205-CPH-Amendment 19 on n or er an o rues
November 3.9, 1992 sA,~o,a ~m,l=~m-~s0e
TEL 407-322-6841 TEL 407-831-5717
FAX #407- 330-0639
Mr. Paul Moore, P.E.
Director of Utilities
City of Sanford
P O Box 1788
Sanford, F1 32772-1788
SUBJECT: City of Sanford Vacuum Sewer Project
CPH Job No. S0602.44; S0602.45 and S0602.46
Additional Services
Dear Paul:
This letter is being provided to confirm verbal discussions held on November 4, 1992. As
discussed, we believe there are three time-frames for consideration in connection with additional
services provided on the referenced project. The following information is provided on that basis.
3 Time Frames Under Consideration:
Time Period 1: The past period from the March 30, 1992 completion date for
Speegle (the time basis used in our last authorization), to the
current date of October 31, 1992; and for Southern Line Cleaning,
from a completion date of June 30th to October 31, 1992.
Time Period 2: From November 1, 1992 to completion of constraction estimated
to be December 15, 1992 for Speegle on Contract 1 and March 1,
1993 on Speegle (Johnson) Laterals, Contract 4.
Time Period 3: From the estimated completion of construction date of December
15, 1992 on Contract 1 for the one year start-up, operational
assistance, project performance certification and as-built drawing
phase to December 15, 1993.
Time Period 1:
Our last authorization dated February 21, 1992 was based on a completion of Speegle's Contract
1 by March 30, 1992 and Southern Line Cleaning (Johnson's) Contract 3 by June 30, 1992.
rt es
SANFORD, FLORIDA 32772-2808
TEL407-322~841 TEL407-831-5717
November 19, 1992
Page 2
As of October 31, 1992, seven months have passed beyond Speegle's completion date and four
months beyond Southem's completion date. During that period of time, the following services
have occurrod:
· Extra services on Speegle's Contract (from March 30 to October 31; 7 months) as
follows:
o Normal construction administration time caused by simply going beyond the
anticipated completion date by seven months.
o Unknown site field conditions that caused extra change orders, supervision and
assistance as to how to make lateral hookups on the 2nd Street extension and other
similar field problems.
o Additional co-ordination and effort with FDER regarding time extensions on grant
funding and in getting other work eligible for remaining grant funds.
o Extensive negotiations with Speegle attempting to close out the project. As was
stated previously, we have encountered substantial difficulties in getting Speegle
to final the remaining work and provide the required documentation so as to
closeout the contract. Involvement of attorneys, claims for arbitration and
substantial extras, numerous quantity calculations, and the like have affected the
engineering time and fees spent.
· Extra services on lateral Contracts 3 and 4 (from June 30 to October 31; 4 months) as
follows:
o Preparation of change orders and coordination with Southern Line Cleaning
concerning the vacuum sewer lateral installation and assistance to the City and
contractor in trying to verify bonding capabilities, with the eventual outcome that
Southern Line Cleaning was unable to get bonded for this work and the change
orders and Phases III and IV of Contract 3 had to be closed out with no work
being done.
o Rebidding of the remaining lateral work (Contract 4) as a result of Southern's
inability to become bonded. Included was preparation of Contract Documents for
bidding the remaining laterals and furnishing documents and other assistance to
contractors and others during the bidding process, receipt of bids, bid tabulation,
bid evaluation and recommendation on award.
November 19, 1992
Page 3
· Our conclusion on Time Period 1:
We have approximately $19,850 of costs charged on the extras on these contracts up
through October 31, 1992, above our previously authorized maximum fee. When one
looks at the considerable period of time involved and the extra services listed above under
the job circumstances outlined, the costs charged appear reasonable and justifiable to us.
Time Period 2 (from November 1 to completion of construction):
We currently estimate a December 15, 1992, completion date for Speegle on Contract 1 and
March 1993 for Speegle/Johnson on Lateral Contract 4.
