My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6/13/1990
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1990
>
6/13/1990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:02:45 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 9:06:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Special Call Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
06/13/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
39
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
r <br />JUN 13 1990 <br />BOOK 80 F'r1GE�� <br />Mr. Casey emphasized that they are not coming to the County and <br />dictating design. The County makes the design decision and the <br />developer puts the decisions in place. He contended that <br />privatization will get this building built faster and cheaper, <br />and they will stand behind Mr. `Flick's whole effort because it <br />works. Mr. Casey noted that he has with him Rob Wells who came <br />off a very similar project in Brevard County where they went to <br />private developers. He agreed there is big controversy over this <br />procedure because it is new and unusual, but he again stressed <br />that Rooney has 31 projects right now and every one of them is on <br />schedule and within budget. They have built government buildings <br />in Martin County, Miami, Dade County, and Marion County to name <br />just a few. <br />Commissioner Scurlock commented that none of those were <br />privatization deals, and Mr. Casey agreed they were not. They <br />were construction management, but they are involved in a privati- <br />zation for Broward County right now - a 60 million dollar <br />mixed-use development which involves the city, the county, and <br />the Port. <br />County Attorney Vitunac felt the developer is mixing up two <br />issues. The first issue is the site, and the second decision is <br />by what method should the building be constructed. He did not <br />believe the Board is making the decision tonight on "Design <br />Build," and he pointed out that there is also the possibility <br />that the developer could build on the County's land and not on <br />Mr. Flick's land. <br />Administrator Chandler agreed that we need to delve into <br />this issue and decide what is the best approach. He believed we <br />ultimately will be recommending the construction management <br />approach on a project of this magnitude, but there are distinct <br />differences between those approaches. The Administrator also <br />emphasized the difficulty of discussing specific design at this <br />point. We can discuss the general concept or talk in terms of <br />_ 24 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.