Agenda Packets - 1991/05/28 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Agenda Section: 9.1 • ooNJioos REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION Report Number: 91-21c STAFF REPORT Report Date: Md,y 28, 1991 Council Action: ❑ Special Order of Business May 28, 19 91 ❑ public Hearings CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE ❑ Consent Agenda )l Council Business Item Description: Preventive Maintenance of Well # 6 Administrator's Review/Recommendation: - - No comments to supplement this report >8)-9—d - Comments attached. Explanation/Summary (attach supplement sheets as necessary.) SUMMARY; The preventive maintenance work on Well # 6 has gone over the estimated bid cost. The reason for the increase includes several item's. The first and foremost is the amount of work necessary that was unknown when preparing the bid documents. Upon removal of the motor, column shaft, and pump, it became apparent that the pump was severely worn and_ needed replacement. The estimated cost of a new pump was $4,000 - $5,000. Fortunately, there was a surplus pump in storage at the booster station that was able to be modified to function for approximately $1,500. This pump had been used only a few hours when it was determined it was incorrect for the well in which it was specified to be used. This had occurred over 5 years ago. The City had decided to keep in for a possible future use. The second item unknown at bid time was the fact that the well had collapsed in the lower aquifer. This well is 679 feet deep. The lower 150 feet of the well had collapsed-. This left only one water bearing source feeding the well rather than two as the well had originally been established. The cost of 'bailing' this material was $6,510. A third problem was the fact that the bid called for replacement of 'spiders' when in fact this well used combination couplings. The----combination--couplings increased-the -cost --over -'spiders-'_ by $1,152 . The inspection reports from the last maintenance project on this well are missing. Therefore, we assumed that this well was similar to Well # 5 and used those documents as a basis for the bid. The reason the documents for this well were missing appears to be the fact that approximately 3 years of project files were destroyed at some past date. We have no records of projects from 1981 thru 1983. The final problem was that 2 items were left out of the bid documents . These were line shaft couplings and line shaft sleeves. The total for these 2 items is $1,284. This was an oversight by staff. (over) RECOMMENDATION; Staff recommends authorizing the additional work for well #6 and increasing the authorized amount of the project to $19,000.