Normal time for construction administration for 1-~,~ additional months will be required on
Contract 1 and 4 months more on Contract 4 (laterals). In addition, each job will have a close
out cost associated with it because of the extra work involved over the normal monthly activities,
especially with Speegle associated with both contracts. We estimate as follows:
Contract 1 December 15, 1992, completion date
1-1/2 months x $3500/mo = $5,250.00
Special closeout costs = 4.000.00
(change orders, quantities,
claims and negotiations)
Total = $ 9,250.00
Contract 4 March 1, 1993, estimated completion date
Laterals 4 months x $500/mo = $2,000.00
Special closeout costs = $1.500.00
(change orders, quantities
and negotiations)
Total = $ 3,500.00
Total Time Period 2 = $12,750.00
rscycled paper
November 19, 1992
Page 4
Time Period 3 (from December 15. 1992 to December 15, 1993):
During this one year period of time, we would be preparing as-builts, providing some limited
operational assistance and performance certifications to FDER and grant close out documentation.
We have not included any C.S.O. work (either design or construction administration) in this
estimate as we assume it will be separately handled. The biggest work element remaining is the
as-built drawings for Phases II, III, IV and the downtown extensions. As you will recall, the as-
builts for Phase I were very difficult and time consuming to prepare, with many discrepancies
between the contractor' s mark-ups and the records of the two City inspectors which we ended
up trying to resolve. This resolution effort took a great deal of time and cost.
We have noted that the contractor' s records and marked-up as-builts have improved since Phase
1. We now propose to prepare the remaining as-builts based on the contractor's marked-up
prints and to submit a set of review prints to the City for red-lining by the City' s inspectors, of
changes that the City wants made. We will make those changes on the originals and furnish a
set of record drawing mylars to the City for their records and use.
We estimate as follows during this one year period:
As builts (Phases II, III, IV and
downtown extensions) $10,650
Limited Operational Assistance (50 hours) $ 2,500
Performance Certification and Grant
Closeout Documentation (30 hours) $1.500
Total Time Period 3 $14,650
SANFORD, FLORIDA 32772-2808
TEL407-322..6841 TEL407-831-5717
FAX #407-330-0639
November 19, 1992
Page 5
In Summary:
Time Period 1
(From previous authorization to 10/30/92) $19,850.00
Time Period 2 (from 11/1/92 to 12/15/92 and
03/01/93 - To completion of construction) $12,750.00
Time Period 3
(1 year from completion of construction on
12/15/92 to 12/15/93) $14.650.00
Total $47,250.00
In accordance with the provisions of our Contract, we are hereby requesting an increase in the
total fee for this project from $452,241.05 to $499,491.05. This fee is further broken down as
follows: $451,329.17 "Target Cost Ceiling" and $48,161.88 "Fixed Fee Percentage".
It is noteworthy that the rebidding of Contract 4 laterals ended up saving $30,000 from the
previous contract, and we suppose there still remains the possibility of Liquidated Damages on
these contracts to help cover the additional engineering costs.
Also noteworthy, is the fact that there is no profit in this request for extra payment. In fact,
there has only been one small adjustment to the fixed fee since the inception of the project, and
that was an increase in the amount of $1,535.58 early on in the project work when new design
work was added for the 2nd Street extension. As you will recall, this Contract was a Cost Plus
Fixed Fee type of contract which is typically used when the scope of the work is unknown or
very difficult to predict. This has very much proven to be the fact as these contracts at best axe
difficult projects with a whole lot of unknowns. Additionally, the contractors have required a
great deal of attention and extra work to obtain reasonable quality and to just get through the jobs
to completion.
recycled paper
November 19, 1992
Page 6
We appreciate your consideration of this request. If it meets with your approval, please return
one executed copy of this letter for our files. Thank you.
Sincerely,
CONKLIN PORTER AND HOLMES-ENGINEERS, INC.
Bristol C. ConkiLn, P.E.
Executive Vice President
James C. ranch, P.E.
· ' sident
BCC-JCB/jms
xc: William A. Simmons, P.E., City Manager
1103LTR3.jms
ACCEPTED BY:
Name and'~e Date:
recycled paper
~ ~ ~k~'~rter and Holmes
" ENGINEERS, INC.
