Agenda - Public Works Committee - 10/16/2012

Home

Councilmember Elvig asked how an eight -foot trail was included in the specifications since the City has a policy of ten -foot trails. Development Manager Lazan reviewed that this item was before the HRA for additional easement and WSB prepared the Armstrong Boulevard plans but did not understand that Ramsey had a policy of ten -foot trails. He noted it had also been discovered that too many utilities were located at the intersection so additional easement was secured from the HRA for a ten -foot trail. Chairperson Backous asked if the project plan also directed public water drainage onto private property. Development Manager Lazan explained that south of Sunwood Drive, the plan did not accommodate commercial development. He noted that adding the curb section will get drainage down to a swale and had this situation been caught originally, this would have been the fix so "no harm /no foul." Interim Engineer Nelson stated they surveyed the existing ground prior to designing the project but should have designed for the design grades with built up pads. Councilmember Elvig asked about the internal process for staff to look at the engineering drawings and determine whether or not they will work. Interim Engineer Nelson stated he was not with Ramsey at the time the plans were reviewed but, generally, the City Engineer assures the plans fit when different engineers and design teams are working on plan components. Councilmember McGlone noted these project plans were done when we had City Engineer, not a consulting engineer. Chairperson Backous stated he understands things happen but there seems to be a constant flow of change orders, which is of concern. He noted without change orders, it means the best project estimate came forward. Councilmember McGlone stated rather than "pointing fingers" maybe the City Council needs to look at whether the best (lowest) price results in generating more change orders. He shared the concern of change orders, noting the City has professionals to review the plans. Councilmember Elvig agreed this is an age old problem and his question was one with process to assure it was thorough enough to catch these issues and eliminate or reduce change orders. City Administrator Ulrich stated these errors were in the review process, not in preparation of the bid. He agreed City staff should know when plans are reviewed that the policy is for ten -foot trails. Councilmember McGlone stated a septic was also missed with this project. Public Works Committee / September 18, 2012 Page 9 of 16