Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2011/11/15 Item 10
ITY COU NCI ~ STATE 1V1 E N T ~,~,~ CITY OF CHULA VISTA 11/15/ll, Item !~~ ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN MOFFATT AND NICHOL AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE OVER THE OTAY RIVER AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY ~ SUBMITTED SY: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORK ASSISTANT DIRECTO FEN EE REVIEWED BY: CITY MANAGER ASSISTANT CITY NAGERGj~ 4/STHS VOTE: YES ^ NO SUMMARY The existing 82 feet-long by 52 feet-wide Heritage Road Bridge was constructed as an interim timber deck facility over the Otay River in early 1993. Heritage Road Bridge replaced pipe culverts washed out by a severe storm in 1992 that created a road closure. The interim bridge does not accommodate existing peals event traffic, pedestrians, and a 50-year storm event. ChLila Vista's General Plan indicates that Heritage Road is planned as a six-lane major arterial between Olympic Parkway southerly to the City boundary with the City of San Diego. As Chula Vista's eastern areas and San Diego's Otay Mesa area develop, there will be a need for a wider bridge that accommodates projected traffic and a 50-year storm event. City Staff completed a "Project Study Report" in March 2010, initiated the "Preliminary Environmental Studies" (PES), and subsequently solicited a "Request of Qualifications" (RFQ) for Consultant Bridge Design and Environmental Services. After completing the RFQ process, City staff negotiated an agreement with Moffatt and Nichol to provide Engineering and Environmental Services for the Heritage Road Bridge. Additionally, the California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS) completed aPre-Award Audit of the draft agreement; the attached agreement incorporates the results and recommendations of the audit. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Director of Development Services has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that approval of the subject agreement is not a "Project" as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines because said action will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the 10-1 11/15/11, Item Page 2 of 5 environment. Therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the approval of the agreement is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is necessary at this time. Although approval of the agreement will not require environmental review, the proposed project, consisting of the replacement of the existing Heritage Road Bridge over the Otay River, will require that the appropriate environmental document be prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines. Since the project is federally funded, it is also necessary that the appropriate environmental document be prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The anticipated environmental documents, based on a similar recently completed project, area "Routine Categorical Exclusion" for NEPA and an "Initial Study" for CEQA, leading to a Mitigated Negative Declaration. RECOMMENDATION Council adopt the resolution. BOARDS/COMMISION RECOMMENDATION Not applicable. DISCUSSION The existing Heritage Road Bridge over the Otay River was originally constricted by the County of San Diego in 1993, primarily using federal and state disaster relief fimds. The interim steel pile and timber deck bridge replaced culverts that were washed-out during the previous year's storms. The bridge was widened shortly thereafter to accommodate traffic related to near-term development. The existing 52 feet-wide, bridge has two travel lanes and a wide center median; the median is converted to two additional travel lanes during major events at the Cricket Amphitheater. In order to satisfy multi-use demands under General Plan build-out conditions, the bridge should have six vehicle lanes, two Sfeet-wide shoulders that incorporate bike lanes, and two 5.5 feet-wide sidewalks with railings. In order to accommodate a 50-year storm event, it is anticipated the bridge span would need to be approximately 500 feet in length. The proposed contract would commit Moffatt and Nichol to complete the .design of the ultimate facility. However, the bridge may be constructed in phases based upon; project funding and projected traffic demands; Moffatt and Nichols' design scope will consider both phased construction and constricting the ultimate six-lane bridge. The approximate limits of the project include the Heritage Road Bridge and approach roadways between Main Street and Entertainment Circle and the extension of -Main Street, approximately 200 feet to the east. During the early design phases, right-of--way and temporary construction easement needs will be determined. This project will require inter-agency coordination between the City of Chula Vista, the City of San Diego, and CALTRANS. CONSULTANT SELECTION PROCESS Since bridge design is a highly specialized area of civil engineering and outside of the expertise of City staff, it is necessary to retain the services of a bridge/strtctural consultant. Additionally, a significant number of environmental studies will be required for the project. Therefore, City staff, in accordance with the California Department of Transportation's Local Assistance Procedures Manual, released a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) in September 2010. In October 2010, the City received Statements of Qualification (SOQ) from four consultant 10-2 11/15/11, Item /~ Page 3 of 5 teams. City Staff reviewed and evaluated the submitted SOQ's and all four teams were invited to participate in the interview selection process. The City Manager approved the formation of a consultant selection committee that included representatives from the California Department of Transportation. The committee interviewed the following four consultants: • Simon Wong Engineering • AECOM • T.Y. Lin International • Moffatt & Nichol The committee selected Moffatt & Nichol, and City staff subsequently initiated discussions regarding project scope and fee. The terms of the final agreement are that Moffat & Nichol will perform the -work on atime-and-materials basis, with a maximum compensation limit of $1,777,421, based upon the scope of work outlined in the proposed agreement. The agreement .includes, preliminary engineering, environmental clearances, final design and construction support items. It is estimated the agreement will extend over a period of three to five years. Staff is recommending the approval of an agreement with Moffatt & Nichol for said scope of work and fee. SCOPE OF SERVICES Due to the multi-disciplinary nature of the project, the consultant will need to retain the services of various subconsultants to fulfill the required scope' of work that includes, but is not limited to, the following: Taslc 1-Preliminary Engineering • Project management & administration; • Design alternative evaluation; • Environmental doctunentation; • Topographical mapping; • Geotechnical investigation; • Hydraulic studies; • Bridge type selection; • 30% design details Taslc 2 -Final Design • Project management & administration; • Development of all required construction ready plans and documents; • Development of all project specifications and estimate Task 3 -Construction Support • Project management & administration; • Bid and Construction support CITY STAFF SERVICES In addition to administering the consultant contract, City Staff will be performing the following scope of work: 10-3 11/15/11, Item ~~ Page 4 of 5 • Right-of--Way Studies • Legal Descriptions, Easements, and Right-of--Way Plats • Right-of--Way Certification • Coordination with CALTRANS DECISION MAKER CONFLICT Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found no property holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property that is the subject of this action. CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT Sufficient funds are available in the CIP project balance to fiord the consultant and staff services required to complete the bridge design and associated environmental clearance work. Under the "Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act- A Legacy for Users (SAFTEA-LU)- Section 1702 High Priority Projects, the City received funding to "Conduct project design and environmental analysis of Heritage Bridge on Heritage Road linking Chula Vista to Otay Mesa". The initial FY2004/OS Federal allocation was $2.8 million. When City Staff obtained Authorization to Proceed on Febriary 13, 2009, the fiord balance was $2,519,720. The initial funding amount of $2.8 million was reduced yearly to contribute to National Emergencies (i.e., Hurricane Katrina). This Federal Funding contributes 80% of the Preliminary Engineering, Environmental Analysis and Staff Costs and requires a 20% City match. Design and Environmental The following summarizes the proposed maximum consultant compensation amount for the scope of services outlined in the agreement. FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES A. Contract Amount $1,777,421 B. Staff Costs $550,079 TOTAL FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONTRACT AND PROJECT $2,327,500 The City's 20% TDIF match for the bridge design and environmental work, as outlined above, will be approximately $465,500. Additionally, there are sufficient Federal SAFTEA-LU fiuzds available to cover the remaining $1,862,000 required to complete the bridge design and associated environmental clearance work. There is no ongoing fiscal impact associated with the proposed action as the project account has adequate funding to complete the design and environmental work. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT Future Constriction It is estimated that the cost to construct the six-lane bridge will range between. $15 million to $17 million. Currently, $3.98M in matching TDIF finds are anticipated to be budgeted in FY13/14 ($980,000) and FY14/15 ($3M) respectively for bridge constriction, totaling $3.98M. Staff will explore a variety of possible State and Federal programs to obtain additional finds needed for construction. Additionally, the Eastern TDIF identifies this project for fiiture TDIF funding. Moreover, the City of San Diego established a Facilities Financing Plan to partially find bridge 10-4 11/15/11, Item ~Q Page 5 of 5 construction beginning in FY17-FY20. Preliminary discussions with the City of San Diego have resulted in a probable phased construction alternative. The phased constntction alternative could result in the City of Chula Vista constntcting the bridge to accommodate four traffic lanes and sidewalk on one side of the bridge. Under a phased constntction scenario, the City of San Diego would constntct the remaining portion of the bridge width at a later date. ATTACHMENTS 1. Project Study Report 2. City Manager Memorandum Exhibit A. Proposed Contract Prepared by: Jose Luis Gomez, Project Manager and Mario Ingrasci, Associate Civil Engineer, Public WorJcs J: lEngineerlAGENDAICAS2011111-IS-IIIFINALISTM3641STM364Heritage Rd Br Agreement -11-IS-llrev.doc 10-5 ~~~t~ ~TT~cH~rENT __~ .~.. GTYt?E ~~ ~'$~~~$ ®~ ~dI~~~C ~®~~.CS C~(,lI~~STA ~ n-sa-o-c DISTRICT 11 LOCAL ASSISTANCE EA - tl-2t3Qt4L PROGRAM - SAFECEA-LU CA DEMONSTRATION (D - CA35fi FED. PROD. f NPLU-52Q3(028) PROJECT STUDY REPORT HERITAGE ROAD BRIDt~E REPLACEMENT PROJECT HERITAGE ROAD FROM MA]N STREET TO ENTERTAINMENT GIRCLE IN THE CITY OF CHUL.A VISTA, CALIFORNIA CALTRANS BRIDGE No. 57C-0670 z ~ a ~,, €• O~ E AVENUE MAIN APPROVED BY= RICI-IAR A IO ~ ~ P.E DIRECTOR OF WORKS !CITY ENG~ER CRY OF CHULA VISTA ~ ~~~~ DATE p~YMP1C PaRxw. BRANDYWINE AVENUE srREEr ENTERTAINMENT AVENt1E CIRCLE `-'\ C VICINITY MAP xo scAES: Y ~~•, ~~ NlRVANA~ ~ ~~~~~~~_ RO DA } ~AVENUE~ \~ / ~ ~' / ~ ~P,I~aG _~ -` `,~ ,,,,PROJECT SITE ti~ ~~~ ~ 2s ~~ SUBMITTED BYE !LUfS G0141EZ, P.E., P IECT AAANAGER OF CHULA VISTA C(YY OF CHULA VISTA FILE NO. S i M-364 J.• ~Survey~ST7A364 {HR Bridge}~HRB Drawings`F+nd PSR Drawings`(7J 57M3S4 PSR Title ~eeis.dwg 03/79/2Q70 09:45:37 Aa! PD Chu ° X614. 691-021 ~ ,ax (5i°) 591-171 ~ ~vivw_chulavistaca.~ov En~~ee^n2 - 276 ~u,th a,,.=nue, la Vista. `.~ 41,1Q I 1 Operations - igOv ~tax~.ve:! Road, Chula 'v'ista, C:~ 91°11 11 Q(~~) 397-6GOC j fax (61°) .97-6259 tt-SD-0-C1-iV DiSTA1CT fl LOCAL ASSISTANCE EA - it-2f30t4L PROGRAM - SAF~fEA-LU CA. DEMONSTRATION lD - CA356 FAD. PROD. ~ HPLU-52fl3(028? THlS PROJECT STUDY REPORT HAS BEEN PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE FOLLOWING REGISTERED CML ENGINEER. THE REGISTERED CML ENGINEER ATTESTS TO THE CHHRECOMMENDATIONS, GONCLU ONS~, AND DEC S ONS ARE BASED. ATA UPON WH ry wQ~Q`O J• tNG9~O~~ o' ~ _ ~ ~ No. 38273 ~ C~V.~ ~ cats ~- ~ ,...~ . ~~~~~~ MARK J. MGAASC C.E # 38 3 ~`~~~ C(TY OF C}IIILAVISTA . ~-- --~ PUBLIC WORDCS - ENGINEERING 276 FOURTH AVEAIUE CHUEAVISTA, CA9i8iQ ~l~~A (619)4 N476 ~f- 2 ~° DATE J.~~Sun%_y~Sl?.l3S~ (HR Eridge)~NR9 OrawingslFina! PSR Drawings~(1+j STA(364 P51Z Tltle Sheefs.dwg 04/02/7010 10:00:29 AM ADT ~~_7 APRIL, 24 i 4 i l -SD-O-CHV DISTRICT 1 i LOCAL ASSISTANCE EA - 11-213414E CA. DEMONSTRATION ID - CA35b PROGRAM - SAFETEA-LU FED. PR03. # HPLU-5243(028) PROJECT STUDY REPORT I INTRODUCTION This report evaluates the size and location of the river crossing necessary to replace the existing interim wooden deck Heritage Road Bridge (Bridge No. 57C-0670) crossing the Otay River between Main Street and Entertainment Circle. The report will determine the, scope, cost and schedule of a new facility that will addresses the future traffic projections as well as the existing operational and hydraulic deficiencies of this connection between the developing Otay Ranch area in eastern Chula Vista and San Diego's Otay Mesa sub-region (EXFIIBIT 1 -Regional Map & EXHIBIT 2 -Aerial Photo}. II EXECUTIVE SUIVIMARY Existing and Planned Facilities Heritage Road (formerly Otay Valley Road) is a North-South facility serving the City of Chula Vista and portions of San Diego County and the Otay Mesa sub-region of the City of San Diego. Heritage Road is the only existing (paved) public crossing of the Otay River between Interstate 805 (1.8 miles west) and State Route 125 toIl road (2.5 miles east}. Currently, a temporary wooden deck bridge striped with two lanes and a 23' wide median connects the existing easterly terminus of Main Street north of the river with the existing two-lane Heritage Road south of the Otay River. Main Street transitions from a 6-lane Arterial (0.7 mi. west of Heritage Road) to 2-lanes just west of Heritage Road, then curves southerly to Heritage Road. South of the river, two seasonal traffic generators, the Amphitheater and the Water Park, are located west of Heritage Road, off Entertainment Circle. Heritage Road then continues southerly as a two-lane road of varying widths into the community of Otay Mesa, ending approximately '/, mile south of Otay Mesa Road. {EXHIBIT 3 -Existing Facility and Right Of Way; EXHIBTT 4 -Sub-Regional Land Use Map) The General Plan shows that in the future Heritage Road will extend northerly as a six-lane prime from Main Street to Olympic Parkway. Main Street will also extend from .its current terminus at Heritage Road easterly as a six-lane prime, following the planned "Rock Mountain Road" alignment, to connect with Hunte Parkway at SR-125. Additionally, the City of San Diego, with a Benefit Assessment Fund, will be widening, in phases, various portions of Heritage Road from the City of San Diego boundary south to SR-905 and beyond. The bridge replacement is required to accommodate the increased traffic as determined in the City of Chula Vista General Plan Update, Land Use and Transportation Element, and S.ANDAG's Otay River Valley Transportation Study: (EXHIBIT 5 -Planned Circulation Roads) 10-8 ' ~~~(l c~rr e~ c~€u~a v~s~~a f~ ~~j°I t~~~ FUc~Li~ V'dC4~ - E~JCIi~~~i~SG 27H POU~I"rl AVEr4U~ L 0~~ TI ~N 1 E~CHIB1 i 2 - =~_~~` _.:: fTLE N0. STM 364 - - ~„-~, Oc0 1Gn:n:fi. Afnn a a.,.~ n?/t7/2010 10_Z~-03 Ahf PD „r- t,Svrwy`~Si'd.:64 ;NA ~rldge) .t'1tC ~raArrngs ~rmcr ~ ~,. ,.~,,..,..y.. AA ~ -- , 10-10 'EXHIBIT 3 ~~~ E -~ ~I ~~ ~C~ ~~ ~T ,.•,=urieyl ~ ihf.?E4 (HR n~ae,~',,~xu xar~:ncs ~r:,,u, T_„ ~, ~,.., y~ .~ , 10-11 ®_ ~ ®EXISANG RIGHT of VYAr ®• -- ®®-o -•'- EXISANG BOUNDARY LJNF MR F- (n 3: X W ri 'R fhlilRl - Y. I...."..! If li ®r, I", 'n Q, • giti, AVIDIUM8 , U.. A �l";::':r'rr:+"Jjf .Ul 4� 11 ti, bD' ::I N\ T PIT '- 9 m IT ABS 'o.n4 WAI —tap Mi W �11 L 11 'j, U gg Or 2, 1 N�M' • wol aiitz-1 7;' rid LIT I tea CO :5 R 9.: CC 0 cn fib cn LL — 11- •4t I, t" OW: > M m Q) , b 0 101) C) m- In; Jan I" sO all U. ti EXH1BlT 5 oad _) - ~~~ ~ ~ j rj~ .~' San tN9wr?d t,Ao~t M, _..j ..., t ~n~ta ~,'7' Otay t .__, t/ (Y„ '•! 3 G _. .., ~ ekes R ~,, f ,+~~~,. ~m ~ `- ., oa _ x o _:,;. ~~ n . `~4 ~ ~. _..~- ~ ~ 1r^ Sue$t _, ~ ~e$ moo- ._ .-. ~ - S{ ee cl ~•-~ ~~~'~ ~ ?- to m ~ * 't \ t 4~ ~ astpa `^ * 1ti` . Legend ~ ~--- ~ ~~~'`~ ' ". - --_, Freeway ~ ~ , •~-gExpressvay (7 arB Lane) ) \' ~ L•~.i~-~ _ ~oLy- oad nw, n"; _.-,;•~;t 3~ fi Lana Prime I 81WY ¢ Scree - 6 Lane Major Main r ._,~.•' s 4 Lane Major . i ~(`~ ; + w__ ~ Ota I I "~ ` -- -fr-k~t' Class I Co4lector -' ^`~`•"-"'~" _:~'-~ ¢¢~•0 Gateway S4'eet (6 Lane) ~tQy ~ ~. QpQ-Q Gateway Street (714 Lane) ~'' 1Ylesa Town CenterArteriat - Other Reads '~---"^'--~""'~ e SR125 Enterchange - ~~ T State Route 905 _ ~~ U.S.A. _ hIEXICO ~~ ~® ~~~ _ \ ~ ~ . ....e.i mot- ntn et w \nP4A F7LF N0. STr41-364 ® ;~s~ ,-tsS«a ~cK r-.-.~trsicn FI_n fi..~wC 0.3/i7/Z010 04:13:<"5 P,~f ?.ri J: ~Surrey~Si~a„o4 .HY drrCgeJlrn~ ;:; v,:,:~x, ~, _. _.. ,- ., , I O~~ Project Study Report Heritage Road Bridge. 04/02/2010 Proiect History The Otay River floodplain in the vicinity varies between approximately 400' and 800' wide. At the existing Heritage Road Crossing, it was over 500' wide. The floodway was filled in many years ago to construct the existing roadway using several culverts of varying sizes to convey the flaw under the roadway (2 - 24" corrugated metal pipes (CMP), 2 - 28"x 24" CPM's and 5 - 24"x 36" CMP's). Since the roadway was constructed, the floodplain appears to have been modified further. Today, the existing floodplain has been narrowed at this point to less than 404'. (only 80' through the bridge) {EX~ItBTf 6.- FEMA Map) In 1993, due to heavy rains, the culverts were washed away along with portions of the roadway. In 1994 the County of San Diego, with FEMA funds, replaced this portion of the roadway with an interim 80' long x 2$' wide, two-lane wooden deck bridge structure. The bridge was designed to accommodate a 2-year storm event. Due to traffic demands, in 1995 the City of Chula Vista widened the wooden deck bridge structure to its current width of 52' by adding a I2' lane to each side. In 1997, SANDAG compiled the "Otay River Valley Transportation Study" which discussed the need for three Otay River crossings and proposed a financing plan. Since that time the Alta Road Crossing, east of SR-125, in the County of San Diego, was eliminated from all local and Regional Plans. If the La Media Road crossing was eliminated from the City's General Plan, the Heritage Road Bridge would be the only river crossing between I-805 and the SR-125 Toll Road for the foreseeable future. In 2005, the City received federal SAFETEA-LU funding to perform Preliminary Engineering for the Heritage Road Bridge. The current funded amount is 51,995,271 and is to be used for Environmental Studies and project design. Recommendation Construct a new river crossing structure and approaches to accommodate six traffic lanes between Main Street and Entertainment Circle. Anew bridge will be needed when Heritage Road and/or Main Street are extended to the north and/or east, respectively, to accommodate the planned future development. The study evaluated five alternatives and reduced them to two alternatives for further " evaluation. The preferred alternative, Alternative 1 crosses the river approximately 200 east of the existing bridge and would cost approximately $21.3M. Alternative 2 constructs the new facility in the same location as the existing interim bridge and would cost approximately 520.9M. Alternative 1 would probably be open to traffic sooner since the demolition and restoration of the existing bridge and roadway could be done after the new bridge and roadway are constructed and open to traffic. The next milestone will be to con7pile a Project Report on the approved alternative and initiate the required Environmental Clearances. Project design would also commence for the 30% design required far the Environmental Clearances. 2 10-14 _ ~c...s_ sc=. ~,. c~ .~ ,< ~~ ;~\,~-.^. c -~ ~~ x us 3~~.y-r-~..-5.~.£~~s^-~a`f~,,,o`'?~ys~~~ ,.z .~ ~--~ ~• ~5~ ~-'i: ~' L ^•t-cm-'-.3531." c a " t ~ =~ r r .-+~. r Y'4' ~ =~,a~,rt, ~~~ <~b+~•3~z "'m ~~r Q'r' -~ ''~ Cy z, m.~Gx~~~ . ~ ~ r^ .~ ~ 'f'Y c IIR~ ~ .,,,~.,,.~y9r.Gc~.r3. ..y r~ ./~'~-~Y~e~-~ r.~~"ar Q ~~s`'~E' rc.. ~-a., ~ ,ay~^.'~y,• "y"Ld+c~ °--.,-iarff 2~ -~~-. rOl~ Y, ""- _y., V' . c-,Zc ,,.t ~ IJ +~ l'o ~ ri _~~~~,~.T ~,~ncrra.,,s;•+4~`•~?~12~- _ -'s. ~ .~ r..z .NL ~ ~E~' 'y"-~Q`- ~ ~Y R R/M. 7'.".cn~cy ~Y '9 _ ~~ '~ L~~j } .~ ~? ~i i -i_,sy~"~T"' __. rd ~t~"2't )} .. s '1~ , Yc. .` ~ .ter-.4~ },..~ ~ sue., , .'r'~.r~~,a ~ ~ aa",~ ~) ~ rte. s's ,1„~~'~i r -.t '~ ,r .~• ~.~~ 4t.~'"---t-e~~`~~~ y~~ ~ s,~~{Q~, mss'-.. i .~.~ ~ t .~\~'c;~~L"` r ,~ .-_, aui~rpr+,+• ~yti,~ -y r,-,,,. t-y~ ~G r~ a ~, ~. ~-~~,g'w r r. `-fit `i - y,F~= 's ~x~ `"r.F' ~~h =K~~2~~• `~;. f? ~°~'' '~ ~.~ ~~`9 ~`v°`+'\.r~ C=" ''e ` ~ ^~. ~~~"4i~`~ .x.~.Y>r..~ ~i,~y^~-as~`~Nr~4~'':..x ~T~tm-r." ~.Y10s~. .f 13-tir~ ~ _ ~~ ,_'~-+ 'rtseea s ~ ~"~'? rt'•~ s r3 a ~ ~ °~ (L[ u { ^ (t ZE ~ . use fig- - ~- ~ ^ ~-~sw.r',..rt?x~e--fir ->=-~-•~ _ . y~l' ~p Rte, ~- '' 3~L1 ~ ~ '~": .zs'i Ot~e"'^sv. < iM1 fig N -`~ ~'~c_~~j, ,~ •y+: ~ - ~• _,~_ ,ti. ~,.-~..a- ~ 1. _ '~;.r"r~'..i:. \ ~r a-s aqK 4'...w' ~* \ ; ~.r- ~8 _ ~(~!~*_u § 3 "J ` ~'~' ,a. ~ .~'~.s.~~'~._ '_"~'fr~"~`1 O 'a t-*,,-~' ~ ~ J' r}11~ .' '"""ri-. x s~, ~ ~ ~ ~^Y^~..s°X. r~`-~..` ~s~ 0 ;~yt~~ ~ ~cr, •-~ ':\~,~` it _....:;,..~ "''' - _,r:~~i: si...s -.+`_a~"i~ _ ~ 4 N m~ •° c m ~ C I.~ O ao '°mN o .~~ 3~~° ao ~rJ°, cr.~11.~II ~ IIpJJ L }H munj~v >L ~= mcmc sip E3 u a"1 c v ~ ~ G ~ oIL- m ~~ °a~n~ m ~E m ~ a °? m 3 j r'O F-vj °~ a.v v an ~. w~ Rr`am °o ~ da c E m0 c u -on° ym~= a~ vv a c~ o c ,° tOi10 °ID Rc c. ~ 3pcoc ~~ ro~ ~~~ °`to ° ~ C NLL m C Y m °IL m O '~C 7 ~ u ~ ° C m C C O. m N r0 N m~ ° C ° wm. O m 'C a ~ N !~ ~ o~ G t L> Z• N O N R m C 6w a~ mac °n ~ ,C rJ' °o '". um ~ .+v~ u ~ a v =~° v L m I t~i.Z °rm4u _ ci° cv c °oo ~ ~~ ~ > > > 'pa @ 3 > 1J7 Q ~ c c ~ ° ~ d aEi m'~ m e m c° ° 3 j = m .°D ~ 0 7 ~ C U mR° ~dar7 m y'm °~''rE `~ _° d ~ m E c c sLa a~ v ' c ~ t p~n`E m e $ c ~ in°> 2° y '-° c 3°° c> m i ,~~J 3-vOm~. m >a `°. ~ c-Ts m'° as rv v .Qa uc m .m~+ ~~ .cxa>am ? mm $~~c m~ 6 16~ Q'•-a v 7 cc a ~c c ° ° ¢Z ~uca~-'+ 3 ?° ESmG o $ ~ me ~c°J ~ m ~ c~ o cm a ?:+ ~ v Ov wa~Q¢m c v ° ~~~° ~a`r O _1° ~~`a a w `°r3cm6 2us m ~` O c Z Co c° .. v `LL °~ a Ea N ne m w ~ a 'S = c °• a ~ a c o e ~ QNN"-s oacaa E ~~ m_°13„ °~ ~u`" o ff m ~~ o O o a o- 9~- ~ CW ~ '°.. m-° v us rn n c ~ ~a a E Z m v'J`^ ~ 1° ~ a t c w '~° a m mu°. so ~a y ~ U =F=" Td~n'm o v .°.Q SE m1°aa m~ ~ ~~ro tY c~c s o m n a m ~ ~m m my = cL° ._. mm Q mym a A n a° m o m m. ~ ~ Y ° o N ~ °' N C~ ~~ d '° ~ ~ ° '~ G' ~ L n y 'O C D u. iV U m m m m y u 1- Om ~ma?`v' u~ oE`oa z G nc Q °oa p oa_m Q c u E QZ aav='~° u.+ m ,°' wry. y aaN~v nvif }' c~~ O omc C ~ L 1 Is.O 0o~-y a ui ~v ~n5 ?°° 3° elv Q cc ~ °~ Q °s 3 I • k- ~ 01?`m ° a u uvE u. c.tjwo o v ~ mmc o~~ ~ a c ~ ~ ~ ° Q N 1¢ u uTSN.o u- ° ac ~ d c~ °`°.~ Q ~~+ tdil a~ uJ 111 s .- 2 W~ L'~m~Q-r m d o> o ~a eui~u~as v°°d O ~aa ~ ~~wQ FZ-. m m o -- I:. ~ t d u era... ° o?r °>K a~ m ov -3 uv O $3-+c O ~ ~ ~ • m o I ~ Z _ e Q` oo '-" 2 m u. w. si m m ut ~ ~ r`.+ d c 'i7 LL H ~ ~ ~ _ ~ °s a r a LL° a c • ~ !J u + 11 ~ m m ~ a • ~ o a ~ a v ~ x x a ~ • - .... ~~= d 4 a s ¢ a 7n7 c a m ~ ~ 1 r m w c :.'. u s ~"'1 .. L "~ L'1 l:l ll3 ~ ~ ~ I'__' Z t Z e a 4 ~ j J +Oi ~ ? a - ~ ti ~t N Project Study Report Heritage Road Bridge 04/02/201Q III NEED AND PURPOSE Ties project to replace the Heritage Road Bridge crossing over the Otay River is needed to accommodate future traffic demands, to accommodate the 100-year flood event, and to add standard pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Deficiencies • The existing interim wooden deck is approximately $0' long and 52' wide. A width of 118' is required to accommodate 6 -traffic lanes, 2 -Class 2 bike lanes, sidewallcs, a median, railings and a possible additional right turn lane at Manz Street, if required. Currently, the north approach is actually anon-standard intersection comprised of a large curve from Main Street to the bridge and a private access road to the quarry extending to the east. The curve will be replaced with a standard intersection that will accommodate the future extensions of Heritage Road and Main Street. . The bridge and approaches can accommodate, a 2-year flood event. (less than 10,000 cfs) A 10-year flood event will most likely reach the tog of the bridge and overtop the south approach approximately half way to Entertainment Circle. See "Hydrology/Hydraulics" for additional information. This could potentially darnage and/or close the roadway for a significant duration. The south approach currently acts as a "dam" directing the river' flow to the existing $0' bridge opening. The roadway and bridge need to be removed and a longer bridge constructed returning the river to a more natural state and lowering the water surface level fora 100-year flood event. _Fnture Requirements Heritage Road provides a connection between the developing communities of southeast Chula Vista (Otay Ranch), portions of San Diego County and the City of San Diego (Otay Mesa) and may likely remain as the only Otay River crossing between Interstate $05 (1.8 rrzi. west} and State Route 125 Toll Road. (2.5 mi. east). The City's Circulation Element shows that Heritage Road will extend to the north connecting with the existing portion of Heritage Road at Olympic Parlc~vay and Main Street will extend east, generally along the proposed "Rock Mountain Road" alignment, to SR-125. These major roads will be constructed as the various planned communities of Otay Ranch are developed. South of the bridge, the City of San Diego, in accordance with the Otay Mesa Community plan and its Public Facilities Financing Plan, will widen Heritage Road from the southerly Chula Vista boundary into the Community of Otay lblesa and connect it with the State Route 905 (currently under construction}. These improvements are necessary to accommodate the planned growth in Otay Mesa. These developing communities, both north and south of the Otay River, will generate a large volume of traffic that will need to cross the river at the Heritage Road connection.. These developments will assist in their fair share of the funding for the proposed bridge. See "Funding/Schedule" for details. (EX.HIBIT 7 -Regional Facilities Map - SANDAG Study) 3 10-1s EXHIBIT' 7 J: ~~urw_y~~;5i~l36S !NR Ruda°/1HnH Orcnin~rsl.;:r~q! F.`(7~:rtrwri:GSi,j~7 PSx !'rcpasea .:-_°=ricn.a:rg .;a~,~~~u,:. ,.. ...~.. ~ ,~ ~ ~, Project Study Report Heritage Road Bridge 44/02/2014 The 1997 SANDAG "Otay River Valley Transportation Study" discusses the need for an improved Heritage Road Bridge and potential funding scenarios far the Cities of San Diego, Chula Vista and the County of San Diego. The City of San Diego has included the construction of this bridge and portions of Heritage Road south of Chula Vista as projects in their Public Facilities Financing Plan (PEEP} and is collecting funds for this bridge to be used between FI' 2010 to FY2020. Additionally, portions of Heritage road, including the bridge, are accounted for in the City of Chula Vista's Transportation Development impact Fee (TOTE) Program. (ATTACHMENT A - SANDAG's Otay Valley Transportation Study; ATTACI->NIENT B - Otay Mesa PFFP; and ATTACHMENT C -Chula Vista TDIF Program} Proposed Scope The project will replace the existing Heritage Road Bridge with a 118' wide bridge comprised of 6 traffic lanes, a median, Class 2 bike lanes, sidewallts and railings and the associated approaches necessary to accommodate the increased traffic and a 100-year storm event. Preliminary calculations indicate that a 400' to 500' long bridge can accommodate the 100-year storm event. Detailed hydraulic calculations will be required to determine bridge geometry. (EXHIBTI' 8 -Proposed Cross Section) IV ALTERNATNES The project alternatives propose to replace the existing Heritage Road bridge with a new 118' wide bridge comprised of six 12' lanes, a 16' median, two 8' bike lanes and 14' for sidewalks and railings on each side, all within a 128'wide right of way. The total length of the roadway segment from the centerline of Main Street to Entertainment Circle is approximately 1200'. The bridge length could vary, depending upon the location, hydraulics and length of the approaches, from approximately 450' to 500' (EXHIBIT 9 -Proposed Alignments). Alternative 1 -Construct new 500' long bridge and approaches, approximately 200' east of existing interim bridge anal roadway. Issues: + The bridge and approaches will accommodate the projected traffic voltunes. + The bridge and its approaches would be constructed at an elevation high enough to accommodate a 100-year storm event with a minimum freeboard of ane foot. + Pedestrians and cyclists will be accommodated an the bridge. + Tlie bridge and approaches will align with the planned future extension of Heritage Road to the north. . + This bridge would be more accommodating for future trails for equestrians and others crossing under the bridge and above the floodplain. + This alignment would allow the existing bridge and roadway to remain open during construction. -}- After COnStlllctiOn, the existing roadway and interim bridge will be removed and the area returned to a more natural state. - This alignment would require 2.46 acres of additional right of way. (EXHIBIT 10 -Preferred Alternative ROW; EX~IIBTT 11-Existing and Proposed Profiles) 4 10-1$ EXHIBIT 8 TOTAL WIDTH OF PROPOSED BRIDGE 118' 5g ~ 59' 8' 7' S' 5' 7' 8' 36' 16' 36' 128' TOTAL RIGHT OF WAY REQUIRED 6 - 12' TRAFFIC LANES (3 LANES EACH SIDE) 1 - 16' h1EDIAN 2 - 8' CLASS 2 BIKE LANES (SHOULDERS) " 2 - 5.5' SIDEWALKS (TOTAL 7' ON EACH SIDE) 2 - l.5 RAILING 6-LANE MAJOR ROAD r~o sc~ \Il~ PUStlC OR`w -- ENGINEFAING 278 FflURTii AVENUE J ~~~ CiiULP1VISTA.G4979'10 . (S79) d7s-23ct7 F7LF N0. Sfli 1-364 _ca.-i:,.,. .: rIT/iR/:G)Q G9:2&5& Ahl PDi J: `~Sutveyl5i.+f_+'63 (NR Bridae%lHK3Jrawlayg<<rmCl rim b~rawm?D ~;ui -.~ ~ ~-- ~~ --- - 10-1 9 ~Xy1BIT ~ _ _- ~n °^y__ tix , >•y -•~y~ T F~ -} .XY ~~•.T` 3 Y' _ r'. ; - i:l ~1 Lim r !L, _ - _ ',_- _ ~.~"_y= ~ - _ -_`_ ---~ER~'~G~'~EiEpENBFE~T,A~Iry ._ _ .. .z . ... z:. . ,_' :._ ._'.. ~.~c..:.... .'. r..:: . _ ~ i._ .- _:~ry _ _ f~ _•"~ Vii- ~:vb - - _ _ I-~l.~ ~ _ _ .. v .,: . .i~ .+~ "~~~ ... ..r ... _ . _ %1 ~~ ~ . ,ac ~ '-^ - s s~ w.~-~ cam'" .c : F"G...".•~ '`. Y ~. ~ . ~ .r 4'z? ~ "a'' 1 Y x-x' "k. x .,y a.{ . ;., ;ya !^`^~• -'t"' '^h 1. ~. ._..`:t ,y+- ~ ~ .. - '__~' ~1. a rT "~ w _.,,: '~~ ~ u ,T' s - mac- ""s .k` ; _.t~ F v..~~". `~ y c: n~' t _. *a,P3 l ~'P !tl`-'~"~`'•'~r ~ ~ . ~'~~--mot. . Lyr ?...~ --Lv Nt~ T` a:Y'• 4: ~,;~„f -:.'k "d a,,,ra '~.. ~,. TM.,:., -~ ~-r. v ~. ~ ~' ~ _ T _;• ~ a~ ~~~ ~~- f',y x Trv-.~ vLC ~-Z~a'is~:i• -,_. w.~ ~ - .. .... ~ . •, . >.-.rte.. ~~~~, .,^-~t .:.. • 7~ T t i . ..~, s~_ . t:t 7~sc-;,e.' r w ~ ~..cr +~:, ..+y . a _ $3 Cry,,., siv ~i s-~-'Z i ~ X i--?i.`=- ~„T- R. ~~.i 1 -µ ~ .~E~Y > ~ ^Y . F F r ~~ • „~.,~--.~%.~~ ~ '; ~ - ~ ETRE~PHLC SSG., a .r. x ,~' ~s . ..~ Y •, .. _ '~ ~3y.I,~C7,LL`"1f1.~3t~1E6.~L`5G`,irl~St/S~~ - y~ _ - " .. .~ r .S a .s~ ~ s~ ~ . ~ - a-- t~~ ~ • ti .x.. it ryj ~+' '~+. ..C ~ ]1- S.3 t;:1s.. 1' ~.._ ..._ ... ... ~ ~~__ __,._ . .:3 .ssr t.. . . _. .. .. .. . - ._ _ .. .... 1L....! \I ~~V~ I l ~~~ ~l i(LJV~ qy.qq ~.~l~i ~ ~~ F_'Y S•'.~~..i. ~i~•r~rt ~~~~®`O.IKd ~~~ e-?~~P Q s~~T~ ~~~P~ 'rir.,?I ~f~liJf.:' i'::'~'.~.r~F7~t•f~~: +lf'{7 ~n~' tr:i:-i-1~=:=a31 -„ i ,..,.,~ n ,+,•,,, a : if.'S /201 C 70: 2~: v^2 a.N ?~ ~ .Y l5urxzyySP,rf36= (:R v: tcgeJ ;,~ttC :ircwirys ~r r,~~~L ~~ , _ L~ i ...-.- EX~1(BlT 1Q _ - - o~tM1 _ W G n~ _ty~ _ ~~ - -SHEET _ ~ .. ~ ~ . ...~ 1 ` . _ .-•.. ... :. .. _ . ...~ ..... ... . i~." - - _ }.,~- - .~t-r.:.:.. - . ~:. -- .. , ..--_ ..r.~ -.. ..... ... ..... - •. ....x__ .:-- - . a~: ~:,: .::.: ...~. _ - .. BRl CAE.-... ..: _ ~:. ~;: . . ,.w - _ -_ _ - ~Et~~=_= - _ _:C3 r ~~ ' - - - ~I'Y _ '~. - - . _ _ ==', .`v:; _ _ ;~ .- . .. .. ~: ~:~r - _ l ~A - ' c~ . ~..-..: x}, tea.- '=C _ _ _ ,. _ _ s '. - .KA~ - - __ - f. ~, ~. i. , ' ~-' -.~~ ~ - . ;~;: ....:.. ~r~ - .s._. - - - ~\ ~~-_ .. r . r ~ ~ ~ .... - G~ ,~•~ 5 ~ ~ > gyn. ^' -. - .~"'' .I.. ii r ~~ --s' .~ - - -~ k a ;. a- ~ --.. - s~ ~ ; J - ifllr O r~ ~~ ~s ~!'al~ ~~f s~~~ ~Za .f'^. ~3y y ~Y ../J O c . _++ ~t+ g¢ f 2_ ~ ~/ 4 .....: ~.i '• :' xs :s .4 r°'. •r ~~ .. .. - e x ®- ®® EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY ®®gg ®~.. ®e~p- /®~ EXISTING BQUNDARY LINE ~~~~~5~~ .f~@~ ~~ tl~l ~i~ ~ALl"~F~~VATIVE 13 !±/ PO r' .c 1,~urre~~Srra364 (uft ~, ye/~.~.Ht1 ur~~r:nsir,rro:.~~~ ~,~,.,.y-,~.-, 10-21 Q `11J~ CiSY OF CHE!!A VISTA IG ,~..,- r PUBLIC YYORICS - EA16iIVF.ffiEY~ 27a Fcw~ Av~au~ CHULAVISTA,CA91910 _ ~`~~llafl.:~ ~'~' (819}~76-2301 ~~R~"AG~ R0~4® PRO~ILE~ Cf1Y 4F CHULA VISTA ~ fH~J. 1 r ~$ ~ -r-~Q~~ ~-rn~ ~ t~Nn Fxi~"iiNG BRIDGE PROFILES ~ Project Study Report Heritage Road Bridge 0/02/2010 TdRT.F.1 ALTERNATIVE 1 PROJECT COSTS Construction Costs $18,600,000 Preliminary En ' eeringCosts 51,800,000 Construction Engineering Costs $900,000 Total 521,300,400 _Alternative 1-The preferred alignment for the following justifications: + Accommodates the City's General Plan Circulation Element. + Provides the most direct connection to planned Heritage Road extension to the north. -}- AIloWS eXlSting traffic on the existing interim Heritage Road Bridge to continue while under construction. + Restores the current roadway right of way, within the river valley, to a more natural state that will accommodate the flow from a I00-year storm event. + Allows for access of future pedestrian and equestrian trails under the bridge. These trails will be constructed as part of the City's Greenbelt Trail and the Otay Valley Regional Park. + This alignment is also shown as a "permitted transportation use" on Figure 6-1 in the City's MSCP Subarea Plan. (EXHIBIT 12 -MSCP Map} Alternative Z - Construct a 450' long bridge in the same location as the existing roadway and interim bridge and widen and raise the remaining roadway approaches. Issues: + The bridge and approaches will accommodate the projected traffic volumes. + The bridge and its approaches would be constructed at an elevation high enough to accommodate a I00-year storm event with a minimum freeboard of one foot. + Pedestrians and cyclists will be accommodated on the bridge..- - The bridge and northerly approach do not align as well as Alternative 1 with the planned future extension of Heritage Road to the north. - Bridge may not be able to accommodate trails for equestrians and others under the bridge and above floodplain. - The existing roadway and bridge would need to be closed to traffic for most, i.f not all, of the construction time, adversely affecting the access and use of the amphitheater and the water park. - A temporary detour road will need to be constructed across the river valley or vehicles will need to be detoured to I-805 and SR-905 to Heritage Road. This would be a considerable inconvenience for the traveling public. (approximately 4 miles) - The old soil under the remaining portions of the existing roadway approaches most likely are in poor condition and will most probably need to be removed and replaced before the roadway approaches could be widened. - This alignment would require 0.98 acres of additional right of way, adjacent to existing roadway. 5 10-23 CV '^ r o a; ,~ i .°, r a iL3= _ e R ao ~:i~ Q .a 6 a 'tl~ a.0 0 o p n _ _ LL! G ~It7 6'O pD3~ ~ „ ~ _~ ~_ __ :3 -a1:; r.'~s •~e= .,~.Cl;..: ~~::.-' ?,Fyn 4. . 'Ei~ % '.' - s. i ~ r ..~„'T-may Y~Y r' t- i_ .S~ rs "~"J ~~-~ - L 4 ~+r ~ y. }h~:. L' ~!i ~ 1 ~ 1. -rr ,may ~' T r ti 9 '- ~o s r y ~ ~-~~ - .9 ,: -~ --~ _ rf 4~J SrfL th i r Y Z ~ ~ ^ •c+ ~ jy ~ z~-, 1 -i '~11t. t r h ~ '~- .' _ ^^98 ~,^~rr^A^ +. 7 1~ ` .' t tit L a4*t ~ rF ~ /y~O ~ J r t L `°~ h t t~ a .+.w t • .a,y*s_t..`.'.g`.~'4 i. ~` ~' f L J 5a la ! ~ t .r ems. ..'~ rte. s'r+l i ~ .:31 •( ~~ a, I,w ., 1•.*1 •}1 ``y.fi.. 1~1.-.•. ; Lj...~ yQ~~~/\j{ .`Y ~ -_~,~y 3 at ~ eF ~ Y ~1 y .`.'f .~43 ..±`'k. ~ ~ r .,. i'•=1•( . i~i~ Yo....~ .!, ~ r fir„?, 7 S i ~ t v +t f : ~,,, y? ~ w ~,. ~ :~ .ae 4 t r ? f~ ~ ~` a ti! ~ t.a t ,~~ i t .3~ ~ ~ .y ..~'i .`''r ti-ai -a5 h Y 'y ''' t r1 't 1' CC7J .+ ~ s~( ~,. r_ 5 r! ~ 4 r ~I~st }~}i,u4, t a! Y _ ~ ~3i 1e t y~ t~iq y"Y y. ~{ J. ! ` L •~-"t' . 7 ~ t ~ <3l ~.-.c.. c, i . t~ ~ S '~1. 4`~i ~ r r ~ i~ r ~-~' .} ~ i- ~vl r a "', `' - krr I a..~, a -sx S a~.~ ,.(, . t S ~T, ~ n - "-• ~, y,a¢yq{taaagSao Si~YagaaQRyaatBfiLLasatC~aaallaafi~IIl QAy7y~ - i.rf : j r ~ ~- a f,~t~ '4r0 °- ;~ t _=~7.:~iti ~':^ '.iii:]; iii: .t ~a 7;.: ^:`;=±~ •a'+;~'` ,.SsI `~`• ~~ ~s= ~ 6 ;~L ~. ~,~: - . =.} ~r-t1 ~ ~ - _ ~:~. :i'_.-,ate{,~ =~_.~.~ ski :e: . i'.:. • ~ 1;.~. ~ i~ '.1.. 4.. - ~( =yHi..41J ~i. _ t. }r ~n:• -.~A`li ," i i:a _ -':~~_~. _sy C 2• - 4 y._~ ..,~ r •.=r{ ,. ..-•;~u+.:: ~a:a viii yrP{L'; ~•'•^•'~^ .~~>~ ~ w Z ~,. 1 ~ ti' _... ,i` tit! . ; .r.-i.'` ..CB' ~ ~ f ~ i ,C ._ .V. w.:n' .lji• ~ Lt _ ;V~ ~ G_ ic4.8x?. .. .Y r` ~, c .'`. ,, Y ~ i t, r p L ~~ r~ . d ~ '~ ~ ~, _ ~ Q~ 3 r 1 ~ ~ v 1 ~ .~' y r5 o.a t J .. y.;~~C.t{ S t_ r~1. ~ '! 3f ~ ~ i. ~ ~ ~ L v r t - .~,~'I,.~'-,tea jai , ~~"~ r,,, ~ O S 1. -'{ ~ ~ a~ z S -"~' - - . aM '` to ~ a""!. __ ~' . 7~r s:.s -•r 'i - s ' as a ~ ~ ~ r ~ .3. _ • '" .;,.. ~ ' ry tc~ia ">1. 'Y~ ~~ ~ ~ . r." ~ gut o .3 C ~' ,~~ y ~ '"~ i~ 3 '~ r fit`` ~~ /. ~ 2' ~ _ 4~ s t.. a r ' _ ,. r r ~., +h 1 f <. 1 >~~ V l _ _~ P ' ,L• ~ t t t , k. ~ _ - ,.r c .t. ~ ^,, n j ~ s- X •~~• ~ r _~t - Fr _~ ~. tr. .l t .i ~ t ' ~•F. i1 ti•1. . ,.•1 Project Study Report Heritage Road Bridge 04/Q2/2410 (See EXF-ID31T 13 -Alternative 2 -ROW}. TABLE 2 ALTERNATIVE 2 PROJECT COSTS Construction Costs $18,200,000 Preliminary En ' eerin Costs $1,800,000 Construction Engineering Costs $900,000 Total $20,900,000 Alternative 3 - No Build Project - Issues: - - The existing interim bridge will not accommodate the projected traffic volumes and will become a "bottleneck". Also, due to its proximity to the bridge, Main Street will also experience congesfion. The levels of service (LOS) would degrade to unacceptable levels. - The existing bridge and northerly approach do not align with the planned future extension of Heritage Road to the north. - Pedestrians and cyclists will not be accommodated on the existing bridge and trails for equestrians and others can't be accommodated under it. - Storms greater than a 2-year storm event will overtop the southerly approach and potentially undermine the roadway and possibly damage the bridge. - The bridge would still remain an interim. timber deck .bridge resulting_ in greater maintenance costs and future repairs. Eventually, at some point, the approaches will need to be widened to, provide transitions to the future Main StreetJHeritage Road intersection to tl2e north and to a widened Heritage Road to the south. The bridge could be re-striped to accommodate a 4-lane roadway with no shoulders, sidewalks, or bike lanes, but tivould nat accommodate the projected traffic volumes. Other Alternatives -Studied & Rejected Two other aitematives were briefly studied and discarded: one approximately 2,000' easterly and one approximately 1,100' westerly of the exist bridge. These alignments were rejected because they required significant right of way, presenting significant environmental issues and/or will not mitigate the anticipated circulation issues and expected traffic volumes. V SYSTEM PLANNING This project is included in and consistent with all the following documents: Chula Vista Documents: • The Circulation Element of the City's General Plan, Updated -December 2005 • City of Chxda Vista's Eastern Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) Proo am • The Otay Ranch, Villages Z ~ 3 Sectional Plartnirzg area (SPA) and approved tentative map. These documents show the future Heritage Road alignment between the existing Heritage Road Bridge and the current southerly tenmiiius of Heritage Road at Olympic Parkway. (EXHIBIT 14-Village 2 TM} 6 10-25 ~X-Hi~fT ~3 ' ~_~- _ .~W _ F s~' . ~~ ~ , ._ - _ p•-~. _ :. .. .... _ ~F" ":1 ~. ~ - i. _ - - .,E - - . , . .. . .. ~,::~ tST1NG - - -- - -f'f~OPt~~ .: ~ .::: .. :_ .. ,. . . . .:~.. .. , ..., ... _ _ __ - _ _ ~f~lf_-, ~... ~~T10 _ _ ~, _~ . _ _ ~ r ` .=.~:r . . _ _ - ' ,~ ^.~ `. _ ~~ - :r_' _~ - - Q _ _- ' ~'~. ~-` ~~~ _~.`~'. rte:?`,.s :,4~~~~2.i ~'~;~~ _ •. _ _'. c .. ....., .. ~... N'. . a .. ~ :..." T --. r. . . ..'.':a.. . ' ~ ~~'~°' :' :' "T~.::t.:Y :SLR _ -~-..~.~:~~~`[;•~~,~ . .. ..x., . ~..:.. _ . . 'I. ~~: ~~ _ _ - ~_ Imo!` _ _ ' ~,~~. 'iS... ' - :ti _ :'J:`r ' - - ~.:: _ :'-#,. - :~'z .. t•_ "~ .. "R. ...:y- ~I _~?:;,-t •s•- - ~:~-- ~+~• -~ ~'• o S"` _ } i. ~.r :~.:i'.~. ~.~:'~~~~'~~er ]'1 `" ~ .ir+s mot: f"1-~=:~ •. } . _ ,,~' -' -.iaf?i: ~ =CSI-.~•e -- ~ +r. _ . - ~~ ... ~...... ..., ..: .-r:.:.r r, ~- ~,.' ~ a g x.tix[yf r -p-~- e - -^~^° EX/ST/NG RIGHT OF WAY .- ®~ ~ m ®° EXISTING BOUNDARY UNE f7LE NO. STM-3S4 ~ __tf~zt c'nirE cc2 Pmnns=d RQW. A7C 1 A.t?w9 03/16f20f0 lf:4B:42 AM PB? ,k ~Sur~y`S~fJtiS (,^tx crrage/ ~rro urcu:r,y~„~„" , .•,. ~.-. ,_ „ -, 10'26 _ •, ~ ,. _ f ~,; •• '_ ,.•.''~'.' "'' •1•,yn?111,,;1) 'z''~-•-._`.-,.,.'-"`~ i',' CA • I ,*Ti:;, ., .. _ ~ S'" - 1:":~^.C~ i~~l:(a,' _~ Ft'L i,: yr: ~_`•-: ,7 . -~ t- I . ~„• ---~ ` _ ~ ., i ,t ~` ._ , y;:.=-~;~1..,;. `:,~'it~C~r~;3~14a1{ `1•A'i:; ~~;;t%, C,=.~~ z N _ • k • .~~=~„ : ~ ,-- i I 1,~~~{;~~1,4~~:ii;l`•It4ii~intl~lf,>~~`:~ ~-~i`: rs =c`;~ ~ C =' `' - i i ~ • ','r ~ - ---- - -- ~~' T-- ~1 Ili {.r ••rr II 11'd`t ' ~G: ~,.~ : .,L'.;.. ~ ¢ U LLi a ! ';~ ~~, _y`- .. -- ~..~. _ ;~I;., r'If~ i1l~~l!~~IdlEl:~•"~'Ffy"<:-~, '.. ~a, ~ sz „• , { ! i a.'_'n.`i;,:.._. _ ., O\~ ~ _ l :, . {~y5+1~,~Ij~,~.~:=:; :$'.L~ ~'=.r.;:-~~'" :-.•~c:'t7ilr : i ~ F ([ Q ~ . i I t i ' ~z-~``:. ;~ `) `~ - ~ I ~': t . 4~:"~,~,; ,llll!a's~~: ;".'.-.~;~`~~-i.._ri ~ ~f~2^ ."r:...ti 0_ F ~' J `i~:r. CZ i `3 '~I i, j. III}ISU`,'. ,:~ e"~7:-^~-.._.'_;~ J ~z Ltt ~ f ~~ / '1 Il ~ ~ M1 W«•.c.~. rr 5 . _ ` : { fa"Y'-.:: ~:'w:~:/?•=': 1; L'' •.+Ta art ~F^3J> rAr' '• ~ "- _ 1 r (. .: t' _ _ ..2i, ~ ~. {~ ! i i,>ar''~ '.,•.:'~~ :. ~i•7i11.•~nr:_. •. _ ~~ ~ . r I t 1 1 t i .~:`.^`se ``~'~'" " - - 3 = '~'.:.~ ml=t: ',,_ -•,.~ ...;xa:~ i •._' ~. i f ! 1 '-.•:'`v`i•T=-'.Fy~Ci.!- ~ 'z ° ~ ,t,,_~ltbc9. '•'={. - _.. a~iy:_. fG. ..- ~. i j •~ ~ ~~•_a>..:.~ _t•` r`~.._•' ~ ~ I.r';?:~._~.~a _ -v,..r,J_.7;,.=•;' - ~ J - sr` {.~ .y i ~ • I ,:%;;_ e ` rs' ~ _ -. - 2 r K"~ yr.'' ~-;R: •.;, .;~y~1 J . i! i . l- i `~ . .. =•r, __c'c'., _ - .. a"' '`.:''t:"-."y+'=~. 't'=y' ~`"","~'I' i - ~t{ l•! :al ul I , I,''.~L:.LT .<yi5 { .~"-'Y!y' i;. `'FF~'~=i:ti~. ,::r:~-".---iarJ--+~`~.- -= l ' i 1; ~ ~ k I, - \a~. T 7•-"~~.-~.~~': __. IyeC:?~">:1 1 z ~ i e :7 '~ "'? 1 ' ~ • - _ ;vim`,; .w;1~i•L'•~ -' Ir,~~ - ~••~~.r~,~~.--,.~~,~ .15 q "~^"`~:.. ~~11 f_ 'i_~.~=`~..:~.-- 1 f'-.,-2"r: fa I ~~/~`a.~ j(" 7A'C ~ r1 • ~,•'l~.'~4~-~... .y~~. 1 .~' ___ ~~~Y~-_~r~~".~ .i aa~,~..~~•~5~r~ ~4t.1 '~i..~~'- ~~ , ..t; ~' .t •':j~i,:I 'yam _ }•frk `p[ae~~M` i I I Iw .. `~: ~_~~1.~ .,1• '1': N.~_y~ ~i ^.~_£-~_ ~ _ - ~ _ 'S.['+:a:~:,,.'~. ~.~•y~r,.~.. ^!• i `~«a~ .at c •i, ~ ~`...:.eo-...":f,• M1 ~-O^ 3 •' ~ _ . _ a !~ '~ "E'li'-+. ~ ' ~_' ~= ~~' i'=?. ~ sc.~" -3.'. '`''~~.- • •ly-. ~-c . ,t'W `=j "~.`~v:~e•~ •' • °~` ~.: =~~,i O.;%~r--.' .` _ f.~'~+'' =" ^~,:~c':. •fi ~~ ~>::i.~r: ~.r.'2 _ 7 ' ~e-~'ea ~-',d`7- ~.i~_;. »~`y,~;~.~~ .i;, ',` +c. -'hZJ.. .3 ~G`:i-"~'=.•~ .~.. ~ tea` u ~ tnC ~ ,~ ' /, ;' r.~ ~`~~`' ,r--. rz.~'~-0q~ '';•.~ ' 'n. '~-- ' 5~~~~M.,,:,.h~~ ~'~ a3,~ ::4 ' ~ t '~ a ~-,., r`~a..,-.::;tiw'~G'?,'.:1 f-,fe '-~-t,5 "~ _-~w~-v`1~~~'v~ - ~'r ,~°• _~~ ~. ~.rt e. k.. ;c, ~,.\:`_r, z~~t^"3..i'~~`x ~,a~r~^ ~ •T'LLyf~, i '":..-'v'^.::~~'- ~~ ~ ~~.1`'~°; "^'w~~ a~- .W:~ - •~ ..,,•w:, _ et,'.:c 3a_ \I,it q P i~ ~5~ ..:. __, ~-. E ~.{ g c < ~ vi ~.. ~yl ,~ y.~~ay.G~~~ Ga, ~~ j+,Y ,..:. gyp, 7 s ^'~S.'4' ~''~ 7 ~ .• .. '~:1 ''^-t ~ ~'~ ~~s~ ~~~ Y--:4+.~.Kt,-~ F~_ -'~.... d -p:•i~~~i<'~`. _ ~ _.M.-r_ ~o--.,-~, $..! w.~. ~. .. ,~.,: Y ,~'• -'"r-,~~ii=~ ~.' :tom i •:' . • m : ~: ~ . , .,_~ ._ i i'ij.ia ~/i~hJ~•; jj1a, ~'gggil.~;:'`a •_ , /'; t irk, . _ , _ ~, r' _ ! ,t • •'. ;I/. f '~: f: ~.-. 1, A.p _ ,* _ ~1 . ~~~ha er=r ~r`~ '- '); -_- - -4€!~~_' _ r:s~: - .._ 1, .I .f .;1~ 1~_;:::. f s.:/ : _ ~. iJ lij ..~-r .'~tji J J t °a j ~. r_... _._ y' 1 ~c~:' r Y%'r'. j 1 r ~ j f } ti~.~`_riii?,`.-tis7~T~ ~•a:u. ~ ` •~ I - .~: ,~.. jr ~ % ~ ' :f:-..~_..:.._~~~_- ~.• fir: _ ~:~r. l . ~ i . ,~~. ~J;y:.i 1 101 d.~ _- ,{_ < . _, ...._ =.. _.~~~..~}~t:' I 3~;~~ ~„_;Na f li.' `' ~ I~ ix ~ yN i.4` '~' ' ;fie : ~ ~I~~~i~ ~ `;~ .u tel: ~kvcl~ _~ Li~~. •_-- ~.4`1.~ air ~.{ i ,: ~,~: ~ _ -. ; , (j-~~" . It • , a Irr~ S .,. 1~, -~ ~g~t ~..'~ ra -- i ' ~~ ~~ ~ f. ,: '.~ir.Jl `f.l ''0 ~~ ~- ..~ r' ~r ~. ~., G, t'i.i- (' . ~i. '~ r {i{ ; ^ '.,..111 ~:~'" 4 $ _ y ' ..~'-, 4 -~C~''~ . ~•.. / ~~ - 3 '.8 ~` , a ~i ~. 3~ ~ /yam., g~ _ ~~ .'~= I ~• f T •4`._ n.o •y u { .1 ;~W u f 1 s- W..r~, x~ _~ t 3;;t , ¢ ~' . 5 _ . J11( `~ •1, •~ • {I Mph .' t; ~ ~ ~, l I x,.~ _, z ,,ter t:~`- . -_ : r,~- ~; r.a `n ~. rrti a'•p, a l• i _ _ __ • ter"" 1-t~.,~~'~~±' ~, I_~li~ i k.. ...., i! 'l.u.. I U - L / Project Study Report Heritage Road Bride O~J02/2010 City of Charla Vista's Bike~vay 1~Iaster Plan, January 244 sY1SCP Subarea Ti-atzsportation Plan -showing the permitted transportation uses within the MSCP Alternative 1 also can accommodate the trails shown in the following Planning Documents: Chula Vista Greenbelt hfaster Plan (ATTACHMENT D -Greenbelt Master Plan & EX~B1T IS - Greenbelt/OVRP Map) . The Otay Valley Regional Park (OVRP} Concept Plan (ATTACHIv1ENT E - OVRP Plan) City of San Dieao Documents: The City of San Diego's "Otay 1[~Iesa Public Facility Financing Plan", FY 2007 SANDAG Documents SANDAG's Reo oval Transportation Improvement Plan (RTIP) dated February 2008 (ATTACI-IMENT F - STIP/RTII?/SAFETY-LU) SANDAG's Otay Valley Tr•ansportatiof2 Study .1999 VI TRAFFIC ELEMENTS Traffic Volumes Under the adopted CTeneral Plan, land use and circulation assumptions, the average daily traffic (ADT) for 2030 from the SANDAG Series 11 Model for South Chula Vista (February 8, 2010} traversing the Heritage Road Bridge is calculated to be 33,700 ADT. This assumption includes a future second Otay River arterial crossing at La Media Road just west of SR-125. The La Media Road Bridge is not programmed for construction in the foreseeable future. If the La Media Road crossing is not constructed and the Heritage Road Bridge remains as the only arterial crossing the Otay River, the traffic crossing the bridge will increase significantly to over 60,000 ADT in 2030. . Because of the praj ected traffic volumes and the bridges proximity to a major intersection, a six lane prime or Major road will be required to maintain at least a LOS D. (EXHIBTT 16 -Traffic Volumes E~iIBTT 17 -Chula Vista Capacity Standards} - Acciden# History A review of Accident Reports on Heritage Road through the curve to Main Street and within the project limits from January 1, 1998 to December 31, 2008 showed that there were 43 collisions far various reasons, but primarily due to excessive speed through the curve. The accident rate of 1.25 in this area is lower than the average State rate of 1.58 for this classification of road and time period (the time period used by the State is 2005 thru 2007}. This curve will be removed when the conventional intersection far Main Street and Heritage Road is constructed. 7 10-28 u E~~lBi i C'~ Q C~. C~ C~ I i~I i ~~Htl 8~ a 4 0 h O h ^~'~ I Q tiI Z Q a~~Q r z ~ o s ~~ ~o ~o~y~ ~~~;~ o~og~ ~~ti=m ~~~ ~~ J ~~ b D 0.' O a v li v N G1 ,[ 3 0 Q C D .; 0 c m 2 s k m ~= n~ 10-29 - E~HfBIT 16 . a m o i'E7 '9 _ 9'bZ 8'6 ~ `. -r I..~ ~'•. fi N -i N NN N~ y 77 1 No ' l Z Z S LE 5'LE ~~" - b'b b.7 9'0 SZ b• C~ Z 0 m ~- N ^ ' V L~ ,~" 6 i C9 • .A• n °ta i F•B SZE 9"b m r { _ ° ~o ~ ° q ~ Q r " ~ ? ua c 7 . ~ ~ "' ~~ Jam' b £b ~ •rr ~w• - { nn n ej • .~ b tt .' 4 LL ~"^^t !- W ~r /~ t ~ t••~ r 2 L'9 >-Q 2 - ,,,ppp A 9 i El d _ .: ~~ A ~ . ~p g9 ~' ~ ~ `/ a~ .` ~ n m o N A ~ F Z'EL C ~~o ~ n E'B Z'EL n 6 o ~ '~, 'e ` ~ ~... c C ~~ ~ € ? ~ ~ ~ h w~ et 2 ~~ tu5 i cos-r ! 4 i rv 4 - i tt. tb.fi ~ ,~R~ 'tL~ umi u _ i i ~ m • ~'O \~ ~Y pq^~~ (6~L~ O \ O Lim ~ ~ o~ 8 @,o ~ ~ w' w m ~ 3 b'Et t'S b'S Cb i,s °mt° - _ ti '` c ~ 6'6 SS . . ~ N. ^~ ° C ~ E fi g ~ $ a . m - J.6 ~-6 ~ It 6-E6 b' L a c ~S : '~hG 01m t7.4 m'r elt~'\~~ 1-ZL £'Zt / ~ L C~~9 R is __ ` _ - l .4 N ~ i ° ~ ti~ e ~ ~ ~ y "~ f8 - EEE t ~ ~ nt47 g c ~ i LL ~ r 5~.`- ~: Lr': B8t R-.I :'! ~ Sr. Z_ O o ~ ~ g~ m ~ ~ ~.{ ' g <~ o ° ° ° ~ ~r , io~~"`~ ~ ~ a e ~ ~ c ° z o N° p ~ U?rtY~~- ~ QV~~~ ~ Q. a '~ » ¢ P ~m ?'m ~_~ ~ ~ ~ p Q _r ~ ~ ~ ~ J 7 ~F a e ¢ M [~ O ~ ~ ° ~ U U T [6 3 2 -1 VI V ~ ~ ~ m 7 Q Q f~ ~ Q e¢ q°° r Ti-"- =y¢m ~ a n ~ a z ~ c °= ~ J K C `L U ii o m a J lL 1 c ICE 1 ~\~ (~~ z N +~ O ~ ~J ~~ oY ` f ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ k ~ ` ~ ~ 1 1 {~ ~ ~ ~ Q HC.~2.~mm a ~_ `X~ `/' \; f..L.1 EXHIBIT 17 USE AND TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER 5 TABLE 5-9 STREET SEGMENT PERFORII~LANCE STANDARDS .AND VOLUMES Acceptable Volume Street Classification Acceptable LOS (ADS • E;~pressway C 70,000 prime Arterial C 50,000 Major Street (six lanes) C 40,000 Major Street (four lanes) C 30,000 Town Center Arterial C 50,000 Class I Collector C ?2,000 61,200 (six lanes) Gateway Street ~ D 4,,200 (four lanes) U;b~ ~~~ D 37,&00 Commercial Boulevard D 33,750 Downtown Promenade D 14,400 A roadway's capacity is primarily a function or"the number of lanes provided to carry frame volumes, and whether or not the roadway is divided with a median or center tum lane Typically, the more lanes provided, the more capac"fij the roadway has to accommodate trafnc demand. _ The peak hour capacity of a roadway is influenced by a number of variables, including: the type of intersection controls; signal timing; the presence and frequency of driveways; on-street parking; the percentage of the daily frame in the peak hour, the direction oftramc in the peak hour; and other factors. ~AP~4~1TY STANDAR~~ car o~ cHU~ v~sT~ ~~ n-r /rr; /anrn 71-nc~ iR 4Fl ACi ,,: '>>urve/~~~?~'354 ,tiR 3~rdaej ,~ r•'„ ~rew:ngs ~rrno r_ _ 10-31 Project Study Report Heritage Road Bridge 04/02/2010 VII OTHER BRIDGE ISSUES Bride Inspection Records Information Svstem BIRIS) The latest CALTRANS BIRIS report preformed on November 11, 2006 indicates that the interim bridge had a Sufficiency Rating of 80.3. Bridges are normally inspected every two years; hence a new report is expected in the near future. A sufficiency rating below 80; may qualify this bridge for the Highway Bridge Program. This program could become a significant funding source for construction. (ATTACHIvIEENT' G - BIRIS Report) Iiydrolo~y/Hydraulics Performing preliminary calculations and using FEMA data, it is expected that increasing the widtl~ of the channel from 80' to 400' by removing the existing roadway and building a longer bridge will substantially lower the watez surface level fora 100-year storm event. Currently, according to FEMA Map No 0607302159 F, dated June 1997 (the new Preliminary FEMA Map, dated May 2009 concurs}, a 100-year storm event will inundate an area reaching from Entertainment Circle, south of the bridge, to the southerly edges of Main Street, north of the bridge. After this roadway obstruction is removed the 100-year flood event, in the vicinity upstream of the existing bridge, is expected be contained within the river's floodway. Detailed hydraulic calculations, including a Conditional Letter of Map Revision {CLOMR), will be preformed to determine the water surface profile prior to final design. (EXI~1T 6 - FEMA Map} VIII ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE (See ATTACHMENT H - Preliminary Environmental Study (PES)} Biolo v No significant biological impacts are anticipated. Although work will be preformed within the floodway/river bottom, all impacts will be mitigated and the river bottom restored. A staff biologist must be notified prior to construction to locate any nesting binds and to direct field crews accordingly. Seeding with native species is recommended; for erosion control. All proper documents shall be obtained. prior to construction and the restoration of the. #loodplain (riverbed}. Cultural Resources Occupation of the river valley has been documented. Therefore, a cultural survey will be performed as part of the project approval process. The appropriate NEPA/CEQA protocols will be followed if any cultural resources are identified with the proposed project construction site. Visual No Visual Impacts are anticipated. However, the preparation of a Visual Impact Study pursuant to Federal Highway Administration guidelines will be proposed in order to appropriately evaluate potential visual impacts. Noise It is anticipated that associated construction related noise would occur. 10-32 Project Study Report Heritage Road Bridge 04/02/2010 Hazardous MateriallWaste An Initial Site Assessment pursuant to the methods and guidelines of the California State Department of Transportation will be prepared for the proj ect. River Restoration Some grading will be required to construct the abutments and roadway for the new bridge as well as to remove the existing roadway and bridge abutments and then restore the area to a more natural state. AlI appropriate Federal and State permits, including a CLOMR will be obtained for this work within the river bottom. Amer the project is completed a Letter of Map Revision maybe required. NEPA/CEQA .. CALTRANS is the lead agency for the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process and the City is the lead agency for the California Environmental Quality Act {CEQA) process. It is anticipated that the project will include NEPA and CEQA environmental documents, based upon a similar bridge project in the City. Specifically, a Routine Environmental Assessment will be required for NEPA and an Initial Study will be required for CEQA. It is anticipated this will result in a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONS13 and a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), respectively. IX FUNDING/SCHEDULE Funding Sources Available and potential funding sources for this project include: Transportation Development Impact Fee (TOTE) -These City of Chula Vista funds can be used to help mitigate the increase in traffic that is attributed to future development. • Otay Mesa Public Facilities Financing Plan (PEEP} -These City of San Diego funds from development in Otay Mesa are earmarked for the future construction of this bridge (2018- 2020) as well as other portions of Heritage Road south of Chula Vista. "Safe Accountable Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users" (SAFETEA-LU} - This Federal Prograrn has allocated $1.99 M for Preliminary Engineering, including Environmental Studies and Preliminary Design for the Project. These funds require a local match of 20%. . Potential Funding Source • Highway Bridge Program {IMP) -For bridges with a sufficiency rating below 80, this program could contribute 88.53% of the construction and right of way costs for bridge rehabilitation or replacement using Federal Funds. 9 10-33 Project Study Report Heritage Road Bridge 04/02/2010 Proiect Schedule Milestones Schedule Preliminary Engineering & In Progress -December 2414 Environmental Review • Environmental Clearances September 2410 -December 2412 • Final Design January 2011 -December 2412 Right of Way {pending funding} December 2412 -June 2013 • Construction (pending funding} June 2013 -December 2014 • Demolition and Restoration Completion -December 2415 X ATTACHIVIENTS & EXHIBITS (Attached Documents contain only the portions relevant to this project.