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.