home and $8,000 in`rehabi- tation -how do they meet that higher assessed valuation? The air advised they don't get a higher assessed valuation, because a lace is worth what the mar ie front footage cost or f lock, and, of course, the ill bring on the open mark kccording to the Uniform A fly variation is the estim ?aring on it. If you buil ;sessment will go up for t ided, but just in the case i assessment would be the on, so you haven't really square footage. All you ements of the structure, (et will bring. The assessor goes by igure for each piece of land in a certain improvements are what he thinks a house �t for a sale. Commissioner Wiggins added, ;sessment Law in the State of Indiana, the ition of condition or quality that has a i an addition on to a house, then your ie value of the addition that you have of repairing a house, the only change !stimation in value of terms of the condi- substantially altered the house in terms have done is change the condition of the ;o that the actual changes would be very - 7 - 6. NEW IUSINESS (Cont'd) inor. One of the real problems that I think we all need to recognize s that the idea of penalizing people for maintaining their structures s one of the incentives that creates the decline. If anything there ught to be the incentive applied the other way - -to give people some eason to keep their homes up.' Now, this has been kicked around from ime to time in the state legislature, but, unfortunately, legislature s either state, national, or what; seems to grind exceedingly slow." Ir. Lindstaedt said the average taxpayer-has to tighten their belts- - nd, sometimes, this irks us just a little bit. "'I go to meetings fter meetings, and they keep stressing that we don't do enough for he lower income bracket. And, then I come to your meetings, and I ee the Housing Allowance Program-- I's-ee the Homestead.Program - -I ee all these innumerable things that are seemingly stagnated in this 'ield, instead of one consolidated division in an overall picture, and ometimes we become very, very confused. As I.have said before- -you ehabilitate the building, then you send the people down to the Housing llowance Program; they carry on from there. Where is the initiative? have spent my lifetime working so I wouldn't have a mortage on my ome. I pay taxes. Sometimes.people get a little disgusted to have o subsidize somebody else's expenses. I can see certain agencies, ut the younger people, why can't they do for themselves? The problem s the tax bill for the average taxpayer. With inflation going up, s well as everything else- -you pay Peter to pay Paul: The Chair nswered, "The basic social philosophy, of course, is determined by he Federal Government, and some of us who have been in politics and he national scene for some time have said 'When you take Federal oney; you take the government regulations.' Whether it be the high - ay program, education, welfare or what - -when you take the money; you ake the regulations, and that is the situation.we are in here." r. Lindstaedt added that he realizes our problem. Motion carried. h. Change Order No. 2 to Rehabilitation Contract No. 48, Southeast roject E -7: Commission approval was requested of Change Order No. 2 to Rehabilitation Contract No. 48, with Ted Combs Decora- ting & Construction Company, for an increase in contract total f $311.25, (Contract: $6,897.63), or an amended contract total f: $7,208.88, for rehabilitation work at: 226 East Pennsylvania venue, Southeast Project E -7. he specifications called for re- roofing the structure including he front proch, 1,434 square feet. Since the time of the initial nspection, the side flat portion of the roof has begun to leak, nd also damaging the rear foyer ceiling. Although the inspec- ion called for a new roof on the main portion of the structure, here was nothing included for the flat portion. The replacement f roll roofing, 90 lb. weight, on side flat portion (160 sq. ft.) osts $86.25; rear foyer ceiling for replacement of ceiling tile 160 sq. ft.) costs $225.00, or total increase to contract of 311.25. Staff recommends the change order for approval. tion was made by Mr. Wiggins, seconded by Mr. Cira and carried, r the approval of Change Order No. 2 to Rehabilitation Contract . 