} EXHIBrfS: 1. Regional Location Map 2. Aerial Plzoto (Location) 3. Existing Facilityand Right of Way 4. Sub-Regional Land Use Map 5. Planned Circulation Roads 6. FEMA Floodway 7. Regional Facilities Map 8. Proposed Cross Section 9. Proposed Alignments 10_ Alternative 1 (ROW) 11. Existing and Proposed Profiles 12. MSCP Subarea Plan- (Transportation Uses} I3. Alternative Z (ROW) I4. Village 2 Tentative Map 1 ~. Greenbelt/Otay VaIIey Regional Park 1v1ag lb. 2030 Traffic Volumes 17. Chula Vista Capacity Standards ATTACHMENTS: (Includes Relevant Excerpts) A. Otay River Valley Transportation Study B. Otay Mesa PFFP C. TDIF Program D. Greenbelt Master Plan E. OTVRP Concept Plan F. STIP/RTIP/SAFTEA-LU G. BIRIS H. PES I. Cost Estimate Alt 1 3. Cost Estimate Alt 2 ~4 10-34 Heritage Road Bridge 04/02/2010 Project Study Report X Schedule In Pxo~ess December 2010 September 2010 -December 2012 3anuary 2011 -December 2012 December 2012 -Tune 2013 3une 2013 -December 2014 Completion -December 2015 (Attached Documents contain only the portions relevant to this project.) EXHIBTTS: 1. Regional Location Iviap 2. Aerial. Photo (Location) 3. Existing Facility and Right of Way 4. Sub-Regional Land Use Map S. Planned Circulation Roads b. FEMA Flaodway 7. Regional Facilities Map 8. Proposed Cross Section 9. Proposed Alignments 10. Alternative 1 (ROW) l 1. Existing and Proposed Profi]es i 2. 1vISCP Subarea Plan - (TransportatioaDses) 13. Alternative 2 (ROW} 14. Village 2 Tentative Map 15. GreenbeltlOtay Valley Regional Park ivfap Ib. 2030 Traffic Volumes 17. Chula Vista Capacity Standards ATTACHIvIEENT'S: {Includes Relevant Excerpts) A. Otay River Valley Transportation Study B. Otay Mesa PFFP C. TDIF Program D. Greenbelt Masser Plan E. OTVRP ConceptPlan F. STIP/RTIP/SAFTEA-LU G. BIRIS H. PES I. Cost Estimate Alt 1 J. Cost Estimate Alt 2 ATI~ NMFNTS Praiect Schedule Milestones Preliminary En~.neering & Environmental Review Environmental Clearances Final Design Right of Way (pending funding) Construction (pending funding) Demolition and Restoration ATTACffiVIENTS & EXSCBITS /~" ~ ~ ~a 10-35 _! . +i1 ~) _~ TECHNICAL REPORT C}TAY R1VER VALLEY TRANS~C)RTA1'lON STUDY AUGUST, 1997 .~ _ _•~ k__ t ~__.. -~ San Diego ASSOCIATION 4F GO~RI~NT5 401 S Street, Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92101 (619) 595-5300 This study was financed with federal funds from the U.S. Department of Transportatittq Federal Hjghway Administratioq and local funds from SANDAG member jurisdictions. MEMBER AGENCIES: Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, Ef Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Emparial Beach, La Mesa Lensan Grave, National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Diego, San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach, Vista, end County of San Diego. ADViSORYlLfAiSON MEMBERS: California Department of Transparisdon, U.S. Department of Defense, San Diego Unifiad Port District, San Diego County Water Authoriy, and TijuanalBaja Califomialtvlexica. 1~-37 INTRODUC'TIOI~I AND SUMMARY STUDY PURPOSE The adopted Land use plans in the border area of the South Bay include significant residential and industrial growth. These future developments would require new transportation infra- structureserving north-south traffic movements accessing and passing through this area. Development would take place in the City of Chula Vista's Eastern area, the City of San Di- ego's Otay Mesa, and the County of San Diego's East Otay Mesa. These jurisdictions would be the main beneficiaries of the future roads and, as a result, they agreed to examine a joint, cooperative approach to financing these facilities. The objective of the Otay River Valley Transportation Study was to develop amulti- jurisdictional financing plan for three arterial crossings of the Otay River east of Interstate 8Q5. Serving subregional travel, the facilities evaluated were Otay Valley Road-Heritage Road, La Media Road, and Alta Road, as shown in Figure S-I. Currently, the City of San Diego is collecting fees for the Heritage Road crossing as part of the Public Faciliries Financing Plan for the community of Otay Mesa. The technical work for this study was completed during FY 1996. This report documents the study's assumptions, methodology and findings. No financing plan was adopted at the cam- gletion of the study. BACKGROUND In the Spring of 1995, the County of San Diego and the Cities of Chula Vista and San Diego requested that SANDAG include the Otay River Valley Transportation Study in its FY 1996 Overall Work Program. This study focused on financing alternatives for three arterial cross- ings of the Otay River. Earlier in 1994, the Board of Supervisors had recommended the creation of an Inter- Jurisdictional Committee with the objective of preparing a subregianal transportation financing strategy far the South Bay. Both the Cities of Chula Vista and San Diego concurred with the County of San Diega and supported the formation of this committee. The Inter-jurisdictional Committee, made up of Public Works and Planning Departments stag; met occasionally starting in the Fall of 1994 and developed an initial scope of -work to guide the preparation of the subregianal financing plan. -, 10-38 Far the Otay River Valley Transportation study, astaff--level Technical Advisory Committee was set up with representation from the Cities of Chula Vista and San Diego, the County of San Diego, the Metropolitan Transit Development Board, Caltrans, and SANDAG. A Policy Advisory Committee, comprised of elected officials from the Cities of Chula Vista and San Di- ego and the County of San Diego, provided direction and oversight to the Technical Conunit- tee. The last Policy Committee meeting was held in May 199b, after completing the traffic fore- casts and initial proposals for shared financing. At this meeting, the Committee requested in- put from the Otay Mesa Planning Group regarding the proposed multi jurisdictional financing apgroach for the three river crossings. By June 1997, the Planning Group had not taken a po- sition regarding a joint financing strategy for the three bridges. As a result, two main issues were not resolved during the Otay River Valley study. . 1) Whether the City of San Diego would participate in a multi jurisdictional financing ap- proach. 2) Whether to apportion the cost of the project based on each jurisdiction's share of new de- velopment or based on each jurisdiction's share of trips across the bridges (or other poten- tial methods). The City of San Diego is currently updating its FY 1997!98 Public Facilities Financing Plan for the community of Otay Mesa. As in the earlier FY 95 plan, the FY 98 plan would fund only the Heritage bridge. The Otay Mesa Planning Group indicated they would consider joint fi- nancing of the Otay River bridges for the FY 1998/99 Public Facilities Financing Plan. MAIN STUDY TASKS The Otay River Valley Transportation Study consisted of four principal tasks: 1. Estimate capacity requirements for the three proposed crossings of the Otay River at full development conditions and at two interim periods, 2005 and 2015. 2. Prepare preliminary cost estimates for the three bridges and approaches. 3. Define the area that would benefit from the three crossings. 4. Propane a financing plan to pay for the facilities. 10-39 _! 3 ll` .I •~ 1 .~ .~ `~ •~ `~ ,~ ~i ci ~ _ t Yti$,.. _ ~~~ =_ _1. `mss ~ ~, r -'V~ ir! ~~ ~- - N- ~ • ~ ~ ~~ `~ k". taw' -'' •r.-~a-v. ~ O 2 ~ +~,"F+-.,, -,5. -•e~ si -.~.i `-. ~ _F ~~ ~ ~~' ~ -~' ,~z~ -~ .~. 5~m. ~ ..~' ~t ti °~ -"+~. -ax~"`z~.z~ ~~"z~-'vs. ''~`"c.,`n'C. .~x.,~"~.sm~`~4*O~ ~ ~ ° ..yt~1=~} ~ ~ r' Yi y Fq~A ;;~ ~ ~ ' ~ m ~`""r'~- M rte' ~~-~` '~,~` Yam" g '~S'~ "~xr~~'~•~'~ ~?'~ ~ r s ~-~,~ "--~ ~`,`; _ .> ~ia. .7 ~ ~~ a fr ~, ~ _ 3"~'?` '~ _ L _ i . ~ 7„_ '; T.e_, ~:~_-~-T"`r ,iT-,Z+,6r~ i r ~ >. ..~~Om ~' r ~F ' ~~'+-' a,.~.-°L~ ~~~ e -y''s'.'D '~ ors} '_^ ~"'~~. G ~~+y~i-' ~ ~T 24.x•+ _L: P +~..t. ~. j ~4 ~~+.3'LLe"" -x.. 6 . $ ~', ~ ~ ~ ~~ '~- . 'J"-r'.'s,.~q,~~'1"-~s'~-'~~.~j f kr '. ~`~.. ~~ .. . ~ µ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ y~ ~. _ d~ pey mad, ~' ~ - 1 ~-''- t -x- __ fit.-t.- rs ~. _~; U.c1,1 y. t } ~ t. c 1.. '-~ [B t ~ d Y.r. ~ Q S .~ i~ O 1 ~ ~ N C a ~ °j ~ r. ~ '~` 'a '° H ~ Q ~ o 1 L. (~ y ^ w U Ci3 ~ L 'a a. ~ rm~ > m ~ ~ ~ ~ 10-40 PHASING OF PROPOSED BRIDGES THROUGH THE YEAR 2015 The two-lane bridge at Heritage Road carried approximately 4,004 daily vehicles in 1995. A year later, volumes had increased to 5,200 vehicles ger day. An interpolation of volumes be- tweeci the 1995 tragic counts and the projections for 2005 suggests that ADT on the Heritage bridge would exceed 10,000 vehicles by 199$. Interim capacity improvements to the existing Heritage bridge would be needed to relieve this projected trait demand. A developer-funded mitigation project was undertaken in 1996 to provide additional capacity on Otay Valley Road across the river to accommodate future special events' traffic at the pro- posed AMC Amphitheater. Between Otay Rio Road and approximately 1,200 feet northwest.. of the Otay River crossing, one lane in each direction and a 22 to 24-foot wide. two-way left turn median were provided. These improvements were intended to allow the operation of reversible Lanes in conjunction with traffic security personnel. Three eastbound lanes and one westbound lane would be dedi- cated for arriving traffic and three westbound lanes. and one eastbound lane for departing traf- fic. The bridge would have a total width of 52 feet, with four 13-foot Lanes. With additional minor improvements, four travel Lanes could be provided on the existing alignment until sufficient revenues are accumulated to build asix-lane permanent facility on a new alignment. However, the southern approach -to the bridge would remain as a two-lane arterial. A six-lane Heritage crossing would be able to accommodate travel demand across the Otay River through the year 2015, assuming that State Route 125 South is operating as a tollway. The permanent Heritage Road facility would be realigned approximately 400 feet to the east to connect with the future Pasco Ranchero in Otay Ranch. The La Media and Alta bridges would be needed beyond the year 2015. 33 10-41 BRIDGES AND APPROACHES: PROPOSED ALIGNMENTS AND COST EST'IlVIATES PROPOSED ALIGNMENTS The proposed bridge alignments would span the 100-year floodway of the Otay River. Both the La Media Road and the Alta Road bridges would be 30 feet above the river to accommo- date environrnentaI concerns and to allow equestrian riders a minimum clearance of 20 feet from the floodway up to the bottom of the bridge, assuming a 10-foot bridge. ' The six-lane Heritage bridge would have a length of 700 feet and a width of 110 feet. The La Media Road bridge, with four travel lanes; would be 750 feet long and 86 feet wide. The four- lane Alta Road crossing would have two bridge segments due to a nose of land. The northern segment would be 300 feet long while the southern segment would be 400 feet long. These bridge segments would also have. a width of 86 feet. The endpoint of each bridge approach would be the first circulation element road in the com- munity. The southern approach of the Otay Valley Road-Heritage Road bridge would extend approximately 4,000 feet to the existing Old Heritage Road. Otay Valley Road would be at the northern end of the bridge. The approaches of the La Media Road bridge would extend approximately 4,500 feet to Lon- estar Road to the south and 1,500 feet to Otay VaIley Road. to the north. The southern ap- proach of the Alta Road crossing would extend about one mile to the East Otay Mesa Specific Plan boundary. The northern approach would reach Hunte .Parkway, with an approximate length of 2,250 feet. The three bridges and approaches are highlighted in Figure I (on page 13 PREL7NIIl~IARY COST ESTIlYLATES Preliminary cost estimates were developed for the three proposed bridges and their ap- proaches. The unit cost for the bridges is estimated at $125 per square foot, including a 25 percent contingency factor. The unit cost for the roads is estimated at $1 million per lane-mile, assuming rolling terrain. Considering these unit costs and the described alignments, asix-lane crossing at Heritage~Road is estimated to cost $14,165,000. The cost for the La Media Road crossing is estimated at $12,562,000 while the Alta Road crossing would cost $13,225,000. Therefore, the estimated total cost for the three proposed crossings would reach $39,952,000. Table 8 provides a 4J1 0-42 summary of the estimated cost for the bridges and approaches. Appendix C presents detailed cost calculations. Table S O#ay River Valley Transportation Study Summary of Cos# Estima#es (1996 dollars) Facilities Heritage Rd. La Media Rd. Alta Rd. Total Cast (6 lanes) (4 lanes) (4 lanes) Interim Improvements $ 133,000 ---- --- $ 133,000 Bridge $ 9,523,000 $ 8,fl52,000 $ 7,525,000 $ 25,212,000 Bridge Approach $ 4,540,000 $ 4,500,000 $ 5,700,000 $ 14,740,000 Total Estimated Cost ~ 24,298,000 $12,562,000 $13,225,000 $ 40,085,000 Source: SANDAG Interim Improvements to the Ezisting Otay Valley Road Bridge Traffic projections indicate that afour-lane facility may be needed at the Otay Valley Road- Heritage Road crossing by the year 1998, when traffic volumes are expected to exceed 10,000 daily vehicles. Interim improvements to the existing Otay Valley Road bridge would provide additional capacity to relieve the projected traffic demand until sufficient. revenues are accu- mulated tobuild the six-lane permanent facility an a new alignment. The additional improvements would allow the operation. of two travel lanes in each direction. They would include an eight-foot median and alive-foot pedestrian sidewalk at an estimated cost of $133,000, which would also be financed through the multi jurisdictional fee pro~am. 4~ 10-43 D .Q ~ ^~ ~ .~C ~ ~ m o n N V Q O ° z„ ~ *+ L. Q~ C , m` m o~ = N O Q1 ~ ~ r ~3a ?. ~ ; a ° U Li ~ o O '~ Q ~ Qy ~. C. m ¢mi E O m m a o ° 4 3 ~ n E ~ ° a O ~ri bi `ti °. ~` QJ 4 ~ Q} C G~ [] ~ flS` ? p tap CC ~a Of ~ ~ , CC s3. ~ ,.,.,, "~ a'o~ c o~ o ~ m > C~ >.~ cc r~-+ t4 p u. G O o ~ o s ~ oF=cc ~~~ ~ x ~° 19 10-44 ~~~~~ ~l ~ stay lwlesa Public Facilities Financing Plan FY2t1D7 OTAY MESA PUBLfG EAGILITIES TRANSPC}RTAT(ON PR0.IECTS 10-45 Otay tt~lesa Public Facilities Financing Plan FY?007 Introduction Authority This financing plan implements the annual adjustment to the Facilities Benefit Assessment (described in Section 61.2212 of the San Diego Municipal Code) for Otay Mesa. Update of Financing Plan Resolution No. R-299535 (adopted by City Council on August 3, 2004) implemented the Fiscal Year 2005 Otay Mesa Public Facilities Financing Plan. This report comprises the comprehensive update of the Financing Plan for Otay Mesa. Future updates are anticipated to occur on an annual basis or upon an update of the Otay Mesa Community PIan. Scope of Report The Fiscal Year 2007 Otay Mesa Financing Plan identifies the public facilities that will be needed over the next twenty-five years, during which the full development of the community is expected. This report also includes the revised Facilities Benefit Assessment (FBA) for Otay Mesa, as required by City Ordinance 0-15318. The FBA is established to provide public facilities which will benefit the Otay Mesa community. Summary of Changes Community-wide Impacts The following changes, which apply to the community, have been incorporated in all relevant portions of the financing plan: 1) Updated Development Schedule includes actual permits pulled through FY 2006 and revised estimates for fiscal years beyond 2006. 2) FY 2007 Facilities Benefit Assessment (FBA) rates have increased 52%. Project-specific Impacts The following changes apply to specific projects and have been incorporated in ail relevant portions of the f nancing plan and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) project sheets. Only those changes affecting the Otay Mesa FBA are described below: 10-46 Otay Mesa Public Facilities Financing Plan FY2007 1) T-1.2 and T-1.3. Palm Avenue/I-805 Interchange Stage II and III. This project was previously Iisted in the financing plan in four phases. The total cost of the four phases was estimated at $15,227,727. The project is now listed in the f nancing plan in three stages with a total cost of $43,972,887, increasing $28,745,160 based upon changes in the scope of the project and updated cast estimates. Otay Mesa West contribution increases $8,890,982 from $5,406,536 to $14,297,518. Otay Mesa East contribution increases $14,504,759 from $8,821,191 to $23,325,950. Timing for the project is extended through FY 2006-2013. 2) T-~ 3 Ocean View Hills Parkway -Phase III (Southl. Ocean View Hills Parkway is being constructed in three phases. Phase I and II are complete. The expenditures and appropriations for Phase I and II are included in the third and fnal phase of the project. The project costs for Phase III includes the total cost for ,all phases of Ocean View Hills Parkway, which has increased $2,430,621 from $13,167,616 to $15,598,237. Otay Mesa West contribution increases $1,046,554 from $3,045,484 to $4,092,038. Otay Mesa East contribution increases $2,802,244 from $2,740,424 to $5,542,664. Otay Mesa PDff decreases $1,418,173 from $6,841,708 to $5,423,535. Timing for reimbursement of the project has been extended one year to FY 2007. 3) T-3 4 Dennerv • Road - Avenida De Las Vistas Connection. This project reflects a change in the title. $1,900,000 increase in estimated total project cost from $5,600,000 to $7,500,000 based upon updated estimates. Otay Mesa West contribution increases $1,900,000 from $5,600,000 to $7,500,000. Timing for the project is advanced two years FY 2015-2016. 4) T-4.3 Del Sot Boulevard - (Centrall. $4,450,000 increase in estimated total project cost from $2,050,000 to $6,500,000 based upon updated estimates. Otay Mesa West contribution increases $4,450,000 from $2,050,000 to $6,500,000. Timing for the project has been extended three years. 5) T-? 1 i New Heritage Road (Otay Va.Iley Road) North. $800,000 increase in estimated total project cost from $5,500,000 to $6,300,000 based upon updated estimates. Otay Mesa West contribution increases 2 10-47 Otay Mesa Public Facilities Financing Plan FY2007 $304,000 from $2,090,000 to $2,394,000. Otay Mesa East contribution increases $496,000 from $3,410,000 to $3,906,000. Timing for the project has been extended three years to FY 2017-2021. 6) T-21.2. New Heritage Road (Otay VaIley Road) - Bridse. $2,015,000 increase in estimated total project cost from $13,500,000 to $15,515,000 based upon updated estimates. Otay Mesa West contribution increases $766,000 from $5,130,000 to $5,896,000. Otay Mesa East contribution increases $1,249,000 from $8,370,000 to $9,619,000. Timing for the project has been extended to FY 2018-2020. 7) T-21.3. New Heritage Road (Otay Valley Roads - Central. $2,115,315 increase in estimated total project cost from $I1,15Q,000 to $13,265,315 based upon updated estimates. - Otay Mesa West contribution increases $451,814 from $3,819,000 to $4,270,814. Otay Mesa East contribution increases $695,732 from $6,231,000 to $6,926,732. Otay Mesa West PDff contribution has decreased $329,876 from $418,000 to $88,124. Otay Mesa East PDIF has increased $143,000 from $682,000 to $825,000. Additionally, $392,124 in credits are identified; $205,248 from Otay Mesa West FBA and $186,876 from Otay Mesa West PDIF. Timing for the project has been extended two years to FY 2020. 8} T-21.6_ New Heritage Road (south of Airway). $9,440,400 decrease in total project cost .from $64,500,400 to $55,060,000 based upon updated estimates. Previous funding shown as "unidentified" will now be funded by the Otay Mesa East FBA since the funding is available FY 2019-FY 2027. Otay Mesa East contribution increases $23,400,000 from $18,000,000 to $41,400,000. 9) T-23_ La Media Road. $1,519,000 increase in total project cost from $21,650,000 to $23,169,000 based upon updated estimates. Otay Mesa East contribution increases $119,000 from $1,700,000 to $1,819,000. Timing for the project has been advanced two years to FY 2008-201 I. 10) T-29.1. T-29.2. T-29.3. and T-29.4. Southbound Truck Route (Phase I. II. III and IV). Project T-29, Southbound Truck Route, has been divided into four 10-48 Otay Ivfesa Public Facilities Financing Plan FY 3007 CITY OF SAN DIEGO FACILITIES FINANCING PROGRAM TTTLE: NEW HERITAGE ROAD (Otay Valley Road) -North DEPARTMENT: ENGINEERING AND CAPITAL PROJECTS CIP orJOR: N!A PR03ECT: T-21.1 COUNC TL DISTRICT: 8 COMMUNITY PLAN: OM :== SOORCE:.~ ''FUNDihG.:_ EXPENDED ~:. _-CO~1T,4PPROP' :-_3-. EY3007:= ~ -Y,FY3006 =_ ~-?004 _. _.-:FY-?010 _ I'Y30IE:- FBA-OM{w) 5294,000 FHA-OM(e) 53,406,000 PDff (w) PDff (e) CRD CITY DEV/SURD • CALTRANS STATE OTHER .. UNIDEN >~TQT.~IL,_ .. '..,:;56;340:000 _ ~< .._ ~ . ,... ='S0 .= _ SO `"_ ...: ,,:-SO `:w . _-;=50 - = 50 :=` SC _ i0 iSOURCE . M FY2016 i=' ._'EY20IT_ .-.- ;- - FY20I8 ~~: FY2019.: = i> F!f2420 _; F4-2031 :, .. - FY ~0~?', - ;y_, FL20" FBA-OIvi(w} 5600,000 5600,000 51,194,000 FHA-OM(c) S1Si3,000 51,453,000 PDff (iv) PDff (c} CRD CITY DEV/SURD CALTRANS ' STATE OTFffR UNII?EN STOT.~I. ~ -.SO.:_ '' s;Sb00;000 ;_:.:5600.000 -_-.>>SLI44;000 ..,,-_SI;.45=:00 ~- 51;4».000 '_ '_:SO SO ):UNDING SOCJRCES - - r~s~+,ooo _~\ FBdAM(w) ~' \ 38': .~~:~ r i ~..s ra- ~,~~:~ y~kC. ~L /~-Oi.~(tl 62:: COh'TACi: LARRY YrLY WEY T--21. ~ Q N TELEPHOhc (fil9)533-3005 88 10-49 F.wlAlt.: fvanu~evrisandieeo.em• Otay ~Llesa Pubfic Facilities Financing Plan FY 2007 CITY OF SAN DIEGO FACILITIES FINANCING PROGRAM TITLE: -NEW HERITAGE ROAD (Otay VaIiey Road) -North PaO.nccr: T-2I.1 DEFAR.TMtENI•: ENGfNEERING AND CAPITAL PROJECTS COUNC4. DISTRICT: 8 CII': N/A COivdvIUNITY PLAN: OM DESCRiPTIaN: WII?EN OTAY VALLEY ROAD TO A 6-LAIvrE PRIMARY ARTERIAL STREET ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF THE EXISTING "OTAY RIO BUSII1E55 PARK", APPROXIIv1ATELY 2,000 LINEAR FEET (ASSUMING THAT ONLY 1/2 WIDTH WIDENING i5 REQUIRED) AND APPROXIMATELY 900 LINEAR FEET NORTHERLY OF OTAY RIO VISTA BUSWESS PARK TO THE INTERSECTION OF OTAY VALLEY ROAD (370 LINEAR FEET OF THIS 900 LINEAR FEE'T' IS PROGRAIvfMED AS A BRIDGE CR05SING OVER THE OTAY RIVER AND I5 A SEPARATE PROJECT). 3IJSTIFICATION: THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT' OF THE OTAY MESA COMbIiTNI'IY PLAN SUGGESTS THAT AN INTEGRATED TRANSPORTATION NETWORK WILL PROVIDE MOBILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY TO THE RESIDENCES AND BUSINESSES OF THE COMMUhTITY. THIS PR07ECT IS REQUIItED AND IS CONSISTENT WITH THE C0,'vIIvIUNITY PLAN. FUNDING ISSUES: NOTES: 5EE COMPAMON PROJECTS: T-21.Z, T-2I.3, AND T-21.~ SCKEDULE: DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION C41V3'ACT: LAAAY VAN WEY FY 2017-2021 TELF3FIOLv`E: (6L9)S3]-305 89 EMAIL: lramvey(alsandir_ro. cov 10-50 Otay ivlesa Public Facilities Financing Plan FX 2007 CITY OF SAN DIEGO FACILITIES FINANCING PROGRAM TITLE; NEW HERITAGE ROAD (Otay Valley Road) - Bredge DEPARTMENT: ENGIIJEERII,iG AND CAPITAL PROTECTS CIP or 30m: N/A rRO.rECr: T-zl.z COUNCII. DISTRICT: 8 COMMUMTY PLAN: OM _ .,SOURCE : "FUPeDll\G?' :.~E.KF?ENDED ': iF:CONT':4PPROP.? _ -_= F~:~Q07=~ _::81E~408;_ ..: _ :_, ': FY=2004 -F5 X010 .= ._:. E!i=Z011; ?i FSA-OM(w) 55,39b,000 FHA-OM(c) 59,614,000 PD<F (w} PDff (e} CRD CITY DEV/SUBD CALTRAN5 STATE TF~R O UNIDEN ~TOZ1L w_:Si5.5I5:000 _.. -::-----~:.SQ - ~: SO "' -_ ~~- 50 - _=_ .SO ' ~. -=- SO »L..:_-. .. :SO _~._~..-.SO iSOCiRCE- 'FY"f0I6:.~: ="-EYZ017=~=, `r;I'-201£+ I E1:ZOI~ :EY~030:_ = ':.._..,:EY`20ZF -==FY?0~?-:~;r. -,:E~"?0?3.,:'e FHA-OM(w) 51,600,000 51,600,000 $2,696,000 FBA-OM(e) 53,350,000 53,069,000 52,700,000 PDIF (w) PDIF (e} CRD CITY DEVlSUBD CALFRANS STATE OTHER TINIDEN :z'-COT1I~ :.~: 50:~ ~- ::.:..._,c51;600;000 -:,,...:.55!150:000 55:765:000 ,,.:..w%S'?,'a00:000 -'~:.SO _;~ ;-SD . -= --= - 50 FUNDING SQURCLS ss,s94ooa :~~~~~, - 'r ~ ~~~ w:_ ~'~ z S9,5i9.000 ;~ FSA-0hf(c) 63:: CONTACT: G1RRY VAN VlEY -;~; .. ~~,,-j--~ -~- T-21.2 ~i:~.~t:4 mar"/ ~~J,7•~ ~\ _ <:.;~ _ ~ '~) ji~ ~~ ~ I ` `~~\ ~'_ Q ~ ~~ ~~ N TE.FPHONE (614) 533-3505 9~ 10-51 E.'wL•1II: I~nnwcirsindir_o am Dray 1Llesa Public Facilities Fincvrcing Plan FY2007 CITY OF SAN DIEGO FACILITIES FINANCING PROGRAM TITLE: NEW FIERITAGE ROAD (Otay Valley Road) -Bridge PR03ECT; T-21~ DEPARTbfEM: ENGINEERFNG AND CAPITAL PROTECTS COUNCQ. D1STR.[CT: 8 CIP: NIA COMM[FNTfYPLAN: DM DESCRIPTION: CONSTRUCTION OF NEW HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE, A 370 FOOT, 6-LANE BRII7GE (! L" WIDE) ACROSS THE OTAY RIVER NSTIFICATIOIY: ' THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT OF THE OTAY MESA COMMUNITY PLAN SUGGESTS THAT AN INTEGRATED TRANSPORTATION NETWORK WILL PROVIDE MOBILITY ANA ACCESSffiILITY TO THE RESIDENCES AAID BUSINESSES OF THE COMMUIvTITY. THIS PROJECT FS REQUIRED AND IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMMUNITY PLAN. FUNDING ISSUES: NOTES: SEE COMPAMON PROJECTS: T-21.1, T-21.3, AND T-21,4 SCHEDULE: DESIGN, AND CONSTRUCTION ARE ANTICIPATED: FY 20I7-2Q20 COk?ACi: LARSiY VAN WEY 'iF.LEPHONE: (619) 533-3005 ESSA3L: h~anwevrs~nd~eco cav 91 10-52 Otay Mesa Public Facilities Financing Plan FY 2(707 CITY OF SAN DIEGO FACILITIES FINANCING PROGRAM TITLE: NEW HERITAGE ROAD (Otay Valley Road) -Central DEPARTMENC: ENGINEERING AND CAPITAL PROJECTS C!P or JOm: 53.672,0 PRO.TLCT: T-21.3 CO[JNCII. DISTRICT: 8 COMMSINiTY PLAN: OM . >:SOURCE: =:F[IN`Dl~`7G ~ :..='sE~ENDED.>-~ ~CONT`APPROP :-_.FY:2007 ; ...:.=FY~008 =; ..._F1;200g~, ,.a,:FY2010~~,~- _.EY~20fL= FBA-0M(w) 54,560,572 Str39,268 FBA-0M{e) 57,399,495 51,980,5'!6 PDff (w) 588,123 S88,I24 PDff{e) 5825,000 SS?5,004 FBA-0M(w) CR 5205,2=38 5305,248 PDIF (w) CR 5186,876 5386,876 DEV/S1JBD CALTRANS STATE OTHER UNIDEN _ .=.'1'OTII._ _° '-5[3;263,3i~ ,?~2543~~~04~ ._ '....,..h.SO .~: _.~...~ .._50 :.:_;".~ __-S0 x+,v..~ SO .,-- -.~~SO ._ 'SO 'SOURCE .':• :-=-FY2016 - - '-FY3017`~' ~:...';F.Y2013<..w:< .,.._LY.2019: .,~FY.~0~0;;,` ._FL20~L .:. : ;-.FY.~02?=` ~FY;20?}.:.; FBA-OM(w) Si,453,3i9 51,867,985 FBA-0M(e) S?,5'P 534 53,846,435 PDff (w) PDIF (e) FBA-OM(w) CR PDIF (w) CR DEV/SUBD C.4LTRANS SLATE OTHER TINIDEN _;,_TOT4.L., ~.,; - S0:>' ~ -'S 54;4.853 SP;86i:Q85 _ -- ._`50 ,__.`S?."846;43 _ SO 'ss +=SO S -. SO FUNDING SOURCES 5186,875 S8:S,000 S:O8~a8 PDIF (a•} CR PD[F (e) -Fgq.OM(w) CR (.~ 6%: ~ , sa8,iz+ ^4•_ - sssao,sr_ PD[F (a} - _.'~\ FBA-O~t(,r} )`• ~'~'-,~"--`,iae `?,-- ~~ fin: 57,3'M,~95 FBA-OAi(e) 56?: CONTACT: LARRY VAN WEY TELEPHONE: (6l9) 533-3Q05 92 E1~WL: Fvanwevrrsnndie~!o ^_rn• . 10-53 Otay Mesa Public Facilities Financing Plan FY2a07 CITY OF SAN DIEGO FACILITIES FINANCING PROGRAM 'T'ITLE: NEW HERITAGE ROAD (C-tay Valley Road) -Central QEPARTtv~"111': ENGINEERING :4ND CAPCfAL PR07ECT5 CfP: 52-fi7Z0 PRQJECI': T-2i.3 COUNCII, DISI1tiCT: $ COMMUMTY PLAN: OM DESCRII'TION: CONSTRUCT NEW HERITAGE ROAD FROM THE SOUTHERLY TERIvII~i TIJS OF COMPANION PROJECT T-21.1 TO A POINT 5,000 FEET SOUTH AS A 6-LANE PRIMARY ARTERIAL STREET. (THIS PROTECT CONSISTS OF OPEN SPACE; BEGINS AT OTAY RIO,BUSINESS PARK ON THE NORTH AND TERTvIINATES AT TFIE TOP OF THE CANYON IN THE 50UTHJ NSTIFICATION: THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT OF THE OTAY MESA COIv114i1TNITY PLAN SUGGESTS THAT AN INTEGRATED TRANSPORTATION.NETWORK WILL PROVIDE MOBILITY AND ACCESSIBFLITY TO RESIDENCES AND BUSINESSES OF THE COMMUMTY. THIS PROJECT IS REQUIRED AND IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COb21v1UNITY FLAN. FUNDIt~1G ISSUES: A 2-LANE PORTION OF THIS PROJECT WAS CONSTRUCTED iN ORDER TO SERVE THE ROBINHOOD RIDGE SUBDIVISION AND WAS REIMBURSED BY.FBA CR:cDITS. MOTES: 5EE COMPANION PROJECTS: T-21.I, T-21?, A_ND T-?1.4 SCHEDULE: DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ARE AAITICIPATED FY 2016 TO FY 2026. ROBR~THOOD RIDGE REIMBURSEMENT PORTION OCCURRED FY 2001-2004. corrcacr: LatutY vary wsY TEiEPHDNE (Sl9) 533-3005 93 EhUl[L: [van-.vn r~sandie_a.em• 1©-54 Otay 1Llesa P:~blic Facilities Financing Plmi FY2r707 CITY OF SAN DIEGO FACILITIES FINANCING PROGRAM TITLE: NEW HERITAGE ROAD (Otay Valley Road) - Soukh DEPARTMENT: EfICilI LEERING ARID CAPITAL PROJECTS Cff or JOR: N/A PROJLC'T: T-21.~ COUNCII. DISTRICT: 8 COMMUNITY PLAN: OM ,.>=SOURCE:_ -`%FCJA'DL~IG:i`:. ,:[= E.~ENDED - :-CONTrAI?PROP v'-?.~=EY.3447:~. .~-F,Y?048 . _- i-..;'F.Y:2049. FY?p14.:_G: =' -FY?O1T~:; FBA-0M{w) FBA-0M(e} PDff (w) PDff (e) CRD CITY DEV/SUBD SS,i25,000 CALTRANS STATE HER O T UNIDEN "TOT_~I. ___=;~SS;TS.000 _, ::50 .x, _:;:. .:__ :54 .~ _; -w,_SO c~..~:=50 -,,..~.~=:_`S4 ~,,:..,.;._..w..•SO .*__.__-_..._Sp c:SOURCE-.. ..:.FY'2016..ir' ;, "1?OI7 :~ ; : =_E1-2018 °. ;:- EY'?019.._ "_:E:Y.24Z0::.==- :`=EY_0?l.__. _:.:..:F`<.2091=- rFl:?0~.;.3= FBA-OM(w) FBA-0M(e) PDff (w) PDff (e) CRD CTTY DEV/SLIBD 51,7'..3,004 Sd,000,40D CALTRANS STATE OTHER UNIDEN `:.TOT ~L __ ._, ~,..3 50 . ,r;_ '. ---. .' : 50 __r _ ~-'_ ~ 350 - Sliii.000 .:.. 54:000,000 _:::' SO • - _ .. _ .50 _ SO FUNDING SOURCZS ss,ns,axi DEVrsuon CO7vTACT: LAR.4Y VAN WEY TELEPHONE: (619) 533-3005 94 EM.UL Ivanwevrannndiecn cov 10-55 Otay Mesa Public Facilities Financing Plan FY?007 CITY OF SALT DIEGO FACILITIES FINANCING PROGRAM TITLE: NEW HERITAGE ROAR (Otay Valtey Road) -South PROJECT: T-Z1.4 DHPARTMENf: ENGiNEEFtI33G AND CAPITAL PROTECTS COUNCII. DISTRICT: 8 CIP: N/A COMMUMTY PLAN: OM DESCRIPTION: CONSTRUCT NE W HERITAGE ROAD FROM THE SOUTHERLY TERMINUS OF COMPANION PROJECT N0. T-21.3 TO OTAY MESA ROAD AS I,450 LTI`FEAR FEET OF A 6-LANE MAJOR STREET. LNCLUDED ARE 112 WIDTH IMPROVEMENTS FRONTII3G THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO'S BROWN FIELD AIRPORT. JfISTIFICATION: THIS PROJECT 1S REQUII2ED TO ACCOMMODATE THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC GENERATED AS A RESULT OF DEVELOPMENT III THE OTAY MESA CO\~IIvItJMTY. FUNDING ISSUES: NOTES: 5EE COMPANION PROJECTS: T-21.i, T-213, AND T-ZI3 SCHEDULE: D£SIGN • CONSTRUCTION CONTACT: LARRY VAN WEY FY 2019 FY 2020 Tn'LEP(iONE: (6l4) 933-3001 9~ EbL1IL.: har+w•evr~sandiceo.¢ov 10-56 Qtay ~Ltesa Publrc Facilities Financing Plan FY2Q07 CITY OF SAN DIEGO FACILITIES FINANCING PROGRAM TITLE: HERITAGE ROAD - (Soatheriy of Otay Mesa Road) DEFARTMEN'f: ENGII~IEERING AND CAPITAL FROJECTS CIPorJOR: N/A SOURCE : :::_FII?YDFriG~ E~B~[DED .-: ?GOIvT~.PPROP '-- E~'3007 _ _:~FY2608_ `: :.FY2609 .:. :.sFY3010-- ,_ 'EY301i :y FBA-OM(w) FBA-OM(e) PDIF (w) PDff (e) CRD CITY 52,000,400 54,300.000 DEVlSUHD 56,300,000 CALTRANS STATE OTHER UNIDEN sTOT-aL '_S=~;S6,300.000 ~ ___ . _ -` '~ ~ +X50 ~ _ _ ~- ' S0 '.-_ 50 ~, "; -. SO ':-;-.52,000:000 .. r. ~.5~;i00; 00 ;:'SOURCE :F1r:201~= ' __;EY30L 'FY:2014 -_ `EY26I5 b-1`.2016".-~ `FY2017.~ .=~FY201Sn ..._.Fl.?019.:.:- FHA-OM(w) FHA-OM(e) PDff (rv) PDff (c) CRD CITY DEVlSUBD CALTRANS STATE 'E~R 07 UNIDEN SO :-:50 I - V=T.OTSL _ 50 ,=! _ _ _ . .. FLZ+iDI1VG SOURCES T-21.5 56,300,006 DEYSUHD Pizo.r~cr: T-zis COUNCff. DISTRIG?: 8 COMMUNITY PLAN: OM Q N CQNSACt: LARRY VAN WEY TELEPifONE: (619}533-3005 96 10-57 E1dAI1_: vaawn~r cindicco crn- Otay rYlesa Public Facilities Financing Plan FY 2007 CITY OF SAN DIEGO FACILITIES FINANCING PROGRAM TITLE: HERITAGE ROAR - (Southerly of Otay Mesa Road} PROTECT: T-2fS DEPARTMENT: ENOII+}EERING AIv"D CAPITAL PROJECTS COUNCQ. DISTRICT: 8 CIP: N!A COIvRvRFNITY PLAN: OM DESCRIPTION: CONSTRUCT HERITAGE ROAD FROM OTAY 1v1ESA ROAD SOUTHERLY TO AIl2.WAX ROAD. THIS INCLUDES APPROXiN1ATELY Z,fi00 LINEAR FEET OF A 6-LANE MAIOR STREET. NSTLi'ICATION: THIS PR03ECT I5 REQUIRED TO ACCObIIvIODATE THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC GENERATED AS A RESULT OF DEVELOPIvIE1VT IN THE OTAY MESA COIvIl~2U'M'IY. FUNDING ISSUES: NOTES: SEE COMPANION PR03ECTS: T-2i.6 SCHEAULE: DE51GN CONSTRUCTION ' COM'ACl': LrtRRY VrW WEY FY 2010 FY 2011 TEC.EPHONE; (fil?} 531-3005 EhSAIL: h:vnrevrsandietn. cov 97 10-58 u C.1 ....z Q :^ rr~ i, 1W1 V irn 0 C~~ :^ v U ~1 .y O C,~ rl ti E ~~ - o o x - - ~n o 0 0 o c - o o 0 0 0 0 0 ~~ _ w w _ c; v, v ~ ~ ri w w w w w in w in w oo m w w h w i _ r - ~ w N ~ w ~ - A w ~s,J O w w %K~ a m ~. - b N O w Y1 O w ~ "J b O iq O w O w O ~ O Mf O w Y1 iA O of O w O w O w O O O O C C ~~ Q ^ rl O a b l _ Vf G_ tD _ iR N In/1 ~ ~S_ Lg ~ O t [+ - O w w C w m p v/ O w O O o O w .n O O w O w O w O w O ° C w a ~ ~ rv o ., ~ o c ~~ - m c ri o a o o tri n o a = c` ~o c~ ~:, n z ~n m a o w h rv w v. ~ n m "? r ..L fq G w iA H N irgl Vi ^ .t?: ~ o-- o c o o c o a h o 0 o N - - o 0 0 o 0 o 0 c 0 o 0 w 0 w _ o ~=' q w w w w w o o o 0 c i o o w :q rl c w a o o. o '~~ O :~. ~~~ O ~ ~ w h h O n i N H F O - h ~ O ~ ~ rl w O n n b K . p~ (il N r t/1 w +A Vf _T if= ~~ o u~ C n m C O O W o w o w n O O O O O F c C N -~ O .~ C o O O O O O O O O O O O '~+'~~ O ~i~ O m F O h N m O V1 O O n ~ O O h N G1 O~ ~G O O O n O O O m O O O h O ~ O ~ a h i V'1 n n h ~ {~ an C w .. V1 a _ n i N w f"I o h 7~~ _ ~n a w n nw v w w N w -- w t vl _. w +n in ~ r w ~ w In w s~~: 'viK ~.~yE tip? k~~ n ~ ~ u ^ n C ° ~ O e~ tl C - ~o - -t '_ c -7 a n o F + ~ .~Y Cl ° ° f - LJ L~S ° F , U Cr.! 0 0 o L'1 Lr'-1 ° F , L7 E - L" o ,n o 0 - ~ tl O f ~! ~'~ ~ ~ N v ~ J t`I d N h rl O J L ~ G N r• ~ G a C rt l~ ... O N N C. ~? ~ pp m p ~ 2 0. ~ o G ~ L ~ o o O ~ ~ o ~ . ~ o rl O C j~ ~ r! N ^ Q Q N Q Q N PI N Q Q N 0 Q N N N U U U V U U V U U :5° _+ c ~, : ,. .-' L': L•3 L•7 L'I ~• y < •: ~ c ~ y ~ C v M z Z Z z < G < 3 . - r < < < < .. ~ Q Z _ ~ a o W u U ~ ~ 3 3 3 - = ~ A 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ F a a o 2 v ~ D 9 cv ~ y ~ ^ ~ z ~ a ~ < ~ ` ~ n v o 0 z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ < a a ~ ^ Z ~ 3 3 3 o a o oz O ~ ' n ~ n S C < C < C < ~ ~ c: Z L c:7 v C / C Gs C i C i ~j } C ] L Q O ~ O "S.i ] O CS ] 1:1 ^ I:1 ~ L:.t ' F.., ~ }~ C ~ < < < < Z Z Z L L•7 L:.1 L L:I L ~ .t L:l L'1 . O . Q . Q V L L L ~ .U.. VS ~ ~ ~ ~ < G G z Z Z Z Z~ -7 v: rn v1 n } } } z ` ,~ ,~ a .a cu u m z z z z G L ~ ~ ~ ..z ~ < < < 3 3 . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U U U 1:.7 L•.1 tV L:1 O C L•` I11 t:.! F- 0 o L•I t:l o Q o ^ ^ n nU L ^ n n _ 0 z z F ~~'k: ~!~ -_ N n ~ i rl l rM N ~. M N n M ~ +n 1 - N t1 N rl ~ e•<I O -' N _: r r rl !n M 7 :~ 1 h N N C N "' N b m N N ~ V m O N ~ b m O N - b m O yt: r+y w'1 h h h ~n b b ~ V N F n F F m 9G x 5 m P 10-59 l~ N G ~_ ti ti O . °'°rµ"'' ''•' ~ l T l09 40f ~ f0/1 ipfi 0 w M _ N I O O O M1 O O O o O O O O `~~ u :- . N w w w h0 w 00 Op OO w w w w a:f7-~ ,~.... '° O. n h ~ C -z n . b - ~? O y - _ _ w '6i - _ ':a ~"``~+ `= y C~ O w O Vf O C O O N 0 y N ~ O O O O O 0 o ~ w O 5, q q w w O O j V 1. 9 y y q ~ ~ 4. ~''.' P .1 O O O y O y O y '- n = ~ n n ~ w ~ - cq w w 4Y %`? re o :n o w c w o w 0 w 0 - a o 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,~; K w re w w w c9 w w w w w w w a w yu c o _7:; ~ vl . o y 3~. c er ~: w nw ^ ~s`i 0 o 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o c o o o a o -.s °7 O O O O O O O o O O O c O O p C w ~ w w w O w , ;.„ N O ~~ O p ~ G O 'J'am O 4 O G C w _ w w _ "~' w w w y •'•~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ O O O O O '"-~ ?~~ e't O O O O O p O O O O O O O O O Q O O O O `~' -,:•, K `G y N O O O v7 O O 6' y y M O O O o O O O O p y y v, ~ h C y O O :~;. N F M O i~ OO y e~1 m y y rl y rn n T O V ~• V n N ~ .,. ~ Vy! h N i~q ~1 w W - w - in w w H f'1 w T H i N w w w c9 s,9 w ig / l . '-h-~^~. r~ N O t^ N O O N a O N N C N N O O O j ~ N 0 tT O N P O n c~ ao 06 ~..i 0 0 0 t 4 N O _ _ O O O N O C O = a. N N N ~N.. 0 C O r~ N O t O N N N N ~ O N N Q ~ 0 r N t V N j N N ~~ U U i~ ~ U . '-~" u ~ o N c V 1 y s ~ e -. d ra H ` .y ~ a n ~ v ~ ~ .~ C ."~.. ~ ~ • > O ~~ C C ~ o . ~c F o v a o a O u j ~ ~ = ~ ~ ` 7 .~ 2 ~ T 7 ~ ~ y O O G , . ~ ~ v O O = - " ~ ~ C C O ' O = C G" ^ i v i < :G ~G ~ ~E 1 O A Q ^ ^ ~'' ~ D F ~+ H ~ F O < ~ r L7 C7 ^ < < ^ < < O ^ O t- C rn :r O < F I- F c.' c' O m ~ C 5 O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 5 ~ ~ w u < ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~.. ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ < F- 3 ~ ~ F h~ t-~ F G o O u ] U C ~ ~ C O O O O ~ A 'C z ~ W m < < < < ~ O ~ G Z S. U ..~ ~ v~ d < ..t ~ ~ rn rn z ~ o o U E% ss,: i+` ~2Ne, 1'1 T ~R V - N !'1 T - N { N = N N N N N = N tV = N N N N N fV N N rat [~. y y ~; ? r h F F E r ; F F F F != 'r E= [= F F F= k= F ~~~, ~, N ° 0 0 0 0 ° ~ m o r~ - .o m o _ ,, ~ c ~ 0 _ - _ - ~ _ ~' ~ N N N N ~ 10-~0 Otay 1Llesa Public Facilities Financing Plan FY 2007 Figure 2.1 Project Location Map (West Subarea) 45 10-61 ~~~~~~L~~l ~i NER/ GE ----~~ BRIDGE • R .QQ ~ ~ SITE ~ o i - \ ~ '/ ~ / 1 r ~ OFAY LAND FILL ~ ` 1 ` \ ~ ~ 4. ~. ~• ~ t Z ~ ~ t i s 10-62 cLCn[,Crvt r rfusnrmo/au+t uinc { ~ rr,~ f -LANE PRIME NO SCALE FACILITY 588 Heritage Rd Otay River Bridge New Bridge on & Lane ~rirrte Arterial . i Canstr'uction Cast $ 4,200,000 2 Spacial Items $ 350,000 Habitat mitigation $ TOTAL I-fARD COSTS $ 4,550,000 (Source - Hunsaker & Associates) SDFT COSTS Contingency {15%) $ 682,500 Design. {12%} $ 546,000 Inspection/Adm[nistration (6°1°} $ 273,000 Developer Administration {i .75%} $ 79,625 City ProJact Administrtian {2%} $ 91,000 TQTAL SOFT COSTS $ 1,672,125 TQTAL PROJECT COST $ &,222,725 350,000 10-63 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY N0. ~$A PRbJECT DESCRIPTION: 1-lERITAGI= RDAD FRDM MAIN St~tl:fF/ROCIf MOUNTRIN RD. TD GTY L1MiT, WIDEN fX/STJIVG ROADWAY Tfl 6 LANES {LfNGTN = 2.468 Z ---..ate-x--~~ NER1T,gGE r. o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1tA ~£~ s i \ ~ ~ ~ ` ~ <i ~ i DTAY LAND FILL z c~.~rcY 10-64 _. GMLl~OG R~1 rn+tinuev/amc ~~~.c ~. ~~./ 6-LANE PRIME NO SCALE FACILITY 58A Herifage Rd Main Sf fo Gify boundary Widen fo 6 Lane Prime Arferlai Length (Lf}; 2,468 1 Construction Gast g TOTAL HARD COSTS S 4,8QO,OOq (Source - Hunsaker & Associates) soar costs Contingency (15%) Design (12%) 4nspection/Administration (B%) Developer Administration (1.75%) City Project Administration (2%) $ 720,000 $ 576,000 $ 288,000 S 84,000 $ 96,000 TOTAL SOFT COSTS pt~o~ECr cost $ 1,764,OOQ 10-65 EXECUTIVE SUMIYTARY This report represents the 2005 update of the Chufa Vista Eastern Area Development Impact Fees for Streets, also known as the Transportation DIF, or "1'D1F". The report includes a discussion of the rationale behind development impact fees, a brief history of the Transpor#ation D1F Program, an analysis of the proposed fee program including updates to the development forecast, the average daily trip (ADT) rate assignments for each land use and associated EDUs and the street facility projects. The focus of this report is fourfold: • To refine the current fee program to include changes to land uses and facilities within the benefit area; ^ To modify the average daily trip (ADT) rates for non-residential land uses; ^ To update costs for the facilities currently within the TD1F program; as wail as provide cost estimates for newly added facilities. • This update represents an increase in the cost of the remaining transportation facilities to be built from $222,807,379 in 2D02 to $229,Si9,4g9 in 2005 and a decrease in equivalent dwelling units {EDU's} from 27,236.5 to 20,543. The resulting recommended foe increases from the current $8,825 per EDU to $10,050 per EDU. .image sa ._...--~ ---- - -- - .. .. _ 10-66 _ D~f'VELDPMEIVT 1MPACT FEFS Development impact fees are imposed upon development in an area of benefit, often containing a number of different properties, properly owners, and land use types. Such fees are governed by the regulations and requirements of Government Code Section 6fio00 et seq. of the State of California. The Chula Vista Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF} has two main purposes: {1} To fund the construction of facilities needed to reduce, or mitigate, potential impacts, including but not limited to, direct and cumulative impacts resulting from development within the specified area; and {2} To spread the costs associated with construction of the fiacilities equitably among the developing properties. !n the environmental review process, such as in the California Environmental Quality Act process {GEQA), a project's potential impacts are identified and, where possible, a method of mitigating those impacts- (reducing the actual impact to a insignificant level} is identified. In the case of larger projects, the Environmental Impact Report {EIR} usually identifies cumulative impacts resulting from the project, as well as direct impacts. Gumulative impacts are impacts created by overall development, of which individual projects do not create a significant impact directly, but contribute to an impact through additive effect, Since the individual development projects are not completely responsible for the entire impact on any single segment of roadway, for instance, they are required to contribute a portion of the mitigation based on each project's fair share of the overall impact to the roadway system. Each project's fair share of the impact is based on the amount of traffic as measured by Average Daily Trips {ADTs) #hat the projec# places on the overall street system. A development impact fee is an ideal mechanism for identifying the fair share distribution of the overall mitigation program. TRAIVSPORTATt4M DEVELDPMEIVT IMPAGT FEES (TD1F} A transportation development impact fee is a typical impact fee designed to mitigate cumulative impacts on the local transportation network as a result of development of nearby areas. Generally, development of property produces impacts on the local road network resulting In decreased available traffic capacity on the street system. To measure the effects of traffic, cities establish capacity or level of service standards tha# they each consider appropriate for their jurisdictions. Where potential impacts resulting from development are projected to reduce the capacity an streets to the point where the identified level of service will not be maintained, the impacts are deemed to be significant, and should be mitigated. Typical mitigation for cumulative impacts #o the system would provide a menu of improvements designed to restore capacity and maintain the desirable level of service. Examples of capacity-increasing improvements 'tnclude adding now roads to the circulation network, widening or improving existing roads, installing new traffic signals or improving existing signatization, freeway interchange improvements, and improving signal coordination (Management of traffic operations). In the case of transportation development impact fee programs, the accepted method of distributing costs In an equitable manner fs to compare traffic generated by each project that will potentially affect the overall system. This can be done by establishing a uniform fist of trip generation factors typical for the types of uses contemplated for the developments. ~ Usually such an analysis fs perfamzed when information on the proposed developments is general fn nature. The actual number of trips generated by-the fina# development of individual parcels may vary from ~a~~ ~ 10-67 the projections, however wifh carefully selected factors, the net effect should produce approximately the same amaunt of revenue. ~tsro~rlca~ e~ c~coROUi+vr~ !n February 1986, the Chula Vista City Council adopted a schedule of development impact fees (D1F) for the Eastlake I development. Eastlake was the first major planned development that added significant traffic to the street system. Fees were established to ensure that Eastlake contributed to the cast of certain street improvements, including a~four-lane interim facility in the State Route 125 (SR-125) corridor. Also included in the development Impact fee was the cost of constructing a fire station and a community park in Eastlake 1. While the fees were imposed as a condition of development on Eastlake, City staff recommended to the Council that a development impact fee ordinance be prepared to provide for.the financing of transportation improvements by al! of the developments that would benefit from the improvements. In January 1987, the Council authorized the preparation of a development impact fee program for the financing of street improvements in the area east of interstate 845. In December 1987, a report entitled °`The Interim Eastern Area t?evelopmenf /mpact Fees for Streets was completed. The "Area of Benefit° included all of the undeveloped lands that benefited from the proposed transportation improvements, within the City of Chula Vista and County of San Diego, east of interstate 805. i3ecause the Eastem Territories Genera! Plan Update was in progress, the" Council adopted an Eastern Area Development impact Fee in January 1988 by Ordinance Number 2251 (TDl~. The fee was established at $2,101 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU}. The Eastem Territories General Plan Amendment was later completed and adapted. On August 8, 1991, the City Council authorized the preparation of an °Interim SR-125 Facility Feasibility Study," The purpose of #his study was to identify an interim SR-125 facility that would meet the transportation needs of the region unfit a pem~anent facility could be constructed. The interim SR-125 Facility Feasibility Study report recommended the es#ablishment of a new fee (separate from the existing TDIF} to specifically finance the construction of interim facilities that would temporarily postpone the need for a permanent freeway/toll' road facility, Gonsequehtiy, projects dealing with the SR-125 construction were excluded from the TD1F program and were included in the Interim SR-125 DIF program. In October 1883, the City Council approved the Genets[ Plan Amendment far the Otay Ranch. As a result, the TDIF program was updated !n December 1593, including the first phase of the Otay Ranch. For the first time since the adoption of the original TD1F in 1988, a comprehensive general plan of land uses and circulation system requirements was in place on the Otay Valley parcel. The TDIF program was subsequently updated twice in i999 and 2Q02 to reflect changes to the circulation element of the Genera! t~lan, land use changes and to adjust the construction cost estimates. The purpose of the 2005 update to the TD(F ("Update") is fiourfold: first, to review all previous projects and update the costs and land uses which affect the adequacy of the current fee to construct the facilities previously included; second, #o evaluate the current costs aril credits as severs! TDIF projects have been completed; third, to re-evacuate the average daily trip (ADT) rates for commercial land uses by considering only trips generated outside the benefit area and to introduce office and mixed-use residential as separate designations; and fourth, to ccmply with the P~r~~ 3 10-68 _. 2005 General Plan changes including the revised Circulation Element and related Land Uses in Eastern Chula Vsta. Since its inception, the amount of the TD[F fee has been revised several times, as foilews: '~'='~i-k'iS'~•~+G4 .w~ F ,~ ~Y' ~Y:'~ ~ ~. Tic~.'aa '1 ~4S' vK"C3 x. ,~.. CG7~~~3~ E~~~ •.. January 9, 1990 2349 $2,880 December 11, 1990 2431 $3,080 January 4, 1994 2680 $3,998 November 30, 1999 2802 86,920 September 10, 2002 _2866 $8,180 October 1, 2004 ENR index $8,825 This report recommends changing the fee to $10,050 per EDU. -This report represents the 2005 update of the TDfi= and, where appropriate, makes adjustments to " the development impact fee based upon completed street construction, revised development projections, modifications to the ADT trip rates for commercial land uses, changes to the categorization a€ residential land uses, and revised project cast es#imates. ~a~e ~ Q- 6 9 ...... _-- - _ ~ - --- - -- -------- x~._~ {~_~~~L ~f" S ;N. w J ~ z ~ o ~ O ` ~ W ~ ~ a d 9aa~~y `igy7 Z ~ a6 ~Ea gE'i5 -~+ $~ s U W ~ . a a '~ ~ ~~~ E= a=~g€g~~ Z V ~ZM ~Q _3~;~ ~°y£eg~ V m ~ ~ ~ E" ~ ~ :~es~~ 3 s Z• a p a~:«S r~~ F ! 1 ~ Q Z c e6 a: :°as~ 1 a -.+ YE ~ = P~~a LL -;~ 4 ~ Iii !Q Q a E ~ € n ~°e ~ Y~ ""~ 1 ~ lei! ~ ~ ~oc~1jR ~e°i~eib as ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~~ f~ _\ f is,~.1 ~ 1 r' ~ i _~~•1 i:,.~% ~ Trot. _ i~r~~~"`i Y ~w'i ~s t~I ~ ~ v,~ .ter G .`"o-! + ~ ~ ~evV - i ,: v. -~ _ ~ _ r'~ ~, -__ ~,' ~ '~ ~ ~ yam„ y'~'aI`. .,. •~Vi~~! ar~~ ~°a ' '-` ~1~' .' i y ,~ ~: ~_ ` ,..t j~~ _?~' i . '~ .'' %= Wit; ~ ~;~ ~, ~ -,V }^-.i.. 11, J~~ -~~;+ ! t ..,-• ref , J`i `l`am.. .1 - ~.i. 1'.'l~ ~ "°~~,~., ~.'7i1: ,.-_':--+ ,iii :,=~,~,.,~~•? S ~, ~ ` ~' 4 _~ •,s•'9~,~ ~ ~ ' 1 i ~~ '~ r. , .yam: j,. r,.:~"J •}-~ s, _ ter, ... , i_ r `: 1 :.4, ~ ! ~';\' . •.r~ .. Jr J `•, 1, i ~... '~ rte, /~ 1 j~'^'~ _ .~ t° ~~ r '. .' 1 i 1. 'F~' ~,~ ~~ '` ~ •t ~^ i 10-7 0 ~~~~~ ~~~ 10-71 City of Chula- Vista Greenbelt Master Plan Adopted by City Council on September 1 S, 2003 Acknowledgements CityofChu/a 1/sfa.- Duane E. Bazzel, Principal Planner Dai Hoang, Planning Technician 11 Frank J. Herrera-A, Associate Planner Mary Hofmockef, Principal Landscape Architect John Krizan, Landscape Architect Nancy Ross, Geographic Information System Specialis# Todd Schmit, Landscape Architect Chapin LandManagemenf, /nc.• Peggy Gentry, Project Manager Kelly Ballard, Research Liz Sears, Graphics i0-72 City of Chu(a Vsfa Greenbelt Master Pfan September 16, 2003 Ofay (/a//eyRegiana/ParkConcepfP/aa The key goal of the Otay Valley Regional Park Concept Pfan is to link major open space areas within the southern area of San Diego County and South San Diego Bay with lower Otay Lake. The concept plan provides policy direction for the jurisdictions for coordinated land acquisition and development for the Regional Park. The Regional Park extends from the southeastern edge of the salt ponds at the mouth of the river, .through the Otay River Valley, to the land surrounding bath Lower and Upper Otay Lakes. Trails should be located on both sides of the river wherever possible, with crossings where appropriate. Trail corridors should provide connections to other regional trails, including the Bayshore Bikeway to. the west, the City of Chula Vsta Greenbelt trails which wil! provide a connection to Sweetwater Regional Park, and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) holdings to the east. /LTu/lip/e Species Canserv-afion Program fiLISCPJ Subarea P/ao The Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) Subarea Plan far the City of Chula Vista was approved by the City Council in May 2443. This comprehensive document is a long-term habitat conservation plan which implements Chula Usta's portion of a 172,404-acre Subregional Plan for the South San Diego County, from Del Mar to the Mexico border. The MSCP addresses the potential impacts of urban growth, natural habitat lass and species endangerment, and creates a plan to conserve habitat that supports a variety of endangered and threatened species, as well as other sensitive species, while providing for future development of both public and private lands within the South County. PorfDistricf/Chu/a ~sfa Bayfronf/LlasferP/an Both the San Diego Port District and the City of Cliuia Vsta have begun the preparation of the Bayfront Master Pian that wtEl address the arrangement of land uses on approximately 344-acres west of Interstate 5 freeway and roughly between G Street and Palomar Street. It is the City's intent to coordinate with the Port District to include elements within the Pfan that implement the City of Chula Vista Greenbelt concept. As the Bayfront Master Plan is not expected to be completed for about two years, any parks, trails or other facili#ies identified in this Greenbelt Master Pfan are considered conceptual at this time. is 10-73 City of Chuka Vsta Greenbelt Master Plan September 16, 2003 segment, the Coors Amphitheater and Knotts Soak City Water Park, both within the Otay River Valley Regional Park segment, and the Marina Vew Park with the Bayfront segment. Mu/ti-use Trai/s -provide for a variety of uses from equestrians to biking and hiking. Trails have been and .are currently being constructed by severs! developers of residential communities including Railing Hills Ranch, San Miguel Ranch; Otay Ranch, and Eastlake Trails. Active and passive parks as described above already define the Greenbei# and it is because of these parks that the majority of the Greenbelt exists. Expanding on the existing parks and creating additionaE parks, primarily within the Otay Valley Regional Park where there are opportunities fior expansion, will further enhance the greenbelt. Mul#i-use trails have been randomly developed, both formally and informally. [t is the intent of this Master Plan to recognize where trails currently exist and to identify where the trail system may be expanded to enhance the trail system and connect the Greenbelt segments. This chapter describes the Greenbelt amenities, trail design, sign standards and provides guidance for managing the Greerr6e/t. The reader should refer to the City's Perks and Recreation Master Plan for further discussion on park programs and park design within the Gity. 4.1 Trail Types The City's Landscape Manual, dated November '[994, sets specific standards for trail construction within the City. The intent of the following trail standards is to augment the standards in the Landscape Manual. The design guidelines identified in this chapter set forth minimum standards for the two general types of trails specified below. Variation to the minimum standards will be based on consideration of the number and types of trail users and environmental constraints. These factors should guide the width of the trait and the location of the trail to reduce impacts on resources and topography. For the purposes of the Greenbelt, there are two general types of trails defined: iL/u/ti-use Trail and the Rura/ Trai/. The iLlu/ti-use Trai/ is a trail far bicyclists, equestrians (where identifed), pedestrians, joggers, and other non-motorized activities. The f,'ura/ Trai/provides access #o natural open space areas that may be off limits #o vehicles. These trails may serve pedestrians, bicyclists and equestrians depending on permitted uses in fhe resource areas. 20 i0-74 e r _ r ~ ~ ' E i ~ ~ "='. I _- - e' ]sF ~• ~ ~ ems.'-. i, y I '•Y.. ~ l t _ _~ ~ 1 ~ fl y } >< i C ~ ; t ~{, -y tf ~ ~ o I rJ UI L `'7 ~1 & `x ~ r;~' ~~"r F~ 4- J sr~w§ .,~: J `~t r4-_".r~~.1„'t~-.1 `SF'r `~'" ,y,xf.1,'`'"C`^"z~,s"',~x _ ~ ~` ~:a ~ J Vii-=~7 _i..+ _ r'i~.i ~^"~.ny~ ~' ~::.. ^d 1 ~ ~ ~ -~ ~i .r ~c. .zJ` ,~x a . ... •I ~~.JrU y~r .. ~ .S „u+•;~~~4t;- .~u"~ t a 4 ri h"a-`"«1 a..^x ._-x n. ~` ~ fy f ~~., "Ri~i'T„'~ mi+2'ts . ' i~'1 ~~-"~It ..- 3^''~ .~,.~rr-y ;l _ ~. t `1 I ;"~~ "'' I to ~"~ ~ 1 t ,~ i *'r ~ t ~,, t.+.~.z a _ i .~, _,~ 4 ~' F -" i ` -M .~ ~- fix- ' ..f'~ ' ,•? ~ rk }ySd' j 1i j{' i ss \> ,~ 1 mbb' { \ -ice ~, - _ }ba~3 E „- ..+ ~ S ~c; +-x•~.~ .ate. _ } 1 C~ ~ F +w .w ~~ 'ae_ .. fa-nYa~i- ~/ ~ ~\ `1^~4't" { `Y. ~: ``..~. 1 X~~1Y1 ~~. { ~ ~~' 1.I 4 _ ~f ti r '.,~`; r~ a«~, ~ R "fit f ;~ I ~ ~ 1 ~ i ~1 Pats ~ ry~ r~~ ~~~ J t . , t y' ~ a ,~is ;'f qtr`' ~ ' `i ~~ - ~~..-•-•~ `.'~ "` ~'n '~~'"~f`' .. - g to ~'~ " +~i ~~ s1 \~-s }~" - ~`.~ ` ~crt-.i y'~"~L~f \ - . Y^ ~`~ ` ~~--~\-- F"a" Ct ~ t, iS~\sJ ~~.. Y3 ~~~~ ~"~. ~f .a~ F ~'.i~i'...'"`~~+' •r~-~.,__ t, l >. pF ~~; • ~; ? ~ ~. _ ~ '_;. l ! cwt 1t ~> F ;..r~ ~• '" '-~, ° j -` ~-L'.i~ ire ~'•• t I~~~~~tE ;~~ Fj U m ~, 't C"`.. • it t tiu t '/+,~ ~ _ ~ ~~-~=-: ' ..: I=~t~(rfr# 3' t .l O `~` i. ~. Fi,'t .fit t ` ~ ~,;R Z1.: ~~. .~ x a';i ~:"~~a ~ ~ ~IfBrr b a -.i ~ 8 j 10-75 City of Chula Vista Greenbelt Master Plan September 16, 2Qfl3 4.1.1 General Standards By design, the City's trail system encourages use by a variety of different types of users. In cases where the trail is adjacent to, or located along an existing or proposed park, the park design should consider the trail access, trait parking, and trail signage during the park design. Active recreation is recommended to be located at a minimum of twenty feet away from the trail. Continuity and consistency in trail design is necessary to ensure that the user's expectations are sa#isfied and will result in the trail being used frequently. A discontinuous trail or one that changes in trail width or trail compost#ion results in complaints by users. Trails should intersect all crossings at 90° angles, if pc~ssibie. Motorcycle or vehicular access shall be restricted with signage or additional design or detailing. No curbs or ver#icai features within five feet of the edge of the trail should be constructed along trails that provide for equestrian use, except where a fence is required for a downhill slope. A minimum of 14'0" overhead clearance shall be provided and maintained for hath built and natural features adjacent to the trail. Trail design or construction techniques may vary in order to respond to specific site constraints as determined appropriate by City staff. 