City of Ocean Shores Regular City Council Meeting

Transcription

1 Agenda City of Ocean Shores Regular City Council Meeting Monday September 26, :00 PM Ocean Shores Convention Center 120 Chance A La Mer Ocean Shores, Washington Call to Order Roll Call Flag Salute Approval of Meeting Agenda Ceremonies & Proclamations Public Communication to Council Announcements 1. Board and Committee Vacancies Two member and two alternate vacancies on the Building Code Board of Appeals and one vacancy each on the Civil Service Commission, Library Board, and Radio Board. Appointments Council Reports Mayor's Report Other Reports Staff Report Consent Agenda 2. Approval of minutes for the January 19, 2011 City Council Study Session and September 12, 2011 Regular City Council Meeting. 3. Approval of Claims. Old Council Business New Council Business Page 1 of 22

2 4. Resolution A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Ocean Shores, Washington, authorizing the surplus of and declaring certain miscellaneous equipment as unserviceable, inadequate, obsolete, worn out or unfit and no longer necessary; and disposal of the surplus equipment and materials for the street department. Presented by John Wagner Council Questions Public Comment Council Action Tonquin Bridge repair agreement. The change order expenditures are included in the WSDOT funding with no cost to the City. Presented by Karla Roberts Council Questions Public Comment Council Action Future Agenda Item Suggestions 6. October 10, Regular Meeting, Water Plant Remodel October 12, Wednesday 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Budget Study Session. October 17, Monday 1 to 4 p.m. Budget Study Session. October 10, 24, and November 14, Regular Meetings with Public Hearings on Budget Other Future Items: Camping in B-1 and B-2 zones. Extension of 90-day camping limit. New Councilmember orientation and training. Mayor-Council roles, authority, responsibility, budget, purchasing, contracting. City Administrator role, responsibility, authority, potential municipal code changes. Review of collective bargaining process, roles and responsibilities. Council approval for change orders on Capital Projects. Parks Comp Plan Update. Economic Development Plan. State Auditors Report. Executive Session Adjourn Page 2 of 22

3 CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MINUTES JANUARY 19, 2011 Call to Order: Mayor French called the City Council Study Session to order at 1:01 p.m., at the Ocean Shores Convention Center. The meeting was audio recorded. Council present: Councilmember Lynn, Crumpacker, Berry, Farra, Skewis, and Broadbent. Council excused: Councilmember Creighton. City Staff present: Mayor Garland French, Chief of Public Safety Mike Styner, Public Works Director Ken Lanfear, Director of Business and Tourism Ken Mercer, and Deputy Clerk Julie Minsker. Other Present: Greg Prothman with Prothman Services. Discussion: Mayor and Council Roles City Council and staff discussion with Prothman on a City Administrator position and Mayor and Council roles. Mayor French introduced Greg Prothman commenting that Mayor, Council, and City Administrator roles will be discussed. A decision needs to be made to create the City Administrator position so mayoral candidates will be aware when filing in June. Greg Prothman commented that he was the Des Moines city manager for thirteen years, an organizational consultant since 1996, and has conducted about 300 professional searches. There was Council discussion regarding: Mayor authority to hire without Council consent; creating an ordinance for Council confirmation prior to hiring key personnel; and budget overages. Mr. Prothman commented that Ocean Shores is a code city; RCW Title 35A delineates each of the elective bodies. Council is the policy body that sets the budget and gives direction. The Mayor is the administrative branch and operates the City on a day-to-day basis; hires and fires personnel, and signs contracts. Mayor proposes the budget, Council adopts the budget, and the Mayor executes the budget. The Mayor cannot hire unbudgeted positions without a budget amendment. There was Council and staff discussion regarding Mayor s authority to transfer funds, spending authority, and hiring ability. City Administrator: There was discussion between Council, staff and Mr. Prothman: in favor of a City Administrator with the reduction of the Mayor s salary hire a City Administrator with public works experience it is common for cities to combine City Administrator duties opposed to City Administrator as citizens voted for a strong mayor concern for level of expertise if duties are combined a City Administrator was discussed during the change of form of government a City Administrator will provide professional management begin City Administrator process and let final candidates, including new Mayor, assist with hiring decision use an interim administrator for transition process of new Mayor and Council Study Session Page 1 of 2 2. Approval of minutes for the January 19, 2011 City Council Study Session and September 12, 2011 Regular City Council Page 3 of 22