500 W. FULTON STREET
~eb~aa~y ~0~ ~992 ~
~ty ~a~age~
C~y o~ San~o~d
~ 0 Box ~778
San~o~ ~Zo~da 32772-~778
Re: Vacuum Sewer Construction Services
Contracts I, II and III
CPH Project No's. S0602.44; S0602.45 and S0602.46
Dear Mr. Simmons:
We entered into an Agreement with the City to perform construction
services on November 28, 1988, for these three construction
contracts. General supervision of construction was to be by CPH
with designated inspection services to be provided by City
personnel and some by CPH personnel. The fees in the Engineering
Agreement are based on a construction period of 28 months to
substantial completion, plus one additional month to final
completion for Contracts I and III and 9 months to substantial
completion, plus one additional month to final completion on
Contract II.
The Engineering Agreement was extendedby $11,772.76, for design of
an extension of the vacuum system to add an additional section of
the downtown area not previously covered. There have been no
other changes to the Engineering Agreement.
We notified the City in March 1991 and September 1991 (copies
enclcsed) that costs associated with the project would exceed the
current target cost ceiling. In the September 24th letter, we
described the cost plus fixed fee basis of the engineering contract
and the fact that this method was chosen primarily because of the
uncertain nature of the work and the difficulty in estimating the
resulting costs. This method also facilitated future adjustments
required in the fee to reflect actual job conditions and actual
costs incurred, without increasing the "profit" or "fixed fee"
beyond that in the original Agreement.
· Conkffi !Porter and Holmes
(~ POST OFFICE BOX 2808
Page 2 SANFORD, FLORIDA32772~2808
TEL 407-322-6841 TEL 407~831-5717
February 10, 1992
The job conditions have been very difficult, with narrow,
restricted alley rights-of-way and poor record information on
existing utilities buried in the alleys, etc. Also, a
considerable amount of difficulty and extra work not anticipated
has been necessary to get through the project with the contractor
on Contract I and to a lesser degree on Contract II, as I am sure
you realize. At numerous times during the progress of the work, we
and the City have jointly reevaluated the situation and
periodically decided to continue with this contractor as it seemed
the lesser of evils compared with the risks, costs and time
involved in declaring him in default. Default would have involved
going through the bonding company, possible law suits,
readvertising and a considerable amount of unknown risks, costs and
delays.
Contract II construction is complete. The contractor for Contract
I is anticipated as having a contractual completion date of March
1 1992, after final execution of a change order which is currently
in process. Orville Johnson, Contract III contractor, has a
current completion date of June 30, 1992. These estimated
completion dates are consistent with our letter of September 24,
1991. Obviously, these completion dates extend well beyond those
contemplated in our Agreement for construction services entered
into on November 28, 1988, and nobody knows for sure if they will
actually be met, even though they seem reasonable at this time.
In estimating costs to finish included in this request, we have
utilized a final completion. date of the end of March for Contract
I (allowing one month over-run), and the end of June for Contract
III, (no over-run). Beyond those dates, additional work will be
required under the grants program for additional start-up services,
O&M Manual revisions and Performance Certification for one year
after substantial completion of the Contracts.
Our last invoice on the project dated September 23, 1991, was for
engineering services through September 6, 1991. At that time, we
were within $826.83 of the authorized fee, so essentially all
charges past that invoice are over the target cost ceiling. Please
refer to the attached computation sheet for our estimate of
additional engineering fee required to complete these projects.
With this letter we are hereby requesting that the City consider an
increase in the "Target Cost Ceiling" on this job from $321,079.17
to $404,079.17. For perspective purposes, these are three very
difficult contracts to administer, inspect and start-up, with a
construction cost totalling approximately $4,400,000.
,. ' rter and Holmes
ENGINEERS, INC,
500 W. FULTON STREET
POST OFFICE BOX 2808
Page 3 SANFORD, FLORIDA32772-2808
TEL 407-322-6841 TEL 407-831-5717
February 10, 1992 FAX#407-33~OS39
If we can provide additional information or data, please advise.
Sincerely,
CONKLIN PORTER AND HOLMES-ENGINEERS, INC.
