RM 06-06-75 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

6. NEW IBUSINESS (Cont`d) f. Change Order N6.1 to Contr6ct'4, E -7 Commission approval was CHANGE ORDER requested of Change Order No. 1 to Contract 4, with Madison Con NO. 1 TO struction Company, for rehabilitation work, at 729 East Penn CONTRACT 4 sylvania Street, E -7, Bureau of Housing, which is for an increase APPROVED, in contract amount of $519.00, for an amended contract total of E -7 $5,519.00, subject to Legal Counsel approval and City Council ap- Droval. r. Mark S. Davis, Chief Inspector, E -7 Program, in his memo ad- ised upon opening up the kitchen floor; the Madison Construction ompany discovered extensive termite damage. To correct the termite amage, the kitchen subfloor, three joists, and two jack posts are eeded. In addition, to install the joists, the electrical wire ust be re- installed. Termite infestation was not noted during he inspection. The home has been exterminated this past week to revent future problems. The staff recommendsthis change order e approved. lotion was made by Mr. Wiggins, seconded by Mr. Chenney and carried, for the approval of Change Order No. l to Contract 4; for an increase in contract amount of $519.00, for $5,519.00, subject to Legal Counsel proval. an amended contract total of: approval and City Council ap- Change Order No. 2 to Contract 4, E -7: This Change Order was pre- CHANGE ORDER sented to the Commission and recommended it be rejected, as thC. NO. 2 TO alterations were made without the Bureau of Housing approval, was CONTRACT 4 done solely at homeowner's discretion and has severely weakened REJECTED, the support system of the home. The Change Order, is in the amount E -7 of $354.00, or an add -on to the above, amending the contract total to: $5,873.00. Mr. Mark S. Davis advised after their inspection was completed and ready for the contract, the homeowner made some alterations to two load bearing walls of her property. The alterations were not done in a safe manner and have severely weakened the support system of the home. The alterations were not made in accordance with standard construction procedures, and were done solely at the homeowner's discretion The homeowner made no attempt to noti- fy the Bureau of Housing that these alterations were being made. The staff recommendation is that the requested change order for $354.00 submitted by the Madison Construction Company be rejected, and the homeowner be notified that the correction of this problem is to be her responsibility. Commission concurred in the rejection of Change Order No. 2 to Contract 4, with motion made by Mr. Wiggins, seconded by Mr. Chenney and carried.