4 CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MINUTES JANUARY 19, 2011 Discussion Continued: City Administrator Mayor will appoint City Administrator and Council will confirm Prothman can perform a City Administrator search for a cost of $16,000 Prothman can help define Mayor and Council roles Council needs to decide if a City Administrator will be hired before mayoral candidates file for election City Administrator hiring process takes three to four months create City Administrator position by ordinance Prothman can help determine salary range have ordinances creating the City Administrator and reducing the Mayor s salary at the first meeting in February change Council meetings back to second and fourth Monday ordinance for Council confirmation of department heads a probation period for the City Administrator will limit quality of candidates City Administrator will be an exempt employee or have a personal contract with at will language and a separation agreement make the position at will and use performance evaluation at six months opposed to not having a probationary period encourage a City Administrator to become a resident by helping with moving expenses, but not a requirement a draft job description for City Administrator Prothman will submit a proposal to perform a City Administrator search Adjourn: Mayor French adjourned the City Council Study Session at 2:37 p.m. Signed: Attest: Garland E. French, Mayor Diane J. Foss, CMC City Clerk Study Session Page 2 of 2 2. Approval of minutes for the January 19, 2011 City Council Study Session and September 12, 2011 Regular City Council Page 4 of 22

5 City of Ocean Shores AGENDA BILL COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 26, 2011 SUBJECT: Surplus Street Department Equipment CATEGORY: CONSENT AGENDA ORDINANCE STAFF REPORT PUBLIC COMMUNICATION RESOLUTION PROCLAMATION OLD BUSINESS X REQUEST STUDY SESSION XX NEW BUSINESS CONSULTANT REPORT OTHER ATTACHMENTS: Resolution and Exhibit A SUMMARY/BACKGROUND: Surplus Street Department s worn out and unserviceable equipment. EXPENDITURE AMOUNT: -0- AMOUNT BUDGETED: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: BUDGET MODIFICATION REQUIRED: Authorize surplus and disposal of equipment. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: PRESENTED BY: Mayor French (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED CONTINUED DENIED COUNCIL REQUEST FOR INFORMATION: updated 4. Resolution A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Ocean Shores, Page 5 of 22

6 CITY OF OCEAN SHORES, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OCEAN SHORES, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE SURPLUS OF AND DECLARING CERTAIN MISCELLANEOUS EQUIPMENT AS UNSERVICEABLE, INADEQUATE, OBSOLETE, WORN OUT OR UNFIT AND NO LONGER NECESSARY; AND DISPOSAL OF THE SURPLUS EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS FOR THE STREET DEPARTMENT WHEREAS, the City is authorized by RCW 35A to sell convey, lease or otherwise dispose of property which is unserviceable, inadequate, obsolete, worn out or unfit and is no longer necessary, material to, or useful in the City s street department operations; and WHEREAS, through the course of its general government and utility activities, the City accumulates miscellaneous equipment which is unserviceable, inadequate, obsolete, worn out and/or unfit to be used in the City s operations; and WHEREAS, it would be in the best public interest to dispose of miscellaneous equipment as it accumulates: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Ocean Shores, Washington that the miscellaneous street department equipment listed in Exhibit A hereto is deemed surplus to the City operation and declared as unserviceable, inadequate, obsolete, worn out or unfit and is no longer necessary. FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Ocean Shores that the Mayor or his designee is authorized, pursuant to Washington State Law, to dispose of such equipment. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Ocean Shores, Washington, at an open public meeting thereof on this 26 th day of September ATTEST: Garland E. French, Mayor Diane J. Foss, CMC City Clerk Resolution No. 4. Resolution A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Ocean Shores, Page 6 of 22

