Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Change Order topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident questions $350,410 change order for Riverfront Quiet Zone; staff says railroad will pay half
Summary
A public commenter at the May 6 Committee of the Whole questioned a $350,410.60 change order to CPKC for the Riverfront Quiet Zone project; public-works staff said the railroad must pay half and that some equipment thought reusable could not be reused.
A Davenport resident pressed the council on May 6 over a $350,410.60 change order to Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) tied to the Riverfront Quiet Zone project, asking why such a substantial cost appeared after initial approvals and warning the city could face higher costs or legal exposure if problems persist.
"How much more is it gonna cost the city? Why change order now? Why wasn't this taken care of prior to approval of the quiet zones?" the resident asked during the public-works section of the Committee of the Whole meeting, noting the project’s prior attention and suggesting the city should have anticipated the issues.
Public-works staff responded that part of the change order arose because equipment the railroad had planned to reuse could not be salvaged once crews uncovered it during construction. Brian Chad, C.M., speaking for staff, stated that there were savings in some locations and increases in others and that "Canadian Pacific Kansas City will be paying half of this particular change over." (Transcript language corrected to identify the railroad as Canadian Pacific Kansas City.)
The change order was listed as change order No. 1 for crossings at Oneida, Cary, Pershing and Harrison within the Riverfront Quiet Zone project and was read into the record as part of a larger public-works slate of 19 items. Staff also noted earlier project planning had produced both savings and increased costs at different locations; the council moved the public-works slate to the consent agenda for formal action at a later consent vote.
Why it matters: The change order represents a material budget question for a high-profile downtown project that has required intergovernmental coordination with the railroad. The resident’s remarks framed the issue as oversight and planning-related; staff said the railroad shares responsibility for the additional work. Council asked staff to provide further cost and responsibility breakdowns prior to final consent adoption.
What’s next: Staff will prepare follow-up detail on cost allocation and the specific items that could not be reused; the change order was advanced with other public-works items to the consent agenda for formal action at the council’s consent meeting.