48, with Ted Comb's Decorating & Construction Company, for an offlom C. 0. NO. 2 TO CONTRACT NO. 48 AP- PROVED, SOUTHEAST E -7 6. NEW BU$INESS (Cont'd in�Crease in contract total of $311.25, with an 'amended contract total of: $7,208.88, Southeast Project E -7. Co issioner Robinson asked how long is this going to last doing it in this manner; is it a stop gap measure? Mr. Cr ighton answered that with proper maintenance, it should last for 10 or 15 years. Co missioner Wiggins added that 90 lb. rolled roofing °is a pretty good grade. Motion carried. i. Change Order No.] to Rehabilitation Contract No. 52 Southeast C.O. NO. 1 Pr ject E -7: Commission approval was requested of Change Order TO CONTRACT No. 1 to Rehabilitation Contract No. 52, with Barany Sheet Metal & NO. 52 AP- Heating Company, for an increase`in contract amount of $122.00, _ PROVED, (C ntract: $5,243.00) or an amended contract total of: $5,365.00, SOUTHEAST fo rehabilitation work at: 113 East Keasey Street, Southeast Pro- E -7 je t E -7. The memorandum from Mr. James L. Johnson, Jr., Chief Inspector, advised the specifications called for the two rear entrance doors to be replaced, including the frames, jambs and thresholds; also the rear porch deck to be replaced. Since the time of the initial inspection, the rear porch joists and side rails have deteriorated. Thle front entrance door has also deteriorated. The contractor proposes to delete the cost of the two (2) rear do Dr frames, jambs and threshold and install the front entrance do 3r for that price; the only increase in price will come from the two 2 x 8's, six ft. long and five 2 x 8's, seven ft. long to secure the rear porch. The deletion amount runs $110.00 and th added work $232.00, or a difference of $122.00 for an increase to the contract amount, with an amended contract total: $5,365.00. Co missioner Wiggins asked if the door is salvageable, or if the of er is needed worse and what is the trade -off? Mr. Johnson., Chief Inspector for the program, advised that he talked to the carpenter several days ago and he had indicated that he can repair the frames, jambs and threshold on the rear two entrance doorways anJ take that off the specifications and instead give us a new solid core door for the front entrance door which has deteriorated since the time of inspection. Co issioner Robinson said he will ask the same age -old question: "H )w long of a period of time will elapse from the inspection to the actual time on the job site ?" Mr. Johnson advised about a year. Motion was made by Mr. Wiggins, seconded by Mr. Donaldson and carried, for the approval of Change Order No. 1 to Rehabilitation Contract No. 52, with Barany Sheet Metal & Heating Company, for an increase in contract amount of $122.00, with an amended contract total of $5,365.00, Southeast Project E -7. 6. NEW BUSINESS (Cont'd) j. Ch n e Order No. 3 to Rehabilitation Contract No. 54. Southeast Project E -7: Commission approval was requested of Change Order No. 3 to Rehabilitation Contract No. 54, with Barany Sheet Metal & Heating Company, for an increase in contract amount of $255.00, (Contract: $6:,072.50), or an amended contract total- of: $6,327.50, for rehabilitation work at: 628 East Indiana Avenue,- Southeast Pr ject E -7. During the course of the contract, the hot water heater has begun to leak, causing a serious health and safety problem: Staff re ommends_ the approval for the replacement of the water heater. Tha replacement is a 52 gallon. electric water heater according to city code, in amount of $255.00 including installation. Mot,ion was made by Mr. Wiggins, seconded by Mr. Cira and carried, fo the approval of Change Order No. 3 to Rehabilitation Contract No 54, with Barany Sheet Metal & Heating Company, for an increase in contract amount of $255.00, with an amended' contract total of: $66327.50. Commissioner Robinson asked if the others ever have had the feel- ing sometimes that the contractors might have bid these jobs too cheap and that sometimes all these extras they have is to compen- sa e for their low quote or something? The Chair agreed-that is a possibility. Commissioner Cira replied that he.has also had that thought before himself and knows how they feel about it. Mr. Larry Ford, WSJV -TV Reporter, asked the Commissioners what they are going to do about it and also shouldn't the work schedule be closer to the inspections? Commissioner Cira said they have brought this up before and the staff advises they can't do it. Commission Legal Counsel, Mr. Kevin J. Butler, advised on Item 6 , on the Agenda, we should be seeing some improvement in that respect, as those are the newer contracts and are on the new program. The others noted as Rehabilitation Contract Nos., e.g., 48 54 above, etc., are on the old Southeast Program. On the ne program approved, the contractors are picking up the schedules an procedures that are to be used. (SECD /PR /CS- 1/02). Commissioner