TOWNSHIP OF WASHINGTON—The cost of the new emergency services building, taking shape on Washington Avenue and tentatively scheduled for move-in this spring, has increased by at least $216,785, about 4% over its original estimate.
That’s according to public records detailing 16 construction change orders since work began in late 2020.
The cost of the building as a joint home for the town’s volunteer firefighter and ambulance corps units has come under fire by residents over cost increases, its height and scale, its lack of an available project budget, and officials’ transparency on progress.
Public records obtained we obtained note that 20 change orders have been issued. Most show increases, but a few decreases or credits, on building construction.
The records returned do not specify totals for change orders 4, 6, 7, and 10. Pascack Press received the following reply March 8 to a public records request for the missing change orders.
“Change Order #6 will be the concrete apron once it is issued. Change Order #4 has been provided to you via OPRA 87… on March 1. There are no change orders for 7 and 10 at this time. This OPRA request is considered CLOSED.”
The OPRA request 87 referred to was Pascack Press’s request for all change orders issued on project. That request provided no change order “Change Order #4,” which was why we requested it again.
It appears no actual change orders exist for numbers 4, 7, and 10. Our request for the recent $30,000 apron change order for concrete was returned marked, “No such Government Record.”
An approximately $30,000 change order was submitted to upgrade the material used for the building’s drive apron from asphalt to concrete. (See “Another $30K gets apron material upgrade,” Pascack Press, March 7, 2022.)
Administrator Robert Tovo said all parties had agreed the $30,000 increase was necessary as the concrete apron will hold up much better to use by the heavy apparatus. A firefighter website says average pumper and hook and ladder vehicles weigh 19–30 tons.
At the March 7 meeting of the governing body, pressed on how the inferior material was allowed in the plans, Tovo said the increased cost was “not expected but still within the overall budget” and that concrete was the advised material for the purpose. Member Steven Cascio responded in part, “I’m surprised the architect didn’t know that.”
At the same meeting, former council member Michael Ullman asked whether project planners had considered installing a radiant heating system beneath the apron to work against icing; Tovo said no.
Previously approved change orders include $1,320.49 to cut and dispose of two maple trees; $1486.47 to clean, clear, and repair a pipe; $18,889.49 to remove three seepage tanks; $206,518.30 for “unforeseen conditions” during retaining wall installation; $13,514.84 for a parking lot extension by 3 feet including curbing; $50,041.97 credit for removing a keystone retaining wall from contract; $4,051.10 for owner-requested interior windows in two rooms.
Other changes were $2,141.86 credit for removal of fresh air inlets for heaters; a contractor’s request for additional time (no charge and extra time not stated); $20,000 credit for removing automation controls from HVAC system; $2,298.05 for removal of two maple trees; $8,156.61 to change from MRL to elevator machine room; $2,703.53 to remove a maple tree at east end of property.
Underneath that it notes the change order includes a $4,932.57 “net credit” back.
While the new building was needed to replace an outdated, 70-year-plus-old firehouse to house fire and ambulance vehicles and volunteers, the structure’s size and scale has come under fire from neighbors, who allege the building was higher than local codes allow, among a multitude of complaints.
Its architect, Robbie Conley, of Robbie Conley Architects LLC, Woodbury Heights, visits the site every two weeks to meet with general contractor Tekcon Construction Inc., Somerset, and subcontractors to evaluate progress. Conley has inspected the building’s height, as well as the cupola’s height, and said the building’s height remained within the 53-foot-high code allowance.
Conley submits bimonthly reports to Tovo detailing updates on building construction and changes. Those reports are also shared with council members, which was not the case during the initial phases of construction.
Among local building critics, its alleged rising cost, and a lack of available information on progress at the rising new complex at Township Council meetings has been a sore point.
The viewing public is generally not privy to updates: Asked at the March 7 meeting for “project tracker” update on the project, Tovo told the council vice president, running the meeting, “It’s in your [meeting] packet.”
Conley appeared at one public meeting in 2021, and was to appear again, but his appearance was cancelled by Mayor Peter Calamari after Calamari issued a public update on issues raised by neighbors about the building’s roof, trusses, and overall size.
His update cited Conley and a private party inspection report and noted that the disputed issues had been addressed and were resolved.
Early on, a $206,000-plus change order for extra work needed to drive a steel foundation retaining wall into hardpan soils caused some council and public pushback.
Some council members, including former member Michael DeSena, said the contractor should have foreseen the soil situation and some residents questioned Conley about the alleged general contractor oversight.
Even more upsetting to neighbors, the project appeared to lack proper oversight when a subcontractor installed its roofing structure, including shingles, during a tropical summer downpour.
After some council members and firefighters observed the suspect roof work, Conley inspected it and ordered the subcontractor to replace the roof so that the work would qualify for its lifetime warranty.
While neighbors have complained about everything from alleged increased storm runoff, the building’s height, added cost of its cupola, fire vehicle turning radiuses, light pollution, and inadequate public notice, another sore point raised by critics was that the township did not follow its own local building codes.
For more, see “Council punts on call to reform town projects,” Pascack Press, Oct. 24, 2021. The town also is planning a new DPW headquarters.