Debate over the increasing work delays on the Wrangell Road Improvements project came to a head last week as contractors and the project engineer looked to each other for reasons for the slowdown. What superintendent Mike Ashton called differing site conditions than the plans his crews have been working from has, in part, delayed the project, which is currently in the final stages of Phase I, he said. “We have encountered, and will continue to encounter, differing conditions,” Ashton said during the bi-monthly meeting of project principals at City Hall on Thursday, Oct. 20. “That is to be expected on a job like this.” Differing site conditions typically comprise one of two different situations. In the first, the conditions encountered at the site differ materially from those indicated in the contract, or in the second type, conditions encountered at the site differ materially from those normally encountered in similar construction. Ashton also added that one example, the NAPA supply line, was roughly 30 feet away from where the plans showed and on the opposite side of a valve body. “Had the line been anywhere close to where they were shown to be, we could have permanently hooked them up at the same time as the Stikine Inn,” Ashton said. “We ended up having to excavate several different places to find one line because it was not where it was shown. Rather than make a big public deal of the differing conditions we encountered, we have tried to solve problems and move forward by shifting the supply lines to where the actual lines are located,” Ashton added. There was nothing but praise for the city coming from Ashton, however. “The city, Carl Johnson and Jeff Rooney in particular, have been invaluable with solving some of these problems,” Ashton added. According to John McGraw, the project contractor, the designers and engineers are partly responsible for the delays experienced so far in Phase I. “So far, it’s come back that all these delays are a contractor thing,” he said. “Nobody knows about the design mix ups. We have had some problems on the project, as the contractors, that we have fessed up to,” he said. “But on the other hand, when ADOT or DOWL-HKM have had problems, they haven’t taken any responsibility for issues we have had with the design.” Project engineer Eric Voorhees said there has been no blame assessed on the contractors in particular. “I don’t think I have seen anything in the media that says it’s the contractors fault,” Voorhees said. “We all know that the construction has taken longer for Phase I than we first thought, but I don’t think it was ever pinned on a party or company.” In addition to his work as the design engineer for project designers DOWL-HKM, Voorhees is also the project engineer and inspector for ADOT. That combination is upsetting to John McGraw and his team. “It’s like the fox watching the henhouse,” McGraw said. “DOWL is doing the design and DOWL is doing the inspecting.” Voorhees expressed disagreement with that assessment. “I don’t think it’s a conflict and it’s not a bad thing,” Voorhees said in an interview after the meeting. “As the engineer, I have a more intimate knowledge of the process than someone from outside the project.” Mitch McGraw also said he has asked for permission to continue on to the opening of Phase II – but has been stymied by Voorhees. “I turned in a traffic control plan three weeks ago stating how I wanted to begin Phase II,” he said. “I have not received permission yet and I clearly stated I don’t want to rip up all of the next phase, but to do what I can finish this year.” Voorhees said he agreed with what Mitch was getting at – but only in part. “I agree that asking to go in there is appropriate, but that doesn’t mean we want to let you open up that work yet,” Voorhees said. “That’s prohibiting our ability to move forward,” Mitch replied. Carl Johnson, the borough’s Director of Public Works, also weighed in, saying his main concerns were over blasting, and to keep up with the project timeline – for the safety of residents and the benefit of businesses downtown. “The city just wants to make sure the project stays on schedule and wraps up before winter comes,” Johnson said. “I know our concern over blasting is that the buildings and people in that area stay secure.” There was debate during the meeting between McGraw and Voorhees over the use of blasting to clear bedrock at the tail end of Phase I and into beginning of Phase II. McGraw Construction was given a Request For Proposal by Voorhees and the Alaska Department of Transportation asking for a price to complete a pre-blasting survey before any such work could go forward. After the submission of the RFP, ADOT turned down the proposal because it felt it was not a cost effective or time efficient solution for rock excavation, according to Voorhees. Another option, instead of blasting, would be for work crews to remove the bedrock along the end of Phase I and part of Phase II with an impact hammer. “We are actively looking for any large hammers that are available to help move this project along, even though we have yet to receive an RFP to do this work,” Ashton said. A heavy rock-breaker owned by John McGraw broke down earlier this month while chipping rock near NAPA Auto Parts. In the past three weeks, the project has moved forward with the flushing, testing and disinfecting of the city water main between the City Dock and Federal Way, the pouring of concrete near the dock cul-de-sac, and chipped rock for the installed water main between Federal Way and Campbell Drive. This week, the crews should be moving forward with Phase I dirt work completion and concrete pouring at the intersection of Federal Way and Front Street, and continuance into Phase II. The next meeting is set for Thursday, Nov. 3 at 10 a.m. in the assembly chambers of City Hall.
