Streetscape Project Finds Pipe Problems

“The biggest expense we’re looking at is replacing some 36” pipe that rusted out”

The City of Blue Ridge received a bill this week for $32,804.07. The bill was part of a change order for the on-going Streetscape project, a beautification effort currently taking place in downtown Blue Ridge. According to Joy Still, the project ran into several snags with water pipes.

Delivering a presentation at Tuesday’s workshop, Still listed some of the largest expenses on the change order. According to uslegal.com “a change order is a written order signed by a contracting officer, directing the contractor to make a change that the changes clause authorizes the contracting officer to order without the contractor’s consent.” In the case of the Streetscape project, the change order deals mainly with water pipes.

“The biggest expense we’re looking at is replacing some 36” pipe that rusted out,”

she explained. She said the 36 inch pipe runs parallel to the railroad track and feeds into the culvert drain line. Still stated the proposal is to replace it with two 24 inch lines.

“This was part of the infrastructure that the city is responsible for and it is really in bad shape,”

she said. Including installation, the cost of the two pipes is $10,858.30. Still said that the funding for this could either come from the city’s general fund or Streetscape project money. In response, Mayor Donna Whitener said she was not sure if it could come out of the Streetscape money.

Still explained that another expense is concrete needed to fill an 18 inch pipe to seal it up. The cost of the concrete for this is $4800.

“The other pipe issue was one that wasn’t noted on the drawing when it was bid,”

she continued. She said this pipe was noted as a 18 inch pipe on the drawing, when a 24 inch was required.

During the workshop, Mayor Whitener said that funding for the pipes can possibly come from SPLOST money, the water department, or the transportation grant.

Still said that they have reduced the change order by $1500. The contractor, she said, was able to reduce the price because he did not use as much pipe as initially projected.

Despite the minor pipe problems, she said