Loading...
Staff ReportsVA 11%#%LISPELL FIRE DEPARTMENT 336 1 st Avenue East P. O. Box 1997 KALISPELL, MONTANA 59903.1997 TED MAIN TED WAGGENER ASST. CHIEF FIRE CHIEF FIRE DEPARTMENT QUARTERLY FIRE REPORT JANUARY 1 THROUGH MARCH 31,1997 Clarence Krepps, City Manager Doug Rauthe, Honorable Mayor City Council Members RICHARD SEDDON FIRE MARSHAL The Kalispell Fire Department responded to 50 fire calls during the first quarter of 1997. Total fire loss was estimated at $54,000. There were no general alarm fires. The calls were as follows: 1. Combustibles near heat 1 8. Natural gas leak,or 6 smell 2. Electrical wiring 4 9. Chimney Fire 4 3. Electrical appliance 2 10. Alarm Malfunctions 11 motors# 4. Food Preparation 4 11. Smoke scare, honest 6 mistake 5. Rubbish, weeds, garbage 2 12. Standby for roof 1 cans collapse 6. Vehicle accident, gas 2 13. Accidental Alarm 3 containment 7. Vehicle, fire, wiring or 3 14. Public Assistance 1 backfire F -2- The Kalispell Fire Department Ambulances responded to 479 calls during the first quarter of 1997. The calls are as follows: MVA 72 Respiratory 53 Cardiac 52 Allergic Reaction 5 Transfers 54 Syncope 18 Psychiatric 10 CVA 18 Public Assistance 13 Seizures 24 Abdominal Acute Sick Calls 39 13 Industrial/Sports DOA Diabetic 4 4 Drugs/Alcohol 15 10 Respiratory 53 Swing -by 3 Trauma/Assaults 7 Falls 64 Extrication Our "Chimney Brush Program", was used forty-six times during this quarter. Approximately one -hundred people toured the fire station, and firemen conducted approximately 200 commercial building inspections. Respectfully Submitted, �a94�0 Orland Leland Interim Assistant'Chief DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING & ZONING MEMORANDUM TO: CITY MANAGER CLARENCE KREPPS, MAYOR DOUGLAS RAUTHE & CITY COUNCIL FROM: CRAIG KERZMAN, BUILDING OFFICIAL DATE: MARCH, 1997 RE: PERMIT REPORT PERM MAR 1997 FEES RECEIVED Mar., 1997 PERMITS JANUARY TO DATE FEES REC JANUARY TO DATE PERMIT FISCAL YEAR FEES REC FISCAL YR TO DATE Building 33 $8,325 66 $20,382 320 $102,917 Plan Review 8 11000 23 5,154 96 32,916 Plumbing 8 1,488 38 3,396 203 13,998 Mechanical 29 1,795 88 5,524 400 22,790 Moving 1 50 1 50 2 150 Signs 2 50 9 165 9 165 TOTALS: 81 $12,708 225 $34,671 1,030 $172,936 BUILDING VALUATION March., 1997 Jan to Date Fiscal Year to Date CITY $832,187 $1,863,725 $7,387,552 COUNTY $361,480 $1,369,721 $97219,178 TOTAL $1,193,667 $3,233,446 $16,606,730 SEWER CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT FUND 3,250 $10,321 $105,465 WATER CONNECTION FEE 1,250 $18,562 $59,190 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FEE 0 1 $175 1 $1,575 CAK/ak DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING & ZONING COMMENTS FOR MONTH OF MARCH, 1997 Building Activity Permits were issued for 8 single family homes, 2 town homes and one foundation upon which a manufactured home will be placed. Commercial construction was limited. The two main projects were the Pit Stop quick Tube on West Idaho and Dr. Lambert's office at Center and Meridian. Zoning: There were two (2) sign permits issued in the month of March: 1) Temporary sign permit for Artists and Craftsman of the Flathead 2) Allstate Insurance - 22 3rd Avenue West A great deal of time was spent this month on the Kalispell Golf Association's floodplain development permit application. The permit was finally issued on April 4th. The zoning administrator met with the FEMA representative from Denver, along with our state floodplain representative, Karl Christians. We went over a few different projects that have taken place in Kalispell and they gave this office some direction on how to proceed with the permitting process. They have a great concern over the Hampton Inn project and are working with this office to get it resolved. Diana attended a floodplain workshop that was put on by FEMA and DNRC. The zoning administrator has worked continuously with City Service to get their remodel plans ready for submittal for plan review and building permits. There continues to be many requests for floodplain determinations from the public. Diana is contacting businesses regarding the portable and temporary signs that are being displayed illegally throughout the city. The number of walk-in traffic as well as phone calls regarding proposed uses and setbacks is increasing as spring approaches. General: With the cooler temperatures throughout the month the river levels stayed low, however, the building department received numerous calls related to water in