Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2012/11/20 Item 12
TY COUNCIL STATEMENT ~~~ CITY OF CHULA VISTA 11/20/12, Item~2 ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE EXISTING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND MOFFATT AND NICHOL FOR THE HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO EXECUTE THE AMENDMENT ON BEHALF OF TH ITY SUBMITTED BY: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF ENG ERING REVIEWED BY: ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER S t CITY MANAGER S T 6c. T S, 4/STHS VOTE: YES ^ NO SUMMARY By Resolution 2011-221, on November 15, 2011, the City Council approved an agreement with Moffatt and Nichol in the amount of $1,777,421 for preliminary engineering, environmental documentation and final design for the Heritage Road Bridge Replacement Project. As the vazious studies progressed, it became evident that two projects, the future widening of Main Street to the west and of Heritage Road to the south, would potentially impact the ultimate configuration of the bridge; thus; it is necessary to perform additional studies at this time. to complete preliminary engineering and environmental clearance for the bridge. Therefore, staff recommends that the Moffatt and Nichol agreement be increased by $553,633 to a total maximum amount of $2,331,054 to facilitate completion of Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Clearances for the Heritage Road Bridge Replacement Project. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Development Services Director has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the approval of an amendment to an existing 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 environment. Therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c) (3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the waiving of the consultant selection process and the approval of the agreement amendment is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is required at this time. Although the proposed activity will not require environmental review, the proposed project, consisting of the replacement of the existing Heritage Road Bridge over the Otay River valley, will require that 12-1 11/20/12, Item /2- Page 2 of 6 the appropriate environmental document be prepazed pursuant to CEQA Guidelines. Since it is anticipated that the project will be recipient of federal funding, it will also be necessary that the appropriate environmental document be prepazed in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The anticipated environmental documents, based on a similar recently completed project, aze a "Routine Categorical Exclusion" for NEPA and an "Initial Study" for CEQA, leading to a Mitigated Negative Declazation. _ RECOMMENDATION Council adopt the resolution. BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Not applicable. DISCUSSION The existing 82 feet-long by 52 feet-wide Heritage Road Bridge was constructed in 1993 as an interim timber-deck facility over the Otay River. 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 peak event traffic, pedestrians, cyclists or a 50-year storm event. Chula Vista's General Plan indicates that Heritage Road is planned as a six-lane major arterial between Olympic Parkway and the City's 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 Enviromnental Studies' and solicited a "Request for Qualifications" for Consultant Bridge Design and Environmental Services in September 2010. Subsequently, Moffatt and Nichol was selected to provide Preliminary Engineering, Final Design and Environmental Documentation for the Heritage Road Bridge. PROPOSED SCOPE CHANGE AND CONTRACT AMENDMENT As preliminary engineering progressed on the Heritage Road Bridge Replacement Project, it became evident that the future wideningr of Main Street west of Heritage Road, and Heritage Road south of the bridge, would potentially impact the ultimate configuration of the bridge; thus, absent preliminary studies of these roadway projects, the preliminary engineering and environmental studies for the Heritage Road Bridge project cannot be completed. In addition, federal policies/regulations associated with environmental review require feasible project alternatives to be presented: the addition of these additional services would assist in complying with these federal requirements for the bridge project. CALTRANS, which administers the federal funds for the bridge project, concurs that the impacts of these two segments should be studied with the bridge project (Attachment 1 -Expanded Scope of Work). The Main Street segment between Nirvana Avenue and Heritage Road was constructed in 1994 with two east-bound lanes and three west-bound lanes. Main Street was designed and graded for an ultimate 6-lane width. However, one east-bound traffic lane and the curb, gutter, and sidewalk along the south side were not constructed. 12-2 11/20/12, Item ,' L Page 3 of 6 The Heritage Road segment from Entertainment Circle North to the southerly City boundary is currently a 2-lane roadway. Preliminary engineering is needed to verify and develop the ultimate Heritage Road alignment, coordinate its connection to the Heritage Road Bridge, and determine right-of--way requirements. Since the rights-of--way would be acquired from a single property owner, it is anticipated that this future right-of--way will be obtained concurrently with the bridge right-of--way. Additional biological services are also needed due to the possible presence of the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly and the Western Pond Turtle. These studies as well as a Noise Abatement Decision Report will be performed for the original project azea as well as the Main Street segment. CALTRANS has concurred with increasing the bridge replacement project's scope and limits to include the preliminary engineering and environmental services for the additional segments; thus, allowing for the use of the federal funds currently programmed under the SAFETEA-LU Grant for these additional services. The maximum federal reimbursement for this project is currently set at $2,519,720, with a required City TDIF match of 20%. Therefore, 80% of the cost for the additional services proposed in the contract amendment will be covered by the federal grant. FUTURE FEDERAL BRIDGE REPLACEMENT FUNDING Subsequent to awazding the contract for Preliminazy Engineering and Environmental Studies to Moffatt & Nichol, CALTRANS updated its Bridge Inspection Records Information System (BIRIS) Report. The BIRIS report evaluates bridge conditions and operations by rating various bridge elements, including number of lanes, sidewalks, shoulders bike lanes, hydraulic capacity, etc. As a result of CALTRANS' update to the BIRIS Report, the Sufficiency Rating (SR) of the structure was revised downwazd from SR=80.3 to SR=71.7, thereby resulting in a "Functionally Obsolete" designation. This rating allows the bridge to be eligible for the Highway Bridge Program (HBP) and has been tentatively approved for inclusion in the HBP for. future construction funding. Staff has submitted an application to CALTRANS for HBP inclusion and anticipates approval in the fall. The bridge project would then be placed in SANDAG'S RTIP in January 2013 and receive Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) funding approval in the spring. Once in the HBP and construction funding is approved, the HBP will reimburse the City 88.53% of the Bridge Construction Costs. To date, the consultant has been responsive to City issues and project needs. Staff is satisfied with Moffatt and Nichol's performance and recommends amendment'approval. EXISTING SCOPE OF WORK Task 1 Preliminary Engineering, including: project management & administration; design alternative evaluation; environmental documentation; topographical mapping; geotechnical investigation; hydraulic studies; bridge type selection; and 30% design details. 12-3 P.~. II~2~/I2, Item t L Page 4 of 6 Task 2 Final Design, including: project management & administration; development of all required construction ready plans and documents; and development of all project specifications and estimate. Task 3 Construction Support, including: project management and administration; bid support. ADDITIONAL WORK REQUIRED FOR THE PROPOSED CONTRACT. AMENDMENT • Added biological monitoring due to the additional studies and scope of work • Added Civil engineering design due to additional roadway improvements The majority of the amendment costs are attributed to the increased scope of work along Main Street and Heritage Road segments and additional environmental services required for the original scope. City staff will be performing portions of the engineering tasks, including ROW documentation and preliminary engineering for the Main Street segment. 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 which is the subject of this action. Staff is not independently aware, nor has staff been informed by any City Council Member, of any other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision maker conflict of interest in this matter. CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT Sufficient funds are available in the CIP project balance to fund 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 (SAFETEA-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 February 13, 2009, the fund 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). ,The SAFETEA-LU Program funds 80% of the Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Analysis, including Staff Costs. The City is responsible for the remaining 20% match, which will be funded from the City's TDIF program. Design and Environmental Services The following summarizes the proposed total consultant agreement amount for the scope of services in the original agreement and the amendment. 12-4 11/20/12, Item 4~L_ Page 5 of 6 ADDITIONAL FUNDS RE UIItED FOR FII2ST AMENDMENT A. Phase 1-Preliminary Engineering B. Phase 2-Final Design C. Phase 3-Construction Su ort $272,682 $251,000 29,941 Total Funds Required For Amendment 1 $553,633 D. Original Consultant Contract Amount (Moffatt and Nichol Reso 2011-221) $1,777,421 NEW CONTRACT AMOUNT (BASE + INCREASE) $2,331,054 FUNDS COMMITTED FOR STAFF SERVICES Staff Costs (Original Contract) Staff Costs For Contract Administration And Design Work (First Amendment) $550,079 286 517 TOTAL FUNDS COMMITTED FOR STAFF COSTS $818,596 City Staff costs for project management and preliminary engineering are expected to be approximately $818,596. The Consultant and Staff costs would total approximately $3,149,650, of which 80%, or $2,519,720, would be reimbursed to the City from the Federal SAFETEA-LU program (maximum amount). The remaining balance of approximately $629,930 (20%) would be funded from the City's TDIF program. The project account's TDIF balance is sufficient to cover the City's required match. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT 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. However, below aze identified City of Chula Vista and other funding sources for future projects within the scope of work. There aze five TDIF program facilities/segments identified for funding located within the Bridge Project's scope of work as well as three City of San Diego funded facilities. These facilities include two TDIF segments along Main Street, a portion of Heritage Road, the Bridge, and a Traffic Signal at Main Street/Heritage Road intersection. Below is a detailed discussion of the five TDIF segments and the three City of San Diego facilities (Attachment 2-TDIF Funds). Future Bridge Construction (Facility 58B & 63-10 (Traffic Signal)): The TDIF Program identifies $6.2M in future funding for the Heritage Road Bridge. It is estimated that the cost to construct the six-lane bridge will range between $15 million to $17 million. Staff expects the bridge replacement project to be added to the HBP, which would fund 88.53% of the construction costs. The remaining $1.7M to $2M would be funded from Chula Vista TDIF. Future Main Street Widening (Facility No's. 56A & 56E): The TDIF Program, currently being updated, identifies $930,000 (the previous 2005 TDIF cost estimate was $5.7M) for the Main Street segment, between Nirvana Avenue and Heritage Road. The City would be able to widen Main Street utilizing the completed plans and documents developed with this project with TDIF funds when warranted under the City's Traffic Monitoring Program (TMP). 12-5 11/20/12, Item t' Page 6 of 6 Future Heritage Road Widening (Facility 58A1: The TDIF Program identifies $6.SM for the Heritage Road segment, between Main Street and the City Limits. However, it is assumed that the City of San Diego will take the lead in funding and constructing Heritage Road to its ultimate width south of Entertainment Circle South. City of San Diego Funded Projects (PFFP's T-2L1. T-21.2 & T-21.31 In addition to Chula Vista's TDIF Program, the City of San Diego has established a Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) for the Otay Mesa Community (Dated FY2007). The PFFP identifies three widening projects within Chula Vista jurisdiction along Heritage Road between Main Street and the City boundary with San Diego. The T-21.1 & T-21.3 projects identify funding of $19.SM for widening Heritage Road to 6 lanes from Main Street to south of the City of Chula Vista boundary between fiscal years 2017 and 2021. The T-21.2 project identifies $15SM for construction of a 6-lane bridge between fiscal yeazs 2017 and 2020. Currently, the City of San Diego is updating Otay Mesa PFFP with an anticipated completion in FY2013 (Attachment 3- San Diego PFFP Funds). Although there is no formal agreement between the Cities of Chula Vista and San Diego, San Diego could share in funding Chula Vista's portion of the bridge costs and/or possibly fund the entire cost of widening the remaining portions of Heritage Road within Chula Vista's jurisdiction. City Staff is initiating a dialogue with the City of San Diego to discuss a formal funding agreement. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 -Expanded Scope of Work Attachment 2 -TDIF Facility Cost Estimates Attachment 3 -City of San Diego's Otay Mesa PFFP T-21.1, T-21.2 & T-21.3 Attachment 4 - Origina12011 Resolution # 2011-221 Attachment 5 - Origina12011 Agreement Exhibit A -First Amendment to the Agreement Prepared by: Jase Luis Gomez, Land Surveyor, Public Works Department Mario Ingrasci, Associate Civil Engineer J: IEngineerlAGENDAICAS2012111-20-121Fina! CAS Packet (11-20-12J IAgenda Statement dm (& mjiJ edits - STM364 - 77-73-I2 REV.doc 12-6 ATTACHMENT - 1 ENERGY AAY ¢° v w i ~~ NIRVANA MAIN STREET _~~ SEGMENT "A" N `~~ \ ~~ -O 1' \~I I I RED ~ ~ i /g4~0~ =_ e °P°~~ SEGMENT "B° _ _ crruu, vrsTA EXISTING BRIDGE ~ ORIGINAL sArl niA'co _ - T- \ PROJECT SCOPE I E,~ T~NNENT CIR. N0. J I I~ \\ o~ ~~ _ ~~~ f ~'NrER ~~~~/ I r.91.VbA'Nr C!R SO O I ~ I 00.0 ~' L.....-..-.,-.._..-.. -CNULA VISTA SAN D/EGO .. - .. - .. _ .. MAJOR TASKS FOR AMENDMENTI MAIN STREET -SEGMENT "A' AVENIDA DE \ He~Aacff RplO - ENVIRONAAENiAL CLEARANCE ..____. ~ \ - RNAL DESIC~J Id VISTAS \ GRAPHIC SCAT.F. ORIGINAL BRIDGE AREA -SEGMENT "B' ~ ~ ,. u ~~ soo -ADDITIONAL ENV910NMENTAL STUDIES HERffAGE ROAD -SEGMENT "C" ~, - PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING a SCALE: 1" = 200' o HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT ~~~~~ °'TM~~HULAVISTA EXPANDED CHULA VISTAACA 91911DNEERING ~~ (619)4762301 SCOPE OF WORK ATTAGMtrfENT ~-~ CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITIES FACILITY COSTS FOR: HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE - NO. 58B HERITAGE ROAD - NO. 58A MAIN STREET - NO. 56A & 56E REVISED COST ESTIMATE FOR MAIN STREET TRAFFIC SIGNAL - NO. 63-10 12-8 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EX~-IIBIT F ACILITX N0. 58B pR07ECT DESCP.IPTION: HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE CROSSING THE OTAY RIDER. CUNSTRUCr 5 LANf BRJ~GE. (LENGiN = ],070) 0 HER/i ~ R ~ 31TEG£ AD ~. ~ ~ orar J t \ SAND FuL '.1 ~ 2 I y ' 2- t tDa• ~cE rsucmti sl' ~~ ar ,r z' s s ~ s-''?s r :r. u _ ~~• t _ e• v' tz' rz• I,s• ,~' iz• e- P.ce aaewvc I (BDM ~lDESJ EYE71Gc?ICT PAFNIxC/Bft(E Wff (7YP,J 6-LANE PRIME x0 SCA[E .... .. -. ~ 2_9 ® - _ FACILITY 58B Heritage Rd Ofay Rrver Bridge New Bridge on 6 Lane Prime Arterial 2 Specialltems S 350,000 Habitat mitigation ~ TOTAL HAAD COSTS $. 9,550,000 (Source - Hurzsaker & Associates) SOF7COSTS Contingency (15%) S 682,500 Design (12°<) $ 546,000 Inspection/Administration (6%) 5 273,ODD DavaloperAdministration {1.75°>) 3 79,625 CiryProjectAdministraiion (2°e) S 91,000 TOTAL SOFT COSTS 5 1,672,125 TOTAL PROJECT COST S 6.222,125 350,000 _ . .._ - 12-10 ,. CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY E~IIBIT FACILITY N0. 58A PROJECT DESCRIPTION: HERITAGE ROAD FROM MAIN STREtT/ROCK MDUN7AM RD. 70 CITY lllf,IT. VADEN EXISl1NG ROADWAY i0 6 LANES (LENGTH = 2,468') z V z-~-Z t z HERtTAGc" o s PO~so ~ GE Rp• ~\ °~ HEIi11p y 5~ ,_ ~ J H ~~= OTAY LANG FILL. _ Div Y 6-LANE PRIME NO SCALE 12-11 FACILITY 5BA Heritage Rd Marn St to Gity boundary Widen to & Lane Prrme Arterial Length (I_I): z,as6 TOTAL HARD GOSTS (Source - Hunsaker 8 AssoclatesJ SOFT COSTS Contingency (15%) Design {12%) Inspection/Administra4on {6%) OeveloperAdminLstration (1.75°~°) City Project Administration (2%) TOTAL SOFT COSTS PRDJECT COST $ 4,840,000 $ 720,000 $ 576,000 $ 2ee,4oo S 84,000 $ 96,004 $ 1,764,060 $ 6,564,000 ._ .- - 12-12 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY NO. 56A PRCSECT DESCRTPTfON: MAIN STREET fROM NIRVANA AVENUE TO 1.600 WEST Of HERITAGE RD./ROCK MOUNTAM ROAD. WIDEN EXISTING PORDCN TO SIX LANES MAJOR_ (C£"NCTH = 2095) i ~ ~ 9~L~P ~ S" P - ~?~~ pp ~ ~ ltAlN ~AJF~ S>RffT Z~~{e kL~ MWNtNN m CV. pTY Wii - Q t ~- 1 I 1 e uB' e ar' ~' rz' rr' rr' rF 5, r 8' B' I Y 5 1 }.! N.{X Z.t luL ~~ \. ~ U i a' P.GC SVC-R~iX 12'I 12' 1R' 8' r' P.CC :SA:1~tW' ~ 8' 12' 72'l 72' ~ nPE .~ LidTB ~ ~~ 6' TYPE 'C QlF3 @ W 115t S-LANE MAJOR NB 3G1tf 12-13 -- ® ~ - FACILITY 56A Main St Nirvana Ave fo 7SDO' Wesi of Heritage/Rock Mtn Rd Widened, new 6 Lane Major Road Length (Lf): 2,095 2 Surfacelmprovemen[s Linearft 2,095 5 225.00 5 471,375 3 Landscape & Irrigation Llrlear ft 2,095 $ 150.00 5 314,250 4 DryUtililies Llnearft 2,095 5 60.00 g 125,700 5 Misc. Construclion Logistics Linear it 2,096 S 10.00 S 20,950 6 Special Items 5 826,000 Habitat mltigzdon Acres 11.8 570,000 5 626,000 TOTAL HARD COSTS 5 1,600,175 SOFT COSTS Contingency (15% of total hard costs including dght-of-way) 5 270,026 Civil Engineering (7.5% of hard costs, excludes right-ot-way) 5 135,013 Landscape Architecture (10°~ of landscaping costs) 5 31,425 Surveying (2% of hard cosis, excludes right-of-way) $ 36,004 _ Utility Engineering/Coordinauon (3% of dry u0lfties costs) 5 3,771 InspectlorJAdministration (6% 01 total hard costs including right-of-way) 5 108.011 Developer Administration (1.75% of total hard costs Including right-of-way) 5 31,503 City Project Administration (2°e of total hard casts including right-of-way) 5 36,004 TOTAL SOFT COSTS 5 651,756 TOTAL PROJECT COST S 2,437,937 12-14 CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT FACILITY N0. 