Laserfiche WebLink
r APR 21 193Y <br />BOOK <br />Chairman Scurlock asked if there is any reduction in <br />engineering services, and Director Pinto stated that the <br />engineering will stay the same. <br />68 r "w,'F1_ 144 <br />MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by <br />Commissioner Bowman, to approve Change Order No. 1 <br />with Coastline Utilities in the amount of $30,918.50 <br />and Change Order No. 2 Masteller 8 Moler in the amount <br />of $3,185 as recommended by staff in memo dated April 20, <br />1987. <br />Commissioner Bird asked if there is any lesson to be learned <br />here about possibly having better coordination between Public <br />Works and Utilities on these projects. He noted that 6th Avenue <br />has been torn up for months. <br />Director Pinto informed the Board that he and Public Works <br />Director Davis have been discussing this with a little bit of <br />difference in opinion. When Public Works is going to do a road <br />project such as this, Director Pinto felt the relocation of <br />utilities, even if it is to be paid for by Utilities, should be <br />part of that project, and not go out to bid, do the road project, <br />and then call Utilities and say move your utility lines. In this <br />particular case, however, Utilities did look at it and made <br />provisions for some relocations, but during the construction <br />engineering process for the road, they lowered a lot of their <br />storm drains and Utility had to go back and revamp all their <br />plans. <br />Discussion continued re the need for better coordination in <br />the future, and Director Pinto noted that this involves a <br />combination of all utilities, cable N, electric, telephone, etc. <br />One of the problems the Utility Department faces is that these <br />things are unbudgeted items. Probably $300,000 has been spent in <br />relocation, and Director Pinto did not know how you allow for <br />this. <br />30 <br />