Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Crew quarters receives certificate of occupancy; commission debates contractor change orders and requests electrical confirmation

October 15, 2025 | Nantucket County, Massachusetts


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Crew quarters receives certificate of occupancy; commission debates contractor change orders and requests electrical confirmation
The Nantucket Memorial Airport Commission heard that the new crew quarters building received its official certificate of occupancy, but commissioners deferred a final settlement on four outstanding change orders pending further documentation and confirmation of the site’s electrical service.

Airport staff told commissioners the project has four change orders with the following amounts as recorded in meeting documents: basement steel $31,007.37; retaining wall height $11,817; a 600‑amp disconnect $21,087; and a split‑rail fence (transcript shows inconsistent figures for this item; staff later discussed this item as being roughly in the mid‑$30,000 range). Staff recommended the airport pay the two code‑required items — the retaining wall modification and the 600‑amp disconnect — (combined total approximately $33,000) and accept the contractor’s offer to waive the other two items. Legal counsel reviewed the proposal and staff recommended deferring final settlement to the next meeting after additional review.

Why it matters: Approving or rejecting these change orders affects the final contract closeout, the airport’s capital accounting for the project and whether the owner (the airport) or the contractor bears specific costs tied to code compliance and design interpretation.

Commission requests and follow‑up: Commissioners asked the airport’s owner’s project manager and documentation team to provide written confirmation that the electrical service and incoming conductors are appropriate for the intended basement build‑out (discussion focused on whether service conductors from the street are rated to support a later basement expansion and why a 600‑amp disconnect was required). Commissioners also asked staff to confirm whether any code changes occurred after the design that would shift responsibility to the architect or OPM.

Outcome: The commission agreed by unanimous consent to hold the SW Cole pending‑contract discussion and to revisit the change‑order settlement at the next meeting once the OPM and legal counsel provide written clarifications. No final monetary settlement was approved at this meeting.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

Get instant access to full meeting videos
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Massachusetts articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI