Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wastewater Change Orders topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lakeland staff seek $131,005 appropriation after unforeseen pump‑station change orders
Summary
City staff detailed four change orders on the North Side pump‑station replacement project that raise the overall contract cost but will largely be offset by contractor reimbursements and existing project funds; the commission was told the city's net impact would be $131,005.30 and asked to appropriate that amount.
City management told the Lakeland City agenda study that several unforeseen conditions and a mandated refrigerant change led to four change orders on the North Side pump‑station replacement project, increasing the project cost before reimbursements.
"Change order 9" was described by the city manager as driven by site conditions: an old manhole needed replacement, additional drainage work was added to mitigate flooding from U.S. 98, and potable‑water and electrical modifications were required. The city manager said the work for that change order totaled $292,026. Change order 7 added $5,000 because the EPA mandated a new refrigerant effective 2025‑01‑01. Change order 10 reflected a design error; the city expects contractors Chastain and Felix to cover $90,000 of that amount ($45,000 each). Change order 11 required removing about 170 feet of an undocumented 18‑inch abandoned force main at a cost of $47,606.
Accounting for $90,000 in contractor pass‑through reimbursements and $213,102 remaining project funds, the manager said the city's net exposure is $131,005.30 and asked the commission to authorize an appropriation to cover that gap. "The change orders amount to $344,632… the total impact to the city for the change orders we've discussed is $131,005.30," the city manager said. Staff emphasized that the original contract was in the neighborhood of $7.2 million and characterized the additions as typical site‑condition and regulatory adjustments.
No formal vote occurred at the agenda study; commissioners asked clarifying questions about which contractors would absorb costs and about the city's contingency planning for future projects. Staff said the practice of including contingencies in future contract approvals is intended to reduce emergency purchase orders and keep projects moving without demobilizing contractors.
The item will be on the commission agenda for appropriation action; the agenda‑study discussion provided the dollar breakdown and the staff recommendation to add the requested appropriation.
