Also, here are the notes from the Construction Update on September 10, 2012 concerning change orders:
Construction Update Change Order Conversation from 9/10 Notes
Due to complexity of issues they have encountered they have started weekly meetings with Celli-Flynn to make everyone aware of everything that is out there.
#1- $63000 Nello Const due to moving sewer lines due to request of municipality. Dan Remely completely blamed municipal engineer for increased cost. "Municipal Engineer did not do his job when he approved the plan". Posti chimes in blames the municipal engineer for not being familiar with the paving ordinance. "Why did they not have the specs for the pavement itself....who did not catch that?". Marciniak says the trench ended up having to be dug wider and there were some unforseen conditions on subbase and had to go to subgrade which made this a bigger deal. Posti say municipality may have paved the street with subpar subbase that the SD has to replace. Sounds like what Rick said is true...contractor simply had to dig a bigger hole. But both Dan and Posti would rather point the finger at the municipal engineer.
#2- $30,000 to Nello for work required to relocated storm and sewer lines to clear way for new foundations in athletic and science buildings. Shouldn't the drawings have show this?
#3- Fairfield Electric for duct bank incoming feed for DQ Light for Athletic and Science. Add two pipes and duct bank. DQE looked at loads required by science builing required additional feed. Saved $200,000 on bid but came back $60,000 on the other end per Dan's math.
#4 IT department Fairfield electric add $12000 for cable feed from B Building to MDF in F building. Running Cat3 (phone) cable instead of Cat5 (data).
#5 Vrabel Plumbing $17,000 site utlity conflicts with caisons and side beams. Shouldn't the drawings have shown this?
#6 $25,000 credit to use PVC piping instead of copper for pipes 2.5 inches or smaller in non-plenum rated spaces. All PVC will be indoor. Shouldn't the drawings have shown where they could use indoor PVC vs outdoor rated copper?
#7 Nello $11,000 change one retaining wall for frost depth and $5000 to replace unsuitable material with concrete. Board blames the architect.
Ed with Pyrite...south end of science building and north end of building. Seems to be limited to these sites at this time. Another half to pyritic soil change that has yet to be submitted.
Fairfield $272,000 related to 5kV power loss. OSEPA or Builders Insurance Claim so it should not affect the project. Costs through 8/31. Generators taken offline day before meeting. 8/31-9/9 costs not yet submitted. Emergency repair would NOT be part of budget and likely will be covered by insurance as well. At most the District will be on the hook for the deductible per a question by Goldman.
Original change order for dirt may be gone...using rockpile dirt for fill now so costs from a few months back should be greatly reduced.
Something else I found out, OSHA has something to say about repairs to anchor bolts of columns. http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=INTERPRETATIONS&p_id=25178
Section 1926.755(b) requires the following:
(1) Anchor rods (anchor bolts) shall not be repaired, replaced or field-modified without the approval of the project structural engineer of record.
(2) Prior to the erection of a column, the controlling contractor shall provide written notification to the steel erector if there has been any repair, replacement or modification of the anchor rods (anchor bolts) of that column.
According to §1926.752(a)(2), where anchor bolts have been modified, the controlling contractor must inform the erector that the modification has been done in accordance with the requirements under §1926.755(b). Section 1926.755(b) has two requirements: (1) no repair, replacement or modification shall take place without the approval of the project structural engineer of record, and (2) the erector must be informed in writing that there has been a repair, replacement or modification.I got a response today for my Right To Know:
Mt. Lebanon School District ("the District") is in receipt of your Public Records Request form dated September 6, 2012, which requests, pursuant to the Right to Know Law ("RTKL"), all daily inspection reports from the project’s testing and inspection firm concerning site work for the high school construction project.
Please be advised that the District requires additional time beyond five business days to respond to your request pursuant to Section 902 of the RTKL.
An extension of time is required because the extent and/or nature of the request preclude a response within the required time period.
The District expects to provide a written response to your request and have any responsive public records available within thirty (30) days of today's date, the records are available at an earlierdate.
"#4 IT department Fairfield electric add $12000 for cable feed from B Building to MDF in F building. Running Cat3 (phone) cable instead of Cat5 (data)."
ReplyDeleteAre you kidding me? Who the hell let them plan for Cat3 instead of Cat5? And why aren't they running Cat5e or Cat6? Or do they like to have to rip and replace when the demand for gigabyte to the desktop is realized in the near-term future? I thought this was the "school of the future?" Maybe this was one of the cost cuts they foolishly thought would save them but is going to end up costing them in the long run.
Who planned this project? The first graders?
This was sent to me as a comment about your comment, Jack.
ReplyDelete"Seems like they are overbudget already, and now it's time to cut corners, technology always takes the hit first."
