by Matt Marquardt –
MASON CITY – A repair project on the 12th Street NW overpass has wrapped up but City Councilman Travis Hickey isn’t satisfied with the results.
“I’ve had numerous comments and calls on this” from citizens, Hickey said.
“We were supposed to fix all the structural integrity” on the bridge, Hickey noted at Tuesday’s council meeting. “But there is still some significant cracks, when you drive up and down the bridge.”
“The cracking that you are referring to is the actual street pavement, the only part of the concrete that we replaced as far as the structural integrity of the bridge was on the approach section,” City Engineer Mark Rahm explained. “That is actual street pavement and has nothing to do with the bridge structure itself.”
The cost of the project was $74,382.55 according to a city hall memo, and the scope of the project involved “the replacement of bridge approach pavement panels at both ends of the bridge” as well as “coping” related to the mechanical stabilized earth walls and joint replacements and “routing and sealing of street pavement.”
Hickey said Wednesday that the work didn’t amount to much more than a “band-aid” and he worried that the City would need to be back out there performing more repairs soon.
The council voted 4-1 to approve final payment for the project to Yaggy Colby; Hickey voted no, and Council member Jean Marinos was absent.
A press release from the City in early July indicated that “this project will include the partial replacement of the bridge approach pavement.”
A drive up and down the bridge Thursday morning showed significant cracks on both the east and west ends of the bridge (see photos).
The City Council had an opportunity earlier this spring when the project was being discussed to hold those responsible for building the bridge in the first place, Henkel Construction (general contractor) and WHKS Engineers and ask them to share in the cost of fixing the problem.
Instead, council members Scott Tornquist and Jean Marinos balked at the idea.
According to meeting minutes from an April 12th council work session, discussing the quandary the City faced with the bridge, Tornquist stated, with Marinos agreeing, “the problems were disappointing, but the City would spend a lot more money trying to assess blame.”
Hickey agreed on Thursday night that simply going to WHKS and Henkel this past spring and asking them to fix the problem might have been a good idea. “I don’t disagree with that,” he said.
Watch video:
With the attitude that Henkel showed on this, I would exclude them from any future bids if they don’t stand behind their work. Low bids do not equal quality work. If they wanted to get more business from the city, you would think that they stand behind their work.
Wow and look at all the money that was wasted on the so called art down town. Could that money have been used to repair the over passes? Some thing to think about.
No. Those dollars were from hotel/motel tax “surplus” that City Hall “found” for Robin’s project. Those dollars have to go to parks, trails, art, stuff like that without getting more specific. We published a story on it WITH the Iowa code that spells out where the dollars have to go. It’s just too bad our elected leaders couldn’t bring forward projects to use our own tax dollars on. No leadership at City Hall.
The parks could have badly used that money.
At the first sign of problems, the City should have brought a neutral Engineer and inspected the approaches.
Contractors and Engineering firms must have insurance according to reasonable standards of municipal and State contracts. It would be quite suspect if there were no coverage, or the “tail” of the coverage was short.
Liability and Professional insurance is required to indemnify the municipality or entity (taxpayers) from risk. In this case, the City’s insurance advisor should have demanded such language in the contract.
In my opinion, $75,000 and change should have been pursued under the insurance policy, not the taxpayers.
Unfortunately this was a DOT project. As such there was no warranty or maintenance bond required. When the job was accepted the contractors had no obligation to repair any work. The DOT is usually very strict in their design and inspection but something must have slipped through or been designed wrong.
Then it behooves us to chase down DOT for reparations. If they accept it, they should assume the risk.
Isn’t the DOT story important? Don’t other cities want to know about it? There must be some recourse for a DOT screw up and if not get the legislators going on some protections. Why just pay it? Can you sue the DOT or are they like the VA where you can’t sue the healthcare providers because it’s govt and it’s set up like that?
The contractors who did the work should be responsible to totally repair the bridge or NEVER be given a city contract again! Court action? BBB? This should not fall back on the taxpayer!
For as long as it took to build you’d hope it would last at least 20 years!! Both overpasses are going to crumble if we continue contracting out to lazy bums. Can’t they go back on the original contractor? Isn’t there any warranty on concrete work?
Its amazing city leaders said they have kept an eye on this problem for a few years just enough time so that cant go back on the contractor who did the work. Hopefully our council will hold Trout and Rahm responsible for their lack of leadership and watching the public’s money on this one.
Hopefully this dont happen, but just you wait and see if these bridges decide to buckle and possibly collapse their going to wish they would of listened to a few people. Lets not forget about the MN bridge!
They do a lousey job of representing the public. Why wouldn’t you go after the people who did the work unless you had a vested interest in protecting those people. Right Scott.
Bridge on old 106 is already cracking and is not very old either.
I really doubt that the city will hold one of the biggest contractors in town at fault, as those cracks showed up shortly after the bridge was completed. Just put some crack filler in, it will be OK.
Maybe one of the bigger contractors, but also one of the worse in and around all of Mason City. Such lazy work they do.
I am not talking about the cracks as much as the repairs they have already had to do because of safety issues
I agree with both of you on this, they do shoddy work. The, fill the crack comment, is something I believe that our city engineer, Rahm would say, as I was being facetious. I believe that he is an overpayed wannabe.
I was at the April12th meeting and I remember the attitudes of the city council. It was like they didn’t think it was worth the time and maybe money to go after Henkel and WHKS for the poor job they did. I knew when I left the meeting that they made a big mistake. I kept telling anyone that would listen if it were their private drive they would have had them fix it for free. Now who is going to be stuck paying for all the repairs!!!!