7 City of Ocean Shores, Washington Resolution No. Street Department Surplus Items Exhibit A 1) 1997 Teledyne hydraulic plate compactor. This was purchased brand new and used about hrs. It has been sitting in the shop for over 10 yrs. 2) Husqvarna riding lawn mower. Needs a new transmission, it costs more than the mower is worth. 3) 4 sets of seedoo trailer tires. Surf rescue uses a wider tire than what comes standard on the seedoo trailers. These have just been sitting out by the back fence. 4) 2001 New Holland Tractor with side mount flail head mower attachment. The transmission is out and estimates from equipment dealer to fix it are $10 $12,000 5) 1981 Ford F yard dump truck with sand spreader. Body is completely rusted out inside and out. It rains as hard on the inside as it does on the outside. No longer safe to operate the cab is full of mold and mildew. 6) 1987 Ford F wheel drive pick up. This is the old mechanics truck, it has serious carburetor problems and a bad transmission. 7) Ransome mower. Electric clutch that turns mower deck on and off is broken and parts are no longer available for these mowers. Resolution No. 4. Resolution A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Ocean Shores, Page 7 of 22

8 City of Ocean Shores AGENDA BILL COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 26, 2011 SUBJECT: Tonquin Avenue Bridge Replacement Project Change Orders. CATEGORY: CONSENT AGENDA ORDINANCE STAFF REPORT PUBLIC COMMUNICATION RESOLUTION PROCLAMATION OLD BUSINESS X REQUEST STUDY SESSION X NEW BUSINESS CONSULTANT REPORT OTHER ATTACHMENTS: Change orders #2, #3, #4, and #5. SUMMARY/BACKGROUND: Change order #1, signed April 1, 2011, was at no cost for change in material for the temporary sewer pipes. Change order #2 is an $11, credit for use of hot dipped galvanized utility hangers and hardware in lieu of stainless steel due to difficulty obtaining a domestic source of steel. Change order #3 is a $66, contract expenditure increase for resolution of the WSDOT negotiated settlement of Pier 1 ground improvement claim for work delay. Change order #4 is a $5, contract expenditure increase for detour cost for girder delivery. Change order #5 is a $23, credit for use of PS 46 PVC in lieu of steel for the water and sewer line casing due to difficulty obtaining a domestic source of steel. These four change orders have been approved by WSDOT H&LP. All expenditure amounts are within the current WSDOT funded contract with no City money involvement. EXPENDITURE AMOUNT: $71, CREDIT AMOUNT: $35, AMOUNT BUDGETED: Original contract with Jennings, Inc. $1,913, ESTIMATED CONTRACT TOTAL AFTER CHANGES: $1,950, BUDGET MODIFICATION REQUIRED: 0 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the four WSDOT approved change orders. MAYORS RECOMMENDATION: PRESENTED BY: Karla R. Roberts (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED CONTINUED DENIED COUNCIL REQUEST FOR INFORMATION: updated Page 8 of 22

9 CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 Contract Number: 09PW-08 : August 23, 2011 Federal Aid Number: BROS-0907(002) Contract Title: Tonquin Avenue Bridge Replacement Project Prime Contractor: Jennings NW, LLC Ordered by Engineer under the terms of Section of the Standard Specifications Change proposed by Contractor Endorsed by Contractor Surety Consent (if required) Attorney on Fact Original Contract Amount: $ 1,913, Current Contract Amount: $ 1,913, Estimated Net Change This Order: ($11,542.36) Estimated Contract Total After Change: $ 1,902, Approval Recommended Approval Recommended Project Engineer Leroy Clark AECOM Karla Roberts, Dept. of Public Works City of Ocean Shores Approval Recommended Approved Garland French, Mayor City of Ocean Shores Page 1 of 4 Page 9 of 22

