Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Construction Contract Dispute topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Contractor seeks $103,000 change order for Martinsville levee work; city urges multi-party review
Summary
A contractor for Reed's Sons requested about $103,000 in additional payment for levee work after field-installed apparatuses were removed because crews said the plans would not work as designed.
At a Board of Works and Safety meeting Monday, a contractor for Reed's Sons asked the city to pay roughly $103,000 in change-order charges after removing apparatuses from a recently completed levee project.
The contractor said crew members and city representatives had worked together in the field to try to make the design function, but "the design itself is at fault," and crews were later asked to remove work that had been installed because vaults and piping were not at a workable elevation. The contractor said detailed time tickets and material records were kept and asked to be compensated for labor and materials related to the extra work.
Board members disputed that the city should bear the expense. Council and board discussion focused on who authorized on-site changes and whether the original plans were correct. Mayor Austin and other members said they could not accept that the city pay the additional amount without first establishing who had authority to approve field adjustments. The board suggested a meeting with the contractor, representatives from HWC and the engineering firm referenced in the record (Banning/Manning), the city’s project representative, and city attorney/administration staff to determine responsibility.
No final payment or formal vote to approve the change order occurred. Instead, board members directed the parties to schedule a detailed review with the city attorney and department heads. One board member said the $103,000 figures "are real" but emphasized that the city needs to determine fault before writing a check.
Separately, the contractor raised a different change-order dispute about chain-link fencing from a subcontractor; board members observed that prior discussion had decided that fence costs were the contractor’s responsibility because measurements and the subcontractor selection were the contractor’s responsibility.
The board recorded no resolution to the $103,000 request at the meeting; staff and the contractor were asked to set a follow-up meeting including legal counsel and engineering representatives.
