Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Treatment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee agrees to forward engineering contract amendment for chlorine conversion at water plant
Summary
The Buildings and Utilities Committee agreed to forward a staff recommendation that the council authorize a $26,300 amendment to the consultant contract with Jones and Henry Engineers for design work on a chlorine gas-to-liquid conversion at the water treatment plant, bringing the consultant total to $285,370; no formal roll-call vote was recorded.
The Buildings and Utilities Committee agreed Monday to forward a staff recommendation that the council authorize the Director of Public Service and Safety to amend the professional services agreement with Jones and Henry Engineers of Cincinnati, Ohio to add design services for the water treatment plant chlorine conversion project.
The assistant engineer told the committee the amendment is a $26,300 change order that would raise the consultant contract total to $285,370. "We are asking for a change order ... to bring the new contract total to $285,370," the assistant engineer said, explaining the extra funds are needed to cover additional design and construction-phase support as the project moves into construction.
The request traces to a contract council approved in 2023 for $226,430 and an earlier change order tied to county building-department review. The assistant engineer said county requirements to sprinkle portions of the new construction required hiring an architectural firm and that other smaller construction issues have arisen. As one safety-related change, staff added "what's called ship's ladders"—stair-like ladders with handrails—after an employee injury. "This is ... a means for them to get up over and around," the assistant engineer said, describing the ladders as a safer feature for employees.
Staff also said the consultant helped prepare a $1,000,000 grant application for the project; the application was not successful but staff noted the consultant expended time on that effort. During procurement, staff changed bidding documents from a single lump-sum contract to a format that includes alternates so specific items could be bid separately.
On project costs, the assistant engineer said the requested $26,300 is not included in this year’s budget but that the water fund has sufficient money to cover it. Staff told the committee that council had authorized $2,975,000 for construction but current projections put anticipated construction closer to $2,700,000, which staff described as implying roughly $270,000 in possible construction savings. When pressed by Mister Phillips about certainty, a staff member warned "may," not "will," because construction had only just started; later the assistant engineer cited a $276,000 figure when discussing savings.
Mister Phillips asked whether the sprinkler requirement was driven by building code or by chlorine safety; the assistant engineer said it is essentially a code issue tied to the portion of the plant considered new construction. The assistant engineer also said the front of the plant must be enclosed to fit new liquid-chlorine storage tanks as part of the conversion from chlorine gas.
Mister Phillips moved to "proceed as staff is requesting." The chair agreed and the committee decided to move forward; no formal roll-call vote was recorded in the transcript. The assistant engineer said staff expects construction to be complete by June. The chair then adjourned the meeting.
Clarifying details: the consultant change order amount requested is $26,300; the consultant contract total if approved would be $285,370; the original 2023 consultant contract was $226,430; council had previously authorized up to $2,975,000 for construction while current projections put construction near $2,700,000 (staff gave both ~$270,000 and $276,000 as estimated savings at different points).