4.1.2 Trait Surface The trail surface may be asphalt, concrete, decomposed granite, asoil-stabilized surface, or native soil. The advantages of an asphalt or concrete surtace are that the trail can accommodate the widest range of users and is frequently used in a more urbanized setting. The surtace choice will be dependent on the trail connection and the anticipated trait usage. ln.more rural ,areas or where the trail connects to a decomposed granite trail, the trail should offer a continuous surface treatment. Asoil-stabilized trail is one constructed of anon-petroleum binder combined with aggregate to produce a compacted pavement surface that retains the characteristics of aggregate but is noted for its comparatively cool summer surface temperature and natural appearance. The soil-stabilized product is app{ied as a cold treatment and may be constructed at remote locations. This product also avoids the air quality concerns of the construction of hot mix asphalt product. Users of trails constructed of #his type of surface may include joggers, bikers, equestrians, wheelchair users, and strollers. The surface is not compatible for roger bladders or skaters. 4.1,3 Multi-Use Trail A multi-use trail is simply defined as any trail that is used by more than one user group or for more than one trail activity. Multi-use trails are often called "shared 2I 10-76 Ci#y of Chula Vista_ Greenbei# Master Plan September 1B, 2003 Off-road Vehicle Barriers Off-road Vehicle Barriers shall be constructed where breaks in fences occur that would allow vehicle access on#o trails. ORV barriers shall be at feast eight feet and eight inches in width and attached #o ends of fence posts near to roads. 4.2.6 Arterial Crossings Where the trail will crass a major roadway carrying traffic volumes in excess 25,OQ0 ADTs (average daily trips) agrade-separated overcrossing may be considered. Overcrossings are typically less expensive than tunneling under a roadway, but require as much as 400 to 500 feet of approach structure on each end due to the maximum 5% gradient as specified by ADA. The following table identifies key criteria far overcrossings: Table 2 Grade Se orated Roadwa Crossin s Traffic volume thresholds: 25,000 ADT or neater Recommended minimum trail width 8 feet (undercrossings should provide to ered sides with wider clearances at to Recommended minimum overhead clearance 10 feet {14 feet for equestrian use) Estimated structure costs er linear feet $600 - 800 Maximum radient er ADA 5% Anciila features Li htin ,calf hones, benches This master plan identifies overcrossings of Eastlake Parkway at Hunte Parkway and of Hunte Parkway east of Eastlake Parkway. Undercrossings of the trail system are identified through Wolf Canyon at Main Street, La Media Road and at SR125. Other undercrossings are proposed at. Otay Lakes Road near the Otay Reservoirs and at several roadway crossings through the Otay Valley and the Sweetwater Va[[ey. 4.2.7 Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan Requirements As an implementation measure of the State ofi Ca[ifomia's Clean Water Act, the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board on February 21, 2001 adopted National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System standards (Order No. 2001-01, NPDES No. CAS0108758} referred to as "Municipal Permit". The Municipal Pem~it requires the implementation of a Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program (URMP}. The objec#ives of the Jurisdictional URMP that are to effectively prohibit non-storm water runoff into storm drain systems. The Model Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Pfan (SUSMP) was developed to 37 10-77 City of Chula Vista Greenbelt Master Plan September 16, 2003 address post construction urban runoff pollution from deve{opment projects. These requirements are important to the development of the staging areas when there results in the creation of 5,000 square feet of impervious soil or with greater than 15 park{ng spaces and potential exposed to urban runoff. Design of staging areas, which are subject to SUSMP, w'tII need to provide Best Management Practices (BMP) that may {nelude such measures to reduce imperviousness such as providing runoff storage measures throughout the site landscape with the use of detention, retention. and runoff practices. These measures of may include onsite retention or pavement techniques that allow- runoff to remain on-site. BMPs may also include construction of trails with permeable ,surfaces such as decomposed granite surface or pervious concrete as recommended in this document. Additionally, the NPDES standards identify pollutants of concern that potentially affect storm water runoff and the qua{ity of groundwater that include animal waste. Within the Greenbelt where equestrians are permitted, signs may be pasted that require waste pickup and proper disposal along with the oval{obit{ty of free bags at staging areas and trash receptacles at suitable intervals along the trails. 4.3 Greenbelt Management and Maintenance The entire Greenbelt- falls within five jurisdictions, the Cities of Chula Vista, National City, and San Diego, and the County of San Diego and Port District {Figure 10). Management and maintenance responsibility genera[!y I{es with the property owner, which may be one of the jurisdictions, a resource agency, a utility company or a homeowners association. In areas where a segment{s) is within mare than one jurisdiction, the greenbelt may be managed by several agencies or the agencies may agree to jointly manage the open space. Management and maintenance within the Greenbelt includes open space, passive and active recreation focilities, andlar trails. Each requires a different level of management and maintenance; however, there are some typical ingredients to consider for any one or all of these components, as discussed in this section. 4.3.'f Greenbelt Management A good management program is essent{al to ensure long-term success. After planning and implementation, the success of any Greenbelt system is determined by how well the Greenbe{t is managed. While this document does not identify a specific indiv{dual or department(s) that will manage the Greenbelt, it does however, recognize that the City of Chula Vista will be responsible for management of that portion of the Greenbelt within its control. Further discussion with other jurisdictions may be necessary to assure coordinat{on on management and potential funding mechanisms for the Greenbelt. 38 10-7$ t o ~~ , ~ f •~ jam. n •1 i~D 4 t N l `J1_/ G ,y., ~ _ o '~ ( - - ~ ~J , U~ j ~ ~ ~-,- ~ -__ _. -_ ~ f ` ~ ~t.~ r - _ - ~ ! Y ,. ~ ~ J;`1- r~ / _,~ 'r ~ I S Lam,--' ~_ ~_ _ ~`I 1 ~ ~ '~ 4..'..-_ s .:~ ~ ~ ~ ~iE D ~ ~ ~~~~ ~~++. ~ ` ~. ~ r/~ „;;~ ll ~ ~ s s a -S o m a~ t ~ _ 1~ ©©Q a ~ ~ ^ ~ N Vti • i \ ..~ i '~ .~ ~• Cry m ~ . -..:::~ Zkk ~ m- ~ ~~ ~F ~ II ~i\ U ~ r. - .,p O is ~' „ .i a ,~. v-.. i. ' -. ~ 'a u O ~ ;rya k-r ~~ S _ `'' • ~. ~ _` _ ~ _ .7 l~f ~v 7 1 y ~ Q $ ', f .i. .~ _ 7 I ~~ - ~ w -~ 10-79 City of Chula Vsta Greenbelt Master Plan September 16, 20fl3 The draft County Trai! System Assessment, May 3, 2QQ1, ident~es an equestrian trail along the edge of the O#ay Reservoirs connecting to the County Park. The County Otay Lake Park offers picnicking and restrooms. An equestrian staging area at the park would be idea{ to provide additional access to the Otay Valley Regional Park. Trail Issues ^ Bicyclists will continue to travel along Wueste Road despite the provision ofi other'Greenbelt trails and the narrow width of the road. ^ Developing the proposed equestrian trail along the Otay Lakes will require coordina#ion and approval by the City ofi San Diego Water Department. ^ There is currently no grade separated trail connection between Upper and Lower Otay Lakes. Greenbelt Recommendations ^ Install a signalized crossing at Otay Lakes Road. C3 Encourage the County #o construct an equestrian staging area at the Coun#y Park at the southern end of Lower Otay Lakes. ^ Coordinate with the County of San Diego and the City of San Diego #o permit equestrian #rails along the Otay Lakes. ^ !f an equestrian trail is successfully established around the Otay Lakes design and construct a trait connection under Otay Lakes Road when this segment of roadway is reconstructed and widened in the future. - ^ if Wueste Road is closed in the future to vehicle traffic between Otay Lakes Road and Olympic Parkway (except for maintenance and emergencies), consider the potential far converting this segment as an additional multi-use #rail link far use by bicyclists, rollerblades, and other non-motorists. 5.2.6 Otay Valley Regions[ Park, )=ast and West Segments Otay Valley Regions[ Park is a planning effort by the Cities of Chula Vista and San Diego and the County of San Diego (Figure 16 and 17}. The key goal of the adopted Otay Valiey Regional Park (OVRP) Concept Plan is to sink major open space areas within the southern area of San Diego County and South San Diego Bay with lower Otay Lake. This componen# currently supports two commercial recreational facilities: Coors Amphithea#er and 1<natts Soak City Water Park. Additional park facilities and programs are currently being planned. ~~ i0-80 1 ,! i ;} ~i ~ _, ~ ' ~ ~. Prepared By: County of San Dieg ~ Parks and Recre ~' City of Chuta Vista • Planning Depar ~ Parks, Recreatio City of San Diego • Community and • Fark and Recrea G 1 O N A L P AR K O NC ~ PT PL AN 0 ation Department tment n and Dpen Space Department Economic Development Department tion Department con~~~r Pin ~ 10-$2 __ _ ~~- Adjacent to the Concept Plan Existing • East Mesa Detention Facility • R.J. Donovan Correctional Facility •Brown Field • Olympic Training Center Planned • Otay Ranch • Residential • Commercial • Industrial Open Space Within the Concept Plan Existing • Rock Mountain Quarry • Gun Club s Otay Lakes County Park P Otay Lakes/boat launches e Dpen Space • Air Park Land Uses: East of Heritage Road East of Heritage Road, the valley remains in mare rural agricultural and open space lands. A number of Large public facilities have been sited in the vicinity, including the East Mesa Detention Facility, the R.J. Donovan Cor- rectional Facility, and Brown Field. Large private devel- opments have been sited here as well. They include the Arco Olympic Training Center. Private development plans have been approved for resi- dential, commercial and industrial developments sur- rounding OVRP. They include Otay Ranch, the largest planned development in San Diego County, and indus- trial areas with commercial nodes in the-City of San Di- ego. In this eastern part of the valley, the Regional Park wid- ens over the important habitat lands on Otay Ranch that have been designated as part of the Otay Ranch Pre- serve. Uses within the area designated for the Park in- clude the quarry and hatching operations at Rock Moun- tain, the open space area of the East Mesa Detention Facility, portions of the Donovan Correctional Facility and some other open space lands owned by the County, and several public and commercial recreational uses. These recreational uses include the San Diego Air Park, the Gun Club, San Diego's Clpper and LowerOtay Lakes and the associated boat launches, and Otay Lakes County Park. Planned Important habitat Lands in the Otay Ranch development • Otay Ranch. Preserve will be conserved in the Otay Ranch Preserve. The Pre- •San Diego National Wildlife serve extends beyond the boundary of the OVRP Con- Refuge cept Plan and will cover over 1.1,404 acres of open space lands. About 1,044 acres of the Preserve are contigu- ous with OVRP. The San Diego I`Iational Wildlife Refuge covers the south- ern rim of the valley and western slopes of Otay Moun- tain. 5 ~~'~~" ~~? L Vii' R~' ~~~I`?,r'~L ~,~R 10-83 } i Policy: With the exception of border patrol, maintenance and/ or emergency vehicles, prohibit off highway (motorized} uehicle use throughout OVRP. Trail Corridor Trail Corridors are intended to provide a continuous link through the Park, connecting the Recreation Areas and interpretive Centers through the Open Space/Core Pre- serve Area. The Trail Corridor provides for hiking, bicy- cling and equestrian trails, although these trails may not share the same locations and may not all be established alfng the entire length of OVRP. A Trail Corridor is intended to identify a generalized lo- cation for trails in the Park. Trails should be located on both sides of the river wherever possible, with crossings where appropriate. Trail Corridors should provide looped. trails and should connect to other regional trails offsite, including the Bayshore Bikeway to the west, the City of Chula Vista Crreenbelt trails which will provide a con- nection to Sweetwater Regional Park, and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) holdings to the east. Staging Area Staging-Areas function as neighborhood or regional ac- cess points to the Park and may be located conveniently near public transit stations or stops. They may provide access to Trail Corridors or Recreation Areas or Iink the two. There may be car and/or bicycle parking, picnic facilities and interpretive kiosks or signs in Staging Ar- eas. Staging Areas should not be limited to those specified an the Concept Plan map, but should be developed as opportunities are presented. Viewpoint and ~verIook Area Policy: Encourage joint develop- Viewpoint and Overlook Areas provide sites for short ment of interpretive displays at and long range views into and through the Park. They Viewpoint and Overlook Areas are generally located at the edges of the Park Boundary. located at public facilities outside Some are designated outside of the Park Boundary at of the Concept Plan Boundary. public facilities or along public roads. They are intended to be used as areas for passive en- joyment of the Fark and may include mihimal seating and interpretive signage. They are generally associated with Recreation Areas, Trail Corridors and Staging Ar- eas and do not stand alone in the Open Space/Core Pre- serve Area. Policy: Provide trails that connect to other regional trails offsite and to existing and future park facili- tieslocated adjacent to or near OVRP. Policy: Cltilize existing fire and utility roads and easements for trails to mininu2e impacts to sensitive resources. 10-84 '. t~ COi`ICEPT PLAN SEG1~El`ITS For ease of description, the Concept Pian has been di- vided into five Segments. This section identifies and de- scribes each Segment, the Elements in each Segment, and the Policies for each Segment. The Segments are: © South San Diego Bay to Interstate 5, Interstate 5 to Interstate 805, Interstate 805 to Heritage Road (Paseo Ranchero}, ~ m Heritage Road (Paseo Ranchero) to Otay Lakes Vicinity, and ® Otay Lakes Vicinity. . .~ `':i` ~ ~r~ ~.r.. i ~_ ..rte . ~ - 'Q ~~ 1 ~~~'J' F1 QfYiIiSAItG~$II ~.~! ~ ~ .~`=..~.lS1Y , ~~~" + 9AH~&IICC~(IY ~..~~~d ~ a ~'°-~ i ~ VyR~~[[tE ~Sor~th Satz ~tego Bay ~ to Herffiags Road ~ y ~=~~ aaaav~srn H e Rudd to s t3Eay~al e5 Vfelttk~t . ray e^ ' _~-?~,F'"~'?`F`~ IITEETStatE $tntt0 'y?'" * J A~ - .. ` '=~ Y` t ~ ~ `` . , ;.-~' ~ ~, 3 ; t saxr~~ca~ar r~ i. ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~raFea~~s ~ .sESat ~ .--. ' R.. -~ ,.,,......~ I r,~ • . ~ Concept Plan ~ Otay Malley Regional Park COi~CEPT Pi~~ 10-85 Interstate 805 to Heritage Road (Pasco Ranchero} Policies for Thls Segment This Segment is very environmentally disturbed and de- graded. Sand and gravel extraction in the stream bed have shifted the natural path of the river and created artificial elevations in the floodwayJfioodplain. Devel- opment along both sides of the river and widening of Otay Valley Road have constrained the river to a very narrow corridor in,this Segment. This Segment contains: • agricultural uses adjacent to I-805, • a narrow floodway/floodplain corridor where no activities currently occur, • an area proposed, but not yet finalized, as open space in Dennery Canyon, part of approved pri- vate .development plans, • an area at the southern end of Brandywine Street, developed as part of the Chula Vista Auto Park and identified as a Staging Area for the Park, and, m the Otay Rio Business Park, where infrastructure has been installed on a portion of the site. Access is available from Otay Valley Road, at the south end of Brandywine- and at the Otay Rio Business Park. Elements in This Segment An Alternative Boundary extends the Park southwest, with the Open Space/Core Preserve Area designation, to provide open space on additional canyon slopes and hillsides contiguous with Dennery Canyon. This area is outside of the FPA, but it is designated for open space and appears to connect habitat and a wildlife corridor with the OVRP. ~'~} i 9 b 9 `! ~A i Legend Plcu: Elements Boundary ~ Staging.drea ~~'r` ~4lternativeBaundary ® Interpretive Center +~~ Trail Corridor ®~ Interpretive Center Open Spacel Alternative Sites Preserve.4rea ® ~ Y7ewpoin!/Overlaak Recreatian,4rea ~® ParkShrdyArea x:2$7'0 Other stitap Infvrtn J~~ ~YfunicipalBound~ .Existing Roads f ~ ` Future Roads a. ~: Rivers Trolley Lines Q LakesBays Heritage Road (Pasco Ranchero) to stay Lakes Vicinity Policies for This Segment Policy: Encourage and support creation of the Otay Ranch Preserve as a method of imple- menting Park goals. Policy: Arrange coordination between Otay Ranch planners and OVRP staff so as to preserve viable wildlife corridors and meaningful recreational connec- tions between Poggi and Wolf canyons and OVRP. Policy: Cluster Recreation Area #11 development around SR 125 and Hunte Parkway to provide convenient access and minimize disturbance to the Open Space/ Core Preserve Area. With the exception of Rock Mountain, the majority of this Segment is part of the planned Otay Ranch Pre- serve. This Segment includes: • Rock Mountain, a quarry operation with associ- ated asphalt and concrete operations, • a portion of the planned Otay Ranch Preserve, which will cover important habitat lands -in the Segment, including a large vernal pool area, and sensitive cultural sites, the Caun Club/Bird Ranch, which is developed with a private shooting range, and a a portion of undeveloped area of the R.J. Donovan Correctional Facility. Access is limited currently but will become possible at La Media Road, SR-125, Alta Road and Hunte Parkway as Otay Ranch develops. Elements in This- Segment The Open Space/Care Preserve Area is contiguous with a portion of the Otay Ranch Preserve in this segment. Two Recreation Areas are designated in this Segment. These Recreation Areas will be developed in conjunc- tion with the Resource Management Ptan for the Otay Ranch Preserve, which calls for up to 400 acres of rec- reational uses within the Preserve. • Recreation Area X10: about 125 acres, currently used as the Bird Ranch/Gun Club. • Recreation Area #11: about 200 acres, vacant land disturbed by agricultural activities and graz- ing. It should be located on both sides of the corridor far SR 125. Sensitive culEUral resources may constrain development of this area. 1 - ~'~ ....r-,~ ~. ~` ~, SECMEnT: HERITAGE ROAD (Paseo Ranchero) ~, TO OTAY LAKES VICII`IITY r<. ~ li 1~~ ~~' ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ "r~ ~ 11 ~ ~~ "` ,~ d~ ~~ ~ r:i' ~ ,, -,- ... ~ ~ t ::-~ I ; ~t ~ __ E ~ ~ !. ~ .- ~ ~~ i . to L3cxi{31 ~ ~. ~'~ ~ `~ ~, . ~ ~ . ~~ t f . I ~ f `~ ~ ~ . _ . v . y, ,, if .... _ ~.. ' ~ - HBCk ti ! _ 17~ ~ 'tc ' M6(YSttid` .~ ;~ f '. - - _' . - - i ' ~~y _ :1i` ~r~ ;, ~: ~ fl ~ ` oerw.~as ~.. i 1 1 i _~._ 1 1 ~ - t- . ~ ~. ..w._.~..-.- ~ Legend '~,~:; ~ . =` j ~ ~== Plan .8lernenfs " ~~', wa'~o+w ~` _ ~ ~~~ `'`~',~ t sound Otl:er 11I Iii orinatiari.x:.- ~~,, - j r -: ` ~-,.,,~; ~ ; ~, ~~ ~' ® Stae~ingArea j+~' ~lfuni~alBoundary i i~;. '~ ~`_~+ 4 ~ , ~~~ .;,yam ..a""'ice AlternativeBoundary ~ Interpretive Center ~!~ f'. Existing Roads :,r,~- _ cf, Ewa occxt~x~ ~~. -.:u.•. ++ Trail Corridor ~ ~~', t " ~ ~ w- ~ ; ti Future Roads '~ 7,L` ::._, ~ ~ `+ Fntergretive Center t t a:,:. ,~ ~ : CI Open Space/ ®~Alternative Sites ~ ~., ~' !~i ; :~ ., Riven ~ W .. ~~^'' . t, ~.•.~ Preserve Area a~iz~a .^^' ,,~~. ~ewpointlOverlaok Trolley Zines ,,.' •,' S'~ ~ Rerreatian ,4rea 1 - ~~\~ ® Park Snrdy.9rea 0 LakeslBays ~ - ~1 ~~~ one j :~x ~ E i ~ = !- i..:.....~ ~. 2:.~QtI ~~ 7 ~ dom.. Project Study Report Heritage Road Bridge 04102/2 4 1 0 Project 5chednle Milestones • Preliminary Engineering & Environmental Review • Environmental Clearances s Final Design • Right of Way (pending funding} • Canstrttction (pending funding) • Demolition and Restoration Schedule In Progress December 2010 September 2010 -December 2012 January 2011- December 2012 December 2012 -June 2013 June 2013 -December 2014 Completion -December 2015 X ATTACffiYIENTS & EXHIBITS . (Attached Documents contain only the portions relevant to this project.) EXHIBTTS: ATTACE~i TENTS: (Includes Relevant Excerpts) 1. Regional Location Map A. Otay River Valley Transportation Study ' Z. Aerial Photo (Location) B. Otay Mesa PFFP 3. Existing Facility and Right of Way C. TDIF Program 4. Sub-Regional Land Use Map D. Greenbelt tiiaster Plan 5 Planned Circulation Roads E. OTVRP Concept Plan . 6. FEiVIA Floodway F. STIP/RT]P/SAFT`EA-LU 7. Regional Facilities Map G. BIRIS S: Proposed Cross Section H. PES 9. Proposed Alignments I. Cost Estimate Alt 1 10. Alternative 1 (ROW) 7. Cost Estimate Alt 2 11. Existing and Proposed Profiles 12. MSCP Subarea Plan- (Transportation Uses) 13. Alternative 2 (ROW) 14. Village 2 Tentative Map 15. GreenbeltlOtay Valley Regional Park Map 16. 2030 Traffic Volumes 17. Chula Vista Capacity Standards /} ~ACNI'9EovTS 10 10-90 ~,t °~ ~••,,,,~ I1.S, DEPAR.TM"NT aF 7'gAr.ISPORTATIOItiI °*• E'i~1:RALH1G33W~YAD1vtINISTRATfON z o s CALIFOR2•fIA DMS101~ b.~0' Capitol Melt, Suite 4-I DO ~'`°,y,3 ¢ ,~'~c Sacramarto, CA 95814 November I'7, 2008 SN REPLY REFER To HDA-CA Document m: 552242 Mt. Will Kempton, Duector California Department of Ti ansportation 1124 N Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Attention: Federal Resources Office, MS X82 • For RachelFalsetti,TransportationProg~an~rning Deaz Mr Kempton: SUBJbCT: California 2009 Federal Statewide Transportation Improvement Program We have completed our review of California's proposed 2409 Federal Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (2009 FSTIP}, Statewide Planning Certification and slated supporting documentation that was submitted by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans} to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and the F ederal Hi~way Administr atiari (FHVWA) by letter dated. September 29, 2448. Once approved by the FTA and FHWA, the 2009 FSIIP supersedes the 2007 FSTTP for California that was approved by FHWA and FTA on October 2, 2006, and aIl subsequent amendments to the 2047 F STIP. SeCtiOII 44218 DfTitle 23, Code ofl~ederal Regulations requu~es the State to submit the entire proposed FSTIP concurrently to the FTA and the FHWA. atleast every four years for joint agpzaval California's proposed 2449 FSTIP includes the project and Project phase listings for uroposed transportation projects located outside the planning azeaboundaries of the State's designated Metropolitan Planning Organizations (3vlYOs) California's proposed 2009 FSTZP also incorporates by reference those projects listed in the 2009 Federal Transportation Improvement Programs (FTIPs) that were adopted by the State's eighteen. MFOs and approved by the Govetnnr. With the exceptions of the Lake Tahoe metropolitan planning area and the 8 metropolitan planning areas.located in the San Joaquin Valley, fine FHWA and the FTA have completed the air quality conformity determinations required by 23 CFR 454.21b(b) for the 1v~0 rTIPs in areas of the State designated as nonattainment or maintenance far national ambient air quality standards" As proposed, the 2009 FSTIP also includes interim FT1Ps, prepared. in accord with 40 CFR Part 93, far the Lake Tahoe and San Joaquin Valley MPOs. Based on our review of the information submitted with the State's proposed 2007 FSTIl', including revenue and proposed project funding information required to demonstrate financial t.1 i~ ~'. s5 ~,~' i si'3 ~~~.~~~ ~ ~~~~ " 10-91 __ __ z constraint, and docurn.entation for statewide and metropolitan planning process in support of California's Statewide Planning Certification, we are approving the 2009 FSTTP as proposed_ Anyproject or project phase listed in a MPO FT1F that is not included in the MPO's Regional Transportation Plzn, is_not approved for inclusion in the FSTIP pursuant. to 23 CFR §§ 450216{k) and 450.32i(g) Our FSTIP approval action includes project listings that indicate na funds are proposed far obligation during the four-yearprogram period from 2009 to 2012 These project and project phases cannot be advanced to implementation withott an action by the FHWA a_nd the FTA on the FSTIF pursuant to 23 CFR 460.216(1) and 450.328(e}. In addition, project or project phase funding included in the 2009 FSTIl' that is proposed far obligation outside the foul year program cycle (i e befoze 2009 or after 2012) is accepted by the FHWA and the FTA as `informational' in accord Frith 23 CFR §§ 450.216(a) and 450 324(a}_ We are approving the 2009 F ST1P with the understanding that the eligibility of individual projects for funding is subject to the applicant's satisfaction of all administrative requirements Tbis joint FHWA and FTA approval of the FSTIl' does not constitute an eligz~aility detenaination far the federal funds proposed for obligation on the listed projects. If you have questions or need additional information eoncerraing our approval of the 2007 FSTIP, please contact Wade Hobbs ofFHWA at (9.16).=k98-5027, orby email at Wade Hobbs@fhwa_dot_gov; or Ied Motley of'FIA at (415) 74~-2590, or by email at IedMatley@dotgov. Sincerely, ..~ ~ ~ ' ~/ ~/'~ F Or r Leslie T. Rogers Gene Iti. Fong Regional Admini nor Division Administrator Federal Transit Administration Federal Highway Administration 10-92 FINAL 200 REG~~NAL ~°RA1~~P®~T1~T`~~N July zoos ,~~~-~r 40t S Sweet, Srsite 800 • Satt Diego, CA 82'10'5.4231 ' (Si 8~ 539.1900 - 10-93 2DD8 Regional Transportation lmpravemertt Program San Diego Regina (in ~OOOs} ~~ ChnEa Vcta. Cihi at' MPO lD: CHV36 Capacity Status: NCI RT1P n 08-00 TITLE: Heritage Road Bridge Studies Exempt Category: Other -Engineering studies DESCR1PT10N: Heritage Raad from Main Street to Entertainment Circle -preliminary engineering, environmental analysis far future widening of bridge EARMARK t~lO: CA356/450 EST TOTAL COST: 54,620 TOTAL PR10R 08/D9 09110 iD111 1i/12 12113 PE ~ RW CON HPP 52,800 52,800 $2,800 LacalFunds 51,820 51,820 S1,820 TOTAL 54,fi20 S4,fi20 54,62D MPO ID: CHV37 Capacity Status: NCI RTIP n 08-00 TITLE: Palomar Gateway Community Transit Exempt Category: Air Quality -Bicycle and pedestrian facilities . (CR) Area DESCRIPT1Ohi: Palomar Streef from Frontage Road to approximately 200 beyond Industrial Blvd.; approximately 200 feet north of Palomar Street to ADA Street -street and pedestrian improvements to Palomar transit station and it; environs; includes parkways, medians, bicycle lanes, bus stop, traf"iic circle roundabout, sidewalk construction (this program augments V04) EST TOTAL COST: 53,075 TOTAL PRIOR 08104 09H0 10111 ii112 12113 PE RW CON LacalFunds 5875 5875 5820 S30 525 TransNet - L51 5200 5200 5140 $100 TOTAL 51,075 51.075 5420 530 5125 MPO ID: CMi39 Capacity Status: NCl RTiP F p8~p TITLE: TratTic SignaE System Optimization Exempt Category: Other -Traffic signal synchronization projects {CR) DESCRfPTION: Palomar Street from !-5 to 1-805; Broadway from Palomar Street to C Street; Fi Street from 1-805 to 1-5 - upgrade traffic signal coordination at locations identified by the City's Tramc Monitoring Program in order to reduce congestion and intersection delays EST TOTAL COST: 5500 TOTAL PRIOR OB109 09110 i0/ii 11112 12113 PE RW CON TtansNet - L 5150 515D 5150 TransNet-L51 5350 5150 S5D S50 S5D 550 S35D TOTAL SSDD 5150 5150 550 550 550 550 S500 MPO iD; CHV43 Capacity Status: NCt RTiP x 08.00 TITI-E Congestion Relief Study and Exempt Category. O#her - Intersection signa[ization projects (Helot) Implementation DESCRIPTlOt1: Citywide -program wiA allow for identification and impiementafion of solutions for congestion relief on local streets, such as median instalEation ,new trafi'ric signals, traffc signal upgrades, intersection lighting, traffic signal Coordination/ interconnection, video tra~c surveillance systems, traffic data cailectian systems. EST TOTAL COST: 51,000 TOTAL PRIOR OBF09 09110 1D/11 11/12 12/13 PE RW CON LacalFunds S5D 550 515 S35 TranstVef - L 5575 5575 5525 S50 TransNet-LS! 5375 575 S75 575 S75 S75 ,5375 TOTAL 51,000 Sfi25 575 575 575 575 575 5915 585 Page 21 4~ Wednesday, July 23, 2008 10-94 -I.%- 1 ~~~A~~~P.~1~~ California Department. of Transportation Division of Maintenance ~'~°i~ct~~~°c .lU~~intena.~cc ~~~ In~est~gc~tions RIDGE NSPECTION CORDS NFORMATION YSTEM The requested documents have been generated by BIRIS. These documents are the property of the California Depaz~ment of Transportation and should be handled in accordance with Deputy D'ir'ective 55 and the State Administrative Manual. Records for "Confidential" bridges may only be released outside the Department of Transportation upon execution of a confidentiality agreement. 10-96 D~PAztT~R7'i` OE' ~b13POli~'A0.'IflP7 structe:re 2~.aintenance ~ lavestsgations 12s Bridge Inspectiox~ Report ?age 1 of 3 Sridga rhaaher 57C0670 Facility Carried: OTAY VALLEY ROAD .Location 1.9 24I E/O RTE I-805 City : CHLTLA VISTA Iaspectign Date 11/11/2006 Iaspectior. Type Ro~ a i~ IIade~ ter Snercial Other STRIICTtFRg zr4tuu: - oTAY S.i=YEA CON$TRTJC'1~Tnns 7'Aranavn,..rn;q~ Year Built 1gg3 Skew {degrees): 20 Year Widened: 1986 23'0. of Saints 0 Length (m) 25 No. of Hinges 0 Structure Descriptian:Two continuous steel rolled stringez (12) spans with timber decklAC overlay on two open end stairway steel cap seated timber abutments and on single steel cap, columns (12) bent. All supgarted on driven steel H-pile extension {14 x 117 and 14 x 89}. . Span Configurakion {S) 2 @ 12.5 m {N) c/c I~O~ ~n nA.CTTY ~T~?4GS Des3.gn Live Load: MS-i8 OR HS-20 Inventory Rating: 32.6 metric Cans Operating Rating: 53,5 metric tons Permit Rating ppppp Posting Load Type 3 Calculation Method: LOAD FACTOR Calculation ~Setbod: LOAD FACTOR N/A Type 352 NiA Type 3-3 N/A n2rscRxPTxoty ore s'~gy_~Trr~rt t~ 5 ~ l 4.3 ~ ~. Dec3: X-Section: {W) 0,25 m br, 0.7 m s, 3.6 m, 7.0 m Med, 3,7 m,~ 0.7 m s, 0.25 m br {E} Total Width: 16.5 m fG,Z. Net Width: 15.8 m Na. of Lanes: 4 Rail Description: Steel Railing type 18 Rail Code 5111 M.i_a. Vertical Clearance: Bnimpaired IIE9CRSPTYORI IINFJTs'~Z 3TR[7 +ttsa~ Chancel Description: Natural, well deEiaed. COAIDIfiIOP7 TEX?' CONDITION OF STRUCTUR$ There are minor pothgles and severe cracks at 300mm spacing in the AC surfacing. There is no access to inspect under the structure. There is about IOOOmm of stagnant water. Otherwise, The structure appeared to be in good condition. SI,Ef1E12i T 73<'f3PSCTION R_ATTNCS' F~Elem Element Description Env Total Units RtY Qty i.n St. 1 St, each Condition State 2 5t. 3 St. 4 St. 5 l0I 32 Timber Deck - wJ AC Overlay 201 207 Painted Steel.Open Girder/Seam 2 2 396 sq.m. 0 396 0 0 D 101 2DZ Painted Steel Column ar Pile 2 300 m. 35 30D 0 0 0 0 Extension ea, 36 0 0 0 0 OZ 216 Timber Abutment 2 34 02 232 Painted Steel Cap 2 m. 34 0 0 0 p tDl 330 Metal Bridge Railing - coated 2 52 m. 62 52 0 D 0 0 m. 6Z D D 0 0 .r~a~ea oa: ~re~~:esday 12JD6/200c 09:31 n~i 57COfi;D/P?~C/9957 10-97 Page 2 of 3 ,~Elem Element Description Env Total Units Qty i.n-each Condition State Qty St. 1 St. 2 St. 3 St. 4 St. 5 or uncoated WORK ggCfyiL1TIOZ39 RecDate: 11!11/2(706 EstCost: Repair the gohales and the cxacks in the Action Deck-Repair Poth 5tr"_`arget: 2 YEARS AC surface. Work Sy: LOCAL AGEI`TCX DistTarget: Status PROPQSED ~~ Taspected By : M. 2aarour/ A. Shenouda Registered Civil En.gineez Pri^.Led an_Wedca5day ??/6/2006 79:31 A.M 10-98 r ~: 7 .:~ I~ : ` ` r ` r ; r,~' '~~ 51COfi77/AAAGI9857 Page 3 of 3 STR~ 23dV~PITQRY 2~NI7 APPR.~iTSAI, RRPO.F;:T avert++.=+a+=rr•w IDENTIFICATION ;:+=i+a r=c++=aa I1) STATE NAt.~,-.'- CALIFORNIA 069 { B) STRUCTURE 2diR43E0t 57C0670 (5) INVENTORY ROUTE (ON/UNDER)- ON 150000000 { 2) nIG'titAY AGENCY DISTRICT 11 {3) COUNTY CODE 073 {4) PLACE CODE 13392 (6) FEATSJRn INi'E"SECTED- OTAY A_TVER 17) FACILITY CARAIIED- OTAY VALLEY ROAD (9) LOCATION- 1.4 MI E/0 RTE I-805 (11) MIE,EPOINT/BZr.AM£TEe'Z_°OINT 0 { 12 } BASE HIGHSstAY NETS IORIC- NOT ON NET p (13 } LRS INV'~-.NTORY AOL~' & SUHROUTE (16) LATITUDE 32 DEG 35 Jli'N 31 SEC (17} LONGITUDE 117 DEG 00 MIN 18 SEC {98j BORDER BRIDGE STATE CODE $ SHAPE ~ (99} BORDER BRIDGE STAL'CTURE NUMBER wa••..ra STADCTUA£ TYPE AND MATERIAL +rr=:a+ax 143) STRUCTURE TYPE MAIN: MATERIAL- STEEL CONT TYPE- STRINGER/MULTI-BEAM OR GDR CODE 402 (44) STRUCTURE TY'P£ APPR:MATERIAL- TYPE- CODE (45) NUS~oR OF SPANS IN MAIN UNIT 2 {46} NSJMH~ OF APPROACH SPANS p {107) D£CR STRUCTURE TYPE- TIt2HEA CODS 8 (108} W"e.AR;NG SURFACE / PROTECTIVE SYSTEM: A) TYPE OF WEARING SURFAC?- SITLRdIN0U5 CODE 6 H) TY?E OF NL'+BR,4NE- NONE CODE 0 C) TYPE OF DECK PROTECTION- NONE CODE 0 x xa:rwr ae:awa•+ AGE ~~ FR~~.~. .x+.:aa :xwtr.+: (27} Yr..A.R BUILT 1993 IZO6k YEAR 3t:'CONSTRUCTED 1996 (42} TY?E OF SERV=CE: ON- FSGT3*NF1.v 1 UNDER- WATERS•IAY 5 (aa) LANES:ON STRUCTURE 04 UNDE.4 STRUCTURE QO (29} AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 9100 (3D) YEAR Or ADT 2004 {109) TRUC7t ADT 2 $ {19} HYPA55, Dr"~'QV$ LENGTH 5241! rxi•al•+f ar+twf GEOMETRIC DATA xwerr+++++r++•rx {48) LENGTH Or' MAXI.KUM SPAN 12.5 M (49y STRUCTURE LENGTH 25.0 M 150) CSTRH OR SI2]EWA2.A: LEFT 0_0 M RIGHT 0.0 M {51) BRIDGE ROADWAY WIDTH CIIRB TO CURB 15.8 M {52} DECK WIDTB OUT TO OUT 16.5 M (32} APP30ACH ROADWAY 41]17iH {W/SHOULDERS) 16.5 M (33) BRIDGE MEDLA2S- CLOSED iN0 HARRI^r.R) 2 (34) SKEW 20 DEG (35) STRUCTURE FERRET) NO (10) I&~l£NTORY ROUTE MIN VEAT CLEAR 99.99 M (47} INVENTORY ROD'iE TOTAL HORIZ CLEAR 15.8 M (53) MIN V3RT CLEA?t OVER BRIDGE RDWY 99.99 M (54) MIN VERT OND£RCLEAR RF.F- NOT H/RR 0.00 M (SS) MIN LAT UNDr'1tCLEAR RT REF- NOT E:IRR 0.0 M {56) MIN LAT UNDERCLEAR LT 0.O M •w+trrr rr+rf•rr+•ta r+rr•r ra ax>a+t•r+aw•axt«.r•• S'JFFICTENCY RATI)dG = BD.3 STATUS HEALTH INDEX 98.3 PAINT CONDITION SNDe~'X = 100.0 aar: rrraxrarr CLASSIFICAT_SON °••r r•e+err•r CODE (112} NSIS H.RIDGE LENGTH- YES Y (104) hTGEWAY SYSTEPS- NOT ON NHS 0 {26) FUNCTIONAL CLASS- MINOR ARTERIAL URBAN 16 (100 } D.~r^ENSE iiIGHWAX- NOT STRAN2IET 0 (101} pA~ar.T Fr. STRUCTURE- N0.*IE EXISTS N (102 } DT3ZECTZON Or TRAFFIC- 2 SHAY 2 {103) TEMPORARY STRIICTUR£- (i09) FED. LANDS HWY- NOT APPLICABLE 0 {110} DESIGNATED NATIONAL NETWORi{ - NOT 'ON NE"1' 0 (20) TOLL- ON E'RFF ROAD 3 {21) DrAINTA.iN- CITY OR MLJNICI?AL HIGHWAY AGENCY 04 (22) OS4N"nR- CITY OR MUNICIPAL i£IGH4+IAY AGENCY 04 (37} HISTORICAL SIGN"-FICA2JCE- NOT DET'DZ'~S2.YABLE 4 +r•++arte::.er+r CONDITION "•*•w••++a•ar.er CODE (58) DECK 6 (59) SUPF,RSTAUCTDRE 7 {60) SSTdSTRUCTURE 7 (fil} CHANNEL ~ CHANN:L PROTECTION 9 {62) CULVERTS N =a+++++_. LOAII RATING A*iD POSTING rxw atx:+t COTE [31) DESIGN LOAD- MS-18 OR HS-20 5 {63) OPERATING RATING 2L~T80D- LOAD FACTOR 1 (64) OPERATING RATING- 53.5 (65} IS)VEN'PORY RATTti'G .~+".-.ic?OD- LOAD FACT0t2 1 {66) INVF_NTORX RATTtIG- 32.6 (70} BRIDGE POSTING- EQUAL TO OR ABOVr LEGAL LOADS 5 (41) STRUCTURE OPEN, POSTED OR CLOSED- A DESCRIPTION- OP_N, NO RESTRICTION aaaaa+ara+r-xx+: APPRAISAL •=axa:r=war:rra+ CODS {67) STR.OCTURAL £VALIIATION 7 (68} DECfC GEOMETRY 4 (69) U14D£RCLEARANCES, V-aRTICAL S, EORIZONTAL 2'e (71) WATER ADEQUACY 9 {72) APPROACH ROADWAY ALIGNMaZ1T 8 {3fi) TRAFFIC SAFETY FEATt3RE5 1111 1113) SCODR CR_TTICAL HR137GES 5 =.:+•etxaa PROPOSTA_D 124PAOVx-MENTS +a re:.=*=: 175} TYPE OF WORA- CODE (76) LENGTH OF STRUCTURE iMPAOVEMENT M C943 BRIDGE I*LaROVE_.nNT COST (95) AOATJWAY T2D?ROVEMENT COST (96) TOTAL PROJaCT COST (97) YEAR OP ~SPAOVEMENT COST ESTIMATE (lI4} FUTORE ADT 12000 { 115 } Ye^.A.Ti OF FUTDRE AT.Y}' 2 016 +ar+w.ra++wat.r NAVIGATION DATA rrr rrrs•++a++=+ {38) NAVIGATION CONTROL- NO CONTROL CODE 0 (111) PIER PROTECTION- CODE (39),NAVIGATION VERTICAL CL~~RANCE 0 0 M {116) VERT-LIFT BRIDGE NAV MIN VERT CLEAR M {40) NAVIGATION HORIZON?'AL CLEARA.`7CE 0_4 M Prated cr:Wednesday 12!06/2~?05 Q°:31 ax 10-99 •+raa.w.=wave+wr.t~+gSPECTIONS +rex.:++.•e:.e+ (94) INSPECTION DATE 11/06 (413 FRE¢UEPiCY 24 MO (92) CRITICAL FFATUR.= I."}SPECTION: I93) CFI DA'+E A) FRACTL?tE GRIT D=TAIL- NO MO A) 3) UNDERSYATER INSP- NO MO B) C) O'I_-Lc2 SPECLAL LYSP- NO MO C) 57C057C/~Gl9857 -~-~''~ ~ Ys~~t' i _ ~ _ > ~~ r ~ ~'~ -" f -~'3'-nom' ~L ~' _ ..._'~F~ ~. ~~ ~,GF " `~.~~ ~: r . _! -+e~.#- 1 ~ f +., y ~`^ ;tee 2 ~y~,h~~"~ fir" s~ ,.'z" f ~ w "' r ~i~ ~ ~~ "~ ~ r. ~ ~ ~.i-~' c..P~ ~ ~. ~ ~~ a ~' s~~. ~ ~' :,. =: _. n, e~' ~' X - f ~ .Y .~,~. ~~-.~r"+~'4s rte"' y ~'Ti „6~. - ~ ~ ~ -~ ,. _'^"'.~,n _ ,~ rg., '1y ~ a ~ r ~ i ~, « mss., _~`~ - ~~.,"~."",~ -~ _ ~ f -gym... ~~ a ~ _ <--c..;~y ~r"'e'v.~- ~_,`°~^~..~~'~ Lr ~ {fit -.~ "~,~`-ni 3~ .a -~+ pi Y _ 'A"cS .-~,z? '-~-~1r~.~A, ~a ".'ii'i ~}. ~ "N,~' +z ~jY~f~ .~'~" ~' ~'+' ~ ~. t4"~(~~w~ -F~ _~Y _ ~ ~"yr,"~ mo`w'. ~. .,}5' ~..~. 'L=~ 'W£ .ice ~.. y,fX. ~i ~ r - ~_ ' `v - ,~Yt-" v 3r .~ ~ •• - h f.. •,.~~,.: Y ~~, .~ Lam' ~'b'KV4^V~` -,Y' i J ~2 j 'c-! ~e^ ~ 1 ~~~~. :J- ~e~: c.. ~` _- .._... ., t "- ~ '..~ f =~ ,-~ r _ ~ ~~ :e ~~ _ ~~`~-~~ - .a. ,a.71tiA _ -- ..~ -~ -f~ r - _-~ l - _ ._.~. ....-. .~- ti - '3.r 4 ~_- ~_ '_ ,_, tiF .:: e - N ,~c~~'-n:-a ~~' ,~ ~„« :~. ~ ~-~'~ ~ ~-`r'~--ma=r ~'T~ ~ ~ -J ~. ' f .~_ _~ ~ _ ~` ~'~ ~`~:YV~~ya~~y,~_ ~~Ti xf§ ~.~'~~ ~~ ~~G4~ T ~ S-$" ~~~==- -_=~ a ~r-~.=~_ t _ ~. ~~ ~== -J~-. _ _ _~: ~~ ,k T L - .?~ :a.N ~~ , t ~ _~~ -- _ r '~' Yr' S~'~Cfs„'~~y~ "'y'am y aR,~ te'e' s ~-"~-~-k„~,r~-.if--~'':~ ~:.'-' ~ _ 1,: ~: i : Si y~ ::;i - , ~~ ~~ f wd _ - ~ _ _ _ ~ 1 - _ r 4 . f~ ~~ f _ ~` _ E 3. J Y ~ ~-..4 ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ _ x: _ - _ - _ t '~ _ _ 4 __ - _ 'C R :_ _ r ~ -- - _ ~~L+r=~ - ~ ri.~. ~~f ~. ",may ~` s .Jr r -ar_r~, ~e J ~'-~. _ '. ,'~~ C ..f ~1T _ - _ - ?s.zaz a - ~.:: .\ `i ~ _ - - - - - s~ ~_ :' _ ~2 ~~'~~ _ `j""u-- x `ems v` - - _ x - t - r' __ - _ f~- __ _' _ - - -- - _~f .1 d _ Ly„_,~....~ _~ _ # ~iy e ~~~ i, g~~ --~.~ t~ ~ - M' _ _ - -- ~~i ~.f ~ --. _ - _ - Exhibit b-A Local Assistance Procedures Manual Preliminary Enviranmcntat Studies {PF.S} Farm ,{ 7LHiliiT 6~A pRELIiYiiNARY ENVIROI'tMEIyTAL STiIDIES (PES} ~D12I4i 20I2 Federal projectDlo.: HPi.tl-~203(0?8? Eaimarkr CA>>SJ~•SO F'inat Design: ~~cetedSrarrDIIte) (F'cdemJ Program Prefix-Prvjec[ Na., :1 greemcnt A'a.) . Elwin Goiuanaao From: City of Chula Vista __ Ta: _ (Lacal3gcrrg9 {Drsrrict Local ~tsscsfarscc E+rgrns:erl - District I 1 ]ase Luis Gomez 61976 ?301 • (DutriuJ (Projcu Alaaag:r i Namr aridTclepLave Na.) 4050 Ta for Street. San Diesa, CA 92110 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91410 (.•lddrrscJ (_•[ddrers) erwin aojuanctc>3Ca?datea ov isomez{~ci.chtila-vista.caus (E'mai},[ddrrssj (Email address) Is this Project "C~" the ^ ~'~ iF YES, ST(3P HERE and contact the District Local Assistance Engineer State IiigTZUtay System? ®Na regardin' the completion of other environmental documentation. Federal State Transportation lmpr°vement Program 03RTIP aisproved I 1-17-48 a N,a.-ortadr w rlrisjarnr) {FSTIP} leirP rir~stir dot ev Pordrgrfrmrrprrs~'(edn2ni.ktttr: (Csur~sllrrldapredPlan Dase) (P ge R'sgltt oC 1(day Constntction Programming Preliminary Engineering 2014 S /y, 4.76, ct7o i'orF5T1P: 10[)9r'3ti/t7 5 2,494,000 _nl_ Fiscati'car (Da(1arJ (Fucal ]'car) (Dollars) (Fucal 3 oar) (Dollars) ( ) Project Description as Shown in FSTIp: Hcritayc Rnad Bridge Crom i+flain 5trsxt to Entertainment Circle - Prsiimiaary Encinecrin~ and cnviranmental analysis foi future bridge ividcnin~. • Retailed Project Description: Scope of Worlc and Project Limits: Tire City of Chula Vista is proposin; to replace the existing Heritage Road Brt ,e (Bride No_ 57C-0670, which crosses the Otay ?fiver behveen Main Street and EnteRatnment Circle, connecting Eastern • Chula Visa and Otay Mesa midtivay between Interstate $OS and SR I25: (Contirine descriptt'an vu "Notes" (Page $J) Preliminary Design lnformatlon: Does the project involve any of the foliotivirt~? Please checl: the appropriate bas es and delineate an an attached map, plan, ar layout including any additional pertinent information. Yes 11o Yes Ho © ^ Ground disturbance ^X ^ Widen existing roadway yes Q © No ^ ^ Easements E ui ment sta~irt~ q P ^ ^ increase nturtber of through lanes Q ^ Raad cutlftll = © ^ Excavation: anticipated ib( Q ^ o access road7detaur Temp ~Y t © ^ Ne~v alignment PosS misvmttm de ih I5' p ~ ^ Utility relocation LX-] ^ Capacity increasin,--other © ^ ~g}tt aCway acquisition tee, channeli?atian} Q © ^ Drain ejcutverl5 tf es, attach map ~;dth APN} { Y ^X ^ Realignment Possibly ^ ~]C Ramp or street closure ^ Bridge vrnrfi Q ^ Vegetation removal ^X ^ Tree removal ~ ^ Flooding protection ^X ^ Stream channel tivar3t Possiblt• ^C ^ Pile driving © ^ Dertsolition ^ ^ DisposalJborro~v sites ^ Q Para oFlargeradjacentproject ^ Q Railroad Requirzd Rttacltrrtsnts: ~ ro Decd right of ~;•ay) Project location map ©Project Caotprint moo (ceistin~p p ~ Regional map ~ ^ Eneinecrine dr,rivines {eaistine and proposed crass sections). if availalite [] Borro«ldtspnsal site )acatinn map, ii' applicable (Nate: a!! maps (e.:rspt project laccrtivn map rn:d regional maps) slrauld Le caruusent tridr tLe prajecr drscripriorr {mintrmrra sole: t ° = IOP'):) ^ Nntrs to support the cnnclrtsinns oC this checLlist/prajcet description cnntinualinn gage {auaehed} Paae 6-1 t`lovernber 24, :007 LPP 07-06 10-102 Ezltihit a-A ;:oraI Assistance Prflcedurzs Manual Preliminary Environmental Studirs (PIvS} Farm Examine the project for potential effects on the environment, dirett ar indirect and answer the folla~ving questions. •Fhe uconstruction area," as specified beIosv, includes aII areas of grotutd disturbance ascot-sa ted with the project, including stab nQ and stocl:giIing areas and temporary access roads.. Each atts'sver mast be briefly doctttnented on the "Nfltes" pages at the end of the PE5 Form. A. Potential Environmental f=frects Yes Ta 8e No Determined General I, kril the project require suture construction to fully uu'Iize the design capabilities included in the ^ © ^ proposed grojcat? ? Will the project pencratc public controversy? ^ Q ^ I`lolse 3_ is the project a T}•pc I project as defined in 33 CFR 17'~{h): `construclinn an nciv location ar the ^ ^X ^ physical altcmiion of an c~isting hieh~vay, nhich sieniticantiy changes c'sther tttc horizontal or vertical alignment or Increases the nurnbcr of throunlt-trt!'iie lancs° ? ~, Docs the project have the potential for adverse construclian-related Hoist impact © ^ ^ (such as related to pile driving)? Air Quality S_ Is the project in aN,~QS non-attainment or naintcaancc area? ® ^ ^ b. is the project cacmpt from the requircmcnts to detct7rtinc project Icvc] conformity? (If Yes, state ^ ^ ~ehicls conformity escmption in Table 3 applies):- 7. Is the project c~emgt from the rcquiremt:nts to dctenninc rcgiona3 confarmiq'? {ffYes, state ~thich ^ ^x ^ conformity cvemption in Table 3 applies): _ ' 8, If project is not exempt from regional conformity, (If "No' an Question ~7}, is the project in a ^ ~ ^ currently conforming Reeiaaal Transgoriation"Plan {I2TP} and Transportation Imoravcment Program (T1P} (tivitlr na su6srv+~tia1 c/tvnges i:: the deri~r~ cnncepr acrd scope as used rn the TIP}, or is projcci in an,'isalated rural' Han-anainment area (non-attainment area ~viti7 no A4P0 ~vitltin the non- attainment arcaboundaries)? Hazardous lVlatsrialslHazardous Waste 9. Is there potential for hazardous materials (including undcrcround ar ahovc;round tanks, etc) and/or ^ fl ^ hazardous ~tastc (includine oilhvatcr separators, cvastc oil, asbestos-containing material lead-bawd paint. ADL arc.) nithin or immediate[}• adjacent to the constrvction area? Water QualitylResources 10. Does the grojeci have tlzc potential to impact water resourcrs {rivers, strums. bays, inlets. Iakcs.' . ® ^ - ^ draina_c slouchs) within or imrncdiatcly adjacent to the project area? l 1. Is the project titi~ithia a dcsignatcd sole-source aquili:r? ^ ^ coastal zone 1? [s the project within the State Coastal Zone San Fsartcisco Bay, or Suisun A4ar5h? ^ ^ Floodglain I3. is the construction area located ~sithin a rceulatory floadu•a}• or within the base floadplain {tOt}-}•car) © ^ ^ c}cvation of a ~iatcrcaursc ar lafie? . Wild and 5cenia Rivers i d, !s the project ~ti•ithin or irtmcdialcl}• adjacent to a Wild and Scenic fCivcr S}•slcm? ^ ^ (~ Biological Resources I ~_ Is tttcre a patcntial for federally listed tEa•catcncd or endanecrcd sp~ries, or (heir critical hahita[ to © ^ ^ occur within or adjacent to the eogsttvction urea? I G. Does the project have the potential io d'sccll}• or indirettly affecE migrstssr}• birds, or their ncsu or ~ ^ Q ^ eggs {such as vc_ciation removal, bas cuIvcri rcplacement/rapair, brid_c ~varf;. etc.)? 17, Is t€terc a poicntial for wetlands to occur tviEhin or adjacent to the construction area? © ^ ^ Page 6-2 ?`love; tber 24, 30tJ7 LFP tI7-Q6 10-103 Local Assistance Procedures Manua[ Exhibit fi-A Preliminary Environrnenia[ Studies (PES} Farm 18. is there a potential for aEricultural tveilands to occur tiri[hin nr adjacent to the coastruction area? ^ ^ 19. is there a potential for the introduction or spread oCinvasivc plant species? ^ ^ ~ Secfions 4(f} and 5(f} Are there any historic sites or publicly owned public pad's, recroation areas, wildlife or ttaterfosvl ?{1 Q ^ ^ . refaces (Section ~jtj} ~vithtn or immediately adjacent to the canstntctian area? 3l. Does the project hat a the potential to alTcet properties acquired ar improved with Land and lValer ^ ® ^ Conservation Fund Act (Section bjl7} funds? Visual Resources ^ ® ~ ~? Docs the project Isave the potential to afiecl any visual or scenic resources? Relocation impacts ^ © ~ ?3, l~'iIl the project require the relocation of rrsidentia] or business properties? Land Use, Cosnmtlrtity, and Fartniand impacts 29. ~irill the project require any right aC ~vay, including partial or fait takes? Consider construction ® ^ ^ cascmcats and utility rclocatintts ^ ^ IS 111C projCU inCOnSiSECnt tt•it11 plans and eaais adopted by Utc community? ?] . Does the project have the potential to divide or disrupt nciehhorhaodskommunitics? 3b ^ Q ^ . 37. Does the project have the potential to dispropari[onatcly aliect lon•-income and miaorit}• ^ ^ populations? ' Q ^ ^ scs? 3$. trill the project require the relocation of public utilit ^ ^ 39. WiII the project affect access to propertirs oc raad.says? © 3p. 1~ III file project involve chances in access control to the 51atc 1-li~h«my System (Si-1S}? ^ ® Q 3 i. 1Vll the project itn~olvc the use of a Ecmporar}• road. dctaur, or ramp closure? ^ Q 3? 't~fill the project reduce available parl.-ing? ^ ^ ^ 33. 1~'il[ Lhe project construcdnn encroach on state or fcdersI tands? ^ 3:i. 1~'ill the project convert any farmland to a dilTrscnt use ar impact any farmlands? CultttraI Resources l i ^ Q ^ ca Is thercNatianal lzceisicr listed, or potcntiall}• eligible hissoric prapcrtics, or nrchacnlag 35 . resaurcrs nithin or immediately adjacent to the construction arcs? (11'ate: Caltrarts PQ5 armrers quertian X33 J ^ ^ Q 36. Is the project adjacent to. or nauld it cncraach on Tribal land? Page b-3 November 20, 2Q~7 LPP a7-o6 3 1 0-104 Ezhihit 6-A Laval Assistance Procedurrs Manual Freliminnry Environmental Studits {PES} Farm For Sections B, C, and D, check appropriate boa to Indicate required technical studies, caordinatian, permits, or approvals. 13. Required Technical Studies and Analyses C. Coardinafion D. Ant'scipatt:d ActionstPermitstApprovals ~ Traffic Check one: © Tsafiic Study Q Caltrans ® Approval ^ Tcclmicai Memorandum ~ ^ Caltrans ^ Approval ^ Discussion in ED only ^ Cal[rans ^ Approval Q Noise Check as aFplicabfc ^x Traffc Rclatcd (X~ Construction Related Check nne: © Noise Studp Report Q Cattrans ^X Approval ^ Technical Mcmorsndum ^ Cattsans ^ Approval ^ Discussion in ED only ^ Caltsans ^ Approval © Air Quality , Check as oppfica6le: ~ Traffic Related ® Consttuction Rclatcd Check one: ~cj Afr Qnaliq• Report ® Cattrans ® Approval ^ Technical Memarstdam ^ Caltr~st5 ^ ApprovaI ^ Discussion in ED only ^ Caitrtns ^ APprovnl ^ Fl-I1VA ^ Coni'or~niq' Fistdine (6d0~ CEs, £As. EISs) ^ Caltrans ^ Conformity F'indine (GOOA Cfis) ^ Regional Agenc}• ^ P1ti410/PM?S Interagency Consultation ~ Hazardous iVlat~rialsl Hazardous Waste Check trs applicable: ® initial Site Assessment X^ Cafuans ® Approval (Phase t) ` ^ Prclim'snary Site Assessment ^ Cafttasu ^ Approval (Phase 2) ^ Discussion an F.D only ^ Caluans ^ Apptaval ^ Cal EPA DTSC ^ Review Datnbase ^ Local A~cnc}• ^ Rcvicw Database ® Water Quality/Resources Cheek ar applicable: ^X Water QuaIit}• Assess. Report Q Caltrans ^ Approval ^ Technical A4emorsndum ^ Caltrans ^ ApprovaI Q Discussion in ED ant}• ^ Caltrans ^ Approval ^ SofeSource Aquifer {Districts S, 6 anti 11) ^ EPA (S.F. Rc~ional C7fiicc} ^ Approval afAnalysis in ED ^ Coastal Zone ~ ^ CCC ~ ^ Coastal Zanc Consistency Determination Page ti-d November ?0, 2007 LPP 07-06 10-105 Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 6-A Preliminary Environmental Studies {PES) Ft?rtn B. Required Technical Studies G. GoordinaEion D. Anticipated ActionslPermitslApprovals and Analyses © Floodplain Cftecl; ¢s applicable: ® Locauan Hydrauii': Study ® Caitratts [Xj Approval © Floodplain Evaluation Report ~ ® Cnltrans © Approval ^ 5u~nmarp Floodplain ^ Caltrans ^ Approval Encroachment Regan. ~ ' ~ F' dine ^ Caltrans ^ FHR{A ^ Wiis3 and Scenic Rivers ^ River t`lanaeine Acency ® Biological Resources C13ecf. as appffcablc © NES. t`4inimal Impact [~ Caltrans ^ NL• S © BAl[3E © Caltrans ® USF~VS ^ N4AA Fisheries ^ LFH Hvaluation ^ NOAA F'uhcrics ^ Bio-Acoustic Evaluation ^ NOAA Fisheries ^ 7eclrnicat Mcmorandtun ^ Caltrat:s © Wetlands Cltecfi ar ¢pplfcabfe: ^X 1VD and Assessment © Caltrans ® ACt}£ ^ NRCS ^ Calttatts ^ Invasive Plants ^ Discussion in ED oni}• ~ ^ Calttans Szetion 4{ij Cf+eck rrs applicable: CaitrS4rS ^ do Minimis ^ Caltrstrs [] Programmntic d(1} L-valuation ^ Caltrans Type: ^ D ^ ^ '~Indi~ ideal ~i(1} Evaluation ~ Cailrans -' ^ Aecncy ~~ndr 3unsdteuon ^ SHPO ^ DOl ^ HtfD ^ usDA ^ Ont}• Prncucabtc Altcrnautc to _ Ay~E:roves si~rit'icant una¢achmcnts and concurs in pnl}' Pmclicablc Altcmatitre rndins ^ {V ild and Scenic Rivers Detcrminatian © Approves for Consultation ® Section Z InformaUFarmat Consultation h4SA Consultation ^ Approvnl ^ Approv¢t [X] Approval © Wetland Verification ^ AericuIturai 1Veiland \fcrificatian ^ ~vcdands Only Practicable Alternative Pindin_ ^ Determine' ^ do M'snimis ^ Approval Approval ____.~- Page 6-3] 1'It}vetnber Z6, ZOIl7 LPP 07-OS 5 10-106 F.shibit b-A Local Assistance Procedures Manual Preliminary En~•ironmental Studies (P1;5) Form B. Required Technical Studies and Analyses C.' Goordination D. Anticipated Ac6onslPermitsfApprovais ^ Section 6{fj ^ Agcacy with Jurisdiction ^ NP5 ^ Dctrsmsncs Consistency «•ith Long-'fcrm Manaccmcnl Plant ^ NPS ^ Approves Com•ersion ® Visual Resources Check ogre: ® VisvailmpaclAssessmenE ^X Caitrans ® Approval ^ Tcchn'scal Memorandum ^ Caitrans ~ ^ Approve! ^ Discussion in ED only ^ Caitrans ^ Approval ® Relocation Impacts Gccrk olre: © Rclocatinn Impact A•iemo [ Caltrans Q Approvat ^ ltciocation impact Study ^ Caltrans ^ APProval ^ Rclocadan impact Report ^ Caltrarts ^ Approval ^ Land Use and Cotstmunity Impacts Check aBC: ^ CIA ^ Caltrans ^ APProval ^ Technical Metstarandurn ^ Caltrans ~ ^ Approval _ ^ Discussion in ED only I ^ Caltr.~ns ~ ^ Approval ^ ConstructionlEncroachment on State Lands Check as applicable: ^ SLC Jurisdiction ^ SLC ^ SLC Lcasc ^ Calrians Jurisdiction ^ Cailrsrts ^ Encroachment Permit ^ 5P Jurisdiction ^ $P ~ ^ Encroachment Permit ^ ConstrttctionlEncroachment on Federal Lands ^ Federal Aeenc}• t~tith ^ Er;croa~hmcnt Permit Iurisdiction ^ Construction/Encroachment ^ Bureau of Indian ATfairs ^ night ot'Vtlay PcnniE On Indian Tntst Lands ^ Farmlands cll~rk oll~: ^ Cla ^ Caitrans ^ Approval ^ Tccitniea! A4crnarandum ^ Caltrans ^ Approval ^ Discussion in ED only ^ Caltrans ^ Approval C1tecIL• es appiicIIblc ^ Form AJa 1 t)t1b ^ NRCS ^ APPrvvcs Convcr;ion ^ CDOC ^ Approves Conversion ^ Cnnvcrsion to Non-A,ri Usc ^ ACOE Novem'vcr 2~, 2tltJ7 LPP ti7-ttG -~~7 Luca! Assistance Procedures lYlanual Exhibit 6-A Preliminary Environtnentai Studies (PES) Fortn B. Requirzd Technical Studies G. Goardination Q. Anticipated ActionslPt:nnitst and Analyses Approvals © Cultural Resources t;PQS completes this section) Check as ¢pplicairle: ® Caltrans PQS ^ Screened Undcaakine ^X APE Map _ © Caltrans PQ5 and DLAE ® APProves APE Map ^ I3PSR ^ ASR ^ H1tER ^ Finding of Effect Itcpon MaA Permits Copies of permits and a list of L-nviranmcntal eommitments arc mandatary suhmiEtals following NEPA appravaE. ^ Lotal Preservation Groups andlar Native American Trihcs ^ Catuatrs ^ Cattrssts ^ SHPt3 ^ CaIL-ans ^ SHPO (1 ACHP( ^ Provides Comments Rceardm: Concerns n•ith Projccl ^ Approves for Consultation ^ Concurs on No Effect, Na Adverse Effect with Standard Conditions ^ Lcncr of Concttrrencc an Elieibilit~•, No Adverse Ei'fccE ~vilhovt Standard ^ Apptavcs M0A ^ Approves MOA ^ .Approves MOA ® ACO£ ~^ Section ~1D~ Natiom+•idc Permit ^ ACOE ^ Scction~t04Individual Pcsmit ^ CaltranslACO£IEFA Q NEPA14Qd [nte=ration MQU ^ (~sF~vs ^ NOAA Fisheries ^ ACOE ^ Section iQ Permit Q USCG ^ USCG Bridge Permit ^ R~irQCl3 ^ Section X301 t1'atcr Quality Certification ^X CDFG ^ Strcam6cd Altctatian Aercemcm ^ Rti1rQCB ^ NPDES Permit ^ ^ CCC Local Aecncy ^ Coastal Zanc Permit ^ RCI}C ^ HCDC Permit Page fi-35 November 24, 2D47 LPP 07-46 ,~ 10-108 Eihibit d-A Local Assistance procedures Manual preiitninary Environmenta€ Studies (PES) Forth Notrs CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1: The approximately 7~-foot-wide by possibly TO' long bridge will probably be built with an easterly shift in the roadtt~ay alignment and construction may be staged. Class nvo bicycle lanes and a sidewall: are also included as part of the proposed project. The nett' bridge will most likely be longer than the existing in order to span a larger flood~•ay. The bridge may need to be constructed in a different location, further to the east or to the west Temporary construcdan access easements tvt1l most likely be required for the bridge construction and some permanent right-of--way (ROVJ} may be required, depending upon the size and final location of the bridge, purpose and Need: To replace the Heritage Road fridge to meet the Federal Highway Bridge Program (H13P) ;uide€ines and accommodate the futtue traffic of the region. This bridge tv'rIl connect the eastern portions of Chula Vista and the County with the Otay Mesa Community of San Diego. The Circulation Element of the City ofChula Vista's General Pian currently shows the ultimate Heritage Road to be a six- lane major arterial. Future traffic analyses indicate that afour--lane roadway will be sufncient Heritage Road south of the bridge is described as a four-lane major roadway €n the Otay Mesa Community Plan. Additionally this segment of Heritage Road also connects with the State Route 905, currently itrider construction. ' In addition, the hydraulic perfortrtance of the bridge is a critical factor as the bridge and approaching roadway would be overtopped during a 3 Q ~~eas flood event. The existing interim wooden deck bridge also does not have any bike Lanes or sidewalk to accommodate pedestrian traffic, To accommodate these various requirements the bridge may need to be constructed in a different location up stream to the east. ACt3P = Advisoq• Cauneii on Historic Presenatian HR.ER = Historical Resources Evalvalion Repari ADL = Aerially Deposited Lcad HUD = U.S. Housing and Urban Devciopmcnt APE = Area of Potcntiai Eficct A•IOA = Memorandum of Agreement APN = Assrssar Parcel Number MSA = Magnuson-Stcecns 1=tshcry Conscnation and ASR - Archacoiogical Survey Report Management Act BA = Bioloc'scal Assessment NEPA = National Environmental Policy Act BCDC = Bay Conservation and Dcvclopmcrrt Commission DIES = Natural Enviranmcnt Study BE = Biologics! £valualian NOAA = National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration BO = Bialaeicai Opinion Fishcrirs National P9arinc Fisheries Scrvicc Cal EPA = California EnviranmcntaE Protection Agency NPDES = National Pollutant Dischasec Elimination S}•stem CCC = California Constar Commission NPS = National Pant Service CDFG = California Department of Fish and Gamc MRCS = Natural Resources Conservation Service CBOC = California Degactmcni of Conservation Plvt lt} _ :Particulate Matter 1014ticrons in Diameter or Less CE = Categorical E.