Wiggins raised the question on the prices of the elec- tr c water heaters. On the new program, the change order request on 6 -L, the water heater replacement is $185.00, whereas on this change order we are paying $255.00. Mr. Brownell said he also raised that question and requested Mr. Crighton'to explain the difference. Mr. Crighton advised he talked to our cost estimator a little while ago on why the wide variation in price, and he ad- vised that the average cost for electric water heaters was $270 - $2 5. The price itself depends on the general contractor's markup, who puts it in for him, the type of liner, the duration of the war - ra ty on the unit, where it is purchased obviously, and if there is an3 additional work required for the plumbing system to facilitate installation. A number of factors are involved. Also, the price quoted from Bailey Electric of $185.00 is a very good price and he ga a us a break. - 10 - C.O. NO. 3 TO CONTRACT NO. 54 AP- PROVED, SOUTHEAST E -7 6. NEW BUSINESS (Cont'd) k. Mr. Dan Caesar, WSBT -TV Reporter, and Ms. Jeanne Derbeck, South B nd Tribune Reporter, both raised questions on why we are replacing t ese water heaters with the electric water heaters in lieu of gas, b th relative to cost and the energy crises. Mr. Crighton advised according to the project specifications and according to HUD's pre- ference in terms of our Community Development.housing activities, we have to replace like -items with like- items. In other words, if a gas hot water heater goes out, we can't, without a lot of paperwork, go to replacement of an electric water heater. Those regulations have been in effect since 1968 through.the Department of Housing & Urban Development. The Chair further added that this does not cause us any conflict with either utility. Also; we run into some situations where there is no gas line in the property, so there would be additional costs for installation of line runs. There would also be.charges for electric lines from prior gas installation. On the 'question why we should be concerned with criticisms from the utilities, this is the basic national philosophy and we do need to comply with HUD regulations, replace like - items with like - items. "I have been i`n a lot of these discussions before, and the reason for the regulations, and you get into the national lobbies involved, and the regulations are set." Co missioner Wiggins added that, just as we have people.here who represent taxpayers, we should also notice that public utilities ar2 also taxpayers -- substantial taxpayers. They have an interest in equity in tax money being spent. Mr. Lindstaedt stated, "We all ag ee that the utilities pay a great amount of taxes, but when you to k at the overall costs as to who carries the tax; it is the con - su er himself and nobody else. The costs are carried over." Change Order No. l to Rehabilitation Contract No. 60, Southeast C.O. NO. 1 Pr ject E -7: Commission approval was requested of Change Order TO CONTRACT No 1 to Rehabilitation Contract No. 60, with Ted Combs Decorating NO. 60 AP- & onstruction Company, for an increase in contract amount of PROVED, $3 0.00, (Contract: $3,760.85), or an amended contract total of: SOUTHEAST $4,080.85, for rehabilitation work at: 1511 South Fellows Street, E -7 So theast Project E -7. Mr. Johnson's memorandum states that since the time of initial inspection, the gutters and downspouts have deteriorated and sh uld be replaced. Staff recommends approval of the change or. er. This is for replacement of the gutters around the structure- - 76 feet -- excluding the front porch, and the replacement of four 10 ft. downspouts, for an increase in contract amount of $320.00. Motion was made by Mr. Donaldson, seconded by Mr. Wiggins and ca ried, for the approval of Change Order No. l to Rehabilitation Co tract No. 60, with Ted Combs Decorating & Construction Company, fo an increase in contract amount of $320.00, with an amended co tract total of $4,080.85, Southeast Project E -7. - 11 - 6. NEW BUSINESS (Cont'd 1. Ch n e Order No. 1 to Rehabilitation Contract No. SECD /PR /CS -1/02, o t east Communit Develo meat- `Housing'Pro ram: Commission ap- pr )val was requested of Change Order No. 1 to Rehabilitation Co tract No. SECD /PR /CS -1/02, with Bailey Electric Company, for an increase in contract amount of $185.00; (Contract: $3,414.00), or an amended contract total of: $3,599.00, for rehabilitation work at: 310 East Dayton Street, Southeast Community Development Housing Program. Mr. Johnson's memorandum states since the time of the initial inspection, the