crawl spaces and water in basements. Both surface water and ground water seem to be causing problems. As the weather warms the surface drainage issued will be replaced with flooding concerns. raig Kerzman ZF, O O N O n 696 a w U w J J O U IRO 1 � T � 1 1 L=L W 0 u> u) u) 1 N :40 M r Cl) r Cl) T Cl) r MM rIP z Z FA 613, (/). to arlua O I Q I W U I I Z 1 Z L nnnn ln O rnrnwrnrnlm �000rnrnlao W aaaaZ; U D I O 1 � I I I 1 mc000Ococow rno0) co ..rnarn-IcoN011Z 0010 amcmotocD m E J W tcoo Q tm wit tt�� R I V ifi � � I I I i �I �I J C N CI W 0.,IW i 0 J J c I (A U) (D W J IT N 1 1 LLI J R IV 1 M 51� W CM ( C r C �I o N r 0 Gf Q 00 N O1i o CO C d Him Q' O n CO I tD (L c - ^ :j 4) O �N 0_ lL w N L e- 'C U1ui � .22 Y —y 031 =IJ Co(J ai CIS J A Z 0.S y fl m N NI f0 N �-)amUa' o 97-34 FAITH FREE LUTHERAN CHURCH 405 LIBERTY STREET LOT 6 SLR 2 OLSON ADDITION S12 T28N R22W REPAIR TRUSSES DAMAGED FROM SNOW WEIGHT COVERING 32' X 50' AREA. DOUG SERVO CONSTRUCTION $25,000.00 97-35 ROSS & ROSS LLC 212 5TH AVENUE WEST LOT 2 BLK 167 KAL ADD CONSTRUCT A 3 BEDROOM 2 BATH SINGLE STORY 1025 S.F. ON A CRAWL SPACE. ROBERT W. ROSS BLDG CONT. INC. $63,837.00 97-36 JOHN & KELLY THIES 434 SUMMIT RIDGE LOT 11 BLK 3 SUMMIT RIDGE ADD CONSTRUCT ADDITION TO 2 STORY RESIDENCE ' TIMOTHY MARTIN $54,398.00 97-37 TERRI RICHL & SHANE WYMAN 828 6TH AVENUE WEST LOT 4 BLK 3 FISHER ADDITION CONSTRUCT AN 8' X 12' ADDITION TO THE KITCHEN ON A PERM FOUNDATION. SELF $5,904.00 97-38 DALE L. MCGARVEY 405 3RD STREET E. LOT 7 BLK 60 INSTALL AN EGRESS WINDOW FROM AN EXISTING WINDOW. SKIP HARVEY $6,000.00 97-39 ABC COLLECTORS 30 5TH STREET EAST IT 18 BLK 84 KAL ORIG REMOVE DROP CEILING REMOVE PANELING INSTALL SHEETROCK ON CEILING AND WALLS RICHCREEK CONST $8,500.00 97-40 ALEX HILTON 311 SOLBERG DRIVE LOT 3A GRYDE'S TRACTS CONSTRUCT A 3 BDRM 2 BATH SFR W/ 2 CAR ATTACHED GARAGE ON A PERM FDN SELF $108,618.00 PERMIT NUMBER --------------- 97-41 LARRY ROBERTSON 1319 HIGHWAY 93 S. LOT 2 AMMENDED PLAT S17 T28N R21W CONSTRUCT A SINGLE COLUMN 24' X 24' CANOPY GLACIER PETROLEUM CO. $11,103.00 97-42 JAMES BEAGLEY 192 2ND AVENUE WN LOT 1 BLOCK 13 KALISPELL ORIGINAL CONSTRUCT A ONE STORY COMMERCIAL BUILDING FOR OIL CHANGE ON EXISTING FDN TREWEEK CONST. $59,596.00 97-43 JEFF YOUNG 148 BUFFALO STAGE LOT 38 BUFFALO STAGE ADDITION CONSTRUCT A 4 BDRM 2 1/2 BATH 2 STORY ON AN UNFINISHED BASEMENT WITH AN ATTACHED GARAGE GILLETTE CONST. $127,695.00 97-44 TAMI KINSHELLA 1218 4TH AVENUE EAST S 22' OF LOT 2 & N 18' OF LOT 3 ENCLOSE EXISTING PORCH SELF $450.00 97-45 TRACY WILKONSKI 238 E. CENTER LOT 1 BLK 38, KAL AD #2 INTERIOR REMODEL & CHANGE IN OCCUPANCY/STILL B-2 TRACY WILKONSKI $40,000.00 97-46 STANLEY M. ZATTOSKY 2102 5TH AVENUE EAST NE1/4 NW1/4 S20 T28N R21W CONSTRUCT A 30' X 42' 2 BDRM, 2 1/2 BATH ON A FULL UNFINISHED BASEMENT ECHO CREEK BUILDERS $92,490.00 97-47 BENTLEY BLOSSER 809 1ST AVE EAST CONSTRUCT A FENCE 94' LONG BY 614" HIGH SELF $1,500.00 PERMIT NUMBER --------------- 97-49 MENTAL HEALTH 909 5TH AVENUE EAST LOT 11 ELK 207 KALISPELL ADDN NO. 3 CONSTRUCT A NEW ROOF AND DECK AT REAR OF HOUSE M & M WOOD PRODUCTS $2,198.00 97-50 LEWIS BELKER 764 CONRAD DRIVE CONSTRUCT A SPLIT ENTRY 2 BDRM 2 BATH SFR AND UNFINISHED BASEMENT LEWIS BELKER $221,400.00 97-51 BRUCE HIRD 305 5TH AVE. EAST L12,BLK194, KALISEPLL AD #i2 ROOF DAMAGED BY SNOW, REPLACE RAFTERS W/ENGINEERED TRUSSES, NEW ROOF SHEATING & TAB COMP SHINGLES THE TIMBERLAKE COMPANY $3,400.00 97-52 COLIN BRADLEY 706 9TH AVENUE WEST IT 1 BLK 5 HIGH SCHOOL ADD ADD TWO NEW EGRESS WINDOWS IN THE BASEMENT. MARK NEWMAN CONSTRUCTION $500.00 97-53 RUSSELL SWINDALL 137 RIVERVIEW DRIVE LOT 31 RIVERVIEW GREENS CONSTRUCT A 4 BDRM, 2-1/2 BATH SINGLE STORY SFR ON A CRAWL SPACE WITH ATTACHED 3 CAR GARAGE. MONTANA HOMES $189,605.00 97-54 TAMMY MUNROE 511 E. EVERGREEN DRIVE LOT 5 HOLLAND DAY ACRES CONSTRUCT A 19' X 29' 551 SF DETACHED GARAGE ON EXISTING FOUNDATION. DANDI BUILDINGS $5,110.00 97-55 GARY LAMBERT 5 S. MERIDIAN ROAD LOT 1 TRACT 5DED & 5DECA S18 T20 R21 FOUNDATION UPGRADES, BATHROOM, INTERIOR WALL FINISH IN ACCESSORY BLDG. SELF $3,500.00 PERMIT NUMBER --------------- 97-56 JOHN & SUSAN COLLIS 250 WILSON HEIGHTS TRACT 3BB & 3CH CONSTRUCT A 30' X 50' WOOD FRAME STRUCTURE WITH METAL SKIN. STEEL STRUCTURES OF AMERICA $15,000.00 97-57 MARK GILLETTE 180 BUFFALO STAGE LOT 51 PHASE II BUFFALO STAGE CONSTRUCT A FOUNDATION ONLY FOR A 1120 SFR WITH A 451 SF 2 CAR ATTACHED GARAGE MARK CONSTRUCTION $5,500.00 97-58 FAY STIDMAN 1028 5TH AVENUE E. LOT 4 BLK 137 KO REPLACE