Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09282010 - C.01RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE the Bethel Island Road Bridge Replacement project contingency fund increase of $2,300,000.00 for a new contingency fund total of $3,827,871.30, and a new payment limit of $14,106,584.30, effective September 28, 2010, and APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute Contract Change Order Nos. 26, 27 and 28 with CC Myers Inc., effective September 28, 2010, for a combined total amount not to exceed $1,775,000.00 to settle Notice of Potential Claim #1, and accelerate the project due to regulatory permit work window requirements and overall project delay impacts. FISCAL IMPACT: The Project contingency funds are currently insufficient to cover the increased cost. The increase in contingency funds will be funded by Road Funds 100%. BACKGROUND: CCO No. 26: The Contractor has filed a Notice of Potential Claim #1 (NOPC#1) on the project related to the means and methods to be used APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 09/28/2010 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Supervisor Contact: Rob Tavenier, 925-313-2009 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: September 28, 2010 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy cc: C. 1 To:Board of Supervisors From:Julia R. Bueren, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:September 28, 2010 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract Change Order Nos. 26 - 28 and increase Contingency Fund to $3,827,871.30 for Bethel Island Bridge Replacement Project BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) for the construction of the portion of the project located over Dutch Slough. The County attempted to negotiate a resolution to the claim but was unsuccessful. The claim was pursued by the contractor to the Dispute Review Board (DRB) that was established for the project as set forth in the project specifications. A hearing was held before the DRB on April 30th, 2010 with a decision being rendered by the DRB on June 11, 2010. The County requested reconsideration of the DRB decision which was responded to on July 14th, 2010. The DRB found that the contractor was due additional compensation. Cost $751,968.43 CCO No. 27: The project was also delayed for 18 working days due to a utility relocation issue by AT&T. AT&T had a major trunk communications line serving all of Bethel Island located in the old bridge. Those lines had to be replaced by new lines in the new structure before the old bridge could be demolished. AT&T was given adequate notice for the relocation but failed to begin work in the time frame agreed to prior to the project. They began relocating their facility on June 15, 2010, completing the work on July 9, 2010, delaying the project an additional 18 working days. The County intends to seek restitution from AT&T for the cost impacts to the schedule. Cost $255,290.57 CCO No. 28: Various delays during the first in-water construction season prevented the execution of certain elements of the original project schedule. The most significant delay was an issue with the soil plug and seal course for the cast-in-steel shell piles. The seal courses failed and material entered the steel shells. After much analysis and discussion it was determined that some phenomenon at the pile tip occurred, which led to a determination of differing site conditions. Another delay included time spent analyzing the partial demolition of the existing bridge, which was ultimately determined to be infeasible. These delays prevented the contractor from constructing Phase 2 of the bridge construction during the first in-water construction season. The County obtained an extended work window for the first season to allow completion of the Stage 1 construction. The County attempted to obtain an extension of the second season in-water work window, however the regulatory agencies would not provide an extension without going through a formal consultation process, which would have taken too long to be of benefit to the project. The Stage 2 and Stage 3 construction of the project were then combined into a single activity in the second and final in-water work window. The addition of the Stage 2 work to the second in water season along with the cumulative delays necessitated the acceleration of the project to achieve a completion of in water work prior to October 31, 2010. Cost $767,741.00 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The lack of approval would prevent successful completion of this contract and preclude payment to the contractor for compensation due to them for completing the required work. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: Not Applicable. ATTACHMENTS CCOs 26-28