Laserfiche WebLink
<br />CASE # \ <br /> <br />CONSIDER CHANGE ORDER FOR FORMER ST PAUL TERMINALS <br />ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP <br />By: Steven Jankowski, City Engineer <br /> <br />Bac}{ground: <br /> <br />Recall thatImprovement Project 06-33, Removal of Contaminated Soils on the Former St. Paul <br />Terminals Property project consisted of the excavation, hauling, and disposal of contaminated <br />soil for a 1.5 acre il.J.dustrial property located at 14050 Basalt Street. This site was acquired by the <br />City from St. Paul Terminals for redevelopment purposes and for many years was occupied by <br />Danny's Trannys. <br /> <br />The scope ofthis project had been estimated to require the excavation and removal of 4400 cubic <br />yards of material, of which 200 cubic yards was estimated to be contaminated to such a degree <br />that it would need to be disposed in a hazardous waste landfill as Tmcic Substances Control Act <br />(TSCA) wastes. The project was completed early last year and the final quantities have been <br />determined. The contractor on the project, Team Earthworks is requesting final payment based <br />upon the actual project quantities plus an additional payment of$14,107.50 for compensation <br />associated with extra cost associated with the disposal of the TSCA wastes. Team Earthwork's <br />letter and invoice of January 25,2008 is attached. <br /> <br />The TSCA waste was located in an earthen bank located along the western property line. Upon <br />excavation large pieces of concrete and other debris items were found buried inside this bank. <br />This debris was neither evident from visual observation prior to the work, nor was it encountered <br />in the two soil borings made by ProSource Inc., the City's environmental consultant which <br />assisted in the preparation of the technical specifications for this project. Bidders were not <br />. permitted to make their own borings because ofthe hazardous nature of the material involved. <br /> <br />The hazardous waste bags that were used to transport the TSCAwaste contained roughly half of <br />the volume that was anticipated. <br /> <br />Staff feels that this entitles the contractor reasonable consideration for compensation since it <br />represents a changed condition over that which was bid. Corroborating this fact, it should be <br />noted that the other six bidders that submitted proposals for this project submitted unit prices <br />roughly similar to Team Earthworks, and all six would have experienced a loss had they been <br />compensated for the removal and disposal of the TSCA wastes assuming that their disposal cost <br />was the same. <br />It might be noted that another consideration also has bearing on staff s recommendation. The <br />actual volume ofTSCA waste removed was only 37% of the quantity estimated in the bid <br />document. Generally, a contractor is entitled to an adjustment in unit price in the event of a <br /> <br />-107- <br />