Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Torrington council tables $226,178 Church Street bridge change-order request pending bond accounting
Summary
The council voted to table a $226,178.60 request for design-initiated change orders on the Church Street bridge (CTDOT Bridge No. 03976) and asked staff for a full accounting of bonded projects before reconsidering the expense.
Torrington — The Torrington City Council on Nov. 10 tabled a request to authorize the mayor to approve design‑initiated change orders totaling $226,178.60 for rehabilitation of the Church Street bridge (CTDOT Bridge No. 03976).
City staff told the council the work — described in a city engineer memo dated 11/05/2025 — grew out of inspections and revealed concrete deck deficiencies and additional paving/shimming work that had to be completed while the road was closed. Staff said the change orders would be covered from the city's pavement bond funds. "They're part of the project, but outside of the original contract request for the approved amount of expenditure," said an unidentified city staff member during the discussion.
Councilors questioned why contingency funds for the project were not used and why the council had not been informed earlier. One council member said, "It doesn't really sit very well," and another said they were uncomfortable voting on an amount that should have been addressed in the original project specifications or presented to the council earlier. Staff explained some repairs were unforeseen, including concrete patching discovered after milling and inspections, and that some expenses had to proceed to avoid extended road closures.
The original awarded contract amount referenced in the discussion was $1,000,004.74; councilors noted a contingency figure in the record described both as $60,000 and $70,000 during the discussion and asked staff to clarify the numbers. Council members asked for a detailed accounting of the bonded projects fund and remaining balances before taking further action.
After the exchange, a motion to table the request until the next council meeting prevailed on a roll call (tabled, 4–1). The presiding officer directed staff to provide a full accounting of bonded project funds at the next meeting so councilors could consider using contingency funds for railing replacement and prepare a separate request for the other unforeseen items.
The council expects the accounting and a revised funding proposal at its next meeting, scheduled for the following Monday.