10 CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 Hot Dip Galvanized Utility Hangers in lieu of Stainless Steel Utility Hangers Description of Work: Jennings NW notified the City that after thoroughly searching for a source for the specified domestic stainless steel rollers for the bridge utility hangers, a domestic source cannot be found and, therefore, requested permission to switch to foreign stainless steel or be given approval to substitute domestically produced hot dip galvanized rollers for the stainless steel specified. The request to substitute the use of foreign steel for domestic steel was denied by WSDOT Highways and Local Programs since the approval process, performed in Washington D.C., would take too long to be practical for this Project. As a result the City elected to use the hot dip galvanized utility hangers and hardware. Since this is a lower quality product, Jennings was asked to provide a credit proposal showing the detailed cost comparison of the two systems. 1) Why is this change order being written? This Change Order is generated at the request of the Contractor to authorize the substitution of hot dip galvanized utility hangers and hardware in lieu of the stainless steel utility hangers and hardware denoted on the Plans and in the Special Provisions. 2) What did the plans and specifications require? The Contract Plans and Special Provisions required stainless steel utility hangers and hardware. 3) Why won't the current plans work? This Contract carries a provision to use domestically produced steel and iron. The current Plans will not work because stainless steel utility hangers and hardware are not available domestically. Stainless steel utility hangers and hardware is only available via foreign producers at a cost in excess of $25,000 well over the limit provision of $2500 for foreign produced steel and iron materials. Staff has made several attempts to confirm the availability and cost. Of the five contacts only one supplier responded. This respondent confirmed the availability and the offered credit. 4) Which items will be added by this Change Order? A new item 84 will be added to reflect the credit for use of Hot Deep Galvanized Utility Hangers in lieu of the specified Stainless Steel Utility Hangers. 5) Which items will be affected by this Change Order? (Include increased or decreased plan quantities) No existing items will be affected. 6) What does this change order accomplish? This Change Order provides authorization for the use of hot dip galvanized hangers and hardware in lieu of Design s original intention to use stainless steel material. Page 2 of 4 Page 10 of 22

11 CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 7) How does this change order solve the problem? What is it you are asking the contractor to do? This Change Order solves the problem of procurement of domestically produced stainless steel utility hangers and hardware by authorizing the substitution of a domestically produced material that has a record of long life duration in similar environments. The Contractor has been asked to procure and supply hot dip galvanized utility hangers and hardware to be used in lieu of the stainless steel material specified in the original Plans and Specifications. 8) What new materials (if any) will be incorporated into this change order? Hot dip galvanized utility hangers and hardware, in lieu of stainless steel material, will be incorporated into the Contact by this Change Order. 9) Are you requiring the contractor to use a specific procedure to do this work? If so please explain the procedure in as much detail as possible. No specific procedure is being required of the Contractor for this work, rather, a specific treated material, i.e., hot dip galvanized material, is being requested. 10) Which units will you be using for this C.O.? (square foot, square yard, cubic yard, ton, Force Account etc.) List the item and how it will be paid. The new item, 84A Credit for use of HDG in lieu of stainless steel for utility hangers will be Lump Sum. 11) Will working days be affected by this change order? Contract Work Days will not be affected by this Change Order. If YES state the number of days that will be affected by this change order: N/A 12) Will we need an updated Progress Schedule from the Contractor to show the impact of the additional work resulting from this C.O.? This change to the Contract authorized by this Change Order will not affect the critical path of the Project Schedule and, therefore, an update of the schedule based on only on this Change Order is not required. SUMMARY OF QUANTITIES Item no. Change Description Unit Qty. Unit price Amount 84A New Credit for use of HDG in lieu of stainless steel for utility hangers LS 1 ($11,542.36) ($11,542.36) Subtotal new items ( $ 11,542.36) Net Increase (Decrease) to the Contract TOTAL ( $ 11,542.36) Page 3 of 4 Page 11 of 22

