Cascade Township delays vote on Cascade Road pedestrian bridge change order after county-led repairs increase scope and cost

Engineers and contractors told Cascade Charter Township trustees on June 24 that unplanned county-directed repairs to the Thornapple River pedestrian bridge uncovered badly deteriorated deck joints that required immediate attention and resurfacing, extending construction by about four to five weeks and triggering additional inspection and administration work.

Engineer Eric Thorne and representatives from Spalding DeDecker and Davis Construction said the scope of the township’s pedestrian enhancements — new pedestrian crossings, vehicle-rated barrier, decorative work, lighting, brick pavers and fencing — has not changed from the project approved at bid. The contractors said the extra time and charges resulted primarily from county work to replace deck joints and resurface the deck once the damage was discovered during construction, not from a redesign of the township’s pedestrian improvements.

Contractors said Kent County elected to perform joint replacement and resurfacing after partially opening sections of the deck and finding the joints had disintegrated; Davis Construction representatives said the county agreed to invoice its work directly to the county and that Davis invoiced the county about $415,000 for that county-directed work. Separately, the engineer requested a $66,380 change order for additional construction administration and inspection hours related to the extended schedule.

Public commenters and some trustees pushed back. Resident Doug Lee asked why the project shows large overrun figures in the budget packet and whether the project scope had been changed; he cited numbers in the packet and sought an explanation of how costs rose. Virtual commenter Scott Vansalcma said the engineering contract assumed a shorter construction schedule and questioned whether engineers coordinated sufficiently with construction crews, arguing the taxpayer should not cover avoidable overruns.

Trustees pressed contractors and staff on three points: (1) how much of the additional time and cost is the county’s responsibility versus the township’s; (2) whether formal (written) approvals, or only verbal direction, authorized the extra work; and (3) which funding sources would cover township liabilities. Staff and engineers said state grant funding, CARES funds and DDA dollars were expected sources for the township’s portion and that the county’s actions and invoices were separate decisions by Kent County.

Given lingering questions about cost allocation and documentation, trustees did not vote on the change order that evening. Several trustees asked staff, the manager and the engineer to meet with Kent County to clarify who is paying for each element and to return with recommendations at a future meeting. A trustee also suggested tabling the item to allow those conversations to occur.

Next steps: staff will confer with county representatives and the project team to document approvals and cost responsibility and will return the change-order and any proposed budget amendment to the board for formal action at a subsequent meeting.