Accabonac Mess Grows
Construction on the East Hampton Housing Authority's affordable apartment complex on Accabonac Highway, East Hampton, has ground to a halt, following the disclosure that the project was improperly put to bid four years ago.
"Personally, I think we dug a very deep hole for ourselves," Larry Zimmerman, the Authority's vice chairman, told his fellow board members Monday. "The progress on this project is going to be nil for quite some time."
Work was suspended shortly after the quasi-public agency fired the project's architect, William Clemency, on Sept. 15, and has not resumed since then.
"Now we have to go through the bidding process again," Mr. Zimmerman said. "Then we're getting into the winter . . . this budget, the timing we have for this project is out the window."
Bidding Mix-Up
The general contracting part of the project and subcontracting for heating, electricity, and plumbing were to have been put to bid separately, as is required under laws governing bidding on municipal projects of this sort, said the Authority's attorney, Scott Allen.
However, it appears that no primary subcontractors were ever asked to submit separate bids. The fault, according to Mr. Allen, appears to lie with Mr. Clemency, who handled the 1992 bidding process.
Meanwhile, the Housing Authority owes its construction firm, Landmark Builders of Hicksville, close to $300,000.
"We're being told we can't pay him. The [State Housing Authority] law voids his contract," Mr. Allen told the board members on Monday. The law stipulates, he added, that "if anybody would release taxpayer funds on a contract that is void, that person becomes personally responsible for the funds."
Lawsuits Foreseen
"We're going to be in litigation with all the parties," Mr. Allen predicted to the East Hampton Town Planning Board last week.
"The best way to litigate this is: You have the checkbook," responded Gary Swanander, a member of the Planning Board, meaning, apparently, that the Authority should not pay for work it thought had been done incorrectly, rather than going to court.
By Tuesday, however, after representatives of the Authority met with officials of the contracting firm and its lawyers, Mr. Allen was playing down the numerous-lawsuits scenario. "Either it's a free-for-all in suits or we work it out," he said.
The day before, the Authority had discussed several options for getting construction back on track. So far, the site has been cleared, foundations poured, and preliminary road and drainage work done.
Modular Housing?
Mr. Allen suggested prefabricated modular housing as an alternative, built to specifications to be approved by the Town Planning Board.
"The only way to work through the winter might be to do something like that," he said.
If the Authority went with that option, it would still have to take bids from modular companies and from subcontractors in the three prime trades - heating, electricity, and plumbing.
Modulars are less costly, but once the low bidder was selected there would be production time to consider, Mr. Zimmerman pointed out.
He favored coming to an agreement with Landmark rather than starting over with an almost entirely new plan. "At this point," he said, "I really feel we are changing horses in midstream. It's going to cost us a lot more to get on that other horse."
Landmark, Authority Meet
Mr. Zimmerman asked Mr. Allen if plumbing, heating, and electrical work could be taken out of Landmark's contract and put out for rebid.
Between the foundation and the scenic easement, there is now what some Housing Authority members describe as a six-foot cliff.
separately. If Landmark was the low bidder, then its contract would essentially remain intact.
Otherwise, said Mr. Zimmerman, the site would probably be quiet until spring.
The group agreed to look into both options.
On Tuesday, following the meeting between the Authority and Landmark, both Mr. Zimmerman and Mr. Allen were optimistic an agreement could be reached to insure work begins soon.
It appears Landmark will continue as the general contractor and the three trades will be put out to bid on their own. Mr. Allen is to determine whether the Authority would be within the law if it follows this course.
Would Pay Contractor
"They're not at the point that not having the trades is going to hold them back," Mr. Zimmerman said. He pointed out that the Suffolk County Water Authority is ready to come in next month to put in the water main, which would mean a savings of nearly $100,000, over the cost of a private company.
"A major portion of the extras on the job would be offset by this," Mr. Zimmerman said.
An agreement with Landmark, assuming one is reached, would involve payment of the money currently owed the construction firm. There is some question about whether to pay for certain foundation plumbing, Mr. Allen said.
The pace of construction has been of concern to the Housing Authority throughout the summer. Mr. Allen's appearance before the Planning Board last week was apparently a plea for help.
Two Foundations Too Low
The most serious issue at this point involves two foundations that were poured too low, creating problems with road, drainage, and scenic-easement requirements.
'We want the fill back. If you can't do that, then come to us and tell us why.'
Henry Clifford
Chairman
Planning Board
"[One of] the foundations looks deep down in this hole," Mr. Allen said to the Planning Board. "The Housing Authority, being lay people, relied on the clerk of the works [Steve Bianchi], who was fully aware, was becoming aware, that something wasn't matching between the road elevations and the elevations of the building."
Thousands of cubic yards of excess fill were generated, the attorney said.
"Why would they want to generate fill?" wondered Pat Mansir, a Planning Board member. "Money," was the quick answer from Lisa Liquori, director of the Town Planning Department. In other words, to sell it.
Truckloads Of Fill
Mr. Allen said Mr. Bianchi took pictures of truckloads of fill being taken off the site. The Housing Authority is investigating whether this was legal and whether it was charged for the removal of fill.
Between the foundation and the scenic easement, there is now what some Housing Authority members describe as a six-foot cliff.
"In lowering the foundations, [the architect was] going to need to exceed the clearing limits that were previously approved," Vincent Gaudiello Jr., the town's engineering consultant, told the Planning Board.
The new, unapproved plan was to push the fill off into the scenic easement area, which would wipe out 75 to 100 trees, Mr. Allen said. "The architect wrote a letter to the contractor - which wasn't sent to the Housing Authority - telling the contractor he had . . . received no objections . . . to do exactly that, to start pushing this dirt into the woods," the lawyer said.
The Red Flag
That, said the Planning Board, was out of the question.
The elevations of the building were placed in such a way that the roadbed was going to be forced to match it, rather than the other way around, said Mr. Gaudiello. When James Cavanagh of the Town Environmental Resources Department went out to investigate neighbors' complaints about the activity on the site, he saw the lower elevations, the engineer told the Planning Board.
"That's when the red flag went up," he said.
The architect reportedly told the Housing Authority that the changes were necessary because the elevations in the original survey were incorrect. The revisions, however, were never submitted to the town building inspector, and as it turned out, the reduction in elevation meant big trouble for the scenic easement area.
"We Want The Fill"
Before further work is done, the Planning Board urged the Housing Authority to get a survey of the site as-built. The board also recommended that the foundation be blocked up, to meet the original plans.
And, said the Planning Board chairman, Henry Clifford, "We want the fill back. If you can't do that, then come to us and tell us why."
Asked why the Housing Authority had gone before the Planning Board, Mr. Allen said the group simply wanted direction.
"In a case like this that is a public project, we don't have any experts, because this is being headed by a board not having experience," Mr. Allen told the planners. "We rely on the contractor and architect, but if those people step out of line, there's no one for this board to turn to besides the other town boards."