RM 05-07-76 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

6. NEW BU$INESS (Cont'd Mr. Brownell stated that the letter attached from Nautilus Construc- ts )n Corporation, dated May 4, 1976, states that things were' beyond th it control. Commissioner Robinson further .added, "All I can tell yoj is what I read in The South Bend Tribune that the vandals tore up the railroad ties and then threw them in the St. Joseph River. If he had been taking what I think is his responsibility, in hiring security guards, the probability of this happening would not have existed. If those ties weighed that much I think they would have caught several kids in trying to lift up this kind of weight before they got it in the river, so I think he is neglecting his responsi- bi ity. He is saying the reasons are due to delays and things beyond his control. I think this is part of it; it is just not written in there." Commissioner Wiggins stated that is possible too, but we have yet to collect from anybody on a penalty clause for running late. "We have been liberal, I believe, with every contractor that we have ever had. If they have had trouble, we have gone along with their troubles; we have paid them extra money. In fact; I am personally inclined to believe that we have been too liberal. Not just this guy, but about every other guy. But to some degree you can appreci- ate that unexpected circumstances do arise if what he says here is true. If we fail to give him an extension, it will not necessarily mean that he will get the project completed on the date it was supposed to be, and although it may render him liable for whatever penalties art required as a result of failure to complete, I don't know that it wi l get the job done any sooner." Commissioner Robinson said; "Just because the Commission has gone along with.this in the past, doesn't make it right." He requested the Commissioner to refer to Nautilus' letter, specifically to Item 2, "We have been delayed in our work on the floating piers and the timber steps because we had to return about 13,000 board feet of lumber to the supplier because of a mix -up on the interpretation of the Specifications." He further added, "Now if he is a responsi- ble contractor, you tell me how he can get mixed up on what they are talking about on the interpretation of the specifications. I think at that time, he would be questioning what the specifications were." He directed the next question to Mr. Slabaugh, "On this lumber we arE talking about, is that the lumber that was going to go across that olc railroad trestle ?" Answer was that part of it was. Next question, "Is this the same lumber that is in the specification that was supposed to be treated under pressure that we are talking about and that was just on the job? Rather than being pressurized- treated like it was supposed to be as noted on the specifications ?" Mr. Slabaugh advised, "No. This wa pressure- treated, but it didn't have the required amount of the ch mical in it. They offered us money to give back to the Commission, and you should have the letter; it is $7.00 per thousand board feet; we said that wouldn't satisfy the requirement and we made him send it back. I think that it is probably his fault, but it's not his fault that he has to wait for the supplier, is what he is trying to say. The lag screws that were put in the plan were too long and would have gone th ough the peg, and the contractor requested they shorten them up . So a were found that were too short that had to be lengthened. I do no know how long that delay was." Tho Chair requested votes on the motion: Dissenting vote was cast by - 11 -