elements in the existing water`heater.burned out. The contractor proposes to replace the 52- gallon electric water heater for $185.00 as an increase to the contract price. Co missioner Wiggins said this is the cheap water heater and he will move for the approva'l,,seconded by Mr. Donaldson and -ca ried. Approval is for the change order as noted above. Th Chair pointed out that the change orders we have this morning on the Agenda, consist of five contractors: 1) Ted Combs Decorating & Construction Company 2) Area Services, Inc. 3)" Barany Sheet Metal & Heating Company 4) Bailey Electric Company 5) Slatile Roofing & Sheet Metal Company m. Change Order No. l to Rehabilitation Contract No. SECD /HR /CS- /17, S6­ijtheast Communit Develo ment Hous�ing Program: Commission ap- proval was requested of Change Order No. 1 to Rehabilitation Contract No. SECD /HR /CS -1/17, with Slatile Roofing & Sheet Metal Company, for an increase in contract amount of $250.00, (Contract: $38,841.00), or an amended contract total of: $39,091.00. The increase is for Contract No. 17 bringing that total to $5,660.00. This is for rehabilitation work at: 2818 Horne Court, Southeast Co munity Development Housing Program. ThE specifications called for covering the entire structure with se 1 -down asphalt shingles, including the front porch, and metal ed ing, and replace sheathing in rear area below dormer. Also, th4 front proch is to be redecked. ThE contractor has indicated that 50 square feet of the porch ceil inc, and 50 square feet of sheathing, and four support columns should be replaced on the front porch. Staff recommends the change order for approval. Mr. lat Met tol 17 Wiggins moved for the approval of Change Order No. l to Rehabi- ion Contract No. SECD /HR /CS- 1/17, with Slatile Roofing & Sheet i1 Company, for an increase in contract amount of $250.00 for tract 17, with an amended contract total of $5,660.00; or a i1 amended contract of $39,091.00, consisting of one set of ;ontracts. Motion seconded by Mr. Donaldson. - 12 - C.O. NO. 1 TO CONTRACT N0. SECD /PR/ CS -1/02, SOUTHEAST CD HOUSING PRO- GRAM C. 0. NO. 1 TO CONTRACT NO. SECD /HR/ CS -1/17, SOUTHEAST CD HOUSING PRO- GRAM 6. NEW- PUSINESS .(Cont'd ommissioner Robinson said, "Let me get back to my age -old uestion: Since we are under a new program regime now, how ong will it take between inspection and the inspection of his? Mr. Johnson advised the fi °rst inspection was 'done in eptember or October. Mr. Crighton added that this is our ousing Allowance Referral Contract and it`is based on their nspection. The Chair confirmed, "In other words we didn't o the inspection." . Butler asked about 6 -L, (C.0.- that involved the water ater)? Mr. Crighton advised that inspection was done in e fall--late fall. As to when the contract was let, Mr. ighton advised the work was started in January. ommissioner Cira asked on 6 -K, house on South Fellows Street, or additional charge for the replacement of the gutters and ownspouts that deteriorated since the initial inspection t a cost of $320.00: "How do we know that is a' competitive bid n that particular addition for that item ? "' Mr. Crighton advised or a change order, all we are concerned about is whether it eets our estimation on what it is going to cost: The contract n this home,`Item 6 -M, that we are on, is for amended contract otal of $5,660.00, but these contracts were bid on 17 homes at ne time - -a set of 17 contracts. : ommissioner Robinson asked, "Again, Keith, we have been promised, tnd promised, and promised that the period of time between inspec- A ons to the actual construction of the house is going to be short. (gain, we are still talking about a heck of "a long period of time, ind you just got through explaining to me that you didn't have inything to do with your inspection department, but ..." Mr. :righton interrupting for clarification, Commission Robinson :ontinued, "We are talking about the period of time elapsing be- tween the time of inspection and time after construction and all these added increases. We are still talking about nine (9) months: : thought we were told not too long ago that it would be anywhere or a period that we would have it cut down to approximately thirty 30) days, and if there were three houses in a row, it might end up ►eing ninety (90) days. Now we are back up to nine (9) months again. : don't understand." Mr. Crighton answered, "I don't follow where to are up to nine (9) months. But, one thing, I didn't say I was iot over my inspection department; I said I am not responsible for :he quality of inspections