56E PROJECT DESCRIPTfON: ' MAIN STREET FROM 1,600' YlcST OF HERITAGE RD./ROCK MOUNTAIN ROAD iD HERITAGE R0./ROCK MTN. RD. WIDEN TO SIX LANES MAJOR. ' (LENGTH = 1,60D'J z ~ - _ o >~ ~'"s e S~ P c`>v~o4 PD m ~ LAIN Sil4'~~,h.l.. S1REFf ~~R~~p 4~ 1dDUNtA1N _ I ~- L~ ~ e 126• e s{' 1 61' 1~. {{• 44' 11' 5' ~ T B' 8' 1' S' i ' Y.! MAY 21 MAY ~ _ ~ ~, '`\ Y I ' ,'f T ~A" i' P.GG 9DEWAlX 12'I 12• tY '8" 4" P.GC JDEWAtd( ~' 12' 12' 12' . d" TYPt "G' LVIB & Lv79EEN 6' ITPE~2" ClfiiB & GURcZi 6-LANE MA10R NO SCALE 12-15 -- FACILITY 56E Main Sf 7600' West of Heritage/Rock Mtn Rd fo Heritage/Rock Mtn Rd laden to 6 Lane Prime Arterial Length (i_~:1 soo TOTAL HARD COSTS $ 2,375,000 (Source - Hunsaker & Associates} SOFfCOSTS Contingency (15%) $ 356,250 Design (12%) $ 265,000 Inspection/Administration (6%} $ 142,500 Developer Administration (1.75%) $ 41,563 City Project Administration (2%) $ 47,500 TOTAL SOFT COSTS $ 872,613 PROJECT COST $ 3,247,Si3 12-16 _= Retaining wall $ 500,000 ~I°&~E'l~ & AssociAT1/s, mc. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING BTRAFPIC ENGINEERING D'lemornndum Date: July 16, 2012 To: Mr. Frank Rivera, City of Chula Vista From: Bilj E. Datvell, Darnell $ Associates, Inc. DSa No. 1201 D4 Subject: Preliminary Cost Estimate for Widening the Southside of Main Street from Nirvana Avenue to Heritage Road.. In accordance with your authorization, Dd.A bas prepared We attached Preliminary Cost Estimate to Widen Main Street from Nirvana Avenue to Heritage Road. The Cost Estimate is based on Ividening the Main Street to provide tlvee (3) eastbound travel lanes, curb, gutter and sidewalk a total distance of approximately 3,695 feel The costs include relocation of the existing chain link fencing and three (3) drainage inlet swctures. The cost includes the installation of approximately 945 lineal feet of 16 feet wide raised and landscaped median. The cost estimate does not include acquisition of rigbts-of--way. Exhibit A depicts the proposed widening. The breakdowns of costs aze as follows: i. General 550,475.00 3. Erosion Control 58,100.00 3. Removals 559,06?.00 4. Surface Improvements 5712988.00 5. Landscape and Irrlgadon S7Q,875.00 6. Drainage Structures 5l8.48D.00 Sub-Total Hard Costs: 5919,980.00 SOFT COSTS: Contineency (15% of total hard costs) 5137,997.00 Civil Engineering (7.5% of total bard costs) 568,999.00 Soils Engineering 59,000-OD Landscape Architecture 57.088.00 Surveying (7.5% of total ]card costs) 518,400.00 Utility Engineering/Coordinntion (Included in Civil Engineering) SD.00 Design Genera] (13% of total hard costs) 5110,398.OD Inspection/Administration (6% of total hard costs) 855,199.OD Developer Administration (1.75%of total hard costs) 816,100.00 City Project Administration (2% of fora[ hard costs) 518,400.00 TDIF Program Monitoring (3% of tntal hard costs) 527,600.00 Sub-Total Soft Costs: 5469,181.00 Total Project Costs: 51,389,161.00 2870 FOURTH AVENUE / SUITE A /SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 PHONE: 619-233-9373 / FAX: 619-233-0034 E-mail: ofnce(ldamell-assoccom 12-~~ 1 2-18 '~ CHULA VISTA TDIF FACILITY EXHIBIT ~ FACILITY N0. 63 _ FACtLlTY 63 System wide lntersectron Traffic Signalization 2 Olympic Parkway ®NM Street 50°/ $ 80.000 $ 40,000 3 Olympic Parkway ®MM Street 50% $ 80,000 $ 40,000 4 Olympic Pkwy ®St'D" 50% $ 80,000 $ 40,000 5 E Palomar St ~ Davies Dr 509'° $ 80,000 $ 40,000 6 E Palomar St ®Medical Center Ct 100% $ 80,000 $ 80,000 7 E Palomar St ®Santa Maria 100% $ 80,000 $ 80,000 e Heritage Rd ~ Future Intersection 50% $ 80,000 $ 40,000 9 Heritage Rd C~ Future Intersection 50% $ 80,000 $ 40,000 10 Herdage/Rock Mtn Rd ~ Main St 100% $ 80 000 $ 60,000 o n ~ Future Intersection 50% $ 80,000 $ 40,000 12 Rock Min Rd ®Future Intersection 50°~ $ 80,000 $ 40,000 13 La Media Rd ~ Oiay Valley Rd 1009'° $ 80,000 $ 80,000 14 Otay Valley Rd ®Magdalena 50°k $ 80,000 $ 40,000 15 La Media Rd ~ Future Intersection ~ $ 0 16 La Media Rd ®Rock Mtn Rd (x4) 1 , 60,000 $ 3 0, 00 17 Rock Mfi Rd ~ Magdalena 50% $ 80,000 $ 40,000 _ t 8 La Media ~ Santa Luna 50°h $ 80,000 $ 40,000 19 La Media ~ Birch 100% $ 80,000 $ 60,000 20 Birch between Magdalena & SA-125 100% $ 80,000 $ 80,000 21 Otay Lakes Rd ~ Ganyon Dr 50 k $ 80,000 $ - 40,000 22 San Miguel Ranch Rd ~ Avenida Loretta 50% $ 80,000 $ 40,000 23 San Miguel Ranch Rd ~ Avenida Akamira 50% $ 80,000 S 40,000 24 San Miguel Ranch Rd ~ Proctor Valley Rd 50% $ 80,000 $ .40,000 25 Mt Miguel Rd ®Paseo Vera Cruz 50% $ 80,000 $ 40,000 26 Proctor Valley Rd ®Rocking Horse 50% $ 80,000 $ 40,000 27 Proctor Valley Rd ®Lane Ave. 50°/, $ 80,000 $ 40,000 28 Proctor Valley Rd ~ Hunt Pkwy 50% $ 80,000 $ 40,000 29 Proctor Valley Rd ~ Duncan Aanch Rd 50°/, $ 80,000 $ 40,000 30 Proctor Valley Rd ~ Coastal Hills Dr 50% $ 80,000 $ 40,000 31 Proctor Valley Rd ~ Lakecrest 50% $ 80,000 $ 40,000 32 Otay Lakes Rd ~ W ueste Rd 50% $ 80,000 $ 40,000 33 Hunie Pkwy ®Stone Gate St 50% $ 80,000 $ 40,000 34 Ofympic Pkwy ®Spine Rd 50% $ 80,000 $ 40,000 35 Olympic Pkwy ~ Future Intersection 50% $ 80,000 $ 40,000 36 Olympic Pkwy ®Future Intersection 37 Hunte Pkwy ~ Future Intersection 50°1° $ 80,000 $ 40,000 38 Hunte Pkwy ~ Future Intersection 50°~ $ BO,OOD $ 40,000 39 Hunte Pkwy ~ Future Intersection 50°/, S 80,000 $ 40,000 40 Hunte Pkwy ~ Eastlake Pkwy 50% $ 80,000 $ 40,000 41 Hunte Pkwy ~ Spine (x4) 50% $ 80,000 $ 160,000 -~ 42 Eastlake Pkwy ®Birch 100% $ 80,000 $ 80,000 12-19 =_ gTTACHMENT 3 OTAY MESA PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN (PFFP) City of San Diego FACILITY COSTS FOR: OTAY MESA FACILITIES MAP HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE - T-21.2 HERITAGE ROAD - T-21.1 & T-21.3 ~2-20 35 U2 -,~ ~ OTAYMESA-WEST VIEW T-3.3 . -. _ ~ FACILITIES BENEFIT ,`1~~ I~ ~ F ASSESS NT PROJECTS 1 2 T-3 ~ i-~..,~'-^,`i ~_ ~~ T-21.2 13 'i, ~~~~~.~ ' ~-j y T-21.1 „~`~ °, n T 2 T-3.4 ~`~"'~~. ^~~ ~"~-.v?~~ -c ,T-21. -3.1 ~~ -:~` T-4.2 fi===- ~' °-- ~ .~~y<y-. -80. -2.2 ~~ T-21.5 -21.6 -52 i. -53.1 Legend /~/ Otay Mesa byas[ f Easteoundary Otay Mesa Fba 9oundary ~ Traffic Signals 6 Park BRec Projects Fire Station - - Utilities Projects Pt Police Sta6en •ua Transportation Projects ~i Library N N --~ T-53.2. r e -- ~_I - __ - i I G ;~; E ^ ~ 12-21 Omy Aleut I'rlhlie Fnailille5 /:innncinl: !'Inn FI'I00y CfI'Y OP SAN DILTGO I~ACILI'1'I8S FINANCING I'ROGIiAM l'IILI: NI';\V IIKIiI'i'AGE (LUAU IUINY VOII4y Imnd7-NnrIL Ull•AIt1AI1:NT kf1UINC4111N11 AIM [AI'Il'A1. 1'IlOlll-IS t'II': N/r\ OWr u<,~, r~ddm r L~rrn45 m~~„nLaNl; ro,,, rr znoy CITY OP SAN D[EGO PACILITiL~3 FINANCING PROGRAM 'PI'PLI: NEW IIIiIi1Y'AGI?ROAU (Olny Valley Mandl-NIII'lll rnoaecr: T'al.l I'I10JEC1': T-31.1 I]F.PANIAII!Nt: IN,IIN4FIIINU ANN CAPITA I. 1'IIVILCIS COIINC'II. UISFIVCI": 5 CUVNCII.IIISINICI` 6 CIPU, IVI: NIA CfIMM11NIttItAN: OAI CUAIMVNIiY IN.AN; OM OL:XCIIII'IIIIN: \VIUI!N O'I'AY VALLEY ItUAII'10 A f-LAN[ 1'IUMAItV AICI'LItIAL SI'RUGr ALONG'I'111i IirON l'AGG UI' TI IG LXISPING "O'1'AY RIO IIUSINISS I'AItK", AI'I'ItD%IMATLLY i,PoO LINEdII Plil'r (ASSUMING TIIATUNI,Y I2 WIDIII WIDIiNINU IS RIiQUIILL01 AND AI'1'Il0%IMn1tiLY Mq LIN1iNl RUT NUII'IIIUItI,Y UP UI'AY RID VISTA DUSINUSS PA1lK'IU l'IIL INILIVSCCI'ION OI' U'I'AY VALLEY IIOAU (DU LINLAII I°llI' UI'"1IIIS 9UU LINRAII I:lli IF I'itW MMMIiD A5 A IIIUUGR CROSSING OVEII'I'llli O'I'AY ItIVEIt AND IS A SEI'AIIATG 19lUlEC I ). .Illti i'IPICA'IION: '1IIL I'IIANSPUII'I'A'I'ION LLUMIJfI' Of"fill U1'AY MUSH WMMUNITY PLAN SUGOLSI'S 1'1IA'I' AN INTEGIIA'I LD'11tANSl'OIIfA'I'IUN Nifl'WUItK \VILI. I'ItUVIUIi MUDILI'I Y ANU ACCR5S1R11.1I'Y t'O'rllli IIISIUENCESAND UUSINIiS51i5 OP'I'IIL CUMMUNI'IY.'I'IIIS i'ItDIICr IS IIUQUIIIIU AND 14 CUNSIS I'GNI' WI"1'll T411i COMMUNITY PLAN. N 1 EUNUINf.ISXUCN: N N NO I El: SLIiCOMI'ANIUN I'IWl[Ci'S 'r3 L2,'I'dl 1, ANU'1'-illl SCiil':UIILK: DI!XIGN AND CUNS'1'IiUCI'IUN PY 2UIl-2@I EGl~inli: LANKY V,\N\VNY t[L[iIWIF.: lelvl)IIVwI X9 I.uAl1.: IwnuNmNnOeY! 'tiWNLN"''i. PlIN11NC A'I"li%PFNIIIU:': CVNTAI'PM101 lY1gN\"': !, hY3001 V. '!N'1'Y3M1U941. JN'I'YMIIIIS f,l'V ]011": NAWIIrv) 5]?4J.W4 411 A.UAIIe) 5].146.W4 UnI41wl Nllr (s) am CIIY i)CVAWU CALlAANS s]nnl lI1 NE% IMII fN 1-'I'UI'.\Y415'i -I4,1W.0.tY PVi10.W S4 1~AIA1 /VN iIliYWF iI^SO eJl W L'~(I:L 1115 R.GSI`=11}?y'IA. '16Y4FCI4150 bi0U11(9fi~N1 FY OI4.Gf xd01:YY 10141 •alA'IBSI1111 ViY3A 19 C: hY20304''aKI`Y:30311t IE'M1L9Yfirt I'I Y'+0~'A%Y FlIA~UAIIrvI SdW,444 SWOOIN 51,19JpU0 d'IIAUAIIe) 5191 ),W4 1195]0114 IN11f (xl 191Y 1e) cnN c1TY INi VI5N1U cnl.Txnw SLATE UTIIIP IINIIIF.N ' l'M U00"11t193]WOII{iya5195]WO VN(fiIUP"eR4ID N'n.AmtlfO 1 iIl J ' i'1'IYFACYL' AI'll,YRSW IW0 16 SU : .G35WOW 41 i SeA L PIINUiNU SONIICEti __ ~ T-21.1 ~ r 111 -`~(~ 1~ la~,lr h~ I ,n ,,.,w, rr ~, Fl A„AN", ,.. /Ijl~ t ~y. 1 \ h'} - I `~ ~ V \` Ilan ~. `~ runlGl u+. ~ _._._..___ -..___. -._._- _~.--~I---... _..._.L._.__ _ 4 CUNJAI:I; LAM1M1Y VAN\VkY ~ I41 LY11U10i: 1b1v1111.1wf I.AIAl1.: NPM6dImdWSO X8 oN y nJm„. r:,nur rNnrelJ re:,xFrmy rhNl n' zum CI"fY OP SAN DIiiGO FACILI'I'lL5 FINANCING PROGRAIvt 'I'IILL': NFW IIF.111'I'AGLIIOAD (Oluy Valley llonA)-1)riJpe 1'ItUJECf: '1'31.1 U111'A rtrAll!NT: fNOINCL111NO AND CAI'RAI. I'IIUILCrS COUNCII. UISTIICT'. R CII': NIA COMMUNITY PLAN: OM UKSCiIi I`I'ION: CGNS I IIUCI'ION OI' NL\V IIGIIITAGC ItDAU ^ItlDUli, A J]O POOP, fi~ V:NIi nU1DGU (112"WID[I ACRUSS'I'IIL O'fAY IlIV1iR. Jus'rlr•ICA~norv: 'I'IIR'fIIANSI'Oil'1'AfION ULRMFNI' OPI'I Ili OrAY MftiA CUMMIINII'V PLAN SUGGRS'I S'I'IlA'I' AN IN'rGGItA'I'RU'11IANS1'Olll'A"PION NEl'WUIIK HILL PItOVIDG hlUilllPl'Y ANU ACC'IiS511111.1'I'Y l U'I'lIC ItCSIIJUNCIiSAND UUSINI3SRS OF fIIG CUMMIINI'I'Y. 1'i115 I'it01ECl' IS ItCVUI1tfD AND IS CUNS6'I'RN'I' WI'RI I'llli COMMUNI I'Y 1'VSN. N 1 If11NIlING IS.l'IIRS: N w NOIL5: Sl.li COMI`ANION PIlO1RCf\ 'I'-21.1,'f-ELJ, ANU'I'~21A SCIIRDIILR: I11iSIUN,ANU CUN511WC1'ION AIIL AN'I ICIPA'ItiD: RV xoA-1UEU SUVinG1. I.AI:xv VAl:rvuv T:gNIXn'm.IeIVISU-1mf I.n:AIl-lrnnaMlgUewae+ UI o. ~' ul,,. rlmr<~ rxl~u;nXr ro,r:,NNIN; vxlxl rr mn> C1TY OF SAN DIEGO FAC1LPf~?S FINANCING PROGRAM nrl,r;: Nn\v xnnlrncl: noon talny vllnmy nmxu)-nduRX OIiPARIFIlN'r; lNIIINr.LXINU ANU CAPITAL I'llUll!CR CII'ur1UI: NIA 19lOlItcL 'f31.a GbUNC11. 1113fnIf P. CUMIIUNI'IV I'I.AN; (IM dRU111lUG9J _JIINnIN1.Ua "'U%PLM)kUL. [CON4A1'NIOn r cRY RppEfili„ 1 PYIpW J 'IA'6Y i0p9 'L}EY:OIOR. r.A YYiSpIIaA RIIA~OxNrvl Sf}M,WO ~mnuARO fLMA9m ATF Irv) 1UIF (el con crrr nnvrsmm G'A LIXANS STATI: onmx UNIIIEN A'rOTAII(fi i O:AR.51RgN Mq'III'r413 SU blt',YIgiXWIdN Arv.t-YLYSp UM1 YpNJ A'NI fIM'A(U(IUpIIW U aAh5]LV.W L''kS9.Nl{III SWIIfUIP 1VVVY 1pIM1f ~:'A'~IYID1114 lia 4YiplE~e akfY.inl4sld 1, RY ipxn IYd:RV MIIF U,NA1N11@M1II ,tIY]px].li NAUMIw) SI.6W.pp0 f1.6Wppp A,696,pW I'I1Ai)lllel fIp)x,XnO 31,06V,Ip0 t1.1pp,XOp 1'I111'Iwl I'UI4lo1 Clm crrr Ix vlAnnn fAI:IMNS <rAfk U1'IILX UNINkN fArllfAl)FI M 63p 41' ILY`UU.316W OpII JEC,'l u"ff9poJp eU^ISS,fL3UW N'l fi-0W WII Alll"16 hvSp .,'LrtlIIb1UH45p l^"1 LM4!.l}fp -~- -yllNl)INC SOIIIICRS ,,, S wF .I ~~ ~ II \~„s ~. - - T-21.2 ,4 ~•'J)u~ •`.I,( I ^^tt~~ AJ ~~'I l ~ ~} UI ~f {~~ YY~[n1 9R ~ i ~~~Jlfi flillllll f t Ir~ld'¢ _N, g IRI~II ~ EyV .._~ ggvs . ~ ~ 1 Ir \ P\ I^I / 5 ~ __.._ ~_1\1 ......~ 1 o11tACr. Lnnly vnxwl.v iEl.l!MXx111.IbN11 R'fXUF LI.InII.: bAXYSCB!gASmgv ')D Glrlr AY6,N r1du. r lounl." ralNNOn1q rmrl rr zrmY CITY OP SAN DIFGO FACILITICS FINANCING PROGRAM 'I'll'LL: NF\V IIKIII'1'AGGItUAU (GNIY VnIIey ltanA)-CUtlrnl 1'IIUJ6Cf: 'I'-21J ULI'AliIMLNT: F:11U1lILFNINII AM]CAI'I fA 1. l'ItOIL[t3 CYIVNCII. UISIRICT F CII". fYbllb Cnb1Al11NIiV PLAN: UM UPSCItII'1'ION: CONS I RUCT NIiW IILIIII'AUIi ROAD IIIOM 1'IIL YOIN'111iIlLV'fliltMIN11S 01r COMI'ANIUN 1`ItOIUCI')'~21.1'I'UA IN)INf 5,000 PGI I' SOU1'll AS A UiANU 1'IIIMAIIY AKTIi1l1Al.5fKlila'. 1'I I ITS I'It011'.CT CONSISTS Of OI'GN 51'ACU; IIRGINS A"f UfAY NO UUSINISS NARK ON )'I IN NOIffII ANU'I'LIIMINA'1tiS AI"fIIL'I'UI' OFt'llli CANYON IN 111E YUU'fll.) J11Y'1'IPICA'1'IUN: '1'1IG'IIIANSP01(fAfION IiLUMINT GI:'Dlli O'fAY MESA CUMMUNI'fY PLAN SUOGI'S'I'S l'IlA'f AN IN'I IiUItA'1'UU'1'11ANSPUIf1'A'f1UN NU'1'WURK WILL 1'1tOVIDC XIUU11.1'1"Y ANU ACCRSSIUILII'Y"I'O RUSIDIiNC&S AND IIIISINLSSPS UP'1'IIC CUMMUNI IV. '1'111Y I'ItO1RCf IS IIIiQUIIlUO AND IS CONSIYT[Nf W fl'N'1'I Ili COMMUNI'T'Y PLAN. J N PlIN111NO 15SU1+Y: N A2-I,ANIi I'UlttlON Of TNIS PROIIiCI'NAS CUNS11tI1CIliU IN OIIDRIIlO YCItVU'111R ~ ItUUINIlUOU RIDGNSUDUIYIYION ANU WAY ItI:IMUU1lS1iD IIYIUA CItI;UfIS. NU'I 11. SRR COMI`ANIUN I'IlO1LC15 I-ELI,'I'8L2, AND'I'-21.A scuenuls: ULSIGN ANU CONSl1tUCYlON Altl? AN'I'ICII'A'fRU IR lUIGI'O PY 3XID. IWIIINIIOODIIINGUIl1i1MIlUIIYLMP.NI'1'N11C1'IUN OCCIIIl1UiD IY 21101800'1. CONfAt'S:IAXnY VM1NSVnY l1iLfPIIn1R: p1Y1111.1m5 CLIn11.:1NYIS1Niu1dY N) Olnl' Alrm 1'nLltr himililies I')nnnrlny I'Inn PI'?l101 CI'T'Y OF SAN UIFGO I~ACII,I'I'IIiS I+INANCING PROGRAM '1'1'1'1.1:: NF:\\'llRlll'fAGR ltll,\Dµ>my Valley ltnndl-C<no'nl I n!I'AII'ITIrN'r'. IN111N1!I'XIIIl1 ANI5l'AI'I1A1. 1'IlCllli('li l'IIIINCII.IILV"1'1111'1': f l:ll'ni lOn; 11.61:0 IYlAIF111X111'1'I.AH: 11A1 YIX11111L:IF: MINI INI !',:kI TI I1NVl11'.,4.L'!p(Xi\I I.ROI ii.=i l!NIIMII It 'Y ]XUX',V"~yll\ q91 ih:liY'.:111111X 1 X1 Ill lk,;{, I IIAAMNxI SI,X61~511 1111'1.!bE fll..\iIAIIN efrNS SI.YAASIb l su,rzJ See,eJ Ianr ml Iou'nl SnSnYn SXXSpw Ialo-lmuwlYx nm,aX S1oLN6 role lwl fn sun. aebnm vnunu cv:InnnX v rrcn: nnnal VNI .N kLL. f11Y'AIIuI'~i-[.51]}6[:115 h11 Nr.{a SAX IN3 .krU Fla 3X.f`VN~r.X lla rU'RI500Vip1L1 UU "H. ii'•`.irP1N tLiM1I V+Sn nffiLSIX9lriL JI'Vr10166H1 li 1\1 111 i 41fiiFY IIIXrILr 1 I'Y]Ip4u .11\: R11 IINl~r,l,ll\ II IA3 ~ SIiNRNl9 I . f@HIIRFk I'IIAVFNxI S1,lSl,l1V 51.6M1I,Y65 SIIA116Xe1 Tty]3 ))J SE,011..A15 1'NII'Inl I'nlF Ul vnn.oul•u'x IN11Y IwI Ll1 m:vnunn 1•nLrX,eu , Nccrf annx 1 nnn,u 'TAIN1YR.SIIA JdN YN M1Lil K11~IIUJ~lFq 3111(FYXS1lEdL.nrPob FN.1(5?blX.rll}iJNulllY di SNNiG~vIS; ,N M$A 14.5 J11 IUNUIN( 4111111(.11 ) !~ ~ r l \ 1~ __- / :)11 T-21 3 ' ~ , . ., ~ 111 n1(Y~~,.1 q,t % i I ~~ ~ ' - .. J~v10111[gll ~ ~~9 ~.~ "+.rN ` . - ~ lum:nu I L~~ ~ . __ I \... ' L. _ _I u \~ m lNIr1u 1.1.nN0\Sn1:N115 1r11J rnYlll. rul nfrr ruo r!binrl.:Irmmrm Ff'ndmnpm 11 ATl"HCI-14VtENT RESOLUTION N0.2011-221 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 yeaz by the Otay River and subsequently widened to accommodate peak event traffic; and WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista's General Plan indicates that Heritage Road will ultimately be a 6-lane major arterial and the existing bridge will not accommodate expected traffic resulting from the future planned development of eastern Chula Vista and Otay Mesa; and WHEREAS, the existing bridge does not accommodate projected traffic, pedestrians, cyclists or a 50 year storm event; 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 attached agreement allows Moffatt & Nichol, a qualified consultant, to evaluate design alternatives and to provide environmental services, preliminary engineering design, final design, and construction support; and CALTRANS has completed aPre-Awazd Audit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the agreement, between Moffatt & Nichol and the City of Chula Vista to provide professional engineering services related to the replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge. 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 12-25 Resolution No. 2011-221 Page 2 Presented by Approved as to form by AYES: Councilmembers: Aguilaz, Bensoussan and Cox NAYS: Councilmembers: None ABSENT: Councilmembers: Castaneda and Ramirz ATTEST: ~ ~ ~~ Donna R. Norris, CM ,City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CITY OF CHULA VISTA Cheryl Cox, Mayor I, Donna R. Norris, City Clerk of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2011-221 was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council at a regulaz meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 15th day ofNovember 2011. Executed this 15th day ofNovember 2011. ~~ ~ ~~ Donna R. Norris, MC, City Clerk 12-26 PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, California, this 15th day ofNovember 2011 by the following vote: a-RAC~~rr 5 AGREEMENT BETWEEN CTTY 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 less 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, Pazagraph 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 ofwork; and, WHEREAS, Consultant watrants 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. Neat Page Starts Obligatory Provisions.] 12-27 a0f./- o?e?/ 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. Scone of Work and Schedule. In performing and deliverine 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 sepazate fixed fee is otherwise agreed upon. All compensation for Additional Services shall be paid monthly as billed. 3. Standazd 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 standazd of caze ordinazily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similaz conditions and in similaz 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 standazds, or the willful misconduct of the Consultant or its subconR~actors. Page 2 Two Parry Agreement Between Ciry ojChu[a Vesta mtdMojjatand Ncho[ to CondudtLe'Prefirninary Engineering and Final Des[gnjor the Reptaaanent ojtbe Heritage Road Bridge (STM364)" 12-28 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 conhavention 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 ]aw, 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. 1. 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 1. General. Consultant must procure and maintain, during the period of performance of this Agreement, and for twelve months after completion, policies of in~,rnnee 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 Forrn 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. Page 3 Twp Parry~4greenwn Between City pjClrala Yrsm and hrojfat rmd Nd~pl Po Candrrct the "Pre&ninary Engineering and F+nat Design fpr the Replacement pjtlie Heritage Road Bridge (STM364J" 12-29 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. Lf 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 Projectllocation 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 Liabiliiy or Errors & Omissions Liabili 4. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self=insured retentions must be declazed to and approved by the City. At the opfion 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 fmancial guazantee 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 azising 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 famished 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 ProductslCompleted 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 rrvo Party Agreanent Bet,ueen City of Clw(a Vuta artd Mojfat and Nrhol to Conduct the °1'relirrdnary Engineering and Fural Derign jar the Replacement ojthe Heritage Road Bridge (SrDf364)" 12-30 and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City; its officers, officials,' einp]oyees, 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 addifional 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. )f 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 yeazs after completion of the work required by the Agreement. a 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 ieview. 