Salt Barn / Truck Washout Water Service Change Order To: Webster Town Board Members From: Patrick Stephens, Superintendent of Highways Date: 10/10/2026 Subject: Authorize the Supervisor to Sign a change order to shift the scope of work related to the Truck Washout Building’s water service line and RPZ from the Paving and Utility scope to the General Contractor. ($107,414.00) During the budgeting and contract award portion of this project the installation of the new water service for the Truck Washout building was included in the Paving and Utilities line item presented. We have chosen to self-perform that scope of work to save costs. Therefore, the action above results in the removal of this cost from the Paving and Utilities budget line and adds it to the Truck Washout Building budget line, performed by the GC. This results in no net change to the project budget. Document 2 of the backup information is an up-to-date budget summary showing this change from the initial budget in blue. To date there has only been one other change order related to unforeseen demo abatement in the old building, $14,875.00, this is also shown in blue on the budget summary. The previous change order was approved per Guideline 18 of the Town Procurement Policy (Document 5). For tracking purposes, the Construction Contingency has been reduced by the amount of the first change order to accurately show the amount of contingency remaining. The two factors driving the shift in scope on the Water Service are; 1) The waterline and RPZ / Backflow Preventer portion of the utility work have components that are complex in nature and require very specific trade skills. 2) Our current staffing shortage is greater than average and has resulted in significantly less senior staff to perform the complex work. The combination of these items in conjunction with the project timeline makes this shift a must. We had both the General Contractor and the Prime Plumbing Contractor provide a quote for this work. We also added an option to change the waterline material from Ductile Iron to PVC for additional cost savings. The quote from the plumbing contractor, DGMessmercorp, came in at $144,145.00 after taking the cost savings option to switch to PVC. (Document 4)
The quote from the general contractor, Whitney East Inc, came in at $107,414.00 after taking the cost savings option to switch to PVC. (Document 3). This provides the best value and is therefore the chosen path forward. Thank you for your time and consideration of this action and your continued support in the success of this essential project.
Sincerely, Patrick Stephens Superintendent of Highways