Water board recommends approval of $520,000 amendment for Old Hampden utilities work near Swedish and Craig hospitals

The Englewood City Water and Sewer Board on Wednesday recommended that City Council approve Amendment No. 2 to the Old Hampden Utilities Improvements construction contract, a negotiated change order of $520,000 stemming from additional work and delay tied to risk mitigation on an 18‑inch transmission main near Swedish and Craig hospitals.

The board heard from Peter, director of South Platte Renew and the water utility, who told members the work is part of utilities improvements done ahead of the project’s complete‑streets top side phase. “This is right near Swedish and Craig hospitals,” Peter said, describing the location and the critical nature of the line.

Peter said staff and the contractor agreed to install three live insertion valves — specialized valves that can be installed while the line remains in service — to provide incremental control while excavations proceeded. He said crews decided that additional valves and a revised methodology were necessary because that transmission main is vulnerable: if it failed it could “drain the tanks and drain the system.”

Peter described the negotiation with the contractor: the firm initially submitted a change order request of roughly $800,000; after months of negotiations staff and the contractor agreed to a $520,000 amendment. Peter told the board the water fund will absorb the majority of the cost while other project funds (including the stormwater fund) will take smaller shares. He characterized the $520,000 figure as the total negotiated payment to the contractor and identified approximately $438,000 as the water‑fund portion of that total.

Board members pressed staff on alternatives and accountability. A member asked whether work had already been completed; Peter confirmed the field work was done in March and said the amendment documents the negotiated settlement after the fact. Another board member suggested the city and contractor should share responsibility for cost overruns; Peter and other staff explained the trade‑offs of pausing a complex live‑line project versus continuing with mitigations to avoid catastrophic system failure.

Peter said the city used internal and outside engineering review to validate the necessity and cost of the additional valves and other work. Board member Ty asked whether a third‑party pricing review had been done; Peter said both the city engineer and an owner’s adviser reviewed and validated the costs.

The board moved and approved the staff recommendation; the item will go to City Council for final authorization. During the discussion Peter and others told the board that while rejecting the amendment remains an option, doing so could push the dispute toward litigation and would not restore the work already completed.

The board’s discussion included operational context: staff explained why the insertion valves were placed at multiple control points, including on either side of the hospital connection, and that one of the other change orders added a redundant feed to the hospital to increase resiliency. Peter said the valves cost about $100,000 each to install on an 18‑inch live main and that the valves reduced the risk that an excavation would trigger a larger, uncontrolled failure.

The board approved the staff recommendation by voice vote. Chair Moore asked “All in favor, please say aye,” and the motion carried. The amendment will proceed to City Council for final action.