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 ho less than A X. Exception may be made for the State Compensation Fund when not specifically rated. 8. Verificarion of Coverage. Consultant shall famish the City with original certificates and amendatory endorsements effecting coverage required by Section LC. 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 Pary Agreement Between City oJClada Yuta and Moffat andNuAol to CanduC tLe "Prelindnary Engin¢enng msd Final Design for tfie Replacement ,oJthe Heritage Raad Bridge (STM364J" 12-31 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 famish _. _. separate certificates and endorsements for each subconsultant. All coverage for subconsultants is subject to all of the requirements included in these specificafions. 10. Not a Limitation of Other Obheations. Insurance provisions under this Article shall not be construed to limit the Consultant's obligations tinder this Agreement, including Indemnity. D. Security for Performance 1. Performance Bond. In the event that Exhibit A, at Pazagraph 18; indicates the need for Consultant to provide a Performance Bond (indicated by a check mark in the paeenthetical space immediately preceding the subpazagraph entitled 'Performance Bond"), then Consultant shall provide to the City a performance bond, in the amount indicated at Exlu'bit A, Paragraph 18, in the form prescribed by the City. and by such sureties which aze authorized to transact such business in the State of California, listed as approved by the United States Department of Treasury Circulaz 570, htto'//www.fms.treas.¢ov/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 Pazagraph 18, indicates the need for Consultant to provide a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mazk 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 satisfactoi to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Letter of Credit," in Exhibit A, Pazagraph 18. 3. Other Security. In the event that Exhibit A, at Pazagraph 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 paeenthetical space immediately preceding the Page 6 Two Party Agreement Ba,veen City ajChula Iruta andDloffat andNcbol to Conduct die °PreGrrdnary Engineering aadFtna! Design jor tLe Replaeernent aJd~eHeritageRaadBridge(SriY1369)" 12-32 subpazagraph 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 Attainey. 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 regulazly 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. Followine Receipt bf Billine. Upon receipt of a properly prepared bill from Consultant, submitted to the City as indicated in Exhibit A, Pazagraph 17, but in no event more frequently than monthly, on the day of the period indicated in Exhibit A, Pazagraph 17, City shall compensate Consultant for all services rendered by Consultant according to the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit A, Pazagraph 10, adjacent to the governing compensation relationship indicated by a "checkmazk" next to the appropriate arrangement, subject to the requirements for retention set forth in Pazagraph 18 of Exhibit A, and shall compensate Consultant for out of pocket expenses as provided in Exhibit A, Pazagraph 11. 2. Supnortine 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 Consultants negligence, errors, or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement has resulted in expense to City greater than would have Page 7 Tiro Parry Agreemertl BetweenCiry ofCTu+la Vista mtdbfttfjat andNtrAa! to Candart tLe "Prelirrd+tary Engineering aadFiaal Desigrt jet AieRep/aaement oftLe Heritage Raad Bridge (Sr.YI364)" 12-33 resulted if there were no such negligence, errors, omissions, Consultant shaA 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 fmal determination about the eligibIlity of any cost until the final payment has been made on the Project or the results of an audit of the Project requested by the City has been completed, whichever occurslatest.;.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 prodded' 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 aze 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., aze subject to repayment by Consultant to the Local Agency. ARTICLE III. ETHICS A. Financial Interests of Consultant i. Consultant is Desienated 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 Page 8 Tivo Parry Agreement Between City ajQwla {rota and hfojfat and Nicha! to Conduct the "PreRnrinary Engineeriag and Fiaa! Derign jor the Rep(acenant ajthe Heritage Raad Bridge (Sr7Yf364J" _ " 12-34 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 aze specified in Paragraph 14 of Exhibit A, or if none are specified, then as determined by the City Attorney. 2. No Participation in Decision. Regazdless 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 blow Consultant has a fmancial interest other than the compensation promised by this Agreement. 3. Seazch 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 Conflictine Interests. Regazdless of .whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further 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. Dutv to Advise of Conflictine Interests. Regazdless 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. ~ecific VTarranties Aeainst 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, dtrectly or indirectly, whatsoever in any property which maybe the subject matter of the Defined Services, or in any property within 2 radial miles from the exterior boundazies 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 rewazd 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 Parry Agreement Between CCfy of Cktda Ptsta and Moffat andMdioC to Cand+rct tGe "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for Oie Repfatemetd ojtlie Heritage Raad Bridge (STM364)" 12-35 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 im 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, Pazagraph 13. 1. Estiinatine 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 amounf of damages resulting -from de]ay in performance. The parties have used their judgment to arrive at a reasonable amount to compensate for delay. ` 2. Amount of Penalri. Failure to complete the Defined Services within the allotted time period specified in this Agreement shall result in the following penalty: For each consecutive calendaz 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. Reouest 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 embazgoes, 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 Administtator, or designee, in writing of that fact within ten calendaz 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 Trvo Parry.lgreemer+tBenveen Ciry ofCGula YuYa andMoJjat mrdNthol to Conduct du"PreG+tinary Engineering and Final Destgnjor pu Replaeeme+rt afO~e Berttge Road Badge (ST7M136J)" - - 12-36 any manner azising 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 and expenses (including without limitations, attorneys fees) azising 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. Desien 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 Becton 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.1. 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 casts incurred by each of them, subject to the limitations in Sections A.l. and A.2. 4. Insurance Proceeds. Consultart's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents, and/or volunteers. 5. Declarations. Consultant's obligafions 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. r~vo PartyAgreemu>t Between City of CLula Yata andMoffm mid N+diol to Conduct the "Preluninary Engineering mid Ftnai Design for theReplacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STh1364)" Page. l I 12-37 7. Survival. Consultant's obligations under Article V shall survive the termination of this Agreement. ARTICLE VI. TERMMnVVATlONOFAGREEMENT 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 prepazed by :Consultant shall, at the; option. of the City, become the property of the.City, and Consultant shall be entitled to receivejust 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 finished and unfinished 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 pazagraph, 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, coniracts,,and supporting materials relating to the Project as City may require. B. Aecess 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. Page 12 Tivo Party Agreement Bebveer+Ciy of Q+afa Vista and Mojfat and Nlakol [o Cond++c[tHe`Preliadnary Engineering and F+nal Design farBie Beplatetntnt ojHse Heritage Road Bridge (STdf364)" " 12-38 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 aze 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 Ciry 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 aze 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 5ubconsultants". B. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and -Use of iViaterial. 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 maybe 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 Trvo Parry Agreement Bu,veen City of Chula Ynta mtdMaffat artdNuliol to Conduct the "Prelimuiaq~ Engutee»ng a+ul Final Design jortheReplacement ojtGe Heritage Road Bridge (STM364)" 12-39 entitled to any benefits to which City employees. aze 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 regazd 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 othewi e., Consultant shall have-no authority, express or implied, to bind City or iu members, agents, or employees, to any obligation whatsoever, unless expressly provided in this Agreement. 2. No Obliea6ons 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 party contract at any tier, City shall have no obligation or liability to any person or entity not a party to this Agreement. D. Administrative CIaims "Requirements and Procedures. No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this Agreement, against City unless a claim has firstbeen 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 hereia, 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 parry designates the individuals ("Contract Administrators") indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 12, as that party's contract administrator who is authorized by the party 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 azising 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. F3. Statement of Costs. In the event that Consultant prepazes 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 Tiva Parry Agreement Between City oJCbufa Yuta mtdMoffat mid Nrcho! to Conduct the Prelindnary Enguieering mid FL~a(Designjar the Replacenatrt of the Fleritage Road Bridge (STM364)" Page 14 " 12-40 the numbers and cost in dollaz 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 mazked, 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. J. 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 parry shall be deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served of 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 dischazge 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 acfion 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:~SurveylSlN Projects~SIM364 (HIt Bridge)\Contract AdminlPre-Award AudiflConvsultant Agrr_meut 10.28-I I.doc) (End of page. Neat page is signature page.) Page 15 Two Parry'/greena:nt Benueers City afChuta Vista and Moffat andNdiai fa Condna flee °Prelindnary Engineerurg and Final Design for Oie Replacnnertl njd~e Heritage Road Bridge (STM36A)" 12-41 Signature Page to AGREEMENT BETWEEN CTTY OF CHULA VISTA AND MOFFATT AND NICHOL TO PROVIDE PRELIlVIINARY 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: /~ d~- ~~ Attest: Donna Norris, City Approved Glen Dated: < < / zZ / i i City of Chula Vista - By: ~ Rrchar A. plans, Director of Public Worlcs/City Engineer Moffatt & Nichol By: ~9`" VaQ E~ibit List to Agreement (~ Exhibit A (~ Exhibit B (~ Exhibit C By: ~c.,~.n1 ~. AR.-co~..l v • P. Page 16 Two Furry Agreen+ent Between Gry ojCfrulrt Vvta m+d Maffat and74ic1io! roCardnctdie PreGrninaryEngineeringandFina[DeagnfortheReplacement ojd+e Heritage Road Bridge (STiN364)" ' 12-42 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 Cal'rFomia ()Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, a political subdivision of the State of California ()Industrial Development Authority of the City of Chufa Vista, a ()Other. ("City' 3. Place of Business for City: City of Chufa Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 4. Consultant: Moffatt & Nichol 5. Business Form of Consultant: ( )Sole Proprietorship ()Partnership OCorporation 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-fi055 a Insert business form] 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 Agreement Benvacn Cuy ojCGufa Yrsfn andbfafjal andNic6o1 Yo Condnrx Uie "Preli+ntnary Engineering and Fina! Design jor tlu: Replacement of[Ge Heritage Rood Bridge (SThf3fii)° ... 12-43 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 ARemafiJes Evaluation, Project Report, Envirohmental Dbcumehtation,`~sual Memo, Topographical Mapping, Geotechnioal Investigation, Hydraulic Studies, Bridge Type Selection, Preliminary Water Quality Technical Studies and 30°/a Design Details. The project will be developed in English Units and will be incompliance with Caltrans design criteria, memos and specifications, which are current as of notice to proceed for Task 1. 1.1 ProjectManagement 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 Vsta 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 Consulfani Team Descri Lion M&N DNA BRG LLG Chang EMI Aguirre KTU+A SRA Kick-OffMeefin X X X X X X X X X Team Mee6n #i X X Team Meetin #2 X X Team Meetin #3 X X _ Team Meefin #4 X X Team Mee6n #5 X X Team Meettn #6 X X Team Mee6n #7 X ~ X Team Mee6n #8 X X X Team Mee6n #9 X X Team Mee6n #10 X X Team Mee6n #li X X Team Mee6n #12 X X Team Meetin #13 X X Team Meefin #14 X X Team Mee6n #15 X X Team Mee6n #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 Page 18 Trvo Parry.4greement BeEVeen Cdy oJChula rrista andMaffat midNtrlial to Conduct t/re "PretiminaryEngineering and Fu+a! Design jor the Replaee+nerst oftLe Berilage Road Bridge (STM36!)" 12-44 In addition to regularly scheduled team meetings, review focus meetings will be required with Caltrans to develop an appropriate project aftemative. Up to three formal Caltrans coordination meetings are assumed and budgeted during thistask. Additional informal meetings may be required betvdeen 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 cbordinatiori may be required between the City Staff, the Consultant Team and the Developer's Gonsultants 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 aone-foot contour interval, will be obtained for this area. The area is defined 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 maybe disturbed by the work. Street centerline and centerline stationing will be established to an accuracy offive-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 Parry Agreement Bebveen City ojChutn Yuta and Moj(at and Nd~ol to Conduct the PreRminaryEngirteerurg and Final Design jar the Replacement ojthe Heritage Road Bridge (STM364p' 12-45 Channel cross sections will be completed approximately 100' down stream of the existing bridge and 500' upstream 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 Piahimetrics will be obtained from the aerial and wild 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 ail 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 HECIRAs Analysis A preliminary HEC/RAS analysis will be performed with and without the existing bridge and the new bridge upstream, 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 identfied 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 a 5D-yr. 12,000 cfs a 100-yr: 22,000 cfs 1.7.2 Preliminary Hydraulic Evaluatioh 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: o Bridge waterway opening .Proper location of the bridge Page 20 7wa Party Agreement Between Ctry ojGmla Vvta and MoJjat andNcliol to Corsdact the "Prelimarary Eagirseervrg and Fnal Design jar tLe Replacement afthe Heritage Road Bridge (SThf36!)" 12-46 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 backv/ater impacts will be evaluated and mitigated whenever possible. 1.7.4 Compilation of Hydraulic Models Three hydraulic models will be compiled; fhey 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. . Gorrected Effective Model: Thls 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 (PFI2), A Preliminary Foundation Report (PFR) will be prepared based on a review of available studies and documentation of previous subsurface investigations in th!=vicinity of the Heritage Road Bridge. The PFR will present general geology and subsurface conditions, seismic evaluation, liquefaction, scour, corrosion, preliminary fioundation recommendations and recommended adtlitional 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 haze~ds 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 Twa Pmty.igreen¢nl Between City of Chula Yuta and ~Yfoffat andN+ehol ~lo Conduct the 'PreGminmp Engineering mid Final Design jor IheReplaeemenl of the Heritage Raad Brfdge {STht364)" 12-47 1.9 Traffic Anarysis Traffic analysis will be completed for the intersections of Heritage Road at Mairi Street and of Entertainment Circle. The analysis will include studies for the current traffic volumes, openirig day, assumed as 2015, and the horizon year, assumed to be 2035. A-total of five (5) projections will be pertormed. 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: {2D35) conditions. . -;__ The intersections listed below will be counted to obtain existing baseline - traffic volume data: a MainStreet/Heritage Road a Heritage Road/Entertainment Circle a Hertage RoadlAvenida 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: a 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 Mairi 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 impadts of the tempdrary reduction of lanes ,during construction will be analyzed.. The traffic analysis witl be for typidai 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 contaih 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: a 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 Pave 22 Two Pm'ry' Agreemen[ Between City of Chula Yuta and Moffat andN+ahol to Canduci Ore "Prelirrdnary Engineering and Final Design jor the Replacement oJdae Aeritage Road Bridge (S77d364)" 12-48 • Cursory review by SANDAG, Caltrans and/or City of San Diego staff- . two (2) submittals ,. 1.10 Aftemstives 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 Altematives Development In orderto develop a consensus on the baseline project, two altematives will be developed to approximately a 10% design level and studied. Plans will include a bridge general plan and a roadway plan and profile sheet Up td three replacement altematives will be developed. These may include: • Replace with a 6-lane-bridge with 8' shoulders and 5' sidewalks, Width = 1.18': Demo the existing bridge and re- aligntraffic to new structure {off-alignment). • Replace with a 4-lane bridge with 8' shoulders, 4' striped median arid 5' sidewa[ks, Width =.82' Demo the existing bridge and re-align trafric 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. 