Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council asks staff to investigate $68,000 increase on Hacienda Road signal project; potential design-engineer error flagged
Summary
Council discussed a disputed roughly $68,000 increase tied to construction-management/inspection work on the Hacienda Road traffic-signal project; staff said the variance stems from additional working days and a pole-height/utility clearance issue that may trace to a design-engineer interpretation; council asked staff to investigate and report back.
The council discussed lingering issues on the Hacienda Road traffic-signal and guardrail project, including disagreements about construction-management billing and a field conflict over signal-pole clearance near overhead utility lines.
Staff told the council that the core dispute arose when the design engineer appears to have treated a utility line as low-voltage (under 7,000 volts) and specified a 4-foot offset, but the line in the field exceeded 12,000 volts and required a larger clearance. That discrepancy delayed work and contributed to additional NV5 construction-management and inspection days. The invoice increase discussed at the meeting was roughly $68,000.
Councilmembers and public commenters debated where responsibility should fall — NV5 (construction management) or the original design engineer (GTS). Several councilmembers asked staff to quantify how much of the NV5 increase was directly attributable to the pole-height issue and to pursue an errors-and-omissions claim if warranted. Public commenter Steve Blagdon argued that NV5 shares responsibility for keeping the project on track.
Staff said they had met with the design engineer (who is overseas) and were awaiting a records review; they recommended continuing the matter so the city attorney and staff can determine responsibility and a negotiation strategy. The council agreed to carry the item for further investigation and possible negotiation with NV5 and the design engineer.
Next steps: staff will review design-engineer records, reconcile NV5 billing with the additional working days, consider an errors-and-omissions claim and return to council with findings and a recommendation.