DECK ROOF COLLAPSED FROM SNOW WEIGHT WITH NEW ROOF SYSTEM. DALE HALL CONSTRUCTION $2,049.00 97-59 JEFF & ARLISS MOSER 1481 WILLOW GLEN DRIVE _ PARCEL B NW4 NW4 S28 T28 R21W CONSTRUCT THE FOUNDATION ONLY FOR 3 BEDROOM, 2 BATH 1728 SF SFR WITH UNFINISHED BASEMENT PLUS 672 SF TWO CAR ATTACHED GARAGE. SELF $7,500.00 97-60 KIM TORGERSON 1422 6TH AVENUE WEST TRACT I SE4 S18 T28N R21W CONSTRUCT ATTACHED GARAGE, 576 SF, TO EXISTING SFR. SELF $8,928.00 97-61 DUANE BITNEY Ill EAST NICKLAUS LOT IA & 1B GLACIER VILLAGE GREENS CONSTRUCT A FOUNDATION ONLY FOR A 1190 SF TOWNHOUSE RICHCREEK CONSTRUCTION $5,975.00 PERMIT NUMBER --------------- 97-62 DUANE BITNEY 115 EAST NICKLAUS LOT IA & SB CONSTRUCT A FOUNDATION ONLY FOR A 1190 SF TOWNHOUSE RICHCREEK CONSTRUCTION $5,975.00 97-63 ELEANOR TAYLOR 1943 DARLINGTON IT 158 SOUTH MEADOWS CONSTRUCT A PRIVATE ATTACHED GARAGE ON A MONOLITHIC SLAB, 18' X 241. ALPINE BUILDERS $7,416.00 97-64 JASON ELLIOTT 931 6TH AVENUE W LOT 4 BLK 10 FISHER ADDITION INSTALL A 36" SHOWER WITH ENCLOSED WALLS (2X4 STUDS & SHEETROCKED) AND ` REPAIR TWO EXISTING DECKS. SELF $500.00 97-65 AMERICAN LAND & DEVELOPMENT 2194 SOUTH WOODLAND LOT 17 MEADOW PARK 2 CONSTRUCT A 1266 SF 2 BEDROOM, 2 BATH SINGLE STORY SFR WITH ATTACHED 462 SF GARAGE. AMERICAN LAND & DEVELOPMENT $85,020.00 97-66 PETER M. GHETTI 1023 E. IDAHO TRACT 16 SW4 NE4 S8 T28 R21 CONSTRUCT NEW ROOF SYSTEM OVER EXISTING BUILDING. MARK HUTCHING $10,000.00 97-67 DEBBIE NELSON 314 9TH AVENUE WEST LOT 2 BKL7 INSTALL NEW ROOF SHEATHING AND ROOF COVERING MONTANA COUNTRY CONSTRUCTION $9,000.00 TOTALS: $1,193,667.00 Incorporated 1892 relephone (406) 758-7700 FAX (406) 758-7758 Post Office Box 1997 Kalispell, Montana Zip 59903-1997 Douglas Rauthe Mayor Clarence W. Krepps City Manager City Council Members: May 1, 1997 Gary W. Nystul Ward I Cliff Collins TO: Clarence Krepps, City Manager Ward I Norbert F. Donahue FROM: Glen Neier, City Attorney Ward 11 �; Dale Haarr Re: NuPac Change Ord quest on Woo and Court Project Ward II Jim Atkinson Ward III Over the past several weeks I have been analyzing the Contract Documents for Site Grading, Street Paving and Water and Sewer Improvements for Woodland Court affordable housin�uren Granmo ad III Project. You are aware that the Project was bid in three schedules with NuPac awarded Schedules I and II Site Grading and Drainage and Water and Sewer Improvements) at Pamela B. Kennedy ( g g p ) ward IV total price of $280,847.00. A-1 Paving received the bid for Schedule III at $108, 610.00. JuPac has submitted a claim with the City for payment for extra work and materiaaa dIV Duane Larson x. associated with the project which increases the Project costs by $69,002.00 to $349,849.00. For purposes of this discussion, I am only concerned with the NuPac claim extra compensation. I have been involved in at least two meetings with representatives from Thomas, Dean and Hoskins, the City's consulting engineers on the Project and one meeting with NuPac representatives to discuss the change order request. Suffice it to say there exists wide disparity between the recommendations of the TD&H and the demands of NuPac. Because alleged'extra engineering costs associated with the project, which TD&H suggests charging against NuPac the final recommended contract pay amount totals $276,736.50. The differences between the recommended pay amount of TD&H and the demand of NuPac is contained in seven (7) bid items of the contract. After meeting with representatives of TD&H and NuPac, I outlined the applicable contract specifications which described both the "work required to be performed" and the "measurement and payment"for work performed. After arriving at several conclusions based upon my interpretation of the contract documents, I asked an independent engineer, Jerry Hanson, to review the contract from an engineering prospective to determine whether "terms of art" used in the document would lead to a different conclusion. Hanson's analysis of the contract documents is\wp\woodct.wpd Page 1 of 8 conformed to all but one instance to my conclusion. This report is based upon a thorough review of the contract documents from a legal perspective as well as engineering opinion as to the "standard in the industry" applicable to this type of contract. The discussion below contains an analysis of and my recommendations to the Council, concerning each individual item under dispute. Construction Specifications, Division I, General Requirements, Section 01000, Special Procedures, ¶ 