Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Village OKs $74,443 change order to undercut police station building pad after proof‑roll failures
Summary
Trustees approved a change order of up to $74,443 to remove unsuitable soils and replace them with compacted stone at the new police station site after proof‑rolls failed following heavy rains; contractor agreed to retract an additional idle‑time charge.
Cottage Grove, Wis. — The Village Board on May 4 approved a construction change order to stabilize the new police station’s building pad after repeated proof‑roll tests indicated the near‑surface soils were unsuitable following historic rains.
Project staff and the geotechnical consultant recommended removal of soft, clayey soils and replacement with firm compacted stone. The general contractor’s undercut proposal totaled $67,639; with the contract’s standard 10% overhead allowance the board approved a change order not to exceed $74,443 to be paid from project contingency.
Village project staff said Riley Construction had initially also included an additional near‑term charge — roughly $26,000 — for idle crews while the site dried. Staff objected and the contractor agreed to withdraw that idle‑time claim in conversations before the vote. Project staff stressed that delaying corrective work would shift risk to the village and could lead to significantly higher remedial costs later.
Trustees asked what would happen if the board delayed action; staff warned of both contractor idle‑time costs and the potential for more extensive future change orders if foundations were placed on unstable soils. The board approved the change order.
What’s next: The contractor will undercut the specified areas and install compacted stone as specified by the geotechnical engineer. Staff will monitor costs against the project contingency and report material changes to trustees.
Representative quote: “If we did not approve this tonight, we would be looking at incurring costs for the general contractor that’s not going to be working,” staff said, adding the more serious cost exposure would come if foundations were later found to be unsupported by adequate subgrade.