Executive Vice President
BCC/js
Enclosures
0204LTR1.JMS
Approved:
William A.'bimmons, P.E. Date
City Manager
CITY OF SANFORD
ci,~y Mgr. / Approved
Computation Sheet
Actual "Costs" Since Last Billing:
09/06/91 - 10/05/91 - 11/01/91 - 11/30/91 - 12/28/91 -
10/04/91 10/31/91 11/29/91 12/27/91 01/24/92
$ 8,837.36' $12,224.50 $ 7,626,76 $ 6,968.12 $ 6,491.71
$42,148.45 Total - Actual "Costs" Since Last Billing:
Estimated "'Costs" Per Month to Complete:
February 92 March 92 April 92 May 92 June 92
S 6,900.00 S14,000.00 $ 1,300.00 $ 1,300.00 $ 2,600.00
contracts contracts Contract Contract Contract
I and III I and III III III III
826,100.00 Total - Estimated "Costs" Per Month to Complete
Estimated Start-up And Performance Certification Services (Not Required on Contract III
laterals on Private Property) - Ending March 30, 1993
Principal = 30.00 hours Estimated Total Salary Cost = $4,858.24
Engineer = 116.00 hours x 44.87% Fringe 2,179.89
Technician = 60.00 hours x 110.13% G&A 5,350.38
Draftsman = 12.00 hours Out-of-Pocket Expenses 2,400.00
Clerical = 46.00 hours
Total - Estimated Start-Up and Performance Certification $14,788.51
RECAP:
$42,148.45 - Actual "Costs"- O9/07/91 - 01/24/92
$26,100.00 - Estimate of "Costs" - 01/25/92 - 06/92
$14,788.51 - Estimate of "Costs" - Start-Up and Performance Certification
Through March 1993
S83,036.96, say
$83,000.00
* "Costs" for month ending 10/04/92 totaled 89,556.34. Giving the City credit for unused
target cost ceiling of $718.98, resulted in overage of $8,837.36.
I
March 29, 1991
Memorandum
TO: William A. Simmons, P.E.
City Manager
xc: Paul Moore, P.E.
Director of Utilities
FROM: James C. Branch, P.E.~ ·
B. C. Conklin, P.E.
RE: Amendment 19 - Construction Services - Vacuum Sewer
System - Contract I
CPH Job No. S0602.45
- As~_you know, during the last several months, we have encountered
substantial contractor-coordination problems, resulting in many
needed field observations by both CPM and City staff. This
additional work adds on to the already very extensive contractor
monitoring requirements that have prevailed throughout the Vacuum
Sewer Contract I.
While we feel the additional contractor monitoring and
coordination has been fruitful to keep the job underway, pipe
being installed,' and'satisfactory restoration, it has .been
.............. expensivein terms of our time and thus, the City's cost. ._
Examination of our billings over the last six month period show
that we are far exceeding the budgeted inspection hours on this
Contract.. We will need to ask the City for a fee increase for
the construction administration of Contract I. We are currently
examining past records and our prediction of future costs. When
we have' finished, we will contact the City to set a meeting date
so that we may go over additional work items and their associated
costs in detail.
I
Conklin/~Porter and Holmes
GD~ LF~ ENGINEERSt INC.
September 24, 1991 ~,~.~o~,~-z,~
Mr. William A. Simons, P.E.
City Manager
City of Sanford
P 0 Box 1788
Sanford, Florida 32772-1788
Re: Amendment 19 - Construction Services
Vacuum Sewer System, Contracts I, II and III
CPH Job No.'s S0602.44, S0602.45 and S0602.46
Dear Mr. Simmons:
We are enclosing with this letter, our current invoice for the
referenced projects. This invoice takes us within $826.83 of our
authorized fee of $369,241.05, (original fee of $357,468.29 plus
increase of $1!,772.76 for extension of the vacuum sewer collection
system to serve an additional, existing area of downtown Sanford).
Amendment 19 was prepared on a cost, plus fixed fee basis with a
target cost maximum. This method was chosen primarily because of
the uncertain nature of the work and the difficulty in estimating
the resulting costs, and to facilitate future adjustments in the
fee to reflect actual costs incurred, without increasing the
"profit" or "fixed-fee" portion of the fee.
