Second Street deadline extended to Oct. 19

Colby Second Street construction is behind schedule as soil moisture and contractor errors have extended the project. The project was scheduled to be able to be driven on by residents on Oct. 14. That deadline has come and gone.

The City of Colby public works committee decided to allow Melvin three extra work days to complete the project, pushing the deadline to Oct. 19. After that deadline, Melvin could be paying $1,200 to MSA for daily engineering costs as well as $1,200 in liquidated damages to the city of Colby if the council decides to pursue those damages at the council’s Nov. meeting.

The committee met on Wednesday, Oct. 12 to discuss what action to take to round out the end of the project. Committee members debated for over an hour while they learned and discussed the final time line for the project. Dan Borchardt and Mike Voss of MSA were in attendance and they issued a construction update to the committee while notifying the committee that Melvin would be asking for additional days to complete the project.

Borchardt said the company is behind schedule because of circumstances they couldn’t have forecasted during the bidding process.

“Really what Melvin is claiming here is that they have a change in conditions than what they anticipated during the bidding process,” Borchardt said. “It’s adding time. They are doing testing and trying to figure out what’s all going on here.”

The biggest issue during the project has been the moisture that has been in the trenches that have been dug, specifically at the north end of the Second Street project area. The company expressed its concerns to MSA who put together a letter for the committee which described what Melvin has been up against and what they could have potentially done to mitigate the issues.

“[Melvin] feels like they didn’t have a fighting chance to begin with given the high moisture content of the soil,” Borchardt said.

In December of 2021, when the project was bid out, the city bid that the project would take the construction companies 100 days to complete, Melvin came back with a bid of 90 days. The city budgeted for MSA to work the engineering portion of the project for 100 days so giving Melvin three more days wouldn’t cost the city any additional money.

Borchardt laid out the things Melvin could have done differently to avoid delays in construction:

n The pipe crew was lax regarding compaction of trench soils and needed to be reminded by the RPR to compact per the specifications.

n The project site’s existing pavement surface was completely stripped during the removal phase of the project allowing the soils to become saturated and rutted during rain events.

n During utility installation, Melvin removed 100 percent of the storm sewer resulting in water that would enter Second Street through the curb flows and underdrain. This allowed off-site water to enter Second Street and saturated the subgrade.

n The grading performed after utility installation did not allow stormwater to drain off the roadway to a sidewalk or alternative location. This contributed to the high soil moisture content.

n Melvin began utility work the week of June 20. This schedule delay may have reduced the amount of drying weather for late season road grading by pushing the road grading into a period of shorter, cooler days making it more difficult to farm and dry the subgrade soils.

He also laid out extenuating circumstances that could be considered to be out of Melvin’s control:

n The city is reconstructing Second Street due to poor subgrade and drainage that contributed to pavement failure. The more porous base aggregate layer under the pavement and lack of existing underdrain trapped water in the aggregate layer within the street. These conditions likely saturated the subgrade soils for a long period of time.

n Based on witnessed sand seams within the trenched areas, Melvin could not reasonably control water that seeped into the trench. The city would have had to pay for granular fill to replace soils in these areas that were in marginal condition based on the moisture content.

n If wet soils would have been discovered during the design phase of the project, it may have prompted a thicker roadway section but would have also increased the project costs.

n The project was delayed because a pipe order came in at the end of May which was caused by a supply chain issue.

Borchardt also went through a list of improvements that Melvin made to help with the wet soil which will ultimately add value and longevity to the roadway. Borchardt estimated Melvin made $72,250 in un-bid improvements to the roadway which includes $48,000 in excavation below subgrade, $15,600 in borrowed crushed material and $8,650 in virgin material costs.

Borchardt said Melvin asked the city to pay for $5,000 out of the geo grid cost which totaled $13,000. They also asked the city to pay for $2,500 in testing that needed to be done after the contractor struggled with the moisture content of the soil. The testing totaled $5,000 so Melvin stated they would like half of their money paid out by the city. In total, Melvin asked to be paid for about $31,750 of the $72,250 in improvements from the city. The committee, led by council member Dan Hederer, initially had split views on what to do with the proposal that Melvin had laid out for them.

Hederer stated he believed the contractor should be on the hook for the money and the inability to complete the project on time because they bid on the project. He compromised by giving them the three extra days but would not concede the remaining seven extra days that the city could provide without compensating MSA.

He also said he noticed there were days that minimal or no work was being done and that contributed to missing the completion deadline. Hederer and Borchardt both referenced a 2010 Spence Street project that Melvin performed that had similar issues. Hederer said the company should have known the soil they were dealing with and that there could be issues with moisture in the subgrade.

Council members Jason Lindeman and Liz Baumgartner were hesitant to join Hederer in holding the contractors fully accountable but ultimately decided to vote for the denial of Melvin’s proposal and to give them until Oct. 19 to finish before penalties would be assessed.

If Melvin disagrees, the company could file a claim against the city which would be heard by MSA.

n A citizen approached the committee to ask what he should do if Melvin doesn’t get back to him about performing work on his Second Street property. The resident said he was planning to get his driveway done while the construction had everything torn up but didn’t want a cold joint in the middle of his driveway. He was curious if the city would allow him to finish the driveway out to the roadway and then bill Melvin for the cost of the work that was done for them by the resident’s company of choice.

The resident said they already had a contractor lined up to do the rest of the project and when he reached out to American Asphalt, who is doing the paving of Second Street, about the issue, he did not receive a response. The committee ultimately said the issue was between the resident and American Asphalt but Higley said he would make some calls to try and get a response from American Asphalt for the resident.

n The committee decided to recommend that the council replace the water main on Division Street from Monroe Street to Spence Street. The main has had issues over the past couple of months with multiple failures requiring crews to dig up and fix the main.

n The preliminary plans for a cold storage building near the city garage on First Street in Colby were discussed. Ratsch Engineering Company out of Neillsville bid $6,714 to draw up the plans for the project. The committee recommended that the council accept the bid.