that the Housing Allowance Office program loes." Commissioner Robinson referred to the previous statement lade, "The inspection period was about September or October of last fear; now, that is approximately nine (9) months." Mr. Crighton idvised, "For the Housing Allowance contracts, we waited until we accumulated enough inspections to put on a contract to make it a lecent contract. We waited for 17 houses for rehabilitation. Now cur capabilities for this Housing Allowance Program didn't start intil September 1, 1975. We had no legal right to even let anyone :now when the City of South Bend program was available to them." MlKIE 6. NEW BU$INESS (.Cont'd Co missioner Wiggins added, "There is still going to be some lag when yoj consider that the inspections will have to be made following the ma ing of the inspection in the indications they are going to go ahead wi h something; then they have to advertise, bids will have to be to en, and the whole bid- taking process will take some period of time, an then the contractor has some period of time after the bids are aw rded before he has to start. I don't see how you are going to be ab e to get this thing down to much less than probably four or five mo the from the time of initial °inspection." Commissioner Robinson re lied, "I am a little bit familiar with the area you are talking about, and I say it is too much time. In other words, if we can get this time cut down, I don't think we are going to get `all' these change orders, and all of a sudden something sneaks up on °them again and they need some more money to justify their low price." Commissioner Cira agreed that co old be and he feels the same way. Mr. Lou Tutino, WNDU -TV Reporter, asked what the average time is between the inspection now and the actual work done? Mr.; Crighton advised the ap roximate time is about four months, before construction "Although the implication is that we are not working as quickly as we. should, that is not true. We have a number of requirements--not only set by th Redevelopment Commission, but by the Common Council, by our Commission Legal Counsel,: and also there are certain responsibilities to the con- tractor in trying to provide us with a performance bond - -any number of things that can drag these out. Ideally, we would like to have the work start the da3 after we do an inspection and get a cost, and get it estimated and titled an have copies of the contracts run. Our procedures have so many steps anc have so many people involved that it is hard for us to control all of it for time; and you also have to keep in mind that the people that are doing the Southeast.Project are also helping with the Homesteading, Section 31 Loans, the Non- Profit Group Rehabilitation, plus the other projects thE staff works on. I have personnel working three and four jobs, and it is hard to get a lot of this together. In the time period involved, we arE working the staff as we can - -as hard as we can - -and I think we have done a pretty good job this year." Mrs. Allen asked, "Inasmuch as they wait to gather up 17 houses under one contract, how long does it take the person to get the contract to complete the work on those 17 houses ?" The Chair advised, the staff is trying to get good, big competent contractors to do these jobs, and the onl way they will do it is if they can get a large enough contract so that they will attract the larger contractors. You can't get the large contractors to come in and bid on one particular house. Mr. Crighton added that on some of these jobs on the Housing Allowance contracts some of the houses only had approximately $150.00 work on them. On further questions regarding the time element by Mrs. Allen, Mr. Crighton advised, on the accumulation of the 17 inspections from the time we notified the community that the Housing Allowance Referral Program was available, it took us about 2 -1/2 months to accumulate enough inspections to put them under a contract. Obviously beginning a new program, people at first are skeptical about it, so now they are applying at a greater rate. Now we have considerable more people applying for the same program, but after the 2 -1/2 months, we assembled the contract, checked our con- tract to make sure everything was together, then advertised for bids, - 14 - 6. NEW BU$INESS (Cont'd wh ch I believe was in December, as I do not have the contract here, th n it went before the Council the later part of January--Council me ting in January--and then the steps from there, the contractor pr viding us with bonding, making any necessary corrections in the co tract