My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2020-11-09-minutes-public-works-study-session
>
Meetings
>
2020
>
12. December
>
2020-12-01 10:00 AM - Commissioners' Agenda
>
2020-11-09-minutes-public-works-study-session
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/25/2020 12:54:07 PM
Creation date
11/25/2020 12:49:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting
Date
12/1/2020
Meeting title
Commissioners' Agenda
Location
Commissioners' Auditorium
Address
205 West 5th Room 109 - Ellensburg
Meeting type
Regular
Meeting document type
Supporting documentation
Supplemental fields
Alpha Order
a
Item
Approve Minutes
Order
1
Placement
Consent Agenda
Row ID
69627
Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
110
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
While the construction side of the project was successful, the engineering design side of <br />the project was less successful. The original design called for deep poured in place <br />concrete foundations. The remoteness of the site and long supply haul distance created <br />anxiety on the part of Public Works. Our anxiety was underscored during a mandatory <br />pre-bid site conference required by Public Works. Three responding bidders all declined <br />to submit construction bids on the original design. All three bidders were solicited for <br />their interest in a re -designed project using a 60 -foot bridge on precast foundations — all <br />three expressed interest in that project. Several lessons learned: engage more <br />aggressively on constructability issues with consultant designers early in project <br />development and recognize no one knows this County better than Public Works. It also <br />reinforces for staff the value to stop a project going in a bad direction and regroup — even <br />if project design costs are lost. In the case of Big Boulder Bridge Replacement, the <br />outcome was favorable largely because staff was thoughtful post design and was willing <br />to take risk redesigning the project on a fast track with a cooperative consultant. A <br />project photo is provided as EXHIBIT 1. <br />FISCAL UMPACTS: <br />Total project engineering and construction costs for the project approximate $1 million. <br />Public Works estimates the loss of engineering design costs at approximately $100,000. <br />Construction savings and the 40 -foot temporary bridge in inventory offset the design cost <br />lost in the project. <br />ATTACHMENTS: <br />Exhibit 1: Bridge photo <br />Page 2 of 3 <br />PUBLIC WORKS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.