1.1D.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 Perrormance • 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 Parry Agreement Between City of Chula Y~s7a mid Moffm and N~chal rtiCondnathe'PreliminmyEngineeringandFinalDesignfartLeReplaeunent of die Heritage Raad Bridge (STM36lJ" 12-49 o Pedestrian and Bicycle Connectivity o Ability to Accommodate future roadway extension a Ability to Accommodate Future Multiuse Trail The City will compile the technical infiormation and develop a ranking matrix for each alternative. We will review acid comment on the Citys 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 Vsta. 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 HECIRAs Analysis (Hydraulic Study) A HEC/RAS analysis shall be performed for the additional above alternatives. The results of this analysis shall provide water surface elevations at the bridge and upstream for the 2, 10, 5D and 100-year events along with the corresponding filow volume and velocities. The hydraulic analysis shaltalso be completed for any storm drain facil'~ties 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 controls will be examined in order to develop planning level an accurate cost estimate. 1.1 i.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 Page 24 Two FartyAgreement Behveen City ajChnta Gists andMajjat audNrliof fa Conduct tl+e Preiindnmy Engineering and F:nd Design jor die Replacerreern ojOie Heritage Road Brtdge (STiYt369)" - _ 12-50 conceptual level. Sketches and rough computer models will be provided with enough detail such that visual simulations can be developed. 1.11.4 Visual Simulations Visual simulations wi[I 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 Envirdnmental 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 thrgugh the jurisdictional agencies. These are assumed to include the Cal'rfomia 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 ezisting bridge and along the existing roadways including Heritage Road, Main Street and the adjacent quany access road. 1.13 Geotechnical Investigation Geotechnical field investigation and !ab testing will be completed to support the bridge and 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 prdpose to do all. drilling along the existing roadways and within the un-vegetated area to the north ofi 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 (g) 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 will 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 P¢rryAgreernent Between City ¢f Chu(a vista and FI¢ffat mrd Nrchol t¢ C¢ndnc[!he'Pre[inun¢ryEngineering ¢nd Fural Derign far r/ie Reptacemer+t of Die Heritage Road Bridge (SThf364)" 12-51 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 typeselection report will be developed to forma['rze the bridge type, materials, span arrangement, constraints, foundations, aesthesis and construction methods. This document will be prepared in accordance with Caltrans Memo to Designers 1-2g. 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 alignmenf as determined in the Project Report. Items that will be addressed inthis report include other viable bridge types, Page 26 riva Parry Agreement Bebveen City •fGmla Y'stn andMojfa[m+dNcl+ol to Conduct tLe "Pretinduary Engixeering attd Fina[ Design for 11~e Reprocement •jO+e Heritage Raad Bridge (Srhf3b~° 12-52 abutment and bent layout, utility issues, maintenance issues, aesthetic issues and construction methods. This report vuill reference. the preliminary construction cost estimates for aher bridge types and bridge configuratidns studied for this project. The Type Selection Report wilt be made available to the City and Caltrans. We v~ill attend an informal Type Selection Meeting at the City of Chula Vista..lf 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 6e provided to the City. 1.15 Hydrology, Hydraulics and Scour A final HEC/RAS 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 10D-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 wilt also be completed for any storm drain facilities affected by the pfdject. A final Hydrology, Hydraulics and Scour analysis report will be prepared to document the studies. 1.15.1 Hydraulic Evalua#ion 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 Hydrologtc 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 Adrift 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 Tw¢ PmYy Agrennent Bmveen City ¢fCh¢!¢ Yu?¢ and Moffat andN:dro! Yo C¢nduct 14e °Pretirtinary Engineering and Final Derign f¢r Uie Replacement ¢JtBe Hait¢ge R¢¢d Bridge (SThI364)" 12-53 1.15.6 Bridge Scour Analysis Potential river chahnel changes will be determined to provide the necessary information for bridge design. The following will be performed: e Finalize the hydraulic geometries of the channel and the bridge based on the fluvial study Determihe the general and local scour for the design ofi bridge piers and abutments o 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 o Plotted 100-yr water-surFace and channel-bed profiles of channel reach for the as-built conditions a Plots of sample cross sections m Maps for the updated HEC-2 study showing the new floodplain boundaries and floodway a Inpuf/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. o Responses to questions from FEMA and Baker Engineers during the review process o Making revisions and. providing additional information if requested from FEMA resulting from the review. 1.16 Preliminary Water Quality.Technical Studies Memo Page 28 Trvo Party Agreement Between Gry of CJu<!a Yssta andMaffat andNc7iof to CandnR the aPrefirrdrrary Engineering and Finai Design far the Replacemvrt oj[!~e Heritage Road Bridge rSTM364)' 12-54 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} Canstruction General Permit# CAS000002, the NPDES Municipal Permit # CAS0108758, and the City pf 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 list, 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 engineers 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 Z. 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. Recommendationsthat could change the SR will beformal'¢ed 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 Replacementvs. Rehabilitation Lefler 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 Trvo Party Re een+ern Between Ciry oJC6ula Ytsta arurhloffa[ and Nc1+o! ~to Conduct flu' "Prelindnary Engineering and Fatal Design for Ure Replaeamenl. offfie Heritage Roab Bridge (STM364)" ,_. - - 12-55 replacing the bridge is the best option. 1.19 NEPA I CEQA Environmental Documentaton The following scope of work is based on the assumption that a single ddcument is developed that will satisfy both CEQA and NEPA requirements. Moreover, the required technical reports will be prepared as single document unless btherwise instructed to satisfy both the NEPA federal lead agency requirements as well as the City of Chula Usta requiremen#s as -- - lead agency for CEQP.. It is further assumed for purposes ofthis scope of work, but not conclusively at this time, that the joint document will be an Initial Study (IS) pursuant to CEOA and an Environmental Assessment {EA) pursuant to NEPA. The City and Caltrans will provide a format and recent example for the EA/I5. 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 wilt 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 iri consultation with Caltrans"and will be based on all anticipated pre-construction and construction activities. B) An APE map will be developed iri 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 wilt 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 Page 30 Two PmryAgreemenl Between Gry ojGmla Ycrta andMofjat andN+cha! to Gondact the "Preliminary Er veineering and Final Derig++for the Replaeeme+d oJthe Heritage Raad Brldee (STM364J" ' 12-56 1.19.4 Technics! Studies 1.19.4.1 _ _ _ Visual Impact Assessment . We will prepare a Visual ImpacYAssessment (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: inyolYing tkie interchanges. and vicinity, and any significant visual resources. The potential visual impacts from project construction and use of the widened and/or replaced bridge wiA 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. ".Aitigation 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- frameswould be added over site photos. Detailed visual simulations will be done for the preferred project. Multiple views will 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 Environmehtal Study (NES) will be prepared consistent with U.S. Departmenf of Federal Highway requirements as implemented by Calirans: 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 lncidental'~ake (HLIT) ordinance. The tables and text vvill 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 mi#igation 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: Pa;e 31 7wa Party A;reemenrBepv¢en City ojC(mla Vrsta and Moffat and Nichol 'fo Conduct the 'Preliminary Engineering mtdFinal Desre~n for die Repraeenunt ofthe Heritage Ragd Bridge (STM36QJ" 12-57 o Arroyo toad and westem spadefoot toad habitat. Although nocturnal presence surveys for arroyo toad and spadefoot toad may not be needed, the biological report will need td contain an assessment of the project impact area of the Otay River watershed to defermine whether it contains suitable habitat for the arroyo,toad acid the westem spadefoo# toad. The three characteristics most commonly associated with arroyo toad breeding habRaf ihclude: 1) sandy channel substrate, 2) adjacentopan 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 toatf 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, aletter-report summarizing the survey findings would be submitted to the USFWS and CDFG o 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'iltilizing 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. a 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.. e 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 Page 32 Two PartyAgreemefd Between City ojChala Yufa andMojfat andNtd~ol to Condarl toe Preluninary Ene°ineering and FinalDengnjar the Reptatanent _ aJdie AeritgeBaad Bridge (STM364)° 12-58 medium potential are not to be further considered any further, specifically those listed as threatened or endangered by the state or federal government. o 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 6e 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 Gity's MSCP Subarea Plan. e 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 orderto obtain a favorable Biological opinion. pursuant to Section 7 of the federal Endangered Species Act as may be required by the federal govemment. 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 T>vo Parry Agreement Between City ofClmta rrirt¢ andhlojjat ¢nd Nd+¢I io Candac111re "Preli+ninary Engineering m+d Fnd Design jar IHe Replacement ojfhe Heritage Road Bridge (STM36SJ" 12-59 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 Gity ofi Chula Vista Noise Gontrol 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 Storrn 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 ali project areas are treated before discharge to the river. The.WQTR shall address hydromodification and potential impacts to downstream erosion and habitaf integrity. Mitigation measures shat! 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 conform to Caltrans standards and requirements. - The results obtained from the Hydrologic/Hydrauliconalysis 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 Page 34 Two Parry Agreement Between City ofCimEa YuYa ¢+uiDf¢Jfat andNeli¢I W Conduct the PreBrninary Engineering ¢rul Find Derign for tLe Replacement - ¢Jd+e Seril¢e Raad Bridge (STiN364)" - ~2-60 prepare the construction documents for the final configuration of the bridge. 1.19A`8 InitiahSite 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 Stale _ _ _ _ law. The records search shall also identify business types located within the project study area that would be likely to store, transfer, or util'¢e 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 putilic ecaess 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 previdta5 uses may have resulted in hazardous waste contamination. A draft ISA shall be submitted to the City and CalVans 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 wilt 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 v~ith CEQA and NEPA conformity guidelines. Dust control requirements and abatement measures consistent with City and SCAOMD 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, wh'sch will be determine for the project. The Air Quality repor# will include an evaluation of Green House Gas emissions. Page 35 Two Party .fgreeme,u Between Clry oJChula [rota andhlajjat and Ncho! -to Conduct the "Preliminary Ene~ineering and FirtdDaigrt jor Ole Reptaenrtenf of the Heritage Read Bridge (SL1f364)" . 12-61 The Air Quality report will also determine'rf the project is regionally significant in order to determine ff 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 mite of the project area, as well as the locations of previous cultural resourcestudies. Native American Consultation: The scope of work for this task includes the follov/ing: e Request a Sacred Lands Search from the Native American Heritage Commission, and obtain a fist of Native American representatives who will be contacted e Prepare lefters to each of the above representatives o 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 oh 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. Subsurface 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 cannotbe. avoided through project design or Page 36 Twa ParryAgreenrent Between City oJChuk Yata ¢ndbloJfat and Nrchol - JaCandv#tlre`Prdirrdnary Engineering mrd Final Design jar Rre ReQlaeemen? - oJtl¢Heritage Road Bridge (STM364)" ~ - _ ~2-62 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 or historical resources is required a Historic Resource Evaluation Report {HRER) and/or Archaeological Resource Evaluation Report (HRER) 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 sehsitive paleontological resources, a Paleontological Evaluation Report (PER) and a Paleontological Mitigatioh Report (PMP) meeting Caltrans standards will be prepared. Additidnally, a report far the City of Chula Usta 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 CheckNst wilt 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 will prepare an EA/IS in conformance with the Caltrans document template dated March 2004, The-EA/IS will satisfy CEQA and NEPA Guidetiries. - 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 Part' Agreement Between City of Chu/a Ytsta artd Moffat andNcLo! io ConduU [he "Prertinti~aryEngtneerrng and Final Derign fartLeReplaeeman ojtfie ~Aerifage Road Bridge (STh1i64)" . 12-63 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 FJ~/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 6y 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 6e 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 F_PJIS. 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 concurcence with assignments: We will coordinate the preparation of responses with the Gity,~ 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. Page 38 Trv¢ Party Agreement Ben~een City oJC(ia(a Ycs(a ¢nd rvl¢ffat aadNic(ta( . w C¢ndncl fLe "Pre((ndaary Ersg(neer(ng and Finat Design jarWe Replacement - ¢jW a $ent¢ge Road Bridge (SI'M361)" 12-64 1.19.10 Prepare Finaf EA/IS We will prepare a Final F~/1S, including-revisions based on responses to comments received during-the public review period, for submittal to the City, Cattrans, and FHWA (via Caltrans) for review. As part of the process for the Final EA115, 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/1S: We wiA provide. the approved EA/IS to the City of Chula Vsfa. 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 ormeefings. 1.19.12 Environmental Permits 1.19.12.1 ACOE Nationwide Permit (404) It is assumed that the project wilt 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 Certification. 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 permst iss page 39 ~Trvo Parry Agreement Behveen City of Chula Vlsta mrdMaffa! andNtchof to Condl¢t tke "Prefindnary Engineering and Fmd Dcrign for fire Replacement ojlGeSeritageRbadBridge(SThS3G!)", _ 12-65 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 '' ' " DESCRIPTION: ~ ~ NO OF COPIES= ~_ ,~ 7 Preliminary HECIRAS Analysis (Hydraulic Study) 1 1, 1,g Preliminary Foundation Report 1 1,g Traffic Assessment Report 2 + 2 1.10.4 Preliminary Cost Estimate 1 1.11.1 HECiRAS Analysis (Hydraulic Study) 1 1.11.2 Bridge Advanced Planning Study 1 Up to 3 Visual 1.11.4 Visual Simulations Simulations 1.13 Geotechnical Investigation 1 1.14 Bridge Type Selection Report 1D 1.14 Final Type Selection Report 10 1.15.1 Hydraulic Evaluation 1 1.15 Final Hydrology Report 1 15.6 1 Bridge Scour Analysis 1 . 16 1 30%Design Submittal Plans 6-full size and 6-11x17 , size 1.16 30°/a 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 19.2 1 Area of Potential Effect (APE) Map 1 . 1.19.4.1 Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) Up to 4 Visual Simulations 1.19.4.3 Natural Environmental Study (NES) 4 1.19.4.4 Noise Study 2 4 5 19 1 Traffic Study 2 . , . Pale 40 Tivo Party Agreeme+U Beuueen City of Chula IrErta and hfaffat andNid+ol io Candun fhe "Prelimi+uuy Engineering and Fuial Design for the Replaeema+n of the Heritage Road Bridge (SM36S)" 12-66 TASK NO s ~ DESCRIPTION, `" ~r ~ , .- NO OF COPIES t., 1,19.4.6 Water Quality Technicai 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 Paleonto{ogical Identification Report (PIR) 3 1.19.5 Draft Initial Study Checklist 1 `- 1.19.6 Draft EAlIS 60 total 15 sets/4 submittals. (*) 1.19.6 EAIIS 4 (*) 1.19.7 FHWA NEPA Checklist 1 1.19.8 EARS 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 sets/4 submittals (*) 1.19.10 Notice of Determination (NOD), Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for Final EA/15 20 copies, master photo ready copy, CD 1.19.12.1 ACOE Natiohwide 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.D 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 specfic line weight or layering conventions as defined by the City of Chula Vista. We will provide submittals at the 65%, 95% and 100% levels. Pale 41 Trvo Parry Agreement Between City ojGu<la Vuta andbloffat mrdtYedra[ '[a Cortdud Oie"Prelurdnary Engureersng wd Find Derignfor Ore Bep7acenreru ofO~e Flcri[age Road Bridge (STM364)" ~2-67 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 twehle Team meetings with the City of Chula Usta 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 ConsutrantTe am Descri Lion M&N DHA BRG LLG Chang !