11 states: All excavated materials shall be immediately loaded into trucks, removed from the site and disposed of by the Contractor. Excavated materials shall not be stockpiled on site. Native materials shall not be used as backfill. Trench backfill within the public right-of-way shall consist of imported select uncrushed material (Type A Trench Backfill) containing stones no larger than six (6) inches at its largest dimension. This material shall provide a uniform gradation mixture in accordance with the requirements of the current edition of the Montana Public Works Standard Specifications. Section 02230, Street Excavation, Backfill and Compaction, Imported Borrow Excavation states as follows: Imported Borrow Excavation shall consist of excavation made from borrow areas outside the project limits and outside the normal grading limits for the completion of the embankments. Borrow areas, or areas outside the project pits from which the imported borrow may be obtained, will generally not be designated. However, any source chosen by the Contractor shall be subject to approval of the Engineer. Imported Borrow Excavation, if required, shall be paid for at the contract unit price for Imported Borrow. Imported Borrow Excavation shall be handled and placed as specified in Section 02230.04 EMBANKMENT. NuPac is claiming that it handled and properly placed 3527 CY of material meeting the definition of imported borrow. TD&H disputes this claiming that only 2648 CY of material meeting the definition of imported borrow was placed on the site. A substantial part of the discrepancy revolves around material removed from the trenches on site and placed on lots within the Woodland Court subdivision. TD&H alleges that NuPac, TD&H and the City agreed that NuPac could deposit trench excavation materials on site, at no extra cost to the City. NuPac disputes, and claims that it rejected the "no cost" proposal. Documents made iAwp\woodct.wpd Page 2 of 8 available to this office indicate a discussion of depositing trench materials on site, there is no indication of any agreement by NuPac to do so at no cost. Further, if an agreement to dispose of material on site, in contravention of ¶ 11, above, was made, there should have been a corresponding change order adjusting the haul costs because NuPac under the contract was required to remove a excavated materials from the site. Construction Specifications, General Requirements, Section 01010, Measurement and Payment, ¶ 2.1.5 Disposal of Waste Material and ¶ 3.4.5 Imported Borrow states as follows: 2.1.5 Disposal of Waste Material No separate measurement or payment will be made for disposal of waste materials. All costs related to disposal of materials shall be merged and included in the contract price for related bid items. Waste material meeting the requirements of imported borrow shall be wasted on -site. Disposal on -site shall be behind the curbs from the sidewalk lotward. 3.4.5 Imported Borrow. Approved material accepted in place for site grading shall be measured in place and paid for at the contract unit price of "Imported Borrow". Price shall include all labor, equipment, and incidental items necessary to complete the work. Material removed from the storm water retention area bordering the south side of lots 10 through 16 shall be included as imported borrow. 4 Under the provisions of these paragraphs it is not clear whether or not payment should be made for "Waste material meeting the requirements of imported borrow shall be wasted on site." Placement of borrow for embankment purposes involves more than simply hauling the material away and dumping it. No document available to this office indicates that the material removed from the trenches was placed as other than embankment. It further appears that for purpose of site grading material accepted in place was to be paid for at the unit price for "imported borrow" The difference in amount of borrow between NuPac and TD&H cannot be reconciled. Ambiguity in the contract will be construed against the City, as TD&H , the City's agent drafted the contract documents. I don't believe that the City can rely on the fact that some, maybe even a substantial amount of the material, removed from the trench and placed on the site as reason to deny payment on this item. If the material met the requirements of imported borrow placed as embankment, it should have been paid for at the unit price of "Imported Borrow". NuPac therefore is entitled to a change order totaling $4,043.00 under Schedule II, Item 2. iAwp\woodct.wpd Page 3 of 8 2. Schedule I, Bid Item 2, Excavation Type 1 w/ Type A Backfill According to documents in my possession the estimated quantity was 40 CY at $7.00 per yard for a total bid of $280.00. In a letter to Clarence Krepps dated March 18, 1997, TD& H calculates the quantity at 31.1 CY. The difference between the quantities amounts to $62.30. Rather than haggle over $62.00 it is advisable to pay the amount and issue a change order for $62.30 under Schedule II, Bid Item 3. 