4/21/1982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The chief advantage of Alternative 2, the bidding for additional proposals would be that we could negotiate with other firms and perhaps obtain a fresh insight into the operation and design of the County's Landfill. RECO11MENDATIONS It is recommended that: 1. The Board approve of the proposed agreement between the County and Post, Buckley, Schuh &.Jernigan`. 2. That the Chairman be authorized to sign the agreement on the County's behalf. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS 1. Accept enclosed proposed agreement. 2. Bid for additional proposals in accordance with the competitive consultant negotiations act. The chief advantage of Alternative 1 is as follows: - 1. Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan are the original design engineers of the County Landfill and are familiar with the - physical layout of the site as well as with the DER permit and any.related problems and/or issues involved with the operation of the County Landfill. Due to the firms famil- iarity with the Indian River County Landfill situation it is likely that the cost will be lower in dealing with them then with other firms due to that familiarity and the fact that they have current information readily available. whereas another firm -would have to do a certain amount of research which could translate into increased cost for the County. Commissioner Fletcher suggested that consideration be given to having the County Engineer's office assume the work at the Landfill. Mr. Greene understood that an independent outside firm must do this work. Engineer Davis affirmed that the work must be done by an independent engineer approved by the bonding company. s Discussion ensued about the cost of the services and it was noted that this was an on-going construction phase: Chairman Scurlock stated he would like to see an in-depth analysis of the rate structure and felt it should be monitored closely. He added that the Board will be faced with additional acquisition of land. APR 211982 21 ox ..49, F -AR 421 �,.