Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Belvoir Trailhead Change Order topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee recommends $120K change order for Belvoir Ranch trailhead; one member objects pending energy-company input
Summary
The Finance Committee recommended a contract modification to Full Tilt Services (Fence Track Inc.) for additional work on the Belvoir Ranch Trailhead and access roads, citing turbine proximity and potential gate relocation; one committee member voted no, requesting more information from the wind-energy operator.
The Cheyenne Finance Committee on July 22 recommended approval of contract modification No. 1 to Contract No. 8098 with Fence Track Inc., doing business as Full Tilt Services, for additional work on the Belvoir Ranch Trailhead and access roads. Tom Cobb, the city engineer, said the change order addresses safety and routing changes related to nearby wind turbines and includes a potential gate relocation on state land.
Cobb told the committee the work stems from three issues encountered during design and construction: the access road must be rerouted to stay clear of wind turbine blades, a possible gate relocation through state-owned land (a quoted optional cost of $15,900 appears in the contract backup), and a contract extension because construction will not finish by the original 06/30/2025 completion date. Cobb said the change order funds will come from the Belvoir Ranch Recreation Fund and stated the amount as $120,005.56 in his presentation.
During the motion, the committee recorded a slightly different not-to-exceed figure. A motion to approve passed with a recommendation to the City Council with a recorded “not to exceed” amount of $120,556.50. The inconsistency between the staff-presented amount ($120,005.56) and the motion’s not-to-exceed amount ($120,556.50) was on the record; the committee did not resolve the discrepancy during the meeting.
A substantive dissent occurred: Councilmember Moody said he could not support approval without more information from the energy company about safety risks near turbines and said he would vote no. Moody explained concerns about cattle near turbine blades and requested further input from the turbine operator before he could back the change order. The motion passed despite Moody’s objection.
Discussion versus decision: the committee’s vote was a formal recommendation to the City Council. Cobb provided background and cost details but the committee did not adopt additional conditions pending further consultation with the energy company.
