Laserfiche WebLink
r <br /> <br />Item #10 Amount - 53,500.00 <br />The contractor feels that the damage to his seed drill was the <br />result changes in conditions. <br />This is part of the project and the contractor should have <br />built an equipment allowance into his bid. There is no <br />justification for this claim. It is my understanding that the <br />equipment used was not adequate for this project, which caused <br />some of this problem. <br />Item #11 Amount - S5,500.00 <br />The contractor quarried and stockpiled a large quantity of <br />riprap for which he feels that he should be paid <br />The State has agreed to pay for surplus riprap, that meets the <br />specification, at a rate of $28.00 a cubic yard (approx. 48). <br />The contractor feels that the rate per cubic yard is low and <br />that he has paid upwards of $50.00 a cubic yard. I am inclined <br />to give the contractor the benefit of the doubt on this. It <br />should be noted that the contractor must remove and dispose of <br />the stockpiled riprap that doesn't meet specification. <br />Item #12 Amount - $40,000 <br />The contractor contends that he Chen's Hil~_stockpile was <br />much deeper than what should have been anticipated and as such <br />he should be compensated for moving the additional topsoil. <br />This claim is based on a rectangular hole 6 feet deep x 200 <br />feet x 300 feet. At this point and time it is impossible to <br />determine whether or not such a depression ever existed. The <br />grades on Map #7 are established on 20' contours and as such <br />any depression or lift of less than that amount would not have <br />been noted. At the time of the site visit, I was able to note <br />that along a portion of the east side the area adjacent to <br />where the topsoil had been removed was lower that the existing <br />undisturbed vegetation. <br />In discussing this with Mr. Colgate, he had no recollection of <br />any topsoil being removed in the area that would have resulted <br />