as determined by Mr. Butler, and then we finally get to th award, which was just done recently. The contract time to complete th repairs on the 17 houses is six (6) weeks. The costs are variable on each of the contracts. Th motion to approve the above Change Order No. 1 to Rehabilitation Co tract No. SECD /HR /CS -1/17, for an increase in contract amount of $2 0.00, was made by Mr. Wiggins, seconded by 'Mr. Donaldson and ca ried. 7. PROGRESS REPORTS a. Project A -10: Mr. Brownell reported, in connection with Project A -10 PROJECT we are preparing close -out papers and hope to send them on to HUD for A -10 their perusal the first part of this coming week. We have finished CLOSE -OUT all the relocation payments and claims that went through here today- - three payments and claims that went through the Commission today: one for $2.50; $430.00 and $43.95 Thi now completes all the claims, and we will have the final papers goi g to HUD the first of the week. 8. OTHER a. Dri0king Fountains, River Bend Plaza: Mrs Janet S. Allen asked who is in charge of the drinking fountains DRINKING on the River Bend Plaza. Her complaint centered on the drinking FOUNTAINS, fountain in front of the Morris Civic Auditorium. The fountain has RIVER BEND been malfunctioning for at least six months -- way.after the snow was on PLAZA, R -66 the ground. It was running constantly and never did shut off. When she called about the fountain they shut it off. Now that they have turr ed the water back on, the fountain is again continually running; and with the spray from it, no one can get near the fountain to get a drink if they wanted to - -as it runs constantly. If we wait a few morE months the warranty will expire. She felt the company installing the fountains should be required to repair or replace them. The Chair advised the drinking fountains are the responsibility of the Board of Public Works. We have nothing to do with the maintenance or the Mall once it has been turned over to the City. Mr. Butler also advised that the warranties and the maintenance guarantees have been transferred to the Board of Public Works, along with'the project itself - -the improvements we have made. b. Hotel -Motel Downtown: Mr. Dan Caesar asked, "'Do you recall the results of that survey that was taken recently about the motel - hotel downtown,' whether or not down- town could support another hotel or motel ?" - 15 - DOWNTOWN HOTEL MOTEL 8. OTHER (Cbnt'd) Mr. Brownell advised we had a feasibility study. made. Mr. Caesar asked, "What did that show again? That the downtown could not support another motel ?" Mr. Brownell said it showed that it wasn't feasible to put another motel in at that time, because`it would adversely affect the possibility of several other motels remaining in business, if a new one ere started. Mr. Caesar then asked if we are aware of the new 190 -unit motel that Linebacker is going to build and he wondered where they got their survey that they are building. Mr. Brownell said he does not know what kind of survey they used, we are only required to have a study of HUD land. The Chair advised that he has asked the Chamber of Commerce to bring us uo -to-date concerning convention facilities and the conventions that we have lost-- supaosedly, because of lack of downtown facilities. "It is my understanding and, of course, °I go to a lot of conventions myself, thal oeoole who come in for a convention Tike to stay downtown if the hea quarters of the convention is here and a lot of them object to being seni outside of the city limits. So, I have asked the Chamber of Commerce to cive us what they can in regard to conventions that they have worked with or organizations with the ones we have lost because of the lack of facilities downtown, and, of course, since then, the feasibility study has been made by Real Estate Research of Chicago, Mr. Diamond. We have lost the LaSalle Hotel, following that survey." Legal Counsel further advised that there is a pretty good indication that the motels north of town have been struggling. The report referred to this. There were a number of new motels built within the past couple of years out there, and that was an additional drain on the downtown market. 9. NEXT COMMISSION MEETING NEXT COMMISSION The next, meeting of the Redevelopment Commission will be Friday, May 7, MEETING: 1976, at, 10:00 a.m., in the Office of the Department of Redevelopment 5 -7 -76 10. ADJOUR Motion as duly made by Mr. Wiggins, seconded by Mr. Donaldson and ADJOURN - carried for adjournment, at 10:48 a.m. MENT eii, txecutive ulrec (SEAL) - 16 - , President