Laserfiche WebLink
03/23/98 MON 12:~4 FAX 50~ 223 ~606 MELVIN MARK COMPANIES <br />1.1.2.1 & 2.5.2 <br />These paragraphs relate to the Architect's performa.nce with respect to the schedule. I'm <br />sure you've had discussions relating to perfo.rmance and th.e schedu.le. We would <br />typically, particularly with the nature of this project, strengthen this language to establish <br />the Architect's failure to meet schedule as a material breach of con.tract. I would <br />anticipate a good deal of resistance to such a proposal, and the cnrrent language might <br />have to suff ce. <br />2,4.4 <br />This paragraph indicates that the architect is only responsible for "assisti.ng the owner in <br />connection with th.e Owner's responsibility for filing documents....". We wonld change <br />th,is so the architect would have the primary responsibility for obtaining required permits. <br />For exarnple, "Atchi.tect shall be responsible for appl.ying for and assisting Owner in <br />obtaining all required ~overnment approvals." <br />2.4.5 <br />If the County or Transit has a preferred format for the CAD records, that shoutd be <br />specified in this paragraph. Additionally, it wo~.ild be highl.y des.irable for tiie County and <br />Transit to have a record set of CAD as-built drawings. As the contract i.s currently <br />writte.n, this service is n.ot in the base contract, but is considered Optional Additional <br />Services .in paragraph 3.4.16. Depending on, our bargaining position, we wfluld try to <br />negotiate to have this service incivded in the base contract for a modest charge. <br />2.4.7 <br />This appears to be oId language based on the previous negotiated-contract <br />approach. Rather than having the architect "work cooperatively with the Contractor. ,.", <br />we might subst.itute " work cooperatively wi.th the Owner and the Owner's <br />consultants . . . .". <br />2.6.1 <br />T.he County and Transit may want to extend the Architect's window of responsibility to <br />'75 days after the date of Substan.tial Completion. This would cover the 75-day <br />subcontraetor lien period. Thi.s is not a critical point, but adds a little piece of mind. <br />2.6,4 <br />We would ask that the "Architect advi se and consult with th.e Owner. _." thraugh the <br />period determined in paragraph 2.6.1. <br />2.6,18 & 2.6.19 <br />lt appears that the intent of this contract i.s for the A.rchitect to make recammendations <br />rather than decisions. In view of that approach, th.ese two paragraphs should be revised <br />to reference "recommendations" of the Architect rather than "decisions". <br />~ oos <br />3.1.I <br />