2001-24240 RESO
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-24240
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING A CHANGE ORDER,
IN THE AMOUNT OF $25,167.00, WITH COAST TO COAST
CONSTRUCTION BY LEVI, INC. FOR UNFORSEEN STRUCTURAL
REPAffi REQUIREMENTS FOR THE HISTORIC AND STRUCTURAL
REPAIRS AND RENOVATIONS OF THE FIRE STATION #2 HOSE TOWER
BUILDING.
WHEREAS, on July 12, 1999, the Mayor and City Commission awarded a construction
contract to Coast to Coast Construction by Levi, Inc. for the historic and structural renovation of the
Fire Station #2 Hose Tower Building; and
WHEREAS, during construction, additional unforseen structural deterioration was found that
was beyond the scope of work of the original contract and necessitated additional structural repairs
to the Fire Station #2 Hose Tower Building; and
WHEREAS, the necessary additional repairs were reviewed by Property Management and
E.N. Beachamps who served as the architect/engineer and special threshold inspector on the project,
for accuracy in the scope of repair work that was necessary for the project and the estimated costs
of the repairs; and
WHEREAS, to comply with the South Florida Building Code, the additional structural
repairs were required to provide structural stability of the building and to obtain the required
occupancy certifications; and
WHEREAS, the funds for the Change Order, in the amount of $25, 167 .00, is available from
the Convention Center Capital Account No. 441.2146.069358.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City
Commission herein approve a Change Order, in the amount of $25,167.00, with Coast to Coast
Construction by Levi, Inc. for unforseen structural repair requirements for the historic and structural
repairs and renovations of the Fire Station #2 Hose Tower Building.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 31st
day of January ,2001
A)}~ST: L
~f~
CITY CLERK
~~
MAYOR
C:\MyFtluJRESOIl}{ontuw.,-.wpd
AP._____M1O
FOnIIaLANGlUNll
aPORIHIQIIION
~ I-If-Of
~
."'.""....
~ ''1. U~II^IU..,;)
!t:.I "'....~
.
.-
~
(
"
~...
facsimile
T R A. '" S M. I TT A L
--.....-.-.....
to:
flDc#:
I'll:
Ule:
JIIIg..:
Brad,
Mr. Bmd Judd
305 673.7963
FifO Hose Towu
November 23. 1999
.1, including1hfa cover sheet.
Wo havo tho followllle commoaa Oft lbe Ho.oT~wo~, fa- _ .,~,~.,
t.
2.
3,
of.
. ",
, ,
, .
.,.
Roof:
Wo,...... nol "blolo ... put tho _ on tho roofond we did nOl have "ccoo to Sel up
clo.e 10 Ibe ruof, Ilblnk this II a1e&illmlre extra. The pm. Ippli.. for tho panpet, .
6tb Floor:
The central portion .(th. /IoOl'roquin:d '.Iomiv. repaln os shown 011 the drawinso,
Considerable wnrk WIll also Ihown on lb. beams. lb. percenlA~e nfextru should be:
Ploor ClS~ replace
&a",. 40% .,.1.....
ExlA:rior:
We wen: nul able 10 aecess dI1s ponklu up CIoIOIO dctc:nnlno tho aClUDl
probl'"
I. W.'1l
have 10
IBkohlo
word on
it.
5th Flnnr:
Pleaso Q1110 discuss.
flllm\llecllsk(ff...
Ilh..h II. D_" .....
VIl:e .....-
E.N. BtchIIrC>Ilnd ^"'_. 1110.
82110 Blue Laooon Driv.. SUitt 180
MImi. F1oIi~' a3121-11lOO
(3Q8)2B1107llllZ
for. ClOIl 2a~02
. . f0P;r ;J~)~
E.N. BECHAMPS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
January 27. 2000
CONSULTING ENGINEERS.LAND SURVEYORS.PLANNERS
5200 BLUE LAGOON DRlVE
SUITE 150
MIAMI, FLORlDA 33126-7000
(305) 266-7062
FAX (305) 266-6402
Mr. Brad A. Judd
Director
Property Management Division
City of Miami Beach
1245 Michigan Avenue
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
'"
'"
-,Ir...
