My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9/20/1994
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1994
>
9/20/1994
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:04:26 PM
Creation date
6/17/2015 2:41:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
09/20/1994
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
70
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
BOOK -93 PACE 343 <br />original architectual firm or whatever. A large part of the <br />changes were initiated by the Commission in the interest of <br />avoiding the "sick building" syndrome and this was based on things <br />discovered at our seminar in Polk County relevant to Polk County's <br />unpleasant experience and Martin County's very unpleasant <br />experience. That has accounted for a considerable part of the <br />change orders and it's money well spent. Commissioner Macht <br />emphasized that there will be no building in Florida that is in <br />better condition to avoid sick building syndrome than this one. In <br />spite of some recent deviations, he intended to move approval of <br />the item, with the notation that it is a monstrous project and it <br />is a specialty building. It's not your ordinary building - it has <br />public aspects, it has aspects of a penal colony built into it - <br />and when all those things converge, it is a difficult building to <br />do. <br />MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED by <br />Commissioner Adams, that the Board unanimously <br />approve Change Order Number 13 with James A. <br />Cummings, Inc., as recommended by staff. <br />Under discussion, Commissioner Bird understood we are holding <br />a 10% retainage across the board on construction, architectural, <br />engineering, etc. and that all these change orders, and the <br />question of responsibility and so forth, will be negotiated or <br />litigated or whatever at the end of the project. <br />Mr. Glenewenkle advised 10% is being held back across the <br />board with the contractor. He believed the architectural firm <br />agreed upon a schedule of values and has drawn down on that to just <br />under $11,000. Mr. Glenewenkle wished to leave on one positive <br />note, since a lot of money has been spent on air quality. As you <br />know, the air conditioners in the building have been running since <br />early July. The primary contributor to air quality problems in a <br />building is the humidity, and they have been recording the humidity <br />and checking it, and the building is performing extremely well, <br />within the design parameters. It is staying in the low 60s and <br />high 50% relative humidity which indicates that everything we've <br />tried to do and planned to do has worked and we won't have a sick <br />building. <br />THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. <br />THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. <br />September 20, 1994 52 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.