Item 17 - Amend Agreement for Construction Engineering Services: SR-55/Ritchey Street Water Improvements

Home Browse Search

Page 2 of 5 PM/RE and Contract Administrator Costs tasks that required a significant increase in hour allocation to ensure quality of project delivery include the following: 1. Issue w/ Project Sequencing (Plans vs Spec vs Actual) – meetings & discussions with designer 2. Obtaining Additional Caltrans Rider Permit for City and Coordinating Contractor Procurement of Double Permit 3. Establishing Relationship with City of Tustin and Obtaining Tustin Grading Permit 4. SCE Service to SA-7 – Coordination efforts of design issue. SCE design and coordination had not been started. CM team took on this role. 5. Project Specification not Reflecting Caltrans Spec and Caltrans Desires – i.e. casing requirements and welding requirements 6. Significant Number of Submittal Resubmittals (some resubmitted 4 times) 7. Contractor Baseline Schedule Review Sbmtl 004 – Contractor submitted 5 times and still had issues. Extensive time reviewing and meeting with Contractor 8. Contractor Jack & Bore Shoring Review – no assistance from designer, contractor plan unusually lacking 9. Contractor Issues with Procuring Casing Pipe – Contractor identified over 6 different pipe for submission which included additional submissions for welding. 10. Write-up of CCO-001 – extensive write-up, completed Background and CCO versus “assisting with CCO” per original scope. 11. RFI-034/PCO-012 SA-7 Automation and work of Enterprise Automated (EA) – Unusually time consuming RFI which is developing into a CCO. 12. Preparation of budget and coordination of staff for additional scope added by City with Amendment No. 01 13. Issues with the jack & bore ground monitoring. CWA Rate: As identified in meetings with the City and in BergCM’s Letter to the City dated August 9, 2022, a CWA Rate was established for our Inspectors to be in compliance with the City’s CWA. It was not known, by BergCM or the City, at the time of contract execution that the CWA would apply to CM staff. To-date, through Nov 30, 2022, this rate increase represents roughly $20,000 to-date. These are included in the Inspection estimate above. Submittal Reviews – Unplanned Costs: ON-SITE Conducted submittal reviews in March 2022 that was not allocated in original budget. Additional Admin Reviews by ON-SITE Technical To-Date: ($ 4,130.00) Amendment No. 01 – Unplanned Costs: All of the Amendment No. 01 costs are attached herein to this Letter. The additional unplanned costs that were utilized to date include the following: Specialty Inspection by ON-SITE Technical To-Date: ($ 15,370.25) Specialty Inspection by RMA Group To-Date: ($ 960.00) Scheduling Services for Contingency Plans and Shadow Schedule: ($ 6,280.07) Underestimated Working Days in Original Estimate: In our original budget, 360 working days were used for the Construction periods (Phase 1 and Phase 2). This should have been corrected in a negotiation period, as the actual working days is roughly 390 working days. If project special issues and unplanned costs had not occurred, the Contingency could have been used to account for this error. However, our attached spread sheet shows actual hours per month for the duration of the project according to the Contractor’s baseline schedule. This represents a difference of $69,519.75, for actual costs (390 WD) versus proposed/actual (360 WD).