10/23/1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1985 BOOK �� F1�E 473 absolutely no change orders have been approved by the Board of County Commissioners up to this point, and while staff may have some discretion in minor matters, he would assume those matters would be brought to the Commission for retroactive approval. Commissioner Scurlock emphasized that he is not•accusing the contractor of willfully ordering concrete less than spec, and actually he has identified only five yards of something other than 5,000 p.s.i. being delivered to the site, but he did feel we need a written response as to whether we should tear anything down or whether the walls test out correctly. Commissioner Scurlock did not know how the miscommunication has taken place, but stressed that he wanted to go on public record as identifying this as a problem that needs to be corrected. He also felt this is only fair to other contractors who bid the job as there was a substantial difference between the high bid and low bid. George Bail of Frizzell Architects agreed that problems of this nature are usually a matter of communication. He did appreciate the Commission's concern and stated he was present to answer anything they wished answered and also to make recommenda- tions as to how to prevent this type of communication gap in the future. Chairman Lyons wished to know why 3,000 p.s.i. concrete was used if 5,000 p.s.i. was specified, and what the effects of such use are. Mr. Bail introduced their chief structural engineer, Mike Lastovica, who explained to the Board that the use of 5,000 p.s.i. concrete is standard among off-site precasters because they can achieve the strip strength of 3500 p.s.i. overnight. When RS&H did it on site, they did not need the rapid overnight strength; so, they used a lower strength concrete. Mr. Lastovica assured the Board that this has absolutely no detrimental effect on the structure. Chairman Lyons wished to know if that is so, why we can't take the 5,000 p.s.i. off the books. He did not understand PXq