[KHTS] – Los Angeles County officials approved Tuesday a $450,000 change in work on a $37 million project to build a State Route 126 and Commerce Center Drive Interchange bridge in Castaic.
The project, which began in 2013, includes a cast-in-place, prestressed reinforced concrete bridge, asphalt concrete pavement, Portland cement concrete pavement on base material, reinforced concrete barriers, soil-cement bank stabilization, drainage facilities, traffic signals and intelligent transportation systems, according to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors agenda.
The State Route 126 Interchange Improvement project is being constructed in partnership with the County, Metro, and Caltrans, and once completed, is expected to provide significant traffic flow and safety improvements for area residents and commuters, reduced travel times and enhanced access to the Valencia Commerce Center development, according to th
e Department of Public Works website.
It will also create about 1,600 temporary jobs during the three-year construction period and result in an additional 7,000 permanent jobs at the Commerce Center.
The request adds $450,000 for roadway excavation to the already $37,381,851.17 contract, according to the agenda. The change in work will compensate the contractor. No additional working days are expected to be required.
If the changes in work are not approved, the project completion is expected to be delayed and there would be an increase in costs, officials said.
The original contract amount was $35,387,229.10.
A change in work was previously approved by a “delegated authority” to add $1,315,834.07 to the budget, officials said. Another $228,788 was approved by the Board of Supervisors.
The funds for the project are coming from the Fifth Supervisorial District’s Road Construction Program in the Fiscal Year 2014-15 Road Fund Budget, according to the agenda.
The purpose of the changes are to support of the timely completion of the projects while avoiding delays and the potential for claims, according to the agenda item.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
Tweet This
Facebook
Digg This
Bookmark
Stumble
RSS
REAL NAMES ONLY: All posters must use their real individual or business name. This applies equally to Twitter account holders who use a nickname.
8 Comments
Even I can decipher that language. The contractor found a weak spot/error in the contract language(or the included scope of work) and submitted a change order request that included the number of days the project schedule would slip without a cost increase. That of course is equal to a late finish (completion date), and the contract language probably has penalties for a late finish that must be paid by whichever party caused it. In this case I’m guessing that would be me and you, aka LA County.
It’s probably actually saving money to pay them now.
But stay tuned; a clever contractor rarely submits a complete list of such issues; it’s much more lucrative to submit them over the entire project, especially at key points on the schedule.
The most fun is the after-project equivalent of an open stakes poker game. Both sides sit down with stacks of paper (OK, laptops/tablets and data files and a covey of lawyers) and playing Truth or Dare over who owes who, and just how much.
Trevor Gothie
Kathleen Nagel
I drive by this bridge project every work day. Three years and $37 million sounds like a huge amount of money for such a project. We’re not talking about going over a big river here…just going over road. And not for the life of me can I figure out how this bridge will add 7,000 jobs to the Commerce Center. I’d like to see the study that came up with that figure.
Can’t tell from the diagram — is there some provision for a pedestrian/bike crossing of the 5 so those of us using the bike path on Newhall Ranch and wanting to cross to Castaic don’t wind up having to backtrack to Rye Canyon or doing a perilous (and undoubtedly illegal) skulk along the shoulder?
This was in fact a $53 million dollar project. Don’t know where you got $37 million? I have copies of all the Board of Supervisors approval, if anyone wants to see them. It will also incidently serve the 4060 unit Mission Village tract of Newhall Ranch (directly across the river), which is probably the main reason it is being built – required for their project. It was paid for by we tax payors of course, with state grants that should have gone to repairing our freeways, not supporting more sprawl. A lot of money was also borrowed from east side bridge and thorough fare distrcts, so when Canyon County traffic gets worse, they will have this project to thank. Newhall didn’t end up paying a dime for this. It really burns me that we subsidize big developers. No small business person would ever get gifts like this.
Savannah Eddy Laura Groce Kate Thornton Mona McNaughton June Ning Jessica Hernandez Molly MacKenzie
Clearly, I am in the wrong business….