Apr 24, 2015 4 min read

GRAYSVILLE – West Greene School Board learned Thursday night just how costly it will be to construct a new retaining wall at the district’s new elementary school.

The board approved a guaranteed maximum price of $5.26 million for the wall, prepared by Burchick Construction Co., the company awarded the contract for the project.

A budget for the project, also presented, which included administrative costs, professional fees and a 7 percent contingency to cover any unexpected costs, totaled $6.48 million.

The original retaining wall built as part of the new elementary school project collapsed in November. Since then, the board expedited the process of hiring a contractor and developing plans for the construction of a new wall to have the project completed in time to use the new elementary building next school year.

Before the project manager could even discuss the contractor’s guaranteed maximum price Thursday, board member Joe Coss said he couldn’t support the motion.

“The point is, we can’t afford $6.5 million,” he said.

The guaranteed maximum price for the new retaining wall is almost half the original costs of the elementary project. Contracts the board awarded in May 2013 for construction of the elementary school, including the original retaining wall, totaled $10.9 million, although change orders have increased the total cost of the project.

The board also approved a proposal for technical support services presented by PS&R related to litigation regarding the failed retaining wall with cost not to exceed $80,000. The general contractor on the elementary project, the Liokareas Construction Co., earlier filed a lawsuit against the district seeking damages for additional work it claims it was required to perform partly in response to issues involving the failed wall.

Asked how PS&R’s services might be related to the design of the wall, solicitor Barbara Graham said as the suit with Liokareas proceeds it’s possible other parties might be brought into it. She declined later to comment further on the matter.

Meanwhile, Ron Miller of Aecom, the district’s project manager, told the board that members of the team of engineers and consultants who had reviewed Burchick’s proposal agreed the price is “reasonable” for the new retaining wall. As part of its evaluation, the team considered the costs for labor, equipment and materials included in the guaranteed maximum price not only for Burchick but for all of its sub-contractors. The company will be paid based on its actual labor, material and equipment costs plus a 15 percent profit on its labor and a 10 percent profit on materials and equipment.

Miller also spoke of additions to the scope of the project that were made since the last board meeting, when the project was estimated at $4.5 to $5 million, as well potential problems that could increase the costs and conditions that could result in savings to the district.

Board member Chad Scott said engineers earlier had estimated the project at $3 million, then at $4.5 million.

“Why the big jump from where we were maybe only a month ago?” he asked.

Miller said all changes in costs were “quantifiable” and tied to the costs of materials, labor and equipment. Because the project had been “fast-tracked,” it was difficult to make estimates earlier before the final engineering design was completed, he said.

Joe Coss said he believes the board should have bid the project instead of following the path it did in procuring a contractor and asking for a guaranteed maximum price.

Miller said, however, if the project were bid the initial bids might be lower but the overall costs would the same or higher because of change ordered contractors normally added to address any issue not included in the plans.

If the district bid the project, the wall also might not be completed before the start of school. A tentative work plan presented by Miller set the completion date at Aug. 15.

Asked how the district could pay for the project, business manager Shannon Rutan said the district would have to use all of the unencumbered $6 million in its capital project fund, as well as about $400,000 from the balance in the district’s general fund. The district would be left with about $2.5 million in general funds in its fund balance, she said later.

Board member Joe Coss, Tom Coss and Regina MacDowell voted against the motion to approve the guaranteed maximum price.