Debate over the increasing work delays on the Wrangell Road Improvements project came to a head last week as contractors and the project engineer looked to each other for reasons for the slowdown.
What superintendent Mike Ashton called differing site conditions than the plans his crews have been working from has, in part, delayed the project, which is currently in the final stages of Phase I, he said.
“We have encountered, and will continue to encounter, differing conditions,” Ashton said during the bi-monthly meeting of project principals at City Hall on Thursday, Oct. 20. “That is to be expected on a job like this.”
Differing site conditions typically comprise one of two different situations. In the first, the conditions encountered at the site differ materially from those indicated in the contract, or in the second type, conditions encountered at the site differ materially from those normally encountered in similar construction.
Ashton also added that one example, the NAPA supply line, was roughly 30 feet away from where the plans showed and on the opposite side of a valve body.
“Had the line been anywhere close to where they were shown to be, we could have permanently hooked them up at the same time as the Stikine Inn,” Ashton said. “We ended up having to excavate several different places to find one line because it was not where it was shown. Rather than make a big public deal of the differing conditions we encountered, we have tried to solve problems and move forward by shifting the supply lines to where the actual lines are located,” Ashton added.
There was nothing but praise for the city coming from Ashton, however.
“The city, Carl Johnson and Jeff Rooney in particular, have been invaluable with solving some of these problems,” Ashton added.
According to John McGraw, the project contractor, the designers and engineers are partly responsible for the delays experienced so far in Phase I.
“So far, it’s come back that all these delays are a contractor thing,” he said. “Nobody knows about the design mix ups. We have had some problems on the project, as the contractors, that we have fessed up to,” he said. “But on the other hand, when ADOT or DOWL-HKM have had problems, they haven’t taken any responsibility for issues we have had with the design.”
Project engineer Eric Voorhees said there has been no blame assessed on the contractors in particular.
“I don’t think I have seen anything in the media that says it’s the contractors fault,” Voorhees said. “We all know that the construction has taken longer for Phase I than we first thought, but I don’t think it was ever pinned on a party or company.”
In addition to his work as the design engineer for project designers DOWL-HKM, Voorhees is also the project engineer and inspector for ADOT.
That combination is upsetting to John McGraw and his team.
“It’s like the fox watching the henhouse,” McGraw said. “DOWL is doing the design and DOWL is doing the inspecting.”
Voorhees expressed disagreement with that assessment.
“I don’t think it’s a conflict and it’s not a bad thing,” Voorhees said in an interview after the meeting. “As the engineer, I have a more intimate knowledge of the process than someone from outside the project.”
Mitch McGraw also said he has asked for permission to continue on to the opening of Phase II – but has been stymied by Voorhees.
“I turned in a traffic control plan three weeks ago stating how I wanted to begin Phase II,” he said. “I have not received permission yet and I clearly stated I don’t want to rip up all of the next phase, but to do what I can finish this year.”
Voorhees said he agreed with what Mitch was getting at – but only in part.
“I agree that asking to go in there is appropriate, but that doesn’t mean we want to let you open up that work yet,” Voorhees said.
“That’s prohibiting our ability to move forward,” Mitch replied.
Carl Johnson, the borough’s Director of Public Works, also weighed in, saying his main concerns were over blasting, and to keep up with the project timeline – for the safety of residents and the benefit of businesses downtown.
“The city just wants to make sure the project stays on schedule and wraps up before winter comes,” Johnson said. “I know our concern over blasting is that the buildings and people in that area stay secure.”
There was debate during the meeting between McGraw and Voorhees over the use of blasting to clear bedrock at the tail end of Phase I and into beginning of Phase II.
McGraw Construction was given a Request For Proposal by Voorhees and the Alaska Department of Transportation asking for a price to complete a pre-blasting survey before any such work could go forward.
After the submission of the RFP, ADOT turned down the proposal because it felt it was not a cost effective or time efficient solution for rock excavation, according to Voorhees.
Another option, instead of blasting, would be for work crews to remove the bedrock along the end of Phase I and part of Phase II with an impact hammer.
“We are actively looking for any large hammers that are available to help move this project along, even though we have yet to receive an RFP to do this work,” Ashton said.
A heavy rock-breaker owned by John McGraw broke down earlier this month while chipping rock near NAPA Auto Parts.
In the past three weeks, the project has moved forward with the flushing, testing and disinfecting of the city water main between the City Dock and Federal Way, the pouring of concrete near the dock cul-de-sac, and chipped rock for the installed water main between Federal Way and Campbell Drive.
This week, the crews should be moving forward with Phase I dirt work completion and concrete pouring at the intersection of Federal Way and Front Street, and continuance into Phase II.
The next meeting is set for Thursday, Nov. 3 at 10 a.m. in the assembly chambers of City Hall.
Reader Comments(0)