Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wasatch Retaining Wall topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District hires geotechnical consultant for Wasatch retaining‑wall review; borings delayed by contractor availability
Summary
Provo trustees received an update on the Wasatch retaining‑wall investigation: the district hired Langan for geotechnical analysis, AGEC and the district’s construction manager remain involved, and drilling schedules for soil borings are delayed, holding up final determination of responsibility and payment.
At the study session the Provo School District reported progress on the Wasatch retaining‑wall issue and said the district has engaged a third‑party geotechnical firm to evaluate subsurface conditions and recommend repairs.
The district hired Langan, a national geotechnical consulting firm, to perform borings and an engineering review; Langan will analyze soil borings, evaluate compaction and drainage conditions and provide a final report one to two weeks after borings are completed. District staff said the borings are delayed because drilling companies are difficult to schedule at this time of year and the district is coordinating with AGEC, which has been performing other borings on site.
Preliminary findings presented to trustees indicate there was no drainage behind or below the wall as constructed; Langan has recommended adding a drainage system and possibly regrading the slope to reduce erosion risk. District staff said they are awaiting the combined findings from AGEC and Langan to determine whether the issue was an engineering oversight, contractor error, or other cause.
Because financial responsibility remains unresolved, the district said it has not released retainage payments requested by the contractor. The construction manager under a CMGC (construction manager/general contractor) contract — referenced as Hogan in the discussion — was described as the district’s representative; board members said the CMGC should continue to coordinate with subcontractors but that the district will withhold retainage until the third‑party reports clarify where responsibility lies.
Trustees said the district is collecting multiple technical reviews to ensure solutions address compaction, groundwater and drainage. The district did not set a payment schedule for retainage and said it would await the consultants’ final report before making a payment decision.
