RECEIVED AUGUST 11, 2010 @ 2:31 P.M.
Michele R. Grande, Redding Town Clerk
3 pages
Redding Athletic Fields Committee Meeting Minutes
July 6, 2010
Present: Donald Takacs, Chris Hocker, Liz Pelzar, Paul Degener, Paul Winstanley,
Also present: Barry Blades of Blades & Goven
Absent: Ted Auer
Mr. Takacs called the July 6, 2010 meeting to order at 8:35 pm in the Town Clerk’s Office at the Redding Town Office Building.
It was learned, by Ms. Maday, that the tape of the meeting minutes did not record any of the proceedings, due to a malfunction. These minutes have been provided by Mr. Takacs and include a verbatim report from Mr. Blades, who made a comprehensive presentation at this meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes for April 6 and June 8, as amended, were approved unanimously.
My notes are rather cryptic, since I thought the meeting was being recorded. They are as follows:
The next meeting will start at 8:30 PM re: Paul Winstanley’s schedule.
Welti test boring report indicates: As illustrated for RCC Field No. 2
Weathered rock: 420 cubic yards estimated
Hard rock: 335 cubic yards estimated
Weathered rock can be scooped up with back hoe during normal excavation/site prep.
Hard rock requires special equipment to remove. This hard rock could also include the need for blasting.
Is blasting possible at this site, if it seems desirable?
Town Garden well pump has limited remaining life. Possibly combine with our work on RCC#2?
Next Steps:
1. BB drawings to present to Conservation Commission (wetlands).
2. When is next Conservation Comm. meeting? Target Tuesday August 3, or 17, 2010, at 7:30 PM. Conservation Commission meetings are held the first and third Tuesday of each month, at 7:30, in the Old Town House.
4. There will be a lag between submission and schedule.
5. Planning & Zoning Commission presentations.
6. Possible public hearing for both items 3 and 4, above.
Mr. Blades’ notes:
Following are the highlights from my presentation.
1. Welti completed his boring investigations and provided a report which included sections and a boring location plan. 24 borings were drilled along the east side of the field in order to determine the rock profile in the area to be excavated. Results indicate that rock will be encountered mostly within the expanded field area but not along the proposed slope.
2. Based on Welti's report, we estimate the rock quantities that will require excavation to be approximately 335 cy of hard rock and 420 cy of weathered rock. Depending upon the degree of weathering, we would expect that much of the weathered rock can be excavated by backhoe; thus, it would not be paid for as "rock excavation". Excavation of the hard rock will require specialized equipment. The quantity of rock to be removed is not sufficient to consider blasting.
3. I described 3 options for dealing with rock excavation in a bidding situation.
Option A - "Classified Excavation" - means excavation is classified as either "earth" or "rock". Contractor's base bid includes all "earth" excavation. He gets paid extra (per established unit prices) if rock excavation is required.
Option B - "Classified Excavation with Rock Allowance" - this is a variation of the first option in which we include an allowance in the base bid for anticipated rock excavation. (In this case - 335 cy) If more rock excavation is required, the contractor will be paid for it on a unit price basis. If less is required, the Owner will receive a credit back. By including the allowance for rock excavation in the base bid, the Owner~gets a more accurate representation of total costs in the base bid, and does not have to hold as large of a contingency for additional costs.
Option C - "Unclassified Excavation" - means that the contractor is responsible for all excavation regardless of the type of material. In this method, the contractor takes on the risk of potential rock excavation. Therefore, this method is only used when sufficient borings have been taken to clearly identify rock depth. I believe that the number of borings that have been taken would allow the use of this method.
Options B & C would both be viable for this project. Option B is the fairest method for both parties (i.e. contractor only gets paid for rock if he hits it), but the Owner must still hold a contingency in case the quantities exceed the allowance. Also, quantities of rock excavation must be established (by survey or counting trucks) as the work is progressing. Option C might be the best option for the Owner since the base bid covers everything and there is no risk of additional costs. However, it should be noted that all contractors will typically add some cost in the base bid to cover their risk.
4. I presented a revised cost estimate for the project. (dated July 1, 2010) The total project cost is estimated at $834,015. The cost of rock excavation and associated construction was not included in this estimate. I will investigate current rock excavation costs; however, using an estimate of $100 per cy, the additional work would bring the total project cost to approximately $900,000. The estimate also identifies a potential savings of $124,000 to the contract if the Town were able to perform some of the work. This does not take into account the costs of using Town labor and equipment.
5. The RAFC authorized me to proceed with the preparation of documents for submittal to the Conservation Commission and the Zoning Commission. I will contact the Town to identify potential submittal and meeting dates. The Zoning Commission hearing will include a public hearing due to the quantities of excavation.
Minutes submitted by Donald Takacs, July 9, 2010
| 
