Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1956-03-19-0930AM-Special483 • 01- D • i. ~J f; Special Meeting-- March 19. 39561 A special meting of the Ccamieslonerst Court of Brazos County, Teases, was held in the office of the County Judge in the Courthouse, at Bryan, beginning at 9130 a.m., Monday, March 19, 1956, with the following members presents A. S. Ware, County Judge, presiding; Raymond A. Nolan, Commissioner of Precinct No. 1; t George Duet, Commissioner of Precinct No. 2; Clyde J. Porterfield, Commissioner of Precinct No. 3), , Newton Burlier, Commissioner of Precinct No. 4; and ' • u A. B. Syptak, County Clerk. a. Messrs. W. W. Caudill, Wally Scott and William N. Pam, of the firm of Caudill, Bowlett, Scott A Associates, architects-engineere for the Courthouse-Nail project, appeared before the Court and presented the following report, which was accepted by the Court and ordered recordedt .d Tot THE BRAZOS COUNT! COD(ISSIONEBSt COURT c F Ms CAUDILL, HOWLETT, SCOTT fm ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTS REt ANALYSIS-L? PLANS MR ACTION ON FURNITURE AND FURNISHINGS We submit the following plans for action for the Commissioners' Court aansideratioae - , , JRt t. 'ACCEPT PRESENT BID 1µ A. It la justifiable to accept a single bid it the Commissioners' Court is of the opinion that the bid is a good and fair one. 1. The present bid is good and fair becauses A. Everyone had an opportunity to bid. However, very few took advantage of the opportunity... either they were too busy, or disinterested. b. Price wise, the bid is a good one because the Commissioners and the architect S- -2 }A4 % a. Construction is basically complete. The successful bidder snst have 75 days for r the fabrication and Installation of furniture and furnishings. , In order to re- ;S, i•~k I - - it '7 advertise for bids the architects and interior planners need 15 days to reprepare• - specifications and bid forms. ' , . 4.1f: .Ind}- , ; ' ' - . ..aa ~ 11 . ,l FY.,y~'ii~`t'CRYv..U~YlF} k)+,•~.~ aL,64 NaY~. 7 .w +w.wa z.~+M+Mer_n C.: r ...-..-.yyt~•, _...~J ~.N fit. S~F 1 ,tip ' ~.w ' • - ' ' . have as a basis for comparison itemised quotations as incorporated into a total estimated budget for the project. These quotations were checked against •`Fd ' published price lists less established manufacturer's discount. • sy 1 . , ~j 2. It is not unfair nor illegal to specify the products of one design. Tames A A M College specified the products of one manufacturer for the lounge furniture at the Memorial Student Center. The College specifies one sunufacturerts hardware for their ' buildings. It is fair for the Amer to specify one matmtacturerts products that will fit into,an orderly and co-ordinated plan keeping the desired appearance, function and quality in mind. 3. The Commissioners invited the mamnfaotursr to bid d$rsctly with the idea of saving the taxpsyerst,money. The invitation was accepted. This to not unusual. Manufacturers operating an a national scale often bid directly. B.- The Architects recommend that this bid be accepted. II. BE-BID THE MISTING SPECIFICATIONS WITH KNOLL NOT BIDDING A. It the Knoll bid is not accepted then your Architects n1tt recommend that the existing Ira ' specifications be rebid with Knoll not bidding: Although bids may be higher, the Intent a of the design will not be sacrificed. s ~ B. Disadvantages 1. Tics element 484 b. Us County suet advertise for bids end,give prospective bidders 21 days to j submit new bids. x 2. Unnecessary expense to the county $ Because of the ties involved in requesting new bids, it would entail the Canty spending unnscssaary amounts for additional seat. County being able to use the b. Interest an bonds is &ccwaulsting daily without the building and the furnishings for maximum efficiency. =yi C. Advantage We could expect at least two bids. Caw of these would be low, but We hM, no assurance it will be lower than the wdeting Snoll bid. t III.Bi-BID THS SPECIPICATIONS WITH KIML, RLWK AND MIT-UM AND OMW AS ACCBPTAffili A. From the very beginning your Architects have endeavored to make the Brazos County Court House one of the most functional and beautiful courthouses in the nation. Today we are k#.s urn; just short of this achievement depending upon the selection of the furniture and funnishimpe ' We are still of the opinion that our original specifications are In the best interest of the people of Brazos County. If, however, the Commissioners' Court decides that, them v should be a compromise to Plane I and II then our job is to revise the plans and specifi- cations to keep the total effect of the co-orassated plan as closely u possible to the i~ original intent. If this is deemed necessary then we propose to bring in -two other manufacturers for bids an certain items. ; la 1 j B. Mechanics 1. This plea could be executed by asking for now bids with the opportunities to summit r3 alternates from Risom and Miller and possibly others, and only an stock items. The • 'f 4 present specifications are to serve as a standard. Deviation of design should be kept r to an absolute minimim, since the items were specifically designed for certain areas in the Courthouse which require specific dimensions and materials in keeping with the coordinated plan. y l q Following further discuspiou of the matter of bids far furniture and furnishings for the Courthouse, on motion, duly seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Court voted to re-advertise for bids an existing specifications, with Knoll, Rispm, Miller, and one alternate column provided for my other manufacturer's producte, making a total of four columns in which bids may be 3lsted. The architects were requested to bring in revised fom .of bid notice for advertising at the earliest convenient date. f Whereupon the Court adjourned. rrrrrrrrrrr O ~ , Special Meeting - March 22. 1956. r ?a A special meeting of the Cemmisaianersw Court of Brazos Ceamty was held in the offini of the . ~ ~I ids 3 i County Judge in the Courthouse, beginning at 9100 a. on Thursday, Marsh 22, 1956, with the. following embers presents f s A. S. Were, County Judge, presiding; i< Raymond A. Nolan, Caamisaiansr of Precinct No. 11 s George Dunn, Commissioner of Precinct No. 2; Clyde J. Porterfield, Co®oissioner of Precinct No- 3i and , Newton Bun lire, Comaissioner of Precinct No. 4. F~ ' r On request of Commissioner Surlia and upon motion, duly seconded area unanimcnely adopted, t the Court voted to accept the proposal submitted by the Mustang Tractor h Squipmot company, Res 1173, 1 Houston, Texas, for the sale to the County for allocation to Preofnct No. 4 and,to.be paid for on% of funds available to it, of the following at price and terms and under conditions listed$ ~Wa ~~';,J: i:. F. - ~rtt-~cr• a + - i _ ,{.-p,°_-w. ..~„r•r^•c.,r $ ,*nc.r- - al,