Thursday, December 18, 2008

Lilac Drive Pump Station discussion 12/16/08

Tuesday's discussion included an additional $100,000 in spending on the Lilac Drive Pump Station. Here is the 25 minute clip from the December 16 Council meeting:

I was a bit surprised to see how Councilman Ecke voted.

Tim White


Anonymous said...

Another amazing bit of video into the inner workings of town government. Comments from Dennis concerning how changing the whole design just sort of took place as they went the extra 5 or 10 ft was utterly amazing.

Most enterprises that have involvement in large public infrastructure projects understand that you must follow the plan. If you cannot follow the written plan you must stop work, place the infrastructure in a safe mode and go back to the design authority so that the design can be re-worked. 'Designs' are never to be an after the fact activity - - well, except maybe here in Cheshire! There are some additional nuances for minor design issues, but for big ones, you stop first, fix - - budget included - - the plan and then proceed.

After the fact designs always wind up costing more in the long run. Letting the bull dozer operator decide where and how to excavate on a large project like this isn't exactly the best way to wind up with a project that follows a set of design drawings.

Dennis and all those working on this project may be in need of some re-training concerning the basics associated with the design-build process.

As for the town chasing M&E for a lack of correct as-built drawings, good luck. One has to wonder why a town with a building inspection department, a town engineer and a DPW etc would be so reliant upon an outside engineering firm that the town would not have some of it's own building professionals review for correctness and completeness as well as approve all project drawings submitted by their hired outside engineers.

And of course one has to wonder out loud why in the end after waiting since 1978 that it appears to be the bull dozer driver who was the very first person to realize the plan was incorrect. Town staff must have been involved in the initial scoping and estimating for this job and it would be assumed that someone in town government should be held accountable for missing the very big error in the 30 year old drawings which appears to be responsible for the electorate getting the wrong facts in the first place.

Anonymous said...