In accordance with Section 3.1.7 of Amendment 19, we are hereby
notifying the City that costs associated with this project will
exceed the current target cost ceiling. We are currently in
process of revising the estimate of the target cost ceiling for the
performance of the work under this Amendment and will be submitting
a request for a cost adjustment for the City's consideration. In
an effort to keep our request to a minimum, we do not anticipate
requesting an adjustment to the fixed fee portion of the overall
fee, but only to recoup actual costs in connection with remaining
work.
As you will recall, several months ago we wrote to advise that
substantial contractor/coordination/field construction/time of
completion problems had been experienced which necessitated
increased field observation by both CPH and City staff and
additional office work by CPH, which has in turn seriously affected
the cost of the project. These increased field observations and
office costs have continued and the overall level of construction
services required on this project is much increased from that
originally planned.
Conklin~ Porter and Holmes
G~) ~ ENGINEERS, INC,
SOD W, FULTON STREET
Page 2
September 24, 1993.
contract II (Vacuum and Gravity System Lift Stations and Force
Mains) has been completed and accepted by the City and FDER.
Recent' discussions with the contractor indicate that Contract I
(Vacuum Sewer Collection System Construction) should be complete by
mid March 1992, with Contract III (Lateral Construction), completed
shortly thereafter. Start-up services, O&M Manual revisions and
performance certification generally will follow completion of
construction.
We will be estimating the fee adjustment request based on these
revised construction completion dates and the level of involvement
required of our staff. As we get a little closer to final
completion of the overall project, the City ~ay or may not choose
or be able to enforce liquidated damage provisions in order to
recoup a portion of the costs of the extra services during
construction. It is also possible to consider these additional
engineering costs to be offset by the additional grant money
recently received in the amount of $280,539 on this project.
If you have questions or comments, please advise.
Sincerely,
CONKLIN PORTER AND HOLMES-ENGINEERS, INC.
Bristol C. Conklin, P.E.
Executive Vice President
BCC/js
Enclosures
0924LTR3.JIMS
(:onklir''~ Porter and Holmes
500 W. FULTON STREET
POSTOFFICE BOX 1976
SANFORD, FLORIDA 32772-1976
JUly 2, 1991 TEL 4o7-322-664~ TEL
FAX #407-330-0639
Mr. Paul Moore, P.E.
Director of Utilities
City of Sanford
P. O. Box 1788
Sanford, FL 32772-1788
RE: City of Sanford
Engineering Services Agreement
Amendment No. 19
CPH Project No. S0602.44
De~r Mr. Moore:
Per your request, we have prepared a proposal for consulting
engineering services for an extension of the Vacuum Sewer
Collection System to serve an existing area of downtown Sanford.
The specific area is south of First Union Bank from Oak Ave. to
Palmetto Ave. Recently City investigations show that this area is
served by the combined sewer system, however, it is not scheduled
for rehabilitation under current projects.
The scope of additional services to be provided includes design and
construction administration services as outlined in the attached
Plan of Study. It is assumed that the construction of the proposed
Vacuum Main Extension will be included as a change order to Speegle
Construction, Inc.'s contract with the City. A four week
construction period is also assumed in estimating the other related
construction administrative services. The preparation of a second
change order (to Contract III - Sanitary Sewer Laterals
construction) is not included in this proposal. Due to confined
area and the brick and asphalt paving over the probable vacuum main
route, it may be advantageous to have the service laterals
constructed in conjunction with the vacuum main and valve pits.
The work items included in this proposal are consistent with
~Additionai Services Of the Engineer" - Section ~X of Amendment No.
19. The proposed dollar total for the additional services is based
on compensation for providing professional engineering services, as
included in "Standard Costs Plus Fixed Fee Compensation" - Section
III of Amendment No. 19.
Acceptance of this proposal will increase the original Total Cost
Plus Fixed Fee $357,468.29 by $11,772.76 to an amended Total Cost
Plus Fixed Fee amount of $369,241.05 (The original Target Ceiling
Cost of $310,841.99 is increased by $10,237.18 to amended Target
Ceiling Cost of $321,079.17. The original Fixed Fee of $46,626.30
is increased by $1,535.58 to an amended Fixed Fee of $48,161.88.)
