Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Buttonwoods Pipeline topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council splits over Buttonwoods Avenue pipeline after Stantec change order; committee holds project, council later advances it
Summary
Council members were sharply divided over a $31,000 change order for additional borings on the Buttonwoods Avenue pipeline replacement after an engineering report showed liquefiable soils; the finance committee voted to hold for vendor testimony, but the full council later voted 7–2 to proceed and asked the administration to get vendor answers on timing and costs.
Council members clashed over a $31,000 change order for the Buttonwoods Avenue water-main replacement after geotechnical work showed subsurface conditions different from initial borings.
Public Works and Water Division staff said initial borings taken in August reached 50 feet but indicated loose, liquefiable sands; Stantec recommended three additional borings to 85 feet to confirm a safe depth for directional drilling. Christy Moretti, Public Works director, described the extra line items as $20,000 for contractor borings and $11,000 for Stantec time and expense, and said the channel boring option would not be used. "We have funding available to us to spend," Moretti said when asked whether the city could absorb the additional cost.
Council members pressed why the August borings and the report’s implications did not reach the council until Nov. 6, three days after the administration presented the project for approval. "They knew it in August," one council member said during the debate, arguing the vendor should have disclosed the deeper-boring requirement earlier. Bill Vicente, chief staff to Mayor Picozzi, warned that delaying the project risked missing a six-month window with the Army Corps of Engineers and could prolong service interruptions for Buttonwood’s residents.
In finance committee, members voted to hold the item until the next meeting so the vendor (Stantec) could appear; the committee vote was recorded as 2 in favor, 1 opposed. On the full council floor, members debated whether the vendor’s appearance should be required before the city approves the added borings. The council ultimately voted 7–2 for favorable action rather than holding, while directing the administration to obtain clarifying answers from the vendor and to report back.
Next steps: Stantec or the vendor is expected to be asked to explain the August timeline and confirm whether the 85-foot borings will avoid additional cost increases; the city will track whether the work remains within the original budget envelope for the overall replacement once borings confirm constructability.
