Design Review and Recommendations Sample Clauses

Design Review and Recommendations. (1) Review and Recommendations and Warranty - Contractor shall familiarize itself thoroughly with the evolving architectural, civil, mechanical, plumbing, electrical, and structural plans and specifications and shall follow the development of design from preliminaries through working drawings. Contractor shall make recommendations with respect to the selection of systems and materials, and cost reducing alternatives including assistance to the Architect-Engineer and Owner in evaluating alternative comparisons versus long term cost effects. The evaluation shall speak to the benefits of the speed of erection and early completion of the project. Contractor shall furnish pertinent information as to the availability of materials and labor that will be required. Contractor shall submit to the Owner, Permitting Authority, if necessary, and Architect-Engineer such comments as may be appropriate concerning construction feasibility and practicality. Contractor shall call to the Project Manager's and the Architect-Engineer's attention any apparent defects in the design, drawings and specifications or other documents. Contractor shall prepare an estimate of the construction cost utilizing the unit quantity survey method. CONTRACTOR’S WARRANTY: AT COMPLETION OF CONTRACTOR'S REVIEW OF THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, EXCEPT ONLY AS TO SPECIFIC MATTERS AS MAY BE IDENTIFIED BY APPROPRIATE COMMENTS PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION, CONTRACTOR SHALL WARRANT, WITHOUT ASSUMING ANY ARCHITECTURAL OR ENGINEERING RESPONSIBILITY, THAT THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE CONSISTENT, PRACTICAL, FEASIBLE AND CONSTRUCTIBLE. CONTRACTOR SHALL WARRANT THAT THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE VARIOUS BIDDING PACKAGES IS CONSTRUCTIBLE WITHIN THE SCHEDULED CONSTRUCTION TIME. OWNER’S DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTY: THE OWNER DISCLAIMS ANY WARRANTY THAT THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE PROJECT ARE ACCURATE, PRACTICAL, CONSISTENT OR CONSTRUCTIBLE.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (8)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Design Review and Recommendations a) The Construction Manager shall familiarize himself thoroughly with the evolving architectural, civil, mechanical, plumbing, electrical and structural plans and specifications and shall follow the development of design through Contract Documents. The Construction Manager shall make recommendations with respect to the selection of systems and materials, and cost reducing alternatives including assistance to the Architect-Engineer and Owner in evaluating alternative comparisons versus long term cost effect. The evaluation shall speak to the benefits of the speed of erection and early completion of the project. The Construction Manager shall furnish pertinent information as to the availability of materials and labor that will be required. The Construction Manager shall submit to the Owner and Architect-Engineer such comments as may be appropriate concerning construction, feasibility, and practicality. The Construction Manager shall bring to the Owner and the Architect-Engineer’s attention any apparent defects in the design, drawing and specifications, or other documents. The Construction Manager shall prepare an estimate of the construction cost at appropriate milestones during the design and shall evaluate such estimate with the project budget. The Construction Manager shall recommend cost saving alternatives, as appropriate, at each design milestone. At each design milestone the Owner, Architect Engineer and Construction Manager shall conduct a value engineering review.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (6)
Design Review and Recommendations. 1. The XXXX shall participate in all design review meetings with the Owner that may be scheduled. For each design submittal, the XXXX shall review the design documents for clarity, consistency, constructability, construction feasibility and practicality, and identification of errors, omissions, conflicts and apparent defects and coordination of documentation.
Sample 1Sample 2
Design Review and Recommendations. A. Review and Recommendations and Warranty - The DESIGN-BUILD FIRM's construction personnel shall familiarize themselves thoroughly with the evolving architectural, civil, mechanical, plumbing, electrical, and structural plans and specifications and shall follow the development of design from Phase I through Phase II. They shall make recommendations to the designers with respect to the selection of systems and materials, and cost reducing alternatives including assistance to the OWNER in evaluating alternative comparisons versus long term cost effects. The evaluation shall speak to the benefits of the speed of erection and early completion of the project. They shall furnish pertinent information as to the availability of materials and labor that will be required. They shall call to the DESIGN-BUILD FIRM's designer's attention any apparent defects in the design, drawings and specifications or other documents. They shall prepare an estimate of the construction cost utilizing the unit quantity survey method.
Sample 1
Design Review and Recommendations. Developer shall supervise, coordinate, and otherwise facilitate and familiarize itself thoroughly with the evolving Preliminary Plans and Specifications and the Plans and Specifications and shall direct and closely follow the development of such documents from preliminary design through working and construction documents. Developer shall make recommendations to Architect and Architect’s Consultants with respect to the selection of systems, materials, and cost reducing alternatives (including assistance to County in evaluating alternative comparisons versus long term cost effects, and value-engineering). Such evaluation shall be directed to the benefits of the speed of erection and early completion of the Project. Developer shall furnish to County pertinent information in connection with the availability of materials and labor that will be required for the Construction Work. County’s failure to notify Developer that such alternative comparisons are not acceptable within thirty (30) days following receipt of such pertinent information from Developer shall be deemed to constitute the County’s approval of such alternative comparisons. Developer shall prepare or cause to be prepared by qualified cost estimators an estimate of the Construction cost utilizing the unit quantity survey method.
Sample 1
Design Review and Recommendations. Without assuming liability for the design of the PROJECT, the XXXX during Phase I – Construction Services for Design Phase, shall familiarize itself thoroughly with the evolving architectural, civil, mechanical, plumbing, electrical and structural plans and specifications and shall follow the development of design from schematic design through Construction Documents. The XXXX shall make recommendations with respect to the PROJECT site, foundations, selection of systems and materials and cost reducing alternatives, including assistance to the ENGINEER and the CITY REPRESENTATIVE in evaluating alternative comparisons versus long‐term cost effects as the PROJECT Team deem appropriate. The XXXX shall furnish pertinent information as to the availability of materials and labor that will be required. The XXXX shall submit to the CITY REPRESENTATIVE, the Permitting Authority and the ENGINEER(S) such comments in writing as the XXXX and the CITY REPRESENTATIVE may deem appropriate concerning construction feasibility and practicality. The XXXX shall call to the CITY REPRESENTATIVE and ENGINEER’s attention any apparent defects in the design, drawings and specifications or other documents that it notes.
Sample 1
Design Review and Recommendations 
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (15)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Design Review and Recommendations

