Laserfiche WebLink
1 °~ ~~=~ <br />From: Mike Hansen <br />To: i:teleport.com:bfether <br />Date: 4/27/99 l0:llam <br />Subject: Amendment to IDA <br />Ben, <br />I checked with Craig Lewis on add alternate items 12, 13 and 14, which are <br />listed at paragraph 6 of the proposed amendment to the IDA. Craig tells me <br />that items 12, 13 and 14 do not relate to specific areas for excavation or <br />fill. Rather, these items are intended to cover the cost for activities which <br />are expected to occur but cannot be identified until general excavation <br />begins. <br />The purpose of each item is as follows: <br />Alternate 12: There are pockets where additional excavation, beyond the <br />estimated general excavation, is necessary because unsuitable material may be <br />in place and the contractor cannot pour footings or other structures over the <br />pocket. An example is a recently discover pocket of miscellaneous junk that <br />needs to be removed. The $20 covers the cost of this "overexcavation". <br />Alternate 13: There are pockets related to alternate 12 or just standing <br />alone, where the soil or material is unsuitable to support the concrete or <br />other structures to be placed on it. Therefore, compacted fill must be <br />placed. The $15 covers to the costs of "compacted structural fill". <br />Alternate 14: As we discussed, the cost for removal and disposal of <br />contaminated soil is solely a county expense. <br />This raises a question whether the county should be solely liable for the <br />cost of compacted fill, when the fill is required after removal of <br />contaminated soil. I would argue not. The county did sell and promise to <br />Transit a site free of contaminated soil. The cost of removal and disposal is <br />covered by Alternate 14. Other excavation is covered by Alternate 12, which <br />should be a project expense. The same holds true for any compacted fill <br />required for construction purposes. Alternate 13 should be a project expense. <br />The purpose of Alternates 12 and 13 related to project construction needs. <br />Although some compaction work will be necessitated by removal of contaminated <br />soils, compacted soil is not required to deliver a clean site. It is required <br />to construct the project. The county only promised a clean site, not a site <br />suitable for construction of the project as designed. <br />A long-winded prologue to a suggested change to paragraph 6: <br />"The parties agree that alternates no 12 and 13 are unit prices for items <br />which are project expenses ahared by the parties pursuant to any change order <br />requiring the work described in the alternates. The parties further agree <br />that alternate no 14 is a county expense, the cost of which will be borne <br />entirely by the County pursuant to any change order requiring the work <br />decribed in the alternate." <br />CC: M-MARI.BWASSON <br />