Elaine
"Elaine, so it looks like according to the recent construction update we have incurred additional costs as such:
ReplyDeleteSeptember 10, 2012 Construction Update:
move sewer lines as per Municipality $63,000
relocate lines as per Nello $30,000
additional duct feed as per Fairfield $60,000
Cat3 cable as per Fairfield $12,000
utility conflict issue as per Vrabel $17,000
credit for indoor PCV instead of copper -$25,000
retaining wall modification as per Nello $11,000
replace unsuitable material retaining wall as per Nello $5,000
deductible and possible emergency repair cost for for power line incident unknown
cost savings using Rockpile dirt for fill unknown
Total Additional Cost during recent update timeframe $173,000
Previous change orders $718,492
Grand total Change Orders to date (unknown costs/savings excluded) $891,492
Is this correct? If so, what does this burn rate considering the life of the project indicate, if anything?
-Charlotte Stephenson"
Another comment emailed to me:
ReplyDeleteThat screw up in planning for the network is unforgivable. And their "fix" is only a 1/2 way fix. If someone in the IT department at a real company planned that, they'd be fired so quickly they wouldn't have time to clear out their desk.
Cat3 is 10/mb networking cable that I didn't even think you could buy anymore. No one who had any competence and was planning out a new facility would be installing it. And you'd think the "school of the future" would be using VoIP (voice over IP) where they could maximize the use of the ethernet network for data and voice. And Gigabyte to the desktop is not out of the realm of possible need. With video conferencing (they are going to host classes for Peter's Township over the internet, aren't they?) and with every kid having a network device that they're going to let them put on the network, they'll have full bandwidth saturation on their wireless access points in no time if they don't plan properly. No, they're smarter than the experts. They're putting the network of the 1990's in and then they'll complain that they need to spend more money on IT.
The only thing I can think of is that it was INTENTIONALLY under-spec'ed so they could come under the magic number for the referendum.
One more comment emailed to me:
ReplyDeleteIt took me awhile to figure out the minutes reporting system, but here it is: pages 1 thru 232 cover weekly meetings under the broad category of COORDINATION with a sub-categorization of Construction Issues. To focus on "the rumor" only, I will refer to only those meeting minutes dealing with Summary: Buildings H, J and K, which is just one of some 10 different meeting subjects +/- covered every week. For every following week, the entire file of preceeding weekly meeting minutes is brought foward, repeated and the then current week subject matter added...that is why there are so many pages!
With this as background, I will now list the page numbers for weekly meeting remarks for only what they term buildings H, J, and K and let you review the material to see if you can see anything that might suggest a problem related to "the rumor":
Page 11/455 = weekly meeting of 4/24/2012
19/455 = 4/30/2012
27-28/455 = 5/7/2012
36-37/455 = 5/14/2012
47-48/455 = 5/21/2012
58/455 = 5/30/2012
69/455 = 6/4/2012 - note "Nelson studs welded on the S.O.D."
80/455 = 6/11/2012
90-91/455 = 6/19/202
102-103/455 = 6/27/2012
116/455 = 7/3/2012
128/455 = 7/10/2012
140/455 = 7/17/2012
7/24/2012 = no meeting because RDR (Del Re of PJ Dick - Project Supervisor) on vacation
167/455 = 7/31/2012
179/455 = 8/7/2012
8/14/2012 = no meeting because of electrical accident
201-202/455 = 8/21/2012
From page 233 through 455 the minutes change to the category of SAFETY, and begin with a safety meeting on 4/27/2012, etc., to the end.
This best word to describe this project is: comedy. Anyone experienced in similarly-sized developments can easily figure out that there is a serious absence of proper planning and owner oversight.
ReplyDeleteWorse, while I think the folks on the Board are not remotely capable of managing this project - I believe the errors in pre-development work and oversight could be judged as professionally negligent.
The errors and problems we're seeing now will escalate in scope and cost as this project proceeds. This is absolutely no question in that.
Keep your eyes open, and scrub the documents. And ask for every bit of information you can get your hands on, and compare everything you discover against the approved plans and budgets.
If you don't have the approved plans and budgets -- GET THEM! They are critical tools in evaluating how the project is being constructed and managed. And the REAL total and final project cost.
The update for the paving issue seems to be on page 12 of the PDF. The update is from 4/16/2012:
ReplyDelete04/16/2012 - The stadium entrance at Morgan Drive would be closed that day until Wednesday evening,
04/18, when it would be made available for a lacrosse game. This had been coordinated with and approved
by the Owner.
There were issues regarding the new plan as the Owner was very definitive in that the existing ticket booth
was to remain. RDR was also to provide confirmation that the booth did not contain ACM.
DM stated that he was encountering some large obstructions during the excavation and it was at times causing
some undermining.
I am wondering how Jo and Dan can blame the municipality. Surely they did not in the middle of the night put "large obstructions" around where the school district contractor was going to dig.
Nobody but nobody runs cat3 anymore. It is from the Jurassic Period of IT cabling.
ReplyDelete