1975 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

277 talayor Brunette advised the Council of the receipt of a request for resignation from Dr. Clarence Gilmore from the Charter Study CoFcmission. A motion was made by Council- man Stone and seconded by Councilman Rainey that the resignation of Dr. Gilmore be accepted with regret. The motion carried: 7 ayes, 0 nays. City Manager Sweatt presented a request of Ernest Randle and Darrell White for sever services outside the city limits. Mr. Sweatt advised the Council that it Oas the po- licy of the City to serve only those residents inside the City with city sewage ser- vices. After discussion, a motion was made by Councilman King and seconded by Coun- cilman Whitaker that the request be denied. The motion carried: 7 ayes, 0 nays. Mayor Brunette called for a review of the construction, contract, and related matters regarding the Sewage Treatment Plant. t-ir. Robert Hayter, consulting engineer for the project, appeared before the Council, stating that $162,716.32 was presently being. vJ thheld from the contract and Elm Fork Construction Company including the'10/ retaine- f1r. Hayter advised that the completion date was projected for April 11, 1974, that additional time due to inclement weather and other factors, had extended tho date to June 27, 1974; that treatment had been commenced on October 11, 1974, but prior to the acceptance of the plant; that the plant was operative on December 3, 1974; that at this date several items vtere yet to be completed before acceptance. City Manager Sweatt made the following recommendations concerning the contract: 1. Release of all present retainage (10%) less estimated cost of undelivered materials and installation cost when "punch" list of items of work is complete, i.e., release the 10% retainage amount to the contractor for final payment when the items of labor are complete from the "punch" list and retain only the estimated cost of any undelivered materials together. with their installation cost so as to maintain an incentive to complete. 2. Authorize proceeding with plans and application for change order to the Texas t;fater Quality Board and Environmental Protect -ion Agency to accoii- plish the above - listed, additional items of work under the existing con- tract and grant agreement with the total estimated cost (including engi- neering charges approximately $150,000 with city cost of $67,500) with the understanding that any items not made eligible for the 55% grant funding be reviewed prior to actual issuance of work order. 3. Liquidated damages - while some legal as well as moral questions and dif- ference of opinion exists, it would seem that as contractor diligently tried to secure necessary material for completion timely, and was unsuc- cessful, and was caught in unprecedented situation Are could only hope to satisfactorily withhold our actual damages of approximately $8,000 (additional.inspection costs ) from October 11, 1975 through final com- pletion.- Mr. Ed Farrow, representing Elm Fork Construction Company, appeared before the Council, stating that not only inclement weather but material delivery delays had caused the delay of completion of the sewage treatment plant. Mr. Farrow stated that orders for materials had been made timely upon award of the contract by the City to Elm Fork Cori - structinn Company. Mr. Farrow presented copies of purchase orders issued by his com- pany to Rex Chain Belt Co. for materials integral to the plant dated 11 -2 -72 and Mr. Hayter agreed portions of the material covered by the order had not yet been received as i;iell as late arrival of much other. After discussion, a motion was made by Coun- cilman Ping and seconded by Councilman Hutchison that recommendation No. I,. as noted in the city manager's recommendations, be approved. The motion carried: 7 ayes, 0 nays. City Manager Sweatt advised the Council that, while not necessary for the co;nplete operation of the plant or essential to the quality of effluent, there are additional items that is felt would be extremely desirable additions to the contract and grant agreement if it were possible to achieve 55% grant and recommended the following ad- dit,ional itemms: A. Convert, present fresh water piping to utilize effluent crater use for sprinkler system - matter of economics for water cost. B. Install mechanical bar screen ahead of master lift station -to relieve rnanhour cost of manual operation at each lift station and to protect master lift station and sewage treatment plant facilities. C. Renovate existing sludge beds - to provide more effective drying time and reduce manhour removal time.