~clusion Ptv1Z.5 = Particulate Ivtatter ? ~ Microns in Diameter or Less CIA = Community Impact Assessment PQ5 = Professionally Qualified Staff C\VA = Clean 1~'atcr Act RTIP = Rceional Trsrtspanatian impravcmcnt Program DLAE = District Loca{ Assistance Engineer RTP = Reional Tnutsportation Plan DO€ = U.S. Dcparimcnt of Interior RYJQCB = Regional Y,ratcr Quality Control Board DISC = Department afToaic Substances Contras SER = Standard Environmental Rcferencc EA = Environmental Assessment SHPO = State Historic Preservation Officer ED = Environmcntnl Dacumcnt SLC = State Land Commission EFH = Essential FLsh 1•Iabitat ~ SP = Stale Parts EIS = Em•ironmcntal Impact Statement ACOE = U.S. Army Corps of Engineers EPA = U.S. Enviranmcntai Ptotcc!'son Agency USCG = U.S. Coast Guard rEMA = Federal Emeraene}• Management Agency U5I}A = U.S. Department of Agriculture FI•i1YA = Fcdcral I-iiglt«•ap Administration USF1V5 = U:S. Fish and ~Vi{dlifc Scn•icc HPSR = Historic Propcrt}• Survey Rcpart l~'D = ~Vctland Dclincation November 24, ZQ07 LPP 07-Ob 10-109 Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 5-A Freiitninary Environmental 5tndics (PES} Form E, Preliminary Environmental ©ocument Ciassiiicatlon (NEPA) Sasecl on the evaluation of the project, the environmental document to hz developed should be: Check one: ^ Environmental Impact Statement (A`ote: F.•irgagesrent tirit/t partrripAttrrg o~nties in accordance ~ritk S~FETEi-Ltf Section 6003 required) ^ Compliance with SA.FETEA-LU Section bOfl2 regarding Participating Agencies required ^ Complex Environmental Assessment © Routinz Environmental Assessment ^ Cate~arical Eaciusian, ~~•ithout required technical studies (ifsrlecrerl, cGrck one afflejollais~irrgJ: ^ Section bflfl4 ^ 23 CFR 771 activity {c)L__ ^ 3S CFR 771 activity (d}~_} . ^ Activity listed in the Section 6flRA MDU ^ Section 6aQ5 F. Public Availability and Public Hearing Cltecl; as applicable: ^ Not Required © Notice of Availability of Environmental Document ^ Public Meeting ^ Notice of Opportunity for a Public Hearing ^ Public Hearing Required G. Signatures Locat Agency Staff artdlor Consultant Signature / j (Signature of PreparcrJ (Date] elcp{~onc Aa.J- ~tlir-~n.t~r.! ~~~cP-R~tt.~ Ct/N~tt~onji.~~nf°rr~L~ Local Agency Project Engineer Signature This document ivas prepared under my supervision, in accordance With the Locat ~lsrisrmrca Procedures tilanual, Exhibit b-5,;: htsguctions for Compledn3 the Preliminary Environmental Study Farrtt:' {Dare) (ietcpltartc A`o.1 ~vyf fivts 4~r~~` ~'-'~ I"~ Page 6-35 November 3t), 2(lt}7 LFP Q7-Q6 9 10-1i0 Exhibit fr-A local Assistance Procedures Manual Preliminary Environmental Studies (PES} Form Ca{trans District Professionally Qualified Staff (PQS) Signature ^ Praject does not meet definition of an "vndertalan~'; no Cnrther review is necessary under Section 106 ("No" Section A, X35). ^ Praject is limited to the type of activity listed in Attachment 3 of the Section I Ofi PA and based on the information nravided in the PES Form, the project does net have the potential ifl affect historic properties ("No" Section A, X35). ^ Praject is limited to the type of activity listed in Attachment 3 of the Section 106 PA, but the follotivin~ additional procedures or information is needed to determine the potentQ for effect ("To Be Determined' Section A, r35): ^ Records Search ^ ^ Praject meets the definition of an "nnderiaking°; aIt properties in the project area are exempt Tram evaluation per Attachment 4 of the Section 106 PA ("No" Section A, n35). ^ The proposed undertaI:in~ is considered to have the potential to affect historic properties; further studies for I06 compliance are indicated in Sections B, C, and D of this PE5 Farm (°Yes" Section A, X35). {Sig:r¢trrrr nJ'ProJcssi¢rr¢!!v Oua{fed StaJJ) {Dolt) (!'elcpkmrc Ar°•1 The foltof;~ing signatures are required Lor all Cl:s, routine and eosnplex ]rAs, and EISs: Coltrane District Senior Environmental PIanner (or Designee) and DLAE Signatures I have reviewed this Preliminary Environmental Study (PfiS) form and determined that the submittal is complete and sv~cient. l cantor ~viG`t the studies to be performed and the recommended NEPA Class of Action. (Slgnartrre afSeniar L•in~ironmcnt¢f Planner ar Dcsignce) {Date1 {I'clcphortc t~'a.) {A°orrm) (Sigrrmtux of Dlsrriu 4aeal.tssivancc ,Errginecr ar Desigrrec) {Dote) (Fclephane nrc.) ~rwnc) ^ I.1Q DEA Environmental Coordinator concurrence E-mail concurrence attached. tdate} November 20, 2407 1~ l.Pp a7 a~ 10-111 Lunt Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit t}-A Preliminary Envirortmerttat Studirs (PES} Fflrm Prelimiaary ~>SVironmental investigation Notes to Sapport the Cotzctusiores of the PES Form (May Also Include Continuation ofDetailed Project Description) Brief Lxglanaiion of Flow Project Complies, or Will Comply with Applicable Federal Mandate (Part A): 1. T3'ill tTre project reg:rire future corrstr-rtctiarr to fzrll}~ utilise fire desio capabilities irrclrrded irr the proposed project? To Be Determined. It is anticipated that at the time of the Heritage Bridge construction, road construction to the north ~vili have been eomple€ed. l3'ill tTre project generate public coturoilers}r? To Be Determined. While it is not possible to make a" definitive conclusion at this stave of the project, the project may generate public controversy. 3. Is the project a Tjpe 1 project as defined. in 33 CFR 77? 5(Ir); "corrstr:rctiorr err a neu• location or the physical alteration of err etistirrg highs=a}~ ~rliiclr sigrr~carrtly changes either the hor%orrtal or e~rfical aligrnrrerrt or increases the r:unrber• of througl:-traffic lanes. "? To Be Determined. Based on the Federal HiGlttivay Administration (FHWA) interpretation of 33 CFR 772.3(h}, a Type 1 project is any project that has potential to Increase noise levels at adjacent receivers. Such a project would specifically create a new noise source, or increase the volume or speed of traffic or move the traffic closer to the receiver. These project features have yet to Ise determined. ~. Does the project ha:=e the poterrtia! for adrerse carutrrrction-related noise irrrpoct (szrrlr as related to pile drip=irrg}? Yes. Based on the project proposal, it is very probable that associated construction related noise tivould occur. • ~. IS the prOjeCt lr1 a N.~IOS77orr-rztfalr7lrrerrt Or RJQllrterrar7Ce area? Yes. The County of San Diego is in non- attainment for ozone 6. Is the project exempt from the requirements io• deter•nrine project lei=e! cor~ornrit}=? (If 1`es, state tr~lricJr carrforrrriry exemption irr Table ?applies. No. i. Is the project exetrrpt frorrr the regzrirertrerrts to determine regional cos fornrit}>? (If }`es, stale ~s•lrich COr far•Trrit}r etierrrptiorr irr Table 3 applies} To $e Determined. Further analysis would determine if the project vvouid be exempt from the requirement to determine conformity. $. If project is rrat exempt Jrranr regional confor'rrrftY• (If "No" ors Orrestiort ~7), is the project in crtrr•ently cot farming Regional Transpor•t6tiorr Plan (R3'P) acrd Transportation In:prol=errrent Pragr•arrr (T7P) (~rit1J rro substantial char:oes in the design concept arrd scope as used irr the TIP), or is project its err, "isolated rural " r7on-attaintrrerrt area (rtorr-atrainnrerrt area ~r~ith rro 11'4 tis=itlrirr the Harr-attainvrerrt area boundar•iesJ? To Be Determined. Confirmation of the project to be included in the RTP or RTIP ~vilI need to be included in bath in order to ensure conformity z~ith the federal Clean Air Act. 9. Is tfrere a potential for Troaardous materials (irrchrdirrg urrder;gr•ound or abot=ea •orrnd tanks, etc,) arrd/ar Irct=ardozrs tiraste (irrchrding oilhrrater sepm•ators, ~+•aste oil, asbestos containing rrraterial, lead-based paint. ~iDL, etc.J zr=itlrirr or irrrrrrediatel}+ adjacent to the canstr•rrctiorr area? To Be Deter•ruined. An Jnitiat Site Assessment pursuant to the methods and Guidelines of the California State Department of Transportation will be prepared for the prajecE. LPP 47-06 11 1-age o-3~ November 2Q, ZQQ7 10-112 Exhibit b-A Local Assistance Procedures Manual Preliminary gnvironmenta[ Studies (PES) Form 10. Does the project hm=e the potential to inrpaet ti=aier• resources (rii=ers, str•eavrs, bays, inlets, lanes, dl•aitrage sloz+glrsJ a=rthin or inunediately adjacer2[ tD the project area? Yes. The Heritage Bridge. crosses the ]otver Otay River Valley, which originates in the hills and mountains of southwestern San Diego County. The Otay Lakes Reservoirs are located upstream. II. Is project a=itltirr a desio afed SOIe-SOItI'Ce aclItifer'? No. The project is not located in ar near one of the three sites in California that have Seen designated as sale-source aquifers. 13. Is project ~:=ithin the State Coastal 2orre, Sarr Frrnlcisca Ba}; or Suistul l~farsh? No. As outlined on the Regional Map, the project is not within the Coastal Zone, San Francisco Bay, or Suisan Marsh. 73. Is the constr•actiorr m-ea located ts=itltin a r•egltlatory floadit=ay or 3ritlrirr the base jloodplain (iD0 j~ern) elet=ation of a t~=atercolrrse or lab-e? Yes. A review of the.Flaod Insurance Rate N1ap far the project area, maintained by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, indicated that the proposed project site is located within, and therefore would encroach on a I00-year floadplain. Inf. Is the project ~vitlrin or irtunediately adjacent to a Ff'ild arrd Scenic Rit=er ~S}rstenr? No. The project is not within or immediately adjacent to a Wild and Scenic River. 1 ~. Is there a potential for a federally listed tflreaterred, ar endangered species, or• tlteir• critical habitat to occzrr is=itlrin or adjacent to the construction area? Yes. Previous surveys in the area surrounding the project have documented the presence of sensitive bird species. Biological studies conducted for the project will be supplemented by protocol surveys as may be required. 16. Does tTre project trot=e the potential to directly or indirectly affect nriQ •atory birds, ar their nests or ego (sziclr as vegetation rernoral, bos crrltrert replacement/repair-, bridge troth, etc.? To Be Determined. Further analysis ~i=ould determine if migratory birds, their nests, or eggs are located within the project area. 1 ?. Is there a potential for- iretlmrds to occur tiritlrin or adjacent to the corrstr•uctiorr area? Ycs. A consultation of National Wetland Inventory maps indicates that wetlands have the potential to be present within the construction area. Therefore, further study wilt be conducted to delineate the boundar}= of the.vet]ands based on the Army Corps of Engineers three-parameter definition, and to quantify the project related irrigacts an the wetland. In addition, a consultation will $e required uritlt FI-IWA, Environmental Protection Agency, and the Army Corps of Engineers to verify the presence of jurisdictional wetlands. 18. Is tlrer•e a potential far agr•icultrn•al tttetlands to occur tritlrir: or adjacent to the eoncv•uctiorr area? No. The majority of the proposed project would be constructed tivithin nevi=ly established right-of-~vay. There are no a~iculttlral wetlands in the vicinity of the proposed project site. 19. Is there a potential for tlae introduction ar spread of irn=asit=e species? No, The project tvauld not include landscaping that would introduce or spread invasive species. 34. ire there arty historic sites orpttblicl}t oi~~ned p2rblic parks, t•eer•eatian areas, t~lildlife or tc=aterfotirl refuges (Section ~[fJ) ti~ithin or irnn:ediately adjacent to the carrsA•nction area? Yes. Natural vegetation is located along the Otay River Valley and is managed by the County of San Diego, the City of San Diego and the City oFChula Vista as an open space recreational area. l~to}ember 2U, 2007 I2 LPP 07-OG 10-113 Loral Assistance Pracedssres Manual Exhibit 6-A Preliminary EnviranmentaISfudies (PE5) Farm ?l. Does ttre project Irai=e the potential fo affect properties acquired or inrprot=ed ts=ith Land arsd N'ater• Copse»=anon Fund pct {Sectiotr 6jfJ) funds? To Be Determined. Further analysis would detes7ttine if the project has the potential to affect properties acquired or improved wit[t Land and Water Conservation Fund Act monies. ?3. Does the project Kati=e the potential to affect an}j t'iszial or scenic resatsrces? To Be DeterrrtiAed. There arc no federal, states, or local recognized scenic attributes located adjacent to the project site. In addition, the construction of the proposed project would not include large cut or fill areas, os large structures that would adversely impact the existing views, and the project is not anticipated to produce Iiglti, glare, or shadows. However, the preparation of a Visual Impact Study pursuant to Federal Higlnvay Administration guidelines will be proposed in order to appropriately evaluate potential visual Impacts. 33. 13111 the pl'Ojecf TEgt(Ire the r'e1QLatta)7 Df l'eSidenllal or• business properties? To Be Determined. At this time iE is not anticipated that the project will require the relocation of residential or business properties. However, the final bridge site location will determine if residentia! or business properties will be affected. ?~+, i3fill 11re project reguir•e any right-of-is'a}+, trrcl~rdrng partial or full fakes? Consider colsstrtrction easements Gn7d utllil}= relocations. Yes. The project has the potential to require additional permanent right-of--way depending an the fnal location selecrion of the bridge. ?~. Is the project irJCOnsistent ~ritlr plans and goals adopted by the corrrnntnitt=? No. The project would be consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan and the Otay Mesa Comrrtunity Plan, 36. Does the project Irm=e tl~e potential to divide or disrupt neighborhoods/canrrrrmrrties? To $e Deterrrsined. The proposed bridge crossing would be designed to accommodate existing and future traffic and as such would not sen=e to directly or physically divide a community, particularly since the bridge would be crossing a river valley and not be located within an existing developed community. Construction activities could disrupt temporarily certain traffic movements but this has not been determined_ 37_ Does the project Ira:'e tine pate~ltial to dispropor•troJrately L7~C'Cf TOl!'-r11COrrle a!!d r11ilTar'tt}~ pnpltlafiOllS? No, The project would not disproportionately affect tow-income and minority populations. ?$_ Fi'ill the project rerprire lire relacatian of public utilities? Yes. There is the IikeIihood that public utilities would need to be relocated, The City of Chula Vista svould coordinate all wort: with the appropriate utilsty companies to minimiae any disruption of service. • ?9. Brill ille project affect access to prQper•ties or• roadu'a~+s? Yes. The proposed project has die potential to temporarily afFect access to properties, depending on the final bridge site selection. 30. kl'rill dre project involve changes in access control to the State I~glns'a~+ S}+ste!!! (SIBS)? No. 'The project will not involve changes in access control to the State Highway System. 31. Nril! the project im=vlz=e the trse of a ternporar~+ road, detaur• or ranrp closta•e? To $e Determined. The project may include the use of temporary construction access to surrounding roadways. 3?. F3rill the project reduce m=ailable par~~ng? No. The project does not anticipate the removal or reduction of any available parking. IsPP o7-05 13 Page b-35 Noti'esnher 24, ZOO7 10-114 I3zlzsbit 6-A Locat Assistance Procedures Manual Preliminary 1/nz•irontnental Studies (PESj Form 33. tf''tll the project consfr-uctian encraaclr an slate or federal lands? No. The project will not encroach on state or federal lands. 3~. ffi~ill the project conl~esl any fm~nrland to a d~ererrt :rse or• impact an~~ farnrlarrds? No. The proposed area of construction would not be located or impact prime ar unique farmlands per review of Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Prot am (FMMP} maps, lvhich indicated drat na prime or unique farmlands are located in the vicinity of the proposed project site. 3~. Is the~•e National Register listed, or potentially eligible historic properties, or archaeological resom•ces Il~ithin or immediately adjacent io the corlstructiotr area? (Note: Caltrar7s PQS answers Ouestian ~3~.) To Be Determined. A cuItut•al sun~ey ~vili be performed as part of the project approval process. The appropriate FHWA protocols will be followed if any cultural resources are identified «•ith the proposed project construction site. 36. Is the project adjacent to, or it=ould it encroach on Tribal land? No. There is no indication that the project will be adjacent to, nor would it encroach on Tribal Land. DISrItlBt.tTION: I) Original - DL,41; 3) Local Agency Projcci Manager, 3} DLA En~nronmcnta2 Coord'snator ~) 5cnior Enviroamcntat PEanncr {or desiencc), ~) District FQS Updotcd i IP_Q167 {J:\SurveytSTM3641PES~I•IeritageBlidgePFS AUCj?OI}9-E~X:P.doc} (0911 SP_OQ9 3•?5 PM) I~lovember 24, 2407 1~ LFP 47-06 10-115 DISTRICT I t AT"I'AC~IIVIEI~T I PRELIMINARY FRO.IECT COST ESTIMATE Alternate - 1 I ~ I I i I I II _ ~ HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE IMPR0I~EMENTS I I 6 LA1VE ALTERNATIVE #1 I 7 pe of Estimate : I PALED Level Estimate I Program Cade PrDJ2Ct LFTT31ts : i Main Street to En#ertainmen# Circle Description: I 6 Lane Bridge Replacement with approach roadways Scope : Replace existing inadequate interim bridge crossing t e Otay River with new bridge roachs between the a struct new roadwa t d i ti t f Attemative : pp y con ure an s ng s ruc east o ex brid a and Main Street to the north and Entertainmen# Circle to the south. I 1 I I I I i f I I I I 1 1 i t I I ~ 1 1 Current Cost } ~ I I I i I I I I ! II 1 ROADWAY ITEMS $ 7,122,510.04 STRUCTURE ITEMS ~ $ 17,251,000.00 ` SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION GOST I $ 18,373,540.00 i RIGHT OF WAY ~ ~ $ 250,000.00 TOTAL CAPITAL COST ~ $ 't8,624,000.0a I l I I PRtED SUPPORT I $ 1,000,000.00 PS&E SUPPORT I $ 800,0OO.OD , RIGHT OF WAY SUPPORT - ` CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT ~ $ 900,000.00 AGENCY SUPPORT ~ $ - TOTAL SUPPORT COST $ 2,7oa,DO0.o0 TOTAL PRO.lECT COST ~ $ 2't,324,0a0.Q0 manth ~ I ear I Date (MonttT/Year) of Estimate I 121 !~ 2003 { ) ( Estimated Date (Monih/1'ear} of ConsWction l 1 51112095 + i ~ Number of Months of Escalation ) ~ 65 ~ I I I ~ i I I I I I I f ~ Number of Working Days I I 360 l I I I ~ I I 1 Estimated Pro'ect Schedule I I ~ I PJD AP rovai l N/A I I I I I PALED a ravat l os1o1/2011 I ( i 1 Plans, 5 ecificatiorts g Estimate I 01101!2012 t i I I ! 1 01/0112013 ~ ~ I I I Read To Lrst , 06/01!2013 1 E 1 I EE I ~ f ~ ~ ~ f f I ~ } I I I ! i I I Approved by Ptnject Manager ~ y I 619-475-2301 t 1 Project Manager 1 I Bad I Phane ~ 1 ~ I I ~ J I 1 1 1 { I :~crlation rota uxd i on tlia o-anw:o for I I ' 1 f S I I I I I I I I ( ^c.~i~listl LfDcr".-cmJfrr.~hL-~! 9 OT 1Q erg norsy,:a.~~LC. 10-116 DISTRICT I i A.rI`7~LA~HMEI°IT I PRII.IIvtIl~FARY PROJECT COST ESTIMATE Alternate - 1 -------~---~-~-------r , ~ I I I i ~ j ! I. ROADWAY ITEMS I I f I I I i ! I 1 1 1 1 I :Section I I I I I 'Cost I I I { I { NORTH SOUTH PHASE 1 I I I i t I I 1 { EarthvvorK { { $128,000 $770,500 $898,500 I i i I 2 I Structurat Section { 1~ { I $58,900 $399,800 $458,700 I I I I I 3 ( Drainage . { ; ( I { $99,000 $252,500 $351,500 { i I I I I I 4 { Speciatty items I { . I $1.1,400 $21,500 $32,900 I I I I i I l . 5 EC1Vtf"~tltT3etltal ~ ~ ~~ $368,800 $533 500 $902,300; --~ ----I._~.I_ _-~__..__. ___ ~ ! ( 5A Environments! Mitigation { ( { 5256,000 S2fi6,000 S522,000 I { 58 it_andscape and Irrigation ( { 5101,000 5251,500 5352,500; { 15C {.NPDES I { { 511,800 Si6,000 527,8001. i I f l i 6 Traffic items ; I f I $481,800 $972,100 $1,453,900': ~ .~_ _~-__._._~_I ~ i i ~ ; { ~ 6A IEfectrical { { 5405,000 5740,000 ~ 51,145,000; { 6B Signing and Striping { 51,000 56,300 57,300; I 16C ITraific Management Ptan 5800 5800 51,6001 j { { 6D {Traffic Control { { 575,000 5225,000 5300,000; I I I I I 7 Detours { I { $0' l I I I I I I 8 {Minor Items I i { I I $409,800 . $409,8001 I { I I I 9 {Roadway Mohitization ) ( ( I $450,800 $450,800: I I I 1 I 1 ! i 10 (Supplemental Work { I $247,900 $247,900: l l~ I I 1 1 11 State Furnished I I I $0 $Q1 f I I I I I I 12 IContin encies I I 1 ( ( X1041260 $1041260: 1 I I I I ! I I 13 (Overhead ~ ~-- -~----_ ~_._. ~.-.... $875,000 _ ._._ -_ _,__-~- -- $874,9501 -- ------ ~~~--_...---- L TOTAL ROA DWAY ITEMS $4,172,660 $2,949,900 $7,122,5101 I I I I I I I i i { I - I I ! I l l i I -- !Estimate Prepared By: I ! I I I I I I I ( I Name and Ttle I Oate I Phone I i i ~ I I f ~ I ~ '.Estimate Reviewed By : ~ I I I I Name and Title I Date I Phone I I 1 ( 1 1 I I I ! I n., ~t~+nina this estimate you are attesting that you have discussed vour proiect with ate functionai units and have incotyotated atl their comments or have discussed with them why they witl nat be incarparated. 10-117 D~TRt~ l l ATTACHM~loTT ~ PiiEiJb[IN~tRY PROJECT COST FSTt4t3TE Al[ernatc - I t f { 1 1 1 I 3 11 1 SECTION 1 EARTHWORK I I ~ I I I Total P hase 1 R j unr't Price North A roach South A_ roach (North & Soutttl u°meoda I ~ I unit I (5} I Quanti I Cost I ~ quanti I I Cost IOuan' I i Cast 190103 190103 Roadwa Excavation IAssume SrtO' ~ Roadwa,~Excavallon .LTYP?.~ ADt E2521-1261=1266 cy CY _ CY 25.00 x I 2,500 I x I I = = 562,500 ! 50 r x) 9,000 x I 1 =E 5225,000 I _i SDI x 111,500 I xx l 0 I =1 =1 5287,500 SO 590505 i94DD1 I 196001 Roadway Excavation~Txpe Z 2j ADL I DiichExcavation I Imported Borrow ~ CY CY CY ~ 30.00 x! ~ xl I x I 2.000 I = = = 50 SO 560AOD x J _ x{ x I 18~ODa ~ f 50 I I SDI 5540,000 I xl 0 I xl 0 z 120.400 ={ =I I = 1 SO ~50 5600,000 146007 ~ _ imported Material IShoulder Bacidng~ I ~ TDN x l I =1 50 x l ~ =1 SD J_ x l D I = I SD 192Q37 Siruaure Excavation Retaining Watq I CY x! I = ( SD x E I =I 50 ~ z I D I = I SO 193013 StnrclureBackfA(Retainin Wai i CY ~ xl 1 - = 1 SO "~~ xl I=1 SDI xl 0 ~ =1 S4 193031 {{ 766141 I PerviousBackt'dlMateriat(Retainin Wall Ctearin 8 Grubbin I CY LS 5,500.00 ~ x{ x 1 =I ~ SO y SS,SDD _.__.. xl~ x 1 ~ - -I SDI I 55,500 I ~ .u 0 xI x~ 2 _I 50 I 511,000 770101 Devela Water SL I _ LS x1 I = SD I x _ 50 I x 0 I ( 56 I I 1 1 i I I 1 1 II I I I I TOTAL EARTHWORK SECT{ON ITEMS I I 5128,aoa I j s~ ro,SDD i 5898,500 I I 1 I I i I I I I 11 I 1 i t 1 Section 2 S_T_ RUCTURAL SECT{ON I ~ I I ~ I I l Total Phase i~ I i roach North o South A roach North ~ South n°^1°°d° I ~ Und ce unit Pr (5) t I DUBntl I _ ~ Cost I _ l ii ~ Duan6 ~ i Cast I Quant' I Cost 401000 Concrete Pavement ! CY x I 1 - = I 50 z I I ~I SD x I 0= I 50 404092 _ Seal pavement Joins I LF x I I SD z I ! =1 SD x I 0 E = I SD 404094 I SealLostgitudnalisolatian3oint f LF _ .___ xl ~ I T = SD xl,;,~1 50 ~~ xl D~_=1 SDI at31i5 ~SealExisiin Concrete PavementJoint I LF zl 1 =1 SD zl =I SDI zl 0 I=1 50 401108 Re Ip ace Concrete Pavement (ttapd sverrcatn convcrol CY x I f = I SO z I = I SDI x I 0 I SO ~ 390102 Asehaft Concrete Type A){5') 3 TON 90.06 x! 3i5 1=1 528,3517 T xf 7,830 =I 5164.700 zl 2.145 =1 S193~050 )CXX7CCX 390126 393001 Stabilized Decomposed Granite I Rubberized Asphalt Concrete {fie G) } Pavement Reintoran Fabric I S.SS7ans7ry CY TON SQYD 40,00 M - x.l x I x I I 50 I =r I =1 50 = I 50 zl l =1 SO x~~ 1 = I SD x I _r1 ^SO xl D I =1 SO z I 0 = I ~ SO { z I D I = I ~~ SD 260201 290201 _ Ctass2Aygrec,~ateBase 10' I As toils Treated Permeahle Base I ._._. CY CY _ 80A0 xl 370 x f I=i 529,600 i = 50 xI 2,170 15173,600 x I { = I SD 1 I xl 2,54fl =!5203,2017 z ~ ~ = SO 250401 Ciass 4 Aggregate Subbase I CY x l I= SO z l =1 SD z 0 I= E 50 374002 347401~ Asphaltic Emulsion rwFag Seal Coat I ~ hallic Emulsion SPeint Binder) I TON TON _ - - x ; z { I = SD { = SD ; x I - I 50 x I T-~= I 50 I x I 0 I =1 SO x I D = I SD 377501 375DXX Is1U Seat i Screenings ~TyQe XX~ I TON TDN _____ xf x ; I =I SD I = I SD ~ _ xl =f SO x I I = { - SD ~ x{ 4 =1 SD x I D~ 50 I 374492 As~_ghatfia Emulsion Pol er ModifiedZ I TDN T x 1 SO I =1 Y x I I = I SD I x I 0 I = ( _50 ~ - 3650flt Sand Cover I TON x I _ i = SO `W x I SD ~ ~-~ ^ I ~ SD _z I 0_ ~_ ~ 731530 Minor Concrete exlured Pavin S1' 9~__-__ I 394001 I SgFT CY _ _ x I„i I z l SD =I j =1 50 { I =1 SD -x ~ x I ~~~~~~ 5 I x l D I = I 50 z I D Lj 50. I LF zl =1 SD ~ xl I=1 50 ~~- xI 0 1=1 SO I 150860 I Remove Base and Surtaanc,L-~~ { ~ CY _ t 2.OD _ x 1 I ' Sl7 { _ { SD z I x I l) I = I 50 390095 i532XX Re~tace Aspf7att Concrete Surfadn Remove Concrete (type} I CY _CY ~ x 1 x 1 ~ I - 50 50 x 1 _(= I SO x 1 I =1 SO I ~ x l D = I SO x I 0 I= I 511 394002 153103 Piece As alt Concrete (Misc. Area) I Cold Plane As hp alt Concrete Pavement l + -~-~ SgYD SQYD 10.00 x x l 55 SO I ° ( 5550 ) x l = I 50 x 1.500 =1 515,0017_ y -~ ~ x I D I = I SD x j 1,555 1=1 515,550 394050 i _ I I I SD - I ~ ~~ I x{ 0 I= I SD 4731 t2A ~ _ Re air Spoiled Joints (Pol,~esler GroatZ _ l, __.. S{]YD ~__ _~ ^~ _x { I =1 SO ~ x i =1 50 I x I fl I =1 SD 420102_ Groove Existing, Concrete Pavement _ ~~ 4 I SQYD _ z I i = SO ~ x I __ 1= I 50 I z1 0j _ I SO { 150768 150846 IRemove As hail Concrete Remove Concrete Pavement I I Sidewalk Curb & Gut SgFT CY 1.50 _ 11 x.00 x I 250 x I ~ 1 = I 5375 _~ 5D i x I 31 :000 I 546.506 z I~ I = I 5~ ~ z 131.250 i 546,875 x I 0 W~ I 50 I I t E I I I I I I I I I I I TOTAL STRUCTURAL SECTIQN ITEMS ~ 558,900 ~ 5394,800 5458,700 I I I I I { I I i 1 1 I I x,, «-, ._r.,,:n l.rr-v;,-ro~,~-~~~0-.,1 3of 70 10-1i8 PREtihl4N?.RY D`~~ t' ATTACJ[3M~NT I FRO}ECTCQST FSTL4L4TE Alternate - i SECTi0N 3 DRAINAGE I f i I I I 1 I I I T_ota! Phase 1 I ~ Unit Price North A roach South A_ roach Nort h & 5 outh rtcm coac ! ! f unA (S1 1 Quanti I I Cost I Quant} I _ } Cost I _ ! ouanG I I __ Cost I 553213 (Remove Cancre~siructure ~ I LS 5,600A0 z 1 I = LSS,D00 I x I =I 50 I -I SD x! 1 I = l 0 I = SS~D00 I 5 ~ 150806 Remove Pipe (42"CMPA _W,_ I LF 25.00 xj I = 50 x x „_, 0 150821 JRemove Headwall _ _ 116' headvra!I t50227 (Abandon 36"x22' CMPA ~__,__,_-_~-2.28 cy conc EA LF 5,000.00 20.00 x I !, x I I +,I = 50 I ~ SO ( ~ x x { SD I 50 i x I 0 I = x! 0 (= 50 ! SO I ~ 152430 (Adjust Intel I _ 122 Ib steel ' LF x! __I _ _= ' ~_ SD I I - x =1 SO I -I 50 ! xl D I = ! D = SD I 50 I C.D. f55003 !Cap Inlet 14'x4 t EA Y 560 00~ t xl I x~ I = SO 50 I^ x z ~~ SO =1 x 1 xl D f = SO e~Mirwr Structure} ~ ! 257 510502 Itv_finorConcre C . 1 ~ -~-~~ ~, -- 510512-I Minor Concrete (Box Culvert I 800 tb steel CY x I ~ I x W 50 h x ~ ~ 50 I x I D I = SO I _ 62XXXX I XXx' APC Pipe _..~ I manhole " LF F ~ x I ! I - = SD ! 50 ! x! z ~I f SO ! I SDI x { 0 I = x l 0 ! = 50 I 50 I Plastic t?ipe _____ ! 864 !b_steel 54XXXX': XXX fiSXXXX 130" RCP Pipe ~__~_._..~ L LF _ 150.00 x x{ 180 I = _ 527,000 I x ~ 100~~~ =1 515,000 I xl 280 I = S42,000 1I ~~ I _._. 6G»CXX I XXX" CSP Pipe ~.. ~ ~ SD.OD . xl i =1 SD ! ~ x ._ ( ~ SD = zl D I = SO I _ saXxXX I Edge Drain ! ~ LF z l I = L, Sa I x ~ f SD { x ! I = .,,`~50 I , 64)Ct)CX (XXX" PiPi e~_Downdrain dvralk T XXX)QC)C I Hea LF EA 10,000.00 x I ( x I_ _i r - I= SO I 510,000 x x _ _ t I = I SO ! ° 1510,000 x f 0 1.= x I 2 I= ~ _ 50 520,000 I _ _ 70XXXX l XXX' Pi a Riser j, _____.. LF z! _ I = 50 1 ~ x ___?I ~ CI SD ~ x I 0 I = SO I 70XXXX ! XXX" Flared End Section I FJ+ x I _ '~ ~ I = SO I x N- _I ~ SDI = ( x! 0 ! = ~ SO i ~ 703233 !Grated Line Drain LF _ x I M I = 50 I z _ ~ -~ = I SO x ( 0 ! _ SO I t.~__,_,,, nrot:rtrowyernaecrvrrrr•yp~ e !,-,_„_„___,_„_ 72XXXX!~ M~, ~ EA 10,000.00 4 x! I= 540,0001 x 14 =(5140,0001 zl 18 1= 5180,0001 , ,,,,, „ ~Protection Fabric I 724010 (Rock Slo e SQY_D ~ x! I = 50 I x =! SO xf 0 I = 50 I_ _T 721420 !Concrete {pitch LiningL ! CY x! I = 50 I z =! 50 x! I 0 !_ _...._- 721430 !Concrete (Channe. I Unin~}j I 750001 IMiscellaneaus Iron and Steel ( CY LB 1.35 x I x! 0 ~ I = I = SO ! ~ 50 I x x { _~~ •~ _! SO -i SOT -x I 0 ! = xl 0 1= SD I 50 I 731564 (Curb and GulterS6"} _•},_,,,,Y, - _ CY 500.00 x l 11 ! = 55.500 i 7 500 x 63~ I ~ 104 = 15311500 I =! 552 ~^ z C 74 ! = x I 1 t9 I = S37,D00 559 500 I ! _ 731521 (Minor Concrete (Sldevralk ~' ~~~ _CY 506.00 T x 1 15 ! I = 1= , 5 54 000! x x 8 , 0001 =1 54 xl 16 1= . 58 0001 73t5461MinorConrrete(Drivewa} ~ CY 500.60 8 x , , . i i 1 TOTAL DRAINAGE 1TEMS I 1 ! I I k I I 544,000 I 1 11 I 5252,500 I 1 I I $351 b00 i SECTION 4 SPECIALTY ITEMS I I I I i 11 I TotaE P hase # I I Un;t Price North Ao roach South A r_o_ach Nort_ h i g South nol+, qua= I 1 una (S) I ouanutvl I Cest I Quantr I ~ Cost I Ouan " I I Cosa 070012 (Progress Schedule {Critical Path Mefhod~- ~ ~ LS T _ x! I = ) SO ! 50 I x! I =i 50 I =1 SO ~ z! 0 ! = z l• 0 I =~ 1 50 I -~ 50 I I 518002 JSound Wal[ Masonr~Block) 510524 Minor Concrete (Sound Wail} ~ ! SOF CY ~ x! ! = x I !_= 1 I 50 I x x) _! SO ~ x l 0 I = ~ SO I 153250 I Remove Sound Walt _ I y SQFT x I_ _ l = 50 ~ z; _! SDI xl Q I = 50 I - I LS xl I= SOI xI =1 50I - xI D (= SDI ~ 2532XX ( lF ~. ~•"- x! !_ ! 50 _ x SOI 1=1 xl 0 1= SOI t XXXXXX I Relocate Utility Vault ~ I EA 4,060.00 z! _ (= ~ _ 56 I 6 ~~ z I SO ; ~ = SO x I 0 I = x I D I = 50 I SO BOXXXX I Gate pnsert Type] 1 832001 (Metal Beam Guard RaiAnQ I ~ EA _ LF 50.00 _ z I ! x I _ E = ~ 5 SO x z = SO I x! 0 I = 50 ! 832002 (Metal 6Beam Guard RaiArttl Steel Post I l.F 35.00 210 i = z! 57,350 ! z! 500 - L, 547,500 I x! 710" I = S24.850 i _ 834310 !Double Thrie Beam Barrier I ~ 834521 ! ~~~ LF_ •••Y~~ ~~~ x I = ~ { ~. I _ SDI I x! r__y._._.._.~ ~ I ' I SO ! =1 SO x!_ 0 I ° x l 0 ! = ~ SO I 50 1 8395XX ITetmina~tem ypeCAT)_ ~~_ ' EA ~ EA ~~~ xl != x I ".. I = 501 50 x~ . x! ~ = SDI = I 50 I x! 0 i= x) 0 I = ~ 501 50 I stal System I •~,,,,~, 8395XX IAUemative Flared Term µ ~ _ I I = , _ !~ SD I~ x =! SO { x ~ •D I = 50 I 8395XX IAttemative In-line Terminal Syslem I _ _ ~~~ _EA ~ x ~ ! = " Y~T 50 I x " =1 SO ! xl 0 I = SD I 49XXXX ICIDH Concrete PAing-(trtsertDiametert ( ~ LF A - x~ x I ~ 1I = I 50 I z _ ( 50 I x I ~ D I_ SD ~ 839XXX ! C2sh Cushion Jnseri T ,pe~f I 83XXXX I Conaele 8anier (Insert Type} j ~~ e) !~ 83XXXX I Concrete Bonier (Jnsert T E '~ LF LF x l „_ I = x I i ' SD~ S0 -~ x~ x ~ 50 I ! SO _ _x I D I = x I 0 ~ = _ ~• 50 I SO _ I yp 520103 I Bar Reinf, Sleet Ret. Wall} I _,__ I LB CY~ x I ! - x I = SD (~ ____. SD x x ! __.__ SO L { =1 50 I z I 0 - I = x! 0 I = SO SD I I 510408 IC1ass t Concrete ~RetaiNng, Walt) 510133 Class 2 Concrete Retainin~Wall} I ~ 510060 I SWCtutal Conraele Reiainin~ Wall} „I 543553 !RYetaining WaU (Masoruy Wal _CY CY CY ~ ~ z{ 1 = _x I _ I = x I ~I - ,,, 50 SO ! SDI ~ ~ , x _•-__• x z~~ ~ i 50 ' S0 ~ 50 x ~ 0 I = x I _ 0 ! _ z I 0 I = ^ SO +SD SO I ! ! T I SOFT _____ x I i = 50 ! I z € _! SO { 0 I = x I SO I ype? S110XX !Architectural Treatment insert _ _ M , ~_ ~ - ~ ~ SD I 541048 IAeP~ Anti-Gra(fiA Coating I _,___,,,, 5136XX I RReinforced Concrete Crib Wall (insert Type) SoF7 SOFT x} I = x f ~ 1 = ~ 0 5 , __.. ~ SD ! -~~ x x ; =1 SO I l = I SDI x! 0 I = z I 0 = SO I __ 83954X ITlansition Railin~Lserf Typed I EA ~ _ I = z 1 50 ! ~ x1 =I 50 I x I 0 = SO ~ I a2 and Stain Concrete I v~ 597601 (P SQFT x l I = SO ! z ~ ! =! SO r x I 0 == SO I_ _ re u ~ EA ~x I ~~ ! = SDI z I = ~~ SDI x 0 SO ! 834567 !Rail Tensioning Assemb>~ ~~ i 8395XX !End Anchor Assemb (1nseR T e } EA _ 2.000.00 x ( 2 3 = 1 54.000 I z h 2 ~ } =1 54.000 I z ! 4 I =. ~ 58.000 I I ~ ~ I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 7 f TOTAL SPECIALTY ITEMS I 1 ( 511,400 j I 521,500 I I 532 900 I - ._....._,... - a ~ e 10-119 DtSTFt1CT1` ATTAC~IMENT I PREL12v1CvARY PROJHCT COST FSTLtLiTE .4tternare • l ! 1 ! 1 I I I I I I 1 I I Section 5 ENVIRONMENTAL ( I ~ I I I I I I - { -- ----- I I f I I i I l I SA -ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION ( I I I I I l I Total Phase i ~ unit Price roach North A South A roach North 8 South ktmcede Una (51 __- IQUanf- I I Cast ( Quanta I I Cast I IOuaatl 3 Cost 181ological Mitigation I 671325 ITem a fence (T eESA} { ~~ _ LS _.~ 500,000.09 20.90 _x I 0.5 I = 5259.000 ! x( 300 1= 56,9001 ,x 1 9.5 I~15250.000 I xi B00 I=I 516.000 x i 1 I =~~550..D~.D~ I z) 1,i00~=1 522,0061 { I I . I I I I ( I I I I I i t Subtotal Environmental ! I I 5256,000 I 5256.000 I I 5522 000 I I I I I l I I EI I I I I 1[ I i t I I I t 56 -LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION I I I I I I 1 { J unit Pace North A roach South A roach P ha se 2 ntm code I _ I I Uru7 (S) Quanti ( Cost I Quan#t I I Cost I Quantl I I Cas! ZDXXXX Landsca e, hQ„~,ardscape and ir» anon I ~ LS 5a,09D.00 xl t I =1 550000 I p xl ( 2 1510_4,000 I xl _3_} = - 5150,000 ~ ~ em I _ 206000 Iirriaation~si 204099_ Plant Esfablshment Work ( 20a191 Extend Ptant Establishment {X Years) ~ 20t7D0 ImpoRed Topsol I (USe forlrrigatron x- ~ 20XXXX IXXX" (lnserf Type) Conduit LS LS LS + CY LF 10,000.90 1D.00 x 1 x I X' xl x I I= I 5 I = _ I'= 100 I= I = S I 559,900 ( 50, 51.000 ~ SDI x x x x x I ~-15 150 , I 50_ I =15150,00_6 { =1 SO =1 St,500 _I _ SO I . x I I x I_20 I xl 0 xl 250 x I 9 = = I = 0 5200,000 I 50 S2,509 ~ 50 _ ~ ~~~ Extentl XXX" {Insert Typej Conduit ~ jffs@,(or awxte~rsio~ R(~9at:pn-~.~-~5 ~ 2039XX :ErasionConirol~Type~. I 243026 i Move IN Move Out ~ sion CantralL I 209801 Maintenance Vetdcte PuUaul I 206304 ~ W ater Meter ~ I ~ .... ____._ ~ ~ SDYD _E4 EA EA ~~ _ x I xl x I x1 x I (_ ~ ~~ I = ~~I = ~l = Sp I _ S01~ 50 I 50 I 50 -~- x I x x x x _ ~M _ ~ 1 I SO ~ =I SD + ~S9 ~50 I = I SD x~ D -I zl D z I 0 ~ x{ _ 0 z 1 0 I = I-~ = I ={ I 50 S0 SD 50 ~ SD _ 203021 IFib re Rolls I LF x 1= 501 x ! 1 =1 S01 xl 0 !°1 SO I I I I I I Subtotal Landsca a and frri atian i I 5101,000 S251,500 1 5352,500 I I I I I I II 1 1 II l l I i I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 I I 5c-NPDES I I I I I ! I I I i North A roach South A roach Pha se 2 ntm coat j I D740t9 PrepareSWPPP I 974917 Prepa2WPCP ~_ I 974016 i Construction SRe Managemertt I ____ 074023 Temporary Erosion Control 074027 Tem Erosion Control Blanket i _ 074037 Move IrV Move Dut (Temporary Erasion Controt} 074026 Te_mpo2rY Fber Rob - I 074032 I __ I 074036 Temp. DrautaQe Inlet Protection ._.__. I ____,_, 074041_~StreetSweepin~_ I SuEpiemeniatWorkforNPDES I _ 466535 Water Potlution Control Maint. Sharing. I 966596 Additional Water Pollution Control I _~ ofifiss7 _ _ _ I XXXXXX (Per Ci of Chula Vista su lemental vrork far NPDES not I Unr7 LS LS LS SDYD SQYD EA ~ LF_ LS EA F.A LS ~__ _ LS LS ._ uired~ unitPdce (51 7,000.00 .00 2.509.00 300.99 5_900.00 _ _ _ II k xl x{ xl x -x x x x x x z x x x ---- - Quan ' I 0.5 I= I= I = i I = I M,_f _ I I - I 500 ~_ I I = l 0.5 I- I E,Y l 1 I= I I I I = G ~ ~ - f I j I = - ~ Cost I 1 53.SD0{ , 50I _SO i 50 i ~____ 50 I __ SDI _ 52,000 I ~ 50 I_ 51,2501 ,,,,,,,~,SD k~ 1 55,0001 (_„_ I I I `~!I ^ I _ I OuanS x 0.5 xl ~ x x~~ x ''`'' x x ~ 1,500 x 1 x 9.5, x 1 x~ t W x~~~^ x 1 ~~~ T . x i .. ~ Cast I I 53,5001 ! 50 I!~1 50 I =i~ 50 ~I 1 ~ SO I =1 _ 50 I I =1 56,000 I =1 SO I S1,Z50 =I 5390 =I 55,OD01 I~~ _ J~ f 50 I I ~59 ~ s9 I SD , I , Quanti I xl 1 I- x; 9 ~ x I 0 I = xl 9 I= x I 0 x I 0 x I 2,000 _x I 0 I = xl 1 I= z t = x1 2 I= ~ I I x { 0! = x ~ 0 z I o E = x I ~9 I = I Cost 57,000 SO .____ SD I 50 50 50 58,900 ~~ 50 52,500 5300 51D,000 50 ~ 50 so y~ 50 1 ~ W 1 I I E ! I I - I it I i Subtotal NPDES {Wiihout5upplemental Warkl J I 511,800 , r i r I 516,100 i i, J I J 527,800 I ~ i I I I ] i I E I1 I II I! I II II I. TOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL I i ! I I J I J 5368,800 I r! I 5533,600 I I I r I I ~ 5902,300 l l V I I A'a.'~~„=o So<u G,.:..n[i.'D:,;s,1on,,.Iw,n,.im! 5 of 10 10-120 PRELIbtI?J?JLY D'~`~"' ATTACHMENT I PROSECT COST ES7Ih[~1TE Altcmate - 1 Section 6 TRAFFIC fTEMS I I I I I l l I I , , I , I I Total Phase 1 IfiA -Traffic Electrical I unit Price roach Notch A South A>3 roach North 8 South ucm ~aac I I I urm f5) I Quanfi i _ t Casi I _ ( Duan6 1 1 Cost i Quan ' I I Cost I 86Q55X I Li hc,~trng 8 Sign Illumination I 860XXX I Signals & Lightinrl i ~ LS LS 15 000.00 75.000.00 x x 2 1 =! 530,000 I =! 575.000 I x I 6 x l 2 -I ~I 590,Ot70 I = I St50,000 i x I B I x f 3 I = = 512Q,DOQ I 5225.00_0 I 86XXXX i Fiher Op,Fic Conduit S rem ~ ,~ T LS x = SDI x ( I SO I ~~ x I D } = 50 I 8611XX IRampMetering~tem tgcationX)~~ LS x =1 501 x =1 501 xl _0 f ~ = 50) 861 SXX I Ramp Metering SYStem Location X ~_ 8607XX I Interconnection Facilities ~ LS LS ,_,_ ~ .~ x x I ~ = I SO I =i 50 I x i x I =I 50 I =I 50 I x i 0 I x I 0 I =_ = -SO I 50 1T 5602XX I Furnish SiSn Stnrcture _ _ I 5602XX ltnstall sign Swcture ~ ~ ~~ LB L6 -. x x I --- ~^ =1 SO I =1 SO I x l __._ x ~ I -_ I 50 } =1=1 SD k x l 0 i xl 0 Y = = SO I SO 1~ 86XXXX IXXX" CiDHC Piie Sign Foundation),____ 1 LF ~ x ~ = I ' SDI x i I,- t iI ~SO ( x I 0 I ~ = SRI _ p Detectors _~~ „-,~,,, 860840 ~ Inductive Lao _ EA z = i 50 I x ____ I = I SDI x I 0 I = 50 I _ _ 8609XX Traffic Monitoring Stations 150760 IRemave Sign Structure ~.~-I1( ! LS EA _ 6,000AO x x! =1 SO I =1 SDI x I z~.~ _I 50 I =l 60 I x I 0 I xI 0 I = = SQ i SQ I 151581 I RecansiruU Sign StmGUre 3 152647 1 trtodiN, Stgn Structure ~ ~~ ~~ EA EA ,x~ J~ ~ ~..~ ~~.i__._~SO I I =! SO I =1 x I x ~~~ = ( SQ i = i 50 i x I D i ~ x i 0 I = = SO i SO I ~ XXXXXX IRetocate Existing Uti Poles ~ LS SD.ODO.Q6 zi 6 5300,000 1 I xl t0 I =1 5500,060 { x{ 76 I = SSQD.00 i I I I i I I! 1 i I I I I I Subtotal Traffic Electrical I I ( 5405,000 I 1 S 40,000 I I I I I I I _' I I I68 -Traffic Signing and Striping } , unit Price North A roach South A roach Nort h ~ South rcom cede 1 f ! tlnx (5) IQuanti k i ~Cosi I I Ouantl ~ I Cost I IOuanti I I Cost f 565611 IRoadsideSi9n OnePast)~_~y_~ ~ EA _ w x i I=1 SQI xi _,,,__ I =' 501 ~ xi 0 1=I S01 566012 I Roadside Sign 1Tvro Post) ~ ~ F.A ~~~~ x ,YI 56 { x I „_,_,,,_ ~~ ~~ 56 I = I x I 0 i = SO f_ y54~ FumishSignPanets 560 XXX~ SOFT x I=1 SDI ~ ~ _ z =1 S01 xI 0 I= 1 ~ S60XXX I Install Sign Panels SOFT x ~ SO I f _,_j ( ~ x ,_ ^ = i 50 i x I 0 I= SD i ~ t507t0 IRemoveTralficStripe ~t50701 (Remove Yellow Painted 3ralfic Stripe 150773 Remove Pavement Marfang ~ ^~ LF LF SOFT 1,06 _.___. ~~~~ ~~~ x ~ x i 1=~ SOl ~~~ -i ~ 56 I ~ =I SDI x x x ~ ~ ~~~~ =1 SOi = I 56 i 1 SO I xl D x i 0 . x I 0 i=~ I_= I I = SDi _ SD I SO i W 150742 Remove Roadside Sign _ 1 F?. x i =1 50 ! ~'~~ x ,~ = I SO I x I 0 I = SO I + 552320 Reset Roadside Si lA x l =1 50 I z (=1 50 I x 0 I = 56 l 552390 Reloc2te Roadside Sign __ ~ EA ~ ~ x I =I SO I x =1 SO I x 0 i - SO i ^ 82010X Delineator (Class X) ~-~ EA ___._ x -I ~ I _ ~- x ={ __ 50 i ~ V xl D I = S0 1_ ^ 84XXXX Permanent Pavement Delineation ~ 220090. Construc8on Area Signs LS LS x x 50 ( `i ( I 50) x ( x f _ _ 50 i = =1 50 I + x I 6 xl D i = I~ SD I ~ _ SD 1 84Q501 I7henno lactic Traffic St ' e I LF 1.00 x 1,000 I = i 51,006 x E 6,300 I = I 56,300 l x I 7,300 I = I 57300 1I I I I 1 it I i II 1 ! Subtotal Traffic Si nin and Stri in ~ I 51,000 I I 56,300 57,300 I rcem enan I I 128650 IPoAa6teChangeableMessageSigns„ -I ~ I unx LS LF I 400 ~~ x x I Ouanti I I Cast I I-_=2 I=! 58001 ( _ I = i SO I I x x i - Quanf I I Cost I 2 „__i_=1 58001 T-I 50 ! f Quanfi I I Gost I xi 4 I=1 51,6001 x i ~ 6 I =~~-~ SO-I I I I I I 1 11 I I i Subtotal Traffic Mana ement Plan { 5800 I I SB00 I { 51,600 { Total Phase 1 I6i) -Stage Construction and Traffic Handling I unit Price North A roach South A roach North & South reamcoae I I I una i f5) __. Quanti I~ I Cast I _ _. Ouan&t 1 I Ccst Ouan6 I i Cost 129049A Traffic Plastic Drum t20t6X Channelizer 120120 ITYpe Ill Barricade .. 129tOQ i Temp Crash Custaon Module ~~ ~ ~--_~ ^~~- EA EA EA EA _~ _~ ~__ _._.. ~~~ x I_=1 56 ( x~~~ ° i SQ I x i~~~~=,1 .__SQ I x I -(= I 56 I W x x x x ~~ µ ~ { _; SO i ~ I 50 I ~I~ 50 i = I ,_ 50 I ~' x I 0 I = x _ 0 I = x I 0 (= x I 0 { _ _ SO I 50 i _ SO I _ SO i ~ t20tOQ ITtafficControlSystem [ WD ~~ SO ( xi I=1 x S0 { =1 xl _0 I= 50 839603A ITemparar~Crash Cushion,~ADIEM~ 529000 ,Tern-porary Railing (Tape fCJ ~ ~-~ 12Qta3 ITemporarLPavementDelineatian __ YJCXXXX I Traffic Control I ~-~ _ ~___..__....__......._ I EA LF LF LS _ y 156.000 x_ I =) SDI x I ~y^I =i S0 I x(i- ~ I _ SOI x l 0.5 I =1 575.000 I x x x ~ .5 =I 50 1 =1 SO I =1 50 I= 5225,000 I zh D I = x I Q 1' x 0 = x l 2 i= SO I S0 I _ _501 5300.000 I I I I I ! ~ I I 1 I i f I I k I Subtotal Stage Construe8on and Traffic Handling ~ I 575,000 I I 5225,000 I I 5300,000 I I f I I I I i t ! I I ! I I I I E I I TOTAL TRAFFIC ITEMS I I I I 5481,800 I i i 5872,100 I I 51,453,800 ( - ~-~ -' - 6 c, , G 1 0-1 21 D`S`R`~-" ATTACH~VIENT I PR£L.t~fIN ~FtY PROlECt' COST ESTD.4ITE Altcnasa - 1 I Section 7 RETOURS' I I I ! I I I I Tota l Phase t I I I 1 1 North_ A_ roach South A _ r ~ oach Nort h 8~ South nom cnae ; ~ ~ I Unit Unit Price SF OuanG I• I Cosa I QuanB I I Cost I 14uantr ~! I Cost 190701 I Roadway Exravation~R ~ I CY 25.00 ~ z { i =3 S0 1 x l_~~ I = i SO x 1 4 1 = I 50 I i98050IEmbankment CY x =I 50 _ x I= 501 xI 0 ~I 50 _,,,,,_ _ 198001 {Imported Hanow ___ ~ l+ 390142 IAs~hafl Conaete~fYpe A) ~ ~ y 12.000 sf - 3' CY TON 30.00 9D.d0 z z = l 50 1 50 x I = z I = SO _ SO ~ x I 0 1 x 1 0 = I SD ~ = I SO 260201 Klass 2 A~,¢rregat_ e__Hase 12.400 sf - 6 250401 Klass 4 A~2gate Subbase ~ TON CY ' 84.fl0 _ ~ z x . a 1 SD = I 50 x ,~ x I I = W~ 56 I 54 I x 0 x I D = I 54 =I 50 I 07XXXX (Te o2ry Drainacte ( LS _20~D04A0 ~~ x f = I SO x I = ~~ SDI x I 0 = I 50 129040 ITem~ Railinq,iType 1 LF ~ z ~ ~ { 50 { - x 1= 50 I z 0 =I SD ,1286XX ITemporar~ Signets _ ,_ 120143 ITem~om.,r~tPavementDeLneatfon I I NPDEMS 1 EA LF LS 4.500.00 ~N_ xl ~ x! I SO = I i) SO = I ~~ S+O T x { = xl 1=1 x I =( SO _ 50 ~ 50 ~ x l D _ zl 0 x I 0 =1 SO =_i 50 = I SO I IntluCes censtsuaing. maintaining, and removal { I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I i I I i I 1 " I I I I I S4 1 I SD I I I I ( II I I II I I II I I I I i 4 I I ! I I Section 8 MINOR ITEMS I ~ I I I I I I I ~ Totat phase ~ I I(Use Appropriate percentage betvreen 5%-14:nFI - North A roach South A_ roach North ~ South nom coda I I Tota4 Of Section 1-7 I Un.t LS 1D% I Total J-Z I Cos! I x 14.097.81701 =1 5409.780 I I Tota11-7 I Cost I x I I =1 SDI I Tota! J-7 I I Casf x 14,097.8001 =1 5409.780 I 1 I I I I 1 3 1 1. I f I I E I TOTAL MINOR ITEMS 1 I I 5409,804 50 I 5409,$00 I I I I it I I II I I I I I i l I I I I Section 9 ROADWAY MOBILIZATION' ~ G ~ ~ ~ Total Phase 1 I i-" -'-' orth A_ raac _ ~ oath A ra_ach _.. . ~ North 8~ South hero eedc I i unr I cost 4 rorar J-e I I rorar J-a I I cast 1 rotor J-a I I con I 994990 I Tolal Secban 1-8 { LS 10% x 14.507,600) = I S+i5fl,760 I x I I= I 50 I x 14,507.6001 = I 5450,760 I I I t i 1 1 I 1 I I I i I TOTAL M061L1ZATiDN ITEMS ! 5450,800 I I 50 j 5450,$00 I i 1 E I I I I G i I I I ~ I I I ! I I 1 Section 1D. SUPPLEMENTAL WDRIC~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ( ( Total.Phase 7 ( Natth A roach South A roach North ffi South - Item cede J i and I Totat J-8 i t Cost I I Totat J-e I I Cost I I Cast 17ota11-8 I I Total Section 1-8 I LS 5% x l 4.958,400 1 = i 5241.920 I x l ( = 1 54 I x 14958,4001 =1 5247,920 I Clem cede Unit UnrtPrfce SF I Olranti I I ,Cost I I Quarrfi I I Gosf I I I Ouanti I I Cost I I 066090 I Maintain TraKc LS ~ z 1 = I- SO z ~ 1 ~ = I, SO I _ x I D 1 = I 5Q _ _ _ 066920 I Disoute Review Board ~~ _ i ___. 066075 I FederaE Trainee Pro ram~_ ~~ _ 066704 Partnering ~ ~,_._.~. D6b204 IRemove Rock 8 Debris ~ _ L_... ~ as6izz i ___ _~ _ ~( 066866 ^Operation of Existing Traffic Management } ~. __ System Elements During GanslNCliOn 1 _ ~ NPDES Suoorementaf Work specifred in Sectror_r 5C _ LS LS LS ~ LS LS ~ _..__ ~ ~ y~^ _ ~ x f z _ x .- x { „_„__, ~__„_„ x I ( _ ° 54 = I SO I I = I 50 I ' I~I 50 ~~ I 1 ~ I = } 50 I t 1 SO I x t x~(~ 1 i ( _ x 1 y ~ z ~~ _ ( = = I = I,, I= I - ~ ( SO I I S0~ r SO 1 ~,,,_, SO I 1 so SD f _ !!!! SO ~ z I 0 = I 50 z 0 1 SO x I 0 (_ } 50 x I 0rl ~~St1 xll~- a f=1~ sD x! D (_, 50 I _ z ~ 0 I = ~ SD ~ I I i { I I I it 1 I f I I I I i TOTAL SUPPLEMENTAL WORK ~ 5247,900 I I SO ~ I 5247,900 j I I r I I I I I i I e:n:.ma,.,ca„u~~n.a,u l,a:,,,n:.,.~.e,z,.m„t 7 of 10 10-122 °'S`R'~T" ATTACHMENT ~ PRL-LthiRdAitY PROTECT COST ES1~.(?.TE Aitemate - l I ! 1 I i I I i t I I i I Section 11 STATE FURNISHED MATERIALS ~ ~ ( ! ~ I Tata! Phase 1 I ` Unit Price North A roach South A r aach North 8 South ttem ~oa< I 06&105 066063 066901 06684X 06684X I REO(fce ~~ Public lidatmaUan `4 1 Wafer erases -~ Ramp Me~ r Canltnller Assembl -~ TM~S ContmgerAssem~~, - ___„ ~ ~ unit I CY CY CY TON CY (5) - ~ ~ Quanta I xI x I x; x I _xl ~ I Cwt I =f 50I = SDI =1 50'I = I 5D ~ =1 SO I x! x x x x Quanfi 1 1 I- I = ~~-~ i = I I =1 Cast I SO SO ~50 ~! 50 SD ~ _ I x x x x x Quanti I I 0 I- 0 (_ 0 ~ = 0 I m ~ D ~ I = Cost I SD~ _50~ ~ SD I -~ 50,E SD ~W 06684X -I Ofi606?A I 0668138 066803 Tralfie Si nt~al Contin~ler Assemhl~ .., I COZEEP Expenses ~ ReOective Numbers and Edge Sealer I Padbdcs ~~~~~~I -~~ CY LS _ LF EA ~ _ ~ ~~ x I _ x I _ z I ~ x I = I ~ I_ I = I SDI = I 50 I =1 SO ( x x x x I = ~ 1= I = I = 5D 50 SD 50 x z x x 0 I = 0 I = 0 I = 0 I = 50 SO SD _ 50~ ' Includes xnsavcling, maintaining, and removal ) I I I I TOTAL STATE FURNISHED I I SO E E ' S0 I SO I I I I i I E I I I i I I I I I i I I I I I I k I I Sectio n 12 CONTINGENCY ~ E om„ r:,a, Use appropriate percentage Cased an the detail of esfimate. Anything other Clan L1e suggested wntirigenry in the POPM needs to be'jusuCad. (Pre-PSR 30".e-50'.5, PSR 25?~, PR 204x, PAR 755, Ater PAR t0:5) ( I i Total Sectionl-11 I nir 5 0;9 atth A r03Lh I TaYa11-1 i t I Cost x15,206.3001=1 51,041,260 ~ South A roach I Totat i-> i l l Casi I zl i=1 SO I TOta! Phase '( North 8 S_o_ uth I Tota! 1-t i I I Cost 1 z15.206,30D1=1 51,041,260 I ' I I f I I i 1 i t I TOTAL CONTINGENCIES I I 51,041,260,1 I 50 I I 51,041,260 I l ! I i i I I 1 7 1 I I I I I 1 1 i I I I Section 13 OVERHEAD ~ i ttnm max I 07DD18 (Tune Regaled Ovefiead (fR0) ( umt vw Unit Price l51 5°9 North A _raach I Ouan6 I I Cost ! x i 517,499:0 5874,950 Sout A nraach I Quanti I I Cost I x i { = I 50 ( Total Phase 1 North & South I Quan ' I I Cost x 117,499,0001 =I 5874.950 i I I I i I i I I I i 1 I I I I ! i t I I I 70TAL OVERHEAD I I I 1 I I I $875,000 I I SO I I I I I I 5874,950 I I I I I I I I 1 ! i I I 10-123 DSSTRICT it ATTA~IE'1~El~IT I PKELIMSNAJtY PROJECT COST FSTI7v[ATE Alccmme -1 I[. STRUCTURES I TEMS ~ ~ I ( I ~ i I I I I { I I I I I ! ~ I I I I Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 I I I DATE OF ESTIMATE 06/03/49 D6l03109 DO/001D0 Brid a Name Herita a Road i3rid a Otd Herita a Road Brid e Brid a Number 57C-Ofi70 57C-0670 57-XX3C Structure T e CEP P!S Slab Brid a Removal UVidth Feet out to out . 116.OD1 LF I 0,00 LF 1 0.00 LF I Total Brid a Len th Feet 500.001 LF I 0.001 LF 1 O.DO LF I Total Araa S uare Feet ~ 590D0 SQFT 1 O.D01 SQFT 1 0.00 SQFT I Structure De th Feet 2.00{ LF I O.DOI LF I 0.00 LF Footin T e Ile ors read Pile Cost Per 5 uare Foot 5162.22 $SOO,OOD Lum Sum $O.DO I I I 51 fl,750,980.04 55fl0,000.D0 CAST OF EACH STRUCTURE 510,751,000.00 $500,000.00 X0.00 I ~ I ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ( ~ I I I I I I 1 ! 1 I I I f I I E 1 1 I I ! i I 1 i I I I I I I i Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 t I I l DATE OF ESTIMATE ODl04l00 00!00100 ODl00lOD Brid a Name Brid a Number 57-XXX 57-XXX 57-XXX Structure T e Width Feet out to out 0.001 LF I O.ODI LF 0.001 LF 1 Total Brid a Len th Feet 0.00 LF 0.00 LF 1 0.00 LF I Total Area S uare Feet O.DD{ SQFT I 0.00 SQFT 1 O.OD SQFT Structure De th Feek 0.001 LF 1 0.401 LF 1 0.001 LF i Footin T e Ile ors read Cost Per S uare Foot $O.DO SO.QD 50.00 i I I 1 I € i I I i I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I COST OF EACH STRUCTURE 50 DD $O.DO 50.00 1 { 1 I I I i E I 1 I I I I i ! I I I I I I i I I I E I I I I I I ! 1 I I I I TOTAL COST OF STRUCTURESi l ~ $'11,251,dD0.00 S11,251,U00.001 I I ~ I St1,251,0a0.00 I 1 i I I I i l I Estimate Prepared B . 1 ( --Division of Slsvdures 1 I Date I l i i M I I I I I I I 'Structure s cstimale includes Ovemead and Mohlization. I I i I I I I I I i i ! I ( i I I 1 I I 1 i I I I I I I 1 nP~::a,vxmaa«u s,.:.:,,i „r ~.a ~a<-,.~~ 9 of i0 10-i24 DISTRICT i i ATTA~~l?'JLA1~T JL PRELR~tINARY PROTECT COST ESTIIvtATb Alternate - 1 ~~ i I I ! I I I I I q) Acquisition, including Excess Land Purchases, Damages to Remainder{s) & ss i Goodwill Lo ~ $ 250,000 I I I I I I I e ( Railroad 1 I I I I $ Oi I I i I I C I Ac uisi6on of Offsite Miti ation I f $ I Ol I I I i I I I I i D (Utili Relocation State Share I ( ~ 0 I Pothafin Desi n Phase I I I I f I I I I Clearance Cost I I I 1 $ i i 0 I I I i I f 1 I I RAP and/or Last Resort Hous'sn Costs I 1 ~ I o 1 I { I I G (Title and Escrow Fees I 1 ( ! I 1 5 0 I I I I I 1 1 1 ~ I RIW ESTIMATE I ~ $250,000.00 I 1 1 I I I I { I I H (Condemnation Settlements ( 0% I I 1 I ~ 01 I I ( I 1 I (Desi n reciation Factor o 0 Ja I ( $ I 0 i ( Items H& I a fled to items A+ B i I ' I I I I I I I I I I 1 I i I I I I I ` ~ ,TOTAL RIW ESTIMATE ~ ,$250,000.0© i I I 1 I I I I ( i Excludin Item #8 -Hazardous Waste { I I I I I i I ( I I ~) ~ TOTAL R/W ESTIMATE: Escalated $250,000.00 I i ( I I I K Utiii Relocation Construction Cost I I 1 5 0 I ! I I RIGHT O I { j I F WAY SUPPORT S I ~ i ! I I I I I I ( Support Cost Estimate Prepared By Project Coordinator I! Phone Utility Estimate Prepared i BY ~ UEiliy Coordinator ( Phone R/W Acquistion Eslimatel I Prepared By Right of Way Estimator' ( Phone i I I I I I i I I I I ! I I I ~ When estimate has Support Casts only ~ Z When estimate has UU6ty Re4acafion ~ When RNJ Acquisition is required Sttp.llc:v--mp-dot ca.;ovluiscl l,`L'¢icnlCc~-v.'Con:s.:vsi ~ ~' Qt ~ V 10-125 DISTitlCT I I P~ARY ATTAC~VIEI~T J p2olscr casr ESTIMATE AI[emative 2 i~ i i I 1 I 11 I I HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE IMPROVEMENTS I I S LANE ALTERNATIi/E #2 T pe of Estimate ; I PANED Level Estimate I Program Code : I I I I I I Project Limits : Main Street to Entertainment Circle Description: 6 Lane Bridge Repiacementwith approach roadways in same location Scope : Replace exis5ng inadequate interim bridge crossing the toy River with new bridge roachs between the ew roadwa a t ct ti d i l Alternative : y pp cons ru n on an n same oca brid a and Main Street to the north and Entertainment Ci rcle to the south. i I I 1 i I I I I I I I I I I ( 1 Current Cost I I I I I 1 I I ~ I I I I i ` ROADWAY ITEMS I $ 7,663,05D.00 I I ' STRUCTURE ITEMS I S 10,776,000.00 I ~ ( I ~ I SUBTOTAL CONSTRUGTION GOST I $ 77,839,050:00 - ~ I I RIGHT OF WAY ~ S 375,000.00 ( 1 I TOTAL CAPITAL COST ~ $ 18,215,000.00 1 i t PRIED SUPPORT ~ S 7,000,000.00 I I PS&E SUPPORT _ f $ 800,Ofl0.00 ~ ` RIGHT OF WAY SUPPORT I ~ ( I , . CONSTRUCTION SUPPOR3 ~ 5 900,000.00 4 I ( ( ~ AGENCY SUPPORT I $ - I ( I ( TDTAL SUPPORT COST I $ 2,700,000.00 ~ I I ` TOTAL PROJECT COST ~ $ 20,915,000.00 j month E ~ ear ( I Date (MonttWear) of Estimate ) j 12 1 / 12008 1 I I Estimated Date (MontttiYear) of ronstmctlon l f 5 1/ 12D15 Number of Months of Esoaletion ~ I 65 I , 1 I ! I i I I ! I I 1 1 1 i I I j Number of Working Days l 360 I I I ! I I I I I t I I I I Estimated Fro'ect Schedule 1 I I I I 1 FID A raval l N!A I I I I PANED Ap raval l O61D112tl11 I I I I I Plans, S eeifrcations & Estimate I OtJ01/2012 I I i t I 1 Read To List OV0112013 i i i I I I Begin Construction tt E O6JD112013 I ~ I I 1 I i 1 ! I II I I I I -I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I li I Approved by Project Manager I ~ ~ 6T9-476.2301 III 1 Phone I Project Manager Date I I I I I i I II I EsealaLOn rates used xm Nis fiats fox SaFPa,l Cesl axa t'_^.S ter FY 87108. +'•~ iw F,' OP~69, and 3X ro< F`! 68!16 aM eaar your aeyand. Es~c~ rato used in tfus Gtorate Im H~9sM+Y Gan:v~we GP'~I Costs are i tl!1 emParmdcb arivaltp t4 Cansmrctiaa year, 71ine rates are eittyen Stan !ha sugga3ad 2606 Si1P a7 8.7X Ix rGOI Y^a' O6N6 arq 7.0°A Neroa6rY. i he xxrs+an to uw 5.0X tx tms ewmxc was as PerNe crfa r><Othcs Elrgmam. (R8Vt0."96'n !. prrar ATP Sx~.,~rr~:i:ma;,-pia-.:r n i 1 of 10 10-126 DISTRICT tl A'I'TAC~I~4~l~ITI' J PREF~fIIJARY PROJECT COST ESTIMATE Alternative 2 - ~_-~._.._...~._~-- -{~--I .-T I ~ i I I i M I I I I I ~ I l I i 1. ROADWAY ITEMS I ! I I ! I I { I I I I I A I ! I Section I i 1 i I f Cost I I I ( ( ( i NORTH SOUTH PHASE( i I i I I I I I I ! I I 1 ( ( Earthwork ( ( { $120,500 $661,000 $781,500 i l I 1 i l l 1 1 I 2 ( Structural Section ( j ( $153,600 $431,000 $584,800 1 I I l i l ! I I 3 ( Drainage I ( ( ( ( $93,000 $273,500 $366,500 I l 4 ( ms Specialty he I ( ( I ( $12,800 $21,500 $34,300 I I I I I I I I ': 5 ( Environmental I ~ i ~ _ $371,,300 $536,000 $9D7,300~. I - - I I - -, _ _ _- ( 5A Environmental Mitigation ( 5256,000 5266,000 S522,OOD I ( 58 ;Landscape and Irrigation I I ( 5101,000 5251,50D 5352,500; ( ( 5C NPDES ( ( { 514,300 518,500 532,800; l I I I I 6 ( Traffic Items I I - - I _`~~ _-` .- t $483,500 $971,200 $1,454,7001 i i I I I I I I 6A Electrical ( I 5405,D00 5740,000 Si,145,00D1, I ( fiB Signing and Striping ( ( 52,700 55,400 58;100; I ( fiC (Traffic Management Pian ( ; ssao 5800 S1,6D0 ( 6D (Trainc Control ( ( 575,000 5225,000 53D0,000 ' I i 1 I I I i t 1 7 I Detours I ( I I I $0 $340,OD0 I l I f I I i g (Minor Items j ; l J I $446,900 $446,9001 ( I I I I i I 9 (Roadway Mobilization ( I I ( ( $491,600 $491,6001. I I I I I I 1 I 10 (Supplemental Work ( ( I ( I $270,400 $27D,400`: I 1 l i l { 11 (State Furnished ( ( ( ( $0 $0 12 (Contingencies I I I ( I $1,135,600 $1,135,600 I l I I I I 1 1 13 (Overhead ( I ( I $849,450 5849,4501 I i 1 I I I I I i TOTAL ROAD WAY ITEMS ~ $4,428,850 $7,663,D50 I ! I I I I I ( i { ' I I I I i t ~ i I Estlmate Pre pared By : - ~ f I.------ __-_~.__ .~ I f _ Name and rile ( _ _ I^ Dete __. ._.__.---.._-- I Phone I i E I I E I i E I '. { ~ ~ `Estlma[e Reviewed By : I I I { ___ __ _ __ I Name and Titlew I- _ _ .I_... _- Date ~ ~ -- ~ __-.__.___._ .I . ~ Phone I I I I _ I I I { I ! l ! ' B~~ signing this esfimate you are attesting chat you have discussed your oroiecY with ail funcNana! units and have inc_o_ rparated all their comments or have discussed with them why they wi[) not be incorporated. 10-1''7 PRELIIvtINAF2Y Dt5TR3CT II A7C1TA~~[IYIEI~TT J PROJECT COST ES'I'IM.4TE Ai[e[na[ive 2 I f I i I I I I I 1 i SECTION 1 EARTHWORK f ~ I i I ~ I ~ ~ Tota! PF1ase 4 ~ Unit Price North AQ nroach ou A roach (North 8~ Southi I=cm coat I ~ ~ ~ Unit ($1 ~ Quan ' ~ II Cast 1 Quan ' ~ Cost ~ Quanti ~ ~ Cost 190101 I R~ Excavation { Assume 5710" CY 25.00 x I 1,DDD E =1 s2s,DDD x I zODO I = 1 550,000 ~ ~ x I 3,D00 I = { 575,000 I 190103 1 Roa>~»I:xcavailon (T~pe ADL } 490105 J Roadway Excavation (Type Z-2 ADL I 2527.1261 = 1266 CY CY ~ x x I = I I =' I SD SO x z i J - I AI 50 ~ 50 ~ x ~~ 0 _ I = I x 0 I = I ~~ SO l SO ( ti h E i I CY x } =1 50 x I } ~1 50 ~ D } _ { S0 1 xcava on D tc 194001 __ _.~.. ~ ,, ".._. _ 198001 k im orted Bortow CY 30.00 x 3,000 I =I 590,000 x 20,000 1 =1 ~ ~ 1 x 123:OD0 { =I $69D,D0D I 198007 Ilm op rted Material Shoulder Backing) TON x ~~~ ~ =1 I ____ SO I x { I =I I SO 0 _z I 0 I = 0 } = } Y,., SO_ j 50 192037 I Sbvcture Excavation Retaining Wal~ ~, CY ~ x I I = ~ 50 _ x ~ = 5 x ~ ~^ 193013 I Structure Backfili (Retainin4 Wall) ~ ateaal (Retaining WallL 193031 (Pervious Backfil[ M CY CY x ! x I = I I ~~~ 1 = I SO I SD x x _ I = I I = I 50 50 L x { 0 I = x ~ 0 i = SD I I 50 I T r~ _ 160101 ICieari~ & Grubbing i LS ~ ~ S:SDD.DO ~~ x l i ~ = I 55,500 z 2.0 ~ I = 1 511,000 x l 3 { = 1 516,500 I 170101 IDevelopWatetSu LS x l }- ~ SDI xl I= SO xl 0 I= 1 501 I } i I I I I 1 I I I I I TOTAL EARTHWORK SECTiDN !TEl1!!S I I 5120,500 J 56t31,DDD { { $784,500 I I I . I I V I I I 1 1 I f l I t I Section 2 STRUGTURAL SEGTIONI ~ ~[ j 4 k ~ ( Tota! Phase 4 ~ North A p proach South Ap proach jNorth R South} Item code ~ ~ Unir Unit Price (51 ii Quant" 1 ~ Cost ~ ~ Quartt' ~ ~ Cost C I Quanti ~ II Cost I 401000 {Concrete Pavement ~ CY z I I - = I SO I - _ x I - } ~~ 50 f ~ x } 0 { _ { SO I 404D92 (Seal Pavement Joint 404094 (Seal Lon~iludinat Isolation Joint Conaele Pavement Joint f E i t ' 5 1 S ~ ~ LF LF _ LF x~ ~ x I I x , I = I ' I = SD - 50~ I 50 ~ x _ I = f x I =) x I I = { SO } 50 50T x D I x 0 ( z D I = I SO =I 50 = I~ 50 ea x s l n~ 41311 I I = I SO _^ x I = I ~ 5D~` x 0 ~ = I 50 401108_ { Re lad ce Concrete Pavement (Raaid Stren 3901D2 IAs~hatt Concrete (type A 5' gth Conaete ~ CY TON 9D.00 x z 625 ( M. = 574.250T ~ __ x} 1,950 ; _ T _ } _ ~ ~ x 2,775 I =15249,750 I-_ , XXXXXX I Stabilized Oecom_posed Granite _ _._T_ 1 ~Stenstuy ~ CY 40_DD x _ I = ( SD x ~ I = ~ SO { } x I 0 1 I =1 SO _ = I SOT 390126 Rubberized Asphalt Concrete (Tape G ' ~ TON SQYD _ x i I x I I = = 50 I SD , I x 1 I = x ; 1 = I SO I SO x I _, 0 x I D 1 SO 1 = I se 3930D1 (Pavement Reinfordn Fabr 2602Di ICiass2AggregateBaze(1D'~ ~ CY 80.00 _ x~ 975 I = 1576,000 x 2,300 1= {iLi°' i x; 3,275 1 ___ ~{5262,000 I_ 29D201 IAs~halt Treated Permeable Base e-~ -~ CY CY x I I x 1 w = l 50 I 50 x I I = x 1= 1 50 ~ I SO j x I 0 I x 6 I =} SO { _ = I SO { 250_401 (Class 4 A+~,c~2gate Subbas O x I^--I = 1 50 _ x I 1 = I SD I x { 0 I =j 50 [- 374002 IASPt1aI6C Emulsion Foq Seal Coat) ~ u.