3. Schedule II, Bid Item-2, Imported Backfill Water Construction Specifications, General Requirements, Section 01010, Measurement and Payment ¶'s 3.16.1 Section 02713, Water Mains and 3.16.4 provide as follows: 3.16.1 WATER MAINS. Measurement of water mains shall be made in lineal feet along the center line of pipe through all valves, fittings and appurtenances. Payment for water mains will be made at the contract unit bid price bid per lineal foot for "Water Main, in Place" for the various sizes called for, which price shall include furnishing and installing pipe Type I or Type 2; excavation and Type A backfill, furnishing and placing Type 1 pipe bedding; and all other work i necessary or incidental for completion of the item. 3.16.4 Imported Backfill. Imported backfill accepted in place for water mains shall be measured by suitable means and paid for at the contract unit price of Imported Backfill. Price shall include cost of all imported material, labor, equipment, and incidental items necessary to place and compact backfill material to the contract specifications. Imported material shall be a granular material meeting the requirements of Type II Bedding. NuPac claims that the Contract -Documents contain no specific wording regarding excavation of trenches for water mains. NuPac, therefore, claims a quantity of 1594 CY of material based upon measurement and total tickets. TD&H calculated backfill requirements, at 881.3 CY, based upon Type 1 or Type 2 trench, excavation and Type A backfill. Section 02221, 04, B, and D, Montana Public Works Standards describes TYPE 1 TRENCH EXCAVATION as follows: B. Excavation performed as Type 1 will not be shored or sheathed. The sides of all trenches greater than 5 feet in depth shall be sloping back to the angle of repose to preclude collapse, in accordance with Table P-1, Section 1926.653 of OSHA Safety and Health Regulations for Construction as shown on Standard Drawing No. 02221- iAwplwoodct.wpd Page 4 of 8 1. In no case shall trench walls above the 5 foot level be slopped steeper than one foot rise per one foot horizontal (1: 1), except for rock excavation. D. TRENCH DIMENSIONS. Trench dimensions shall be as specified below. (1) Width. The width of the trench shall be such to provide adequate working room for men to install and join the pipe in the specified manner. The width of that portion of the trench ... (b) from the bottom of the trench to a maximum of 5 feet above the bottom of the trench shall for Type 1 Trench Excavation, shall be as follows: a) A minimum of 3'-6" for pipe sizes 12 inches and under. b) A minimum of 2'-0" plus the outside diameter for pipe sizes greater than 12 inches or a greater minimum width as specified by the pipe manufacturer. c) A maximum width as specified in the Special Provisions. Section 02221, 05, C, (2) reads as follows: Type A. Trench Backfill. Materials used for backfill shall be carefully deposited in layers as specified above, wetted to within 3% of optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density, as determined by AASHTO T-99 or, for material which does exhibit a typical well-defined moisture -density curve, 70 percent relative density as determined by ASTM D4253 and D4254. Standard Drawing No. 02221-1, Montana Public Works Standards and the Sections quoted above from the Standards describe the work to be performed in trench excavation Type 1, with Type A Trench Backfill. Method of payment for the work is set forth in Section 3.16.1 and Section 3.16.4. It is acceptable industry standard to measure the work to be performed by determining the dimensions of the trench and calculating the backfill required based upon the placement of appropriate material back in the ditch. Nothing contained in the representations of TD&H or NuPac indicate to me, that any other method of payment was appropriate. A contractor should not be compensated for over excavation resulting in an increase in the amount of backfill required, when the over excavation was occasioned for the convenience of the contractor. The monetary difference between the amount claimed by NuPac and the amount recommended for payment by TD&H amounts to $9,265.00. Based upon the contract i:lwplwoodd.wpd Page 5 of 8 f language, I would respectfully decline to recommend a change order on the NuPac claim. 