Commissioners approve Kilo Construction pay application and change orders for Coffey County airport access road; KDOT stop-work and drainage issues raise extra‑
Loading...
Summary
The board approved pay application No. 2 to Kilo Construction and two change orders (time extension and added culvert work) for the airport access road project, while staff outlined ongoing KDOT permit concerns, drainage disputes with a downstream landowner and the risk of additional local costs beyond the county's CDBG grant.
The Coffey County Board of Commissioners voted to approve pay application No. 2 from Kilo Construction Inc. and two related change orders for the county’s airport access road project. Commissioners also discussed an unresolved KDOT stop‑work order related to encroachment in state right of way and engineers’ concerns about drainage that could require additional local spending.
At the meeting the board authorized payment of pay application No. 2 in the amount of $117,969.39 to Kilo Construction and approved change order No. 3 (dated 08/19/2025) adding 160 calendar days to the project schedule for phase 2 and change order No. 4 (dated 09/04/2025) adding 24‑inch RCP and associated features at a cost of $6,608.07.
Staff said KDOT issued a stop‑work notice on July 22 alleging encroachment in the state right of way; the county is awaiting permit decisions and has appealed to higher levels at the Kansas Department of Agriculture/Department of Health and Environment as needed. Engineers and county staff reported that the constructed grades are likely acceptable but that downstream property owners have expressed concern a project grading change could reduce water flow to a private pond; staff said an additional small culvert or graded ditching might be required to address that concern.
Project funding includes a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) with a stated grant maximum. Staff noted the grant is fully drawn to its maximum allowable amount and that additional expenses arising from re‑work or design corrections are likely to become local expenses, not additional grant reimbursement.
Contractor quantities and field change orders were discussed: county staff and the engineer signed off on completed quantities in the pay application, but commissioners and staff asked the county engineer and project manager to investigate possible engineering or design errors that might shift some additional costs to the engineering firm or contractors.
Commissioners directed staff to arrange a focused work session (including the project engineer, county staff and contractor representatives) to clarify outstanding permit, design and cost‑allocation issues and to report back to the full board. They also approved holding 10% retainage on pay items until project completion, per the project practice discussed in the meeting.
Outcome: pay application No. 2 approved; change orders 3 and 4 approved; staff to pursue state permit resolution and convene a technical work session to evaluate design, remaining work and potential cost obligations.