~ N T T ON x I i = i 50 x I = _ 1 ~ SO I x ( D 1 i ~ sD I = 397001 IASRhattiC Emulsion~Paint Binder) t ~~ ^ _ TON x; 1 ° I SO I zl = I 50 x} 0 I , SD I =1 3~50t IsIU Sea 3756XX ISareenin s ape )OSL _ d TON _ x 1 _I_ ~ „ _° _I 50 ~..~._._. _, L_ x I = .._~_. ( SD { x j 0 1 1 _ = ( 50 f_ = { SO 374492 IASR~tGe Emulsion (Po mer Modifie r ~ {S d C 0 ~_._.Y TON _ _ TON z I x ~ I = = I S I 50 ~ x ( I = x J I = I _ SO I 50 I x 0 I x ; D I = } S0~ ove an 1 3650 731530 Minor Concrete (Textured Pavin~i_ I _.._~ S_QFT x _ ~ ~ ~ 50 ~ ~ x~_~ I = ~ } SO_~_ x I D (= I 50 I } =1 50 731502 {Minor Cancrete~Misc. Const) I CY LF x I x 1 = 1 = SD 1 I 50 I ~ x 1 = x I ~ I = } SD ~~, 1 SO ~ x 0 x . D } = I SO 394001 I Piace_AS h.E alt Concrete Dike ~~ J ~ _ _ ~ I= I SD _ I xl I= SO E 1 xj 0 _ SOI 1=I 150_771 (Remove _ haltConcreteDike P t LF SQYD ~ x _ x I - ~ = SO I (- I _ x~ ~ _ _ ___, ~ 50 I x 0 _____ I = I SO I avemen _ 420241 (Grind Existing Concrete 150860~Remove Base and Surfacin ~~ ~ CY 12.00 x ! I = _ . I SO { ~ x_ ~ = ~ f 50 I x 0 I = I. 50 ~ 390095 I Replace Asphalt Concrete Surfacin~_ ~ CY_ _ ~~ CY _ _.r__ _ x I z ~~~~ (_ = ! 50 I SO I L z ~) = z j I = I 50 I I SO L z I 0 x D SQ 1 i = I I = { SO I 1532XX I Remove Cancrete~typ~ 394002 (Place Asphalt Concrei~Misc. Area) ~ I ~ ` 4YD _ S x l __ I_ ,, _ 50 ,,. I ~ _ _ _ , x I = ~~. (_ SO I x~ 0 _ I =} _ SO> I _ _ 153103 iCold Plane Asphalt Concrete Pav~ment :~~~ _ SQ_Y_ tO.OD ~ x I 110 ~ 1 = = I 51,100 ~ x { 2,SD0 } = 1 5_25^000 ~_ 50 x, 2,610 ~ a µ ~ I = i 525,10D I = I 56 } 39_4050 {Rumble Strip _ 413 12A Repair Spatted Joints (Polyester Gmut 1 ~ ~ STA ~~, SQYD z I ~ x I _ { = I 50 I SD 1 1~ x 1 ~ 1 x I~~ I = ~ ,_,_ ~ 1 SO I I I x z D 0 I = },,,,_„ SO I = I 50 } 420102 IGraove Exisiin~ Conaete Pavement € I ~ SQYD 50 SQFT 1 x I x I 240 I = I = _50 I 5360 J 1 z I = x ~ 31 000 I = SO 154fi,500 I x x ~31.24D i = I 546,650 I i Concrete 150769 I Remove Ash a 4 5D846 I Remove Cancrate Pavement I Sidewalk, Curb 8 Gu . CY 11 Q.00 ~ ~ ,x I~'- i = I 5o I ; x I I = _ I sa lI x D r l = I sD 1 I I I I TOTAL STRUCTURAL SECTION ITEMS ~ I i V ~ I 1 I I I ~ 5453,800 I I I ! j I I i t 1 { 5431,000 ~ I I I I y 5584,800 ~ 3 i i I Sapu,mnr,, ,w~=c~,~rd~u;,*Y_:pvr •s,,,~ul,~w 3 of 1D 10-~ LS DISTRlCf t t .~T~~.CI~JENT J PRL-LI~tIN:1RY PROTECT CAST ESTL~I.4TE Alternative 3 SECTION 3 DRAINAGE I ~ ` I I I ~ 1 1 Total Phase 1 ~ unrrPrice North A roach South Ap proach North & South nem coda I { I Un;t i (sJ I Quanti { Cost I I4uarttity I Cast ! { Quan ' I { Cost 153213 (Remove Concrete (structure ( '- -'-'- LS 5000.00 x I 1 I =i S5,000 I x I { _{ 50 I _ x I 1 I _ 55,000 I i( 150806- I Remove Pipe (42"CMPA) ^~ LF 25.00 z I _ {,,,, _1 SO I _ ~ x I I ? I 50 x j ~ 0 I = _ SO I 0 ~ l 150821 f Remove Headwall 150227 (AbandOR 36"x22' CMPA i 16' headwall 2.28 cx COnC _ EA 5.000.60 LF _ 2Q.00 sa I x ._______i = I_ _x I I = ~ 50 f x I I x j I = I = E SO _ SO _ x x ~ = i SO j 0 I = SD 1 Adjust In€et ~ 15243 122 tb steel LF ~~..__._.. x I I =1 50 f z I _~ I CI SO x I D I =; SO I ^_ 155003 ;Cap Inlet 4'X4' c_o, TEA 0 x ( _ I = I 50 ~ 500 I~ 1 I = ( 53 x I 1 x 1 I - I = I SQ S3 5D0 - x I z~ D ~ I~ - _ SO I D00 2 I =1 s7 5105Q2 1 Minor Concrete (Minor SWctureZ~_ ~ __ 2.57 CY 3,500.4 , x , M , _510512 I Minor Concrete Box CulvertL I 800 Ib steel CY F x k ,NI 50 I I 1 = i 50 I x I x 1 ( = I = I 50 SD z x 0 1 = I 50 I ~ D = SO I 62XXXX I ~" APC Pipe ~_-____ manhole l L x SD { ~~ I = I x I I = I SO x 0 = i 50 I fi4XXXX i XXX" Plastic Pik _ 65XXXX 136" RCPRCP pipe __._._ r µ 864 [b stee ~- ~Y-~ ~ LF LF 150.00 ~ µ _ x xl 1DD f =1 515,000 { zl 100 I ) -I { 515,000 D - x 200 =1 530,000 S0~ ~ 0 I = f 66 XX I XXX" CSP Pipe ~- ~~ ~~ LF L ~~~'~ x I I = ( SO I x I =1 SO 1 x j x I I _ ={ S SD ~ - x x _ ~ ~0 1 i ~ { 68XXXX IEd~e Drain 69XXXX I xxX" Pipe Downdrain I F LF »... x I I =1 56 I V ~ x j I = 1 50 x _ _ 0 I =1 50 1 XXXXXXIHeadwall _ i " _ Fes'. 10,000.00 LF xl 1=1 501 z l W I = I SO I xl 1 1 x I = = 1 510,000 I 50 x x t I=1 510,000 a -I =~~ SO Pipe Riser 70XXXX I XXX 70XXXX i X%)C" Flared End Section. .___._ _ ~ _ ^ Fh _ ~ _ x ~ __ _I = I~ SO I ~ x I I = I I 50 I SO T x l 4 I = I 50 I I O~~TI =T=SO I Line Drain 703233 I Grated LF I = I 50 I z I x { = x __ _ 7?XXX)C I Rock Slope Protection Tyge and Method ,_,_ ,_ ~,_ _ EA 10,ODQ.00 x I 4 = 1540,000 I x { 16 1 = ;5160,000 x I 20 = f 5200,000 I I Rack Slope Protection Fabric 724010 _.._. SQYD x I I= i SO 1 x i i= ; SO ti x 0 ,___,i 50 I _ 721420 { Concrete~Ditch Linin _ CY CY x I {= I 5D ~ z l I= I 5D i x 1 x 1 (= (= 1 50 I 50 ~ ' x x 1 I Q I ~= 50 I 721430 I Concrete~Channel Linin L 750001 IMiscetlaneous Iron and Steel ~ LB _ 1.35 x { 0 (= I ~~ 5D T OD0I iS11 I x i ~ xI 6D I = I= I 50 000 1530 ~ x x 0 I = 50 I DOD1 sa1 H2 I 731504 (Curb and Gutter (6" CY 50Q.D0 _ , x 22 = . , ~ .______ 731_521 (Minor Concrete (Sidewaik~ y~-. ~ ~ ~ CY SOO.DD z I 37 I =1 518,500 I x I 105 l I = 1 1552,500 500 (~ x 142 - I 571,000 500 I 1 5 i= 52 731516 (Minor Concrete Driveway i CY 500.00 z l 0 I =1 50 I x 5 = 52. x . I i I TOTAL DRAINAGE ITEMS ! I ( I 1 1 ! I 593,000 I I I I I S273,500 1 i I 5366,500 SECTION 4 SPECIALTY STEMS ~ I i I I I I I Total Phase 1 1 i I Urtrt Price North Approach South A roach North 8~ South Rem aodn ~ ~ Unit (Sl ~ Qvanti ~ ~ Cost ~ ~ Quanta I ~ Cost I I Quan& I ~ Cast ( 070012 I ~ I Ls XI !=1 5D I xl 1 =i sD I x o I=1 so I _ ,., 518002 I Sound Wall Masonry Block} ~ SQFT x I I = i 50 I ~ x I = i SD x : 0 I = 50 ~ ~ 510524 I Minor Concrete Sound Wall) ._._. I ~ CY x I i = I ___, 50 I x I I = ( 50 z I D (= I 50 153250 )Remove Sound Wall SQFT ~ x l 1 =1 501 I l 1 =1 50 i x I I= I 50 I xl I =) 50 z z 0 I= I 50 I Q 50 1 190110 (Lead Compliance Ptan ~ LS LF x x l 1 = ( 50 I x l I =1 SO x 0 I = 50 I 1532XX (Remove Harrier (Insert TyQe~__.__~ I 50T~ I ' x I= I 50 x 0 I= I SO 150652 I Remove Metal Heam Guard RaTnQ•~ XXXXXX rAd~ust utili to grade ~ I ~~ ~ LF FJi 10.00 7,600.00 x 1 - x I I= I SO I x C I= I SO ~ L x 0 = ~ 50 XXXXXX i Relocate Utili Vault _ 80XXXX (Gate (tnseri T e- _. 832601 Metal Beam Guard Railin Steet Post 632002 I Metal Beam Guard Rai6n lw_._..~~_~ ! _ ~ EA EA LF LF _4.000,00 _50.00 35.00 x i I= I DSO I x l I= i SO I _x.~•_~_ I = I 56 I x I 250 1 = i 58,750 I I= I 50 I x I x l I =1 SD x I =1 50 x I 500 I = 1517.500 _ ~ _ x x x x D I= I 50 I 0 I =1 SO i 0~1 = ~ SO I __7_5_0~J,~_{ 526,250 I ~~ .~ H3_4310 i Double Thrie Beam Barrier ~~ ~ LF ~~ ~ x { 1 =1 54 I I I = I SQ I x! I ° 1 50 x { I = l SO ~ x x SO a i =1 ~~~5~0 I ~ U I =~ 839521 I Cable Railin ,_._ ~~ LF _ _ _ x _ . _ I ~~ 50 I I 8395XX (Terminal System1Type CAi'~_^_~,.,,_ , ~~~ EA x i_ I = I SO j x ! (= I SO_ x 0 = r ~~~~ 8395XX IA[lemative Flared Fem;final System _ EA z i j= I SO I 1= I so I x I I= SO I x f I= I 50 ~ x x 5D 0 = I o I= I SD f 8345XX IAltemative inane Termina~__ I System_ ' D I EA x I I { = I 50 I x ( I = i SO x D = I 50 iameter _ r~cn Insert 44XXXX I CIDH Concrete Pil t rt T ~ h C hi I C I LF EA x I = ( SDI x I x I i = I 50 x ~ : 0 I = 50 I ,ype~~M_„_,,, us on ( nse ras 839XXX ,____ _ x 1= l SO I x I I= I SO x 0 I= I SQ I 83XXXX I Concrete Barrier (tnserf _Typ~ `-~~ I -_~ LF I sQ E~ i I I = i 50 x { ~ }~ SO I O~y 83XXXX (Concrete Barrier Insert T eJ ~ LF x = I I = I SD ( x x I I = I SO ~ x _ _ = I 5D 0 520703 I Bar Reinf. Stee3 {Ret Walt) Retaininr Wall 1 C t I Cl ~ LB_ CY x x I = 50 I x I (= I 50 ~ x . D I = I 5D I M. ~ er • oncre e~ ass _ 510408 ~_____~,,,~ , I ~ I =!~~SO 1 x 1 I= I 50 i x D (= I SO 510133 (Class Z Concrete (Retaining Wale R (( CY CY x x I =1 SO i xI ! =I SD I x 0 { =I SD I etaining Walt) 570060 IStructuraiConerete 513553~I Retaining Waq {Masonry Wald I„_,_, _____, ~ CY ~ z l = I 50 I _ .~ z l (= I SD _ i x 0 I- i 50 I eatment insert T e) hitect al T 5110XX (A ~ SQ x i ! _ ; SDI x I I = I SO x 0 I = I SO I yp ur r ( rc i T ~-~ SQ x I I =? SO _ z ; = I SO z I D I = I 50 I ng ti Coat 511048 (Apply Anti-GraS 5136XX I Reinforced Concrete Cn"b Watf (insert Ty _ pe} ~~~ SQ x { I = I 50 I x I _ I = I _ 50 ~ I x 0 i =! 56 I I =1 50 I ~ 83454X (Transition Railin Insert T.pe~,.„______ , ~~ ~ ~ - _EA x I =i 50 { z! I =I 5Q I ~ ^ 0 D I - ( S6~1 ~ 59_7601 IPreoare and Stain Concrete rr- -' - - - ~ SQF T x I i = I SO I x { =! SD SD I I I z ~ 0 I = SD 839561 !Rail Tensioning sembiy _ H345XX I End Anchor Assemb( Insert T e) ~ { _ { ____ EA EA 2,000.00 x f 1 = SO I x l 2 I= I 54,000 I z = i x l 2 I= 54.000 i~ x z f 4 I=( 58A00 1 1 ! I I I E I i k I i I I I TOTAL SPECIALTY ITEMS I I i S12,800 I i 521,500 I ! 534,300 hn,-, i~R -~~:,rt u:o.lJU:I :lY_i_Jkn-s'foma s..ti 4 r.( ~~ 10-129 DISTftlCT f 1 PRELiIv€INARY ATTAC~II~~IOTT PROJE~ COST ESTL~iATE Alternative 2 I I I t I I! [ I E I --- I Section 5 ENVIRONMENTAL I I I I I I I I I I f I { I i I 5A - ENVIRONMENTAL MlTiGAT10N I i ~ ~{ I~ I I Total Phase i I ~ I Unit Pnce North A roach South Approach. (North ~ Sotrthl Rem code ( I Unit (S} 1 Quanfi 1 Cost I I Quanff I Cost I I Ovanff ; I Cost I _ ! Bio[oQical Mitigation 071325 ~Temora Fence oeESA ~ _ I ~ I LS I LF I s0a,D00~DO 20.00 x 0.5 1 = 5250,OOD { z 30D I=I S6,flODl x I 0.5 I =15250.OOD I xl 800 1=1516.0001 x I 1 =I SSOO,OOD xl 1.100 ~~S22,D00 I I I I I I I ( I I 1 Subtota! Environmental 1 I 5256,000 I I 5266,DOD I $522 000 1 1 1 I I z5flffo ! I I I I i t 1 I I I I I I I ! I I I I I •. 1 I 1 1 1 5B -LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION I I I I I I l I ~ ~ ~ i P t North Ap proach South Approach P hase Z Item codo ( I _ I Unit I r ce Un t (s} I Ruantit I Cost I quans I I Cost I I ouanti I I Cost I 20XXXX ( .208000 I landscape, hardscaee and irri~atian I Irri anon S stem ~.~......X......_._.._......___.__-.........._..... ~._.:.~. LS LS 50,000.00 __ z x 1 i __ =1 _ ( SSfl.D00 I / ~-SO I ~ x l x f 2 I =15100.Dfl0 I _ I = I SO I z l 3 I ~~ ~.. =1 5150,000 1 I D a -..~.T~._ 204099 204101 ~ 20170 Plani Estahlishment Work ___ I Extend Plant Establistsment (X YearsL_- 01mparted Topsoil I ~~ LS LS CY 10,D00.00 _ - 10.00 - z x !_ 5 - ( ~- . ---I 10D - I - =1 550,000 I ~~ SO I 51,000 I ~ x ( x { x 1 15 I = (5150,000 I 1 = I 50 150 I = I S1,500 - x I 20 I x I D ~ x 1 250 - = I S20D,OOD _~-- SD I = I 52,500 20XXXX .._ 20XXXX 2030XX 203026 ~XXX" {Insert Type) Conduit (Use fw tnigation x- .._.. Extend XXX" (insert Type} Conduit ,(,Use for Extensron o{Im„~,afion x-ovens) ,,,,_„ Erosion Control~Txge ~,~}~ ~,~- Mave Inl Move Dut sErosion Control) LF LF _ SClYO EA ~ z xI _xl x ( I ...... = = _ = i 56 I 50 _ 50 I 5fl I x I xI x I z I I = I 50 __ I-I SO~ ___. I =I SO 1 1 =1 50 I x 0 x~D x 1 - 0 x I 0 =1 SD -I 50 =~ ~SO I = I SO~ _ - 209801 Maintenance Vehicle Pullout ~~ E A x ( _ ~, = I SO J x I ~ = I 50 I x I 0 SO I = I 208304 203021 _ Water Meter ~~_ Fiber Rolls ( _ -EA LF ~ ~ _ , -~-{ ~ ~ =1 , SQ I SO I ___ x I x I _ I SDI ~ = 150 I x I 0 x i D~~~ _ I = _50 ( = I 50 I 3 I # I I I I I ! I I I Subtotal Landsca a and (rri anon I 5101,000 ( I 5251,500 ( I $352,500 f I I I I I ! i II I I II I I i l I I I 1 i I 1 I I I I sc -NPDES I I I i I I I I I I I I I NO~h Approach South A roach Phase 2 uem eaae I I I Un8 unit Price (SJ I Quanfi I Cost I I }} Quanf' I I Cost i I Quantity! Cost 074019 IPreoareSWPPP~ 074017 Prepare~WPCP 074016 IConstructian Site Management _ ~~~ I f - - ~~~~^ - LS LS L5 7,000;00 ... M ~ x z z 0.5 ~~ I~ 53.5001 I - SD = I SD I ( x1 x 1 x I 0.5 I=1 53,500--~1•- _ 1 =1 5u I ~ I = I 50 I W x{ 1~=1 57,0001 x I _D I =j 50 x_~_0_~ = I SO M ~ 074023 lTemparery Erasion Contol SOYD x _ LI SD f _x I 1 =1 50 I ~ x I D 1= I 50 074027 Tem oraty Erosion, Control Blanket _ 07403_7_1 Move lnl Move Out (Temporary Emsfon Cvnlrol) _074028 Temporary Fiber Rot[ _._.. 1 0740a2 Temporary Concrete Washout {Panabte) Temporary Concrete Washout Facility I 07403 2 SO`fD F_A MLF LS EA 4.00 _2,540.00 x x x x z i~~ ~ 5170 ~0.~ - I SO - I SO I = 52.0D0~ I ° SO ~51,250 { j ~ i ! z x x x x ! = I 50 I I I = I 50 t 1 1,500 =1 56,0_!70 ( I I =1 SDI I 0.5 I = I 51.250 f x 1 0 1= SO x IUD 1 = I S4 x I 2,000 I = I SS,OOff x I D I =': SD x 1 1 = 52,500 I 1 T _ _ 074033 Temporary Construdion Entrence N__-- 035 (Temporary Check Dam ~ ~ .. 074 ~~~ ~- I -EA LF s,DOD,oD ~ x _x ( D.5 ~ I = I SZ-,500 I = I ~ SO ! I - x z I D.5 I = I -52,5Dfl I I 1 =1~ 50 I x I 1 (= 55,000_ x I 0 I = 50 _ __ _ _074036 Temp. Drainage Inlet Protection `~ 074041 I Street Sweeping _ ~ 5uppfementalWarkforNPDES~ ~ _ _ ~ ~ -~ -~ - ~ EA_ -_ L5 w _300.00 5,000.00 x x ~ I_ ~-2 -~ ~ ~ ~ I_=_I _SD _ 55.000 ( I f I x x ( 1~ I = 5300 I I ~ 1 I = 55,000 ' I~--~ ( I _ I -- - x , 1 ~'; 5300 x ( 2 _I = 510_000 I _I I _ ~ I _ r - 056595 Water Poliul'ron Control MainL Sharing' LS x I - - - =1 I x I _ 1 = I SDI - 0 ~ SO x 066596~Addil3onat Water Pollution Con6rot { L5 _ - x ~- - I (°_ ,_,.,,_ ~ I ~ x I = I 50 x I 0 1 = L,,, SO Y _ 06654r Storm Water Sampling andA_nalysis'~~-_ X ~ Per Ci of Chula Vista s~vlemensal work for NPDES naf re4uired L_5 -MT x x _•- ~ tj-°.^- I = I - I I x x l =I S0 I I = SO I x1 D 1=1 50_ z ; 0 I = I SO I- I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I Subtotal hfPDES (Without Supplemental Work) ~ ~ 514,304 ~ ~ 518,600 ~ f 532,800 i i t t i t i i i i ~ i i I I I E I I I t l l I I I I I TOTAL ENVERONNIENTAL ( I ~ ~ 5371,300 I I 5536,100 ~ i ~ 5907,300 ~ I;rp:fcvar~:. Cntc ror~li:t~ lRY_~:.Jfx:n/(w^_,:W Sot 10 70-130 DISTRICT Il A.rT'I`~.~~ITNT J PREi.IMiiJARY FROIECT COST EST1hL4TE Alternative 2 Section 6 TRAFFiC ITEMS I ~ I I I I ~ I I Total Phase 1 . 1 I { I I I I .. ffsc Electrical ; T 16A I unit Price North A p proach South A pproach (North & South} aa - Ncm cods ( I I and I (5) I Quan ' I Cast ( ( Quanh i i Cost I ! Quan ' Cost _ 86055X I Ligtttin~ 8 Si n Illumination ~ I ~I & Li hti l L ,,,, S 1 LS 1 15,OOO.D4 000.00 75 x x l ~ 2 I= 1 = S3f),000 ~ 575,000 x~ x l 6~ 2 1 ~ = I 590,000 J 515a,0oa J x I 8 I=15120,006 1 x I 3 (=15225,DD0 r~ ng~„___, s H60XXX {Signa ~ . J 50 I J 0 I = l BfiXXXX.-tIFiber ODEic Condui~slem ~.~ - -._ _~ LS I z = I I 1 56 SO - z _ - ~ 50 I x xl 0 I =1 50 I~ I ~ 8611XX lftam~Metering System~Location X~ 8611XX I Ramp Metering System ttflcalion X~ I _ I3 ~~- LS I LS I - x ± - -= ~ 1 ' I SO_ x x = ~ SO I x I 0 I = I 50 I I 8607XX 11nterconnection Facilities I ~ LS I ,_ x =1 SO L 50 x = = SO I I 50 1 x l 0 J= I 50 I x I 0 I =I M~50 ! 5fi02XX 1Fumish Sign Strucure_-___ LB_I _ ~ - x_ ~ = x , , ° - 5602XX I ltutall Sign Structure I S6XXXX~ IXxx- CEDHC Pile (Sign Foundation) __.. i L$ ( LF I - ~~ x x = 50 I 50 I ' x x - ~ = I SO I J.._ SO I x I 0 I = ( SO x I 0 I -I SO 860810 I InducWe Loo D~ etectors EA I ~ _ x_ C ~ ~ 5~ _ x , - ~ SDI ! x I 0 ~{ =1 SO I = I Bfi09XX ITrafc Monitoring, Stations LS I x ! I = O I 1 50 I - x x __...~ I= ......-SO ~ 501 x I 0 50 xl ooY !_{ sOI~ 150760 Remove Sign Structure ,_„ { !r 151581 Reconstruct ~n Structure I I EA 1 - E4 I 5,000.00 _ x x I - = r 50 I SO - - , x l z~ __ - 1= ! __50 I SO I x l D I =1 50 x! 0 ~{ =1~ S0~ 152641 Modify Sign SWcture _ I ~ XXXXXX I Relocate Fxistin tltili PPoles I F.A I LS 1 50,060.00 X I x l 6 1 = __ 15300,000 x l _ 10 = SSOO,D00 I x l 16 I=15800,000 I ; i I Subtotai Traffic Electrical I l I ~ I I I S405,D00 I ~ I l ~ I ~ I I 5740,000.1 ~ ~ l I f I I ; I i , ~ ~ i I 1 I ~ 1 I I' i I I I _ f I ~6B - Taaffic Signing and Striping I unrr Prfee North A roach South A pproach (North 8e South) t C t I Q I I C t I Item node i I unit (Sj i QuanG I Cost I Quanti i ost uan r os ~ 5fib011 I Roadside Si n~One Post) ~ 566012 1 Roadside Sin wo Post ^^ EA ~+ x I x ( , = 50 = I SO x x ( -. -_.- I ~ I 50 { 50 I ~ ` f 0 I x I 0 I = I = I 50 SO ~ ____~_ ~_ SQFT x 50 x I SO I xl 0 ( =1 50 5fi0XXX IFumish Sign Panels I ______ SOFT ..- x ; ~ = SD x SO I x I D ~ =1 SO 566XXX {Install Sign Panels 15D710 (Remove Traffic Stripe~~ ~ LF 1.00 x __ __ ~ =t 50 x - I - _ 50 I ~ x I 0 I =1 SO 150701 IRemove Yellow Painted Traffic Stripe ~ _ ~ LF ~ »._. x ._I .....-~_ 1 = I SD ={ 5D x x _ I ~ 50 1 ~ SO I x 1 0 I x I D I = I = I 50 S~ 150713_ I Remove Pavement Marking 150742 ~1 Remove Roadside Sign I SQFT EA z x ~_..._._._._. ~~"'~ 50 I ~~ ~. x r...._.__ ~T,., ~ w ..._.~. ~ 50 _ x j 0 1 = _ I 50 _N FJi x 1 5>D x I 50 ( z I 0 I = I 50 152320 I Reset Roadside Sign - ^~~- _ = SO x ~ I =~T50 I x j 0 I = 1 SO ~ 152340 ?Relocate Roadside Sin F~ - x I =T 50 x 1 1 = 50 1 x ~ 0 I = 1 50 ( 8201DX ~ Delineator Class X H4XXXX I Permanent Pavement Delineation f ~ E4 LS x x I = I SO x l ( - ~ SO I _ x l D I = 1 50 _ x - I SO x I SO = ~ 1 x I 0 I = I SO0 120090 I ConsWction Area Si ns ~ ( I _ LS LF 1 D0 z _ _ 700 ( 2 700 =1 S2 k x _ 5.400 I _ =~ -S5,400 I x l 8,100 1 = 58,100 I 840501 Thermoplastic Traffic Slri e , . , I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 ! I 1 1 Subtotal Traffic 5i nin and Stri in I 52,700 I I 55,40D I 58,1D0 I ~ t Pl ( M I I unit Price North Approach Souttt Approach I Total Phase 1 I an anagemen 16C - Traffic " I C t teem eodo l ( Umt I (S) I QuanSt I Cost i 1 Quanli F l Cost I { os I Quanf 128650 I Portable Changeable Messa a Si ns I ~ LS ~ 400 x _2 ~, I 5800 ,_ S J - ~~_ ~-2J I- + 5800 ! l~ -1=1 sDl x I 4 I =I S1 800 l o -1=1 sot - j I tF O I=1 T x x I 1 I ! 1 I I 'I I l i I 1 I I I Subtotal Traffic Mana ement Plan I I 5800 5800 I 51,600 Total Phase 1 6D -Stage Construction and Tratfiic Handling { ~ unit Price North A roach South Ap proach (North 8, South) Item eox ; ! I Unit (5) I Quanh I Cast i I Quanh i i Cost ! I Quanti 1 I Cost I 129099A I Tragic Plastic Drum I EA z SO ~ - ~ = SO I x 1 0 1 = I SO _ 120ifiX ~ Channeiizer I EA x -. x L I . = __ 50 ( M x l 0 I =1 SQ 120120 T e III Barricade - ~~ ~ -EA Fem x z { = SO SO - x ~ I = Y ~ SO J SDI x 1 0 I = I S0. x I 6 I = I SO f _ _ 129100 I Temp. Crash Cushion Module ____.. . WD _ z ~. - - ; = 50 _ ~~_ , x L ~~ _ 50 I x { 0 I =1 So _ 120100 (Traffic Control System 839fi03A ;Temporary Crash Cushion (ADtEM) I- W EA - ~-~~~ x _ _ ~µ _- ~ I~ SO- - _ x I ~ I 5~D ( x (~_0 f = j__SO ~ ( T K -LF -x _ l - I S0 t 1 xl = S01 x( 0 (=1 S y~e ) 129000 ITempo2rYRailin~ etineat icn I 120143 JTe rary Pavement D LF - x I ~ 50 _I- T x_ - ~ ^ SO ( x j 0 I = 14 _50~ ^ _ _ _ XXXXXX I Traffic Control ~- I ~ LS 150,000 x 0.5 = 575,D00 I t.5 x = 1 S225.OOD I x I Z J =1530D,006 { f I I I 1 ( I I 1 1 1 I I Subtotal Stage Construction and Traffic Handling ~ S75,000 ~ I 5225,ODD ~ I S3DD,DDD I I ! I I f l t f I l i l i I TOTAL TRAFFIC I I ( 5483,500 I I I 5971,200 i l l 51,454,7D0 I i 0-1 31 PRELttvtIN.~RY DISTRICTIt ~.T'~['AC~-II~El~rI` ~ PROIEL'i' COST ESTIMATE Alternative Z I , , 1 I I i i , I 1 f Section 7 DETOURS' I I I 1 1 I I I I I Total Phase 1 I I ~ I Unit Price North Approach South Approach (Narftr 8~ Southl Itcm~eode { I unit . (5) I Quant~ I i Cost I I Quanta i Cost I I Quan ' ~ I Cast I 190101 I Roadwa Excavation _ I t .~ I b k E CY CY 25.00 x _I =_i SO I x I ~- I =1 SO x I I x I = I SDI =l 50 1y z 2,SOD I = { 562,500 I xl^ 0 -I~I~ SO I men an 198050 m 198001 Iimparied Borrow I - CY 30.00 _ . _ _ z =1 S0~ ~ x I =< S0 ~ x~ 5,000 =I 5150,000 1 _ 3901D2 IAs hE alt Concrete •Pe A~ ~ 112. ODO sf - 3' TON 90.00 x I = 5D I '~ x I I •~~ = I 56 ~_~ I x ( 930 I = 583,7D0 I ~ W 0 I 26o2D1 Class 2 A~~ atre2e Base_,„„_ 112, Ooo sf - 6 _..~ TON 80,00 x I = I sa 1 56 I = x D 5 25tl401~ Class 4 Aggreclate Sublsase ( CY _ I =1 _ SO x I ~•-- - x I I = ( 50 L x I 0 Ir= SO I ' ~ 07XXXX (Tern ors Drains a 129000 ITempora Ralinc~TYRe K) I ~ LS LF 25,000,00 ~ ~ x { y ~ 50 I xl I =f_,_;_„_„SOh S ~ z I x I ~ = ( 50 I =1 SD~ t = ~ S25,000 I x I 1 xl 0 ~= 56 ~ T _ 1286JCX I Temeota~ tiynals I w FA _ W' D I _ _ i = I x l x I = SDI i I I~" Sp z l O~ = SO I _ I Pavement Delineation • 1 ITemporary 120143 LF x I = I _50~ ~ ~ x So = x 0 • _ , _ INPDES I LF 18,800.D0 5D I T x x I (_ (. 50 i x l 1 I= 518,BD0 I - InUUdes~consiruaing, ma'mtaining, and removaE { I I ( I I i ( I I I I I I I ~ f f 1 I I I k 1 I I 1 i i t I TOTAL DETOUR' ITEMS I 1 I SD { SD { S34D,DDD I I ! I E I 1 i I' I I I I I j i t I ( ! I i I Section 8 MINOR ITEMS ~ ~ I ~ I ~ ~ Total Phase 1 ~ {{Use Appropriate percentage between 5%•10°.5) North Approach SouthA roach North&5outh Storn codo { unit :5 I Tota! 1-7 4 I~ Cost I Tata! f-7 I Cost I Tota! 1-7 I Cast I { Total of Seetion 1-7 LS 10 h x l 4,469,tOD 1= 15446.910 I x l D I =1 SO i x{ 4,469,1001 =1 5446,910 I i I 1 1 I Il I I II l i II TOTAL MINOR ITEMS I $446,900 I~ SO I ~44fi,90D I I• I I I I I II I I it I I ~ I~ I I I Il I I I! Section 9 ROADWAY MOSILiZATION' . I ~ I I ~ ~ 1 ( Total Phase i --I -- - _ I Mort pgroac Sou A roach . North & Sou Item cads { - I Unit ;E Total 1-e I I ~ Cost 1 Tofa! i-8 I Cost . Total f-8 I I Cost I 994990 I 7atal Section 1-8 I LS 1D°!° x{ 4.916.0001 ° 15441,600 I x I D = I SO I x 14,916,000{ = 15491,600 I I I I I I II I I !I I I II I TOTAL M061LlZATION'ITEMS I I 5491,60D I { SO I $491,6DD I ( I I I I I 1 I I 1 I 1 11 I I 11 I I I f I I l I I Section St) SUPPE_EMENTAL WORE ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ( ~ ~ 'f-otaf Phase 1 I I North A roach South Ap proach (North 8 Southl ucm cotlc I Un$ go Total i-8 I ! Cost Total i-H ! Cost I ~ ! Tata! f-8 I ! Cost Total Section 1-8 ( ~ LS ~_. 5% _ x 1 5,4_07,fi00{yl 5270,3H0 I ~~ ~ z ( _ I = I SD ( x 15,407,6D0(~ 5270,38D ( ~ _~ 1 UnftPrice I I I I 1 ( ( I I I S 'Item code( ~ I unit (5) I Ovan& i ( Cost I I Quantrty I Cost I i Quantit ~ I Cost I - Campensation Adjustment for Price Ofi6fi66 ~ ( i As halt f P i LS x ~ ~ ~ 50 ~ I = I i: LL x I I - I 50 I I x, D ~ 50 4~ av e •_~~~,,,_,,,,,,_,__ n . ons o _index Fluctuat ~z _- MY .._ I = I 50 h ~ x ~~~ ° I SO I 50 1 x I D j - D66094 I Value AnafYsis,.,-T___„_„~ I O(i6~080 I Maintain Traffic I _ LS LS - z __ I = ~ ~ 50~-_ -~ x I = So II ~ - " z) m 0 1~= I SO ~ 066920 I Dispute Review 8aard ~~ 1 _,_~~~• . LS ~LS ~ x z ~ I _ SO I ~ { =I 50 { I x k z { i ~ I ° SO I . 50 IT I~ x _ Q I = I_ ^ 50 I 50 I x I ^ D i =~ 066015 I Federal Trainee Program I ~,_~ ~' I` 066700 I Pertneling ~ t5 •~!u ~ X __. I = I So {~ -~.... x I = ___ I So ~I ~ __ _ _ ,-,~ x 1 _ Q ~ I =!___, So I _ ~„_,_ D662D4 I Remove Rock & Debris _._~~_ I ~ LS x I I - ~ S0 1 x ~•-„ ._ ~, - 066222 I Locate Existing Cross~Over I __ _ - LS ~ z _ _ SO ~^ x I ,,,, I = I' SO II x I-~~~~ 0~~~}i~_f SD I + Operation of Existing Traffle Management System LS x ~ = 50 ( x ~ = 50 i SO x ~ 0 I = ~ 466866 Elements During Construction Y_ ~ _. - 111 _ 11f 5D ~= INPDES SuROfementa! Work saeciBed in Section 5 C ~ ~ I So ~ I ~ I ( 50 ( x ~ 0 I I # { I I I I I I I I A I I TOTAL SUPPLEMENTAL WORK ~ I I t I S270,4D0 I I! I I SDI 1 I I I ~27D,4DD I v V I I ..ne,.,,-nn;~mncmwmttl rr.~:;~vovm.tor-stied 7 of 10 10-132 DtSTR3CT 21 ~TT~ir~L~ o •~~T PftELENiJTJARY SS77ii PROJECT COST ESTFIvtATE Alternative 2 i i l I I l I ! I I f I 1 Section 11 STATE FURN[SHED MATERlAL~ ~ ~ ( Total Phase 1 ( I Unrt Price North ARRroach South A roach {North & South} IMm Bade f I unit (5) quanti j cast IQUBnti I cost I Quant- I I Cost 066105 RE Offcce f CY z I ice( SO I x I - I = 50 I x ( 0 I = I _ SO Ofi6063 Public information i F ~ ~~ CY ~ z I I = I SO x ( ~^ ~ - I SO I x { 0 I = ( 50 066901 I ense s ~ Water Exp _CY x I I = I SO ! x I = 50 I x I 0 I = I 50 06fi84X - 06684X I _ o Ram Meter Contratler Assembl TMS Controller Assembly TON CY x I I = I SO I x I __..W I = I SO I x (_____.._ x {_ __ ~ = = SO ( SO I x { 0 (_ ( x I 0 ={ SO SO 46684X TrafSc Signal ControFler Assembly CY x I = 50 { x I~ ~ = 50 I x { 0 I = I 50 066062A 066838 I COZEEP• Expenses ___ Reflective Numbers and Edge Sealer ~ LS LF x l I =1 50 xr-~T= I 50 x l x { = = SO I I SO I x l 0 I =1 x ; 0 I = ( SO 50 066803 Padlocks _ EA ~ x l I =1 SO x 1 = l 50 I x l 0 I = 1 50 'Includes wnstructing, maintaining, and removal I I ( I I I I I I I i I I I t ! I f I i I I I I I TOTAL STATE FURNISHED I I SO I I 50 I I $0 i I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I i t I I I I Sectio n 12 CONTWGENCY , I I I I i ~ ( I Use appropriate percentage based an the detail at estimate. Anything atherthan the suggested contingency in the PDPM needs to oe'justified. (Pre-P5R 30°.6-50%, PSR 25%, PR 20%, PAR 15:°, Alter PAR 7095) orth AoProaCh outh Aoaroach Total Phase 1 {North ~ South} qem coat { Unit ".'o I Tota! 1-111 I Cosf I Total 1-f 1 1 Cost I 701811-11 I I Cost I I Tatal Section 1-11 I S 20% x 15,678,0001 = I Si,135,600 x I I =1 SO i x 15,678,000 I =1 S1,135,60D I { I I I I I I i I I 1 I TOTAL CONTINGENCIES I ( ( 51,135,600 I SO I i I $1,135,600 I I i I I I. I I I l i I I { I Il I I I i f I I Sectio n 13 OVERHEAD ~ I ~ , I I ~ Total Phase 1 { ( Unit Price ort A coat out coat North 8° South item eadc I I unit (5) (Quanti I I Cost ( IQOBnti Cost ( Ouantit I I Cost 070018 ITxne Related Overhead (TRO) I WD 5% x 116,989,000 I SB49,450 x I i = I SO { x { 16,989,000(= ( 5849,450. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t ! ! i I l i I I I I I i i I I I 4 1 I I I TOTAL OVERHEAD I I $849,500 I $0 ( I 1 5849,450 I I M I I I I 1 1 i I ( ! I n~,r,~=.,, ~Irti.Tsl~ r .ar :n:.~f 8 cr 10 10-133 DISTRICT 1t PRELBvIINARY .C A-~~.f"Y~~~,Jt..l'43..Z:1~~ J PR03ECT COST ESTIMATE Alfernafive 2 I ~ 1 Il. ST RUCTURES ITEMS II f Structure '[ Structure 2 Structure 3 I I I I i I A BATE OF ESTIMATE 06/03109 06/03/09 00/00/00 I Br'sd a Name Heritage Road Bridge Herita a Road Brid e ~ Brid a Number _ 57C-0670 57C-0670 57-)(y~( - I Structure T e ClP PIS Slab Brid a Removat ( Width Feet out to out 118.00 LF I 0.001 LF I 0:001 LF ( Total Brid a Len th (Feet 450.001 LF I O.DOI LF I 0.001 LF I ( Total Area S uare Feet 531001 SQFT j 0.001 SQFT 0.00 SQFT Struc#ure De th Feet 2.00 LF. i 0.001 LF 0.001 LF 1 Footin T ile or s read Piie ( Cost Per S uare Foot 518222 $500,000 Lum Sum $0.00 i I I 59,fi75,882.00 S500,000.00 1 .COST OF EACH STRUCTURE $g,676,OD0.00 $500,000.00 $0.00 I 1 I I I ! I I ! I I 1 f I ! I i I 1 ! 1 I I 1 I i I I 1 I a I V I I I i I i I I I ~ I I I I Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 _ I 1 f I f I ( BATE OF ESTIMATE 00!00100 00!00!00 .00!00100 Brid a Name ( Brid a Number 57-XXX 57-XXX 57-XXX Structure T e I Width Feet out to out 0.00 LF ~ 0.001 LF 1 0.00 LF 1 ( Total Brid e Len th Feet 0.0D1 LF ~ 0.001 LF 0.001 LF 1 _ ( Total Area S uare Feet 0.001 SQFT 1 D.DDI SQFT 1 0.041 SQFT ~ ( Structure De th Feet 0.001 LF I 0.001 LF 1 0.001 LF _ 1 Faotin T e iie ors read 1 Cost Per S uare Foot $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1 I E 1 I I I I f ! t 1 I I I I I E ! I 1 I 1 I I COST OF EACH STRUCTURE $0.00 $OAO $0.00 I I I I [ I i t I I I I I I i I ! I I i l i I I I I ! I I I I i I i 1 I I I I 1 I I ! ( f I I ( i I I TOTeAt.. COST OF STRUCTURES( I ` $1©,178,000.00 i St0,S7b,00f1.D4 StD,i7fi,DDD.DD I ~ I { Estimate Przpared By: I f I - Qivisioa at SUUCtures I Qaie I I i ! I I I E I l i~Sisudure's Estimate incivdes Overhead and Mobir¢atiun_ I I I i I I I I f I I I 1 i I I I 1 1 k I I 1 I ! i I I I I i f I Ilap Ilmu-...~ loln F:n~lifisit l/rYiF~J(.an,Jfu,xrs.hvN 9 of 1 iJ 10-134 DISTRICT f f /~, ,L~ PROTECT' C05T ESTFMAY£'~~~'` "~~~~~~ Aiternative 2 i I I I i ! I I I[I. RIGHT OF 1111AY I I i I I A) Acquisi#ion, including Excess Land PurcFtases, Damages #o Remainder(s) ~ Goodwill Loss (Also includes rent for temporary easement} {$150,00 0 $225,000 $375,000 I I I ! I I I I 13 ( Railroad I I I I I I S 01 - ! I I I 1 C ( Ac uisition of Offsi#e Miti atian - I I I S I 01 I I I i i l I I I D I Ufilit Relocation State Share i 1 I I $ 0 I Potholin Desi n Phase I ( I j I I I I I I I I ( I E ! Clearance Cost I I 1 I I ~ I 0 1 I I I I I I I I !. F I RAP and/or Lasf Resort Housin Costs I I ~ 0 1 I I I - I I I I I I I G ( Title and Escrow Fees ( ! ! I I $ I 0 1 i I I I i I I RIIN ESTIMATE ~ ~ $375,000.00 I I I I I l I I I H I Gondemnation Settlements 0%1 j I S 01 I I I I I i I I l I I (Desi n A reciation Factor I 0%I I I I S I 01 I items H u l a lied to items A+ B I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I i I I I I I 4 I I i I I TOTAL RNV ESTIMATE I $375,000.00 Excfudin Item #8 -Hazardous Waste I I I I l I 1 I ! I I .I> TOTAL R/1~1 ESTIMATE: Escalated ~ $375,000.00 1 I I 1 I i I I I K IUtilit Reiocat"son Construction Cost I i I $ I of i I I I I I I I I I I I I i f RIGHT OF WAY SUPPORT ! S I OI i I I I I I I I i I I i i I~ 1 i I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I i i I I ! I I Support Cost Estimate Prepared By Project Coordinator' I Phone j tltiiity Estimate Prepared By I Ufsiiy Coardnato+^ I Phone ! R!W Acquistion Estimate f Prepared By I Right of Way Estimator' Phone ! I I I I I I I I I i I I I 1 I I I I 'When estimate has Support Costs Doty I 'When estimate has Utility Relocation ;When RNJ AcquisiBon is required I I i I I i hsm:!/cm~-np ~i.:a.y-cs~l~liscl l(Jsi5n/CornJCams.h:nl ~~ OT ~~ 10-135 IViENiORANDUlYI August 25, 2010 File: 0735-10-STM364 TO: Jim Sandoval, City Manager FROIYi: Rick Hopkins, Public Works Director/City Enginee SUBJECT: Request for Approval of Selection Committee to iew Consultant Teams for Professional Services consisting of Preliminary Engineering for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge over the Qtay River The proposed project tivill perform Preliminary Engineering and Envirorunental Studies for the replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge, crossing the Otay River, between Main Street and Entertainment Circle. The Consultant selected shall provide to the City of Chula Vista, professional and technical bridge design and related support services including but not limited to, structural, geo-technical, and hydraulic design and develop design plans for the replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge. The Consultant must be familiar with the following: • California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Local Assistance Program Guidelines • State of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) • National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) • Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) regulations. On Friday September 10, 2010, the Public Works Department will issue a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) with a due date of October 13, 2010. A Number of consultants are expected to respond to the RFQ and submit Statements of Qualifications {SOQ). The responding consultants will be ranked and a short list of three to five qualified consultants will be invited for interviews.. The final ranking of consultants will be based on the interviews. Fer Section 2.56 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, we request your concurrence to appoint the following people to form the Intervie~,v Selection Committee that will be responsible to interview and select a Consultant Team: Iracsema Quilantan, Assistant Director of Engineering Kirk Ammerman, Principal Civil Engineer-Project Design Ben Guerrero, Senior Planner-Environmental Jose Luis Gomez, Land Surveyor-Project Manager Mario Ingrasci, Associate Civii Engineer-Project Engineer Representatives from CALTRANS If you have any questions, please contact Jose Gomez, Project Manager, at Ext. 2301. We request your signature indicating your concurrence with the recommendation to appoint the above listed Interview Selection Committee members. Thank you. 10-136 RESOLUTION N0.2011- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH MOFFATT AND NICHOL, AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE OVER THE OTAY RIVER, AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the Heritage Road Bridge was constructed as a two lane, interim, timber- deck bridge in 1993 to replace the culverts that were washed out the previous year by the Otay River and subsequently widened to accommodate peak event traffic; and WHEREAS, the existing bridge will not accommodate expected traffic resulting from the future planned development of eastern Chula Vista and Otay Mesa, pedestrians, cyclists or a 50- year storm event; and WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista's General Plan indicates that Heritage Road will ultimately be a 6-lane major arterial and; and WHEREAS, the City has been allocated funding in the amount of $2,519,720 through the Federal "Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act, A Legacy for Users" (SAFTEA LU) Section 1702 - "High Priority Projects" for Preliminary Engineering and Environmental analysis; and WHEREAS, the City publicly advertised for the services of a consultant to evaluate design alternatives and to provide environmental services, preliminary engineering design, final design, and construction support or the Project; and WHEREAS, the City interviewed four qualified firms and ranked Moffatt & Nichol as the top firm for the Project; and WHEREAS, the estimated cost of the services, included as the not to exceed amount of the contract, is one million seven hundred seventy seven thousand four hundred twenty one dollars ($1,777,421); and WHEREAS, CALTRANS has completed aPre-Award Audit for the project, which audit included reviewing the fees for to be charge for various services and tasks. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve an agreement between Moffatt & Nichol and the City of Chula Vista to provide professional engineering services related to the replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge. 10-137 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Director of Public Works of the City of Chula Vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreements for and on behalf of the City of Chula Vista. Presented by Richard A. Hopkins Director of Public Works 10-138 THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE FORMALLY SIGNED UPON ~PROVAL BY THE CITY, COUN I~~ Gl n R. Googins ity Attorney Dated: ~ l ~ f AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, AND MOFFATT AND NICHOL 10-139 AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND MOFFATT AND NICHOL TO PROVIDE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION AND FINAL DESIGN FOR THE HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT This agreement ("Agreement"), dated for the purposes of reference only, and effective as of the date last executed unless another date is otherwise specified in Exhibit A to this Agreement ("Exhibit A"), Paragraph 1, is between the City-related entity whose name and business form is indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 2, ("City"), and the entity whose name, business form, place of business and telephone numbers are indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraphs 4 through 6, ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the following facts: Recitals WHEREAS, the City has planned for the Preliminary Engineering, Environmental Documentation and Final Design for the Heritage Road Bridge Replacement Project over the Otay River in Chula Vista, California, (hereinafter referred to as "Project"); and, WHEREAS, the City publicly advertised for consulting services for the Project; and, WHEREAS, the City interviewed four qualified firms and ranked ( Consultant ), Inc as the top firm for the Project; and, WHEREAS, the City and Consultant have define a scope of work; and, WHEREAS, Consultant warrants and represents that it is experienced and staffed in a manner such that it can deliver the services required of Consultant to City in accordance with the time frames and the terms and conditions of this Agreement; and [End of Recitals. Next Page Starts Obligatory Provisions.] 10-1~0 OBLIGATORY PROVISIONS PAGES NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and Consultant do hereby mutually agree as follows: All of the Recitals above are' incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. ARTICLE I. CONSULTANT'S OBLIGATIONS A. General 1. General Duties. Consultant shall perform all of the services described on Exhibit A, Paragraph 7 ("General Duties"). 2. Scope of Work and Schedule. In performing and delivering the General Duties, Consultant shall also perform the services, and deliver to City the "Deliverables" described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, entitled "Scope of Work and Schedule," according to, and within the time frames set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, time being of the essence of this agreement. The General Duties and the work and Deliverables required in the Scope of Work and Schedule shall be referred to as the "Defined Services." Failure to complete the Defined Services by the times indicated does not, except at the option of the City, terminate this Agreement. a. Reductions in Scope of Work. City may independently, or upon request from Consultant, from time to time, reduce the Defined Services to be performed by the Consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing so, City and Consultant agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose of negotiating a corresponding reduction in the compensation associated with the reduction. b. Additional Services. In addition to performing the Defined Services, City may require Consultant to perform additional consulting services related to the Defined Services ("Additional Services"), and upon doing so. in writing, if they are within the scope of services offered by Consultant, Consultant shall perform same on a time and materials basis at the rates set .forth in the "Rate Schedule" in Exhibit A, Paragraph 10(C), unless a separate fixed fee is otherwise agreed upon. All compensation for Additional Services shall be paid monthly as billed. 3. Standard of Care. The Consultant expressly warrants that the work to be performed pursuant to this Agreement, whether Defined Services or Additional Services, shall be performed in accordance with the standard of care ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in similar locations. a. No Waiver of Standard of Care. Where approval by City is required, it is understood to be conceptual approval only and does not relieve the Consultant of responsibility for complying with all laws, codes, industry standards, and liability for damages caused by negligent acts, errors, omissions, noncompliance with industry standards, or the willful misconduct of the Consultant or its subcontractors. Page 2 Two Parry Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design far the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STM364) " 10-141 4. Subconsultants. Any subcontract in excess of $25;000 entered into as a result of this contract shall contain all the provisions stipulated in the. contract to be applicable to subconsultants. B. Application of Laws. Should a federal or state law pre-empt a local law, or regulation, the Consultant must comply with the federal or state law and implementing regulations. No provision of this Agreement requires the Consultant to observe or enforce compliance with any provision, perform any other act, or do any other thing in contravention of federal, state, territorial, or local law, regulation, or ordinance. If compliance with any provision of this Agreement violates or would require the Consultant to violate any law, the Consultant agrees to notify City immediately in writing. Should this occur, the City and the Consultant agree that they will make appropriate arrangements to proceed with or, if necessary, amend or terminate this Agreement, or portions of it, expeditiously. Subcontractors. Consultant agrees to take appropriate measures necessary to ensure that all participants utilized by the Consultant to complete its obligations under this Agreement, such as subcontractors, comply with all applicable laws, regulations, ordinances, and policies, whether federal, state, or local, affecting Project implementation. In addition, if a subcontractor is expected to fulfill any responsibilities of the Consultant under this Agreement, the Consultant shall ensure that the subcontractor carries out the Consultant's responsibilities as set forth in this Agreement. C. Insurance General. Consultant must procure and maintain, during the period of performance of this Agreement, and for twelve months after completion, policies of insurance from insurance companies to protect against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work under this Agreement and the results of that work by the Consultant, his agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors, and provide documentation of same prior to commencement of work. 2. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage must be at least as broad as: a. CGL. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence Form CG0001). b. Auto. Insurance Services Office Form Number CA 0001 covering Automobile Liability, Code 1 (any auto). c. WC. Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. d. E&O. Professional Liability or Errors & Omissions Liability insurance. appropriate to the Consultant's profession. Architects' and Engineers' coverage is to be endorsed to include contractual liability. Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (,STM364)" Page 3 10-142 3. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant must maintain limits no less than those included in the table below: i. General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, (Including (including death), and property damage. If Commercial General operations, Liability insurance with a general aggregate limit is used, either products and the general aggregate limit must apply separately to this completed Project/location or the general aggregate limit must be twice the operations, as required occurrence limit. a licable ii. Automobile $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury, including death, and Liability: property damage. iii. Workers' Statutory Compensation $1,000,000 each accident Employer's $1,000,000 disease-policy limit Liabili $1,000,000 disease-each em to ee iv. Professional $1,000,000 each claim Liability or Errors & Omissions Liabili 4. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either the insurer will reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as they pertain to the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Consultant will provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to the City guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses. 5. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability, automobile liability, and where appropriate, the worker's compensation policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: a. Additional Insureds. City of Chula Vista, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers are to be named as additional insureds with respect to all policies of insurance, including those with respect to liability arising out of automobiles owned,. leased, hired or borrowed by or on behalf of the Consultant, where applicable, and, with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of the Consultant, including providing materials, parts or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations. The general liability additional insured coverage must be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Consultant's insurance using ISO CG 2010 (11/85) or its equivalent. Specifically, the endorsement must not exclude Products/Completed Operations coverage. b. Primary Insurance. The Consultant's General Liability insurance coverage must be primary insurance as it pertains to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, Page 4 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Fznal Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STM364)" 10-143 and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers is wholly separate from the insurance of the Consultant and in no way relieves the Consultant from its responsibility to provide insurance. c. Cancellation. The insurance policies required by this Agreement shall not be canceled by either party, except after thirty days' prior written notice to the City by certified mail, return receipt requested. The words "will endeavor" and "but failure to mail such notice shall impose no obligation or liability of any kind upon the company, its agents, or representatives" shall be deleted from all certificates. d. Active Negligence. Coverage shall not extend to any indemnity coverage for the active negligence of the additional insureds in any case where an agreement to indemnify the additional insured would be invalid under Subdivision (b) of Section 2782 of the Civil Code. e. Waiver of Subrogation. Consultant's insurer will provide a Waiver of Subrogation in favor of the City for each required policy providing coverage for the term required by this Agreement. 6. Claims Forms. If General Liability, Pollution and/or Asbestos Pollution Liability and/or Errors & Omissions coverage are written on a claims-made form: a. Retro Date. The "Retro Date" must be shown, and must be before the date of the Agreement or the beginning of the work required by the Agreement. b. Maintenance and Evidence. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five years after completion of the work required by the Agreement. c. Cancellation. If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a "Retro Date" prior to the effective date of the Agreement, the Consultant must purchase "extended reporting" coverage for a minimum of five years after completion of the work required by the Agreement. d. Copies. A copy of the claims reporting requirements must be submitted to the City for review. 7. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with licensed insurers admitted to transact business in the State of California with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A V. If insurance is placed with a surplus lines insurer, insurer must be listed on the State of California List of Eligible Surplus Lines Insurers ("LESLI") with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A X. Exception may be made for the State Compensation Fund when not specifically rated. 8. Verification of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish the City with original certificates and amendatory endorsements effecting coverage required by Section I.C. of this Agreement. The endorsements should be on insurance industry forms, provided those endorsements or policies conform to the requirements of this Agreement. All certificates and Page 5 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STM364)" 1 0-144 endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. The City reserves the right to require, at any time, complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements evidencing the coverage required by these specifications. 9. Subcontractors. Consultant must include all subconsultants as insureds under its policies or furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subconsultant. All coverage for subconsultants is subject to all of the requirements included in these specifications. 10. Not a Limitation of Other Obli atg ions. Insurance provisions under this Article shall not be construed to limit the Consultant's obligations under this Agreement, including Indemnity. D. Security for Performance 1. Performance Bond. In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 18, indicates the need for Consultant to provide a Performance Bond (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Performance Bond"), then Consultant shall provide to the City a performance bond, in the amount indicated at Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, in the form prescribed by the City and by such sureties which are authorized to transact such business in the State of California, listed as approved by. the United States Department of Treasury Circular 570; http://www.fms.treas.gov/c570, and whose underwriting limitation is sufficient to issue bonds in the amount required by the Agreement, and which also satisfy the requirements stated in Section 995.660 of the Code of Civil Procedure, except as provided otherwise by laws or regulations. All bonds signed by an agent must be accompanied by a certified copy of such agent's authority to act. Surety companies must be duly licensed or authorized in the jurisdiction in which the Project is located to issue bonds for the limits so required. Form must be satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City. 2. Letter of Credit. In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 18, indicates the need for Consultant to provide a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Letter of Credit"), then Consultant shall provide to the City an irrevocable letter of credit callable by the City at its unfettered discretion by submitting to the bank a letter, signed by the City Manager, stating that the Consultant is in breach of the terms of this Agreement, The letter of credit shall be issued by a bank, and be in a form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Letter of Credit," in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18. Other Security. In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 18, indicates the need for Consultant to provide security other than a Performance Bond or a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the Two Parry Agreement Between City of Chula Vuta and ~Yloffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STM364)" Page 6 i0-145 subparagraph entitled "Other Security"), then Consultant shall provide to the City such other security therein listed in a form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney. E. Business License. Consultant agrees to obtain a business license from the City and to otherwise comply with Title 5 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. ARTICLE II. CITY OBLIGATIONS A. Consultation and Cooperation. City shall regularly consult the Consultant for the purpose of reviewing the progress of the Defined Services and Schedule, and to provide direction and guidance to achieve the objectives of this Agreement. The City shall allow Consultant access to its office facilities, files and records, as deemed necessary and appropriate by the City, throughout the term of this Agreement. In addition, City agrees to provide the materials identified at Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, with the understanding that delay in the provision of those materials beyond thirty days after authorization to proceed, shall constitute a basis for the justifiable delay in the Consultant's performance. B. Compensation. 1. Following Receipt of Billing. Upon receipt of a properly prepared bill from Consultant, submitted to the City as indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 17, but in no event more frequently than monthly, on the day of the period indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 17, City shall compensate Consultant for all services rendered by Consultant according to the terms -and conditions set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 10, adjacent to the governing compensation relationship indicated by a "checkmark" next to the appropriate arrangement, subject to the requirements for retention set forth in Paragraph 18 of Exhibit A, and shall compensate Consultant for out of pocket expenses as provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11. 2. Supporting Information. Any billing submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient information as to the propriety of the billing, including properly executed payrolls, time records, invoices, contracts, or vouchers describing in detail the nature of the charges to the Project in order to permit the City to evaluate that the amount due and payable is proper, and such billing shall specifically contain the City's account number indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 17(C) to be charged upon making such payment. 3. Exclusions. In determining the amount of the compensation City will exclude any cost: 1) incurred prior to the effective date of this Agreement; or 2) arising out of or related to the errors, omissions, negligence or acts of willful misconduct of the Consultant, its agents, employees, or subcontractors. a. Errors and Omissions. In the event that the City Administrator determines that the Consultant's negligence, errors, or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement has resulted in expense to City greater than would have Page 7 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary En; veering and Fina[ Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (.STYI364) " 10-146 resulted if there were no such negligence, errors, omissions, Consultant shall reimburse City for any additional expenses incurred by the City. Nothing in this paragraph is intended to limit City's rights under other provisions of this Agreement. 4. Payment Not Final Approval. The Consultant understands and agrees that payment to the Consultant for any Project cost does not constitute a City final decision about whether that cost is allowable and eligible for payment under the Project and does not constitute a waiver of any violation of Consultant of the terms of the Agreement. The Consultant acknowledges that City will not make a final determination about the eligibility of any cost until the fmal payment has been made on the Project or the results of an audit of the Project requested by the City has been completed, whichever occurs latest. If City determines that the Consultant is not entitled to receive any portion of the compensation due or paid, City will notify the Consultant in writing, stating its reasons. The Consultant agrees that Project closeout will not alter the Consultant's responsibility to return any funds due City as a result of later refunds, corrections, or other similar transactions; nor will Project closeout alter the right of City to disallow costs and recover funds provided for the Project on the basis of a later audit or other review. a. Consultant's Obligation to Pay. Upon notification to the Consultant that specific amounts are owed to City, whether for excess payments or disallowed costs, the Consultant agrees to remit to City promptly the amounts owed, including applicable interest. 5. Cost Principles a. The Consultant agrees that the Contract Cost Principles and Procedures, 48 -CFR, Federal Acquisition Regulations System, Chapter 1, Part 31.000 et seq., shall be used to determine the allowability of cost individual items. b. The Consultant also agrees to comply with federal procedures in accordance with 49 CFR, Part 18, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments. c. Any costs for which payment has been made to Consultant that are determined by subsequent audit to be unallowable under 48 CFR, Federal Acquisition Regulations System, Chapter 1, Part 31.000 et seq., are subject to repayment by Consultant to the Local Agency. ARTICLE III. ETHICS A. Financial Interests of Consultant 1. Consultant is Designated as an FPPC Filer. If Consultant is designated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 14, as an "FPPC filer," Consultant is deemed to be a "Consultant" for the Twa Party Agreement Between City of Chuta Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Ena~ineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STM364) " Page 8 10-i47 purposes of the Political Reform Act conflict of interest and disclosure provisions, and shall report economic interests to the City Clerk on the required Statement of Economic Interests in such reporting categories as are specified in Paragraph 14 of Exhibit A, or if - none are specified, then as determined by the City Attorney. 2. No Participation in Decision. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant shall not make, or participate in making or in any way attempt to use Consultant's position to influence a governmental decision in which Consultant knows or has reason to know Consultant has a financial interest other -than the compensation promised by this Agreement. 3. Search to Determine Economic Interests. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant warrants and represents that Consultant has diligently conducted a search and inventory of Consultant's economic interests, as the term is used in the regulations promulgated by the Fair Political Practices Commission, and has determined that Consultant does not, to the best of Consultant's knowledge, have an economic interest which would conflict with Consultant's duties under this Agreement. 4. Promise Not to Acquire Conflicting Interests. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant fizrther warrants and represents that Consultant will not acquire, obtain, or assume an economic interest during the term of this Agreement which would constitute a conflict of interest as prohibited by the Fair Political Practices Act. 5. Duty to Advise of Conflicting Interests. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant will immediately advise the City Attorney if Consultant learns of an economic interest of Consultant's that may result in a conflict of interest for the purpose of the Fair Political Practices Act, and regulations promulgated thereunder. 6. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests. Consultant warrants, represents and agrees that: a. Neither Consultant, nor Consultant's immediate family members, nor Consultant's employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently have any interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, or in any property within 2 radial miles from the exterior boundaries of any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, ("Prohibited Interest"), other than as listed in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14. b. No promise of future employment, remuneration, consideration, gratuity or other reward or gain has been made to Consultant or Consultant Associates in connection with Consultant's performance of this Agreement. Consultant promises to advise City of any such promise that may be made during the Term of this Agreement, or for twelve months thereafter. Page 9 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STM364)" 10-148 c. Consultant Associates shall not acquire any such Prohibited Interest within the Term of this Agreement, or for twelve months after the expiration of this Agreement, except with the written permission of City. d. Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any party to this Agreement, or for any third party that may be in conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this Agreement, except with the written permission of City. ARTICLE IV. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES A. Application'of Section. The provisions of this section apply if a Liquidated Damages Rate is provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 13. 1. Estimating Damages. It is acknowledged by both parties that time is of the essence in the completion of this Agreement. It is difficult to estimate the amount of damages resulting from delay in performance. The parties have used their judgment to arrive at a reasonable amount to compensate for delay. 2. Amount of Penalty. Failure to complete the Defined Services within the allotted time period specified in this Agreement shall result in the following penalty:. For each consecutive calendar day in excess of the time specified for the completion of the respective work assignment or Deliverable, the Consultant shall pay to the City, or have withheld from monies due, the sum of Liquidated Damages Rate provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 13 ("Liquidated Damages Rate"). 3. Request for Extension of Time. If the performance of any act required of Consultant is directly prevented or delayed by reason of strikes, .lockouts, labor disputes, unusual governmental delays, acts of God, fire, floods, epidemics, freight embargoes, or other causes beyond the reasonable control of the Consultant, as determined by the City, Consultant shall be excused from performing that act for the period of time equal to the period of time of the prevention or delay. In the event Consultant claims the existence of such a delay, the Consultant shall notify the City's Contract Administrator, or designee, in writing of that fact within ten calendar days after the beginning of any such claimed delay. Extensions of time will not be granted for delays to minor portions of work unless it can be shown that such delays did or will delay the progress of the work. ARTICLE V. INDEMNIFICATION A. Defense, Indemnity, and Hold Harmless. 1. General Requirement. Except for liability for Design Professional Services covered under Article V., Section A.2., Consultant shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers, agents and employees, from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in Page 10 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STM364)" 10-149 any manner arising out of or incident to any alleged acts, omissions, negligence, or willful misconduct of Consultant, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and contractors, arising out of or in connection with the performance of the Defined Services or this Agreement. This indemnity provision does not include any claims, damages, liability, costs grid expenses (including without limitations, attorneys fees) arising from the sole negligence, active negligence or willful misconduct of the City, its officers, employees. Also covered is liability arising from, connected with, caused by or claimed to be caused by the active or passive negligent acts or omissions of the City, its agents, officers, or employees which may be in combination with the active or passive negligent acts or omissions of the Consultant, its employees, agents or officers, or any third party. 2. Design Professional Services. If Consultant provides design professional services, as defined by California Civil Code section 2782.5, as may be amended from time to time, Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officials, officers, employees, volunteers, and agents free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of, pertaining to, or relating to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant, its officials, officers, employees, agents, consultants, and contractors arising out of or in connection with the performance of Consultant's services. Consultant's duty to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless shall not include any claims or liabilities arising from the sole negligence, active negligence or willful misconduct of the City, its agents, officers or employees. This section in no way alters, affects or modifies the Consultant's obligations and duties under this Agreement. 3. Costs of Defense and Award. Included. in the obligations in Sections A.1 and A.2, above, is the Consultant's obligation to defend, at Consultant's own cost, expense and risk, any and all suits, actions or other legal proceedings, that may be brought or instituted against the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and/or volunteers, subject to the limitations in Sections A.l . and A.2. Consultant shall pay .and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against City or its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and/or volunteers, for any and all related legal expenses and costs incurred by each of them, subject to the limitations in Sections A.1. and A.2. 4. Insurance Proceeds. Consultant's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by the City, its directors, officials, off cers, employees, agents, and/or volunteers. 5. Declarations. Consultant's obligations under Article V shall not be limited by .any prior or subsequent declaration by the Consultant. 6. Enforcement Costs. Consultant agrees to pay any and all costs City incurs enforcing the indemnity and defense provisions set forth in Article V. Two Party Ao Bement Between City of Chula Vuta and Moffat and Nichod to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge {STM364)" ®-~~~ Page 11 7. Survival. Consultant's obligations under Article V shall survive the--termination of this Agreement. ARTICLE VI. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT A. Termination for Cause. If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner Consultant's obligations under this Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the covenants, agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports and other materials prepared by Consultant shall, at the option of the City, become the property of the City, and Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation, in an amount not to exceed that payable under this Agreement and less any damages caused City by Consultant's breach, for any work satisfactorily completed on such documents and other materials up to the effective date of Notice of Termination,. B. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City. City may. terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason, by giving specific written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at least thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all fmished and unfmished documents and other materials described hereinabove shall, at the option of the City, become City's sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is terminated by City as provided in this paragraph, Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation, in an amount not to exceed that payable under this Agreement, for any satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials to the effective date of such termination. Consultant hereby expressly waives any and all claims for damages or compensation arising under this Agreement except as set forth in this section. ARTICLE VII. RECORD RETENTIONAND ACCESS A. Record Retention. During the course of the Project and for three (3) years from the date of final payment, the Consultant agrees and to maintain, intact and readily accessible, all data, documents, reports, records, contracts, and supporting materials relating to the Project as City may require. B. Access to Records of Consultant and Subcontractors. The Consultant agrees to permit, and require its subcontractors to permit, upon request, the State, State Auditor, FHWA or any duly representative of the Federal Government, in addition to the City or its authorized representatives, to inspect all Project work, materials, payrolls, and other data, and to audit the books, records, and accounts of the Contractor and its subcontractors pertaining to the Project. C: Project Closeout. The Consultant agrees that Project closeout does not alter the reporting and record retention requirements of this Agreement. Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STM364)" Page 12 10-151 ARTICLE VIII. PROJECT COMPLETION, AUDIT, AND CLOSEOUT A. Project Completion. Within ninety (90) calendar days following Project completion or termination by City, Consultant agrees to submit a final certification of Project expenses and audit reports, as applicable. B. Audit of Consultants. Consultant agrees to perform financial and compliance audits the City may require. The Consultant also agrees to obtain any other audits required by City. Consultant agrees that Project closeout will not alter Consultant's audit responsibilities. Audit costs are allowable Project costs. C. Project Closeout. Project closeout occurs when City notifies the Consultant that City has closed the Project, and either forwards the final payment or acknowledges that the Consultant has remitted the proper refund. The Consultant agrees that Project closeout by City does not invalidate any continuing requirements imposed by the Agreement or any unmet requirements set forth in a written notification from the City. ARTICLE IX. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS A. Assignability. The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and Consultant shall not assign any interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assignment or notation), without prior written consent of City. 1. Limited Consent. City hereby consents to the assignment of the portions of the Defined Services identified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 16 to the subconsultants identified as "Permitted Subconsultants". B. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material. All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures, systems and any other materials or properties produced under this Agreement .shall be the sole and exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant in the United States or in any other country without the express written consent of City. City shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the provisions of the Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or properties produced under this Agreement. C. Independent Contractor. City is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant shall perform as an independent contractor with sole control of the manner and means of performing the services required under this Agreement. City maintains the right only to reject or accept Consultant's work products. Consultant and any of the Consultant's agents, employees or representatives are, for all purposes under this Agreement; independent contractors and shall not be deemed to be employees of City, and none of them shall be Page 13 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Prelirtrinary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Roa~L Bridge (STM364)" 10-i 52 entitled to any benefits to which City employees are entitled including- but not limited to, overtime, retirement benefits, worker's compensation benefits, injury leave or other leave benefits. Therefore, City will not withhold state or federal income tax, social security tax or any other payroll tax, and Consultant shall be solely responsible for the payment of same and shall hold the City harmless with regard to.them. , 1. Actions on Behalf of City. Except as City may specify in writing, Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever, as an agent or otherwise. Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, to bind City or its members, agents, or employees, to any obligation whatsoever, unless expressly provided in this Agreement. 2. No Obligations to Third Parties. In connection with the Project, Consultant agrees and shall require that it's agents, employees, subcontractors agree that City shall not be responsible for any obligations or liabilities to any third party, including its agents, employees, subcontractors, or other person or entity that is not a party to this Agreement. .Notwithstanding that City may have concurred in or approved any solicitation, subagreement, or third parry contract at any tier, City shall have no obligation or liability to any person or entity not a party to this Agreement. D. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures. No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this Agreement, against City unless a claim has first been presented in writing and filed with City and acted upon by City in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as same may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used by City in the implementation of same. Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with City for the purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement. E. Administration of Contract. Each party designates the individuals ("Contract Administrators") indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 12, as that party's contract administrator who is authorized by the parry to represent it in the routine administration of this Agreement. F. Term. This Agreement shall terminate when the parties have complied with all executory provisions hereof. G. Attorney's Fees. Should a dispute arising out of this Agreement result in litigation, it is agreed that the prevailing party shall be entitled to a judgment against the other for an amount equal to reasonable attorneys' fees and court costs incurred. The "prevailing party" shall be deemed to be the party who is awarded substantially the relief sought. H. Statement of Costs. In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document, or participates in the preparation of a report or document in performing the Defined Services, Consultant shall include, or cause the inclusion of, in the report or document, a statement of Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichal to Conduct the "Pre&minary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STM364)" Page 14 10-153 the numbers and cost in dollar amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the preparation of the report or document. I. Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman. If the box on Exhibit A, Paragraph 15 is marked, the Consultant and/or is principals is/are licensed with the State of California or some other state as a real estate broker or salesperson. Otherwise, Consultant represents that neither Consultant, nor its principals are licensed real estate brokers or salespersons. Notices. All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall be deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or deposited in the United States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt requested, at the addresses identified in this Agreement as the places of business for each of the designated parties. K. Integration. This Agreement, together with any other. written document referred to or contemplated in it, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the .parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision of it may be amended, modified, waived or discharged except by an instrument in writing executed by the parry against which enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought. L. Capacity of Parties. Each signatory and party to this Agreement warrants and represents to the other party that it has legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement, and that all necessary resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement. M. Governing Law/Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of California, and if applicable, the City of Chula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and performance under it, shall be the City of Chula Vista. (Y:\Survey\STM Projects\STtiI364 (HR Bridge)1Contract AdminlPre-Awazd AuditlConnsultant Agreement 10-28-1 l.doc) (End of page. Next page is signature page.) Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vuta and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STM364)" Page 15 10-154 Signature Page to AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND MOFFATT AND NICHOL TO PROVIDE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION AND FINAL DESIGN FOR THE HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement, indicating that they have read and understood same, and indicate their full and complete consent to its terms: Dated: Attest: Donna Norris, City Clerk Approved as to form: Glen R. Goggins, City Attorney Dated: City of Chula Vista By: Richard A. Hopkins, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Moffatt & Nichol By: ~'-~ ~~ Q Exhibit List to Agreement (X) Exhibit A (X) Exhibit B (X) Exhibit C By: Two Parry Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the `Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Roa~G Bridge (ST.'~1364) " ~a~1 ~ . ~-~J v • P. Page 16 10-155 Exhibit A to AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND MOFFATT AND NICHOL TO PROVIDE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION AND FINAL DESIGN FOR THE HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT 1. Effective Date of Agreement: 2. City-Related Entity: (X) City of Chula Vista, a municipal chartered corporation of the State of California ()Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, a political subdivision of the State of California ()Industrial Development Authority of the City of Chula Vista, a ()Other: ("City") 3. Place of Business for City: City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 a [insert business form] 4. Consultant: Moffatt & Nichol 5. Business Form of Consultant: ( )Sole Proprietorship ( )Partnership ()Corporation 6. Place of Business, Telephone and Fax Number of Consultant: Moffatt & Nichol 1660 Hotel Circle North, Suite 500 San Diego, CA 92108 Tel: 619-220-6050 Fax: 619-220-6055 7. General Duties: Provide professional services for preliminary engineering, design and environmental studies for the replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge over the Otay River Page 17 Two Party Ae Bement Between City of Chula Yuta and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Ena veering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (ST.Y1364)" ~~-~~~ 8. Scope of Work and Schedule: A. Detailed Scope of Work: 1.0 TASK 1 -Preliminary Engineering Task 1 of the project includes the development of the project design up to the 30% design level. Included in this task are the Alternatives Evaluation, Project Report, Environmental Documentation, Visual Memo, Topographical Mapping, Geotechnical Investigation, Hydraulic Studies, Bridge Type Selection, Preliminary Water Quality Technical Studies and 30% Design Details. The project will be developed in English Units and will be in compliance with Caltrans design criteria, memos and specifications, which are current as of notice to proceed for Task 1. 1.1 Project Management and Administration Project Management and Administration duties will be performed for the duration of this task of the project as noted above. 1.2 Project Schedule The project schedule will be developed and maintained for the duration of this task of the project as noted above. 1.3 Project Meetings Up to 18 Team meetings with the City of Chula Vista are assumed and budgeted during this task. These will be held at the City's office approximately once each month. The following table provides our assumption for meeting attendance: Meeting Consultant Team Descri tion M&N DHA BRG LLG Chang EMI Aguirre KTU+q SRA Kick-Off Meetin X X X X X X X X X Team Meetin #1 X X Team Meetin #2 X X Team Meetin #3 X X Team Meetin #4 X X Team Meetin #5 X X Team Meetin #6 X X Team Meetin #7 X X Team Meetin #8 X X X Team Meetin #9 X X Team Meetin #10 X X Team Meetin #11 X X Team Meetin #12 X X Team Meetin #13 X X Team Meetin #14 X X Team Meetin #15 X X Team Meetin #16 X X 30% Desi n Review X X X X X X X X Totals: 18 2 18 3 2 2 1 2 2 Two Parry Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STYI364)" Page 18 1 ~-157 In addition to regularly scheduled team meetings, review-focus meetings will be required with Caltrans to develop an appropriate project alternative. Up to three formal Caltrans coordination meetings are assumed and budgeted during this task. Additional informal meetings may be required between the City Staff, Caltrans Local Assistance Staff, Environmental Resource Agencies and/or the Consultant Team. The time needed for these meetings has been included in the budget for the related task. Additional informal meetings and coordination may be required between the City Staff, the Consultant Team and the Developer's Consultants designing the extensions of Main Street and Heritage Road. The time needed for these meetings has been included in the budget for the related task. 1.4 As-Built and Utility Research As-built plans and utilities will be researched and located on the project base map. We have assumed that the as-built plans and surface surveys will be adequate to locate existing utilities. Subsurface exploration (pot holing) will be performed during the Final Design task and is included in Task 2.16. If the as-built plans show_that potential utility conflicts exist, pot holing will be completed to verify utility locations. The extent of potential pot holing has been estimated to develop a placeholder budget for this task. 1.5 Site Visit A site visit will be held by all team members to review the existing conditions. 1.6 Field Surveys and Mapping An aerial topographical map (digital color format with a 0.5' resolution or better) and supplemental field surveys will be completed and assembled into an AutoCAD format base map. A digitally rectified orthographic photo, a scale of 1 "=40' with gone-foot contour interval, will be obtained for this area. The area is def+ned as 500 feet on either side of the right-of--way and 200 feet north of Main Street and 200 feet south of Entertainment Circle. The aerial map will include river channel topography at a 1 "=100' scale from two miles downstream to one mile upstream of the bridge. This data is for use in the hydraulic studies. Field surveying will identify existing topographical features, right-of-way (including all critical points) and tie out any and all existing survey monuments that may be disturbed by the work. Street centerline and centerline stationing will be established to an accuracy of five-hundreds (0.05) foot. We will establish one field survey datum or benchmark which was used in the design for use during construction and all elevations, dimensions, and other measurements necessary to establish proper line and grade. Page 19 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STY1364)" 10-158 Channel cross sections will be completed approximately-100' down stream of the existing bridge and 500' up stream of the proposed bridge, on 50' intervals (total of 17 sections). This data is for use in the hydraulic studies. It is assumed that a biologist will be provided to accompany the surveyor within the river channel. Planimetrics will be obtained from the aerial and will include key design features such as driveways, curb & gutter, storm drain manholes and outlets, bridge limits, sidewalks, signal equipment, building boundaries, and visible utilities. Right-of--way boundaries will be obtained from record drawings. The existing bridge will be surveyed to determine the location and elevation of the deck. Documentation for all survey monumentation used in the design for use during construction will be provided with electronic files and a plot of all control coordinates for use in construction staking. 1.7 Preliminary HEC/RAS Analysis A preliminary HEC/RAS analysis will be performed with and without the existing bridge and the new bridge up stream, and up to three hydraulically different alternatives. The results of this analysis will provide water surface elevations from 100' down stream of the existing the bridge to 500' upstream of the proposed bridge for the 2, 10, 50 and 100-year events along with the corresponding flow volume and velocities. Initial scour estimates will be based on engineering judgment and similar river dynamics. The existing drainage structures will be identified and evaluated for current deficiencies. 1.7.1 Compilation of Channel Geometry Flood Data New cross-sectional geometries will be created based on the updated topographic survey of the river channel. The FEMA adopted flood discharges will be used. Such flood discharges as given in the report "Flood Insurance Study" by FEMA for the Otay River are as follows: • 10-yr: 1,200 cfs • 50-yr: 12,000 cfs • 100-yr: 22,000 cfs 1.7.2 Preliminary Hydraulic Evaluation of Bridge The HEC-RAS program will be used for the preliminary hydraulic evaluation of the bridge. A debris factor will be applied to the piers. Hydraulic computations will be performed to provide: • Bridge waterway opening • Proper location of the bridge Page 20 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vufa and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the `Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STiY1364) " 10-159 • Water-surface elevation • Bridge low chord elevation, considering the required freeboard • Flow velocity • Overtopping flow The hydraulic design will be guided by the Caltrans Local Assistance Procedures Manual, Chapter 11. The 50-yr and 100-yr flood will be included in hydraulic computations. This item shall cover the existing channel conditions as well as the proposed conditions. The hydraulic geometries for the optimized bridge length will be used. The impacts of the bridge on the established flood level and floodway boundaries will be determined. 1.7.3 Preliminary Flooding Impacts on Adjacent Properties Potential backwater impacts will be evaluated and mitigated whenever possible. 1.7.4 Compilation of Hydraulic Models Three hydraulic models will be compiled; they are listed below: • Effective Model: This is the HEC-2 model originally prepared by the County of San Diego for the Otay River. • Duplicate Effective Model: This is the HEC-RAS model converted from the HEC-2 effective model. • Corrected Effective Model: This is the HEC-RAS model with corrections made to the duplicate effective model. Such corrections consist of the following: survey datum, roughness coefficient, bridge geometry, etc. 1.8 Preliminary Foundation Report (PFR) A Preliminary Foundation Report (PFR) will be prepared based on a review of available studies and documentation of previous subsurface investigations in the vicinity of the Heritage Road Bridge. The PFR will present general geology and subsurface conditions, seismic evaluation, liquefaction, scour, corrosion, preliminary foundation recommendations and recommended additional work based on a review of published geologic maps, aerial photographs, "as-built" plans, in-house documents, and other literature pertaining to the site to aid in evaluating geologic conditions and hazards that may be present. This report will be superseded by the final foundation report, which will be based on a detailed subsurface exploration program and lab testing. The PFR will generally follow the Caltrans document entitled: "Foundation Report Preparation for Bridges," dated December 2009. Page 21 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STM364)" io-1 so 1.9 Traffic Analysis Traffic analysis will be completed for the intersections of Heritage Road at Main Street and at Entertainment Circle. The analysis will include studies for the current traffic volumes, opening day, assumed as 2015, and the horizon year, assumed to be 2035. A total of five (5) projections will be performed. A traffic study will be completed for the traffic section of the environmental document. The analysis will include projected impacts to the adjacent intersections and roadway segments under existing, phased construction, opening day (2015), and horizon year (2035) conditions. The intersections listed below will be counted to obtain existing baseline traffic volume data: • Main Street/Heritage Road • Heritage Road/Entertainment Circle • Heritage Road/Avenida de Las Vistas. ADT (tube) counts will be collected at three locations including Main Street, west of Heritage Road; Heritage Road, south of Main Street and Heritage Road south of Entertainment Circle. Forecast Traffic Volumes: • The 2030 Series 11 Forecast will be used to extrapolate to the horizon year, which is assumed to be 2035. Separate Forecasts will be run for two bridge alternatives, which are assumed to be a 6-lane, and a 4-lane alternative. The Forecasts will assume Heritage Road extended northerly of Main Street and Main Street extended easterly of Heritage Road. A select link assignment on the bridge segment will be run to estimate the origins and destinations of existing traffic on the bridge. An assumed direct cost of $3600 for the SANDAG modeling has been included. The above analyses assume the existing bridge will remain open to traffic during construction. Potential impacts of the temporary reduction of lanes during construction will be analyzed. The traffic analysis will be for typical days, assuming no events at the amphitheater. A Traffic Management Plan is not proposed. A traffic analysis will be assembled that incorporates all of the above items and it will contain appropriate tables and figures. Processing and Meetings: A Traffic Assessment report will be processed and approved through the City of Chula Vista. The following are assumed for this task: • Two (2) submittals to the City of Chula Vista • Two (2) meetings with City of Chula Vista staff • Two (2) meetings with SANDAG, Caltrans and/or City of San Diego staff Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (ST_Y1364) " Page 22 ~~-~~~ • Cursory review by SANDAG, Caltrans and/or City of San Diego staff- two (2) submittals 1.10 Alternatives Evaluation This task will focus on developing the most appropriate replacement strategy and obtaining a consensus for project development and possible funding commitments through the HBP program via Caltrans and the FHWA 1.10.1 Alternatives Development In order to develop a consensus on the baseline project, two. alternatives will be developed to approximately. a 10°f° design level and studied. Plans will include a bridge general plan and a roadway plan and profile sheet. Up to three replacement alternatives will be developed. These may include: • Replace with a 6-lane bridge with 8' shoulders and 5' sidewalks, Width = 118'. Demo the existing bridge and re- align traffic to new structure (off-alignment). • Replace with a 4-lane bridge with 8' shoulders, 4' striped median and 5' sidewalks, Width =.82' Demo the existing bridge and re-align traffic to new structure (off-alignment). Construction within existing right-of-way. 1.10.2 Pedestrian, Bicycle and Equestrian Circulation Pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian circulation, and the planed multi- use trail will be considered in respect to the proposed alternatives. 1.10.3 Ranking of Alternatives We will provide previous.prepared technical information to assist the City in selecting the evaluation criteria and ranking the alternatives. Potential evaluation criteria will likely include: • Hydraulic Performance Deck Geometry (Width) • Traffic Capacity (ADT) and LOS • Traffic Safety Features • Structure Lifespan • Future Maintenance • Scour Potential Right-of--Way Impacts • Potential Environmental Issues Page 23 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula [~uta and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of tke Heritage Road Bridge (STiY1364)" 10-162 • Pedestrian and Bicycle Connectivity • Ability to Accommodate future roadway extension • Ability to Accommodate Future Multiuse Trail The City will compile the technical information and develop a ranking matrix for each alternative. We will review and comment on the City's evaluation. 1.10.4 Cost Estimates Preliminary cost estimates for each alternative will be developed using current unit cost data and a general plan level quantity take- off. Details will include a bridge general plan and a roadway plan and profile sheet for each alternative. 1.10.5 Draft Project Report This Draft Project Report will be prepared the City of Chula Vista. 1.11 Project Report for Preferred Alternative This task will focus on developing the cost, scope and schedule for the preferred alternative. It will also determine the most appropriate replacement strategy and obtain a consensus for project development. Plans shall include a bridge general plan and a roadway plan and profile sheets. 1.11.1 HEC/RAS Analysis (Hydraulic Study) A HEC/RAS analysis shall be pertormed for the additional above alternatives. The results of this analysis shall provide water surface elevations at the bridge and upstream for the 2, 10, 50 and 100-year events along with the corresponding flow volume and velocities. The hydraulic analysis shall also be completed for any storm drain facilities affected by the project. 1.11.2 Bridge Advanced Planning Study This study will develop the most feasible type of bridge structure for each alternative. Span lengths, structural depth, column locations, seismic issues, scour, railings, approach slabs, falsework requirements, and other details and confi-ols will be examined in order to develop planning level an accurate cost estimate. 1.11.3 Preliminary Aesthetic Studies Aesthetic studies will be performed in conjunction with the bridge advance planning study. Span configurations, superstructure shapes, pier shapes, and other architectural elements such as railings, bridge lighting and pier overlooks will be evaluated on a Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula r~uta and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STY1364)" Page 24 10-163 conceptual level. Sketches and rough computer-timodelstyill be provided with enough detail such that visual simulations can be developed. 1.11.4 Visual Simulations Visual simulations will be developed based on the results of the preliminary aesthetic studies. The visual simulations shall be of a quality suitable for use in the Visual Impact Assessment as part of the Environmental Document, and for use at public meetings. 1.12 Drilling Permits and Environmental Clearance Environmental permits to perform the geotechnical borings and investigation will be obtained through the jurisdictional agencies. These are assumed to include the California Department of Fish and Game, the US Army Corps of Engineers and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Permit application fees will be invoiced as a direct cost. It is assumed that no borings will be taken in the sensitive habitat areas within the river channel, and that drilling will commence from the non-vegetated area to the north east of the existing bridge and along the existing roadways including Heritage Road, Main Street and the adjacent quarry access road. 1.13 Geotechnicallnvestigation Geotechnical field ihvestigation and lab testing will be completed to support the bridge anal roadway design. Based on published geologic maps, it appears that the bridge alignment is underlain by alluvium over San Diego, Mission Valley or Otay Formation. Shallow groundwater at about river elevation is expected. The bridge shall be designed to Caltrans standards, and the geotechnical invsestigation shall follow the guidelines in the Caltrans Geotechnical Manual County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health well permits will be obtained by Earth Mechanics, Inc. for the borings. To avoid potential environmental impacts, we propose to do all drilling along the existing roadways and within the un-vegetated area to the north of the proposed bridge alignment. We have assumed one boring will be completed per day. The scope of the investigation shall consist of the following: • Drill a total of nine (9) small-diameter borings using hollow-stem auger drilling equipment to examine and sample the prevailing soil conditions. Five deep borings will be drilled at the expected locations of the bridge foundations, and four shallow borings wi11 be drilled along the proposed roadway alignment. We expect that borings will be drilled along the existing alignment of Heritage Road and Main Street, outside of the existing river channel. Drilling mud will be disposed of by the geotechnical consultant. Pavements will be patched with cold patch asphalt.. • Subsurface investigation shall be conducted in accordance with Article 4.3, "Subsurface Exploration and Testing, Programs," of the Page 25 Two Parry Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichod to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (ST.YI364)" 10-164 Caltrans Bridge Design Specifications dated April 2000 and the guidelines described in the current Caltrans Geotechnical Manual. • Perform laboratory tests on selected soil samples to evaluate unit weight, water content, pH, resistivity, soluble sulfate content, chloride ion content, grain size, shear strength, consolidation, expansion and compaction characteristics of the prevailing soils. • The results of the subsurface investigation and laboratory tests will be used to confirm the recommendations made in the Preliminary Foundation Report (PFR.) If appropriate, additional guidance will be provided to~the design team to aid in the bridge type selection process. A Final Foundation Report (FR) will be completed in Task 2 of the project to document the final findings, conclusions and recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of constructing the proposed bridge, retaining walls and roadway widening. Grain- size data will be provided for use in the hydraulics and scour studies. 1.14 Bridge Type Selection This task includes the development of the preferred bridge alternative for the project site. A bridge type selection report will be developed to formalize the bridge type, materials, span arrangement, constraints, foundations, aesthesis and construction methods. This document will be prepared in accordance with Caltrans Memo to Designers 1-29. 1.14.1 Foundation Type Selection Coordinate with the project geotechnical engineer for appropriate foundation type and sizing. Based on the known geotechnical conditions up and down stream of the bridge, driven-pile foundations 'are anticipated. 1.14.2 Roadway and Hydraulics Coordination Coordinate with the project civil designer and hydraulic requirements for bridge vertical alignment and landing requirements. 1.14.3 Bridge General Plan and Cost Estimate Prepare a bridge general plan and preliminary cost estimate 1.14.4 Aesthetic Concept The bridge engineering and project architect will collaborate to develop an aesthetic concept for the bridge that is consistent with the site. The aesthetic concept will include the general layout and shape of the main structural elements. 1.14.5 Type Selection Report Prepare a Type Selection Report that summarizes our recommended bridge type, which is best suited to the preferred project alignment as determined in the Project Repcrt. Items that will be addressed in this report include other viable bridge types, Two Party A; reement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the `Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STi'~I364)" Page 26 10-165 abutment and bent layout, utility issues, maintenance issues, aesthetic issues and construction methods. This report will reference the preliminary construction cost estimates for other bridge types and bridge configurations studied for this project. The Type Selection Report will be made available to the City and Caltrans. We will attend an informal Type Selection Meeting at the City of Chula Vista. If desired, the City can invite a representative from Caltrans Local Assistance. However, since our project is not within Caltrans Right of Way, our scope does not include a formal Type Selection Meeting with Caltrans in Sacramento. The draft and final Type Selection Report will be provided to the City. 1.15 Hydrology, Hydraulics and Scour A final HECIRAs analysis will be performed on the selected bridge alternative. The results of this analysis will provide water surface elevations at the bridge and upstream for the 2, 10, 50 and 100-year events along with the corresponding flow volume and velocities. Scour analysis will be developed based in a flood series and aFLUVIAL-12 model. A hydraulic analysis will also be completed for any storm drain facilities affected by the project. A final Hydrology, Hydraulics and Scour analysis report will be prepared to document the studies. 1.15.1 Hydraulic Evaluation of Bridge The hydraulic evaluation performed in Task 1.8 will be finalized based on the final bridge geometry. 1.15.2 Hydrologic Data Summary A Hydrologic Summary in Caltrans format will be provided for inclusion with the bridge plans. The table will include the 50-yr, 100-yr, overtopping and record floods. 1.15.3 Flooding Impacts on Adjacent Properties Flooding impacts on adjacent properties performed in Task 1.8 will be finalized based on the final bridge geometry. 1.15.4 Compilation of Required Hydraulic Models The HEC-RAs models compiled in Task 1.8 will be finalized based on the final bridge geometry. 1.15.5 Bridge Freeboard and Drift Analysis A drift analysis for the bridge will be performed based on the final bridge geometry. The source of floating debris will be analyzed. The production of floating debris will be assessed in consideration of the hydraulics of flood flow. The required freeboard for safe drift passage will be determined and recommended. Page 27 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Prediminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Herita;e Road Bridge (ST~1364)" 10-166 1.15.6 Bridge Scour Analysis Potential river channel changes will be determined to provide the necessary information for bridge design. The following will be pertormed: • Finalize the hydraulic geometries of the channel and the bridge based on the fluvial study • Determine the general and local scour for the design of bridge piers and abutments • Provide recommendations for the design of bank protection and bridge abutments 1.15.7 Application for CLOMR A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) will be processed through FEMA based on the final design. After the bridge is constructed a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) will be processed through FEMA. The package will include necessary items for obtaining a LOMR from FEMA for the as-built plans of the channel including the floodwalls. The following items will be prepared and submitted. • A report for the application providing all necessary information requested by FEMA as documented in a notebook of instruction by Baker Engineers • Plotted 100-yr water-surtace and channel-bed profiles of channel reach for the as-built conditions • Plots of sample cross sections • Maps for the updated HEC-2 study showing the new floodplain boundaries and floodway • Input/output listings of HEC-2 run for as-built conditions of channel • Forms required by FEMA including Certification by Registered Professional Engineer, Riverine Hydraulic Analysis, etc. • Responses to questions from FEMA and Baker Engineers during the review process • Making revisions and providing additional information if requested from FEMA resulting from the review. 1.16 Preliminary Water Quality Technical Studies Memo Two Parry Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and IYloffat and Nichol to Conduct the `Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge /STY1364)" Page 28 10-167 A Preliminary Water Quality Technical Studies Memo will be prepared for the preferred project to discuss alternative temporary and permanent Best Management Practices (BMP's) to protect water quality during and after completion of construction works. The memo will be prepared in compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit # CAS000002, the NPDES, Municipal Permit # CAS0108758, and the City of Chula Vista Development Storm Water Manual, and included as an appendix to the Project Report. 1.17 30% Design Submittal The 30% design submittal will be based on the preferred alternative and will include a project title sheet, a sheet fist, horizontal control sheet, bridge general plan, bridge foundation plan, roadway plan and profile sheets (Geometric Approval Drawings), grading plans, roadway typical sections, preliminary landscape plan and a preliminary engineer's estimate of probable cost. Utility dispositions will be defined on the bridge foundation plan or on the roadway plan and profile sheets. The 30% design will be submitted to the City. Response to comments and comment resolution of the 30% submittal will be performed as part of Task 2. The 30% design submittal will conclude the design effort for Task 1, 1.18 Caltrans Coordination The project must be designed and processed in accordance with the Caltrans Local Programs Manuals to facilitate potential funding from the HBP program. Significant Coordination with the District Local Assistance Engineer and the Structures Local Assistance Engineer will help assure a smooth project that meets the federal funding criteria. 1.18.1 Bridge Sufficiency Rating Analysis An evaluation of the bridge condition will be completed and compared to the current Caltrans maintenance reports and sufficiency rating (SR). This task includes a detailed visual field review of the bridge condition. Recommendations that could change the SR will be formalized in a project memo along with any noted structural or geometric deficiencies. 1.18.2 Project Funding Analysis We will assist the City with securing HBP funding by drafting preliminary paperwork required to nominate the bridge for inclusion into the HBP program, (most likely as a rehabilitation candidate). We will advise the City as to other potential funding sources that may be used for this project. 1.18.3 Replacement vs. Rehabilitation Letter Once the bridge becomes eligible for rehabilitation through the HBP program, we will assist the City in preparing a letter to justify to Caltrans and FHWA that the bridge should be replaced. This letter will address the deficiencies of the existing bridge and describe why Page 29 Two Parry Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Raad Bridge (STY1364)" 10-168 __. . ...................... replacing the bridge is the best option. 1.19 NEPA /CEQA Environmental Documentation The following scope of work is based on the assumption that a single document is developed that will satisfy both CEQA and NEPA requirements. Moreover, the required technical reports will be prepared as single document unless otherwise instructed to satisfy both the NEPA federal lead agency requirements as well as the City of Chula Vista requirements as lead agency for CEQA. It is further assumed for purposes of this scope of work, but not conclusively at this time, that the joint document will be an Initial Study (IS) pursuant to CEQA and an Environmental Assessment (EA) pursuant to NEPA. The City and Caltrans will provide a format and recent example for the EA/IS. 1.19.1 Field Review /PES We will attend a Field Review of the project site with City and CALTRANS District 11 staff as necessary. If necessary, we will review and revise, the current version of the Preliminary Environmental Studies (PES) form, with the input of the Project Design Team (PDT), The PES form identifies (and confirm) the anticipated documentation necessary pursuant to NEPA. We will prepare a CEQA Initial Study Checklist which will be used to determine the appropriate environmental document and what technical studies will be required pursuant to CEQA and the City of Chula Vista local ordinances. The draft PES form will be submitted to Caltrans. After any necessary revisions are incorporated, the final signed PES form will be forwarded for signature. The draft initial study checklist will be submitted to City of Chula Vista environmental staff for review and approval. 1.19.2 Project Impact Area (PIA)/Area of Potential Effect (APE) A) The PIA will be prepared in consultation with Caltrans and will be based on all anticipated pre-construction and construction activities. B) An APE map will be developed in consultation with the City and CALTRANS for obtaining project approval through CALTRANS/FHWA. This map will provide the survey boundaries for. cultural resources evaluated during project studies. The APE map will be based on the total anticipated disturbance footprint associated with project activities (e.g., road construction, staging areas, detours, drainage facilities, and adjacent parcels should any additional right-of--way be required). The APE will incorporate within its boundaries all the limits of the PIA. 1.19.3 Environmental Constraints Report The Environmental Constraints Report will be prepared by the City of Chula Vista Two Parry Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the `Preliminary Ena veering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (ST.Y1364)" Page 30 10-169 1.19.4 Technical Studies 1.19.4.1 Visual Impact Assessment We will prepare a Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) that evaluates the visual impact of the project improvements from several key viewpoints. The FHWA Visual Impact Assessment for Highway Project guidelines shall be followed to quantify the visual analysis. This assessment shall describe the existing visual characteristics of the area involving the interchanges and vicinity, and any significant visual resources. The potential visual impacts from project construction and use of the widened and/or replaced bridge will be evaluated through the use of ground level photographs from viewpoints near the. project site. Visual conditions and project impacts shall be quantified as required in the VIA guidelines for highway projects. Mitigation measures shall be recommended, if necessary, to reduce any significant impacts. The visual quality report would include view shed maps and character/quality unit mapping.and typical -photos of the adjacent visual environment. It would include mass diagram/model wire- frames for each of the alternatives being considered. These wire- frames would be added over site photos. Detailed visual simulations will be done for the preferred project. Multiple views wilt be included of the preferred alternative. An existing photo, proposed unmitigated and a mitigated version would all be provided. The VIA will be prepared under the supervision of a licensed Landscape Architect. 1.19.4.2 Historic See Cultural Resource Studies under Task 1.20.4.9. 1.19.4.3 Biology The Natural Environmental Study (NES) will be prepared consistent with U.S. Department of Federal Highway requirements as implemented by Caltrans. Discussion of sensitive wildlife and plant species will be done within the context of the City's MSCP Subarea Plan, Wetlands Protection Program (WPP) and the Habit-Loss and Incidental Take (HLIT) ordinance. The tables and text will need to reference whether the species are covered, and will describe the appropriate management requirements for each species. This includes, but is not limited to, restrictions for timing for clearing,. implementing protective measures and adjacency guidelines for the species' habitat, and providing the requisite habitat-based mitigation. The mitigation should be identified based on the ratios provided in the MSCP Subarea Plan that governs that particular area of impact. It is assumed that the project will not result in a net impact to , wetlands and that all wetland impacts will be mitigated on-site or at an approved wetland mitigation bank. Work to identify and plan for off-site mitigation is not anticipated in this scope of work. The following tasks will be performed: Page 3I Two Parry Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Enb neerin; and Final Design jor the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STY1364}" 10-i70 Arroyo toad and western spadefoot toad habitat. Although octurnal presence surveys for arroyo toad and spadefoot ~oad may not be needed, the biological report will need to contain an assessment of the project impact area of the Otay River watershed to determine whether it contains suitable habitat for the arroyo toad and the western spadefoot toad. The three characteristics most commonly associated with arroyo toad breeding habitat include: 1) sandy channel substrate, 2) adjacent open sandy terraces, and 3) channel braiding, all of which are associated with low stream gradients. The western spadefoot toad habitat primarily consists of lowlands, sandy washes and river floodplains. This information will need to be included within a list of potential sensitive species that could occur within the project area and incorporated into the appendices of the biological report. Surveys for arroyo toad and western spadefoot toad are not included in this scope and fee. Perform protocol surveys for least Bell's vireo and southwest willow flycatcher. A total of eight surveys would be conducted for the least Bell's vireo, at least ten days apart between April 10th and July 31st; and a total of five surveys would be conducted for the southwestern willow flycatcher, over three separate time periods (one survey between May 15th to May 31st, one survey between June 1st and June 21st, and three surveys between June 22nd and July 17th). Within 45 days of the last field survey, a letter report summarizing the survey findings would be submitted to the USFWS and CDFG • Perform protocol surveys for coastal California gnat catcher. Include a description of the Biological Survey Area for this species and a map that shows the buffer area. • The biological report shall contain an assessment of the PIA to determine if appropriate habitat exists for the clapper rails. If it is determined that appropriate habitat exists for clapper rails then Protocol Surveys utilizing prescribed USFWS methods, taking into account the season and aural and visual surveys, will need to be performed. Surveys for clapper rails are not included in the present scope and fee. • Perform focused surveys for Chula Vista narrow endemic species. If detected, the project would be subject to the provisions for narrow endemic species pursuant to the City's MSCP Subarea Plan. Perform rare plant surveys in May and July in order to coincide with the blooming periods of potentially occurring sensitive species. The report shall also include a table that identifies the vegetation communities and land cover types by name and acreage within the study area. Late season surveys will need to be performed to detect late blooming sensitive and/or special status species. Discuss why species with low or Two Parry Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge /STYt364) " Page 32 10-171 medium potential are not to be further considered any further, specifically those listed as threatened or endangered by the state or federal government.. Perform a wetland delineation using the currently accepted U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) delineation manual. This delineation will be used to determine project impacts and in support of the Section 404 permit required from the UCOE. The City of Chula Vista's Wetlands Protection Program (WPP) shall be referenced in the appropriate Regulatory Requirement Section. Any wetlands identified by the biological report shall be reviewed in order to determine whether these are considered wetlands as defined by the City's WPP. Wetland resources shall be mitigated pursuant to the mitigation standards contained in the City's MSCP Subarea Plan. Prepare a Natural Environment Study (NES) consistent with Caltrans requirements. The NES will describe the biological resources of the project area, quantify project impacts, and recommend mitigation measures to offset those impacts. The NES will address two to three project alternatives and it is anticipated that the City, Caltrans and FHWA will require revisions. Fully describe the relationship between the City of Chula Vista and Caltrans in regards to this project. In particular, explain the federal action involved with the proposed project. The report will incorporate a quantifiable evaluation of expected indirect impacts associated with noise, lighting, drainage, toxic substances,, and spread of invasive species. • Prepare a conceptual restoration plan to mitigate for project impacts. The plan will identify the type of plants, planting densities, irrigation and long-term monitoring requirements. • Consult with the USFWS on an informal basis during design of the project in order to obtain a favorable Biological opinion pursuant to Section 7 of the federal Endangered Species Act as may be required by the federal government. 