Adams County asks commissioners to advance $5.4M change order for 60 Second Avenue as utility delays and contamination swell costs

Adams County public-works staff asked commissioners to advance large change orders to close out two major road projects after utility delays and previously unseen environmental contamination pushed the tab far past original estimates.

Public Works Director Bridal Staley told the board that Change Order 5 for the 60 Second Avenue project requests $5,400,000 and that the project also has a history of four earlier change orders that used contingency or extended time. “The change orders that were talking about today . . . are larger in both cases than wed prefer them to be, due to utility delays and environmental contamination issues,” Staley said. The project crosses Broadway and, staff said, sits atop multiple historic landfills; one older landfill was discovered after design was complete.

Why it matters: the county is the project owner and ultimately must pay contractors and site costs. Staff said much of the additional cost comes from repeated traffic-control and potholing work, dewatering and hazardous-material handling tied to landfill material, and delay-related mobilization expenses when utilities do not meet commitments. Staff named Xcel Energy and permitting friction with the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) as primary causes of schedule disruption.

What staff told commissioners

- Brian (public works) and construction staff said Xcel Energy failed to meet mobilization and permitting commitments for segments where the county required utility relocation; when Xcel could not gain a CDOT permit, the general contractor relocated crews to other areas of the project and returned later, increasing traffic-control, remobilization and potholing costs.

- Steve, a county construction inspector, described environmental remediation steps: “When you run into a landfill, you have to treat that water. You can no longer just do, do water the same way,” he said, describing added dewatering and treatment required to meet CDPHE standards.

- The presentation identified 820 hours of additional potholing charged to the change order (staff listed a line-item cost of roughly $307,500 for those locate and potholing efforts) and said repeated potholing is required by law each time a site is re-entered or new infrastructure is installed.

York Street Phase 2

County staff also reviewed York Street Phase 2, a related but separate project that has accumulated change orders tied to utility issues and illegal dumping on the construction site. Staff said earlier change orders included roughly $1.2 million and later items added about $2.6 million; an additional $250,000 in the most recent change order was set aside to remediate contaminated materials from illegal dumping. The general contractor on York Street Phase 2 is HEI Civil, and staff reported recurring communication and performance concerns with a subcontractor that county procurement is documenting.

Options and recovery

Staff told commissioners the county can submit claims to utilities such as Xcel Energy, and that administrative or judicial remedies exist, but recovery is uncertain and would likely require litigation or Public Utilities Commission involvement. Commissioners pressed whether contractors could be reassigned or denied payment when utilities delay; staff said the county contract contains standard clauses that relieve contractors of liability for delays outside their control and that liquidated-damages provisions apply only when contractors miss dates the county has not approved for excusal.

Board direction and follow-ups

Commissioners pressed staff for improved upfront environmental assessment, clearer utility scheduling commitments, and better internal tracking of potholing and change-order hours. County managers agreed to executive engagement with Xcel Energy, to stop fronting utility costs under certain partnership models, and to pursue after-action reviews for the projects. Staff also proposed three third-party reviews: a performance audit of CIP/project management, a financial audit of billing and contingency use, and a legal review of contract language allocating delay risk. Staff said additional environmental costs remain likely as leachate and containment issues are being evaluated by outside counsel and environmental contractors.

Context and next steps

Staley said negotiations reduced the initial vendor ask from about $7 million down to the $5.4 million now before the board. She asked whether the board was willing to advance the change orders to a public hearing next week; no formal vote was recorded during the session. Commissioners directed staff to provide a checklist of reforms and to return with the third-party audits and a scope for an owner's representative focused on environmental construction oversight.

Ending

The county said it will continue to pursue any recoveries it can from utilities and to tighten upfront assessments for future projects; commissioners tasked staff to deliver the audit scopes, a tighter environmental review approach and clearer project reporting before final approvals.