My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11/4/1986
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1986
>
11/4/1986
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:53:20 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 1:13:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
11/04/1986
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
56
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
0V BOOK 66 u U E 3A?4 _ -- <br />He noted it would have cost something to have this improvement in <br />the first place and felt what we would be entitled to is the <br />difference between that cost and what we will have to pay now. <br />Attorney Vitunac stated that we would have to keep track of <br />our extra costs to solve the emergency problem, keep in touch <br />with the architect and ask if he has any better, way to do this, <br />and advise him that we will look to him for any additional costs <br />we are incurring because of their failure to engineer it properly <br />and provide for this. <br />MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by <br />Commissioner Wodtke, to authorize the additional work <br />in the neighborhood of $62,000 to interconnect Phase I <br />and Phase II and provide the n.ecessary electrical <br />service, with the understanding that we are proceed- <br />ing with this work while we negotiate with the archi- <br />tect for the recovery of any or all of those costs. <br />Commissioner Wodtke felt the key is to contact the architect <br />immediately and be sure this is the best way to do it so they <br />don't argue that we could have done it differently and cheaper. <br />Commissioner Bird commented that the architect apparently <br />went directly to the electrical contractor to negotiate the price <br />without going through the general contractor, and he wondered if <br />we need any kind of signoff by the general contractor. <br />General Services Director Dean pointed out that when <br />Schopke's representative was here, he stated that he did not want <br />anything to do with the interconnect at all. He believed that <br />left the door open, and that statement is in the record. <br />Attorney Vitunac confirmed that as long as that statement is <br />in the record, it would satisfy us. <br />THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It <br />was voted on and carried unanimously. <br />42 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.