  • Conclusion and Recommendations D. Evaluations for Offenders without a sex offense conviction shall answer the following additional referral questions in the evaluations:

  • Ongoing Review and Revisions As set forth in Section 35.7, the Parties have agreed to the coordination and exchange of data and information under this Agreement to enhance system reliability and efficient market operations as systems exist and are contemplated as of the Effective Date. The Parties expect that these systems and the technology applicable to these systems and to the collection and exchange of data will change from time to time throughout the term of this Agreement. The Parties agree that the objectives of this Agreement can be fulfilled efficiently and economically only if the Parties, from time to time, review and, as appropriate, revise the requirements stated herein in response to such changes, including deleting, adding, or revising requirements and protocols. Each Party will negotiate in good faith in response to such revisions the other Party may propose from time to time. Nothing in this Agreement, however, shall require any Party to reach agreement with respect to any such changes, or to purchase, install, or otherwise implement new equipment, software, or devices, or functions, except as required to perform this Agreement.

  • Design Review At appropriate stages of design, documented reviews of the design results shall be planned and conducted. Participants at each Design Review shall include representatives of all functions concerned with the design stage being reviewed, as well as other specialist personnel, as required. Records of such reviews shall be maintained. Any computer software used to perform alternative calculations or verify clearances through the use of scale models or computer-aided design and drafting (CADD) techniques shall be validated before the use of the application, with validation documented in accordance with Section 2.2.15. In addition, at each submittal to IFA for review, Developer shall provide hand calculations that validate any calculations performed by computer software.

