Laserfiche WebLink
WE -ARE SUGGESTING A COUNTER -PROPOSAL OF $280,910, OR 8.57 OF THE LOWEST <br />BONAFIDE BID; WHICHEVER IS LOWER. THEY WANTED 8.5% OF THE ESTIMATED <br />CONSTRUCTION COST OF $3,575,000. MR. NELSON CONTINUED THAT THE ARCHITECTS <br />HAD A CONTINGENCY FEE OF 20%, AND IT WAS FELT THAT WAS ENTIRELY TOO LARGE <br />IF WE.GAVE THEM THE ItASBUILT" DRAWING FIGURE OF $13,500 AND THAT A <br />CONTINGENCY FEE OF 107 WOULD BE ADEQUATE SO WE CHANGED THEIR $3,575,000 <br />CONSTRUCTION COST FIGURE TO $3,146,000 (WHICH FIGURE INCLUDES $2,846,000 <br />FOR RENOVATION WORK AND $300,000 FOR LANDSCAPING.) MR. NELSON FELT THE <br />LANDSCAPING MIGHT RUN QUITE HIGH BECAUSE WE HAVE TO CONFORM TO ALL THE <br />LATEST REGULATIONS. <br />COMMISSIONER SIEBERT ASKED IF THE $300,000 INCLUDES THE 207 <br />CONTINGENCY, AND MR. KONTOULAS STATED THAT IT DOES NOT, <br />MR. NELSON STATED THAT THE STAFF HAD SOME OBJECTIONS TO ARTICLES <br />1.7 AND 15.2 IN THE STANDARD FORM AGREEMENT REGARDING ADDITIONAL SERVICES. <br />ON PAGE 1 HE RECOMMENDED SUBSTITUTING $3,146,000 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION <br />COST IN PLACE OF $3,575,.000. HE STATED THAT ON PAGE 3, WE REQUESTED AND <br />THEY AGREED TO PUT IN AN ARTICLE STATING THAT THE ARCHITECT SHALL MAKE <br />AT LEAST 2 MAN VISITS A MONTH DURING CONSTRUCTION. THIS IS TO ASSURE THAT <br />WE HAVE THE ARCHITECT AND ENGINEER WITH US THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. IN <br />ARTICLE 1.7 ON PAGE 5, IT WAS FELT THAT MAKING THE CONTINGENCY LOWER AND <br />K <br />ADDING THE $13,500 WOULD TAKE CARE*OF ARTICLE 17.5 (PROVIDING SERVICES <br />TO INVESTIGATE EXISTING CONDITIONS OR FACILITIES...) SO THAT WAS TAKEN <br />OUT. WE ARE ALSO RECOMMENDING THAT ARTICLE 1.7.11 (PROVIDING SERVICES <br />FOR PLANNING TENANT OR RENTAL SPACES) BE DELETED. IT WAS FELT IF WE LEFT <br />THAT IN THERE AND THEY MADE SPECIAL TRIPS TO TALK TO THE SCHOOL BOARD <br />OR OTHER TENANTS, THEN THEY COULD RIGHTFULLY CHARGE US FOR OUT-OF-POCKET <br />EXPENSES. <br />COMMISSIONER $IEBERT ASKED IF THESE AREN'T BASIC SERVICES, AND <br />MR. NELSON STATED THAT THEY ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICES. THEY ARE NOT IN- <br />CLUDED IN THE CONTRACT, AND IT WAS FELT IF WE LEFT THIS IN, THEY COULD <br />CHARGE US TWICE. HE NOTED THAT IN ARTICLES 2.5 AND 2.6 ON PAGE 6, RE <br />VARIOUS SOIL TESTS, STRUCTURAL TESTS, ETC., THE CONSULTANTS ACCEPTED OUR <br />54 <br />i <br />39 pAcE ".a <br />