My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2/7/1989
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1989
>
2/7/1989
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/2/2023 10:43:05 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 2:38:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/07/1989
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
71
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
°7 1989 <br />RECOMMENDATION: <br />BOOK 76 F4,:E 46 <br />The Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of <br />County Commissioners authorize the following items: <br />1. The spending of funds for capping the artesian well, <br />surveying the ponds to determine the optimum pond bottom, <br />and the purchase of 900' of 8" gravity pipe and fittings. <br />2. Purchase of the IrriFrance irrigation unit. <br />3. Bidding out of the cleaning and restoration of the ponds. <br />4. Bidding out and construction of the valve pit, valves and <br />connection to the 16" discharge line. <br />The account to be charged is No. 471-218-536-044.69. <br />Commissioner Scurlock wished to know if we resolved the <br />matter in regard to the original design of the percolation ponds. <br />The west plant was designed by Carter & Associates in a joint <br />venture with Williams, Hatfield, and they subcontracted out the <br />design of the hydraulics of the perc pond. He believed at one <br />time we authorized the Utility Department to contract for <br />professional services to take a look at that because we felt <br />there may have been a problem with the original design. That <br />report is in house, and at this point he would like an update as <br />to whether we are accepting the original design and not going to <br />litigate or whether we are talking about going back to the sub- <br />contractor, Dames & Moore, to ask them to provide additional <br />design services at their cost. <br />Utilities Director Pinto confirmed that we have had some <br />question about the calculations that were used in the design and <br />have had continued discussion about this. Unfortunately with <br />hydrological work, it is a "pie in the sky" guess as to what is <br />going to happen. He advised that we are not yet satisfied that <br />they should be released from any liability, but stressed that <br />under any circumstances there are certain maintenance things that <br />have to be done in the operation of the ponds. If we do not <br />proceed with what staff is recommending, he felt it would be <br />detrimental to our position because the designers then could take <br />the stance that the system has blinded off because of sedimenta- <br />tion and growth. <br />46 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.