=NlI Agufne 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 i00% 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 Deoember 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 a three-span cast-in-placed, pre-stressed concrete, hauhched box girder bridge in estimating our design Page 42 Trv¢ParryAy~renrune Between City ¢fQra[a Yu7rs ¢ndhf¢jjat andNchol t¢ Condnrt the "Preliminary Erse neerutg ¢nd Finaf Design j¢r the Replaeemern _ _ of the Herit¢ge Road Bridge (ST'h86~" 12-68 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 with 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 2.4.3. Prepare seismic analysis and design in accordance with Caltrans SDC version 1-.555, dated September 2009. 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 La out 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 ical Section 13 Su ersWcture Geomet 14 Girder La outNo.1 15 Girtier 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 Architecfurel Details 21 Structure A roach Details 22 Structure A roach Draina a Details 23 Joint Seaf Details 24 L of Test Borin s No. 1 25 Lo of Test Borin s No. 2 26 Log of Test Borings No. 3 (As-built log of test borin s) Two Parry Agreemerd Bebveen City ojQiula V$fa and Moffat and Mcho! .m Condact tlre'PreRmirmy Engureerirt,? mrd Final Design jar toe Replacen¢nt oftke Heritage Rand Bridge (STi1t364)" Pale 43 12-69 2.5 Bridge Architectural Details For the purpose of estimating the effort in this task, it has been assumed that athree-span haunched girder bridge will be designed, and that only basic aesthetic details will be developed. These basic details v/~II be limited to shaping of the girder and piers, standard form-linertextures and concrete stain. The project archftect will provide general guidance and minimal .conceptual sketches only. - - Custom aesthetic details such as shaping ofthe 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 ofthe 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 Grerdin Plan No. 7 2 Gradin Plan No. 2 3 Gradih Sections 4 Gradin Defails 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 7 Plan and Profile No. 1 2 Plan. and Profile No. 2 3 Plan and Profrle No. 3 4 Plan and Profile No. 4 5 T ical Sections 6 Details 2.8 Traffic Control Plans - Traffic control plans will include staging ofthe project assuming two lanes open at alt times (except specific closures allowed by the project spec cations). The anticipate sheet list is as follows: Page 44 Trvo Prtrty Agreement Renueen City of Chur¢ L'uta artdMofJat andNeha! to Condna! the. "Prerindnary Engineering m+d Final DesrgnJor (lie Repraeeme+n ofthe Heritage Road Bridge (SThI364J" ~2-7~ Sheet # Sheet Name 7 Traf#c Control Plan No. 1 2 Trafrrc Control Plan No. 2 3 Traffic Control Details 2.9 Signing and Striping Plans The signing and striping plan sheets wiq be prepared. The anticipate sheet list Is as follows: Sheet # Sheet Name Z Si nin and Stri in Plan _ 2 Signing and Striping 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 tb 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 Tiro Party Agreernerrt Be[ween Ciry ofClwla Yssta and hfoffat andNdio! ~to Condurl0ie'Prelirrdnary Engineering and Final Dedgnlarthe Replacement afthe Heritage Raad Bridge (S7i}f364J" ~2-~~ 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 o€ 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 Landsca a Le end 6 Landsca a Details 2.1 Z Erosion Coritrol /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 Wafer Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and post construction BMP's will be included. The anticipate sheet list is as fo{lows: 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, structuraLSource 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 Page 46 Zwa Petry Agreemerst Between City of Gmla Ycrta arsdhfajjat a+ut Ncha! - toCandr+Gthe`Pretindnary Engineering and Fmd Designjorthe Replacement - of Ou Heritage Road Bridge (5374364)" .. 12-72 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 Modifications 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 1 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 1 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 wi8 be performed. A maximum of 8 potholes have been budgeted. 2.17 QA/QC (65%, 95% and 1 OD%) An in-house QA/QC review will be performed by the Project Manager and/or the Principal-in-Charge for each design submittal, including Page 47 T~r° Parry AgreeinentBarveen City °fClmla I'uYU and hf°ffm m,d N/di°r m CanduC the `Preliminary Engineering and Fina! Design for 1Le Repracemem of tGe Heritage Road Bridge (STN36d)" 12-73 subconsultants' work, to assure a high-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°/t Design Submittal will include completed but "unchecked" bridge plans, grading, and civil, roadway plans, traffic, landscape, and lighting plans.developed to a fi5% design level of cbmpletidn. 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 fi5°/t 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 wr'~ten 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°/t 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 specifcations (index of SSP's) will be provided at the 65% submittal. Technical specifications will be prepared for the 95°/t 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. Pave 48 Twa Party Agree'nent Between City of Qeula rresta andMajfat and Mrfitl fa Candutt fke 'Prelindnary Engineering and Final Design j°r tLe Replacemetd oj6~e Heritage Road Bridge (SThf364)" - 12-74 2.22 Quantities, Estimate and Bid Item List (65%, 95°Jo & 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 ahd 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°/a PS&E Submittal We will respond to the comments made at the 65°/o 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°/a PS&E submittal will include bid ready plans, specifications and engineer's estimate based on comments received from the 95°/a submittal. The submittal will be made to the City of Chula Vista.. Upon approval of the 100% submittal, final deliverable will include a CD with the project design file(s) along with ane set of signed and stamped 24" x 36" mylars. A resident engineer's (RE) pending ftle 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. Page 49 Two Party Agreement Benoeen City of Chula Vista and+Yloffoi m+d N3cLo1 to Coadac2 ehe `Pretirrdrsary Ersg[neeriag mid Final Design jot the Rep[aeen+enl ojtlie Heritage Raad Bridge(~64J" 12-75 DELIVERABLE MATRIX TASK 2 -PRELIMINARY TASKNO y DESCRIPTION =rte-' `' ~ ~ x , -. '" `"`NO OF COPIES , ti-, t,,,y 2 3 Final Foundation _Re oit 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°/a Technical Specfcations 1 2.22 95°/a Engineer's Estimate (Quantity & Cost) 1 2.23 95°/a Pions 10 Half-size, 1 pdf 2.23 Hydraulic and Scour Calculations 1 223 Bridge Design Calculations 1 2.23 Bridge Independent Review Comments 1 2.24 95% Response to Comments 1 2.25 100% Plans 10 Hatf-size, 1 pdf 2.25 100°lo 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 RF['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 7ivo Parry Agreement Between Ciry of Clmia (vista andMo,(fat andNchol to Cortducf tl~e "Prelu+dnary Engvuering and Fiaal Design jor the Repiacetnent ofOteHeritage Raad Bridge (STM364)" ' .. ~2-~6 Page 50 B: Date for Commencement of Consultant Services: (X)-Same as Effective Date of Agreement OOther: - C. Target Dates or Time Limits for Delivery of Deliverables: Milestone Tar et Date Plzlimina En ineerin Febura 1, 2013 Environmental A royal Ma 1, 2013 65% PS&E Se tember 1, 2013 95% PS&E Janua 1, 2014 100% PS&E Aril 1, 2014 Construction Su ort 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 a Preparation of Project Report a Legal Descriptions, Easements and Right-of-Way Plats o Right-of-Way Cer#ification 10. Compensation: A. OSingle Fixed Fee Arrangement. For performance of a(I 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: ,payable as follows: Milestohe or Event or Deliverable Amount or Percent of Fixed Fee O 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 Taskis not satisfactorily Pale 51 Two Party Agreement Between City ojCGula Data arrd hfaJjat and Ntchal to Conduct tke Prelindnary Engineering and Final Design jar tJre Replacement ojtlre Heritage Road Bridge (SThf364}° 12-~~ completed. [f 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, buY 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. For the performance. of each phase or portion of the Defined Services by Consultant as are separately identified below, City shall pay the fixed #ee 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. Phase 1. 2. 3. 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 far 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 shat[ have represented in writing that said percentage of comp{etion of the phase has been perfornied by the Contractor. Page. 52 Two Party Agreement@etweep Ctry ojChnla PuYa andMaffe<midNoLol [o Conduct the"PreGnunary Engineering andFinatDesignjor lLe Repl¢cement - - ojtheHerit¢ge Road @ridge {STM364)" 12-78 The practice of malting 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 EngineeringZ $ 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 Pale 53 ?wo ParryAgreen+ent Between City of Cluala Vuffi andMoJjm and Naha! ~to Candnet the ^PreliminaryEngu+eering and Final Design jor flu Replacement - - aftlre Heritage Road Bridge (S~I36a)" 12-79 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 ~hibit B - "Cost Proposal°, by Consultant in the performance of said Services, at the Hourly Rates or amounts set,farth ih Exhibit C - "Fee Schedule° in accordance with the following terms and conditions: (1) (X)Not-to-Exceed Limitatidn 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 herelh 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 Tiua Part' AgreernentBenveen Cty ajChula Yufa and Mofjat mulNuhol ra Condac! tl~e "Prefindnmy Engineering m,d Final Design far rl,e Replacement af!l~e Heritage Road Bridge (SZilLi6~" 12-80 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 ofany 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." Page 54 Two Pmg~ Agreement Benvecn City of Qw[a Ycsta and MoJjat and McLol 4o Conduct O+e "Frelimi+tary E+a~ineerv~ and Faal Design for theRepf¢temem of Use Aerit¢ge Road Bridge {STM364)" 12-81 B. Other Direct Costs for Travel (Airfare and Rental Vehicle) The Consultant shall be reimbursed for these ODG 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 X25,000 shall contain the above provisions. 12. Contract Administrators: City: Jose Luis Gomez, PE, PLS Consultant: Perry C. Schact, PE, SE 1660 Notel 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 Trva Pa+ry Agreement Between City ojCkula YUTa andMoJfal andNcLoi ~ ' ro Conduct tLe 'Pre&ndnary Engineerir+g and Finn! Design jar tl+e Replaceme+u oJtLe $etitage Rand Bridge (STIvf364)" ~2-SZ ( )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 sources: of income that engage acquisition or sale of real properly. business positions in business entities and in land development, construction or the ( )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 df 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. KfU+A Linscott, Law & Greenspan Engineers Safdie Rabines Architects 17. Bill Processing: A. Consultant's Billing to be submitted for the following period of time: (X) Monthly Twa Parry.lgreement Between Ciry of Gloria Yuta and Moff~ andNxclio! !a Candac the "Prelindnary Engineervte and Finaf Derl~n far the Replacemerst of the Herita;e Ha¢d.Brtdge (S7b13ti~!)" Page 56 12-83 ( ) Quarter{y ()Other: _ B. Day of the Period for submission of Consultant's Billing: ( )First of the Month O 15th Day of each Month (X) End of the Month OOther: . C. City's Account Number: 18.Security for Pertormance OPerformance Bond; $ OLetter 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 shall 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: °f0 ( )Retention Amount: $ Retention Release Event: ( )Completion of All Consultant Services OOther: Pale 57 T+~o Parry Agreement Ben~een City ojChula Vlrta andMajjat andNechol mC°ndnct die PreGrrdnaryEngineering and Final DesigrrJor the Replacement ofCheHeritage Road Bridge (STM364)" ~ _ 12-84 RESOLUTION NO. 2012- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND MOFFATT AND NICHOL TO PROVIDE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION AND FINAL DESIGN FOR THE HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY WHEREAS, on November 15, 201 ], by Resolution 2011-221, the City Council approved an agreement with Moffatt and Nichol in the amount of $1,777,421 for preliminary engineering, environmental documentation and final design for the Heritage Road Bridge Replacement Project over the Otay River; and WHEREAS, as the Consultant proceeded with the contract and preliminary engineering progressed, it became evident that the future widening of Main Street and Heritage Road would potentially impact the ultimate configuration of the bridge; and WHEREAS, due to these potential impacts and in order to comply with federal policies associated with environmental review, such as providing alternative feasible designs, it is necessary to have the Consultant perform Additional Services in accordance with Section 2(b) of the original Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Additional Services are associated with the additions of the segment of Main Street, from Nirvana Avenue to Heritage Road ("Segment A"), and the segment of Heritage Road, from Entertainment Circle North to the Southerly City Boundary ("Segment C") to the Project (see Exhibit A-1); and WHEREAS, the $553,633 of Additional Services proposed by the Consultant to be performed under this ls` Amendment are limited to those necessary to complete the preliminary engineering, environmental documentation and final design services for the Heritage Road Bridge Replacement Project as intended in the Original Agreement and are included in the revised Exhibit A, attached hereto; and WHEREAS, the Moffatt and Nichol's team have been responsive to City issues and project needs, and staff is satisfied with Moffatt and Nichol's performance NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve an amendment to the Agreement Between the City of Chula Vista and Moffatt and Nichol to Provide Preliminary Engineering, Environmental Documentation, and Final Design for the Heritage Road Bridge Replacement Project ("Amendment") and authorizing the Director of Public Works to execute the Amendment. 12-85 Resolution Page 2 Presented by Approved as to foam by --' " G' ~ Richard A. Hopkins Director of Public Works R. 12-86 THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE FORMALLY SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY THE CITY,COUNC ~ R. Googir ~ Attorney Dated: ~ ~ ~ I ~ FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, AND MOFFATT AND NICHOL 12-87 FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE 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 ("ls` Amendment"), dated for the purposes of reference only, and effective as of the date last executed unless another date is otherwise specified in Exhibit A (Revised) to this ls` Amendment ("Exhibit A (Revised)"), Paragraph 1, is between the City-related entity whose name and business form is indicated on Exhibit A (Revised), 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,; and, WHEREAS, the City publicly advertised for consulting services for the Project; and, WHEREAS, the City interviewed four qualified firrns and ranked Moffatt and Nichol ``Consultant", as the top firm for the Project; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 2011-221 approved on November 15, 2011, City and Consultant executed an agreement to provide preliminary engineering, environmental documentation and final design for the Heritage Road Bridge Replacement Project ("Original Agreement"); and, WHEREAS, as the Consultant proceeded with the contract and preliminary engineering progressed, it became evident that the future widening of Main Street and Heritage Road would potentially impact the ultimate configuration of the bridge; and WHEREAS, due to these potential impacts and in order to comply with federal policies associated with environmental review, such as providing alternative feasible designs, it is necessary to have the Consultant perform Additional Services in accordance with Section 2(b) of the Original Agreement; and; and WHEREAS, the Additional Services are associated with the additions of the segment of Main Street, from Nirvana Avenue to Heritage Road ("Segment A"), and the segment of Heritage Road, from entertainments Circle North to the Southerly City Boundary ("Segment C") to the Project; and Page 1 Two Parry Agreement Between City ojChula V[sta and Moffat and Nic/ro[ to Conduct the "Preliminnry Engirteer[rtg mtd Finnl Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Rond. Bridge (STM364)" p 12-HH WHEREAS, Segment B was included in the scope of the Original Agreement; and WHEREAS, Segments A, B, and C are depicted in Exhibit A-1, attached hereto and incorporated herein; and WHEREAS, the Additional Services performed under this 15` Amendment are those that are necessary to complete the preliminary engineering, environmental documentation and final design services for the Heritage Road Bridge Replacement Project as intended in the Original Agreement and are included in the revised Exhibit A, attached hereto. 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. AMENDMENTS TO ORIGINAL AGREEMENT I. Amendments. The Original Agreement shall be amended as follows: a. Exhibit A shall be removed and replaced with Exhibit A (Revised) and all references to Exhibit A in the Original Agreement shall mean Exhibit A (Revised). b. Exhibit A-1 shall be inserted behind Exhibit A. c. Exhibit B shall be removed and replaced with Exhibit B (Revised) and all references to Exhibit B in the Original Agreement shall mean Exhibit B (Revised). 2. Scope of Amendment. This 1st Amendment changes only those sections of the Original Agreement specifically identified in Section 1, above. No other changes to the Original Agreement are contemplated or intended by this 1st Amendment. The balance of the Original Agreement shall remain unchanged and continue full force and effect. (End of page. Next page is signature page.) Page 2 Twa Pnrry Agreement Between City of C/uda Vista and Moffnt and Niclml m Condeect fhe'Preliminary Fnglneering and Finad Design for the Replacemend of the Ker•itage Raad Bridge (STM364)" 12-89 Signature Page to FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND MOFFATT AND NICHOL TO PROVIDE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION AND FINAL DESIGN FOR THE HERITAGE ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT 1N 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: City of Chula Vista By: Richard A. Hopkins, Director of Public Works Attest: Donna Norris, City Clerk Approved as to form: Glen R. Googins, City Attorney Dated: Moffatt & Nichol f'~ry C- S~adct v. f? By: Exhibit List to 1".Amendment to Agreement (X) Exhibit A (Revised) (X) Exhibit A-1 (X) Exhibit B (Revised) Page 3 Two Party Agreement Between City ajChufa Vista arsd MaJjat and Nichol to Candact 1/~e `Preliminary Engineering and Fueal Design for the Replacement of the Heridage Road. Bridge (STM364)" 12-90 Exhibit A (REVISED) 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: , a [insert business form] ("City") 3. Place of Business for City: City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 4. Consultant: Moffatt & Nichol 5. Business Form of Consultant: ( )Sole Proprietorship ( )Partnership OCorporation 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 ("Project"). The Project Page 4 Two Party Agreement Between Cffy of Chula Vista and Mojjat and Nichol fo Conduct the `Pre[iminrtry Engineering and Final Design jor the Replacement ojthe Heritage Road Bridge (STM364)" 12-91 consists of three segments; Segment A -Main Street from Nirvana Avenue to Heritage Road, Segment B -Heritage Road from Main Street to Entertainment Circle North, and Segment C -Heritage Road from Entertainment Circle North to the Southerly City Boundary (See EXHIBIT A-1). 