RM 06-06-75 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

5. OLD OUSINESS (Cont'd) s. Derbeck's.question on whether we would be required to pay for this hen it was not properly designed or built to OSHA requirements, Presi- ent Nimtz. said he doesn't believe we can say that. He presumes it as constructed according to the architects plan and the overall plan as approved and this is one of the things that came up after it was n existence. Everyone has come into cognizance that it is a potentially angerous situation. The Commission authorized the construction accord - ng to the plan and we are bound by the plan Commissioner Wiggins stated here is also the possiblity at the time this was designed that the OSHA equirement at that time was not completely spelled out 'because this is pretty recent situation as far as Occupat tonal Safety and Health Act s concerned. Ms. Derbeck said that common sense would tell anyone that here are safety factors involved. Commissioner Wiggins said he is also nclined to agree with that. He would think that whoever designed it asn't thinking about the possibility of people catching thei -r heels in here when they were designing it, but rather were thinking about how it as going to appear, instead of the utilitarian bit of how it will react o people using it. Ir.Doolittle :asked then if the Board was also thinking along the same line - -not looking at the safety factor but going on' the ' recommendation that was made. The President requested Commissioner Wiggins to answer, and he stated, "We, basically accepted the recommendations of our design engineers. This is what we have to go with and I don't think we got into the picture of what would happen in terms of use until we saw it there and could see what was going to happen. Unfortunately, this is a'situa- tion you often find yourselves in. It's difficult to know how it is joint to work until you can see it. Mr. Oesterling wanted to add a word of defense - - "We, Clyde Williams, take blame for this also as we are a joint venture- -Clyde E. Williams & Associates and Environmental Planning and Design. The point brought up on the OSHA regulations, I don't know whether they were actually consummated at the.time of the design--'71 or '72; however, I do know that the grate that exists is not the first that nvironmental Planning and Design did and actually designed fcr construc- tion elements of Malls. It is somewhat of a standard, as was the design." r. Soltesz added, "I would like to say this: If we go through the inutes and picking at nobody - -since last October and in.Ahe minutes f the Commission, we have been speaking about the pools; we have talked bout the grates; we have talked about thE: mishaps that could occur in he public eye. In the last meeting that we had here, a piece of material as brought up with an informative booklet as to where it can be purchased- - ot that it was the ideal - -but it was a remedy. After reading all thE: aterial- -now I have to say this in a cliche -- there is only a 6" difference etween a pat in the back and a kick in the butt! That's exactly what I m getting here. The presentation was made; the material was laid out ere, in oversimplified form. One of the Commissioners - -along with myself- - ent out there and looked at the area; a recommendation was made to cut own a half inch off of the grate that is there. If it has to be anodized., is a touched up anodized process. The screening and the layer on top ould be bolted down, and it would be permanent, and ALL it would take ould be a squeegee to clean it off. Now, we are talking about flower ots; we are talking about all these other items; and grates to complex he whole item. Now the $3,500 or. $3,900 figure we had out here was en- arged, but it wasn't that great:: We got, and a statement was made here, - 21 -