SM 07-01-76 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

6. NEW e. SINESS (Cont'd) ange Order No. l to Rehabilitation Contract 'No. SECD /PR /CS -2/17, CHANGE Southeast Community Development Housing Program: Commission ap ORDER NO. 1 oval was requested for this Change Order, with Fleming Masonry TO REHAB. nstruction Company, for an increase in contract amount of $739.00, CONTRACT ontract: $7,465.00), or an amended contract total of $8,204.00, SECD /PR /CS- r rehabilitation work at: 415 East Ohio Street, in the South 2/17 DE- st Community Development Housing Program. FERRED FOR 7/16/76 MTG. . Keith Crighton advised the primary cost of this has to do with e sheathing underneath the roof on both porches and the rafters the main section. There was no way, at the time of inspection, determine what the damage was or the extent of the damage until e contractor started to reroof the house. Essentially that is e problem. The other problem is in order to keep the cost wn initially we recommended installing a new sink in the exist - g metal cabinet. Unfortunately, there aren't any sinks that t that size cabinet, so we had to come up with a 5' ft. sink se cabinet. mmissioner Wiggins questioned the amended contract total being er $8,000 and whether that will give us some problems in being er the limit. Mr. Crighton stated the limit is $8,000 as far the general rule applies, but the Commission has the authority go over that amount in cases where it is necessary. He said recalls one instance in which the repairs were in approximate ount of $8,700 in which he had photographs showing the upper ar porch had to be completely rebuilt as it was coming off the use. mmissioner Wiggins also asked, "In a case such as this, where e original contract required approval, not only by this body but the Common Council, does this change also require concurrence the Common Council ?" Mr. Kevin J. Butler, Commission Legal unsel, advised only the $5,000 figure requires Common Council proval; once it is over that figure, the Commission can approve e change orders. He asked if the contract is complete, other an for these items, as Commissioner Robinson had asked if the mmission can defer action on this until we get more factual in- rmation since it is over the $8,000 limit? Mr. Crighton stated e contract was in process and he suggested that possibly his aff can negotiate with the contractor to delete some less needed ems and a lot of the responsibility will have to go with the meowner. mmissioner Wiggins made the motion to defer action, and in the antime have the staff attempt to negotiate with the contractor d have this item placed on the Agenda for the next Commission eting, July'16. He said what we are concerned with here is the estion of value. You don't want to put more money into an ob- ously deteriorated house. than what the .whole thing is worth en you are done with it, and sometimes it is just a losing propo tion and that is what we.try to evaluate. ` $8,000 doesn't buy much renovation of a house as you would like in today's market d you have to set some kind of standards, or some kind of figures,