12 CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 Independent cost estimate and location of the work. The Hot Dip Galvanized (HDG) utility hangers shall be installed on the new Tonquin Avenue Bridge as shown on the Plan Sheets 20, 21, and 22 of 52. After review of the credit proposal, the Engineer contacted five suppliers for price quote for HDG vs. stainless steel (see attached backup). Of the five suppliers contacted, three didn t respond at all, one responded that they will have to order some of the components from HD Supply and he did not believe that his cost estimate would be more competitive than HD. Another one responded with a cost estimate for the HDG only (the Engineer requested a quote for the stainless steel as well in order to see what the credit estimate would be but did not receive a response even after multiple requests). The cost estimate provided by this last supplier for the HDG was $80, (see attached backup). The Contractor s cost estimate for the HDG was $56, Page 4 of 4 Page 12 of 22

13 CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 Contract Number: 09PW-08 : August 23, 2011 Federal Aid Number: BROS-0907(002) Contract Title: Tonquin Avenue Bridge Replacement Project Prime Contractor: Jennings NW, LLC Ordered by Engineer under the terms of Section of the Standard Specifications Change proposed by Contractor Endorsed by Contractor Surety Consent (if required) Attorney on Fact Original Contract Amount: $ 1,913, Current Contract Amount: $ 1,902, Estimated Net Change This Order: $ 66, Estimated Contract Total After Change: $ 1,968, Approval Recommended Approval Recommended Project Engineer Leroy Clark AECOM Karla Roberts, Dept. of Public Works City of Ocean Shores Approval Recommended Approved Garland French, Mayor City of Ocean Shores Page 1 of 4 Page 13 of 22

14 Pier 1 Ground Improvement Claim CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 Description of Work: The Contractor installed the first stone column, Column No. 23, at Pier 1, on 5/24/11 and experienced the edge of the embankment sink and heave the local ground north toward the canal approximately 4 to 5. Jennings put Hayward Baker on hold until a solution could be developed. The City / AECOM discussed the conditions with GeoEngineers and notified the Department of Fish and Wildlife. After review of the site condition and alternative construction options and, after the Department of Fish and Wildlife allowed work to continue provided that the movement did not exceed 3 5 feet laterally, the City / AECOM directed the Contractor on 5/27/11 to proceed with the stone column work. Work resumed on 5/31/11 (after the Memorial Day weekend). Jennings notified the City/AECOM that this delay resulted in schedule delay, additional direct and indirect costs for Jennings, and additional direct cost for Hayward Baker (Ground Improvements Subcontractor). After review of Jennings original cost and time request and further negotiations, settlement was reached. 1) Why is this change order being written? This Change Order is generated to authorize the addition of the negotiated Pier 1 Ground Improvement embankment heave claim settlement to the Contract. 2) What did the plans and specifications require? The Contract Plans and Special Provisions did not anticipate any embankment heave at the piers. The Special Provisions required the Contractor to submit a plan of means and methods for the installation of the stone columns while also dictating the means by requiring a certain level of energy for the densification of the native soils. 3) Why won't the current plans work? The current Plans do not work because they did not anticipate any movement of earth caused by the vibration involved with the installation of the stone column foundation. Also, the Plans and Special Provisions required a Contractor means and methods submittal for Stone Column installation while also requiring a level of minimal energy for densification. The Contract Special Provisions committed the error of requiring Contractor means and methods while also requiring an Engineer means. 4) Which items will be added by this Change Order? Item 85A Ground Improvements Claim 5) Which items will be affected by this Change Order? (Include increased or decreased plan quantities) No existing contract bid items will be affected in any way by this Change Order. 6) What does this change order accomplish? This Change Order authorizes compensation for the negotiated full and complete settlement including additional Contract time of the Ground Improvement at Pier 1 claim. Page 2 of 4 Page 14 of 22