8. Scope of Work and Schedule: Unless otherwise indicated, a task applies to all Segments of the Project 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 20 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 M8N DHA BRG LLG Chang EMI Aguirre KTU+A 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 Page 5 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chtda Vista and Moffat and Nichoi to Condact the Preliminary Engineering and Final Design far the Replneement of U:e Heritage Road Bridge (STM364)" 12-92 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 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 aone-foot contour interval, will be obtained for this area. The area is defined 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 fdr 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 offive-hundreds Page 6 Two Party Agreement Bebueen Ciry of Clmla rQStrs and Mofjrst and Nlehol to Condact the "Prellmlmary Engineering and Finrsl Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Rarsd Bridge (STtY(3ti4)" 12-93 (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. 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 (Applicable to Segment B only) 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 Page 7 Two Parry Agreement Between City of Chaala Vlsta and Moffat and Nicko[ to Conduct the `Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road. Bridge (STM364)" 12-94 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 • 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) (Applicable to Segment B only) 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 Page 8 Two Parry Agreemettt Between City of C/uda Vista and dloffnt and Nicho[ to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Eir~al Design for the Replacement of t/:e Heritage Road. Bridge (STM364)" 12-95 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. 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 analysis'vvil(be assembled that incorporates all of the above items and it will contain appropriate tables and figures. When available, forecast traffic volumes using the Year 2035 Series 12 model for the complete study area, including the expanded intersections. No modeling costs or calibration are assumed. Conduct a supplemental horizon year traffic analysis based on these new volumes. Two bridge Page 9 Two Party Agreemettt Benveett City ojChn[a Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Conduce the "Preliminary Engineering and Fina[Design for the Replacement of the Heritrtge Road Bridge (STN364)" 12-96 alternatives are assumed (4-lane and 6-lane). Main Street is assumed to be built to 6-lanes per the General Plan for both alternatives. Document the results in text, tables, and graphics. Adjust Model to Account for Future Changes to SR-125 Toll 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 • Cursory review by SANDAG, Caltrans and/or City of San Diego staff - two (2) submittals 1.9a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) (Applicable to Segments A & B only) Prepare a Traffic Management Plan for the project. The plan will include techniques to manage and control traffic on Heritage Road and Main Street in the project vicinity during construction assuming reduced roadway capacity. No post-construction TMP is proposed. The TMP will explore potential strategies which may include a public information/outreach plan, special traffic control/detour plans, construction phasing &staging management, signage, heavy truck alternate route plan, special event traffic .management. Select up to four (4) applicable strategies and outline the implementation of each strategy for the project. No transportation demand management (TDM) or incident management strategies will be proposed. Prepare a draft TMP in letter report format that details all of the above- mentioned items, analysis and conclusions. The draft report will be suitably documented with tabular, graphic and appendix materials. The draft study will be submitted for City review and by appropriate members of the project team. Attend up to two (2) meetings to discuss the TMP 1.10 Alternatives Evaluation (Applicable to Segment B & C only) 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% design level and studied. Plans will include a bridge general plan and a roadway Page 10 Two Party Agreement Between City of Cha[¢ Vis7rt and Mofjai and Nichol to Conduct the `Preliminary Engineering and Finn[ Design for the Replacement of flee Heritage Road. Bridge (STM364)" 12-97 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, Wdth = 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 • Pedestrian and Bicycle Connectivity • Ability to Accommodate future roadway extension • Ability to Accommodate Future Multiuse Trail The City wil! 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- Page 11 Two Parry Agreement Betweett City of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nicho[ to Conduct the `Prelimittary Engineering and Fittrs[ Design jor the Replacement ojtlee Heritage Road Bridge (STM364)" 12-98 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 (Applicable to Segment B only) 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 performed 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 controls 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 conceptual level. Sketches and rough computer models will 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 shalfbe 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 (Applicable to Segments A & B only) Page 12 Two Parry Agreement Between Ciry ofChn[a Vista andMaffaf artd Niclsol to Coaducl the °Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for Hee Replacement of the Heritage Road. Bridge (STM364)" 12-99 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 Geotechnical Investigation (Applicable to Segments A & B only) Geotechnical field investigation and lab testing will be completed to support the bridge and 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 fallowing: • Drill a total of nine (g) 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 will 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 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 cheracteristicsdithc 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 Page 13 Two Pnrty Agreemer+t Between City of Chula Vista and Moffnt and Nichol to Cottdact the "Prelimiaary Eugitteeriag aad Firsal Desigu for the Replacement of d+e Heritage Road Brbdge (STM364)" ~2~~~0 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 (Applicable to Segment B only) This task includes the development of the preferred bridge alternative for the project site. Abridge 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 alignmbnt as determined in the Project Report. Items that will be addressed in this report include other viable bridge types, 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. Page 14 Two Pnrty.4greement Be[ween City of Cleulrt lrsta and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Fina! Design far the Replacement oJthe Heritage Road. Bridge (STM364)" 12-101 1.15 Hydrology, Hydraulics and Scour (Applicable to Segment B only) A final HEC/RAS 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 Adrift 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. 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 performed:. - - • 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 Page 15 Two Party Agreement Between City ojCha[a Vista and tYlofjat and Nieho[ to Conduct tlee "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design far t/ie Replacement of the Heritage Rond Bridge (ST~N364J" 12-102 • 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-yrtyater-surface 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 (Applicable to Segments A & B only) 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 Eliminatidn 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 (Applicable to Segments B & C only) The 30% design submittal will be based on the preferred alternative and will include a project title sheet, a sheet list, horizontal control sheet, bridge Page 16 Twa Party Agreen¢ent Between City of Chun Vista and Nlofjat and Niclml to Conduct [he "Preliminnry Engineerittg and Fit¢nl Design for the Replacement of the Herknge Rand Bredge (STNI36J)" 12-103 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 (Applicable to Segments A & B only) 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 Feld 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 replacing the bridge is the best option. 1.19 NEPA /CEQA Environmental Documentation (Applicable to Segments A & B only) The following scope of work is based on the assumption that a single document is developed that will satisfy bo"th 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) Page 17 Two Party Agreement Between Ciry afChula Vista and Moffat anrf Nicho[ to Conduct the "Preliminary Eugiueer(ng rsrsd Fina! Deslgaa for the Replacement of the Heridage Raad. Bridge (STM364)" 12-104 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 Data Collection Existing conditions data will be collected from site visits and through identt~ication of relevant secondary data sources such as the City General Plan, MSCP, Subarea Plan, and SANGIS database. 1.19.4 Technical Studies -.- -- 1.19.4.1 VisuallmpactAssessment 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 Page 18 Two Party Agreemettt Between City of Chala Vista and Moffat and Nichol to Condeect the'Prelimirtary Ettgineerbeg and Fina[Designfor the Replacement of the Heritnge RoaA Bridge (STM364)" 12-105 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- frameswould be added over site photos. Detailed visual simulations will be done for the preferred project. Multiple views will 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 impadts 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: Arroyo toad and western spadefoot toad habitat. Although nocturnal presence surveys for arroyo toad and spadefoot toad may not be heeded; 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 Page 19 Two Party Agreement Befween City of Cluda PGSia and Mofjrtt and Nichal to Conduct the `Pre(iminnry Engineering and Fia¢l Design for the Replaeemend of the Heritage Road. Brir(ge (STN364)" 12-106 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 far coastal California gnat catcher. Include a description of the Biological Survey Area for this species and a map that shows the buffer area. • Permitted biologist(s) will conduct protocol surveys, in accordance with current USFWS protocol survey requirements within potentially suitable habitat areas for the federally listed endangered quino checkerspot butterfly. As required by federal permit, a Notice indicating the initiation of protocol surveys on the project site would be submitted to USFWS 10 days prior to the first survey. Within 45 days of the last field survey, a letter report summarizing the survey findings will be submitted to the USFWS. Costs associated with this task are based on the assumption that 5 protocol surveys would be conducted. If quino are not found during the first 5 surveys, then protocol surveys would continue until the end of flight season and each additional survey would be billed on a time and materials basis. • Permitted/supervised biologists will conduct turtle trapping surveys over consecutive days within each trapping location during the pond turtle's breeding season to potentially determine presence. If a western pond turtle is captured during trapping effort, it will be reported to CDFG throng submission of a California Native Species Field Survey form or similar reporting format, as required by the Scientific Collectors Permit. • 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, Page 20 Two Parry Agreement Between Ciry of Chuln Vistn and Moffat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design jar the Replacement of the Heritage Road Bridge (STM364)" 12-107 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 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 Visi"a 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 coneeptual 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 Page 21 Two Parry Agreement Befweers City of Chula Visirt and Moffat and Niehof to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Fina[Desigu for the Replacement of the Heritnge Road Bridge (STM364)" 12-108 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 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. A Noise Abatement Decision Report (NADR) will also be prepared. The NADR will (1) summarize the conclusions of the Noise Study; (2) present the preliminary noise abatement decision; and (3) present preliminary information on any secondary effects of noise abatement. 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 pf 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 Page 22 Two Party Agreement Between Ciry ojChula Vista attd tY/ofjat attd Nichol to Conduct the `Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replrteement of the Heritage Rorsd Bridge (STM364)" 12-109 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 conform 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 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 draff ISA shall be submitted to the City and Caltrans forreview. 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 Page 23 Twa Pnrty Agreement Between City of Chula Vistn and Mojfnt and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Fina[Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road. BrMge (STNT364)" ~2-~~0 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. 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 Page 24 Two Party Agreement Between Ciry of Chula Vistn and Moffat and Nichal to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Fina[ Design far the Replacement ojthe Heritage Road Bridge (STM364)" 12-~~~ 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. Subsurface 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 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 or 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 he completed. 1ri the event the PIR identifies on-site sensitive paleontologicalresources, a Paleontological Evaluation Report (PER) and a Paleontological Mitigation Report{PMP) me,~titlg-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. Page 25 Two Porty Agreeu:eut Between City of Chula Pisia med Moffat and .Nichol to Conduct dhe "Preliminary Engineering and Finat Design jor the Replacement of the Herifnge Rond. Bridge (STM364)" ~ 2-~ 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 will 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 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 theEA/IS for Caltrans submittal to FHWA for signature and approval to circulate the document for public review. 1.19.7 Environmental Checklist 1.19.8 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.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 wl(codrdinate 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 Page 26 Two Pnrty Agreement Between City of G:alo- Vista and iYToffat and Nicho[ to Condnet the "Preliminary Engineering and Fiaal Design fnr the Replaeemeat of the Herknge Rand. Bridge (STM364)" 12-113 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. 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-Section1601 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 RWOCB Water Quality Certification (401) Page 27 Two Party .Agreement Befween City of Chulrt Vistn and Mafjat and Nichol to Conduct Hre "Preliminnry Engineering and Final Design for Uae Replaeemenf of die Reriinge Road Bridge (STM364)" 12-114 We will prepare and submit a 401 Water Quality Certification application to the RWOCB 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 Certification. 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. 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 ~. 5 __ _ r,~".1,; ` , <~ . .~ DESCRIPTION , __ ~ ! C r, i k Y_ may(! ~ } ~ NO. OF,C_OPIES 1.7 /RAS Analysis (Hydraulic Study) Preliminary HEC 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 Geotechnical Investigation , 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 1 115:6 - 'Bridge Scour Analysis 1 1.16 30% Design Submittal Plans 6-full size and 5-11x17 size 1.16 30% Preliminary Engineer's Estimate 1 1.17 Preliminary Water Quality Technical Study 1 Page 28 Two Pnrry Agreement Between City ofC/n~la Vuin and Mojjat anANicho! to Conduct the "Preliminary Engu:eering and Finn/Design jor the Replacement of the Heritage Rond. Bridge (STM364)" 12-115 TASK NO.s' DESCRIPTION NO. OF,COPIES 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 & NADR 2 EA 1.19.4.5 Traffic Study _ 2 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/IS 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 sets/4 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 ACOE 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 Page 29 Two Parry Agreement Between City of Chula Vista mid Moffat and Nichol to Ca~de~et the `Preiiminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of tke Heritage Road Bridge (STM364)" 12-116 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. 2.1 Project Management and Administration (Applicable to Segments A & B only) - This task includes project management and administration during the fnal design as noted above. 