1.19.4.4 Noise It is assumed that the project is a Type I project as defined by 23 CFR 772. We will prepare a Noise Study in accordance with Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. Noise measurements shall be conducted at sensitive receptors in the four quadrants of the existing river crossing/proposed bridge structure area, and at nearby locations as necessary to define existing traffic noise levels and to calibrate the traffic noise model. Future traffic noise will be predicted using Caltrans SOUND32/SOUND2000 or equivalent. Preparation of a Noise Abatement Decision Report is not proposed at this time. The noise study will also include a separate evaluation of construction noise. Noise originating from Page 33 Two Parry Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (ST.NI364)" 10-172 __.. _.,_ construction equipment will be evaluated with respect to relevant federal and municipal standards. In addition to complying with federal noise standards, the noise report will also comply with the City of Chula Vista Noise Control Ordinance. The noise measurements used in the noise report shall be calibrated and comply with both federal and City of Chula Vista standards and methods for assessing and mitigating any potential noise impacts. 1.19.4.5 Traffic A traffic study using the results of the traffic analysis from Section 1.9 will be incorporated into the environmental technical studies. Two review cycles are assumed for the noise study. 1.19.4.6 Water Quality Technical Report The Water Quality Technical Report (WQTR) shall comply with the requirements of the City of Chula Vista Development Storm Water Manual. The report shall provide a Best Management Practices (BMP) Plan with suitable scale to show Drainage Management Areas (DMA's) and locations of proposed BMP's. The BMP Plan shall demonstrate that runoff from all project areas are treated before discharge to the river. The WQTR shall address hydromodification and potential impacts to downstream erosion and habitat integrity. Mitigation measures shall be proposed to prevent such impacts. A project specific Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be developed. The project construction and post construction Best Management Practices will be outlined and described in the environmental documents. The WQTR shall identify responsible persons for maintenance of all treatment control BMP's and establish a maintenance procedure and schedule for each treatment control BMP. An estimate shall be included for the annual cost of post- construction BMP maintenance. 1.19.4.7 Hydraulic and Drainage Study /Floodplain Evaluation Report A hydraulic study using the 2, 50- and 100-year floods adopted by FEMA for the existing bridge profile and the adjusted bridge profile will be prepared by the consultant. The report will canform to Caltrans standards and requirements. The results obtained from the Hydrologic/Hydraulic analysis performed in Tasks 1.7 and 1.15 will be incorporated into the environmental technical studies as a. Floodplain Evaluation Report. A technical report will be prepared. This report will document the background, methods of study, findings and recommendations to Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Roa~L Bridge (ST_%~136Q)" Page 34 10-173 prepare the construction documents for the final configuration of the bridge. 1.19.4.8 Initial Site Assessment (Hazardous Materials) We will prepare an Initial Site Assessment (ISA) in accordance with Caltrans' procedures. We will conduct an agency records search to identify all hazardous waste sites located within the project study area and classified as a hazardous waste site under State law. The records search shall also identify business types located within the project study area that would be likely to store, transfer, or utilize large quantities of hazardous materials. This information shall be obtained from records maintained by the State of California Department of Health and Regional Water Quality Control Board, and other appropriate agencies. We will conduct a visual survey of the project area via available public access to identify any obvious area of hazardous waste contamination. If hazardous waste sites are identified within the project study area, we will determine the potential impact to the project and identify subsequent procedures to determine the extent of contamination and remediation requirements. Historic land use information for the project study area shall be requested from the City to determine whether previous uses may have resulted in hazardous waste contamination. A draft ISA shall be submitted to the City and Caltrans for review. We will revise the ISA as necessary, and submit a final ISA for Caltrans and City of Chula Vista approval. 1.19.4.9 Air Quality Study We will prepare an air quality assessment for the project. Conformity with the Clean Air Act for regional operational emissions will be demonstrated by documenting that the project is consistent with the air quality analysis of the SANDAG Regional Transportation Improvement Program and Regional Transportation Plan. Local emissions will be addressed in accordance with Caltrans Transportation Project Level Carbon Monoxide (CO} Protocol Construction-related emissions will be estimated and compared with CEQA and NEPA conformity guidelines. Dust control requirements and abatement measures consistent with City and SCAQMD policies and regulations will be included in the analysis. The air quality analysis will address the applicability of the City's Growth Management Ordinance and Carbon Dioxide Reduction Plan, as applicable to the project. The analysis of local CO emissions is dependent on detailed traffic data, which will be determine for the project: The Air Quality report will include an evaluation of Green House Gas emissions. Page 35 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (ST~Y1364)" 10-174 ................ . The Air Quality report will also determine if the project is regionally significant in order to determine if CO Protocol analysis will be required. The Air Quality report will reference the most recent Mobile Source Air Toxics Guidance Memorandums from FHWA. Two review cycles are assumed for the Air Quality Study. 1.19.4.10 Cultural Resource Study/ Paleontological Resource Assessment An archaeological records search will be conducted to identify prehistoric and historic archaeological sites recorded within one mile of the project area, as well as the locations of previous cultural resource studies. Native American Consultation: The scope of work for this task includes the following: • Request a Sacred Lands Search from the Native American Heritage Commission, and obtain a list of Native American representatives who will be contacted • Prepare letters to each of the above representatives • Contact each tribe to confirm receipt of the letter and determine if they will comment on the project We have assumed that the tribes will not comment. If we do. receive comments, the additional work may include; responding to the comments, meeting with the tribes to discuss, or developing a mitigation approach. This additional effort is not included in the current scope. Field Survey: Upon receipt and review of the records search an archaeological field survey will be conducted of the project area under the supervision of a qualified archaeologist. The field investigation will use standard intervals of 10 to 15 meters. Special attention will be given to relocating previously recorded sites, which have been identified by the records search. Report Preparation: An Archaeological Survey Report (ASR) and a Historic Properties Survey Report (HPSR) meeting Caltrans standards will be completed. The reports will be prepared to document the results of the records search and intensive field survey. The reports will provide background cultural history for the project area, discuss survey methods, and identify any cultural resources located on the project site and impacts that would occur to those resources. Additionally, a report for the City of Chula Vista detailing the results of the study will be completed. No subsurface testing, significance evaluation, or data recovery or significance evaluation will be conducted. Subsurtace testing may be required under Caltrans guidelines if previously recorded sites are not relocated during survey due to poor visibility or other circumstances. In the event that cultural resources found on the project site cannot be avoided through project design or Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vuta and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STY1364)" Page 36 10-175 mitigation, testing may be required to fully evaluate significance. Under these circumstances, a revised scope and cost estimate will be prepared. If evaluation of cultural ar historical resources is required a Historic Resource Evaluation Report (HRER) and/or Archaeological Resource Evaluation Report CARER) meeting Caltrans standards will be prepared and appended to the HPSR. The Paleontological Resource Assessment will commence by conducting a paleontological records search in the Department of Paleontology at the San Diego Natural History Museum. The records search will identify all paleontological sites recorded within one mile of the project area. In addition to the records search, a review will be conducted of previous paleontological studies in the area. Field Survey: Upon completion of the paleontological records search and literature survey, a paleontological field survey will be conducted of the project area under the supervision of a qualified professional paleontologist. Special attention will be given to inspection of bedrock exposures and to relocating any previously recorded sites. Report Preparation: A Paleontological Identification Report (PIR) meeting Caltrans standards will be completed. In the event the PIR identifies on-site sensitive paleontological resources, a Paleontological Evaluation Report (PER) and a Paleontological Mitigation Report (PMP) meeting Caltrans standards will be prepared. Additionally, a report for the City of Chula Vista detailing the results of the study will be completed. No subsurface testing or data recovery or significance evaluation will be conducted as part of this proposal. 1.19.5 Initial Study Checklist The IS Checklist will be prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines. A draft Initial Study Checklist will be transmitted to City staff for their review. Comments received will be incorporated into the final environmental document. If there is substantial evidence that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, then a draft EIR will be prepared. If it is determined that an EIR will be required then, the City will provide consultant with a different set of instructions and guidelines for initiating and preparing an EIR document. 1.19.6 Prepare Draft EA/IS We wit! prepare an EA/IS in conformance with the Caltrans document template dated March 2004. The EA/IS will satisfy CEQA and NEPA Guidelines. The Draft. EA/IS will incorporate the findings of the technical . studies described above, and will be submitted to the City and Caltrans for review. It is anticipated that three rounds of Page 37 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacemeut of the Heritage Road Bridge (ST.YI364)" 10-176 document review by City and Caltrans will be required. An additional set of revisions will be incorporated subsequent to FHWA review, for a total of four rounds of document review. It is anticipated that comments provided for each subsequent review will be focused and will not contradict comments .previously provided and incorporated into the prior submittals. We will revise the Draft EA/IS per comments received from FHWA and prepare copies of the EA/IS for Caltrans submittal to FHWA for signature and approval to circulate the document for public review. 1.19.7 Environmental Checklist We will prepare the FHWA NEPA checklist to accompany the transmittal of the draft NEPA/CEQA document and the supporting technical studies for transmittal to the FHWA. 1.19.8 Public Review EA/IS We will prepare a draft public distribution list per input from the City, Caltrans, and FHWA. The EA/IS shall be circulated for public review per the distribution list, once the list has been approved by the City, Caltrans; and FHWA. City staff will prepare and publish a Notice of Availability and Opportunity for public hearing. The draft Response to Comments shall be prepared for submittal to the City, and FHWA, via Caltrans. 1.19.9 Respond to Comments We will coordinate the preparation of responses to comments received as a result of public distribution of the EA/IS. Each team member will prepare responses for its areas of responsibility. We will number individual comments and preliminarily assign team members to prepare responses based on areas of responsibility. The numbered comment letters and assignments will be distributed to the team members for concurrence with assignments. We will coordinate the preparation of responses with the City, and Caltrans within their respective areas of responsibility. We will assemble all responses into a comprehensive draft response to comments volume. We assume that no more than ten comment letters with no more than 100 total comments are received on the Draft EA/IS and that the comments do not raise issues that require additional field work, redesign, or recirculation of the draft EA/IS (note that each letter typically includes many comments). A draft version of the complete responses will be prepared for submittal to the City, Caltrans., and FHWA, via Caltrans. Revisions will be made subsequent to review by these entities. Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the `Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STYI364)" Page 38 ~~-~77 1.19.10 Prepare Final EA/IS We will prepare a Final EA/IS, including revisions based on responses to comments received during the public review period, for submittal to the City, Caltrans, and FHWA (via Caltrans) for review. As part of the process for the Final EA/IS, we will file a Notice of Determination (NOD), and if desired by FHWA, prepare a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI} for the EA component of the Final EA/IS. We will provide the approved EA/IS to the City of Chula Vista. 1.19.11 Public Hearings and Meetings The environmental consultant's Project Manager, as well as relevant technical staff, will be available for up to three public hearings or meetings. 1.19.12 Environmental Permits 1.19.12.1 ACOE Nationwide Permit (404) It is assumed that the project will qualify for a Nationwide Permit under the Army Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit Program. Consultant shall prepare and submit the application package; containing an application fora 404 permit, cover letter, appropriate supporting documents, required graphics and pre-construction notification-(PCN). 1.19.12.2 CDFG Streambed Alteration Agreement (1601) We will prepare and submit a Section 1601 Streambed Alteration Agreement request to the CDFG for project impacts to areas under CDFG jurisdiction. The package shall contain an application for the 1601 permit, cover letter, and appropriate supporting documents. 1.19.12.3 RWQCB Water Quality Certification (401} We will prepare and submit a 401 Water Quality Certification application to the RWQCB if a Section 404 ACOE permit is required. The package shall contain the application for 401 certification, cover letter and appropriate supporting documents. We assume the City of Chula Vista will be responsible for paying the application fee for the 401 Certif+cation. 1.19.12.4 Permit Processing We will assist the City in applying for the relevant permits subject to the limitations of this scope of work. We will provide responses to reasonable requests. from regulatory agencies that are within the scope of the overall investigations and meet with agency staff as requested to facilitate permit issuance. Page 39 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Yrsta and Moffat and Nichol to Conduce the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (ST.YI36d)" 10--178 We will request draft permits, review draft conditions and advise the City as to the general implications of these conditions to the construction cost and schedule. We will generally assist the City to develop alternative designs that provide a similar level of resource protection, but are less restrictive to constructability. However, detailed changes to project impact footprints or design will require additional work, which are not included this scope. DELIVERABLE MATRIX TASK 1 -PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING TASK NO: - . = aDESCRIPTION " ~ ' NO. OF:,COP.IES '' 1.7 Preliminary HEC/RAS Analysis (Hydraulic Study) 1 1.8 Preliminary Foundation Report 1 1.9 Traffic Assessment Report 2 + 2 1.10.4 Preliminary Cost Estimate 1 1.11.1 HEC/RAS Analysis (Hydraulic Study) 1 1.11.2 Bridge Advanced Planning Study 1 1.11.4 Visual Simulations Up to 3 Visual Simulations 1.13 Geotechnicallnvestigation 1 1.14 Bridge Type Selection Report 10 1.14 Final Type Selection Report 10 1.15.1 Hydraulic Evaluation 1 1.15 Final Hydrology Report 1 1.15.6 Bridge Scour Analysis 1 1.16 30% Design Submittal Plans 6-full size and 6-11x17 size 1.16 30% Preliminary Engineer's Estimate 1 1.17 Preliminary Water Quality Technical Study 1 1.18.1 Bridge Sufficiency Rating Analysis 1 1.18.2 Project Funding Analysis 1 1.18.3 Replacement vs. Rehabilitation Letter 1 1.19.1 Draft Environmental Studies (PES) 1 1.19.1 Final Environmental Studies (PES) 1 1.19.2 1.19.4.1 Area of Potential Effect (APE) Map Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) 1 Up to 4 Visual Simulations 1.19.4.3 Natural Environmental Study (NES) 4 1.19.4.4 Noise Study 2 1.19.4.5 Traffic Study 2 Page 40 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and tYloffat and Nichol to Conduct the `Preliminary Engineering and Final Design jor the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STiYt364) " 10-179 TASK NO. DESCRIPTION N6. OF COPIES 1.19.4.6 Water Quality Technical Report (WQTR) 3 1.19.4.6 Draft Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) 3 1.19.4.6 Floodplain Evaluation Report 3 1.19.4.7 Draft Initial Site Assessment Report (ISA) 1 1.19.4.7 Final Initial Site Assessment Report (ISA) 2 1.19.4.8 Air Quality Assessment 3 1.19.4.9 Archaeological Survey Report (ASR} 3 1.19.4.9 Historic Properties Survey Report (HPSR) 3 1.19.4.9 Paleontological Identification Report (PIR) 3 1.19.5 Draft Initial Study Checklist 1 1.19.6 Draft EA/IS 60 total 15 sets/4 submittals (*) 1.19.6 EA/I S 4 (*) 1.19.7 FHWA NEPA Checklist 1 1.19.8 EA/IS Draft Public Distribution List Up to 40 copies ('`), 10 CD's 1.19.9 Response to EA/EIR Public Comments 1 1.19.10 Final EA/IS 60 total 15 setsl4 submittals (*) 1.19.10 Notice of Determination (NOD), Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for Final EA/IS 20 copies, master photo ready copy; CD 1.19.12.1 ALOE Nationwide Permit (404) 1 (*) 1.19.12.2 Section 1601 Streambed Alteration Agreement 1 (*) 1.19.12.3 401 Water Quality Certification Application 1 (*} Notes: (*) Technical Reports will be provided on CD Meeting, coordination & support "deliverables" not shown. 2.0 TASK 2 -Final Design Once we have approval of the type selection and environmental clearance, we can begin final design. This task includes the development of the construction documents -ready plans, specifications and estimate (PS&E). Specifications and details will be prepared in English units in a format compatible with Land Development Desktop 3/Civil 3D 2011 or above. We have assumed that all plan view layout sheets will be developed in accordance with City of Chula Vista CADD standards. Detail sheets will be completed in a uniform format consistent with industry standards but will not necessarily include specific line weight or layering conventions as defined by the City of Chula Vista. We will provide'submittals at the 65%, 95% and 100% levels. Page 41 Two Parry Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Ena°ineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STN1364)" i0-180 2.1 Project Management and Administration -- This task includes project management and administration during the final design as noted above. 2.2 Project Meetings Up to twelve Team meetings with the City of Chula Vista are assumed and budgeted during this task. These will be held at the City's office approximately every month. The following table provides our assumption for meeting attendance: Meeting Consultant Team Descri tion M&N DHA BRG LLG Chang EM/ Aguirre KTU+A SRA Team Meetin #1 X X X X X X Team Meetin #2 X Team Meetin #3 X Team Meetin #4 X X Team Meetin #5 X Team Meetin #6 X Team Meetin #7 X X Team Meetin #8 X Team Meetin #9 X 65% Desi n Review X X X X X X X X X 95% Desi n Review X X X X 100% Desi n Review X Totals: 12 1 5 2 1 1 3 3 2 2.3 Final Foundation Report Prepare a report presenting our findings and our conclusions and recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of constructing the proposed bridge, retaining walls and roadway widening. Recommended foundation design criteria including bottom of footing elevations and bearing capacities or pile tip elevations and lateral pile capacities will be included. The report will be prepared in accordance with the Caltrans document entitled, "Foundation Report Preparation for Bridges," dated December 2009. A Log of Test Borings sheet in Caltrans format (but transferred to a City title block) will also be provided. Recommended grading specifications, temporary slope criteria, liquefaction evaluation, groundwater conditions, seismic design criteria, retaining wall design criteria, excavation characteristics including any necessary over excavation and re-compaction areas or embankment surcharges, R- values of subgrade material and the structural section of each road segment using the latest traffic index will be included in the report. Once the draft report has been reviewed by the City of Chula Vista and the design team, comments will be addressed and a final version of the report will be submitted. 2.4 Bridge Design and Detailing This task includes the design and detailing of the bridge based on Caltrans manuals and procedures. We have assumed athree- span cast-in-placed, pre-stressed concrete, haunched box girder bridge in estimating our design Page 42 Two Parry Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Ntoffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (ST.YI364)" ~~-~8~ scope. The bridge is assumed to include two stages with a closure pour near the center median. The design effort for other alternatives may require a revision to our scope and fee estimate. 2.4.1. Bridge Design Calculations Prepare the bridge design calculations based on AASHTO LRFD, Bridge Design Specifications, Fourth Edition wifh California Amendments (with revisions available on the Caltrans Publications web site). The design calculations and details will also follow the guidelines in the Caltrans Bridge Design Aids, Bridge Memo to Designers and Bridge Design Details (versions available on the Caltrans Publications web site as of January 2011). 2.4.2. Bridge Seismic Design Prepare seismic analysis and design in accordance with Caltrans SDC version 1.555, dated September 2009. 2.4.3. Unchecked Bridge Plans Prepare "unchecked" bridge plans. Bridge plans are assumed to include the following sheets: Sheet # Sheet Name 1 General Plan 2 General Notes 3 Deck Contours 4 Foundation Plan 5 Abutment 1 La out 6 Abutment 2 Layout 7 _ Abutment Details No. 1 8 Abutment Details No. 2 9 Bent Details No. 1 10 Bent Details No. 2 11 Bent Details No. 3 12 T pica) Section 13 Su erstructure Geomet 14 Girder La out No. 1 15 Girder La out No. 2 16 Girder Details No. 1 17 Girder Details No. 2 18 Miscellaneous Details No. 1 19 Miscellaneous Details No. 2 20 Architectural Details 21 Structure A roach Details 22 Stn/cture Ap roach Draina a Details 23 Joint Seal Details 24 Lo of Test Bolin s No. 1 25 Lo of Test eorin s No. 2 26 Log of Test Borings No. 3 (As-built log of test Bolin s Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the `Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Herita; a Road Bride (ST.i~1364}" Page 43 ~~-182 2.5 Bridge Architectural Details For the purpose of estimating the effort in this task, it has beeh assumed that athree-span haunched girder bridge will be designed, and that only basic aesthetic details will be developed. These basic details will be limited to shaping of the girder and piers, standard form-liner textures and concrete stain. The project architect will provide general guidance and minimal conceptual sketches only. Custom aesthetic details such as shaping of the abutments, design of special abutment landings, design of pier overlooks or "belvederes", design of custom barriers, railings, lighting and other special details may be appropriate, but have not been included in the base scope. 2.6 Grading Plans Grading plans will be developed for the area of bridge and roadway construction. These plans will include cross-sections of the creek consistent with the channel grading plans including maintenance roads and trails. They will show the specific details required to grade the approach roadway up to the bridge abutments and any transition work needed to tie-in with the general channel section. The anticipate sheet list is as follows: Sheet # Sheet Name 1 Gradin Plan No. 1 2 Gradin Plan No. 2 3 Gradin Sections 4 Gradin Details 2.7 Roadway Improvements Roadway improvement plans will include pavement sections, sidewalk/curb and gutter, driveway modifications and relocations, storm drains, utility locations, and other above ground appurtenances. The anticipate sheet list is as follows: Sheet # Sheet Name 1 Plan and Prole No. 1 2 Plan and Prole No. 2 3 Plan and Profile No. 3 4 Plan and Profile No. 4 5 T pica/ Sections 6 Details 2.8 Traffic Control Plans Traffic control plans will include staging of the project assuming two lanes open at all times (except specific closures allowed by the project specifications). The anticipate sheet list is as follows: Page 44 Two Party Agreement Between Ciiy of Chula Visfa and Moffat and Nichol io Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (ST_%~1364)" 10-183 Sheet # Sheet Name 1 Tragic Control Plan No. 1 2 Traffic Control Plan No. 2 3 Traffic Control Details 2.9 Signing and Striping Plans The signing and striping plan sheets will be prepared. The anticipate sheet list is as follows: Sheet # Sheet Name 7 Si nin and Stri in Plan 2 Si nin and Stri in Details 2.10 Utility Relocation Plans We have assumed that the dry utility (overhead phone, overhead electrical and gas) relocation plans will be completed by the respective utility companies. We will reference these relocations in the improvement plans or on the bridge foundation plans and in the project specifications. We will prepare a letter to each potential utility company asking for the location of their facilities and will assist with the coordination of any relocation plans developed by the utility companies. We understand that there -are not any wet utilities (potable water, reclaimed water or sanitary sewer) attached to the existing bridge. Our scope does not include the addition of any of these systems to the bridge. We will coordinate with the County & City of San Diego, SDG&E and the water districts to verify that there are no proposed utilities along, the bridge. 2.10.1 Storm Drain Plans We will develop plans for the modification or relocation of the existing storm drain system at the southern abutment and near the north approach. 2.11 Landscaping Plans This task includes the preparation of the landscaping plans. It is assumed that the landscaping will include hydroseeding of the new embankment slopes and revegetation of the disturbed areas within the river with native species. Only native trees, shrubs and ground covers will be used. Existing native plant materials will be preserved and protected and invasive non-native species will be removed when feasible. A survey of existing trees and shrubs will be prepared to include location, type, size and general health. This information will be evaluated and incorporated into the final design as appropriate. Since only native species will be used, no irrigation will be required. The special provisions will provide for a plant establishment period. Page 45 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STM364)" 10-184 2.11.1. Field Work Visit the project site to identify site-specific issues, photograph the site, and take a soil sample for horticultural analysis. Identify the general locations of plant materials, and identify any special treatments to meet mitigation requirements. 2.11.2. Final Landscape Plans Prepare final construction documents for the planting and erosion control. The planting plans will identify the species and location of all proposed plant materials. A plant material legend will include the botanical and common names, quantities, container size and minimum height and spread of the plants at the time of installation. The locations and areas to be hydroseeded will be identified and the type of hydroseed mixes to be used will be specified. A preliminary sheet list includes the following: Sheet # Sheet Name 1 Site Plan No. 1 2 Site Plan No. 2 3 Plantin Plan No. 1 4 Plantin Plan No. 2 5 Landscape Le end 6 Landsca a Details 2.12 Erosion Control /Construction Phase BMP's Construction phase erosion control BMP's will be detailed in accordance with the City's standard of practice. -This work will be coordinated with the City's NPDES specialist. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and post construction BMP's will be included. The anticipate sheet list is as follows: Sheet # Sheet Name 1 SWPPP Details No 1 2 SWPPP Details No 2 3 SWPPP Details No 3 4 SWPPP Details No 4 2.13 Permanent BMP's A Final Water Quality Technical Report will be prepared to discuss final approved permanent Best Management Practices (BMP's) to protect water quality after completion of construction works. The report will be prepared in compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Permit # CAS0108758, and the City of Chula Vista Development Storm Water Manual. The Water Quality Technical Report, among other requirements, will include a map showing the locations and types of Low Impact Development, structural Source Control, treatment Control, and Hydromodification Control (if applicable) BMP's for the project. Such BMP's shall be shown on construction plans with adequate details for Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STYt364)" Page 46 10-185 construction. Further, an Inspection, Operation, and Maintenance Plan shall be developed to ensure that permanent BMP's function effectively as designed. 2.14 Traffic Signal Modifiications Traffic signal modification design plans (if required} will be prepared for the two traffic signals along Heritage Road including Main Street and Entertainment Circle. The anticipate sheet list is as follows: Sheet # Sheet Name 7 Si nal Plan 2.15 Street and Bridge Lighting Plans Lighting plans will be prepared for the street and bridge lighting along Heritage Road between Main Street and Entertainment Circle and on Main Street from the west confirm point easterly to the new Heritage intersection. City standard luminaires will be used along the street and if desired, architectural luminaires will be used on the bridge. The bridge luminaires will be a standard design that is selected from a lighting catalog. 'The anticipated sheet list is as follows: Sheet # Sheet Name ? Li htin Plan 2 Li htin Details No 1 3 Li htin Details No 2 2.16 Final Design Surveys Fifty (50) foot cross sections will be obtained along Heritage Road between Main Street and Entertainment Circle. Fifty (50) foot cross sections will also be obtained along Main Street from 100 feet west of Heritage Road to approximately 300 feet east of Heritage Road. Cross sections of the abutment slopes will also be obtained. Existing driveways along Heritage Road between Main Street and Entertainment Circle will also be profiled. The driveway profiles will extend into the existing parking lots to determine the existing drainage patterns. The east and west edges of the existing bridge deck will be surveyed at the joints and approximately every 25 feet. Potholing of existing utilities that may be in conflict or where proposed connections are anticipated will be performed. A maximum of 8 potholes have been budgeted. 2.17 QA/QC (65%, 95% and 100%) An in-house QAJQC review will be performed by the Project Manager and/or the Principal-in-Charge for each design submittal, including Page 47 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chuia Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Raad Bridge (ST.Y136~J) " 10-186 subconsultants' work, to assure ahigh-quality and complete design package. We will also perform a detailed plan review and independent review of the bridge plans as described in Task 2.22. 2.18 65% Design Submittal The 65% Design Submittal will include completed but "unchecked" bridge plans, grading, and civil, roadway plans, traffic, landscape, and lighting plans developed to a 65% design level of completion. The submittal will also include a outline of the technical specifications and a preliminary list of bid items as prepared in Tasks 2.23 and 2.24. The submittal will be made to the City of Chula Vista. 2.19 Review and Respond to 65% Comments Our team will review and respond to comments received from the City Chula Vista and Caltrans. We will also review and respond to comments received from the effected utility companies. Our response will be in written form. 2.20 Bridge Independent Review Since this project is not within Caltrans right-of-way, an independent check of the bridge design including complete structural calculations is not required. Thus, for this task we have budgeted for an independent plan review by a senior bridge engineer who was not involved with the initial design. The design review will focus on the capacity of main load carrying members and a detailed review of plans utilizing a similar bridge for comparison. A set of marked up plans and comments regarding any substantial issues found with the 65% design will be provided. The review comments will be resolved with the designer and revisions incorporated in the 95% submittal. 2.21 Technical Specifications Technical specifications for the bridge items will follow the Caltrans Standard Specifications and Standard Special Provisions (SSP's). The technical specifications for the roadway, landscape and lighting items will be developed using the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Greenbook). An outline of the technical specifications (index of SSP's) will be provided at the 65% submittal Technical specifications will be prepared for the 95% submittal and updated for the 100% submittal. The City of Chula Vista will merge the technical specifications into their boilerplate and prepare the final bid documents. Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the `Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the HeritageRoarL $rzdge (STiYt364)" Page 48 10-187 2.22 Quantities, Estimate and Bid Item List (65%, 95% & 100%) A preliminary list of bid items will be provided at the 65% submittal For the 95% submittal, quantities will be calculated and independently checked for each major item of work in accordance with the procedures in Section 11 of the Caltrans Bridge Design Aids. Items typically bid on a lump- sum basis (landscaping, lighting, traffic control, bridge removal and prestressing) will be quantified by individual component. Once the quantities have been resolved, a unit price will be applied based on the current Caltrans Cost Data, local and site specific conditions and engineering judgment. The resulting estimate will be factored up to include mobilization, contingency and inflation factors (as appropriate). For the 100% submittal,, the quantity calculations and cost estimate will be updated and a final bid item list will be provided for the City's use in the bid documents. 2.23 95% PS&E Submittal We will respond to the comments made at the 65% submittal and advance the plans and specifications to a 95% level of completion. The 95% PS&E submittal will include all plan sheets in a completed format, special provisions and the engineer's estimate as performed in Tasks 2.23 and 2.24. We will also provide hydraulic calculations, scour calculations, and bridge design calculations. The submittal will be made to the City. 2.24 Review and Respond to 95% Comments We will review and respond to comments received from the City of Chula Vista and Caltrans. We will also review and respond to comments received from the effected utility companies. Our response will be in written form. 2.25 100% PS&E Submittal The 100% PS&E submittal will include bid ready plans, specifications and engineer's estimate based on comments received from the 95% submittal. The submittal will be made to the City of Chula Vista.. Upon approval of the 100% submiftal, final deliverable will include a CD with the project design file(s) along with one set of signed and stamped 24" x 36" myfars. A resident engineer's (RE) pending file with copies of the quantity summary sheets, bridge 4-scale plots and other data to be transferred from design to construction will be provided as part of the bid and construction support in Task 3. Two Party Agreement Beriveen City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the `Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STiYt364)" Page 49 10-188 DELIVERABLE MATRIX TASK 2 -PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING 'TASK NO. - ~ ,DESCRIPTION NO.'OF_COPIES ; 2.3 Final Foundation Report 1 2.4.1 Bridge Design Calculations 1 2.4.3 Unchecked Bridge Plans 1 2.13 Final Water Quality Technical Report 1 2.18 65% (Unchecked) Plans 10 Half-size, 1 pdf 2.18 65% Technical Specifications Outline 1 2.19 65% Response to Comments 1 2.21 95% Technical Specifications 1 2.22 95% Engineer's Estimate (Quantity & Cost) 1 2.23 95% Plans 10 Half-size, 1 pdf 2.23 Hydraulic and Scour Calculations 1 2.23 Bridge Design Calculations 1 2.23 Bridge Independent Review Comments 1 2.24 95% Response to Comments 1 2.25 100% Plans 10 Half-size, 1 pdf 2.25 100% Technical Specifications 1 2.25 100% Engineer's Estimate (Quantity & Cost) 1 2.25 Final Plans One set of signed and stamped 24"x36" Mylars 2.25 Final Submittal -Project Design Files CD Note: Meeting, coordination & support "deliverables" not shown. 3.0 TASK 3 -Bidding and Construction Support Provide construction engineering services and administration duties throughout project construction. These services generally include monthly meetings, bid support, construction change orders as well as the following: • Attend pre-bid meeting • Respond to bidder RFI's • Assist City with review of bids • Attend pre-con meeting • Respond to contractor RFI's • Attend 16 site visits • Complete as-built plans from red-lines provided by RE Two Party Agreement Between City ojChula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (ST.YI364)" Page 50 10-189 B. Date for Commencement of Consultant Services: (X) Same as Effective Date of Agreement ( }Other: C. Target Dates or Time Limits for Delivery of Deliverables: Milestone Tar et Date Prelimina En ineelin Febura 1, 2013 Environmental A proval Ma 1, 2013 65% PS&E September 1, 2013 95% PS&E Janua 1, 2014 100% PS&E April 1, 2014 Construction Support (if needed) Se tember 1, 2015 D. Date for completion of all Consultant services: Completion of all tasks to the satisfaction of the City or five years from Effective Date of Agreement. 9. Materials required to be supplied by City to Consultant: The City of Chula Vista will be performing all work required for the following tasks: • Right-of-Way Studies • Preparation of Project Report • Legal Descriptions, Easements and Right-of-Way Plats • Right-of-Way Certification 10. Compensation: A. ()Single Fixed Fee Arrangement. For performance of all of the Defined Services by Consultant as herein required, City shall pay a single fixed fee in the amounts and at the times or milestones or for the Deliverables set forth below: Single Fixed Fee Amount: Milestone or Event or Deliverable payable as follows: Amount or Percent of Fixed Fee () 1. Interim Monthly Advances. The City shall make interim monthly advances against the compensation due for each task on a percentage of completion basis for each given task such that, at the end of each task only the compensation for that task has been paid. Any payments made hereunder shall be considered as interest free loans that must be returned to the City if the Task is not satisfactorily Page 51 Two Parry Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (ST.Y1364)" -~ ~(] completed. If the Task is satisfactorily completed, the City shall receive credit against the compensation due for that task. The retention amount or percentage set forth in Paragraph 19 is to be applied to each interim payment such that, at the end of the task, the full retention has been held back from the compensation due for that task. Percentage of completion of a task shall be assessed in the sole and unfettered discretion by the Contracts Administrator designated herein by the City, or such other person as the City. Manager shall designate, but only upon such proof demanded by the City that has been provided, .but in no event shall such interim advance payment be made unless the Contractor shall have represented in writing that said percentage of completion of the task has been performed by the Contractor. The practice of making interim monthly advances shall not convert this agreement to a time and materials basis of payment. B. ()Phased Fixed Fee Arrangement. Phase 1. 3. For the performance of each phase or portion of the Defined Services by Consultant as are separately identified below, City shall pay the fixed fee associated with each phase of Services, in the amounts and at the times or milestones or Deliverables set forth. Consultant shall not commence Services under any Phase, and shall not be entitled to the compensation for a Phase, unless City shall have issued a notice to proceed to Consultant as to said Phase. Fee for Said Phase )1. Interim Monthly Advances. The City shall make interim monthly advances against the compensation due for each phase on a percentage of completion basis for each given phase such that, at the end of each phase only the compensation for that phase has been paid. Any payments made hereunder shall be considered as interest free loans that must be returned to the City if the Phase is not satisfactorily completed. If the .Phase is satisfactorily completed, the City shall receive credit against the compensation due for that phase. The retention amount or percentage set forth in Paragraph 19 is to be applied to each interim payment such that, at the end of the phase, the full retention has been held back from the compensation due for that phase. Percentage of completion of a phase shall be assessed in the sole and unfettered discretion by the. Contracts. Administrator designated herein by the City, or such other person as the City Manager shall designate, but only upon such proof demanded by the City that has been provided, but in no event shall such interim advance payment be made unless the Contractor shall have represented in writing that said percentage of completion of the phase has been performed by the Contractor. Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Ftnal Design for the Replacement of the Herita~ a RoarL Brid; e (ST.Y1364) " Page 52 10-191 The practice of making interim monthly advances shall--not convert this agreement to a time and materials basis of payment. C. (X) Hourly Rate Arrangement For performance of the Defined Services by Consultant as herein required, City shall pay Consultant for the productive hours of time spent, estimated in Exhibit B - "Cost Proposal", by Consultant in the performance of said Services, at the Hourly Rates or amounts set forth in Exhibit C - "Fee Schedule" in accordance with the following terms and conditions: {1) (X)Not-to-Exceed Limitation on Time and Materials Arrangement Notwithstanding the expenditure by Consultant of time and materials in excess of the below, listed Maximum Compensation Amount, Consultant agrees that Consultant will perform all Tasks set forth in the Defined Services herein required of Consultant for the following total amount: Task No. Description Task 1 (Preliminary Engineering $ 865,305 Task 2 (Final Design) $ 847.813 Task 3 (Construction Support) $ 64,302 Maximum Compensation Amount $ 1,777,421 The Maximum Compensation amount applies to the Agreement as a whole and includes all Materials and other "reimbursables," excepting those specifically called out in paragraph 11, below. Dollar amounts identified for specific tasks may be adjusted, provided that the Maximum Compensation Amount is not exceeded. Additional Services, which increase the Maximum Compensation Amount, shall not be preformed, unless approved by the City Council. The City Engineer may approve Additional Services that do not increase the Maximum Compensation Amount, provided the approval is in writing and the change meets the requirements for Additional Services herein. RATE SCHEDULE The above referenced Hourly Rates include both the Actual Costs and the Fixed-Fee. The Hourly Rates identified in EXHIBIT B are supported by the figures and calculations in Exhibit C - "Fee Schedule". (2) ()Limitation without Further Authorization on Time and Materials Arrangement Page 53 Two Parry Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the `Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (ST.YI364)" 10-192 At such time as Consultant shall have incurred time and materials equal to $ ("Authorization Limit"), Consultant shall not be entitled to any additional compensation without further authorization issued in writing and approved by the City. Nothing herein shall preclude Consultant from providing additional Services at Consultant's own cost and expense. See Exhibit B for wage rates. ( )Hourly rates may increase by 6% for services rendered after [month], 20 , if delay in providing services is caused by City. 11. Reimbursement for "Other Direct Costs" (ODC). . A. Equipment Costs The Consultant shall not be reimbursed for the purchase. of any equipment that has not been authorized by the City. (1) Prior authorization in writing, by the Local Agency's Contract Manager shall be required before the Consultant enters into any unbudgeted purchase order, or subcontract exceeding $5,000 for supplies, equipment, or Consultant services. The Consultant shall provide an evaluation of the necessity or desirability of incurring such costs. (2) For purchase of any item, service or consulting work not covered in the Consultant's Cost Proposal and exceeding $5,000 prior authorization by the Local Agency Contract Manager; three competitive quotations must be submitted with the request, or the absence of bidding must be adequately justified. (3) Any equipment purchased as a result of this contract is subject to the following: "The Consultant shall maintain an inventory of all nonexpendable property. Nonexpendable property is defined as having a useful life of at least two years and an acquisition cost of $5,000 or more. If the purchased equipment needs replacement and is sold or traded in, the Local Agency shall receive a proper refund or credit at the conclusion of the contract, or if the contract is terminated, the Consultant may either keep the equipment and credit the Local Agency in an amount equal to its fair market value, or sell such equipment at the best price obtainable at a public or private sale, in accordance with established Local Agency procedures; and credit the Local Agency in an amount equal to the sales price. If the Consultant elects to keep the equipment, fair market value shall be determined at the Consultant's expense, on the basis of a competent independent appraisal of such equipment. Appraisals shall be obtained from an appraiser mutually agreeable to by the Local Agency and the Consultant, if it is determined to sell the equipment, the terms and conditions of such sale must be approved in advance by the Local Agency." Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge /ST.Y1364)" Page 54 10-193 B. Other Direct Costs for Travel (Airfare and Rental Vehicle) The Consultant shall be reimbursed for these ODC Items at actual costs supported by invoices and receipts. Reimbursement for airfare shall be for Economy Class or equivalent only. C. Other Direct Costs for Printing (Miscellaneous and Outside Reproduction), Courier Services, Reproduction Supplies, and Potholing The Consultant shall be reimbursed for these ODC Items at actual costs supported by outside vender invoices and receipts. D. Other Direct Costs for Printing (Documents and Mylar, Color, Vellum and Bond Plots) The Consultant shall be reimbursed for these ODC Items at actual costs supported by outside vender invoices and receipts. In-House Printing/Reproduction costs shall not be reimbursed as direct costs. E. Other Direct Costs for Travel (Per-Diem-lodging, per Diem-meals, & incidentals, Internet and Mileage) The Consultant and/or subconsultants shall not be reimbursed for ODC for the above Travel items. F. All subconsultants with contracts in excess $25,000 shall contain the above provisions. 12. Contract Administrators: City: Jose Luis Gomez, PE, PLS Consultant: Perry C. Schact, PE, SE 1660 Hotel Circle North, Suite 500 San Diego, CA 92108 Tel: 619-220-6050 Fax: 619-220-6055 13. Liquidated Damages Rate: ( ) $ per day. ( )Other: 14. Statement of Economic Interests, Consultant Reporting Categories, per Conflict of Interest Code (Chula Vista Municipal Code chapter 2.02): (X) Not Applicable. Not an FPPC Filer. ( }FPPC Filer Page 55 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (ST.Y1364)" 10-194 ( )Category No. 1. Investments, sources of income and business interests. ()Category No. 2. Interests in real property. ( )Category No. 3. Investments, business positions, interests in real property,. and sources of income subject to the regulatory, permit or licensing authority of the department administering this Agreement. Category No. 4. Investments and business positions in business entities and sources of income that engage in land development, construction or the acquisition or sale of real property. ( )Category No. 5. Investments and business positions in business entities and sources of income that, within the past two years, have contracted with the City of Chula Vista or the City's Redevelopment Agency to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or equipment. ( )Category No. 6. Investments and business positions in business entities and sources of income that, within the past two years, have contracted with the department administering this Agreement to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or equipment. ( )List "Consultant Associates" interests in real property within 2 radial miles of Project Property, if any: 15. ( )Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman 16. Permitted Subconsultants: Aguirre & Associates BRG Consultants, Inc. Chang Consultants Drake Haglan & Associates Earth Mechanics, Inc. KTU+A Linscott, Law & Greenspan Engineers Safdie Rabines Architects 17. Bilt Processing: A. Consultant's Billing to be submitted for the following period of time: (X) Monthly Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vuta and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Ene veering and Final Desia n for the Replacement of the Heritag e Road Bridge (ST_Y1364)" Page 56 10-195 ( )Quarterly ( )Other: _ B. Day of the Period for submission of Consultant's Billing: ( )First of the Month ( ) 15th Day of each Month (X) End of the Month ( )Other: C. City's Account Number: 18. Security for Performance OPerformance Bond, $ ( )Letter of Credit, $ ( }Other Security: Type: Amount: $ ()Retention. If this space is checked, then notwithstanding other provisions to the contrary requiring the payment of compensation to the Consultant sooner, the City sha11 be entitled to retain, at their option, either the following "Retention Percentage" or "Retention Amount" until the City determines that the Retention Release Event, listed below, has occurred: ()Retention Percentage: ()Retention Amount: $_ Retention Release Event: ()Completion of All Consultant Services ( )Other: Page 57 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vuta and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STtit364)" 10-196 ova C cv G d u R ~ Q ~, a [0 ~ ~ ~ ~ m CG t ;~ _ ~ m` W O ~ V O U ~ d fQ i a S 0 N n N i d O u O x vi .a n M o m': -N o -r~ v i mo ~ ~ M o~ ~ ~ r°n oo . o '' ~ I . O' C '11 f~l V1 1~ N N a ~ Q - t0 Q~~ Q r-1 N 07 'i ~ l4 \D V ~. V? ifY VY v3. iA V} . V} il} lip ~ I ' ~ Q ~ -. - C F ~ ~ n li m u u ~ a q O v ~n I I m O : h- ~ ~ p v ~ N ,~I tp ~' O1 ~ rV ~ m ~ trl ~ ~ C ~ C I I O~ ti ° a, ~ ~ -° O .~ 0 .~ N. u~ e- R1 of U c¢ N m tf1 .ti h m O m Q m I O ~a ~ ~ ri N ri N ~ r1 ~ N , c a .n v. vw .n v~' - v} . ~ „. ~ to N ~ h O N -N u ~.,C ~ ~ i ~j i . u1: In V'1 ~ a ~ ~ ~ N _ ' vi. v>. uy ~~ ~n- ~ 'v~ ~/1 O ' ~/1 N O N .~ wJ c v to x t h O ~ h m vl ti N ~ ~ ~ ° 3 c c ri rj tri ' ~ ~ c a 'c ti m .. m a l7 4i ,n ih v~ ~ in . ~ h .o. v o ~n o ..o o -~ ~ c iri I~ O ul u1 N f~ i(1 ~ O -~ h ip u ~ O Ci ~ .y lD 00 I~ h v 0 ~ o u v .-1. .-, . N N N ~ °' ~ ~-~ v-. - vti yr vim, vw yr rn ' ra cc .-gy m m o ~ ~ ^ ` o o ~ ~ h ~ m ~ {. r - _ ~ ~ ; ro - m _ ~ ~^ a' .ti ' o m i m ~ y ,;.. 2 _ ON ~ O ct u-i • h :. a Q :N .ti M r `_ Q ~f. W 'V} U} v? Vl ih w °' ^ p ~ _ ~ o oh i ..._ ~. _, v o -~ m N o a S - _w v N v~ .~ vri ,=m in v, vi. of v~ W' c}. W: N 7 ..000 ~ ~ 0 O 0 ' a c ~ .ti ti c+i - t0 N _Ot N N '.C . ~ 0 0 o' D ~ ~ " h r ~ _ ~. o m m ti C ~; ti ~_ ` ~ T N N ~O p' U ~ Z: ti il} V'. H V} N t1 ~ V} N y} .._ S/Y '~ .'b ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ OJ ~ OQ . 4 `~ O O I~ h 0 2... ~ ~ vY LTA ~ V} VT V} V/} ,VT ~ ~ C i }h. ' ate. ~ i w~i ~'~1. ~ w~. L .a `~ u ~ ~n ~ I ~n a N v° ~n u ~n ~ u N ~ v° G ~ ` W o a o; C a I- o G o o ~ F- p a o FO- ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~.', N c , ~n L a ~'-~ Q y .p ' ~ e - 0 .. . f- 0 .N. ti ~ ,_ o .y F- \ . o ~' Q v Z 'o v . Z v v ~ d w a n~ ~ a Z ~ l7 ~ ~ "' z a ~ ~ 2 ~ Da _ -_ ~ ~ W ~ z - o O 4 ~ m - , o 2 ' _ ~ " , N „ ~ a~• . ¢ i . O ~ N ~ _~ v v 'N h lD N h to N h ~ ~ of . an v? a ti m u n in in .ti .. lil ~ .,N C O Vt N 'N.: d' ~ ~ ~ :~ N r~~ h c+ a ~ T ai N-S m r•r N yr vy v~ W O Gt 7 N tp N N N N N _, N V} i!} W O o0 N O N N G1 ~-1 O m ~ O ~ ~ - ' yr vx of N O N ~ ~ ~ _~. 01 ~ ui ~. m .ti in m. ut to +n N h T m n a ~ h ,-i .ti : m ~ ~i N N ~ ~ ~ d O 0:Y m .--i ~ N ~ ~ ~ oa a a m cN ~ .~ ~ ~c -o. lD t!] N Op. ti N m N .-i O i H -.. - m _.fl1 i ~ n ao O X10 tD . '~ O O 00 L'Y tM1 ~. UT c'~ ~ , Q1 00 Q ~I M ~~ m .