15 CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 7) How does this change order solve the problem? What is it you are asking the contractor to do? This Change Order resolves the Pier 1 Ground Improvement claim issue by authorizing the negotiated fair and equitable resolution for delay for Engineer assessment and subsequent Engineer recommendation and direction. The Contractor was directed to remove the excess embankment placed for a work bench at Pier 1 and to then continue with the installation of the stone columns at Pier 1. 8) What new materials (if any) will be incorporated into this change order? No new material is incorporated into this Change Order. 9) Are you requiring the contractor to use a specific procedure to do this work? If so please explain the procedure in as much detail as possible. No specific or new procedure was required of the Contractor for this work. 10) Which units will you be using for this C.O.? (square foot, square yard, cubic yard, ton, Force Account etc.) List the item and how it will be paid. A new Item 85A Ground Improvements Claim will be added to the contract and paid by Lump Sum. The Lump Sum Item 85A will be full and complete settlement of the negotiated Pier 1 Ground Improvement Claim of Jennings NW and Subcontractor Hayward Baker including fourteen additional Contract Work Days; No Further Claim Action by Jennings NW or Hayward Baker will be pursued on this Issue. 11) Will working days be affected by this change order? Contract Work Days are affected by this Change Order. If YES state the number of days that will be affected by this change order: Fourteen (14) additional Work Days are added to this Contract as part of the compensation of the Ground Improvement claim at Pier 1. 12) Will we need an updated Progress Schedule from the Contractor to show the impact of the additional work resulting from this C.O.? The Contractor has been requested to update their Project Schedule to reflect the resolution of this Ground Improvement claim at Pier 1. SUMMARY OF QUANTITIES Item no. Change Description Unit Qty. Unit price Amount 85A New Ground Improvements Claim LS 1 $66, $ 66, Subtotal new items $ 66, Net Increase (Decrease) to the Contract TOTAL $ 66, Page 3 of 4 Page 15 of 22

16 CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 Cost Settlement: Jennings NW original cost request of $83, was made up of the following: Hayward Baker (Ground Improvements Sub) standby cost including all markups: $35, Jennings NW Direct Costs including all markups: $16, Jennings NW Indirect Costs including all markups: $27, Rainier Steel Load and Reload including all markups: $2, Additional Work Days After review of the original cost request and after multiple negotiation conference calls, agreement was reached on a fair and equitable settlement for both sides. The negotiated, final settlement is $66, and is composed of the following: Hayward Baker (Ground Improvements Sub) standby cost including all markups: $35, Jennings NW Direct Costs including all markups: $13, Jennings NW Indirect Costs including all markups: $13, Rainier Steel Load and Reload including all markups: $2, Fourteen (14) Work Days are added to the Contact. This Change Order represents full and complete settlement, including contract time, for all issues related to the Ground Improvement. Page 4 of 4 Page 16 of 22

17 CHANGE ORDER NO. 4 Contract Number: 09PW-08 : August 26, 2011 Federal Aid Number: BROS-0907(002) Contract Title: Tonquin Avenue Bridge Replacement Project Prime Contractor: Jennings NW, LLC Ordered by Engineer under the terms of Section of the Standard Specifications Change proposed by Contractor Endorsed by Contractor Surety Consent (if required) Attorney on Fact Original Contract Amount: $ 1,913, Current Contract Amount: $ 1,968, Estimated Net Change This Order: $ 5, Estimated Contract Total After Change: $ 1,973, Approval Recommended Approval Recommended Project Engineer Leroy Clark AECOM Karla Roberts, Dept. of Public Works City of Ocean Shores Approval Recommended Approved Garland French, Mayor City of Ocean Shores Page 1 of 3 Page 17 of 22