Re:
City of Miami Beach
Fire Hose Tower #2
Cost Over-runs
r-
Dear Mr. Judd.
As per your request, we have reviewed the cost over-runs submitted for the above-mentioned
project. Our analysis consisted of field visits and a review of the paperwork submitted by the
contractor. We have submitted the review of the paperwork at an earlier date. In our estimation the
contractor is entitled to approximately half of his original request. The contractor has undoubtably
executed far more work in the field than was originally called for in the repair docwnents.
However, barring a few locations and a few circumstances, we do not feel that all this excess work
is justified. This letter will attempt to justify reasons for the extras and explain why other extras
have been denied. .
The drawings call for the removal of loose concrete, routing of cracks, rehabilitation of the steel and
patching or restoration of the concrete, Loose concrete in the form of spalls or cracks is usually an
indication of excessive corrosion on the reinforcing steel under the surface of the concrete.
However, instead of simply removing the loose concrete to the extent of solid concrete, the
contractor ;;tppe3.red to he ch~ir..g c~rro~ior.. ~n the reinforci:1g ~lt~e1. 1\5 a result he ha:i renl(IVCU [ou
more concrete than was originally determined on the drawings and some of it was good, solid
concrete. But this was not the intent. Reinforcing steel starts to corrode as soon as it arrives on site.
Surface rusting is acceptable and unavoidable especially in an atmosphere in close proximity to the
ocean, Chasing surface corrosion will almost always result in all the concrete being chipped out,
and this is the case in several locations. The extras for doing this are not justified.
Nonetheless, there are some locations and circumstances where the contractor is justified in
receiving an extra. Our condition survey mainly consisted of a visual observation of the existing
conditions, and these were recorded on the repair documents. Often times wc are not able to
determine the full extent of the crack or the loose concrete since we could not get up close enough
()
f.
to the members, ego the ceilings and the upper walls of the stairwell. Sometimes the deterioration
can only be determined by dragging a chain or tapping the surface with a hammer.
As you are aware, our condition survey did not include chain drags or comprehensive tapping with a
hammer. This would have increased the price of the survey enormously and it would not have been
cost effective for a building of this size. The extra costs for the repairs may have been identified in
a more comprehensive survey, but the owner would have had to pay for them nonetheless. In this
instance, the owner has saved the engineering fees. A particularly good exanlple of this is the roof
slab. We noticed a few cracks on the soffit of the roof and called for their repair. However, when
the contractor started to open the cracks he found that steel on the roof surface was also deteriorated.
We did not have access to this area since it required chipping from the soffit or removal of the
roofing. The entire roof slab had to be removed and replaced along with the waterproofing.
Another reason for justified cost over-runs is the presence of sea sand in the concrete mix. This is
very deceptive for the survey crew. The concrete will at most exhibit a few cracks or discoloration
and appear to be fairly normal, However, when the demolition crews try to chip open the adjacent
cracks, the concrete literally explodes. This has happened in several locations and the contractor
has had to patch larger areas than originally anticipated. Sea sand is highly corrosive to the
reinforcing steel, and if it is not removed, it will continue to deteriorate the steel. This has
particularly occurred in the stairwell. These costs are justified as unforeseen conditions,
In general, restoration projects usually have more unforeseen conditions than projects involving
new construction. Often, walls and slabs may have conduits and piping that were relocated during
construction or added at a later date and the changes are undocumented, This may make repairs
more complex than originally anticipated resulting in extra costs. Deficiencies in original
construction are often brought to the surface only when the demolition is underway. These
deficiencies are carefully hidden such that a visual survey cannot detect them. Extras resulting from
these are usually justified if they affect the scope of the work.
