Advertisement

Elkader Council receives Carter Street update, approves Keystone Bridge bid

Error message

  • Warning: array_merge(): Expected parameter 1 to be an array, bool given in _simpleads_render_ajax_template() (line 133 of /home/pdccourier/www/www/sites/all/modules/simpleads/includes/simpleads.helper.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to get property 'settings' of non-object in _simpleads_adgroup_settings() (line 343 of /home/pdccourier/www/www/sites/all/modules/simpleads/includes/simpleads.helper.inc).
  • Warning: array_merge(): Expected parameter 1 to be an array, bool given in _simpleads_render_ajax_template() (line 157 of /home/pdccourier/www/www/sites/all/modules/simpleads/includes/simpleads.helper.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in include() (line 24 of /home/pdccourier/www/www/sites/all/modules/simpleads/templates/simpleads_ajax_call.tpl.php).

By Willis Patenaude, Times-Register

 

Last week’s Elkader City Council meeting involved updates on the Carter Street and Keystone Bridge projects and a planned reading of an ordinance that renews the franchise agreement with Alliant Energy. 

 

Starting with the latter, it was a well-attended meeting with many residents showing up specifically to comment on the ordinance, however, because council members Bob Hendrickson and Daryl Koehn were not present, member Randy Henning motioned to table the reading until the next meeting. 

 

Although member Tony Hauber did not agree with the decision to table the topic, even asking aloud if the residents still wished to be heard, the motion was eventually approved by a 2-1 vote, with Henning and Peggy Lane voting “yay” and Hauber voting “nay.” Hauber was available for comments after the meeting was adjourned. 

 

As far as Carter Street goes, Hunter Nix, from MSA Professional Services, informed the council that the project is about two to three weeks behind schedule. While Nix declined to comment on the issue when asked after the meeting, city administrator Jennifer Cowsert indicated the project is behind schedule for a number of reasons. 

 

First, it appears the construction crew ran into some unforeseen situations after the pavement was removed, namely the issue of unsuitable soil, which is soil that was too wet and does not meet standards, so it needed to be removed and replaced. Second, the company was called away to work on an emergency in another town for a few days. Finally, the phase 1 timeline, which included the sewer and trenching, was underestimated and took longer than expected. 

 

According to Cowsert, this should not impact the overall cost of the project, just the timeline, especially when it comes to phase 3, which includes the intersection by the hospital. If the contractor is not able to start and finish that before winter, phase 3 will be delayed until the next construction season. In an effort to get the project back on schedule, the contractor plans to bring in a second crew to this fall. 

 

When it came to the Keystone Bridge project, there were a myriad of questions no one had answers.

 

Hauber even stated, “we’re at a point of futility with this.” 

 

The futility has to do with the recent bid letting, which again only produced one bid, this time from CJ Moyna & Sons, LLC—who was involved as the only bidder in the previous bid letting—and Taylor Construction Inc. 

 

But it’s not just the failure of the project to attract multiple bidders; it’s also the fact that, this time, the cost of the Keystone Bridge project increased by $400,000 and no one knows why, including Cowsert or project engineer Julie Neebel from Origin Design (formerly called IIW). 

 

Neebel suggested the increase could be due to rising steel prices, but until the contract is fully executed, neither the city nor Neebel can discuss the matter with the contractor. 

 

According to Neebel, the DOT, recognizing the volatile nature of construction costs and the necessity of the bridge project, agreed to pay 100 percent of the bid price, which means it will cover the additional $400,000 cost. But extra costs can mean extra work and extra time, and in that case, the DOT will only provide a 5 percent contingency (5 percent of the total bid price) to account for overruns and changes during construction. If the project continues to rise in cost, whatever exceeds that 5 percent contingency will need to be paid for by the city of Elkader. 

 

Furthermore, the additional cost led to questions about whether or not the engineers would be on site longer, increasing that overall cost. At the meeting, Neebel indicated the situation could lead to a higher cost, which has been a long-held concern of council member Koehn.

 

“The cost of engineering is directly proportional to the amount of time spent on a project. To try to attract better bids, the length of time the contractor can be working on the project was increased. If the contractor takes more time on the project, the engineering staff will spend more time on the project site. The contract for engineering is such that the city pays for the actual time spent working on the project,” Neebel explained in a separate interview. 

 

The total cost of the project now stands at $3,612,211, plus an estimated $655,000 for engineering. 

 

One addition to the contract is that the contractor is required to provide pedestrian accommodation, which can be either allowing pedestrians to safely cross the bridge, or providing a shuttle service. It will be up to the contractor to identify which method is more cost effective.

 

As for the bid itself, despite the council’s reservations, they were informed the state said, “They should accept the bid,” and that Bremer County, who is the contracting authority, agreed to award the contract, leaving the council no alternative but to approve it, which they did unanimously with Hauber, Lane and Henning all voting “yay.”

 

There is no official timeline for construction because it is dependent on the completion of the contract. 

 

“The county will execute their portion of the contract, the contractor will submit required items to execute their portion and the DOT will then review and execute. The contractor is allowed to start construction in 2021, but not required to start construction until 2022. After the contract is fully executed, we can begin to have conversations with the contractor, but not before,” Neebel explained.

Rate this article: 
No votes yet