18 Description of Work: CHANGE ORDER NO. 4 Cost of Detour Route for SR109 Bridge No. 109/6 On May 6, 2011 WSDOT Maintenance and the WSDOT Bridge Preservation Office ordered an immediate restriction of loads using Bridge No. 109/6 located at MP The award of the Tonquin Bridge project was January 20, Jennings NW was notified of the load restriction on Bridge 109/6 by the City on May 6 th, As a result Jennings could not deliver the girders for the Tonquin Bridge as planned via Bridge 109/6 and had to use a detour route. The required detour created a cost increase of $1, per girder. The City/AECOM reviewed Jennings request for additional cost and found it to be correct and justified. 1) Why is this change order being written? This Change Order is generated to authorize compensation for the additional girder delivery time as a result of WSDOT Bridge Preservation s order for restricted loads on Bridge No. 109/6 at MP 6.45 on SR 109 in May of 2011 and after bid and award of Contract. 2) What did the plans and specifications require? The Contract Plans and Special Provisions did not address the bridge load restriction or detour. 3) Why won't the current plans work? The current Plans do not work because they did not anticipate the load restriction on Bridge No. 109/6 at MP 6.45 in May of The heavy haul trucks that were Permitted for delivery of the five girders were over the load limit of the bridge both loaded with girders and even when empty. As a result, girder delivery required following the posted Detour Route. 4) Which items will be added by this Change Order? Item 86A Detour Cost for Girders Delivery 5) Which items will be affected by this Change Order? (Include increased or decreased plan quantities) No existing contract bid items will be affected in any way by this Change Order. 6) What does this change order accomplish? This Change Order authorizes compensation for the added cost of the 13 mile detour with steep grade, narrow, and curves as a result of the load restriction on Bridge No. 109/6 at MP 6.45 on SR ) How does this change order solve the problem? What is it you are asking the contractor to do? This Change Order fairly compensates for the added time needed for delivery of the five bridge girders. The Contractor was directed to deliver via the detour route that included steep grades and narrow, winding curves. WSDOT Maintenance ordered the restricted load to be in effect in early May. Page 2 of 3 Page 18 of 22

19 CHANGE ORDER NO. 4 8) What new materials (if any) will be incorporated into this change order? No new material is incorporated into this Change Order. 9) Are you requiring the contractor to use a specific procedure to do this work? If so please explain the procedure in as much detail as possible. No specific or new procedure was required of the Contractor for this work. The Contractor was directed to follow the Detour Route for Bridge No. 109/6 at MP 6.45 on SR ) Which units will you be using for this C.O.? (square foot, square yard, cubic yard, ton, Force Account etc.) List the item and how it will be paid. A new Item 86A Detour Cost for Girders Delivery will be added to the contract and paid by Lump Sum. The Lump Sum Item 86A will be Full and Complete Compensation for the Added Cost of the Detour for Bridge 109/6 at MP 6.45 on SR 109; LS, $5, ) Will working days be affected by this change order? Contract Work Days are NOT affected by this Change Order. If YES state the number of days that will be affected by this change order: N/A 12) Will we need an updated Progress Schedule from the Contractor to show the impact of the additional work resulting from this C.O.? No. SUMMARY OF QUANTITIES Item no. Change Description Unit Qty. Unit price Amount 86A New Detour Cost for Girders Delivery LS 1 $5, $ 5, Subtotal new items $ 5, Net Increase (Decrease) to the Contract TOTAL $ 5, Page 3 of 3 Page 19 of 22

20 CHANGE ORDER NO. 5 Contract Number: 09PW-08 : September 15, 2011 Federal Aid Number: BROS-0907(002) Contract Title: Tonquin Avenue Bridge Replacement Project Prime Contractor: Jennings NW, LLC Ordered by Engineer under the terms of Section of the Standard Specifications Change proposed by Contractor Endorsed by Contractor Surety Consent (if required) Attorney on Fact Original Contract Amount: $ 1,913, Current Contract Amount: $ 1,973, Estimated Net Change This Order: ($ 23,870.00) Estimated Contract Total After Change: $ 1,950, Approval Recommended Approval Recommended Project Engineer Leroy Clark AECOM Karla Roberts, Dept. of Public Works City of Ocean Shores Approval Recommended Approved Garland French, Mayor City of Ocean Shores Page 1 of 3 Page 20 of 22

