6/11/1991 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

JUN it 199 I Mr. Sabonjohn stressed that a 5' depth 30' wide just does not exist, but that is what was contracted for. Commissioner Scurlock believed the important thing is what did we contract for and what did we get. Mr. Sabonjohn next reviewed the bidder's instructions and requirements, which set out that before submitting a proposal, the bidder is required to visit the site and familiarize himself with the nature and extent of the work and any surface or subsurface conditions that may in any manner affect the work to be done and the equipment, material and labor required and that _ he must inform himself thoroughly regarding any and all condi- tions and requirements that may in any manner affect the work to be.performed. Mr. Sabonjohn pointed out that the bidder's attention is called to the fact that any estimates of quantities of work and material to be removed are estimated only and not guaranteed, which he believed says that the 3,800 cubic yards of material removed has no bearing whatsoever on the facts of the contract. He, therefore, felt the size of the containment area and 3,800 cubic yards don't mean a thing. What does mean something is the size the channel was to be. He then read contract clauses setting out what the contractor is required to do within one year if the dredging is not satisfactory. Mr. Sabonjohn again referred to his boat being undeniably stuck in the mud, and requested that the Board resurvey the dredged area as soon as possible and act in a responsible manner to levy against the dredging company in accordance with the contract. Chairman Bird noted apparently surveying was done both before and after dredging, and he asked if Director Davis felt the surveying done after the dredging was completed was thorough enough to show that the work was performed to specifications. Director Davis stated that he did. He explained that the survey was done by cross sectioning the area. The elevations we found in the "before" condition varied from 0.0 (or no depth) to -1' and -1.7'. The whole area had shoaled in, particularly at the mouth of the river, and before dredging we found a tremendous amount of suspended solids. Because of concern about these suspended solids by both the Health Department and DER, we were required to silt screen the area at both ends of the job. Our cross sections show that the dredging contractor achieved -6.51. Director Davis stressed that this is a fairly narrow channel, and you can be 1' or so out of it and be in a very shallow depth. Chairman Bird asked if it is true that there is quite a large area in the center of the project that doesn't show any post construction survey work. 16