|
|
 |
Lyndon
City Council
Unforeseen sewer repairs prompt
scrutiny of engineering firm
Wayne White
Managing Editor
LYNDON—As Lyndon’s sewer renovation project proceeds,
workers continue to find surprises underground. While the project
is relying on five-year-old video of the sewer lines, last week
the Lyndon City Council questioned the project engineer’s
accuracy in recommending points of repair.
Andy Giles, foreman for K.C. Construction, Inc., the company conducting
the work, had previously reported to the council that a map provided
by the project’s engineer, Kirkham Michael, Inc., did not
always coincide with the engineer’s recommended repairs.
Giles told the council Sept. 15 that a new discrepancy had been
found on Jefferson Street – the recommended repair called
for two 20-foot repairs, but the work crew found a length of deteriorated
pipe under the street.
“There’s 200 feet there that’s not good,”
Giles said.
Council members later determined the difference in repairing two
20-foot points and the estimated 200 to 400 feet of line would be
about $17,000.
“I don’t want to directly point my finger at Kirkham
Michael,” Lyndon Mayor Bruce Williams said, “because
some of that could have happened -– it’s been five years
since they say they videotaped.”
Giles said he had reviewed a photo log of the repairs, and found
that the line was deteriorated when the video inspection was done
five years ago.
“Why was there that limited amount of point repairs if it
was in that bad of shape five years ago, whenever they cameraed
it the first time?” asked Lyndon City Councilman Doug Watson.
Williams questioned Lyndon City Administrator Larry Thurston about
whether the engineering firm had been notified of the discrepancy.
“What’s Kirkham Michael say?” Williams asked.
Thurston said he had not been in contact with the firm.
“I can ask for a change order, and in that manner get their
reaction,” Thurston said. He said the city, the engineering
firm and Kansas Department of Health and Environment must approve
all change orders. Kirkham Michael had been notified of all previous
change orders in the same manner, he said.
“I would have hoped Kirkham Michael would have revisited that,”
Williams said.
Williams noted the company was also performing inspection services
on the project. He questioned how much had been paid to Kirkham
Michael for inspection fees; Thurston replied that $4,000 or 10
percent of the fees had been paid.
“Let’s not pay them any more until this thing gets further
along and we can see we’re getting our money’s worth
out of them,” Williams said.
Williams said he believed the company should be more involved in
making decisions regarding the change orders.
“They are our consulting engineer on this project,”
he said.
Watson and Lyndon City Councilwoman Janet Stout-Walford suggested
the company should be contacted regarding the discrepancies.
“On this one specifically, ask them to justify why they said
two point repairs,” Stout-Walford said.
She recommended Thurston document all details of the project changes.
Lyndon City Councilman Vince Miller responded, “I understand
holding their feet to the fire over these major oversights, but
what do we think we’re going to get out of it? It’s
obvious they haven’t done the best job. Do we really want
them in here mucking it up more than it already is?”
“It’s very difficult for us to make engineering decisions,
and that’s what we hired them to do, make engineering decisions,”
Williams said.
Miller questioned Kirkham Michael’s further involvement with
the project. “I’m not real comfortable … because
they’ve made bad decisions in the past, I don’t want
any more suggestions from them,” Miller said. “I don’t
want their solutions to the problems … because they tend to
overlook big problems and call it minor.”
Thurston said that although the company was providing inspection
services for the sewer project, “Maybe I’ve been a little
remiss of where to put Kirkham Michael in this picture.”
Referring to the city’s plan to reroute a main sewer line
that runs under the Osage County Courthouse, “We went away
from Kirkham Michael to get recommendation on the courthouse,”
he said.
When asked by Williams why the city did not use the same firm for
engineering that line, Thurston said, “I thought that was
the direction I was supposed to go. I thought we weren’t supposed
to exactly expand Kirkham Michael’s services.”
The three council members present at the meeting agreed the council
had provided that direction.
“If it was not for spending a whole bunch of money with B&G
(the company providing recommendations on the courthouse sewer line),
I’m not so sure we wouldn’t be better off – we
can change inspectors at any point we feel like we need to,”
Williams said.
Although Thurston said BG Consultants is the city’s “on-call”
engineer, changing engineers mid-project could be “time consuming.”
“I feel like we could have got a quicker answer from Kirkham
Michael on this courthouse reroute,” Thurston said.
During the discussion, Thurston also informed the council that BG
is progressing on a hydraulic review for the realignment of the
sewer main around the courthouse. He said a crew will measure elevations
and pipe lengths to develop recommendations regarding that portion
of the project.
Thurston pointed out that some of the sewer repairs have required
less materials and labor than recommended by Kirkham Michael, allowing
the work crew to “swap horses” and allowing the project’s
budget to remain balanced.
“There’s more important feet unknown out there,”
he said.
The council took no action regarding Kirkham Michael, but agreed
with Stout-Walford’s suggestion, “to keep a record of
why we have to keep changing things in their original plan.”
“If we do find it’s costly enough to go and hold them
accountable,” she said, “if we have to take action against
them, at least we got everything documented.”
Although the council had previously directed Thurston to approve
change orders as he deems necessary, “If you run across a
$17,000 change order, let us know,” Watson told him.
Thurston is also to provide detailed financial information to the
council as the project continues.
Giles reported the project was about half completed, with most of
the point repairs to be done within two weeks. He said his company
would be videotaping the remaining repairs soon, preceding pipe
relining that is the second half of the project.
The council council also approved alcohol at the community building
and concerns with the alleway behind M&M Surplus. |
|
|
|