21 Utility Pipe Casing Substitution CHANGE ORDER NO. 5 Description of Work: The prime Contractor, Jennings NW, advised of a supplier delay in delivery of the coated casing pipe as called for in the plans for the Sewer and Water casings under the bridge approach slabs. As a result, Jennings NW requested approval to use PS 46 PVC in lieu of steel casing for the 16 inch diameter water main casing and the 36 inch diameter sewer line casing beneath the bridge approach slabs and a credit of $23, for use of the PVC in lieu of the steel casing. The City/AECOM reviewed Jennings request for substitution and approved the proposal. 1) Why is this change order being written? This Change Order is generated to authorize the substitution of casing for utility pipes beneath the bridge approach slabs and provides a credit of $23, to the Contract for this substitution. This Project carries the provision that allows only the use of domestically produced steel/iron material. The approved supplier has recently advised that American produced steel pipe for casing will not be available for delivery for four months for this Project. This Project s schedule reflects Physical Completion in mid October ) What did the plans and specifications require? The Contract Plans and Special Provisions required 36 diameter steel casing for the 20 diameter ductile iron sewer line and 16 diameter steel casing for the 8 diameter ductile iron water main beneath the two bridge approach slabs. 3) Why won't the current plans work? The current Plans do not work because the supplier has advised that the steel casing material will not be available for delivery until approximately January This Project is scheduled to be Physically Complete in October A four month delay in delivery would require an extension to early City of Ocean Shores Sewer and Water Maintenance Supervision has made review and approved this substitution. 4) Which items will be added by this Change Order? New lump sum item 28.1A Credit for 36 PVC Pipe in Lieu of Steel Casing will be added. New lump sum item 29.1A Credit for 16 PVC Pipe in Lieu of Steel Casing will be added. 5) Which items will be affected by this Change Order? (Include increased or decreased plan quantities) No existing contract bid items will be affected in any way by this Change Order. 6) What does this change order accomplish? This Change Order authorizes the substitution of PS 46 PVC pipe casing for steel casing beneath the bridge approaches for the credit of $23, to the Contract. Page 2 of 3 Page 21 of 22

22 CHANGE ORDER NO. 5 7) How does this change order solve the problem? What is it you are asking the contractor to do? This Change Order authorizes the substitution of the more readily available utility pipe casing that will allow the Physical Completion of the Project within the original Contract timeframe. The Contractor is asked to provide PS 46 PVC casings for the sanitary sewer force main and water main beneath the bridge approach slabs. 8) What new materials (if any) will be incorporated into this change order? PS 46 PVC pipe casings, 16 diameter and 36 diameter, new material incorporated into the Project by this Change Order. 9) Are you requiring the contractor to use a specific procedure to do this work? If so please explain the procedure in as much detail as possible. No specific or new procedure is required of the Contractor for this work. 10) Which units will you be using for this C.O.? (square foot, square yard, cubic yard, ton, Force Account etc.) List the item and how it will be paid. New Lump Sum Items are created to reflect the credit for use of PVC Pipe in lieu of the specified steel casing for water main and sewer force main. 11) Will working days be affected by this change order? Contract Work Days are NOT affected by this Change Order. If YES state the number of days that will be affected by this change order: N/A 12) Will we need an updated Progress Schedule from the Contractor to show the impact of the additional work resulting from this C.O.? An updated Progress Schedule is not required for this substitution. SUMMARY OF QUANTITIES Item no. Change Description Unit Qty. Unit price Amount 28.1A New Credit for 36 PVC Pipe in Lieu of Steel Casing LS 1 ($16,940.00) ($16,940.00) 29.1A New Credit for 36 PVC Pipe in Lieu of Steel Casing LS 1 ($6,930.00) ($6,930.00) Subtotal new items ($ 23,870.00) Net Increase (Decrease) to the Contract TOTAL ($ 23,870.00) Page 3 of 3 Page 22 of 22