2.2 Project Meetings (Applicable to Segments A & B only) Up to eighteen 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 fion M&N DHA BRG LLG Chang EMI 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 (.vppucanie to segment rs only/ 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, Page 30 Two Parry Agreement Between City of Chula Vistn and Moffnt and Nicho[ to Conduct the "Prelimin¢ry Englneering arsd Finnl Design far Use Replacemerst of the Heritage Roud. Bridge (SThL364)" 12-~~~ 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 (Applicable to Segment B only) 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 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 with 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 La out 7 Abutment Details No. 1 S Abutment Details No. 2 - 9 Bent Details No. 1 10 Bent Details No. 2 11 Bent Details No. 3 12 T ica/ Section 13 Su erstructure Geomet 14 Girder La out No. 1 Page 31 Two P¢rry Agreement Between Ciry ojChala Vist¢ mtd tNofjnt mtd Nicho[ to Coadact dte "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement ojthe Heritage Rond. Bridge (ST.N364)" 12-118 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 Structure A roach Draina a Details 23 Joint Seal Details 24 Lo of Test Bonn s No. 1 25 Lo of Test Borin s No. 2 26 Log of Test Borings No. 3 (As-built log of test borin s 2.5 Bridge Architectural Details (Applicable to Segment B only) For the purpose of estimating the effort in this task, it has been 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 (Applicable to Segments A & B only) 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 - {Applicable to Segments A & B only). 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: Page 32 Two Party Agreement Benueen Ciry of Chufa Vutn artd Moffat and Nicho! to Conduct the `Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement ojthe Heritage Road Brddge (STM364)" 12-119 Sheet # Sheef Name 1 Plan and Profile No. 1 2 Plan and Profile No. 2 3 Plan and Profile No. 3 4 Plan and Profile No. 4 5 T ical Sections 6 Details 2.8 Traffic Control Plans (Applicable to Segments A & B only) 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: Sheet # Sheef Name 1 Traffic Control Plan No. 1 2 Traffic Control Plan No. 2 3 Traffic Control Details 2.9 Signing and Striping Plans (Applicable to Segments A & B only) The signing and striping plan sheets will be prepared. The anticipate sheet list is as follows: Sheet # Sheet Name 1 Signin and Stri in Plan ~ 2 Signing and Striping Details ~ 2.10 Utility Relocation Plans (Applicable to Segments A & B only) 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 relodation of tli2 existing storm drain system at the southerh abutment and near the north approach. Page 33 Two Pnrty Agreement Between Cify of Chula PlSta and Moffat and Nieltol to Conduct the "Preliminnry Engineering and Finrtl Design jor the Replacement of the Heritnge Rond Bridge (STM364)" 12-120 2.11 Landscaping Plans (Applicable to Segment B only) 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. 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 # Sheef Name 1 Site Plan No. 1 2 Site Plan No. 2 3 Plantin Plan No. 1 4 Plantin Plan No. 2 5 Landsca e Le end 6 Landsca a Details 2.12 Erosion Control /Construction Phase BMP's (Applicable to Segments A & B only) Construction phase ei`bsibh controFBMP'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: Page 34 Two Party Agreement Between City of C6uln Vista and Mofjat and Nichol to Conduct dhe `Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for the Replacement of rLe Heritage Road Bridge (STM364)" 12-121 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 (Applicable to Segments A & B only) 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 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 Modifications (Applicable to Segment B only) Traffic signal modification design plans (if required) will be prepared for the three traffic signals along Heritage Road including Main Street and Entertainment Circle South and North. The anticipate sheet list is as follows: Sheet # Sheet Name 1 Siqnal Plan _ 2.15 Street and Bridge Lighting Plans (Applicable to Segments A & B only) 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 1 Li htin Plan 2 Li htih Details No 1 3 Li htin Detaits Nq 2 - 2.16 Final Design Surveys (Applicable to Segments A ~ B only) 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 Page 35 Two Party Agreement Between Ciry of Chula Vrsta and Majjat nttd Nichol to Canducd the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for Nee Replacement of tlae Heritage Road. Bridge (STM364)" 12-122 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/OC (55%, 95% and 100%) (Applicable to Segments A & B only) An in-house QA/0!C review will be performed by the Project Manager and/or the Principal-in-Charge for each design submittal, including 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 (Applicable to Segments A & B only) The 55% 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 (Applicable to Segments A & B only) 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 (Applicable to Segment B only) 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 ihitial 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 Page 36 Twa Pnrty Agreement Between City ajChulrt Vista and Moffnt rtnd Nicho[ [o Conduct the "Preliminnry Engineering and Fiua! Design for the Replneement of the Heritage Rond Bridge (STM364)" 12-123 review comments will be resolved with the designer and revisions incorporated in the 95% submittal. 2.21 Technical Specifications (Applicable to Segments A & B only) 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. 2.22 Quantities, Estimate and Bid Item List (65%, 95% & 100%) (Applicable to Segments A & B only) 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 (Applicable to Segments A & B only) 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... (Applicable tp;Segments A & , B only) 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. Page 37 Two Parry Agreement Between City ojChu[a Vista and Majfat and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminary Eng6teering and Final Deslgn for the Repl¢eement ojihe Heritage Road Bridge (STh/364)" 12-124 2.25 100% PS&E Submittal (Applicable to Segments A & B only) The 100% PS&E submittal will include bid ready plans, specifications and engineers 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% submittal, final deliverable will include a CD with the project design file(s) along with one set of signed and stamped 24" x 36" mylars. 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. DELIVERABLE MATRIX TASK 2 -PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING -TASK N0. `?.: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°/o 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 =:Ndte: fvleeting, coordination & support "deliverables" not shown. Page 38 Two Parry Agreement Befween Ciry of Chula Vista and Moffat and Nidrol to Conduct the `Preliminary Engineering and Final Design for tke Replacement of tLe Heritage Road. Bridge (STM364)" 12-125 3.0 TASK 3 -Bidding and Construction Support (Applicable to Segments A & B only) 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 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 ineerin A ri14, 2013 Environmental Ap royal Se tember 24, 2013 65% PS&E Jul 18, 2014 95% PS&E October 24, 2014 100% PS&E December 19, 2014 Construction Su ort if needed Au ust 5, 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 Page 39 Two Parry Agreement Between City of Ch~da Vista and Moffnt and Nichol to Coxduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design jor the Replacement of the Herdtnge Raad. Bridge (STM364)" 12-126 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 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. 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. Phase Fee for Saitl Phase 2. 3. Page 40 Two Parry Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and hfoffai and Nichol to Conduct the "Preliminnry Engineering mrd Final Design for fke Replacement oftlse Heritnge Road. Bridge (STM364)" 12-127 ( )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. 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 by Consultant in the performance of said Services, at the Hourly Rates or amounts set forth in Exhibit B - "Cost Proposal" according to 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 said 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 1 (Preliminary Engineering $ 1,137,987 Task 2 (Final Design) $ 1,098,813 Task 3 (Construction Support) $ 94,254 Total ContractAmount $ 2,331,054 These amounts do-not. reflect any payments made to Consultant prior to the 15~ Amendment. Any such payments shall be deducted from the Total Contract Amount to reflect the balance of funds available under this 1st Amendment. These amounts include all Materials, and other "reimbursables" ("Maximum Compensation"). Page 41 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Mofjat and Nichol to Conduct the'Preliminnry Ettgineering rtnd Final Design for the Replacement of the Heridage Road. Bridge (STM36A)" 12-128 Said additional work shall not be preformed until authorized by the City Engineer or appointee in writing. 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 At such time as Consultant shall have incurred time and materials equal to not be issued ("Authorization Limit"), Consultant shall entitled to any additional compensation without further authorization 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 ihventory 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 Page 42 Two Party Agreement Between City of Chula Vista and Moffaf and Nickol , io Conduct the `Preliminary Engineering and Finad Design for the Rep[ncement of the l~erd[age Road Bridge (STM364)" 12-129 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." 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 Page 43 Two Pnrty Agreement Befween Ctty of Chula Puta and Mofjat and Nicho! ra Conduct Ute "Preliminnry Engineering and Finnl Design for the Replacement of the Heritage Road. Bridge (STM364)" 12-130 13. Liquidated Damages Rate: ( ) ~ ()Other: per day. 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 ( )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 Page 44 Two Party Agreement Between Ciry of Chula Vista and eNoffat and Nicho! to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Final Design jor the Replacement of flee Heritage Road. Bridge (STM36A)" 12-131 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. Bill Processing: A. Consultant's Billing to be submitted for the following period of time: (X) Monthly ( )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 ( )Performance 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 shall be entitled to retain, at 1;heir 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 45 Twa Party Agreement Be(ween City of Cluda Vista med Mofjat and NicLol to Conduct the "Preliminary Engineering and Finat Design jor rlee Rep[neement ofihe Heritage Road. Bridge (STM364)" 12-132 -1 \ , N /~`~4 \ // ENERGY NAY ' ' ~ ~ ~ J \II W C ~~ NIRVANA MAIN STREET ~ i "~BR~o~ \ ~ r- - % OPOS~O I SEGMENT "A" ~ ~ PR SEGMENT "B" _ _ cltrlla vtsrA EXISTING BRIDGE ~ ORIGINAL sax niECO - - ~-- PROJECT SCOPE I ENTERTAINMENT C/R. N0. I II ~ ~~\ ~ \ '~ I ~~ i J~ _ ~ ~~~ ENTBRT,1lN~ /R S0. I ~ ^9 I ~OA l ,i I-"-..-_-..-..-..-.. _CHULA VISTA ~. SAN DISCO '~-_-.. -'.. MAJOR TASKS FOR AMENDMENTI GRAPHIC SCALE o~ MAIN STREET - SEGMENT "A° -ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE - RNAL DESIGN ORIGINAL BRIDGE AREA -SEGMENT °B" - ADDffIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES HERffAGE ROAD -SEGMENT °C" - PRELIMINARY ENGINEERWG AVENIDA DE ' '~\ LA VIST-A3 \ ~ o .~ ~ .. HERI TA GE ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJEC T ~~~~~ GI7YOP°HULAVI9TA EXPANDED PUBLIC WORKS -ENGINEERING CHULA VISTA, CA 911910 411~;~, (619)476-2301 SCOPE OF WORK J N W P6OlELT IOTA[ t ~ ~OdBinel TOtel donfr0[t V41ue `r ~ $ `1 2 201 ;449349 $ " '~i5pb 151 $ ~, 328,649 $ „50;432 $ AS,]g9 $' 56,925'. ~ `.` 6b,128 $ 23,690 $ ~ 39,575 $'~; 64,521 `,18,$14 $ .1,779,421: , , , ' ~ ~ 3 .. ,~ ~, r#~. "' s '> ~ "TorolAmpntlment Na.t $ 51,576 $ ` 312,fie6 $ ~: ~ * $ "` 1(!9,689 $t~^ 64,158, _ $ '. :~ "46,22Y, $ $~ .'69~38k $ $~ ~~ $- "-: 3,112'., $ '653,83 `_~ ~ ~ New Tatol '$ 324,27] '. 661,966 $ ` 586p51 $ ' 438338 $ .114j583 ~ `41789 $ 182,Id6, $ 1231588. .$ =`11,698 $ ~ . 3$ 575 $ :'. 64,521 ~_ ,z', "2,331,85 {Ty ~ i ,'', `~~P2itent lnerttlse t 'j 29~% '~4T 3% 30.:3% 137.2%" ~ i 82.6%" 1263% "'~ 31,1% papalo119 suuuu,v~w.oxio-a..~ EXHIBIT B (Revised) October 2,..012 City of Chula Vista Heritage Road Bridge Replacement ' ORIGINAL COST PROPOSAL PLUS AMENDMENT NO. 1-REV COST PROPOSAL October 2, 2012 EXHIBIT B (Revised) City of Chula Vista Heritage Road Bridge Replacement COST PROPOSAL-AMENDMENT NO. 1-REV Page ] of le GRAND TOTAL $.'553,633 SUMMARY El(HIBIT B (Revised) October 2, 2012 City of Chula Vista ' Heritage Road Bridge Replacement COST PROPOSA4AMENOMENT NO. 1-REV. Summary-Task 1 Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Clearance J N r (,Q ~~ I! h 61 rl line ' ~ p - \ ^r P !M '` OVII &dpe r + SJNtY ° NYN b 6'wa[hnh l [ ' I [ ]Pfjl[ eUN NC B ' t nds¢op[ ~ fllndl p wPl ~ 5 ' ~ .~' iA9K T~ ;. r 1 9'i Flii!I 1 '~3 fi M13POHJ " { MPf/Pttl MNhH6 , C enfr M ( P ~ p A9uMee d h 4 mtyltl . sNM RM ,.J. KIU A` rc i l 6 N TAT~~OUNf rASK[as~: } :. I NkM1PI v 1 . Nkh I e ry [M1d • ~ Wp P i M ALa[: {nn ulfanl[ q 6G Wn ,,: : Y' p ' `e el NO,` . BFSfRIP130N +`- ~ 'c + + l ':" In4 . v InL :' A[Nne[n .Fn Ineen AfSP[ 1.1 Pso(<tt Mam9emenr oodAdminlsfr¢rion 4 60 - 113 $ 18,1)5 3.I Prole[tx4¢dule i6 36 $ 3,210 1.3 Prafe[f Meetings 30 33 ]I ]3 $ 13,499 1.1 s-BUlltond UNltYFesevrtM1 4 20 33 $ 5,053 L5 SIIe Visle 1g 6 le $ 3,fi]] l.b fleld5urnys and Mapping 16 9 04 108 $ 18,93] LJ prellmino RFC/RAS AnvIYSis S LH Prellmino Foundation fleport(piRf S 3.9 hnJfi[Anvtysli ]4 8 1R0 3EU S 35,849 1.9v Tmffl[MVnvg¢men[Pbn IYMP) 96 96 f 15,)51 L30 Altemotiv¢S FVPNarlon 13E ]4 ]56 $ 33,03] 1.]1 Pm ea't Report r%eje2d Alsemvfivg S Lll.l KCC/FA$Anngsls fXyd[Pmm srvdYf S l.]1.I Bdtl9e Adwn[etl Plvnnin95NdY $ Llle vermMe,yAesmeN¢smeles and wm¢I6tmmp $ S Idl.4 Virvvllmpvrt assessment tlI WilRn9 Penults mtlFnvlronment¢I Ckarvnre 19 13 $ 2,195 1.13 Geote[hnkollnves09Ptlon 14 1J $ 1,3)1 S 1.14 ed0 eTYPe Sele[tlon va.l TPppepnpAY P<xlettmn $ LM.3 RpnawpvPnaxYa.Awio cvprmnnnpn $ 1.14.3 ~: 8tltlge GennalPbn PM rus[FStlmate 5 S L14A A¢itM1¢tl[COn[ept S 1.14.5 Type SeleAOV Report 3.15 NYtlml Y. NYdrpuliq vnd5mur S S 3.13.1 Appllmslon rCLOMfl 1.16 PreOminPrYWaterWoNfY iea'bnkPl Studlef Mem 80 00 $ lE,E03 S 1.11 30%Desl n5uhmis[vl S 1.18 Cvlsrvns (4orelnatlon 1.38.1 BdO9e SUffl[len[Y ROdn9AnPIYSIf S S 1.18.3 Prole[r fundingAnvl sU S 3.18.3 Repb[emen(vs. RehvMBfatlvn letter ].l9 NFPA/CCgA FnulronmenfPllb[umene¢HOn 16 343 359 $ 44,63) w; ~f -' " YOYAI NOVHS ' ' ]33 " : I60,"' ""' 19J '~ is-BO ' : '' =1A % 311' ~ ~ ~ ~ " ' ~` 3306 9'`-i96~918 9fi3 $^1333.4 S '+i$163,904 S 13,093 $ 'S "''LiTl'4 99.593 ,$ ~ g, S '^ iu4bf¢I[ests 9 SJ $ 146,Y26 ~ $' 9YbNtollllhd CO4U $: +A00 $ v 900 $ $ 45 J05 .$ 13,)99 $ f ,13008 $ 900„3 $ $ t ~ $ 16,399 . .. „ '.. _ ..-~,:__, a ...o ein oe a .~:`t m96A9> 3'i)6b26 ~- $-1fi.2J1.S 50.093!5 ~.•~`$ $ >' .-' $ i]i,fi01°i N J W J Odaber 2, 2012 ' EXHIBIT B (Revised( [Ity of Chula Vista Heritage PGad Bridge Replacement COST PROPOSAL-AMENOMENTNO. 1-REV Task 1 PM - M8N , : T s( . (IA3SIPI4xlgN v. Y pW n ~~ M '-.~ d d[ I I t M J G I ' ~ Y '~ tl r l[ I"r TA6XNgUR6 lA3g CO.tT ~~ { fl Nv. - , a f w UESgIPTIGN a¢ Pssnadt ~. } ~ , << . : t , 1.1 Prot IM np9emen[v dAe ! [mfivn 40 ]3 Sx $ 30,10936 0 $ 1.] pmjPtt S[Fedule l.3 Pro/e[t Meetlrgs 16 4 x0 $ 4,008 IA s-Bull! and UfilityfleseartF 4 • $ 910 0 $ Ls sire Vlsi[ 1.6 fIPW SUrve vnd Mappln 16 16 $ 3,671 0 $ - iJ Preliminary NFC/MSAnatysB LB $truttwe Prellminpry Gevle[FNmlflePprt 0 $ 1.9 Tm ¢Anvlys6 I4 x4 $ 5,506 1.9a T~af/I[Manv emMlPkn ITMPI 0 $ 0 $ ],10 Altemv[IVes EValuvYpn 0 $ 1.11 Prvle[rfl¢Pdrtfvr Pre]<red AlrcrnaN/¢ 1.11.1 NEC/MSAn¢IYSb (HyOraull[S[ueyJ 0 $ 0 $ Lll.x Bridge Aevvn[etl Plannin Gtutly 0 $ 1.11.3 PrellminaryAesMeN[Srueks and Vlsuvl5/ms 0 $ 1.114 VbuvllmPOn ASSenmenN 0 $ 1.3] Brillin4 PP/mlti vnd Envlrpnm¢nfvl Cl¢amn[e 0 $ 1.13 Gevse[Fnl[vllnveitl9vebn ° $ Ll4 ede9e esPk[Ilpn - 0 $ 1.14.1 FounevLlvn TYPe seleNvn 0 $ Ll4.i RvvtlwaY ane NYdmuil[s Cpvrdlnvtlon 0 $ 1.14.3 Bddge Genervl Plan and COS! Estimate 0 $ L14A Aesthefk CVn[ept 0 $ I.I4.s SPlenlvn flepvrt 0 $ LIS Nydrplp y, Hydmull[y one 5rovr a $ L35.1 Appli[vtian Jar CIOMR 0 $ t16 Preliminary WVrerquvlllY Te[bnl[vl studies M¢m o o $ l.ll 30%Oeslgn Submittal o S - 1.19 Caimans cpprmnanan o $ 1.IBd Btle e3u)fi[Ienry Ratln9AnvlYSis o $ L.I6I Pro e[[Eanem9 AnvNna o $ I.IB.3 Re Iv[Pmens vs. RehablBrvfivn LPtler 16 $ 3,611 LI9 NEPA /CfQA Envimnmenra/OV[umenlvtlvn 16 0 $ 1pTAl MGURfi r' '116 16 0 0 9, 0 ~0 Lppeeexaunyflpre s xnAZ,p e. aY sub/pml Cdsv $ x6612 ; ~ 1,9sq S ~ S S. $ „ $,. B 0 -0 0 ''::0 -13x $ ":' x1.963 `•pne[t cosh T. iraM $10D $ $ ~ :$ $ S~ x] 969 t eeproducJ $tao ~~ i Oire[it9zis $>? ;490 `'. oeuvery SzoB • suM9tal $ : xd,963~ Talal $400 J N r W October 2, 2011 E%HIBIT R (Revised City o![hula Vista Heritage Road Bridge Replacement COST PROPOSAL-AMENDMENT NO. 1-REV Taskl Civil-M&N a 2 X MSSIFlCATION F l dPNI j 5 ! Eel /11 fPp II Srmb T[Nr Pe yx s„) '' LIOOII ,Cwt,:. ,, tledr4l_ I Y e Fm at 6158 HGUfl5 ~ " ,. TAS%MSI'- TpSM.' } .-.. ,,,. fd9N~ N~ EmM I ~ ~' S F i ~ j m w Np.";'. . _ ~ r p UF9[fllPilON ~" " ~ nercn ~ " ~ ~ ~ .. ~ r _.~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ L1 Pa dMVna menf nd Adminl4mtlm D $ 1.3 P/v/eRMee[ings Te[M1nlml Mtgs q 5 1.4 sBUlll °nd UNllNRes¢o[[h 4 8 16 38 $ 4,135 L5 Sih Vitll 4 d 4 11 $ 1,88fi 3.6 field Surveys °nd MVpPInO B e $ 1,368 f.) Preliminary NF[/BAS Anvtysl5 D $ LB P/egminvryF°undvtlvn flepwllPFRf 0 $ 1.9 Trvffl[AnalYSls 4 d 8 $ 1,AdT 3.9v Tivffl[Manvgemenl Pl°n iMPf D 5 ].30 AllemvUV¢s FV°luaflm d ]e fi0 10 8 133 $ 18,885 l.ll Profe[I fle Mjw P/e/eredAl[emvNVe D $ 3.11.1 HEC/FA9 Anal ys4lNYdrvull[5[udyJ 0 5 111.1 &Id9e Advanced PlanAng Study 0 5 1.11.3 Prellminwy AeslM1ellr SEWies vnd Vls°ol5lms q 5 1.11.0 Vb°allmp°[[Anosmmt D 5 L1E gtl11in9 Pe[ ib and FnvbommenPol Clevmn[e D $ - q 5 1.13 Gev[e[hnlmllnvesflgvllon 0 $ 1.14 BAdge TYPe Sekalon 1.14.1 f°undatiw rype5ele[Ilm 0 5 1.10.E F°vdw°y vnd NYdrvullaCao[dlnvtlar D $ - Id0.3 B/MOe General Plvn °nd [wtFStlmvfe D 5 D $ ].14.0 AalM1eli[COnttpt 0 5 1.14.5 Type Selection Report D $ 1.15 NYd/d°9G HYdlaalla, vnd5[m/ 1.]5.1 Appli[atim Jw CIOMfl 0 5 1.16 P/ellminary.Waf¢[quvlitY Te[M1nlc°I Slutlles Mem ° 40 d0 00 $ II,3@ q 5 1.11 30%ces(OF SYM1mItt°I a 5 Lle [bllwns CawdlmO°n 1.18.1 etld9e 5u(flNen[y eoNng Analysis q 5 D 5 1.18.1 PmI<N FUndin9AnaNxH D 5 1.18.3 fle a menf vs. fleM1abigl°Om Lettt/ 1.19 NEPA/CFpA Fnvi/onmeatalUwumen[vUOa D 5 O $ •~TarpENOUAf i-p ,bb ^; Y:.a ~ 36 ~ 66 ,.':o w ,`"~-`e YO :ll U 'i5e $r"~~39AT-4 ,2 leotled ftWHYR t ` ~$']1A42 $ 5Y1.05 $-}4917 $ 340.)6' $r 14$19 se $ 1196Ey$ 16490 = 5 +BC 39^ y , : ~ y ;;, ~. Sdaf°fal COStr $-x_91! „ .. $ BAR $ F7~030 $ 18698 3S, 6,136 $' i.$ Ig65 $=1p16 $ ~u ,S:i. .$ ' "~ $ '391a~ 4 Travel $300 Feprodu[I $500 ~01 e[I C°it[,$ ": 900; Delbery $3W 50¢t tel $ ~ ~90r63d'7 T°ml $900 E%HIBIT B (Revised) October 2, 2012 City of Chula Visia Heritage Raad Bridge Replacement COST PROPOSALAMENDMENT N0. 1-REV Task! EnNronmental-BRG e llp$$IFIGTMN Ptl rlp I~ 4Vh[ Psy a ,. fi.a F A ntt F A IYrt ~GIf Oaru 1 ,Oa P d TASKNDURS - TAfi%COSII - Tg3K t . ~: „ .. .,, ~ }p ~ r ... M W . d},' ~ ,? t 4l knl , tadN i M 2 : ii: v + 4 v + _'„ '. 