My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4/12/1988
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1988
>
4/12/1988
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/2/2023 10:44:14 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 2:09:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
04/12/1988
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
81
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
safest course to follow would be the professional consultant, <br />recognizing that electronic experts essentially are employed in <br />two fashions - (a) independently and not associated with a <br />manufacturer, or (b) less than independently and associated with <br />a manufacturer. He felt the second alternative is clearly <br />unacceptable as we should not be hiring design services from <br />someone who is going to bid or sell us a system. <br />Discussion continued at length in regard to the various <br />services Buford Goff would offer, including checking to be sure <br />everything is in compliance, and the Board's feeling that if they <br />must pay extra for consultant services, there should be a deduction <br />from Frizzell's contract. <br />Commissioner Wheeler continued to emphasize the importance <br />of interfacing and integrating electronics in all three phases. <br />Commissioner Bird stated that if he felt comfortable we <br />really could see any kind of substantial deduction in Frizzell's <br />contract with us by adding this firm, he would be inclined to <br />support retaining Buford Goff and Associates, but he cannot see <br />paying $36,000 on top of Frizzell's fees, especially when he <br />looks on this as a part of their overall responsibility as an <br />architect. <br />Mr. Silver explained that on the first phase their fee was <br />based on a percentage of the cost of construction; now it is <br />based on a fixed percent fee for re -use of the documents and an <br />hourly fee for any other changes incorporated to that. It is <br />conceivable they could proceed with the same type of specifi- <br />cations as they did on Phases 1 and 11 without the services of <br />Buford Goff, and with the assurance during bidding that they <br />would have prequalified to be dealing only with subcontractors <br />they felt would be qualified to perform properly, but Mr. Silver <br />suggested that possibly the Board would like him to give a <br />qualification of how many hours he won't be putting into this job <br />if Buford Goff is the consultant. <br />APR 121988 <br />43 <br />BOOK 72 ME 43 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.