New Search
My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
New Search
Owen Rose Garden
COE
>
PW
>
POS_PWM
>
Parks
>
POS Director
>
Owen Rose Garden
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/6/2014 10:21:41 AM
Creation date
8/6/2014 10:17:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PW_Operating
PW_Document_Type_ Operating
Correspondence
PW_Division
Parks and Open Space
Identification_Number
Owen Rose Garden
External_View
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
175
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
OWENS ROSE GARDEN DEMOLITION /MAINTENANCE BUILDING PROJECT <br /> PROJECT MEETING MINUTES <br /> February 5, 1997 <br /> MEETING NUMBER: 1 <br /> DATE: January 31, 1996 <br /> PLACE: PWM - Building No. 1 <br /> ATTENDANCE and DISTRIBUTION: <br /> * - Indicates those who attended. <br /> Dick Morgan -PWM <br /> Bob Hammitt - PWM <br /> Johnny Medlin - PWM <br /> John Etter - PWM <br /> John Weber - PWM <br /> Vic Martin - PWF <br /> Richard Barbis - PWF * <br /> MEETING MINUTES: <br /> 1.1 3 different schemes were presented to PWM for demolition and build back options for the Owens <br /> Rose Garden maintenance building. Cost estimates were also presented and discussed. The <br /> three schemes discussed were the following: <br /> #1 - demolition of the entire house except for the garage - construct a 250 sq. ft. addition <br /> to the remaining garage for a 600 sq. ft. maintenance building. <br /> #2 - demolition of the entire house and construct a 600 sq. ft. Butler building. <br /> #3 - demolition of the entire house and move a cargo container onto the site. <br /> 1.2 Bob Hammitt preferred option #2 over the other two schemes and agreed to pursue additional <br /> resources necessary to implement this option. He said that there could be cost savings by doing <br /> a lot of the work in- house, such as: concrete slab removal, septic tank removal, irrigation <br /> controller relocation, required grading for the new building, etc. John Etter agreed with this <br /> direction. <br /> ACTION: Bob to discuss Option #2 with Dick Morgan for his agreement. <br /> 1.3 Richard discussed the idea of Bring Recycling doing the demolition of the building for a possible <br /> cost savings to the project. Richard to contact Bring to confirm whether this would be a job that <br /> they would be interested in. <br /> ACTION: Richard to set a appointment with Bring to evaluate the facility for demolition. <br /> 1.4 Richard discussed that the lead and asbestos issues are not a concern for this project. PBS <br /> Environmental ran tests and found that asbestos containing materials do not exist in the building <br /> as was assumed. Also, though the exterior siding contains lead paint, as discovered by PBS, it <br /> was interpreted by Chuck Solin, of Risk, that as long as the siding is removed entirely, and not <br /> sanded or scraped, that there is no special abatement process required. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.