9Na i:~:; DL$fflIPpDN . . ,. ` ;,. , .. t om.. .. . . .. :. , L1 Pmje[tM 9[mentantl AtlmiAatmtbn ~ ~ 60 $ !,925.00 LI Pto e[t 5[M1edule 16 SO I6 $ 3,210 1.3 Psv e[[M¢erln 5(8x3 and 18 x31 8 29 32 $ 5,535 0 $ 1.4 ~BUlltand UtllltY fleseanh 0 $ - L5 Site Vitlt 0 $ 1.6 FleMSUrveVS and Ma In9 0 $ iJ Preliminary HfC/OAS Analyslt 0 $ 1.8 Prellmina FoundaNBn Pe rt(PFFJ B $ 1.9 Tmf/1[Analytls 0 $ 1.90 im [Mona ement Pbh (TMPJ 3.10 If[matlvet EValuafb0 6 18 24 $ 4,152 0 $ LIl P/ofe[t fle Rfo/Prefesetl AltemotWe - 0 $ 1.11.1 NFVFAS Anolysls (Nygmall[SNdyl _ 0 $ 1.11.1 eddge Atlvon[ed Plonnln St dy 0 $ 1.11.3 Prellmino AestM1eU[Stadles and-0isual5lms 0 $ 1.13.0 Ntuallm a[t Assessment 1.11 OdI8n9 Pesmltt arW fnvisonm¢ntal Oeomn[[ Y 6 2 13 $ 2,195 - 0 $ 1.13 Geate[M1nimllnvealgmlon 0 $ 1.14 BTldge TYpe 9eletrlon 0 $ 1.14.] Foundation TYPe Sele[tlon 0 $ 1.11.2 FoadwaY antl Nydmulks COOrtllnatlon 0 $ 3.14.3 Bdd eGenetal Plon and Cott fttlmate o $ Id4.4 AesMed[Canrcpt 0 $ 1.14.5 Type SebRbn Feport a $ ].]3 Hytlm ,NYdmull[5 and&pue a $ 1.I5.T A Fmtion for ClOMF 0 $ 1.18 Prcliminary Wa]erquallty tt[M1nkalSmtlles Mem a O $ Id) 30%Deslgn 5abmlttal o $ Id8 CBlhans COprtlinatlon 0 $ LIBI Bridge SaJjnen[Y flatln AnalYfls ].]0.1 Pro/ett FUndln9 Analysb 0 $ Travel $0 1.18.3 Fe IOament vt. RehP6lGrorion letter 90 6 64 60 21 22 42 0 0 343 $ 90,96] Repmduglon $0 1.19 NEPA/fFQA FnWmnm¢nfol OO[umentatian 30 B $0 0 $ Delivery "- 6 !04 60 ' 21 34 42 - D 0 49] $ 63,984 nsM nmae.lc„BUrail $5,3Gi t.:Q ~ TDTAL HOUPS 48 B 214 . „ - faatletl NOUNy pen $ 29566 ~$ ]YB.36 $ 13209 ~$ 162.3fi $ 109.69 $ -51.91 $ 822>,$~llN 69 $ 5]91 ~ ~ wenei66smrlBwmal~ap $36,038 fubrorol (Yttf $ 14,191 $ 2,R) 3 3B.26T $~ 914 $ g11T 63,9BC .;1,RB $ 3,fi33 _$ „1.432 5 ~ $ ,r" 5 $ 3,4)5 j { x NNwq NV:.lHmadap $0 M.DIrfQ CA$s $ `95,)B~ ? Prsen lnlp rvo se8 GN6 $4,313 _..... ... _.______ _..._........ ~....,. I~,:SUElotsl $: 109,fi69 Total $45,)05 N 0 October 2, 2012 E%HIR IT D(Revised( City of [hula Vista Heritage Road Bridge Replacement COST pROpOSALAMENDMENT NO. 1-REV Task 1 Environmental De[a it TA9% Na 1 _e ICU$EIfIGiIDN :- 4 s:. }; " D6TNpTIgN PrmW I/ S:W/Pp1 ) FbMm qq/p[ K l ~"~ TS`NEm M .t1 NNe. ~ 4MUb Tn IYS i. E A N 1. c15_ Pom t oeeproi - ArvAVnI "GmF '4 Po ~ [, TASK NOVRS ~~i ' [; TA9BLg9i 1.19 NEPA /[fgAE I menl lD menbf/w Po 0 5 - 1.19.1 NeIE ReWew/PfS 1 3 3 $ 303 3.193 Pro/xllmpvaArev lPlA)/Area c/PVfentlvl F/jeo 6 16 d 36 5 4,Il6 1.19.3 Envlrmmenfvl DVly fvllecNVn 13 9 33 10 30 8 d 2 103 $ 13,453 1.19.4 Te[bN(OI StuLlee 0 5 - 1.19.4.1 Vliual lmpva'l Assessment 0 $ 1.19.03 NUfwic 0 5 1.19.4.3 BlvlO9y 0 $ ].19.4A No/Se 0 5 1.19.95 TrvfJlc 0 5 1.19.96 WoIVVUVIIry TecM1nlml flepmt 0 $ 1.199.) Nydmvllc vn00minv9e 5tuEY/flvvdplaln EVVlu v(IVn Repat 0 $ 1.19.4.8 In/NV154e Attnsment 0 $ 1.19.0.9 Ali quWifySrvJY 0 5 1.19.940 Culfmvl Reevurse StuEV/PVleontala9lcvlAnen mem 0 5 - 1.19.5 nlllal StuEy [M1edllit d 6 4 3 B N $ 3,456 1.19.6 Prepare Dra/I MNV/FA/6 8 d 3fi 6 d0 40 6 0 40 188 5 19,540 1.193 fnWldlmanlal CFeeklltl 0 5 1.199 Pu6Ne flevlew MNV/EA/IS 0 5 - 1.199 RespanE fv CVmmenb _ 0 $ 1.19.10 PrtPo/e flnvlMNq/FA/IS 0 $ 1.1911 PuGI[NevrM9s and Meelmpt 0 5 1.19.11 Envlrwmenfvl Permin 0 $ 0 $ 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 D S B S o $ 0 5 a 5 - ~ 'TOTAL NUVRS 30 <. 9 " 90 ~ 6 ' :: 6d 6B 21 Tl d3 e0 a ~^143 5 { : X40,9 Gi 1 ded HOUAy Raf $ 39586 f2]0.33 5 33209 $ 15336 ' r •~ < e S 10909'$ e5T91 S Ie3 E1 $ lOB.69 j~ ST 9l T s . iDlo 9 ` 3 ns 9 ~ LZ30 5 3 /33' S -' 1.433 $ r5. :... S x.,90r96i NOTE: COSTS fOR BRG iA5611.191151N[IODfO ON THE PREVIOUS PAGF Igtber 0lretl Cvsts column tlebll lees for Intl eler sub[onsul[anbl ' Nolel: Rlmon if performinp wak wFl[M1 Jnllt wllF In Toektl 19.4.4 PnE] 194.9 Nore3: MCIMeIe ASmaivtes is per/wming work wWab/alls wllFin Tvsk 1.19.43 of e3: ASM A/filiolet It per/ormin9 work wbirF Jullt wilbin Task 1.194.10 E7(HIBIT B~Revised) October 2, 1012 _ City of Chula Vista Heritage Road Bridge Replacement COST PROPOSAL-AMENDMENT NO. 1-REV Task 1 Survey ~ Aguirre J N j J TA(P . 4. CIASSIF/GTON e~ 4 . ' LY II dpol L 4 I Iv d 3rvft' Voi 1 Fu,rcyi M1 .`t ;PwryP f j p114) O, N op } $ ~ f ~ y' ' . TASYNOHP9 TA~SKm3r. Y y y . ,y < P `Y ` l - t V : , r1 [ ~Na.-; 7 DFSGIPTIDN ~ , l4pl 1 s ~ +- - 11 Proje[[M a emeneantl Ad i4mtlon 0 $ - 1.1 Prvle[e3[betlYle 0 $ - 1.3 Pm/e[t Meel/n9s:. 0 $ L0 s-Built and UNllry Pesevr[6 0 $ 1.5 Slre visit 0 $. Sb Fleld3urve fond Mapping 4 4a q0 04 $ 13,893 1.l VrzllminaryHFC/PAS AnolYrft 0 $ IA PrtllminaryFaandaNOn P¢port (PFflf 0 $ - 1.9 imf/I[AnalVSls 0 $ - 1.9o im ii MarWgemenf Plan (iMpl 0 $ - Id0 AltemotNes FVVluatbn 0 $ - l.ll Prol¢Rfle mtlarPkf¢r¢OAltemative 0 $ l.ll.l HEC/M9Analysl5 (N Mulia'Slutly) 0 $ - 1.11.1 Bridge AdvanRd %vnning Sfutly 0 $ 1.11.3 PreliminaryAeiNretk Smdles and Vlsual5lms 0 $ - 0 $ - ].IIA Vlsuallmpa[l ASSeisM¢e[ 1.11 On11in9 Permits antl Env4onmm(ol Cl¢oronre 0 $ 1.13 Geote[Mi[al lnvestlgodon 0 $ 1.19 eHege rrce xle[NOn o 5 Llq.l Fuundotlonryve SEkctlvn 0 $ - 1.19.1 PaodwvY Ond HydrpYlks COOrdinotlan 0 $ 1.14.3 Btld eGeneevl Plan and COSthtimvte 0 $ 0 $ - 1.19.4 Aestbetl[COnapl 0 $ L11.5 type xlettlan eePart 1.13 HydrolvgG Nydrvull[; ands[aur 0 $ 0 $ 1.15.1 a limtlon fw ClOMR 1.16 Pr¢Ilminary WVttr Qlwllty recdnl[alSNdlee Mem o 0 $ 1 0 $ L11 3aX Design SUbmlttol ° $ tie crenans coarebmodn LIB.f -0ritlge SYJfitlenc Pa[in9 Analysis 0 $ 0 $ LIB.1 Pmle<(fundln AnalYtli 0 $ - 1.18.3 Feplo[¢mene vc FebablllroNon Le[te[ 0 $ 1.19 NFPA/CFQAEnvlmnmentvl Documentation 0 $ , NTAL HDUR9 b ' q '0 40 , ~ '~- 9U 0 ' b 4-0 0 : 0 ~, ° P e4 $'-~ 14,093 ["Dln[I Cmn ," Aerial Mapping $13,W9 Color O,thapbvr< $]Oa Delivery $0 Total $13,J49 ...r, a~..w-w•~. '. E%HIBIT B (Revised) October 2, 2012 Cify of Chula Vista - Heritage Road Bridge Replacement COST PROPOSAL-AMENDMENT N0. 1-REV Task 1 Geotech -EMI TASK Na .* CYA£SIgU110N: °'~' k~ OFS[BV11ON - ~ Ptl tlP I ~6lM +', a, Frpln I xc Shff :3 b U. g ~ _ - ~ F 41 a ,Te a Itlonl `3j - ~ TASKNpNRf '>'- TASK COST' 1.1. Pmle[t Marg9em¢nl and Adminisfmfion g S L: Proie<IS<nedpk 0 5 l.3 Prof¢[t MeeEn s 0 S 1.4 s-eullmnd UNlisy Feseomh 0 $ LS Slb NL[ 0 $ I.6 FgeMSUrveYS antl Ma ping 0 $ L] Prellminary NFVRAS Anal If g S L8 PrzlhninoryFOUndotlon Feport (PFFf 0 S 3.9 Tmj/I[AnolYS6 0 S 1.9a TiaJfi<Management Plan liMPJ 0 S 3.10 AlternaNVes EVpNvdan 0 $ 1.11 Prale<3 RePOrt pT Pre/¢]edAlttmathe 0 $ - 1.11.1 NF[/RASAno sls (MydNNk Studyf _ g $ - 1.31.1 Fri eAAwnatl PbnnM93NdY o $ 1.11.3 PreliminaryAestneN[SNdks and Vgsua131ms g S L]1.4 Vlsuallmpa[4asses[ment 0 $ iII Odlling Permits and Fnvlronmenml Clmmna. 0 $ - 113 Geofe[Irnlmllnvtstigv[Im 4 10 1C $ 1,3]1 I.I4 vrgge Type Sele[FMn g S 1.14.1 Fvundatlon Type3ek[slon 0 S 1.10.1 RovdwaYanO Nydroulla [owdinotlon 0 $ - 1.14.3 Frbge General Plon ontl CPSt Falmate 0 $ - l.]d.4 Aetfhetk COn[e e 0 $ 3.0..3 T e3¢le<tbn Feport 0 S Ll3 HYdralogB NYdraull[s, and Smu< 0 $ LISJ Apll[atbn fo[CIOMF 0 S - 1.16 P¢Ilminary Wal¢r4ualilYTe<Fnlrol Studlet Mem o b S 1.1] 30%OHIgn 3ubmi(<al 0 S 1.18 Cvlbans COOrdlnatl n 0 S L38.1 Fria e5u i<en[Y Fagn9 Ano sls g S 3.18.1- Pro%e[t FUnding AnvlyLS 0 S 138.3 Replaamentvs. Fehv611ltpdpn te[ter 0 $ - 1.19 NfPA/CEW Envr[onmen[al na[umenfo<lon 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ - o $ TOTAL NOURS ^g . ;t 0 6 '., ,.~30 'b.0 0 'i' "0 1 ~~0 ' 0 C:"Q b O'1 I6 $ 'aJ,1T4. Na[eL ISATesfin9perfa[medby Ninyo&Maarefvllx within TOek 1.394.8 '-:Olreromsu Trawl $0 N&M 150.. $8,800 Grill Rig/TraHk $6,000 Lab Texting $1,000 Total $16,W0 Octoher 2, 2012 ExHIBIT B~Revised) City of Chula Visfa Heritage Road Bridge Replacement COST PflOPOSAL-AMENDMENT NO. 1-REV Task 3 Geotech -EMI TA9K .~ Na..i% C4133/FI(`.\TIOH F"~C~ 3 ~ :.J ;» 1 d ; a gESLa/PiION P[I !pW -s a y sn C S I( yr em N [Neer , '.S I j' F Mp ! y {, {yc f s.fi +* .fir ~ ~ ,' T s. _r, TASlINOUas TASK COSR 1.19 NfPA/CF4AE Ivnmental W[ ¢ntvtivn a $ - 1.19.1 Fleltl Fevkw/Pf3 6 $ ].39.3 Pme[r lmpOd Atea (PIAf /Area olPvten[lvl ffje[t (APE 6 $ ].19.3 Envlronmen[vl OVm CWleaion o $ ].19A Te[ani[vl6Ntlies p 5 1.t9A.1 Visuollm o[IASSessment 0 5 - 1.19.4.1 Hlnatl[ 0 $ 1.]9A.3 91dvgY o $ 1.19AA Ndse a $ 1.19.4.5 Tm)l[ ' 6 5 1.]9.4.6 Wofe[quvlltY Te[bni[ol ae ort 0 5 1.19.IJ Nyemulk anEOralno eSrusly/FlVOtlplain FValuvHVn Report 0 $' - 1.19A.8 Inlflvl Side Atsessmenl 8 5 1.19.4.9 AU quell ]ruEY 6 $ 1.194.10 Cultural Recourse 9NOY/Palewrolo9kpl ASSeu ment o 5 1.195 Initbl3tutl Che[A1kf 0 5 1.19.6 P[epore 0/eftMNe/FA/l9 8 5 1.19.7 fnvlmnmenml[ae[klist 0 $ - 1.]9.8' PuWI[Fevlew MNO/FA/IS" 0 5 1.19.9 aespane to Cpmmeetr 0 $ Id9.10 repare FlnvlMNq/FA/19 0 $ L]9.ll PuEO[Hevsings anJMeeOngs 0 $ 1.]9.II Envimnmentvl Petmiss 0 5 - 0 $ 0 $ O $ a $ ~ o $ o $ o $ o $ a $ a 5 a $ roU] novas ^' o o a '_ 0 . 0 6 ' o !-a - - o . o ~ a w. o $ ' . Jblmrrfum •;' Travel $o Rnaroe~n~o~ $a oame.Y Total $0 J N October 2, x812 E%HIBIT B (Revised City of Chula Visa Heritage Road Bridge Replacement COST PROPOSAL-AMENDMENT NO. 1-REV Task 1 Traffic - LLG TA F GA5SIFICATION L G k} ' " PM IP I l 3 M d f 1 Ill 0 L U44 f~ r ` ^.y. Cj +v } t 't,i ~. TASNNOOk3 TASY. C49T. S ,y m = . ? r 4 1 T mpw oX ~ Mn<p9 _ " ~ . 1 ~ .,.. p ~ ~ •~ ~ ", Na3-. OE3FRIPTION 1.5'T `>. ' ' Frelna¢Y' pM1aamd: I[vnJ , 1.1 Prv ect Manp9ementand Atlminls[/ptlpn 0 $ S.I Prvle[eslhetlule 0 $ ].3 Proje[s Me¢Nnet 4 ] 8 ] 31 $ 3,955 L4 s-BUNSanJ UI11Iry Fesem[b 0 $ 1.3 3ise Vlsie 1 ] 3 6 $ )91 3.6 Fle103urveys and MapPln 0 $ L] WeFminaryNEC/FA3AnnNs6 0 $ - LF PreliminaryFpunEVllvn flepprt (PFFI 0 $ 1.9 Tm AnvlYSlz 19 3) 60 )] 188 $ 39,495 ].9a TIVJJI[Manp9emen[PIan ITMP) ] )5 50 14 96 $ 15)51 LIB IremalNes FVahaNpn 0 $ - 1.]I V/%C[[FepprtJvs Pttlered AltemalNe 0 $ Lll.l NFC/XA3 Ana1YS41NyJmulh5sWY1 0 $ l.l].1 eritl eAdvonretlPbnMlp 9[WY _ 0 $ 1.11.3 PseOminp/y AeslheN[5ludles pnE Visuvl5lms 4 $ 0 $ l.]].4 Vlsual lmpaRassessment 1.11 4ri11inq Pe/mifs and Envlronmenfvl Cleasanre - 0 $ D $ 1.13 Gevse[M1nl[allnuetN9arlpn 0 $ 1.14 entl eryPe Sele[lipn ].14.1 Fvundp[lpn'rype 5elealan 0 $ 1.14.1 Fpvtlwa anJNydrvWIO CVVNInv[bn 0 $ 1.14.3 Brtlpe Gene/plPbn and Cm[FSllmpte D $. 0 $ 1.14.4 Aeslhell<COn[epe - 0 $ ].14.9 Type BeleRlvn Fepart Ll5 Nytlrolp9Y. Hytlmull[s, and5[avI 0 $ - D $ L15.] APIi[atlpn Jp/CIOMF 3.36 W¢Iiminvry WVte/puoliry Te[hnl[a131utlles Mem a D $ 1 4 $ - L]] 34%Oetign 5u6mittvl 0 $ I.IB COA/vm Cpp/dinOtlOn 3.1&I 9/id4e 5u)fl[I¢n[ Rvfin9Anplytis 0 $ 0 $ 1.1&I P/%e[[fundln MvlYSls 0 $ 1.18.3 Fe Iv['emen[vs. Fehvblllsarlvn lette/ 0 $ - 1.19 NEPA/CEgA Fnv4vnmenfal ba[umen[aNpn O $ ' ll)IAL HOU0.f .30 )4 , '.IIB ~ 91 't 4 b 0 D b 4 9 ' 311 $"`.-09,592 lppdetl HPUily Pere $ 341991.$ 389.84 $ 146.41 $ 101.1) $ 10).35 $ Bb d4: ~ i~ - . ~ . $ $ ~_~ $ S - 3ubrobl Ce]p $ 9,210°$ 13,189 $ 1),83! $ 9.816 $ -' 6~$ $ ` ~' ' ~ - - '_ dre[r Cpitl ~, ~:! -avel $4 ~ $ 49691 8epmdutllvn $0 ~ bl FG1C Is $ ._`.+ S40y SANOAGMVdeI~ $SW sumprtl s -aomx q Tolal $sa4 J N 1 October 2, 2012 - EXHIBIT B (Revised - City of Chula Vista Heritage Road Bridge Replacement COST PROPOSAL-AMENDMENT NO. 1-REV Summary -Task 2 Final Design i TASK O.~ 61 y 1 3~ OlMpflne '~ R ~ _ ~~ ~ t 6'1 Ffsl " ~. .. vy ~'~ OFSCAIP7ION . ;V. ~ "~ PM ~ k MoJj Bb NIM1 L.:r [N8 v~/ i Mff%tta vNISh I s &NG liyfOtt; N[hal yj_ ' ~ 3 N y i. j B1G ASLI <L~: L NuIINp ~y A x k -. Inc ' - Byd dv 6 4vM1nk I T ffl[ A +NttW b d dp[ elil V $l usvltll s~ lu w~N ' FA g M Norylrs 6 B empvn :B bl KN A" ,N yvn d T^nsvllvnb -Ina' En lneen >, ArtMlab `~' A+ID¢ ~ •° TASK HOUIIS "~ {-' TASRN FT. ^'. ^ Ll P/v/e[s M0na9emenLantl Atlmin15tm0an 60 34 84 $ 35,992 2.2 Pm%¢[I Meerings 28 28 3.5 59.5 $ 12,U81 l.3 final FOUndaBOn Bepvrt $ 1.4 B/Id9e Oeslgn pod Oe[olllnq $ 1.6 Bildge AS[hirettuml Oesplls $ 3.6 G/adln9 Plant (Intl w/In TafNf 3.IB, Li3,B 2.IJ1 $ 1.) flavdwvV lmpV'sf (Intl w/In Ivdc S.IB, i.}J,n J.isf $ 1.8 TmfJl[CVnt/vl Plant 24 29 $ 3,2]0 ].9 519nicg alM 3LtlPin9 Pions 24 '24 $ 3,2]0 5.10 Utllilyflelamllnn Pions 56 56 $ ],892 .ll lands[v In9 Pluns $ 1.11 Froslvn [vnhvll C0ns4u[UVn Phan B_MP's 9B 48 $ 6,]25 3.13 Pe/mv4en[BMP's 50 58 $ 8,]41 1.19 T/affl[3ignal 49 49 $ 6,999 3.15 Ssreet vnp B/Itl9e llghlinq Plvns 10 5 10.5 $ 1,968 1.36 Final Design Surveys l4 2II 226 $ 39,H9 1.1J .. ~/QC 29 80 104 $ 22,299 3.18 65%Pf&F3ubm1[MI 300 300 $ 41,3L1 2.19 Nevkwvnd8espvnd 1v 65%C0mmenb 1] 5 ll $ 2,969 S.IO B/Idge lode endent Fevlew $ 2.L' Te[M1ni[a1fPe[iJl[aHVns 40 2 42 $ ],163 E.11 quanlitles, 6limvte, and Bld USt BB 0.5 96.5 $ 12,908 1.13. 95%PSbE $ubmlttpl 198 5 203 $ 29,399 LI4 BeNew vnd flttpand sv 95% Commen4 ]2 3 15 $ 2,146 2.15 100%P38E SUbm1f[vl 12U 4 124 $ 0,512 I $ $ $ TOTAL NOVBS f12 ""' 30]8 ''212 138.5 - '< 1510,9 $,.~A3,9B0 Subfdlnl C0f6 $ 23,814 $ 163,161 $ .'$ $ 36516 $ $ -: ~ $ 19.188'- $ $ $ „`$ 5141.8}01 IJ HPbmM1DIrt[LGmtl $ 100 $ :8.820 $' ~$ $ $ 5~: ''1 $~ ~ <$ ~ p $ ,$ '9030,3 Tvsk2 T0tv1 [os4 $ 13,311 $1]1,982 $ ,$ $ 36,616 $ ~$ $~19,380:~$ ~ $ ,$ - '$~L`9o~1 bctoher 2, 2012 E%HI BIT B (Revised City of Chula Vista Heritage Road Bridge Replacement COST PROPOSAL-AMENDMENT NO. 1-REV Task 2 PM - M&N "' CIASSIfI[A-GN n II - ~N t CI rkW n l ; ~ ~ TAT%NOUflS TASK COST' TAS% NP ~ . N DESLgIP]IDNi ~ PsshxM ~` ~ ; ~ Ll P[ale[t Mano9em[nl anO AEministmtion 40 ID 6o j 11,356 Z.3 P[0)tf[Meetings 34 4 30 $ 6,054 1.3 Flnal FOUntlation R¢port 0 $ 1.4 eNtl9e Desl9n vntl Detellln9 0 $ 1.5 &Itl9eArtblte[turol Details 0 $ .E G[atlln9 Plans 0 $ 0 $ 1.] floatlway lm-rovemen4 0 $ - 1.a T[aH[CVnt[ol Plans 1.9 99nlnB antlShlping Plans 0 $ 1.10 UsIBty FelOmtlpn Plans 0 $ - 0 $ 1.11 LonES[aPln Plant Z.13 E[vNOn [PnM1PI/CPnibu[[lon Phes[aMP'3 0 $ - 3.13 PetmanentaMP's 0 $ - 0 $ 3.14 T[pff![519nu1 0 $ 3.15 Stre[t anE gtltl9e ti9F(in9 Plats 0 $ 3.16 Finol Desl nSUrveYS 1.18 65%P56F SV6mlttvl 0 $ 1.19 q¢vlew and Fes and to ES%Camments 0 $ 0 $ 3.30 a[M9e lnEepentlmtgevhw 0 $ Z.L 1e[M1nl[a15 e[ifimHOns 0 $ 1.11 quantifies, Fitlmare, and gitl Of[ O $ - 3.33 95%PTSF Submittal 1.34 flevi¢w anE R¢sponE to 95°x'CVmmenrs 0 $ LIT 100%PS8[SUbm/ttol 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ O $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ O $ 0 $ TG]ALNOI/g5 '!8 ~ 34 / 0 ~ 0 0 fU ~ 0 ' 0 ~ 0 0 d 1]2 $~ 33 D14 ` ~LPetleO Namly gory $ 33>.6i ~;$ b13 _ _ ~ ~~ ' smtptnlmsu '" £ ;, £ , $ 3aAU .'£ :age S ~ £ £ ~~ $ `S S _ „5„ S ~.~p14~ Dlte[{COSU Lravd $50 PeproducEOn $50 44 Dire[t Latte $ ._ SB01% Beiiverv $L00 366[P41 $ ]9,214 . Total $100 October 2, 2012 - E%HIBIT B (Revised) City of Chula Vista Heritage Road Bridge Replacement COST PROPOSAL-AMENDMENT NO. 1-REV Task 2 Civil - M&N t4 3 TA}K Na ~yy f 1 t ryA551FIfAT10N .1 ~ ": oaSEKIPn4ry t ~ A, M v+.,p [ pf [III [ w [n 3 nd, Ter{: c ~ G0011 .. ~hr ~ 1 Cl rkvl L ` ] TA$KH0UR9 TA$KCRST 1.1 P[O'e[I Mono ement and AtlminbhvtiOn 0 16 34 $ 4,]3] 3.1 P[v/e[LMeetingt 0 16 4 38 $ 5,330 3.3 FIn0l Foundation flepvrt b $ 1.d BHd ¢Resign gnd4etaBing e $ 3.9 B[itl eArtbile[tu[al Be[ails 0 $ - 3.6 Gmding Plvnf -Ududed In 63, 95,180% g $ 3.T Fovdwaylm-rovemi:ntr-InLluded In 63, 93, 100% 0 $ ].8 TIOffILCOI1V01 P1Yn3 B $ i.9 919Nn9 pntl 9Vi Ing Plans 0 5 1.10 UBllryfl<IOmOOn Plam ($to/m 4[aln ln[Nded In 6 3, 93,100%/ 8 34 34 56 $ ],892 1.11 t¢ndsroPln9 Plans% 0 $ 1.11 Eroslpn [onhol/(onihu[tloO Phvse BMPY 8 16 34 48 $ 6)35 Ida Pefmvn[nIBMP's~ 16 32 ]0 50 $ 8,]41 1.,4 ngm[sl npl ° 5 1.15 sneetgnd eHtlge ligban Plans 0 5 1.16 Flna14eL n3orveYS-COO[dim0vn 4 10 14 $ IJ33 3.1] 4N4C6s, 9s, 100%. 40 40 80 $ 16,595 1.18 63X P3&E3obmlttal 10 140 140 300 $ 4],311 3.19 Fevlew and F¢s'nd to 63%CVmm¢nts 4 8 1] $ 1,368 1.10 Brld9e lndepentledtflevleW 0 $ 1.11 Te[Fnhvl3PeLlfimtlons 8 10 8 40 $ 6,054 1.11 4uanfllles, FS[Imate, pnd&d list 0 40 31 B 08 $ 11,916 1,13 9s%PSBF $ubmhtal 8 30 80 00 198 $ 38,]90 .14 flavlewandflespobdro9s%COmments 4 0 13 $ 3,36e 2.15 100%PS&E3ubmittal 20 40 60 120 $ 16,013 e $ O $ 0 $ a 5 a 5 B S a $ o $ TRTAlH4UR9 84 13E . b ~ ,, 3T6 l° 0 ~` 0 ` 3ID , [ A 0 ~ "~ 0 Ifi 10)B $ 363463 laded HO4dYRVte,$~13]bls~$ ST130, 5, 16953 $ I13 B3 $ 15031 _ "$..11393 ,$ O43 ,.,. i. . `r -. '. . ( t 9ubmlPl LdsN $ 19,965 .$_,11,133 $ $ 31,!32 $ ~,. $ $~. 45 034 $ ~ „v $ ~ ~ $ . $ 1999 _ v,. ,. r, $ ,163,162 . ,Bi:.i•iraatr _ wN $16g 8epmdutllon $560 oeimew ~; Slaa Dlrectm u $ 0,010+. Pemdef lml. al Se,bb0 Subtotal $ 1]1,982' iota! $8,810 ~... __: ' - October 2, 2812 E%HIBI78~Revised) Cily of Chula Vista. Heritage Road Bridge Replacement COST PROPOSAL-AMENDMENT NO. 1-REV ' Task2iurvey-Aguirre N TA;% av ki Pa331FIUPON + i' F %1 up I* ! Q ..F d s•/MY~ 3 YieN: r W rytAll NNdf Galrvam C ~ ~.r I q ~ .. "" Tg3RHDUP3 TA.G'[PST. Na 't . i { DE6GIDOON ,': h "+~iapl[4 :- ` £ ~~ ', ~ t, ,t` 1.1 Prole[f Mano9emen[ondadminiftmtiull ° $ 11 Pia~e[t Meetlngs ° $ - i.3 FlnPlf¢undvfion Report ° $ 3A 8rbge 0¢si nantl Oetalllnq ° $ - LS Bridge arcMn[turvl Uetoi6 ° $ 1.6 Gmdkq Planf ° $ ].1 RoaawaYlmprovementf ° $ zR rmryk fomrolPl¢nf ° $ 1.9 98nlvg ¢ntl BVlPln Pbnf ° $ Ll0 Urillty Relo[a[IOn Pbnf ° $ 1.11 tandsmpln PI¢ng ° $ 1.31 F/u31on [anUOl/COnsfru[OOrl Phut¢BMP'f ° $ - 1.13 PermanentaMP'i ° $ - ma rr¢ i[slq~al ~ ° $ :.ds sneee¢na endge ugnpnq ram ° $ - 1.18 Flnvl Defl9n 8uNeYS 1$ 91 IDS III $ 36,516 1.11 qa/qc ° $ 1.18 63%P38f Submittal ° $ - 1.19 Revlewand fles ono f063%fomments ° $ LID Rrb9e lntle entlent Review ° $ LII Te[Fnim13 efl [atlons ° $ - 1.11 quvntitkf, Faimole,PMRia Llst ° $ 3.13 95%P38F SUbmItM1 ° 5 LIi fleview and Re3pundro93%COmmen[s ° $ - 1.35 ]00%PSBF Submf[tal ° $ - ° $ D $ ° $ ° $ o $ ° $ ° $ o $ ' .n . '' ~ _ v; ". ' NTALHDURS 1" 0 _. ~; 15 ~ !; "D " - 92 '°n% IDS D _. D 'FD . ,xia Sr D ` D w F , 211 .: 36,518 $ „~ , ,;. . ;'Dln[[fof4' " Pef MaPa $0 Pho[ogamerry $° Ddm=rv $D Total $D ..-w+.. N ) J October 2, 2012 E%H191T fl (Revised) City of Chula Vista Heritage Road Bridge Replacement COST PROPOSAL-AMENDMENT N0. 1-REV Task 2 Traffic - LLG TALK? na ~. M$$IFIGDON $p:{ i• t v~ p55cR6PnoN ~ P MP I :M n e I T Pwlol P(ndP^I Ij~~~ I II A GAnO I ~ ~ .~ ~ t2> f~ r - TA5KH0UR5 ' TASI(CPST. 3.1 Proje[<MOnaOem¢nf ana AdminisM1O[bn 0 $ - 1.2 Peofe[t Meealn9s 1 2.5 35 $ ]0] 1.3 final F0und9tlon flepart 0 $ 1.4 etld9¢Desi9n and Oet911in9 0 $ 1.5 0[iaOeArtblteatu•ol Detall3 0 $ 1.6 G[adln9 Pbv 0 $ 2.T RoadwaY lmPmvemenls 0 $ - 1.B TPf/I[CDn[rol Plvns 2 4 18 24 $ 3,Da L9 bi9nln90nd5[rlPln9 Plant 2 4 18 24 $ 3,2]0 1.10 U[Illt flelo[a6lon Plpns 0 $ z13 mndt<u m9 vmnt 9 $ - 2.12 F[OSlnn lnnh0l/COnsbv[61nn PbOSe aMP't. 0 $ 3.23 Pemianen[BMP't _ 0 $ 1.14 Tro i[s19n01 4 ]6 29 49 $ 6,994 zu sveee Pndene9e lyevn Pmm ] : u ]os $ ],46e LI6 Flnol Oesl9n SUrvet 0 $ 3.IT qA/qC 0 $ - 1.18 65%PS&F S9hmittPl 0 $ - 2.19 Review ondfleS dto 65%COmmMt3 1 4 9 $ 601 2.30 BrldBe lndePentl¢nI F¢vlew 0 $ 1.11 Te[MI<al SPe<i/ifP6bns 1 1 $ 309 1.13 quanU6ies, FStimo6[, ontl Bld llsS 1 ]s 8s $ 992 1.13 95%P66F5ubmiftpl 1 4 5 $ 601 3.14 Fevlew and flet nd to 95%COmmenH 1 1 3 $ 3]8 1.15 100%PSAF SUbmlrlal 1 1 2 9 $ 699 o $ o $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ D $ 0 $ 0 $ - ~ "~ TOTALHDUfl3 '% 'Sl 0 '395 9 92 ':0 0 0 9 ' 0 / .0 ~ 1385 $'+:k19,288 'Leaded NPddyfl4re $, 32],351$ 19].44 $ 154A3 $`10532 $']1165 $ 13.87: SYbfatP7Cutb $ 3,535. $ $ 51411 $ $yID,1TI $ '-$ $ ~ $ $, $ . t $ ^'19.1881 :Dhe[S fPSk` .. travel $0 flepmdudion $0 01rota Ca666 $ j Delivery $0 •SBhrotal $ 'A9,2O: carol $9