-, 7 ~ N tll VT Vt ~ „'{ O O f~ h N N n ~ ~ O? v° 'vi u ° y a '°; i v o _~ ~ ,:o ~ -v~ c ° ~ a c ~' v v -a` -O ~~ .c m, _, a. v - c E ~. E ti l°j 0 W O __ C C 10-1 97 u R A {.! r E c ~ o a E c u W L A V ~ Q ~ a: N ~ m ~ m p c 0] L L ~ d x ~+ m` a. ~ w 4 a H ~ r ~ Ou ` 'u w ,~ m ~ :°. E d = a Y E E N N 0 N N O o ~ m ~ ~ o ~ o e mM ~ Y a o o ~n d , H N s O Y F ,, o a o ~.-c` $ <` c v ~ ~L E' ¢ . < ~ v d SC o ~ a s {Y y o L W 5 ~ f t e a3 n b ~ 'a~: "' a_ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~. 0 0 0 f b 0 v E ~ E ~ ? ~- ~' E ' W ~ s Q N , ° \ D ` t O d ~ O 3 ~ pp F ~ a ° c V 3 a ~ v ° V '~ L C ° ~ a ~ a c > a 6 ¢ d O v e c ~ ~ c E ` ~ $ y 4 a 4 o ~ ~ ~ a B y y a n a c ° '^ e¢ z ,o_ o m ~ a E ~ uc ~ i a c in 3 y`° o ° tl 0 ° c ~ ~ z E .' c ~ ^ + M ~ ti g v e u v° a ~ ~ ~ ~ c a v c h ¢ ~ o c = ' ~' >= v a ~ " o c ti o ~ ~ $ E a t c ti a a e W a e i c j ° _ ~ b C ¢ i Z , ° M ~n c e ° c V .y ~ i o 3 ' a^ o ~ ^ 3 ¢ i F h ~ a _ ~ a a ¢c '- z z ~ a .E E 6 c d ti 4 v 3 d y 'a' 'i o= ~ °e o @ ~ a v ° ~ ~ ~ v v m ~ v ~ ~ , E ~ d u ° d ` ~ ~ o , ' ~ o n m N ¢ n o = y ~ a° m o m ¢ 0 0 o w a . . o x m a S ., d ? ~ i ~¢ o f a z W H _~ 2 O b D O A ^ w . r ti ti w . n y rv n r ~ .~ + n n n n ~ r m r ~ r ~ M< ~ ~. ~_ ~ M ~~ ~' r .:: n -„~ ~'' T N a .N J. a ~ a s $`a c. ~ ~.'~. V 4 U'; $::~ ° d ` ~_ O ,'~ 3 ,~. . g ~. 10-198 c m c E m m c a A ~ O S -o O N ._ z N m` a F m ~ ~ O t m d E ~ E d ~ r ~ a b r a a ~ Y Fem. n n f ~ n w ~ w n n n a ~n w f n n n n n n n n n w v ~n n n H H w n n n n O O O F ~ 2 ~[.~ C~ C~ a ~ m . . ~ . n e< ~a~ ~ h- .. e 3mW a _r " x~ ~ ~ ~ 8 i ~ a ~ a~ ~ ~ z m ~ r- z, ~ s o a r~ _~ a ~~ L 0 E _ ' ¢h , LL J o o ` = m c c O ;c ~ n E E E e v ' v° °¢ a ~ ? o X u ; ~ ~X a e - ~ c - - a ` 2 u a m a ~ a ~ ~ c 'o n 'n ~ n o _ o o ~ L i m m v 2 „' 'E N h e a ~ - ~ E W E 'n 4 ~ a .' p i e ~ u !e 4 N ~ t ¢ a E e v o e c `c ` ~ m a m w v n a Mn ''n w a e n ~ e c 4 ~ a a e ° 3 °a ~ a ~ 'c z ~ a ~ 'o e E ~ e o o ~ w ~ M n X 3 v 3 ~ ? o ~ ~ ~ ~ N o 2 3 a i o n` a` : m m a v` z° i= ~ 9 W a i= ¢ a m e m` ~= 'a t z $ - Y ~ i b N °0 ~i a n n N N w ti ti b N N N N ry N N ~ N -- ~k b.: ~ ~' ~' ~ ~'' N N ~,~ ~ .7 .. a g .~` o p i . .N, ~Si a ~i N 10-199 O a a c '^ m 0 v m ~ '`' N v ¢ e mom, ~ o u° ~ ~ ~ O ~ X V m a a W ~ 9 ~ m K O M U Y a ~ m r .~ > 2 E E N ri N 4 0 G_ ~. N ~, Q~ ~o ~ a'a s gay ~ ~ 5 S ~ C r e ~yy C ] V W tl' o ~ W~ ~ ~ £ F ~ qa. k "m 2 .5_ ~ ~ z m.- z ~_ z fi ~` d F e~ ~~ F _ ~~ 4 a j C 2 ti 0 t n n c 2 O a G u v a w u D p m Y g ~I ~* ~:x 0 0' 9 0 ~': a 1~-~0~ i~~~ ~~ r-a _ o =~ o~ C d ~ N °J a ~ O ~ ~ a m` a v i-- '" ~p N Y ~ ~ A H EO o y- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ a ti O b ~ E, z " 0 E ~ ~ E o ~ " ° ° a ~ _ `2 y M e v z a m a B a ~ M ~ a e , ~ ~ c ~ o c c ,_E ~ . ~n _ ~ ", a :. p ' a rv ~ e e `a a ~` .E N y y ~ a a E E ° a m v i i 4 W a = e ° ~ 0 e E ~ ¢ a ti N i ~ c ~ ~ E q _ t ~ c a i ~ ¢ a a 2 m c a y ~ ~ o c v 2 _p, a c n' '~ u p t h a ~ u % o `° h n a ,~ ° v i a s ° E F ~ M c ., o ~ c v v a x' c 0 3 '~ e c e w yy o ~ ~ c ~ _ ~ ~ N C ~ u V Q - ~ ~ y ~ c E ~ ~ i 1~ V~ ~ ~ N O~ u C T lj M y ~ v ` a ~y y V -: W L e v e 1 m' S v E ~ O G .01. ~ O U 2 m u 4 M ~ e L O d ~ ] 4 O C 4 m h Q R 1: o T C Q E d O X O a m o O > C ~ W O i <` G 4 d ~ Q C` O V~ m` S o` M U Z Y -, ~• Z N A ~ w n n ti w N n T n N n N b y w n n N ry M n ti A: Q ~1 ~' ~l ~ vi Q- x n a 10-201 0 S - Z u. C _ ~= a r L d M Z ~ N ~ m p ~° ~ 6 m t ;? ~ ;S = u m` a u W T O O N V ~ U H A .~ .r M n N d O 0 ~: m G Y NN Y C Q .J F' 2. C S -4 _,._.. b c ~ S ~~ ~ ~ a ° ~Y -° , 4 N h ~ F - ~ Z. Q 4 ~ U ~ a o C ~ Y ~ F G N V ~ a ; v ~ ~ E V _ ~ a ~ r E N ] y t Q r ] t _ O 0 ~ ° z ~' N v S ° r ° ~ ' a Q d u ti 3 `c E o M i ~ ` a = E ° r v o Q a . ? u = i w c v H ~ o e ° ; ~ O Q . 'a ° ° > ~ e E ~ ~ C ~ `o ` N v N M v - a ~ u ~ ~ ~ L c ~ e o -Z : ~~ ~ a- ~ c ° u i ° W N > W .° a . a ¢ ° v' ¢ u a ° E e o N ~ e c o c ° v - v = e ° a ~ N v ° ~ a ° e ~ u¢ u 0 r c u a > c ~ n Q ¢ e E u .- o 3 v .~ a ~ ~ rn N ' ^ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ e ~ e C C V v > N ~ V 4 b o a N ~ o ¢ p p C v ~ o \ V Y . Q 3 0 ~ 4 ~ ~ C ` . ~ a I m u ` 4 ~ e ° 9 C m Q h ~ Q ~ v .. . 0 d C W H ~. . M N N b n A H @ N n ry T a: j- d'; O": b' ~, :a ~° a 8 d 10-202 0 U ~: Q ~. F ~ H c E A Z a e71 in y Q ~ m > ~ G T a m a m °° L:°- s? X V m y m W O A N e-I U ~ O R Od0 ~ Z ti 0 N v O O y NN k C O p Q ~ ~' 2 j ~ 9 t~ c ^ b Eo 'g.o ' E ~ ~ ~4 a b c N ~ m o ~ 2 ° E ~ ~ ~' N d F ~ O O ~ ° 4 ~ 2. 3 ~ ~ M ~ c V e O O ° F ~ ~ 'a ~ ~ °; ° E ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ° ~ v .y > - c ~ _ a c u i ~ z` ~ a' _o E ~ ~ ~ c ~ e ~ ~ .5 ~ ~ _ ~ 2 °i O ~ ° 2 W w' C Q ° > O Z ~ N ~ C ° v a \ O N ~ y ~ W Q E i ' ~ E a 5 ~ ~ ~ °e °e ° ¢ _ z ~ D v e m ~ ~ `a c a u u V , , o v ~ m g N ~ ~ a 0 ~ O ~ ~ a r o u a c W o ~ 5 v o e » ° o ~ o 4 O i o G` ¢ y d n` a O F. ¢ a` = ~ O l'1 m` m Q 1: a 2 Q y G` 2C m . U ~ n C 4 Z ~.~ 2 b q T n N P w T O N n N ti ti n w M n n ~e ~. ~. n S V 2 v 10-203 C W d' A m V 1 N_ y ¢ y to 7 G N C A N ~ W m L ~ C C X u m` a W O 9 F ~> r H Q W V ~ m Y R R .~ F 2 N N L 0 O O.' O °o n m _ _ - o y _ _ ~ _ _ M 4 _ ~ f _ c ~ a °a ~ ?. i " 'x ~ o ~ f z - ~= ~ o: ~ V Y Q _ a Y ~ - Q ~ a V~ ~ ~ ~.8 _ ~. 2 2 ~ ~', ti I a ~ ~ ~. ~ H O ~ ~' 9 3 L ~ ~ S _ 5 h~ N K E o,' E g o z._~I ~. ~ C Y 4 ~ j 4 a u o ~ ' ' ~ ~ ° o a z - a c ,~ i a ° e e a a ~ ~ ~ 'a - i a ~ ~ a ~ ' ¢ ~ E m N o ' ¢ a a ~ . . E e U U an ~ c a a ~ c i s u° u a a e ' ~ ~ ^ ° e o E ~ . c°. ? te a ~ _ ~ a ti M z y . e ~ ~ r e o m n¢ ~ e o d ~ ° s o n c ° ~ ~ U ~ c y ~ c c f~ a ° a s ~ a C i x ° ' ~ e E ° c 2 a < ' v ~ ~_ ~ > W a Q v ' ~ ° E E a ' ^ a ' L ° e 7 _° 3 Z` h p ° N W g C S ~ a e Z e C n ~ ~ Q C Q E G ~ n, o . P . M ~~ O C ' ` , i w S ~ V ...1 c . e . y N Q o` U ~ a v ? C L V C C . 9 . r 6 o a E C O o n m N ~ m° m~ y E ~ v p 2 a ~ ~ a C r G m Q F. a Q u ~ O m C C W o a` n` i ¢ a` a i = ¢ C` a V~ m` 2 d V 2 2 n m ~n a n r m ~+ "' 10-204 L v d A v :°• o, ~ v ¢ m m > ~ "' c y O y m ~ v O c s x ~ m` a ~ w o ~ N 'S v ~ O '+ W Y 110 n m .~ H S 0 d r ~ o ~ ~ y Q Y rv O O e~ '' z 5 5. a F a ~- ~ . ~ a " ~ ~L F b ~ ~ , a ' ~ a s <~W O W W ~ e "` Q ~ a 3 _ . a e _ . c V ~y a F a ~ c c ` t m t u \ a o v a O ~ ~ ~ ~ C N \ a C E . ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ s ~ ~ °e ° C E j ~ v _ .r L a M o a N c E O 3 p y ~ E ~ C Q ' ~ V v ~ 3 V ~ a C Q `a ~ N W v o '~ ~ S x m 2 is 3 z' ~ ¢ ~' ° c ~ .o ~° $ a O 2 W d W I. D W 6 Y 4 G W ~~ ~ 1 N H T N p n < O H N R n V ti b V ti ti N n b 1~ 4 N ~ ti y y ti P ~ of ~. ai H: `~ o ~'. a x°_.m` _a' a 10-205 3 f .`~ v! ~ r r E O. ~, O C O C a i R m 7 ~ ~ Q m a O m ~ ~ O y s ~ ~ 2 ~+ m a ~ W O ~ ~ H V K V Y a m m ~ Z N N N a O ~ - b Y h o c O ti i ~' 'S ~ ° E i ti $a -~ O E ¢ Z O E h v g n ~ c Z ~ `~ o a ` ~ ` ° - ° ° M ~ o ° c N u y ~- O ~ . . ~ a " e E 8 -~ E M N ~ ° ` a W ~ ° ~ ~ E c c ° - e a ~ m ' ^ c a ¢ °c ~ o o ~ u ~ ~ i E v w = a ~ M ~ ` ° ~ a ° ° = ~ ~ o ° ° o i a ~ E c ~ g z ° a ° > u ~ ¢ c , u t e e i x ' a u° m u ~ ' c ' 1 ` ~ e v ¢ ~> c v ~ ` o u ~ n n N n o o? o ¢ ~_¢ ~ C ~ i 9 ~ E E ~ a ^ o £ :: C 0 ~ 2 v m` . i °, S ~ u o a a ~ o o . m m` ¢ ~ o ' a g ¢ E v 2 F Q m o i `. m W -.. o a a` a c` ¢ a` a ~ = ¢ a` ~ l 9 m` Y i v 2 2 . M O b ~ °~ ry M p N ¢ » N r w r . N M ~+ n n :- .u c 1 '.L ~: ti~ m y., g 9 i a 10-200 0 w ig. C - 4 _ z o C d d ~ a a Q v ~ O m °1 a u O ~~ z m m` a ~ ~ i o O = z v •+ m Y H .~ S ~. o - Y_ ~ $ Y ~ O O O O ~ O 4 ~ ~ 2 ~ { a l a ~ ~ ~: ~ x 2 '` ° E i o Q E N ~ ~. ~ O ~, ~ w J ° O O u 0 T ~ ~ ° O 2 ti ° ' - c a o ° v ~u ~ V - ° ¢ y Q ~ E V U ~j u ¢ O O - C V - ~ Q V ~ N ° O ' 4 9 ~ °i - ~ ° e ~ N t M y a c ~n a u .~ d ~ ~ > q C o v v ~ ~ ~ 2 m ~ "' ~ ° ° ~ ° = o e ° ` v ° ° ~ p u d m ¢ b n` G E ~ N o C 2 .- 3 0 ~~.` ~ E ¢ i S ~ i E ° 2 ~ °e °c ¢ '- ~ ~ a ~ ¢ ~ E i ~E ~° e° 3 ~ $ o - " N 4C, ° ' ~ ~ _ u tu u m ~ ° u w e w ° ~ ~ a ~ o e a °a o y E o $ ~ ° m C - ` , g ` m v u a ` . a o a i Q 4 i a ~= a C t~ m = a °m v 2 Y -~ 2 M m e N b ep N ~ e n n ^. n m a n N n n N ti n N .v n m n ~ q L+ - U u O ~I W ~<. r ~. ~ Ll.i G Oi 2 ~ Hj a 10-2~/ C V cc / t1. C M ~ ~ ~ t R W ~ ~ iuv_ °C a m` a W ~" O O Y v ~ u A v F m .~ Z' 0 N L O O NYN C .I Y K ~.2 ~ ~ ' E.,e H, ~. 3 j. '': 4 ° E x z 0 E ~^ ~ o H _S ~ c e u a . O `a ~ ~ 'o i ~ °- ' ' E v w ° ~ ~ W ` a c ~ ~ i E t a ° E ~ ° o t u , ~ c , c ° ~ 5 T t , v ¢ v - ~`. i d S C ` E C ° o U V N r i. ~ O O Q t u w O S t ~ y ' s n V ~ ° 1 c ~ C E ~ ~ u . ° C a t C ° C .~ 'a '. ~ e T N 'v C s L ° ~ n c Q L c d ~ i ~ ~ w a e .n ~ o v ~ O O ° o c i Q ~ E c ~ ~ F ° n ~ y e d ° a x n v e ~ ~ e v ~ o a - c ~ . . -u ~ . M ~ ` ° ' e o ° e ¢ E . Y o ° ` c a ' o ° ' v ~ w g `y : f V E . °. N N °e c ~ u N a d i c i u ` a w ~ h u M ° n o a ° y ° o o am ' ~ o o n \ v v m~ e E ~ a v o 2 m' a` ~ ~ `° v ° rc m ` a ~ = a ¢ u e c m` i z W ~ n ` d a` ¢ ~ 4 C` a` ~ = ¢ a` . D l 7 m ` 2 o v 2 _ Y ~ ~Q 2 ~ N M O '° N n N T O N N r n N t w n w rl w n a o °o V _ ~ ~ - F _ ~ a ~ '~'. ~~ d. m Q a_ i 11 U Q m a': ~ V _ c`i 10-208 o °op u t c c t ~ ~ ~ ~ - 'o p - ~ n z Fp`- ~ ¢ o c u n J v ¢ ~ K ~ °1 cO. v O ` m` a H m ~ ~ o O Y z v F m 2 -:: o r ^~ Y ~` '~ ya. 0 0 0 - 7 ~ Z 3_: 5- ~,o ~'-:a = r _ ~ ~ j °v ~' t e~ _ ° E ~ o F N V F s ~ ~ 0 ~ d r - ~ vq 0 W .a ~ c y e ° e ° E N e ~ ~ ~ C ; h '.o V _ ~ ~ . E ~ O ° d W > ~ E a t b t y :: ¢ _ 'a N v a E e o° v + v °° .n r ~ e ¢ _ o° 4 ' °~ ~ 4 W t R ° > O ~ ~ N Q C U > v ~ C W ~' ~ . . y 2 ~ ~ _ C „ C ~ ~ ~ ~ Z ° °c e ¢ eu ~ E '° ° c° ~ a° v v N o S S .F ~+ '^ v c a - v u a u ° ' ^ E E C W ° u N m u a ° a N o o E o" a a~ .a V \ . o ` ` ,o m m v m ` a u ~ ` x m` a S ? `° a ` $ m m' ¢ ~ o ¢ r X ~ m` a e o -- a a a ¢ i~ a o F: ¢ c o - l'1 m S c` °m ~ 2 Y Z N O N q n N O w n ti n n N r T n O ~ N n A w w n n ry n m n n G a ti ~ ~. ~. ~ ti m m ~ ,, ° x b 10-209 00 a ~, ,~. ~, L ~ - o q F K O H C N d ~ u a u n m ~ .10. d m ~ ~ N R d H ~ ~ 0 ~ fa j 2 ~ m i ~, W ~ A Vf t ?, O O (.! C U y d a Y d F S :~ N N d O Q U y `. ti O _ O O O O O Y r ~ ¢ O r r o, o F a E '^ a 2 a E ~ ~ ~ v ~ ~: _ t~ 3 a e u n e ~ o `a ., ¢ ~ -a a ~ ' °e E ~> o 3 ~ N]~ C V w O ~ O N ~ = u ~ E O ' ^ u 3 y ~ C G ~ ,s , y a ¢ ° e ° y a e ~ C a ~ > e- a e " ' n 3 o u a w a c N a o ° y ~ ~ Q$- a¢~ c a ~ ~ v ° ~ : > °u « Q e ~ $ x ' ~ a u o v 'E ~ ~ ~ a °~ v ~ > a a ~ a „' c Q ' > E o h e o c u = Q 3 an `a ~ W E Z _ o a . c v a c e : e ~ a Q¢ E a - 3 v u N a ° ~ a w '^ C u : a E $ F . ¢ ~ d °i _ u e ° a a M y o a E p ` a o > Q . ~ m i E y E v W° O S m C 0 ~ ~ ~ O C C 0¢ I ~ S ¢ N O O m C C W -~ ~' 0 a 0 o ¢ w W L a L . . a` ~= ¢ i o ~ m' x i m U 2 ~ w m Y ti . Z N m O ~ n '1 w 'i •i ti w n n ti m N n h n r w r _. ~. `~ J-L° ~_~ c' 2 x a. 1 ®- L ~ O rata 5' w ~ ° ~ _ o ~ i a t= L a v Q m ~ v m N ~ m a a a O ,'~, m' a -c C O N y s Op R -fir H Y ° ° ° o ~~ ~ S S 3 E yy z1 ~x a' G E ~,a~ e~ o E G-. M ~ C ~ g c o e w _ ~ 's ~ ~ v 9 ` `c a ^ ° ~ ti > > a ~ ° v ° ~ o c a E W ' c - i ' i a a a z % ° n ~ a N e v c E ° ~$ ~ ° ~ t' e a o° a `a c ~ z a `e N E °. e ° d ~ a c v c ~ e ° `e z n Q ~ a° ~ a ~ M W a~ c ` o n ~ 0 ° s ° E d ~ a \ e = ¢ 4 L n S' ~ 0 ` 4 E v 4 °' ` a i W w i a e a n M ~ ~ `^ ~ ~ °. c e ~' c u o .. ~ c a a p C e ~ 4 F a , Z a c '^ n a °e E E ° ° ._ Q o V - h _ Q a c °~ °o y ~ W ~ a '-.~ ` ~ ~ C E C E Q C ` ~ ~ W 0 a+ E v O u°i n C ~ 4 ~ ~ C 4 d `y 4 O O n ti 8 ~ O O 4 L C C u V \ ~ o 0 0 " - v m o ° : ` o x m o` 5 c_ o a ~°. a m` ¢ ~ a ¢° v X ~ m` i m a Y :. ~? N R N I~ T ^ T O n ti n ~1 w N n N w O n h w ~ I~ w n n n N » N T n n - ~I h !'s .r o _, w H' W N' d ~, ~~ a!. ~ U~ 2 `a a ,~' 1 O ~ / ~ 1 y >~ 8 t ~ ~ - o c E a y N Y :°. a '° m > ~ N o r =° m a c m z v O 2 ~+ m` d ~ W O R N V_ r ~ Q ~ 'u m A A r `a 2 ti ti O N d .G O ~U ~i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a' .~ ~ _ E ~ Z a E u F ~ o G ~ ° Y O _ V ~- $ ] j d ~ L ° 3 C FQ. O e '~ - 4 ` 0 e e E 'c ~ .u , E E e ¢ rn v E v v ~n ti ¢ ` ' Q a v v ~ ~ o > e` n m ° e S e ~ . c . e E a c ° - ti i p ° t ~ x ? ~ c v N a r o ~ w o Q = c y ~ y N W o h ° y C ~ y p ~ V ~ Q ~ o a ~ i ° ~ ° ~ u H e v ' n 2 u u a ° z c U u ~ a ' c 4 ~ i a ` . u u m a y ° a $ n o ¢ ~ 2 ^. _ ~ i ' c c a ~: . a s 'v e W ' c a 3 'a „ v v g ~ a - o m j 9 v m a a ° d g ~ = 9 m` i N ~ c v o e a ° ~ z ~ m` a ~ o ~ a i .e Q ~ c ~ a m ° i m a , Q ate O , a a Q G ` a ` F . - ¢ . a O t 7 m` 2 a` U 2 Y !Q- Z N a N .y T ti n H ti r m N T a N n s ,j a, 1"-Z1Z o ~ o 5 -~ _ Z C o i°- C v a Z ~ ~ ~ „ o d o g m` o °. ~ F N o O Y z v F m m .~ s U 0 M Y ¢ a o 0 k y 2 o k ~ E g .. _ a m e e g o ~ ~ E E o E v c u .- ~° 4 9 m ._C- N - ~ 3 ~ T N ; ~ ~ x G E w as t ` ~ o y a ° N E M C 'c a y ~ M ` c ,~ ' °' ~ a a a v c ¢ ' ` ° N . C v ` C a a o a c v v a 5 ~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ a 6 c ° o ~ e ~ ~ y a w O a C L Q .a V ~ C i E a C M a a = C . ~' Ct C m ~ C N C C N W N ~ ~ W Q ~ ~ ~ ~ R ~ C V ~ C C ~ d M a .q ~ O V - V ~ ~ W °' °' x o a` c` - m` m t9 m ~ °i ~ w i ~= a u z m ~ a m z b ~i m o N ~n m N N o~ a .°. s N .y .e. ~ .a, ~1 ° ry n N n rv y N n N ~ -~' ~'. n ~: 3'. O 41 N ~ V+ _ ~' a M. 10-213 0 0 p` m `o - a _ - ~ a c E m ;: Z m a a'{ m>z"'~ 0 m m L'o O'S _ '~ m` a W O A N Y V ~ O 1- d 00 r .~ ti .a N N a ~ d Y H an v~ w ~ n w N vs N ~n ~n ~n ~n ~n ~n N o f v l h N ~n ,n w h ~n +n ~n ~n h H ~n ~n ~n ~ n N O O d, . .~ N_ ] 2 O a ~ 0 .~.' D J m 2 dF ? b e ~ O O F Q V 4 ~ d x ° $ E N q a m a o a c e - E E .J E Q b Q C C 9 N ; m ~ t C ° ` C Z 0 ~ y 0 ° ~- r ~ ~ G G ~ ° . 3 . L .~°. ° C y . °i i X_ C ] . ° ~ - ~ ° C ° u O V C a S= M V ~ O ~ ~ y ° Z ° y a ` a a m q '' a . N W „ ' a~ : e u ° C ~~ ? ~ ~ r a u y E U t a a ~ c x ~ n e ~ d , ^ a °' t h b W ° D a ~ Q c a v - °~ ° h 3 a . a _ ~ " °' ~ 0 a v e a a a 3 ~ ° q~ v ~ c o o E v C v e~ N a Q 3 a . 3 ' ~ , ° 2 y t a x °o O . 0 d 6 4 m m~ C N ~ ~ W O 1 ~ N 4 G b 2 9 N Q T C Y Q L- 2 M N b N T w . ~.~ ~ . N may w ti N r N N N M ~: G ~' '. ~ - U I C N ~ ...: m ~: a: ~' J" a ;o! ~ a O j 10-214 ~ o e ~ O Z O v ' H O. H d Z ~~~ °° a m -a O ~ •- z m` a m` ~ N N o O ~[ ~ V ~ d F S O N Q _. ~ ~ H H H ~ H H h h ~ H ~ H H ~ H H h w w H H H H ~ H ~ ~ ~ H H K N ~ x~ ~:' ~ ~ ,.: -_. -- e m ~: s ~' ~:.` ~ _ _ a ~. ~ a: a S o O F ~ s ~ 2 ~ e c S a u O E c E E a r o ~° y v n x a - .. _ y 3 a c E i a o ~ E c °' a a c a ~ e e c u m e E ~ ~ v ° w ~ e a v ' a a ~ o ` - c .. v m ~ a t ~ a s .& o ~ e ~ ~ i e 2 a E o ~ 1 o F y E a E 2 p C '.' . °' ~ mo a .01. t ~^ = 4 E O ` r o a ~ ` m ~ ~ m` N a a P ~ a u s °` N ~ ~ c f f o o a ~ 3 v° e o ¢ e ~ ~ .. c M a a n °~ a ~ ~ m e 4 a ~ 1 '0 ° 0 9q v_°i o o c , ~ s ~ E E a C y ~ X 3 a ~ t o ~ 3 - a o . o a i m` m` m m° ~ - 5 ° a ~ ` a ¢ m ~ a' a e ° Y ~'..2 T N N a ti N n n h n n wTj ry N ~i N N N ~i N N N m ., -5 e 9 0 ~i ,i.' ;~ o i K ~1'. t- ~. 5' 10-215 0 t ~° h, G `o - °o o ~°- C d 1' A m v ~ N y Q r m ~ 1' H = ~=° ma E m t ~ O ~ ac c S u m a v w o ~ r 3 O W U ~ d y 0p A r d. ti 0 N N O V ~. hY C F 2. i ~~ 7 C j 2 O j p _ ti_. lS d Z N 9 a e 1. O S y ~ 4 0 ~ O ~ c ° u ~ U ~ '~ a X e 3 a ' ~ °e 0 t 3 ~ ~ a ~ 2 -` c E ~ u e o .. d m o a o c i e i 5 ~ ~ y h . ~ a 9 c ~ c e v e o ~ o a m o v a a ° ~ i a Z M e c w ? E a a E a s a a a ~ L' N e a ~ m E m N ~ N ~ c ° W M rc N c u a y ~ E a 5 e ~ a „ ~ ~ ~ v ~ v G ~ C u Q e Q 3 V ~ c 2 ~ O ~ F L o N b O C V O N a C u C v ~ " ~ c ~ a 0 m 4 X ~ a •` a 'a v o a ^ _ O ~ ~ ° c F a e ¢ N ' ° s ' M ' $ p > S 0 m V C ' W 4 1. it O ' R m !~ Q Y Y Z N N Q N N n ~` i .~ i " N ~ ~ N H H N N N ..i oa -m O': v. C_' 2 a•I, ~n: 9 I a R 10-216 D O Q q E E' E c _ ~ o C d i ~ A 7 ~ ~ Q m ~ A m 1 T IL D ~ Q W x ~ m a W O ~ N N V ~ O Y OD ~ 10 ~ .a ti 0 N W O F _ o $ ti O S E E S C tl a. a a ~ o ~ S T g .¢. g o u c c e O - c E E E ~ m : 9 a ° c °i N u 3 ~ m a „X~ a c `c u 0 .. o c _ c E M a o ~ c ~ m E a ¢ e o a v E a E ~. g S a ~ i m 2 M E & ~ ~ E y E M E o u a q o E a c . c y c m N a ¢ N W q a F ~ a C C ~ a c o n ~ c a s a W C e N . W c C ^E ~. 'o •o c c v 'c o a 0 e ~ 4 c - E e ~ a R X u S a ~ c a et S ° Q O D - 0 0 l7 C 1. ~ 4 I. 4 O b C 0 h O C o Y . ~ h O N N N N n ~i n ti ry n n w n N ry N h N T h N ry N N ~ DI J' Ur a L O Ni m: 9 ~ v, z i` ~, ~! 10-217 a g G d d ~ C « N Z O N ~ m ~ C A d ~ _~ m ~ L 0 7 t ~- K a W V m 6 -3 ~ N N = V ~ O Y E00 IE A H `a S N N d O Q U r: ~' N y Q ] ~ O O O O~ ~' P alb a e, ~'. ~_ a , a: ~ r-': G '_ s c F ~ a ~. ~ a " u u E E - E ~ a ~+ - y ~ 'E ~ ° c a N ~ 3 m 4 N a Q ° t u $ ` ~ M v e a o ; c rn M - a ° ~ e - ~ a c c n ~ e e a E ° e o ° t _ ° ° ' ` W j , c m a° a ~ E a 8 ~ Q + a m c N e a N ~' a W ~ e °; e o o ° o ~' y 3 'E ~ y ; a m ° _ V ~ ~ ° O . a` a` .LL m` m` C7 C 1. N ~ r W n ~= c - ~ b C m` 1. Q m rc ° Y 2 N ry T ry ' ~n b a ~ .Nr N r N w r ~ N i N N N N N N 0 0 V ~ ~ 1`- O h al ~ N C ~1 ~ ~' ~ .: = s r ~ v 10-21 0 ~ ~ O 1- C O 1°- C u a ~ a a W m ~ ~'" r m a ~ F m a m m ~ ~ O s ~ o _ ~ m` a m W O p N N r ~ 0 ~ U ~ ~° Oo ~ S O N d O Q Y- y ¢ Q = O O O O O rv ti ~ $ i L o ~ - a S y ~ 2 4 O m W M ti `c a -. a u ° v E M - E E p U -~ a U i V C ° C - ] 'a C x b ; ' m V x q ° i y r ~ N ° ~ ° a n c ~ e a ? ° t ° E ¢ ~ ° om y e S O > e ~ ° ° ° o a Y . 'o i = o o b _ i m 2 ~E 4 a ° ~ E ~ E N a ~ O a C d 4 T t Q n E o h C ° ° ~ ~ m ° ~ ~ N q a N e 4 4 ~ N W '° N ¢ a W y ~ F ] ~ C O C ~ _ '4 L m S N W D W C oa qq c a ~ e a ° °a e c c - E o o \ i va c a _ o n o _. W c a i - m` m` ° G z - 5 _°, i i. a H e m o'' X m z ~°. - y. y O ti? N N N N N q q w n N ti N N h N N M m N N N N h N - Yi O ~ a'i 'I ~' Hi NI v°~ 3 a• 2 '~ a ~i .i 10-219 0 0 i' .n JI U 0 C ~, Z Z o - _ 1` s o ~°- c E a :°. n ~ a ¢ ~ m ~ z h- ~ m O u m_ L L ~ A = L.1 m 6 H w 0 9 N N u ~ ~ r m m x 0 N `a O Q o Y '1 0 0 0 0 o a o r ~a ~ ~. 0 3 ~ _ _a ~: a ~y 3 ' ~ ~ ~'U s ~ W Z.._ O F, j . = L ~ w .a m ~ p 3 N c E E a ° ° y a w e a N "° c ° a ° i X e ; m a a° a ° C `c y $ N ~ ° .. u a ° e ° t '° a ° ~ `° o b i ° t 'E ° ~ ~ E E ° .~° a S v c :: o i h a i o g a ,v_ N ~ H ~ u ° m N ~ M ~ a . e g F ~ a 0` z a a E °' ~ v° v ° e ¢ > ~ ~ "c a ,N y o o w m o v " ' 3 ~ "! c ; ~ i z w . u ~ 0 4 'a a na e °° 3 ° ~ c a ~ ° F o y ° w p ¢ a 3 u ' °' e r ., 'L a i N > X +1 ~... t d 0 a C` m m` l7 o ~ ° ~= a ~ ~ a ° w` i ~= _ c C ~ C m` F= Q a ¢ Y.; ~_' ~ , N b f~ 4 N a N ti n h n n n h a N N H ~'i N ~'''s ~., ~) y <~ 3 a -.-. v+' ~: , rvl Mi u~ V'I ~I I b ~. 9 10-220 U. 0 ~ ~ - - a d C L d Q d c ~ m y z ~ F- '° m a v m ~ ~ O _ ~ m` a ~ w `o ~ N i o O z v a d m L a a = N Y A f 0 N d a r O H ~ ~ w ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w Y: C 0 3 ~ ~ _ ri ~ a" ~ b k Z d ~ O ' S i z _ 4. ° Ti N N ° m `° O 4 C ~ "o E E .c v y M ~' N v ~' - c a e. w `° a X u ; m ;p _ o 'a ° M S ~ ° v a ` ° v '^ ~ ~ ~ u' a ° p v a ~ o ~~ a o n a ~ ° ~: o ~ ~ ~ m e ` N E ~° a „ ~ ° ~ E W 'E a ~ E N a e F u E a ' •a o` u ¢ a E o' e ~° e m c ~ e c v ° ~ m o c a " ' ro a o c N a - ~ m C ° W h -.: aJ' ,,, c c W '° u a u s e a 3 a e _ c e o o E _ a o ~ ~+ ¢ - y X 3 'i o - ~ $ a y 2E 3 i ~ y • "1 N N N N N N N ~- D N~ a~ `o. _ is v Ni 10-22i x c v v a t- a a x ~ r ~ o m ~ = V m 6 ~ W O ~ H j y ~ N V N Y OD ~ A F `a Z N ri N N O Q c s ~ , ~ ] j 3 a -... ~ _ k i ~ ~ 5 .~.~ z ~ 'i `~ _ ° g M M q C 4 a C E d E O E c o ~ -a ~ = ~ a N ; a a c Y _ ~~ E c e ~ c a N ~ w t u G q ~ ~ N 1 c e ~ ~ o i j > ~ Q e ~ c ~ o ti C t t a ~' E Z u a o o 'o a ? e ~ o ~ i m e 2 E ~°, _ ;~ E W E „ _: O C y as a s E ~ L e e q am ID N V T `~" w ~ oWj ~c may E a -; ~ o .o a a c ` a e e - ' e o o ~ ' a X ? ` ~ : ~ q ~ a o0 q a d m m l7 C ~= ~ w 4 ~= ~ . ~ ~ m ~ C f Y N N b Q ~ n N ~ N N N N N N N ~~ `~ t ~ z a °o z o ti w y °'o r~ ti' ~ qi ~ ~ a a ~' n a a O-Ll~L s"" o - z a v d Y R N D m 3 H y Q w H A m 6 C m ~ a O c _ '- 1' ie X ~ m` a -y W ~ ~ N W ~_ ~ ~ V V d (C ~ N r Y d F N ed N N a` a O a 0 N~ . _ G ~ c O Y'~ C ~ _ i Q ti 3 ~ O z - ~ ~ Q N C a V e `c o `7 E F _ < ~ E a v " u° ~ 9 a rn g e ; m X m - c e ~ Y n .°. Q y e e ~ w ° c a c ~ .~ i a E s ' ~ c ~ a a '? o a ° u a o a o S '~ ° , ~ E ¢ E E c o a C d 4 a C _ O E u e i o f 9 ° ? 0 C N d 4 ~ w N a M - ~-. ~ ~ ° a C C a s m w C a N w L ~ ~ ~ ~ b W O O~ Q Oi C O 3 U u ° C ~ a ° ~ V p ° C N C O U eE y ° 3 ~ ~ ° ~ ~ - ^D v ° 3 N a w ~° ° e a a ° ° a a ' c o E o °e ¢ ae i s .e o X a o Y 2 N b q n N ti w ~ n n n i`i N N N N N N M N ~' ~~ r ~'. a ~', ::~.. y}- ml m 6 ..U: ~ Q a N. 10-223 i 0 °o ~ ~ 0 Q ~ L F: o f. d E ~ A Z y a ~ G1 ~ ~ O H..= m a u m t v O a 2 tJ m a m M W ~' O O Y u ~ U m m "' m x 0 N N O O m n ti x : 0 n j , a S e ~ _ o ~ z i s i o s n n a o _ V ~ V Y F. 2 r: o ~. ~.. . $.. ;; G ~,' of v; ~i i 10-224 CITY OF CHULA VISTA HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE Preliminary Engineering and final Design Contract No. Consultant Moffatt & Nichol DIRECT LABOR Classification Name Range Hou x Project Manager Perryschach[ 7/1/2011.6/30/2012 389 • " 7/1/2012.6/30/2013 258 • " 7/1/2013-6/30/2014 • Lead Civil Engineer Keith Gillfillan 7/1/2011 - 6/30/2012 107 • " 7/1/2012-6/30/2013 108 • " 7/1/2013 -6/30/2014 • Principal Bridge Engineer Yong Oeng 7/1/2011-6/30/2012 8 • " 7/1/2012-6/30/2013 24 • " 7/1/2013 -6/30/2014 • Lead Bridge Engineer Anthony Sanchez 7/1/2011-6/30/2012 251 • " 7/1/2012-6/30/2013 286 • " 7/1/2013-6/30/2014 103 • Cos[ Estimator Michael O'Donnell 7/1/2011 -6/30/2012 24 • " 7/1/2012.6/30/2013 48 • " 7/1/2013-6/30/2014 e senior Specifcatiori Writer Ron Butler 7/1/2011-6/30/2012 " 7/1/2032-6/30/2013 S6 • " 7/1/2013-6/30/2019 • Senior Engineer TBD 7/1/2011 - 6/30/2012 371 • " 7/1/2012-6/30/2013 367 • " 7/1/2013-6/30/2014 • Engineer 111 TBD 7/1/2011-6/30/2012 342 e " 7/1/2012-6/30/2013 1256 • " 7/1/2013 -6/30/2016 Engineer ll TBD 7/1/2011-6/30/2012 44 • " 7/1/2012-6/30/2013 548 • " 7/1/2013-6/30/2016 240 • senior Tech/Designer 780 7/1/2011-6(30/2072 314• " 7/1/2012-6/30/2013 152 • " 7/1/2013-6/30/2014 • CADD II 780 7/1/2011- 6/30/2012 256 • " 7/1/2012-6/30/2013 880 • " 7/1(2013-6/30/2014 • CA001 TBD 7/1/2011-6/30/2012 • " 7/1/2012-6/30/2013 96 • 7/1/2013 -6/30/2014 p Clerical TBD 7/1/2011-6/30/2012 266• " 7/1/2012-6/30/2013 275 • " 7/1/2013-6/30/2014 52 • EXHIBIT C FEE SCHEDULE Date: Initial Hourly Rate Total Frinee eenfits ~OVer head General and Administrative Loaded Houdv Profit Rate Total $ 7152 $ 28,210.28 $~ 38.88 $ 97.16 $- $ 20.8fi $ 229.42 $ 89,242.94 $ 75.13 $ 19,383.73 $ 40.28 $' .100.66 $ - $ - 2161 $ 237.68 $ 61,320.22 $ 77.84 $ '$ 4173 $ 104:28 $ $ ' 22.38 $ 246.23 $ $ 7252 $ 7,759.64 $. 38.08 $ 97.16 $ ' $.- . 20.86 $ 229.42 $ 24,547.54 $ 75.13 $ 8,114.12 $ - 40.28 $ - 100.66 $ - - $ 2161 $ 237.68 $ 25,668.93 $ 77.84 $ $ ~ ~ 4173 $:~ 104.28 $ $~ ~ 22.38 $ 246.23 $ $ 70.00 $ 560.00 $' -" 37.93 $ ' '. 93:79 $ ~ $ '. ~ 20.13 $ 22144 $ 1,77155 $ 72.52 $ 1,740,48 $ 38.88 $. 97,16 $~-~ $ ~ 20.86 $ 229.42 $ 5,505.99 $ 75.13 $ $ -. 40.28 $ SOO.fi6 $ "' $ 2161 $ 237.68 $ $ fiL00 $ 15,311.00 $ ~- ~ 32.70 $ " " 8173- $' - - $' - ~' 17.54 $ 192.97 $ 48,436.20 $ 63.20 $ 18,074.06 $ 33.88 $' 84.67 $ $ '- 1817 $ 199.92 $ 57,177.10 $ 65.47 $ 6,743.52 $ 35.10 $'~ ~ ~ 87:72 $ $ ~ ~~~18.83 $ 207.12 $ 21,333.05 $ 52.00 $ 1,248.00 $' 27.88 $. 69.67 $ -. - $ 10.95 $ 164.50 $ 3,968.04 $ 53.87 $ 2,585.86 $ 28.88 $~ ' ~ 72.18 $ $ ~ 15.49- $ 170.42 $ 8,180.33 $ 95.81 $ $ 29.92 $ 74.7fl $ $ - . -.16.04 $ 176.56 $ $ 53.94 $ $'- 28.92 $ 72.27 $ - - $- 14:91 $ 170.64 $ $ 95.88 $ 3,129.38 $ 29.96 $ - 74.87 $ $ 16.07 $ 176.78 $ 9,899.77 $ 97.89 $ $ 3104 $ 77.57 $ $ ~ ~ 16,64 $ 183.15 $ $ 54.07 $ 20,059.54 $- 28.99 $ '. - 72.44 $. _ $ : 15.55 $ 17105 $ 63,458.15 $ 56.02 $ 20,557.62 $ 30.03 $. 75.05 $ ~ ~ $ 16.11 $ 177.20 $ 65,033.83 $ 58.03 $ $ '3Lll $ .77:75 $ $ 16.69. $ 183.58 $ $ 50.51 $ 17,272.71 $ ' 27.08 $ ~ ~ 67.67 $ '$ ' 14.52' $ 159.77 $ 54,642.05 $ 52.32 $ 65,717.91 $ 28.04 $ 70,10 $ $ ~ 15.05 $ 165.52 $ 207,897.96 $ 54.21 $ $ 29.06 $ - 72.63- $: : $ : - - 1159 $ 17148 $ $ 44.50 $ 1,957.83 $ ~ 23.85 $ ~ -.59.62 $ $ 12.80 $ 140.76 $ 6,193.58 $ 46.10 $ 25,26174 $ 24.71 $ 6176 $ '. $ 13.26 $ 145.83 $ 79,915.26 $ 47.76 $ 11,461.82 $ 25.60 $ ~ 63.99 $ ~ $_ 13.73 $ ISLOB $ 36,259.36 $ 45.93 $ 5,235.55 $ 24.62 $ - 6153 $ "" $' - 13.21 $ 165.29 $ 16,562.61 $ 47.58 $ 7,23204 $ 25.51 $ 63.75 $ $ 13.68, $ 150.52 $ 22,878.49 $ 49.29 $ $ 26.43 $. 66.04 $ $ 14.18 $ 155.93 $ $ 37,81 $ 9,680.38 $ 20.27 $ ~ ~ - 50.66 $ $- 10.87 $ 119.62 $ 30,623.80 $ 39.18 $ 34,474.27 $ 2100 $ -- 52.49 $ - $ 1127 $ 123.93 $ 109,059.00 $ 60.59 $ $ 2176 $ 54.38 $ $ 1167 $ 128.39 $ $ 26.55 $ $ 14.23 $ 35.58 '.$ $ - .7.64 $ 84.00 $ $ 27.51 $ 2,640.82 $ 14.75- $ - 36:86 $ $ '7.91 $ 87.02 $ 8,354.22 $ 28.50 $ $ 15.28 $ 38.18 $ $ - 8.20 $ 90.16 $ $ 2fi.68 $ 7,042.73 $ ~ 14.30 $ 35.74 $ $ ~-" 7.67 $ 84.39 $ 22,279.60 $ 27.64 $ 7,600.28 $ 14.82 $. 37.03 $ $ 7.95 $ 87.43 $ 24,043.40 $ 28.63 $ 1,488.88 $ - 15.35 $ 38:36 $ $ 813 $ 90.58 $ 4,710.06 subtotal Direct Lahor Costs $ 390,944.19 LEGEND: > - - "Antidpated salary Increases (3.6%J ra...ee,» TBD = To 8e Determined - Total Direct labor Costs $ ~ Mro350,544.19 ARual salary increases shall be based on CPI-W Fringe Benefits Indirect Casts Overhead General And Administrative FEE (Profitl, 10°/. on Ra[e.OH/kinge OTHER COSTS Travel Casts Equipment and Supplies (Itemize) other Direct teas ptemlzel SUBCONTRACTOR COSTS GRAND TOTAL COST Rate Total 53.61% $ 187,926.74 Total Fringe Benefits $ 187,926.74 133.98% $ 469,659.10 0.00° $ Total lndireR Co5[a $ 469,fi59.10 $ 100,813.00 SUB TOTALlA00R $ 1,108,943.03 $ 3,315.00 $ 8,543.00 $ 8,000.00 SUB TOTAL OTHER COSTS $ 19,858.00 Aguirre & Associates $ 50,422.38 8RG Consulting, Inc. $ 320,648.17 Chang Consultants $ 41,708.86 Drake Haglan & Associates $ 64,521.48 Earth Mechanics, Inc. $ 55,925.44 KTU+A $ 39,575.29 Linsmtt, law, & Greenspan $ 54,127.73 Sadfie Rabines Architects $ 21,689.93 SU8 TOTAL SUBCONTRACTOR COSTS $ 648,619.28 5 1,m,aza.31 SUB TOTAL LABOR $ 1,108,943.03 Page _ ar li 10-225 r+ u O ~ 1~ 7 N O Q G -~y rf ~ µl N O' v f0 LL d OI m 0 ~ K C O Q v c v Q N v H I f6 ~' La W J u ~ ~I c ~ ~ o m_ _ V1 W W 'v, ~ W W ~ O Q T u C v O ' N~ O h ~ LL a OI 0 L O u_ Z ~ t4 m Y ~ O C 'c w 1O a ~ a ~ t~l 1 m ~ N Q _ ~ ~ .~ ~ H O W ~ O W ~ 2 ~ Z C U ~ ~ ~ .0+ D LL Q F C` ` ? ~ W ~ W S '' U = O. U V O F p p p p O O O O ~/j O O '11 ~!1 N O N n ~ V1 N ~ n N N y} ~/} ~/} ~/} i/} V} V? V} V} L} V} 1/} iH. ll} i/~ O O O ~ N V7 M U1 ~--~ Y Q `: `~ ~ r• v v W v v o~ Q a~ a- H ~ a 0 0 0 ° ° ~ °o, oo, o N d' N O O O N Lf1 N LD V} N L} ~/} t!1 ~} N ~ O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 o vi vi oa ao 0 0 M 0 0 0 to O vl O N 1~ N N O O t11 d' N Vl N e-i .--i t!1 l0 00 O O ~„~ - rj M W 00 y} t/L M~ a/7. V? W V} y/} +/} lA 1A Vl V4 VY V! O O O O W N m in in O O N ~~ c-l r1 Y Q ~. ~ '~: ~ v °i w v v v v m O' ~' N' Q ~ N .~ d o 0 0 0 o u~ o 0 0 0 ooa~~~ a oa p j N C' r-I 0 0 0 N u1 N 00 1 O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 O tf1 u'1 O O ~..~ O N O ~/1 O N a' N 41 L!1 Q N N Vl ~O O~ N fM1 } L? tl~ t/i VT 1A V} VY V} +h V} V} V} N V} i/?' O 0 0 0 N ~~ ti N N .--i Y 0 0~ o~ d- o~ h h a v j 0 0 0~~~ O O O n N C ri 0 0 0 N u'j N 9 h L} VT V} V? VT V} V} V} VT 'B \ O ~ ` ~ O G 'O O ~ ~ OU N o] a- CJ [tI CI U C 3 c N_ O ~ ~ a m O O O O c c 61 O a u v v N Q _ a a a E m .~ `° ~ ~ o j~ v n v .Q ~ a~ m ° o ~~ ~ .£ ~ 3 ~ j V ~ d of p '~ O v .6 t c v u 7 u0 ~ ~o ~ 'n 7 O G a a N C ~ v O c L ~ E ~~ O N =y O ~ a s u cc u d 7 v v C .-~ M W c-I N M C O O O O CO aC 0~0 W O1 Q1 H N an +ti 0 o O 0 0 o c ~ ~ °o u M t!1 O N Rl OJ 00 L O lA V} V} O r OJ .C Y N v v .~ Y ~ a ~ ~ 7 Q N Y U O r ~ u u r ~ u W O ~ G v a n 4 ~- W Q Q ti w 0 N N m a 10-226 CITY OF CHULA VISTA HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE Preliminary Engineering and Final Design Contract No. 0 Subconsultan[ Aguirre &Associates DIRER LABOR Classification Name Ranee Hours Principal Mickey Aguirre 1/1/2011.12/31/2011 5 ~ " 1/1/2012 - 12/31/2012 2 ~ " 1/1/2013 -12/31/2013 ~ Party Chief (Field) Joel Riipinen 1/1/2011- 12/31/2011 m " 1/1/2012 -12/31/2012 " 1/1/2013 -12/31/2013 ~ Land Surveyor (Office( Joel Riipinen 1/1/2011- 12/31/2011 10 ~* " 1/1/2012-12/31/2012 7 " 1/1/2013-12/31/2013 ~ ~ Parry Chief (Field) Mike Havener 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 56~ " 1/1/2012-12/31/2012 " 1/1/2013 - 12/31/2013 ~ Land Surveyor (Ot£ce) Mike Havener ,1/1/2011-12/31/2011 ~ " 1/1/2012-12/31/2012 ~ " 1/1/2013.12/31/2013 Party Chief (Field( TBD 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 ~ " 1/1/2012-12/31/2012 40 ~ " 1/1/2013-12/31/2013 Chainman (Field) TRD 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 56@ " 1/1/2012-12/31/2012 40 " 1/1/2013-12/31/2013 Survey Technician (OHice) T80 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 " 1/1/2012 - 12/31/2012 " 1/3/2013-12/31/2013 ~a EXHIBIT C FEE SCHEDULE Date: Oct-11 Initial Hourly ~~~ ~ ~ _ ~~- General and ' ~~ :.~ Loaded Rate Total $ 56.25 $ 281.25 Frin¢e Benfits $ ~~ ~ 15.19 ~ ~ Overhead' $ -: ~ 50.34 ' Administratlve $ ~- - 38.2$ - Profit $ ~~. 16.00 Hourly Rate $ 176,03 Total $ 880,14 $ 58.50 $ 117.00 $ '15.80 $ '. "52.35: $.' 39.78' $ ' ' 16.64' $ 183.07 $ 366.14 $ 60.84 $ $ ~ ~. 16.43 $ 54.45- $ -4137 $ 17.31. $ 190.39 $ $ 48.83 $ - $ 13.18' $ -~ 43.70 $ - ' 33.20 $" " -' 13.89 $ 152.81 $ - $ 90.78 $ $ - 13.7Y $ '. 45.45 $ ~ 34.53 $ - -.14.45 $ 158.92 $ $ 52.81 $ $ " 14.26- $ 47.26 $ 35.91 -$ - -15.03 $ 16$.28 $ $ 4150 $ 415.00 $ - :11.21' $ ~ ' '37.14 $ 28.22 '$' 11.81 $ 129.87 $ 1,298.70 $ 43.16 $ 302.12 $ 1165 $' " -' 38.62 $ 29.35 $ - 12.28 $ 135.06 $ 945,45 $ 44.89 $ $ ~ 12.32 $ ~. 40.17 $. ~. 30.52 :$ 12.77 $ 140.47 $ $ 54.54 $ 3,054.26 $ '- 14.73 $ "x'48.81 ~$' -' 37.09 -$ '' -15.52 $ 170.68 $ 9,557.91 $ Sfi.72 $ $ .15.31 $. 50.76 '$ ~ 38.52 $. 16.14 $ 177.50 $ $ 58.99 $ $ ~ ~'-'15.93 $~ ~-~ 52.79 '$ 40.11 '$ ~~ 16.78 $ 184.60 $ $ 42.50 $ $ ~ 1I.48 $ '. 38.03 $. ". 28.90 ~$ 12.09 $ 133.00 $ $ 44.20 $ $ : - 11.93 $ ' 39.55 $ 30.06 $ 12.57 $ 138.32 $ $ 45.97 $ $ .12.41 $. ...41.14 $. .3126 $ .13.08 $ 143,85 $ $ 55.50 $ - $' '~~ 14.99 $ ~~~~-49.67 ~$~ 37.74 $ 15.79 $ - 173.68 $ - $ 57.72 $ 2,308.80 $ '15.58 $ ' .51.65 $ 39.25 $ .16.42 $ 180.63 $ 7,225.14 $ 60.03 $ $ 16.21 $ 53:72 $ ~ 40.82 $,~-- 17.08 $ 187.85 $ $ 52.30 $ 2,928.80 $14.12 $ ~ 46.80 $ ~'- 35.56 $- '~-' '14.H8 $ 163.67 $ 9,165.36 $ 54.39 $ 2,175.68 $ - 14.69 $ 48.68- $ 36.99 $ ~ 15.47 $ 170.21 $ fi,808.55 $ 56.57 $ $ 15.27 $ 50.62 $ 38.47 $ 16.09 $ 177.02 $ $ 27.00 $ $ 7.29 $ ~ 24.16 $ - 1H.36 '$ 7.68 $ 84.49 $ $ 28.08 $ $ - 7.58 $ 25.13 $ ]9.09 $ 7.99 $ 87.07 $ $ 29.20 $ $ 7.88 $ 26.13 $ 19.66 $ 8.31 $ 91.39 $ Suhtotal DireR Lahor Costs $ 11,582.89 LEGEND: ~ •antiapated salary Increases (4%) ,at.amm Ar., oe~r - Total Direct Lahor Costs $ 11,582.89 TBD = To Be Determined "Actual salary increases shall he based on CPI-W Fringe Benefits Indirect Costs Overhead General And Administrative FEE (Profit), 10% on Rate • OH/Fringe OTHER CO5T5 Travel Casts Equipment and Supplies (Itemize) Other Direct Costs (Itemize) TOTAL COST Rate Total 27.00% $ 3,127.38 Total Fringe Benefits $ 3,127.38 89.49% $ 10,365.53 - 68.00% $ 7,876.37 Total Indirect Casts $ 18,241.89 $ 3,295.22 SUB TOTAL LABOR $ 36,247.38 $ 14,179.00 SUB TOTAL OTHER COSTS $ 14,179.00 $ 50,422.38 SUB TOTAL LABOR $ 36,247.38 Page 3 ar 13 10-227 0 E ^~ ~ u O N u ~ ~ ~ ~ RI lL a .~ v ~ v ~ v v `c u c v . ~ x ~ NI N a i1 LL w .~ = U ~ H ~ W m = ~ X ~ ~ W W W W i u c v . 7 o' ti ~ a l v W v m 'u O ~ Q ~ N N (~ ', [C G . .~ OD Q ~ m LL C W ~ O c ~ '~^ m v O ~ C b U D Q Q F ~ ~ W 2 ~ ~ ~ Z c w ~ V ~ C ~ m ^ LL QC O F- ~ ~ W C ~ W V ~ U _ ~ U O n i to h ~ ~. ~ I~I~ O O O o ~ Lfl l!1 e^i N ~ C r-1 ei ~/f I~TI+~ 0 0 O O tl1 ~/1 ~ ~ a~-1 chi cn an~ o ~ O `^ ~ V n ti ~ `i O vf~ v~ +n ~ 0 UJ 4 ~ 3 ~ ~ O C = O ~ ~ O c ~ ate. .7 NN ~ W G ~ ~ V r v cN_ N C 6J V O1 .a y a - c o ~ y ~ u O u L ~ ~ U c ~- '^ f0 u ~ ~ O o ~ O U ? Q C t- W O ~ 10- 228 0 m a CITY OF CHULA VISTA HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE Preliminary Engineering and Final Design EXHIBIT C fEE SCHEDULE Contract No. 0 Date: 27-Oct-11 Subconsultant BRG Consulting, Inc. DIRER LABOR Initial Hourly ~ General and '. ~ Loaded Hourly Classification Name Ranee Hours Ra[e Total Frinee Benfits ~ Over head Adminishative - Profit. Rate Total Principal Erich Laihers 1/1/2011 -12/31/2011 128 ® $ 96.85 $ 12,396.80 $ - - $ ~ : ~ 161.59 $ $ ~ ~ ~ .25.84 $ 284.29 $ 36,388.95 " 1/1/2012-12/31/2012 12 @ $ 100.72 $ 1,208.69 $ - -'. -~' $ .'- 168.06' $ -- '$ ' ' .26.88 $ 295.66 $ 3,547.92 " 1/1/2013 -12/31/2013 ® $ 104.79 $ $ ~ ~ $ . 174.78 $ ~$ ~ -27.95 $ 30J.49 $ QA/QC Tim Gnibus 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 40 ~ $ 91.18 $ 3,647.20 $ --~ $ 152.13 $- $. " " 24.33- $ 267.65 $ 10,705.81 " 1/1/2012 -12/31/2012 cm $ 94.83 $ $ - ~ $„~ 158.22' $ $ - 25.30 $ 278.35 $ " 1/1/2013 -12/31/2013 @ $ 98.62 $ $ - $'. 16d.55 $ $ -26.32 $ 289.49 $ Project Manager Mary Bilse 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 614 $ 39.93 $ 24,517.02 $ $. -~ 66.62 $ $ -10.66 $ 117.21 $ 71,966.03 " 1/1/2012 - 12/31/2012 52 ~ $ 4153 $ 2,159.41 $ - - $ 69.29 $ - -~ ' $ ~ - - 1108 $ 121.90 $ 6,338.64 " 1/1/2013-12/31/2013 p $ 43.19 $ - $. ~ ~- $..: ..72.06 $. ~ -~ ~$. :--1152 $ 126.77 $ - Environmental5pecialist Alyssa Muto 1/1/2011 - 12/31/2011 32 ap $ 49.91 $ 1,597.12 $ ~ ~$ -, - 83.27 $ $ -' - ~ 13.32 $ 146.50 $ 4,688.11 " 1/1/2012 -12/31/2012 n $ 51.91 $ $ $ ' - 86.b1 -$. $~. 13.85 $ 152.36 $ " 1/1/2013 -12/31/2013 ~e $ 53.98 $ $ $ ~' 90.07 $ ' $ - ~ 14.41 $ 158.46 $ Environmental Analyst TBO 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 76~ $ 35.93 $ 2,730.68 $ '-' $ 59.95. $ ~. $ '.9.59. $ 105.47 $ 8,015.50 " 1/1/2012 -12/31/2012 ~ $ 37.37 $ - $ - ~~_ $ ~ - :62.35 $ - $ -~ 9.97 $ 109.69 $ - " 1/1/2013 -12/31/2013 ~ $ 38.86 $ $ $ -- - 64.84 $ $ 10.37 $ 114.07 $ Assis[an[Environmental T80 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 96a $ 18.97 $ 1,821.12 $ $-: - 31.65 $ _$ 5.06 $ 55.68 $ 5,345.62 Analyst 1/1/2012 -12/31/2012 R $ 19.73 $ $ -' $ .32.92 $.. $ 5.26 $ 57.91 $ " 1/1/2013 -12/31/2013 ~ $ 20.52 $ $ $ 34.23 $- - $'' 5.48 $ 60.23 $ GIS Coordinator TBD 1/1/2011 -12/31/2011 73 @ $ 26.99 $ 1,967.35 $ $ ' - 44.97 $ -$' 7.19 $ 79.11 $ 5,774.86 " 1/1/2012 -12/31/2012 @ $ 28.03 $ $ $ 46.76 $ ~ $ ~ 7.48 $ 82.27 $ - " 1/1/2013 -12/31/2013 @ $ 29.15 $ - $ -' $ 48.64 $ - $ ~ 7.78- $ 85.56 $ Document Manager T8D 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 94~ $ 35.93 $ 3,377.42 $ -~ $ ~ ~-59.95 $ .~::. -- $ 9.59 $ 105.47 $ 9,913.91 " 1/1/2012-12/31/2012 ~+ $ 37.37 $ $ $ 62.35 $ $ 9.97' $ 109.69 $ " 1/1/2013 - 12/31/2013 @ $ 38.86 $ $ $ ..64.84 $ $ 10.37 $ 114.07 $ Document Production TBD 1/1/2011- 12/31/2011 48 ~ $ 18.97 $ 910.56 I $ - = ' - - ~- ~ $ 31.65 ~-$ - ~ - I $ - 5.06 I $ 55.68 ~ $ 2 672.81 " 1/1/2012 -12/31/2012 @ $ 19.73 $ $ : $ -32.92 $ - $ 5.26 $ 57.91 $ " 1/1/2013 -12/31/2013 @ $ 20.52 $ $ - $ 34.23 $ $ 5.48 $ 60.23 $ Subtotal Di reR La bor COSts $ 56,333.37 ~ SUB TOTAL LABOR $ 165,358.16 LEGEND •Annripated Salar y increases (a%I .wt .a,ma,"r.aeo". j Total Direct Labor Costs $ 56,333.37 TBO = To Be Determined "Actual salary increases s hall be based on CPI- W Fringe Benefts Rate Total 0.00% $ Tota l Fringe Benefits $ Indirect Costs ' Overhead 166.85% $ 93,992.23 General And Administrative 0.00% $ Total Indirect Costs $ 93,992.23 FEE (Prafitl, l0%on Rate+OH /Fringe $ 15,032.56 SUB TOTAL LABO,. $ 165,358.1. OTHER CO5T5 Travel Costs $ 400.00 Equipmen[and Supplies (Item ize( $ 27,200.00 ' Other DireR Casts (Itemize) $ 127,690.00 SUB TOTAL OTHER CO5T5 S 155,290.00 TOTAL COST ~ $ 320,648.17 Pag_ or'_6 10-229 .--i u r ai ~a O w J V H CG W = V1 W W W W c m o 0 u c 0 Q C N fH p' '-' NI d ~ W L a 7I N J ~ u~~:7 O Q u C 3 NI ~ N W A L a =I G1 J ~GN:7 C O Q T V C H ~ ~-=A N~ d ~ LL a 7I Y~ . m ~ (] C LL W ~ ~ p F. v~i m ~ O J ¢ ~ ~ ~ O W O W _ ~ Z y ~ U ~ ~ ~ r a D W Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ._ W ` C ~ _ U S d U U O J H ~,,, to I IvTl v}1 'I~ ii ~ I I~I~I IK O O O O O d O O N O N N n n N N 00 Y Q "'a v ~~~°~ d ~ d N a a a '^ ~ `^ aEi 7 ~ V C ~ ~ ~ O R N j ~ ~ ~ ~ C .C N O d ~ C C ~ ~. ~ fl- a U CC u .7 W .-1 ~ N M c N O O O O O O Ql Q1 N N v7 N ~ N c-I H vt v~ 0 0 o Y 0 0 0 ~ 0 O O ~ U V N l0 ~ 1~ n L N ~ Q ~ ~ N ~ O F- O O O n N N ifl. O1 v ~ G! ~ Q .- n ~ ~ ~ +" O a U C ~ ~ V C ~ U N SZ y ~ 3 L H W O N 0 Y O L u H O Q F 0 v m a 10-230 CITY OF CHULA VISTA HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE Preliminary Engineering and Final Design Contract No. 0 5uhconsultant Chang Consultants DIRECT LABOR Classification Name Rance Hours Principal Hydraulics Engineer Howard Chang 1/1/2011 - 12/31/2011 180 • " 1/1/2012-12/31/2012 10 • " 1/1/2013-12/31/2013 • Senior Hydraulic Engineer Wayne Chang 1/U2011-12/31/2011 • " 1/1/2032 - 12/31/2012 " 1/1/2013 - 12/31/2013 • Engineering Technician TBD 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 115 • " 1/1/2012-12/31/2012 • " US/2013 - 12/31/2013 • Clerical TBD 1/1/2011 - 12/31/2011 • " 1/1/2012-12/31/2012 • " 3/1/2013 -12/31/2013 e EXHIBIT C FEE SCHEDULE Date: 27-Oct-11 Initial Hourly Rate Total Fringe Benfi[s - Overhead General and Adminis[ra[ive~ Profit. ~ Loaded Hourly Rate Total $ 62.60 $ 11,268.00 $~ $ 93.90 $ '~ $' 15.65' $ 172.1$ $ 30,987.00 $ 65.10 $ 651.06 $ $ - 97.66 $ $ 16.28 $ 179.04 $ 1,790.36 $ 67.71 $ $ - '$ 103.$6 $ $ - 16.93 $ 18fi.20 $ $ 47.80 $ $ -~ $ 71.20 $ -$ - ~ 11,9$ $ 131.45 $ $ 49.71 $ $ $ _ 74.97 $ $ - 1243 $ 136.71 $ $ 51.70 $ $ $ - - 77.55 $ '. $ 1293 $ 142.18 $ $ 28.00 $ 3,220.00 $ $ ~ 42.00 $ $ 7.00 $ 77.00 $ 8,855.00 $ 29.12 $ $ $ 43.68 $ - $ 7.28 $ 80.08 $ $ 30.28 $ $ - ' ' $ - 45.43' $ $ JS7 $ 83.28 $ $ 18.OD $ $ $ - ~ 27.00 $ .... $ ... 4.50 $ 49.50 $ S 18.72 $ $ - $ 28.08. S - - $ 4.68 $ SL48 $ $ 39.47 $ - $ ~ $ 29.20 $ ~. $ ~ 4.87 $ 53.54 $ Subtotal Direct Lahor Com $ 15,139.04 'LEGEND: - Annapated Salary lnueases (4%I .~n.am«„r« i os"« TBD = To Be Determined - - Total Direct Labor Costs $ 15,139.04 'Actual salary increases shall be based on CPI-W fringe Benefits ~ Rate Total 0.00% $ Total Fringe Benefits $ Indirect Costs Overhead General And Administrative FEE (Pra(t), 10%on Rate t OH/Fringe OTHER COSTS Travel Costs Equipment and Supplies (Itemize) Other Direct Casts (itemize) TOTAL COST 150.00% $ 22,708.56 0.00°h $ Total Indirect Cosss $ 22,708.56 $ 3,784.76 SUe TOTAL LABOR $ 41,632.36 $ 76.50 SUB TOTAL OTHER COSTS $ 76.50 $ 41,708.86 SUe TOTAL IABOR $ 41,632.36 > >r'8 10-231 N u O N m w J v ~ ~ o m "' - _ X ~ W W W LL C O '-" 7 ~ _ O V UO ~ m . L U ~ 0 C LL G W ~ Q C Q F V~1 m N N Q ~ c u c ~ w ~ O w S ~ ~ o Z C ~ l'J C a' w o~•~ ~ ~ ~ C w v O O ~ w U S n. V U O ~ ' 0 a an vs. u c m ~ NI N ~ LL a ~I Y ~'I [C a ~y O O ;=1 ~n ~n C N N O Q V} i/1 V C v O 3 ~ ~ NI ~ v N w a ~I ~ v o z a~n O C ~ ~ ~ in u 0 E ~v u v O ~ ~ O tiI Cr w H ~ d SI ~ O C N >~ F ~ - - _- o v a n +n 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ n (h lA vi. va ~ ~ o Y w V r t O O N a ~ ~ ~ '~ N_ ~ ~ 'E u ~ N i ~ N N _ '6 N u of ~ i d a ~E ~ C a = c ~ ~ y ~ u ~ ~ ~ ... a U `'^.. ~ O Y 1O u vri c ~ o c v 6 d a ~y U ~ p V a v v v a _ 7 uai V ~ > ~ = F i Q ~ W O H 10-232 CITY OF CHULA VISTA HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE Preliminary Engineering and Final Design EXHIBIT C FEE SCHEDULE Contract No. D Oate: 27-Oct-ll Subconsultan[ Drake Haglan & Associates DIRECT LA80R Classification Name Ranee Hours Initial Hourly Rate Total - ~ Frin ee Benfits -:.~- ~ - - Overhead -General and .Administrative ~ ~. ~~ Profit Loaded Hourly Rate Total Principal Engineer Craig Drake 1/1/ZOll-12/31/2011 49~ $ 69.72 $ 3,416.28 $ 31.37 $ 89.75 $ - $- -14.08 $ 209.93 $ 10,286.52 " 1/1/2012-12/31/2012 39 ~ $ 72.51 $ 2,827.84 $ 32.63 $ - 93.34 $ $ - 19.85 $ 218.33 $ 8,514.72 " 1/1/2013 -12/31/2013 ~ $ 75.41 $ $ - - 33.93 $ - 97.07 $ $ ~ 20.64 $ 227.06 $ Independent Check Engineer Kevin ROSS 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 ~ $ 69.72 $ - $ -' 31.37 $ -' - 89.75 $ - - '$ 19.08 $ 209.93 $ - " 1/1/2012- 12/31/2012 200 ~ $ 72.51 $ 14,501.76 $ 32.63 $ 93.34 $ - $ ~ 19.85 $ 218.33 $ 43,665.23 " 1/1/2013 -12/31/2013 ~ $ 75.41 $ $ 33.93 $ 97.07 $ . .$ - 20.64 $ 227.06 $ Subtotal Direct Lahor Casts $ 20,745.88 SUBTOTAL IAROR $ 62,466.48 ' LEGEND:. - 'Anticipated Salary lnveases (4%( ,rn.e ;"ro ter., aee.. • Actual salary increases shall 6e based on CPI•W Total Direct Lahor costs $ 20,745.ag Fringe Benefits Rate Total 45.00% $ 9,335.65 Total Fringe Benefits $ 9,335.65 Indirect Casts Overhead 128.73% $ 26,706.18 General And Administrative 0.00% $ Total Indirect Costs $ 26,706.18 FEE (Profitl, l0%on Rate+OH/Fringe $ 5,678.77 SUB TOTAL LABOR $ 62,466.48 OTHER COSTS Travel Costs $ 1,905.00 Equipment and Supplies (Itemize( $ 150.00 ' Other Oirea COSts Qtemizel $ SUe TOTAL OTHER CO5T5 $ 2,055.00 TOTAL COST $ 64,521.48 - gaga = or 1a 10-233 W J U ~ I_ 0 t0 = X N W W W W 0 ur + n v} ~ n v ~ v} + n . n .-, > c fY1 n 6 NI ~ N 10 W a =1 v p Y 5 ° ° o ° ° o o ° o ~ c_ , , a a ~ m M c 3 o 01 N m c-1 o o N O .y Q V1. t/} V} V? V} V~ V} LT u O N O~ N N O ~ N N N v dl LL a .JI ~ ~ ~ a c E ~ ~ ~ a ° ° ~ ° ° o o, o o, O .-~ O ui u1 O ~ t~ ~n .~ U* v~ yr .n +n O ~ 0 a v~i O ~ 0 O ~ O VI in N O Q V} V/} L} V1. th t/7. t!~ i/? U C ~ 7 N ~--f ~ c-I N ~ ~ v N W ~ N t ;~ a ~V cl s ° E ° a a ~ o °~ ° ~ g o ~ o o °° ° ~ ° ~ ~ v x ~ d ' v ~ Y cD G . ~ p y ~ d N ~ G C _ ~E IL ~ d ~ c u ~ = H W ~ ~ ~ - ~ a ° ' ~ n m ° ~ . ... Q Q C ~ N J Q W O W E c G E ! Ul y > ~ = w T Z O ~ ~ ~ p p ~ '° ,` °~ Y m v ~ ~ ~ H W d ~ Q d d C G 2 ' d ~ _ F w N O O ~ ~ 7 ~ U 2 a U V ~ F- r -1 N M V ~fl l D I Q t/f i/} t/T V} ~/} ~ W N a~i m cd C 0 0 0 0 N VI O O N N oa o ~ O ~ U rn ~ v ti Y O vs vT v~ ~ 0 F U! E U1 ~ '^ E v v 'Q .~ n. ~ 7 ~ +'' -p O c U y f0 u C ~ U ~ p U1 O. ~ i 7 L ~- w O 10-234 +n ~ o 0 0 VT ~V O I ~ G VT ~V u O m u ~~.. Q v F O 0 a v m CITY OF CHULA VISTA HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE Preliminary Engineering and Final Design Contrac[No. 0 Suhconsultant Earth Mechanics, I nc DIRECT LA80R Classification Name Rance Hours Pnnapal lino Cheang 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 le " 1/1/2012 -12/31/2012 9 a " 1/1/2013-12/31/2013 m Senior Engineer Eric Brown 1/1/2011- 12/31/2011 12 e " 1/1/2012 - 12/31/2012 61 e " 1/1/2013 - 12/31/2013 Senior Technician ll fteynald Jie 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 " 1/1/2012-12/31/2012 " 1/1/2013 - 12/31/2013 e Staff Engineer Patrick Wilson 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 See " 1/1/2012-12/31/2012 156 e " 1/1/2013-12/31/2013 5eniar Engineer/Geologist TBD 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 e " 1/1/2012-32/31/2012 " 1/1/2013-12/31/2013 Senior Project Engineer/ TBD 1/1/2011- 12/31/2011 0 Geologist 1/1/2012 -32/31/2012 e " 1/1/2013 - 12/312013 e 5eniar Technician ll TBD 4/1/2011-6/30/2011 e " 7/1/2011-6/30/2012 a " 7/1/2012-6/30/2013 e Senior Technician I TBD 4/1/2011-6/30/2011 49 " 7/1/2011-6/30/2032 13 e " 7/1/2012-6/30/2013 e EXHIBIT C FEE SCHEDULE Date: 27-Oct-11 Initial HOUrly ~ -~ - General and - ~ Loaded HOUrly Rate Total $ 73.00 $ 73.00 Fringe Benfits $ 16.79 Overhead' $- - -103.66- Adm nistrative $ - Profit" $19.35 Rate $ 212.80 Total $ ~ 212.80 $ 75.92 $ 683.28 $ 17.46 $ - 107.81 $ $ 20.12 $ 221.31 $ 1,99L7fi $ 78.96 $ $ 18.16 $ .112.12 $ $ 20.92 $ 230.16 $ $ 51.1$ $ 613.80 $ - 1176 ~$. ~ TL63. $ $ Y3.55 $ 149.10 $ 1,78923 $ 53.20 $ 3,244.96 $ - 12.24 .$ 75.54 $ $ 14.10 $ 155.07 $ 9,459.0$ $ 5$.32 $ $ 12.72 $ ~ 78.$6 $ $ 14.66 $ 161.27 $ $ 4$.10 $ - $ 10.37 $ 64.04 $ ~ - - :. .$ 1195 $ 131.47 $ $ 46.90 $ $ ~ 10.79 $ 66.60 $ $, 12.43 $ 136.73 $ $ 48.78 $ $ . ' 1122 $ 69.27'. $ $: -12,93 $ 142.19 $ $ 31.50 $ 1,827.00 $ - - 7.25 ' $ "' 44.73 $ - ' $~' ~ 8.35 $ 9182 $ 5,325 71 $ 32.76 $ 5,110.$6 $ -7.53 $ 46.52 $ $ .. - 8.6H $ 95.$0 $ 14,897.28 $ 34.07 $ - $ - -7.84 $ - 48.36 $ ~ ~ -- $ .9.03 $ 99.32 $ $ 48.65 $ $ ~ - 1119 $ ' 69,08 $ -. $ 1289 $ 14181 $ $ 50.60 $ ~ $ 1164 ~ $ ~ ~ 7185 $ - ~ $ - - 13.41 $ 147.49 $ $ -52.62 $ - $ 12.10 $ 74.72 $ $ 13.94 $ 1$339 $ $ 41.50 $ $ - 9.55 $ ~~ '~-'58.93 $ -$~ ~ ~ 1100 $ 120.97 $ $ 43.ifi $ - $ 9.93 $ : - ~ 6129 $ - $ - ~ - ~ 1144 $ 125.81 $ $ 44.89 $ $ ' 10.32 $'~: ~~' 63.74 $ '$ 1189 $ 130.84 $ $ 45.10 $ - $ ~ .10.37 $~. -~~fi4.04 $~ $. ~ .:1195 $ 131.47 $ $ 46.90 $ $ 10.79 -$ ~ 66.60 $.- $ -1243 $ 136.73 $ $ 48.78 $ $ 11.22 $ - : 69.27 $ $ --12.93 $ 142.19 $ $ 31.00 $ 1,519.00 $ 7.13 $ -- 44.02 $ $ ' '.8.22 $ 90.37 $ 4,427.89 $ 32.24 $ 419.12 $ - 7.42 $ - ~~ 45.78 $ $ 8.54 $ 93.98 $ 1,221.73 $ 33.53 $ $ 7.71 $ '47.61 $ $ 8.89 $ 97.74 $ Subtotal Direct Labor Costs $ 13,490.72 SUB TOTALlA80R $ 39,325.44 LEGEND: ~ - 'Antidpated Salary Inoeases (4%) 0 ., Obe.~ p 0 - TBD = TO Re Determined Total Direct Labor Casts $ 13,490.72 ' "Actual salary increases shall he Based on CPI-W Fringe Benefits gate Total 23.00% $ 3,102.86 Total Fringe Benefits $ 3,102.86 , Indirect COSU - - Overhead 142.00% $ 19,156.82 ' General And Administrative 0.00% $ Tocai Indirect Costs $ 19,156.82 FEE (Profit), 10°k on Rate a OH/Fringe $ 3,575.04 ' SUB TOTAL LABOR $ 39,325.44 OTHER COSTS Travel Costs $ Equipment and Supplies (Itemize) $ 100.00 Other Direct Costs (Itemize) $ 16,500.00 SUB TOTAL OTHER COSTS $ 16,600.00 TOTAL COST $ 55,925.44 Page ! 1 oi'_3 10-235 c 0 E ~ ~ '"~ '~ u C e1 O ~ N ~ s a a v LLL ~I 'ti .o o Y K C O Q iA L T U C N ~ `:1 a v m = 'a ~ W J .~I U ~ ~ ~ O m W - S _ ~ w w Y W w ~ C 7 O Q 4/T T u C a e -i ~ N LL t a V C '~I ~ V o G L ~{ Y a ~ C a7 L t' W a ~ .o a N ~ C LL _ ~£ a c w m v o ~ ~- a vi m a N O vhf G J Q .m U N ~ rv C O w ~ ~ o w ~ £ A i u ~ ~ Z ~ ~ o a = C E O Q ~ E m ~ C W > •°- ~ ~ "' v u x a ~ ~ u u ~ O ~ ~- a w 7 O R ~. 0 0 0 0 O O ~ ~ N v} .n 0 0 0 o a 0 0 ~ .-, u i ~ lD ti L_' o a/} VT v} ~ _ O F- LT O O O N Gl .C Y GJ v v Q ,~ a .., ~ ~ N y O C U Y ~ u C v v° ~ p a ^. v ~ 3 t H w O 10-236 O V O u c V 7 H O u H d ~. a N c-1 a bA a CITY OF CHULA VISTA HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE Preliminary Engineering and Final Design Contract No. 0 Suhmnsultant KTU•A EXHIBIT C FEE SCHEDULE Date: 27-0c[-11 DIRECT LABOR Initial Hourly - ~ General and Loaded Hourly Classification Name Rance Mourz Rate Total Frinee Benfi[s - Over head .Adm inistrative - Profit Rate Total Principal Landscape Architect Mike Singleton 1,/1/2011-12/31/2011 31• $ 56.41 $ 1,748.71 $' '-36.67 $ - -40.21 $ ~ '14.10 $ 14.74 $ 162.13 $ 5,026.12 " 1/1/2012 - 12/31/2012 31 • $ 58.67 $ 1,818.66 $. 38.13 $ 4182 $ -~ 14.67 $ 15:33 $ 168.62 $ 5,227.17 " 1/1/2013 -12/31/2013 e $ 61.01 $ $- 39.66 $ 43.50- $ 15.25 $ 15.94 $ 175.36 $ Senior Trail Planner Jahn Holloway 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 12• $ 44.88 $ 538.56 $ - 29.17. $ 3199' $. ~ 1122 -$ 1173 $ 328.99 $ 1,54792 " 3/1/2012 -12/31(2012 • $ 46.68 $ $ 30.34 $ 33.27 $ 1167 $ 12.20 $ 134.15 $ " 1/1/2013 -12/31/2013 • $ 48.54 $ $ - 3155 $ 34.61 $ 12.14 $ 1268- $ 139.52 $ Project Manager, 30 Terry Kinsman 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 67• $ 26.65 $ 1,785.55 $ 17.32 $ -' 19.00- $ 6.66 $' 6.96 $ 76.60 $ 5,13201 Modeler, GIS 1/1/2012 -12/31/2012 • $ 27.72 $ $ 18.02 . $ 19.76 $ 6.93 -$ ~ 7.24 $ 79.66 $ " 1/1/2013 -12/31/2013 • $ 28.82 $ $ 18.74 $.. ..' 20.55 $ - 7.21 $ 7.53 $ 82.85 $ Visual Simulations Michael Johnston 3/1/2011-12/31/2011 84 • $ 3153 $ 2,648.52 $ ~ 20.49 - $' - ' ~ ~ 22.48_ $ '~ ~ ~ 7.88 $ - ~ " - '8.24 $ 90.62 $ 7,612.35 " 3/1/2012-12/31/2012 • $ 32.79 $ $ 2131 $' 23,38 $ - 8.20 $ 8.57 $ 94.25 $ " 1/1/2013-12/31/2013 • S 34.10 $ $ 2217 $ ~ 24.31 $ 8.53 $ 8.91 $ 98.02 $ Landscape Revege[ation Craig Richardson 1/1/2011- 12/31/2011 48 • $ 25.38 $ 1,218.24 $ - - ' 16.50 $' 18.09 $ -~ 6.35 $ ~ 6.63' $ 72.95 $ 3,50145 " 1/1/2012- 12/31/2012 146 • $ 26.40 $ 3,853.70 $ ~ 17.16 $ ' ~ 18.82 $ 6.60 $ 6.90 $ 75.86 $ 11,076.26 " 1/1/2073 -12/33/2013 • $ 27.45 $ $ 17.84 . $ 19.57 $ .6.86 $ 7.17 $ 78.90 $ ........_.._._...........___-_.....__..___....._.._._..__.._ ~ Subtotal Direct Labor Costs $ 13,61194 SUB TOTAL LABOR $ 39,123.29 •AnticiPated Salary Increases (4%) • Actual salary increases shall be based on CPI-W - Total Direct Labor Costs $ 13,61194 Fringe Benefits Rate Total 65.00% $ 8,847.76 Taal Fringe Benefits $ 8,647.76 Indirect Costs Overhead 71.29% $ 9,703.95 General And Administrative 25.00% $ 3,402.98 Taal lndirec[Costs $ 13,106.93 FEE (PraFitl, 10°, on Rate +OH/Fringe $ 3,556.66 SUB TOTAL LA80ft $ 39,123.29 OTHER CO5T5 Travel Costs $ 102.00 Equipment and Supplies (Itemize) $ 350.00 Other Direct Costs (Itemize) $ SUB TOTAL OTHER CO5T5 $ 45100 TOTAL COST $ 39,575.29 ' ?age l3 ui .3 10-237 G 0 N O W J u ~ F- ~ LG W - = H x W W W LL O Q C 00 r Y c a c W ~ C7 10 O ~ ~ v _ m C ~ •~ a a C ~ ~ w ~ ~ 2 i z C ~ ~ O E _ ~ v w o 0 V 2 d U U 0 a C -~'~ M 3 .:~ NI v A lL a ~I •~-~ "' 7 O Q V C J N~ ~ v N LL a 1 ~I Y C O Q u C 7 ti~ ~ N H W 6 OI a~+ F- ° ° 0 0 ° c o 0 o , ..i o 0 0 0 0 in ~ m n m N h Lf V} VY V1 V} V} V} VF V} i/T ~ " ~ c0 O O .-i I~ N `' `~ v v ~ ~ N N 0 0 0 ° 0 ~ o c o 0 0 0 O O v} v~ v~ vt .h O 0 p O 0 ~ ~ tf1 u1 O ~ c~ N O 4!} i/} t/} V} iJT VT L} +/} i/} V} i? O O O O u1 ~ ~ v d d N d N ~ ~ O O O ~ V Y V T V } O N ~ 4 O . m m V '~ . N LO .. . m ~ U a ~ ~ , . o . E - p p E m ° o o a H . m ~ a a v ` ' ^ E N 3 ~ U G y u Z o r C ~ u ~ 00 > c v ~ ~ p c J ~ m C ~ ~ O N O ~ ~ C L U = N ? CC' . E . C G d O U v z =y y O d E A a ~ N ~ ~ c w ~ l N m ~ 1 0- 2 3 8 ~, -- o m a 0 0 a o N N ~ ~ V V ~ ~ o °o 0 N O ~ U ~ m v y O ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 d y, E N V .+ .~ u v v C .Q Y p Q' V u ~ '" s ~ y 3 -p O U `~ Y to ~ F- v ~ ~ ~ ~ U E O J UJ O. ~ Q ~-- w O ~ CITY OP CHULA VISTA HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE Preliminary Engineering and Final Design EXHIBIT C FEE SCHEDULE contract No. D Date: ' Suhconsultant Unscott, Law, & Greenspan 27-Oct-11 DIRECT LABOR Initial HOUrW - ~ ~ General and Class f<ation Name Ranee Hours Rate Total Fr nee Benfts O verhead - AdminisbaHve - Profit- Loaded 7o[al Principal Transportation John Keating 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 16@ $ 91.96 $ 1,471.36 $ - 27.64 $ 161.30 $ -~ $ 28.09 $ 308 99 $ 4 943 86 Engineer 1/1/2012-12/31/2012 9 @ $ 99.64 $ 860.79 $ 28.75 $ -~ 167.75 $. .$ 29.21 $ . 321.35 $ , . 2,892.16 " 1/1/2013 -12/31/2013 @ $ 99.46 $ $ 29.90 $ -174,46 $ $ ~ ~ 30.38 $ 334.20 $ Associate Principal Walter MUSial 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 40@ $ $6.50 $ 2,260.00 $ '~ 16.98 $-- "' 99.10 $' _. 5 ~ '"' 17.26 $ 189.84 $ 7,$93,74 " 1/1/2012 -12/31/2012 @ $ 58.76 $ $ - .17.66 $ 103,07 $ $ 17.95 $ 197.44 $ " 1/1/2013 - 12/31/2013 @ $ 6111 $ $ 18.37 $ 107,19 $ $ 18.67 $ 205.33 $ Traffic Engineer 111 James Miller 1/1/2011.12/31/2011 @ $ 45.66 $ $ ~ ~. 13.73 $ 80.09 $ ~ $ - - 13.95 $ 153.42 $ " 1/1/2012 -12/31/2012 @ $ 47.49 $ $ - 14.27 $- 83.29 ~$ ~$ 14.51 $ 159.56 $ 1/1/2013- 12/31/2013 @ $ 49.39 $ $ -~ -14.85' $ 86.62 $. - $ 15.09 $ 165.94 $ Traffic Engineer 111 Sha nkar 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 56 @ $ 44.19 $ 2,674.64 $ 13.28 $ 77.51 $~ - $ :~ 13.50 $ 148.48 $ 8,314.94 " 3/1/2012 - 12/31/2012 33 @ $ 45.96 $ 1,516.60 $ 13.81 $ - " " 80.61 $. - - .$ 14.04 $ 156.42 $ 5,095.87 " 1/1/2013 - 12/31/2013 @ _$ 47.60 $ $ 14.37. $ 83.83 $ -' - $ ' -. 14.60 $ 160.60 $ Traffic Planner ll Lisa Carr " 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 80@ $ 30.14 $ 2,411.20 $. 9.06 $.'. ' '52.87 '$" - $ 9.21 $ 101.27 $ 8,101.78 1/1/2012 -12/31/2012 @ $ 3135 $ - $ 9.42 $ 54.98 $ $ 9.57 $ 105.32 $ " 1/1/2013 - 12/31/2013 @ $ 32.60 $ $ 9.80' $ ' 57.18. '$. $ 9.96 $ 109.54 $ Sr. Cadd David Spinier 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 12@ $ 3195 $ 383.40 $ - 9.60 $ -. ~ Sfi.04 $ ~$ - 9.76. $ 107.35 $ 1,28825 " " 1/1/2012 -12/31/2012 87 @ $ 33.23 $ 2,890.84 $ 9.99' $ 58.28 $ - - $ 10.15 $ 111.65 $ 9,713.38 1/1/2013-12/31/2013 @ $ 34.56 $ $ 10.39 $ - 60.61 $ $ - 10.56 $ 136.11 $ Ward Processor Donna Canale " 4/1/2011-6/30/2011 20 @ $ 24.00 $ 680.00 $' 7.21 $ -42.10 $ ~ ' ' '-'-- $' 7.33 $ 80.64 $ 1,612.83 7/1/2011-6/30/2012 8 @ $ 24.96 $ 199.68 $ .. 7.50 $ ~ 43.78 $ ~~ ~ _ _$ -- -7.62 $ 83.87 $ 670.94 " 7/1/2012-6/30/2013 @ $ 25.96 $ $ 7,80- $ 45.$3 $ - .$. 7.93 $ 87.22 $ Engineering Aide TBD 6/1/2011-6/30/2011 @ $ 15.00 $ $ ~ 4.51 $ .26.31 $ $ ~ 4.58 $ 50.40 $ " 7/1/2011 - 6/30/2012 @ $ 15.60 $ $ ~ 4.69 $ 27.36 $ - ' ~ $ ~ 4.77 $ 52.42 $ " 7/1/2012-6/30/2013 @ $ 16.22 $ $ :4.88 $ ~ 28.46 $ ~ ~ $ 4.96 $ 54.51 $ Subtotal Di rett Labor COSts $ 14,948.46 SUB TOTAL LABOR $ 50,227.73 LEGEND: ~ - - " 'Anticipated Salary lnveases (4%) ,w~.e; Me Arrr oee.. TBD = To Be Determined ~ Total Oi rett Labor Costs $ 14,948.46 - `Actual salary increases s i hall be based on CPI-W Fringe Benefits Rate Total 30.06% $ 4,493.51 Tota l Fringe Benefits $ 4,493.51 Indirect Costs Overhead 175.40% $ 26,219.60 General And Administrative 0.00% $ Total lndirettCosu $ 26,279.60 FEE (Profit), 30%on Rate+OH/Fringe $ d,566,36 SUB TOTAL LABOR $ 50,227.73 OTHER CO5T5 Travel Costs $ 200.00 ' Equipment and Supplies (Itemixel $ 100.00 Other Oirect Costs (Itemize) $ 3,600.00 ' SUB TOTAL OTHER COSTS $ 3,900.00 TOTAL COST $ 54,127.73 P34o -i5 af.3 10-239 ~, a m a E Q ~ . n ~ { n.. n a n + n + n . n v } to . n + n 0 ° ~ o ~ c+ c m m p ^~ a '-' I m m t~ a7 i N 17 LL L d GI ~ t/} iJ? a, O O O ~ ~ O O O l.1 ~ y N ri lp N ~ ~ m O V} l/t ~ N 'y +~ O O O O O p0 O_ ~' C O O O O O N O . Q i/} VY V} V} +/? +/? N V? L} V1. V} L1. t/} u C W O O ~ '.:'1 ~ O =1 .--~ NI v ~ LL N ei A L d .C ~ ~ I W ~ ~ ~ J u ~ ~- o ~ ° CD W O O X H ~ W W W W vT ~ a~n O O O O 0 0 C O O ~. ~ O ~ O ~ 7 ~ ~ O m M Q Z/} V} ~/} +/} VT V} VF U} V} 1/} L} t! } i!f T v G pp O O ~ '.`1 O ~ N y LL ~ c ~ N t °' a c v ~l .~ N 0 3 ,-, o J 0 0 y f0 ~ O u c ~ a/ 7. . n c °° 3 3 ^ a ~ ~ v c Y c ~ N E o v N ~ 'E u LL a ~ N ~ ~ v ~ Y .- 'O ~ u C ~ N a O = ~ y .-. ti v N E ~ O Q ' o ~ ~ ~, c ~ ~ E 'v Q " $ . ' in u ` ~ .... O ~ 3 Q Q C U _ ~ ~ ~ ""~ N R V 1 7 ~ l„)r I N t0 U F" _~ ti z G ~ ate. L n 0 i ~ a0.. v O C O O N O LLO ~ 'E `~ ~ w i ' ¢ a a ~ ~ ~ a a v ~ ,~, ~n ~ .j L ~ c c ~ } w ~ a ~ ~ ~ w 0 ~ F- F - ~ V U O F . -i N m d' v~ ~ o w ti N m u x n. 10-240 CITY OF CHULA VISTA HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE Preliminary Engineering and Final Design EXHIBIT C FEE SCHEDULE Contract No. 0 pate: 27-Oct-11 Subconsultant 5adfe Rabines Architects OIREC7 LABOR Initial Hourlv ~ '-' -General and ~ Loaded Hzrurly Classification Name Rance Hours Ra[e Total Fringe Benfits Over head Administrative - Profit Ra[e Taal Senior Principal Ricardo ftahines 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 17 ® $ 78.19 $ 1,329.23 $ 20.30 $ 94.87 $ $ 19.34 $ 212.69 $ 3 615 76 " 1/1/2012-12/31/2012 30® $ 8132 $ 813.18 $ 2Lll $ ~ 98.66 $ $ 20.11. $ 22L2Q $ , . 2 21199 1/1/2013 - 12/31/2013 ~ $ 84.57 $ $ 2195 $ '. 102.61 $ $ 20.91 $ 230.05 $ , Principal Eric Lindebak " 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 51® $ 53.00 $ 2,703.00 $ 13.76 ~$ ~ 64.30 $.~~ ~ ,$ ~. 13;ll $ 144.17 $ 7 35267 " 1/1/2012 -12/31/2012 24 ® $ 55.12 $ 1,322.88 $ 14.31 $ .66.88 $ -' _ $ 13.63 $ 149.94 $ , 3 598 48 1/1/2033 -12/31/2013 p $ 57.32 $ $ 14.88 $ 69.55 $ $ 14.18 $ 1$5.93 $ , . Projec[Manager Chris Varane " 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 ® $ 38,46 $ - $."'- - 9.98 $ - 46.66' $ - $ 9.51' $ 104.62 $ - " 1/1/2012 -12/31/2012 a $ 40.00 $ $ -10.38 $ - 48.53 $ $ - 9.89 $ 108.80 $ 1/1/2013 -12/31/2013 a $ 41.60 $ $ 10.80. $ 50.47 $ $ 10.29 $ 113.16 $ lob Captain Morin Gertler " 1/1/2011-12/3I/2011 ~ $ 30.77 $ $' '7.99 $ '37.33 $'- -' $ 7.61 $ 83.70 $ " 3/1/2012-12/31/2012 a $ 32.00 $ $ 8.31 $ '- .38.83 $. $ 7.91 $ 87.05 $ 1/1/2013 -12/31/2013 ~ $ 33.28 $ $ 8.64 $ 40.38 $ ~ $ - 8.23 $ 90.53 $ Designer3 Sam Scott " 1/1/2011-12/31/2011 80® $ 21.63 $ 1,73040 $. - 5.62 $ 26.24 $ $ ~. -5.35 5 58.84 $ 4 70702 " 1/1/2012-72/31/2012 ® $ 22.50 $ $ -5.84 $ 27.29 $ $ 9.56 $ 6179 $ , 1/1/2013 -12/31/21713 p $ 23.40 $ - $ 6.07 $ 28.39 $ $ 5.79 $ 63.64 $ Designer 2 Salomon Daniel " 1/1/2011 - 12/31/2011 • $ 20.00 $ $' 5.19 $ 24.27 $ - $ ~ - 4:95 $ 54.40 $ " 1/1/2012-12/31/2012 e $ 20.80 $ - $ SAO $ .25.24 $ $ - 5.14 $ 56.58 $ 1/1/2013 -12/31/2013 - p $ 21.63 $ $ 5.62 ' $ ' 26.25 $ $ 5.35 $ 58.84 $ ' Subtotal Direct Lahor COStz $ 7,898.69 SUB TOTAL LA80R $ 21 489 93 LEGEND: - •A ntiapated Salary Increases (4%) " ' a , . "Actual salary increases s hall be based on CPI-W Total Direct labor Costs $ 7,898.69 Fringe Benefits Rate Total 25.96% $ 2,050.50 Total Fringe Benefits $ 2,050.50 Indirect Casts Overhead 123.33% $ 9,583.48 General And Administrative p,p0=~ $ . Total lndirecc Costs $ 9,583.48 FEE (Prof[), 10%on Rate+OH/Fringe $ 1,953.27 5U8 TOTAL LP.BOR $ 21,485.93 , OTHER COSTS Travel Costs $ 204.00 Equipment and Supplies Qtemizel $ Other Direct Costs (Itemize) $ SUB TOTAL OTHER COSTS $ 204.00 TOTAL COST $ 21,fi89.93 _, r',3 10-241 0 E . ~ u ~ ~ O ^'~ v `-" r HI i N (6 LL a SI o Y, n yr + n w O O ~ N N ~ O O 7 O N N Q +/} iA LT Vf V j ~ O NI a UJ ~ LL N a cI E W ~ J V ~ ~,,, ~ ~ W ~ CC = ° o , = X ~ ~ W W W N li O O an ~ ~ N eV C O O ri N O u j ~ O ~ 6 ~ LL N ~ A '~+ L u a Y t =I ,~ U Q ~ N e-1 C tf~ ~ O ~ f0 .y ~ ~ i~ Ul 2' ~ m N ~ ~ ~ D ~ ~ ~ N_ ~ C £ LL y a _ d w ~ •_ y M C ~ N ~ ~ N v i m v O ~ c u -o v ~ i ~ Q Q C ~ ~ ' C ' ° 3 2 O w 2~ i w o Z c w ~ E d y is c m C m U (o O = a ~ A O ~ `~ ~ w v ~ a V ~ ~ W,-~ o Q F _ ~ ~ a 7 v~ _ V S o. U V O -F N w 0 0 O O R ~ O O ~ ~ o ~ o u° N L O W din ~ ~ O H ~ N ~~ O u ~ ~ r ~' ~ v u i ~ •Q Y ~ a - ~ ~ '" vi N a O = ~ u V~1 v Q ~ ~ v a~ a ~ F- w O 10-242 0 v m a