4. Schedule II, Bid Item 11, Cast Iron Fittings In Place NuPac has requested a change order for 2165 # of cast iron fittings in place at $3.00 per pound.. TD&H recommended payment for 2010#. According to my notes it was agreed NuPac's claim was well taken. The difference of 1554 amounts to $465.00. I recommend a change order based upon the NuPac claim. 5. Schedule II, Bid Item 12, Type II Pipe Bedding In Place NuPac claims a pay quantity of 76 CY of Type II Pipe Bedding which is according to the Montana Public Works Standards used in to replace soft, spongy or otherwise unsuitable material in the trench bottom. NuPac indicates that it encountered groundwater in the trench because the existing sanitary sewer was set up as a "french drain". I am not sure that the NuPac can be held responsible for site conditions which were not at all observable upon inspection or anticipated. Over excavation may have been necessary because of the infusion of ground water from the existing sewer. TD&H has recommended payment for 18 CY of material. The difference in money amounts to $1,044.00. I would recommend a change order to NuPac based unforseen circumstances. Caveat: If NuPac knew or should have known, with the exercise of reasonable diligence, of the groundwater problem, there is potentially a defense to the claim. This would involve, however, require an involved fact-finding process. 6. Schedule II, Bid Item 13, Imported Backfill, Sewer NuPac has requested a change order for placement of 5550 CY of imported backfill involved the sewer excavation on the Woodland Court project. TD& H has recommended payment for 3074 CY. The situation here is very similar to the situation discussed in 3 above. Additionally, Construction Specifications, General Requirements, Section 01010, Measurement and Payment, If 3.4.4.1, states as follows: 3.4.4 Excavation. 3.4.4.1 Trench Excavation and Backfill for Sanitary Sewers, Service Lines and Storm Drains. Trench excavation and backfill shall be measured by the cubic yard of excavated material in its original for and condition prior to removal. The volume of excavation and backfill shall be iAwp\woodct.wpd Page 6 of 8 computed in the following manner: 1. The length of trench shall be determined by measuring along the centerline of the pipe from the face of the manhole through all manholes to the end of the pipe being installed. Three feet will be added to the trench length at each service lines. The width of intersecting trenches will be subtracted if that width was previously included in trench excavation quantities. 2. The depth of the excavation shall be determined by measuring from the ground or payment surface down to the flowing of the pipe. Measurement to the flowline of the pipe shall be increased by 0.4 feet to allow for bedding material and pipe wall thickness. All measurements shall be to the nearest 0.1 feet. 3. The width of the trench shall be considered to be as shown on Construction Standard No. 02201-3 (Does not exist) for Type I Excavation or 3.50 feet for Type 2 excavation for the full depth of the trench regardless of the actual trench width or shape actually constructed. 4. Excavation for manholes shall be considered to be 25 S.F. times the depth from the top of the manholes to a point 0.4 below the manhole base. The measured numbered of cubic yards of trench excavation for sanitary sewers, service lines, and storm drains will be paid at the contract unit price per cubic yard for "Excavation Type 2 with Type A Backfill" or Type 1 Excavation with Type B Backfill" as shown on the proposal form and on the drawings. The contract bid price shall include the cost of all excavating, select backfill, backfill, compaction shoring, bracing, dewatering, asphalt and concrete removal, disposal of unusable materials, asphalt, and concrete and all other items incidental or necessary to the complete work except as otherwise provided in these specifications. One problem with the above, as noted is that Construction Standard No. 02201-3 does not exist. A scrivener's error will not create an ambiguity in a contract. Additionally, it should be noted that Section 02221, Montana