To date we have found the contractor to be conscientious but somewhat over-zealous. Nonetheless,
the prices for approved extras appear to be fair and reasonable.
Once again we thank you for this opportunity to be of service to you. If you have any questions or
comments, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Very Truly Yours,
Khush M. Daruwalla, P .E.
Project Manager
cc: Bruce Lamberto
E.N. Bechamps and Associates, Inc. . 5200 Blue Lagoon Drive, Suite 150, Miami, Florida 33126
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA 33139
h1tp:\1cl.mlaml-beaCh.fl.uo
~
-
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM NO. ~t/-O/
TO:
Mayor Neisen O. Kasdin and
Members ofthe City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez \ ~
City Manager 0 0
DATE: January 31, 2001
FROM:
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING A CHANGE ORDER IN
THE AMOUNT OF $25,167 WITH COAST TO COAST CONSTRUCTION
BY LEVI INC., FOR UNFORSEEN STRUCTURAL REPAffi
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE HISTORIC AND STRUCTURAL REPAffiS
AND RENOVATIONS OF THE FIRE STATION #2 HOSE TOWER
BUILDING.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the Resolution.
AMOUNT AND FUNDING:
$25,167.00
Funds are available from the Convention Center Capital Account
No. 441.2146.069358.
ANALYSIS:
On July 21, 1999, the Mayor and City Commission approved the award ofa construction contract
to Coast to Coast Construction by Levi, Inc., (Contractor) in the amount of $154,066 on Commission
Memorandum 541-99, for the complete structural repair and Historic Restoration of the Fire Station
No.2 Hose Tower Building. Funding for the project was provided from a total amount of
$500,000.00 that had been set aside for Fire Station NO.2 from the $35,000,000.00 Inter-local
agreement for the Convention Center and TOPA because Fire Station NO.2 supports both facilities'
emergency needs.
E. N. Bechamps and Associates, Inc. (Consulting Engineers) was contracted to provide architectural
and engineering services that included the development of the construction specifications and
construction documents used for the bid of the project. E.N. Bechamps and Associates, Inc. was also
contracted to act on behalf of the City of Miami Beach as the project's special threshold inspectors
to ensure strict compliance with the scope of work. The special threshold inspections are required for
structural repair projects on buildings over 40 feet in height.
AGENDA ITEM
C! 7 "c
/-3/-0/
n A Tli'.
Page 2
January 31, 2000
ANALYSIS (Contd.)
During construction, hidden and unforseen structural damage was discovered by the contractor who
indicated that the inner reinforcing steel bars had corroded and swelled inside the concrete resulting
in excessive spalling of the concrete. The support columns and waIls had also eroded and had become
structurally unsafe. These findings required additional bracing and shoring during the construction
phase and the removal and total replacement of the concrete roof of the building and the replacement
of some of the concrete stair bed forms.
This condition was due to water infiltration and salt deposits from the sand used during original
construction. This condition necessitated the additional structural demolition and restoration. Coast
to Coast by Levi, (Contractor) submitted a request for payment as a change order in the amount of
$37,000.00 for the repair work caused by the unforseen conditions. Property Management and E.N.
Bechamps, (Structural Engineers), discussed the change order request and after a site visit and after
reviewing the area in question, concluded and mutually agreed that the work was indeed unforseen
but that the contractor was not due the full amount of his request.
The contractor had exceeded the required demolition by removing some non-defective sections of
concrete and therefore caused a portion of the increase in cost. Property Management and E.N.
Bechamps and Associates concurred with the findings and developed a realistic cost estimate of the
required work. An agreement on a proper cost for the additional work was reached with the
contractor for the additional work and materials for $25,167.00.
The City Manager recorrunends that the Mayor and City Conunission adopt the Resolution approving
the change order of $25,167.00 with Coast to Coast Construction by Levi Inc, for the unforseen
structural repairs to the Fire Station #2 Hose Tower Building.
~v.c
JMG~/BAJ ~
C:\Mf'~\PZIhMtoww'.wpd