4/21/1982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Attorney Brandenburg reiterated that the changes he would recommend were that the Board needed a more specific, detailed explanation of what the scope of work would be and_ the dollar limitations. Also, regarding project representation, the County and architect have already agreed that this would be done by Lynn Williams. Because we have agreed to that, the provision will have to be removed from the agreement, the Attorney advised. He commented that the rest was just a general architect contract. Commissioner Bird inquired about the budget for this project. Mr. Greene advised there was $200,000 left in the construction budget, which is available for completion of the project. He commented that they want to meet with the judges and get a clear consensus of the project. Chairman Scurlock stated that the judges have prepared a 10 or 12 page document regarding their requests. Commissioner Bird commented that it should be made clear that we do not want any surprises on this project. Commissioner Fletcher noted that we are preparing to L- pay this architect an amount not to exceed $10,000 for a set of plans and that is all we are buying; this contract says that he will decide all materials and the artistic effect. He then referred to Article 1.5.1 in the agreement and discussed the architect's services. The Attorney explained that the architect has the responsibility of not only furnishing the County with plans, but he has to design a set of plans for the' contractor to follow. The architect will make on-site inspections and his obligation continues until that contractor has completed his job. Attorney Brandenburg noted that the architect is administrator for the contract. Commissioner Fletcher referred to Articles 1.5.4 and 1.5.5 and questioned them. APR 211982 BQQK 49%-fw 415 15