Public Works Standards contains the necessary language describing the work to be done, and references Construction Standard No. 02221- 1. Any ambiguity created by the typo -error is cleared up in Section 02221. Contracts shall generally be construed as a whole so as to not create an ambiguity. NuPac requested change order amounts to 2476 CY @ $13.00 per yard for a total of $32,188.00. Based upon the foregoing, I believe TD&H's analysis to be correct and recommend that the Council deny the change order under Schedule II, Bid Item 13. i:lwp\woodct.wpd Page 7 of 8 7. Schedule III, Bid Item 1, Subbase Course Material in Place NuPac is claiming a change order for placement of 1807 CY of subbase course material placed upon the site as subbase course material under the Street Paving Improvement portion of the contract. TD&H recommends that the City deny the claim because the work was under the Schedule awarded to A-1. A couple of questions present themselves on this issue. Was NuPac directed by TD&H to deliver the material? Was the material subbase course material or borrow? Why was there not a corresponding reduction in A-1 contract for the material? TD&H states that the material placed by NuPac was imported borrow for which NuPac was compensated under Schedule I, Bid Item 2. Because the resolution of this issue involves a - factual dispute, not subject to either legal or engineering resolution, I must respectfully decline to recommend payment for this change order in any amount. The disputed amount involves $22,134.00. In total I am recommending NuPac receive a change order for Schedule I, Bid Item 2, (Imported Borrow), Schedule I, Bid Item 2, (Excavation Type 1 w/ Type A Backfill, Schedule II, Bid Item 11, (Cast Iron Fittings), and Schedule II, Bid Item 12,( Type II Pipe Bedding In Place) totaling $5,614.00. In reviewing the contract documents and related documentation within my possession for his memo, I have reason to question some of drafting techniques and construction administration practices employed by TD&H. While on most points, I have agreed with TD&H's assessment, I cannot say that the practice of letting change orders go until the contract has been completed and then having what appears to be a catch-up change order is an acceptable practice. Further it appears that day-to-day monitoring of the construction process seems to have been weak because the City was not informed of problems in a timely manner. i:\wp\woodct.wpd Page 8 of 8 04/28/97 MON 16:54 PA% 6053348480 April28, 1997 THE RAMKOTA COMPANIES Y' /C � 001 REGENCY INNS MANAGEMENT, INC. A Consultant and Management Corporation W. Larry Gallagher, Director Planning Department PO Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903-1997 RE: Hapen Park Dear Larry: We would like to take this opportunity to respond to your inquiry, No, Regency Inns Management, Inc, will not be suing or standing in the way of the City of Kalispell finalizing its deal on Haven Park. We would like to go on record that should the Haven deal fall througb, we would appreciate receiving notification and being given the opportunity to readdress the bid issue. We would appreciate the opportunity to review the bid package for the land across the street by the airport. For us to be interested W bidding, however, we would need to see a bid package that addresses the issues of" shopping bids", accepting the best bid the first time, and keeping all bids "confidential". Sincerely, 042tDIJW 2600 NORTH LOWSZ AVENUE 0 SIOUX FALLS, SOI H DAKOTA 57107 - (605) 334-2372 . FAX (605) 334.8480 Raihead County Boardof Commissioners (406) 758-5503 Howard W. Gipe Robert W. Wame Dale W. Williams April 2, 1997 To: Honorable Mayor Rauthe - City of Kalispell Honorable Mayor Stephens - City of Whitefish Honorable Mayor Christman - City of Columbia Falls Mr. Mert Webb, City -Manager - City of Columbia Falls Mr. Dale Ennor, City Manager - City of Whitefish Mr. Clarence Krebbs, City Manager - City of Kalispell From: Earl W. Bennett, Administrative Assistant - Flathead County Gentlemen: In reference to the discussion at the 5th Monday Meeting, held this past Monday, I have put together a brief synopsis of those services which are performed by Flathead County offices, and paid by the county -wide mill levy. This list is not totally inclusive nor in great detail. However, it will give each of you some idea as to those services which are available to all Flathead County citizens, whether they live within the limits of an individual