My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Demolition/Abatement Constracts (Folders 1-2)
>
CS_Courthouse Square
>
Demolition/Abatement Constracts (Folders 1-2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2012 4:19:28 PM
Creation date
8/10/2011 10:26:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Building
RecordID
10111
Title
Demolition/Abatement Constracts (Folders 1-2)
BLDG Date
1/1/1999
Building
Courthouse Square
BLDG Document Type
Project Coordination
Project ID
CS9801 Courthouse Square Construction
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
346
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
David Hartwig <br />March 3, 1997 <br />Page 4 - Memorandum <br />basis for selection of a successful bidder. That is not necessarily the case here since <br />we expect a high degree of coordination among the three parties, we are extremely <br />sensitive to the fact that the project must l~e done right the first time in order to keep <br />project deadlines. And, finally, it isv~realistic to provide complete and adequate <br />specifications to all bidders. While we do expect to have significant detail <br />specifications provided, the specs will not necessarily cover all items of interest and <br />concern to the parties in selecting our team to carry out demolition and abatement. <br />If we use the review committee here, and in other processes, to select our <br />contractors and subcontractors, the transit district and the County will be intimately <br />involved. Since these two entities rely, in substantial part, on FTA grant moneys <br />throughout the cons~truction of this project and both parties will be involved directly <br />or indirectly as signatories on contracts involving grant moneys, it appears that we <br />should plan to follow the FTA processes and criteria in choosing the method by <br />which we will solicit and select contractors. <br />While we review this matter for purposes of the demolition/ <br />abatement/recycling contract, we should keep in mind our need to look at our <br />processes for other contracts that we will let. These include environmental clean-up <br />services, subcontracts for construction, and I am sure others if we were to put a list <br />together. <br />Finally, I want to reiterate that I am giving an opinion, not a definite answer. <br />Consultation with the local FTA before we actually proceed further would be <br />advisable. When that is done, I would recommend that we be prepared to lay out in <br />written form exactly what criteria we will use for selection, what reasons we have for <br />choosing the RFP over the sealed bid process, and exactly how we will proceed with <br />the selection. I know that is what ybu and Kathleen Thorpe plan to do. But you get <br />to be the guinea pig. <br />MJH:at <br />Enclosures <br />c: Randy Curtis, General Services <br />Ben Fetherston, Attorney for Transit District <br />Gordon Hanna, Attorney for Courthouse Square, Inc. <br />Ed Einowski, Bond Counsel <br />colcrthse.mem <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.