CC MINUTES 12221987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• 1 *the architect had agreed to reimburse the City for between $500 2 to $600 of the $970 . 00 it cost to add an exterior finish system 3 to the higher west parapet wall because it had been BWBR' s fail- 4 ure to let the contractor know the change was required before 5 his crews left which had resulted in a higher cost for that 6 project; 7 *the City had not been able to use all the old entrance door 8 control mats for the new front door and had to pay $849. 00 9 for three new ones , which should be enough for now at least, 10 although a few of the others may need replacement later. 11 Recalling the conversations earlier in the evening, Mr. Childs 12 recommended the Council deny the requested 35 day extension on the 13 job and instead, instruct him to see what he could negotiate in the 14 way of a trade-off in rent for the time the City has to remain in the 15 old location as a result of the contractor ' s failure to get the 16 project completed at least by January 1st. The City Manager 17 indicated he believed the major part of the contract increase could be 18 directly attributed to Fullerton' s failure and no one else' s. 19 Councilmember Enrooth agreed that the contractor should be asked to 20 pay the . rent on the old location past January 1st because he perceived 21 time was of the essence. now to get .the liquor operation moved during . 22 what has always been the slowest seasonal sales period after the •23 holidays. 24 Council Action - .25 motion by Ranallo, seconded by Marks to approve the $2 , 469. 00 Change 26 . Order on the Stonehouse liquor warehouse project, less the amount of 27 the error on the exterior wall finish system to be paid by the 28 architect but to deny the requested 35 day extension on the contract. 29 Motion carried unanimously. 30 Bids Lower Than Engineer Estimated on Kenzie Traffic Signal 31 As stated in the December 16th letter from the project engineer, Rieke 32 Carroll Muller Associates, Inc. , the low bid of four made on this 33 project came from Collins Electric for $67 , 567 . 00 , about $3 ,000 less 34 than the $70 ,000/$80 , 000 the engineers had estimated the job would 35 cost. 36 Mr. Childs indicated this would bring the total project cost up to 37 around $75 ,000 when engineering costs are included. He also indicated 38 he had consulted Mr. Soth regarding the contractor ' s typo error 39 indicating the bid security as $350 rather than $3 ,500 as provided in 40 the bid bond and the City attorney had advised that the 5% bid bond 41 would prevail. • 5