city or are living in the rural county area. If I can answer any questions, relative to any of these services, please feel free to contact me at 758-5503. Very Truly Yours, OFFICE OF FLATHEAD COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AKC//�. Earl W. Bennett Administrative Assistant 800 South Main ** Kalispell, Montana 59901 ** Fax (406) 758-5861 SERVICES PROVIDED TO ALL COUNTY RESIDENTS INCLUDING THOSE LIVING INSIDE CITY LIMITS AND FUNDED THROUGH THE COUNTY WIDE HILL LEVY Clerk and Recorder: Filing of all legal documents including, but not limited to. birth and death certificates, all local, state and federal liens filed against individuals and/or properties, real estate mortgages. etc. Plat Room: Filing of all Certificates Transfers and other divisions of within the County and the owners Treasurer: of Survey. Subdivisions, Family land. Listing of all properties thereof. Record keeping for all cities, county and school districts of funds received from tax notices and the distribution thereof. Licensing of all motor vehicles, boats, trailers , trucks; etc. Taking a lot of flack for the "excessive and ever increasing taxes" levied by the individual jurisdictions but collected by the County so it is the Counties fault the taxes are going up and running everyone out of the county. Collection of delinquent taxes, payment of all general obligation and special bond issues of the different entities and RSIDS/SIDS. Superintendent of Schools: Budget oversight for all schools, including those within the Cities and well as the rural schools. Establishment and review of school bus routes. Oversees the School Cooperative Program. Holds hearings for disputed matters relative to the schools. Computer Services: Maintains computerized records of all taxes, specials and changes for all cities as well as the county. Parks and Recreation: Provides recreational programs for all county residents and children including those from the three cities. Note: We just received a letter from Ms. Doreen Marcial. President of the Whitefish Park Board, on City of Whitefish stationery. stating "Many communities. including Whitefish. do not have the staff or the facilities to accommodate the recreational needs of the citizens." Page 2 County Attorney: Prosecutes all felony cases and cases not handled by the municipal courts of the individual cities. Acts as legal council for all schools. District and Justice Courts: Provides defense attorneys for all indigent. Tries all cases not tried by the municipal courts. Provides incarceration of all Juvenile offenders which must be detained. Sheriff: Provides back-up for all city law enforcement, including SWAT team when necessary. Provides drug investigation and arrest of persons dealing in this illegal activity, often in cooperation with the city law enforcement. Provides for the incarceration of all persons arrested and awaiting trial and often even after trial for as long as a year. Youth Court (Juvenile Probation): Handles all juvenile related concerns, whether from the cities or the county. Aging Services (RSVP and COA): Provides elderly and handicapped programs, meals. transportation and volunteers for service county -wide, including the cities. Health Department: Provides health services for all entities within the county through tax funds and grant funds. Library: Provides library services to all communities in the county through the main library at Kalispell and through branck libraries in Columbia Falls, Bigfork and Whitefish. This is a short list of services provided for all Flathead County citizens whether they live within the limits of a city jurisdiction or in the county areas. I am sure there are other examples of services that are provided on a county wide basis and those services are covered by our county -wide mill levy. Page 3 In addition, it should be noted that city residents do not pay taxes to support county roads, nor do county residents pay taxes to support city streets. While this may result in a 'wash' as to use, it certainly does not relate to ownership or cost of maintenance. This is especially true when the city annexes property on both sides of the road but does not annex the road. The county loses the taxes from that property but then has to continue to maintain the road. Therefore, it is incumbent upon the cities to annex the road whenever it annexes property along the road. I also believe that the statutes require this. Refer to Sections 7-2-4732 (3) H.C.A. and 7-2-4735 (2) M.C.A.