Mr. Paul Moore, P.E. TEL ~7-322-e84, TEL 407-83,-S7~;
S0602 . 44 - 7/2/91 FAX #407-33~o~39
Page 2
Of course, we will endeavor to handle all the work items included
in this proposal as efficiently as possible and we will only bill
for charges incurred.
Please contact us if you need any additional information.
Sincerely,
Njam~e~C.~PORTER & HOLMES - ENGINEERS, INC.
B
Senior Vice President
07021trl.jyw
ACCEPTED:
Wi
City Manager
CITY OF SANFORD
VACUUN SEWER COLLECTION SYSTE~ EXTENSION
DETAILED WORK PLAN
Equip. &
Item of Work Time in Nanhours Materials Subcontractor
P E T D S
I. ENGINEERING DESIGN
A. General
1. Gather basic data - 1 3 $25.00
maps, plans, files,
aerials, on existing
rights-of-way and
utilities (storm sewers,
gas, telephone, water,
sewer, electrical power)
2. Meet with City staff to 1 2
determine exact area to
be served and discuss
potential alternatives.
B. Subcontract Work
1. Aerial base maps (3) for 2 $1,000.00
proposed vacuum sewer
extension route at
1" = 30' scale
2. Surveying
a. Coordination and 2 1
supervision
h. Field data collection $1,800.00
P=Principal; E=Engineer; T=Technician; D=Draftsperson; S=Secretary
CITY OF SANFORD
VACUUM SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM EXTENSION
DETAILED WORK PLAN
Equip. &
Item of Work Time in Manhours Materials Subcontractor
P E T D S
C. Design
1. Vacuum Sewer Extension Design
a. Review vacuum station
sizing 0.5 3
b. Determine vacuum main 2
piping route
c. Determine vacuum. valve 2
pit locations and
service lateral routes
to existing residences
and businesses
(assistance from City
required)
d. Design vacuum main 1 8 25.00
extension
e. Revise hydraulic 0.5 4
calculations for
vacuum collection
system
CITY OF SANFORD
VACUUM SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM EXTENSION
DETAILED WORK PLAN
Equip. &
Item of Work Time in Manhours Materials Subcontractor
P E T D S
D. Drawinq Preparation
1. Reduce survey notes and 16
plot data onto 30 scale
aerial base maps.
2.Drafting of design on
plans.
a. Drafting (based on 30
three new plan &
profile sheets and
revisions to three
existing plan sheets)
b. Supervision of design/
drafting 2
c. Office review and 1 2 $25.00
checking of individual
drawings.
d. Changes to drawings. 4
3. Field checking of drawings 2
CITY OF SANFORD
VACUUM SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM EXTENSION
DETAILED WORK PLAN
Equip. &
Item of Work Time in Manhours Materials Subcontractor
P E T D S
II. CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
A. Chanqe Order Preparation,
Neqotiation and Processing
1. Meet with City and Contractor 2 4
to negotiate costs and time
to include work in Contract 1
construction.
2. Prepare and submit 1 20 2 $20.00
draft change order
package for Army Corps of
Engineers and FDER review.
3. Respond to comments from I 4
FDER and COE.
4. Finalize change order and 1 4 2 $30.00
process.
B. CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION
1. Advise & consult with 2 10 2
Owner, Resident Project
Representatives,
and Contractor (estimate 4 wks.)
2. Periodic visits to the site. 8 1
3. Supervision of Resident 2 10 2
Project Representatives
CITY OF SANFORD
VACUUM SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM EXTENSION
DETAILED WORK PLAN
EqUip. &
Item of Work Time in Manhours Materials .Subcontractor
P E T D S
4. Inspection, Punchlist, 3 1.5
Final Completion,
Certification
5. Record Drawing Repro- 1 4 8
ducibles (3 additional
drawings)
GRAND TOTAL: 13 94 25 42 12.5 $125.00 $2,800.00
DOLLAR TOTAL: $11,772.76