Laserfiche WebLink
••'^ETINQ <br />2 5 2002 <br />REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION I \jr OHOHO <br />DATE: l-ebruary 22,2002 <br />ITEM NO: / 7 <br />Department Approval: <br />Name RonMoorse <br />Title City Administrator <br />Administrator Reviewed:0 Agenda Section: <br />City Administrator's <br />Report <br />Item Description: Payment Request and Change Order No. I for Soil Correction Work - Long <br />Lake Fire Station <br />The Council, at its February 11 meeting, raised concerns regarding the change order portion of the <br />payment request for Ingram Excavating. Due to these concerns, the Council continued action on the <br />total payment request. On Friday, February 15. the City Administrator polled the Council Members <br />to obtain authorization to release payment of the original contract amount. This authorization was <br />granted. <br />The specific item in the change order that was of concern to the Council was the $ 1,980.00 cost for <br />digging holes for settlement plates, then refilling them when they could not be used. The Council <br />did not believe the City should be responsible for this cost. <br />The project manager has explained that the duplicate settlement plate work w as the result of good <br />faith efforts to try to speed up the work rather than due to carelessness or improper work. The <br />situation was that both the soils correction contractor and the soils engineer were trying to keep the <br />work moving as quickly as possible. They found that the PVC pipes in the settlement plates were <br />breaking because the soil was frozen. They had to get new settlement plates with steel pipe versus <br />PVC pipe. The soils engineer indicated they would do their best to get the settlement plates by the <br />next day. Early the next day, Ingram dug the holes for the settlement plate poles but GME was <br />unable to provide the settlement plates that day. The holes had to be filled in to prevent the soil from <br />freezing. This duplicate work was caused by elTorts to keep the project moving rather than by <br />carelessness. The project manager believes both the soils correction contractor and the soils engineer <br />performed extremely well under dilTicult conditions to get the project completed as quickly as <br />possible. I Ic is recommending that the City pay the duplicate costs rather than penalizing either the <br />soils correction contractor or the soils engineer for their good faith efforts to keep the project <br />moving. <br />COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: <br />1. Motion to approve Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $7,619.00. <br />Motion to approve the Application and Certificate for Payment to Ingram Excavating, Inc. <br />in the amount of $225,500.00. <br />1 <br />J