Item C24
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date: 8-15-01
Division: Public Works
Bulk Item: Yes X
No
Department: Engineering
AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Approval of Change Order No.1 for Little Torch Roads Ill.
ITEM BACKGROUND: During construction it became apparent that an error was made in computing
the quantities used for bidding Little Torch Roads III. The contract specifies that payment will be made
based on actual quantities constructed by the contractor. Had the error been discovered prior to bidding the
bid quantities would have been adjusted and the bid price would have been exactly equal to the revised
amount following this change order.
.:
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: On October 18, 2000 the Board approved a contract with
General Asphalt Co., Inc. in the amount of $648,928.90.
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: Change in quantities. Unit Price remains the same.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval as stated above.
TOTAL COST: $83.520.40
BUDGETED: Yes X NO
Cost to County: $83.520.40
REVENUE PRODUCING: YES
NO
AMOUNT PER MONTH
YEAR
APPROVED BY: coun~ ~lPnn:haSing_
Item Prepared by: M
David S. Koppel, P.E., County Eng~ '
DIVISION DIRECTOR APPROVAL: t1 .~
Dent PIerce, Division Director
Risk Management
c9//Io/
DOCUMENTATION: Included ~ To Follow
Not Required
DISPOSITION:
AGENDA ITEM #
/--r!-~
MONROE COUNTY
ENGThfEERThfG/CONSTRUCTION M ANAGEM ENT
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER
PROJECT TITLE: Little Torch Kev Roads III
CHANGE ORDER NO: 1
Total Previous Change Orders
Current Change Order
% of Original Contract Amount
% of Contract after Prior C/O's
Original Contract Amount
Revised Contract Amount
Change in contract time
$ 0.00
$ 83,520.40
12.87%
12.87%
$648.928.90
$732.449.30
o
Detailed description of change order and justification:
An error in bid quantities was discovered durinq construction. Bid Unit Prices have not chanqed. Had the
error been found prior to biddinq. the quantities would have been adiusted and the end result would be
the same. Chanqes are identified on the attached sheet.
.:
CONTRACTOR:
a.d?
DaVid~(9~
Dent Pierce
Date
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS:
fj-/-ol
Date
rill/o/
Date
COUNTY ENGINEER:
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
James L. Roberts
Date
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
(SEAL)
ATTEST: DANNY L. KOLHAGE, CLERK
By
By'"
Mayor/Chairman
Deputy Clerk
CMD007-11/03/97
Change Order No: 1
1. Item 5 - Optional Base Course: Add 2,408sy @ $8.00/sy
2. Item 6 - Asphalt Leveling Course:Add 8,132sy @ $3.00/sy
3. Item 7 - Asphalt Surface Course: Add 8, 132sy @ $4.00/sy
4. Item 10 - 6" Yellow Solid: Add 524lf@ $0.70/lf
5. Item 11 - 6" Yellow Skip: Add 500lf@ $0.75/lf
6. Item 12 - Bike Crossing Stripe: Add 460lf @ $2.20/lf
7. Item 13 - 6" White Stripe: Add 4,478If@ $0.70/lf
8. Item 14 - 24" White Stopbar: Add 321f@ $3.00/lf
9. Item 15 - "Stop" Message: Add 2 ea @ $100/ea
10. Item 16 - Reflective Markers: Add 62 ea @ $4.00/ea
11. Item 17 - Bike Lane Diamond: Add 26 ea @ $50.00/ea
12. Item 20 - Traffic Signs: Add 3 ea @ $200.00/ea
Total
....
= $19,264.00
= $24,396.00
= $32,528.00
= $ 366.80
= $ 375.00
= $ 1,012.00
= $ 3,134.60
= $ 96.00
= $ 200.00
= $ 248.00
= $ 1,300.00
= $ 600.00
= $83,520.40
"
Change Order Attachment per Ordinance No. 004-1999
. Change Order was not included in the original contract specifications. Yes i:8JNo 0
If Yes, explanation: An error in bid quantities was discovered during construction.
. Change Order was included in the original specifications. Yes 0 No i:8J
If Yes, explanation of increase in price:
.:
. Change Order exceeds $25,000 or 5% of contract price (whichever is greater). Yes i:8J No 0
If Yes, explanation as to why it is not subject for a calling for bids:
The change order reconciles the plans with the quantities. The work was clearly shown on the plans but the quantities
measured for payment did not match the bid quantities.
. Project architect approves the change order. Yes 0 No 0 N/A
If no, explanation of why:
. Change Order is correcting an error or omission in design document. Yes i:8J No 0
Should a claim under the applicable professional liability policy be made? Yes 0 No i:8J
Explain: The cost to the County would have been exactly the same because payment is based on actual quantities
completed.
.-1..