  • Conclusions and Recommendations For the reasons stated herein, Merrimack Energy concludes that the shortlisting decisions by PG&E in the 2007 RPS RFO were reasonable and based on the requirements and evaluation criteria set forth in the Solicitation Protocol. The selection of the shortlist was very inclusive and erred on the side of including more offers in what was a very ample shortlist relative to the procurement target. In the Shortlist Report, Merrimack Energy recommended a number of changes to the RPS procurement process, several of which were adopted by PG&E in the 2008 RPS RFO. Despite recommending certain changes, our assessment is that the PG&E evaluation methodology was appropriate and that it was administered fairly and reasonably. Consistent with suggestions we had made in and after the Shortlist Report, PG&E developed a negotiation prioritization strategy with shortlisted bidders that created an active group of negotiations based on price and viability factors. The Mojave Solar bid was consistently placed in the secondary group and although its proposal changed over time from the proposal initially shortlisted, it remained in the secondary group during the course of contract negotiations. While the project sponsor is a very viable and experienced developer of solar thermal projects and is capable of developing the project effectively, there are concerns associated with the timing of the project that adds risk to the ultimate success of the project. PG&E has done an effective job in managing these risks through contract provisions in both the original contract and the amended and restated agreement. The details of the PPA and the amended and restated agreement are addressed in the Confidential Appendix to this report. While the positive attributes of the project should be balanced against the negative attributes in assessing whether or not the amended and restated agreement should be approved, the IE has concerns about project value for the customers. In addition to the high project cost and low market value, the project contains a number of challenges to meet its proposed construction start date primarily associated with transmission interconnection and access. While PG&E has negotiated provisions in the Amended and Restated contract that generally protects the interests of consumers, should the firm interconnection be delayed longer than anticipated, PG&E customers may be exposed to higher RA costs to back-up the project should the cost of capacity in the market exceed the price caps established in the contract. In conclusion, the IE has reservations about the contract based on project value including the levelized net market value calculations relative to project benchmarks from other recent solicitations. PG&E Gas and Electric Advice Filing List General Order 96-B, Section IV AT&T Dept of General Services Northern California Power Association Xxxxxxxx & Xxxx LLP Xxxxxxxx & Xxxxxxx Occidental Energy Marketing, Inc. Ameresco Downey & Brand OnGrid Solar Xxxxxxxx & Xxxxx Xxxx Energy Praxair Arizona Public Service Company Economic Sciences Corporation X. X. Xxxx & Associates XXXX Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxxxx & Xxxxxx LLP RCS, Inc. Xxxxxxxxx & Xxx, Inc. Xxxxxx Farms Recurrent Energy Xxxxxx Xxxxx Associates G. A. Xxxxxx & Assoc. SCD Energy Solutions Bloomberg GLJ Publications SCE Bloomberg New Energy Finance GenOn Energy, Inc. SMUD Boston Properties Goodin, MacBride, Xxxxxx, Xxxxxxx & Xxxxxxx XXXXX Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx XxXxxxxxxx, P.C. Green Power Institute San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Brookfield Renewable Power Xxxxx & Xxxxxx Seattle City Light CA Bldg Industry Association Hitachi Sempra Utilities CLECA Law Office In House Energy Sierra Pacific Power Company CSC Energy Services International Power Technology Silicon Valley Power California Cotton Ginners & Growers Assn Intestate Gas Services, Inc. Silo Energy LLC California Energy Commission Xxxxxxxx Berkeley National Lab Southern California Edison Company California League of Food Processors Los Angeles Dept of Water & Power Spark Energy, L.P. California Public Utilities Commission Xxxx, Forward, Xxxxxxxx & Scripps LLP Sun Light & Power Calpine MAC Lighting Consulting Sunshine Design Cardinal Cogen MBMC, Inc. Xxxxxxxxxx, Xxxxxx & Xxxxxxx Xxxxxx, Xxxxx XXX & Associates Tabors Caramanis & Associates Xxxxx, Xxxx Xxxxxx Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx Tecogen, Inc. City of Palo Alto XxXxxxxx & Associates Tiger Natural Gas, Inc. City of Palo Alto Utilities Merced Irrigation District TransCanada City of San Xxxx Xxxxxxx Irrigation District Turlock Irrigation District Clean Energy Fuels Xxxxxx Xxxxxxx United Cogen Coast Economic Consulting Xxxxxxxx & Xxxxxxxx Utility Cost Management Commercial Energy NLine Energy, Inc. Utility Specialists Consumer Federation of California NRG West Verizon Crossborder Energy NaturEner Wellhead Electric Company Xxxxx Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx LLP Navigant Consulting Western Manufactured Housing Communities Association (WMA) Day Xxxxxx Xxxxxx Xxxxxx & Xxxx Associates eMeter Corporation Defense Energy Support Center North America Power Partners

  • Project Review A. Programmatic Allowances

  • REGULATORY FILINGS AND CAISO TARIFF COMPLIANCE 3.1 Filing

  • AUDIT REVIEW PROCEDURES A. Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under an interim or post audit of this AGREEMENT that is not disposed of by AGREEMENT, shall be reviewed by LOCAL AGENCY’S Chief Financial Officer.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!