Hill Country Village’s city engineer is working with city officials to develop final to-do lists for a contractor to finish a street project that has been plagued with complaints from local leaders and residents.
City Council on Jan. 20 discussed All In Construction’s handling of the Tower Drive improvement project, which began in the summer of 2020.
The city has received complaints about dust, curbing, missed deadlines, contractor vehicles parked on rights-of-way and other things associated with the road project.
Brady Kosub, department manager with M&S Engineering, the city’s consulting engineering firm, said All In Construction is nearing the final stage of work for which it was under contract to perform.
But the city still owes All In Construction about $120,226, and local officials have cited various concerns about the general contractor’s performance on Tower Drive.
The council has approved two change orders totaling $59,726, adding that figure to the original project contract cost of $895,996, according to city leaders.
Additionally, subcontractors have filed liens with All In Construction. In an executive summary of the matter, City Administrator/Police Chief Frank Morales said two subcontractors and suppliers have pending payment bond claims that he anticipates being settled for between $170,000 and $200,000.
“I anticipate additional claims to come in from subcontractors and suppliers [that All In Construction] uses to close out this project,” Morales said.
Some council members asked to see if they could meet with the engineer and contractor and tour the work site to point out problems in the road work.
“Why would we make a consensus opinion about the contractor whose work we’re unhappy with? Wouldn’t we want to form our own analysis and say, 'Here are the things we think are wrong with the project'?” Council Member Matthew Acock asked.
Council Member Neal Leonard was more blunt in his assessment of the situation.
“The city picked a bad contractor,” Leonard said.
Mayor Gabriel Durand-Hollis said the council tapped All In Construction based on the bids the city received, and on available information provided by the consulting engineer.
“We picked the lowest [project] bidder. It was under the advice that we received,” Durand-Hollis said.
Resident Bernard Swift said he and his wife are frequently challenged by dust emanating from the road work. Swift also said the new curb provided in front of his home “is particularly egregious.”
Swift also said he has done measurements and feels the width varies on the recently upgraded part of Tower Drive.
According to Morales, All In Construction plans to fix some ribbon curbing on Tower Drive, bring in new dirt and reseed rights-of-way along Tower Drive where workers have frequently parked their construction vehicles.
City Attorney Marc Schnall suggested it was best for local leaders to leave it to M&S Engineering to compile a list of project issues with input from the council and have All In Construction address those matters.
The troubled Tower Drive project sparked a separate council discussion about whether the city engineer or another consultant should serve as a temporary employee to supervise road projects on-site.
The same discussion posed whether available city bond proceeds could be used to fund such a temporary supervisory position.
This discussion took place just as Austin Bridge and Road is starting a multimillion-dollar citywide road and drainage improvement initiative.
Kosub said, based on a conversation he had with another engineering firm, having an on-site road project supervisor would cost nearly $600 each work day for several months.
Some council members said they could only see having an on-site supervisor two or three times a week for the size of infrastructure projects outsourced by Hill Country Village, and that the frequency of visits would increase or decrease depending on the contractor’s performance.
Council Member Allison Francis said it was not fair to consider directly supervising future project contractors—in this case, Austin Bridge and Road—based on a negative experience that the city has had with All In Construction.
“I don’t want to punish Austin Bridge and Road for the sins of All In [Construction],” Francis said.
The council took no action with that issue.
Acock said, however, there needs to be a permanent mechanism by which the city can better vet prospective project contractors, its supervisory processes and testing of materials to be used in those projects.
“We don’t have a good feel for who’s doing what,” Acock added.
