HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1981/10/13 Item 8COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 8
~~
Meeting Date 10-13-81
TITLE: Resolution ~~ b Approving change in landscaping,
Third Avenue, "` to "K" Street and authorizing
the City Engineer to execute Change Orders No. 12
and 13
SU MITTED BY: City Engineer (4/5ths Vote: Yes No x )
Th's resolution approves two change orders for the Third Avenue
Project. Change Order No. 12 deletes the fog and sand seal, and
Ch nge Order No. 13 deletes the palm trees as directed by Council
at their meeting of September 8, 1981. It is my
R COMMENDATION: That Council approve Option One and authorize
t e City Engineer to execute Change Orders No. 12 and 13.
DISCUSSION:
C an e Order No. 12
T e Engineering Department has requested Daley Corporation to
s bmit a cost to eliminate the fog seal and sand blotter on
T ird Avenue between "J" Street and "K" Street. Daley
C rporation has submitted a deduct or credit to the City of
$ ,287 to eliminate from the job specifications, the seal coat
a d sand.
U
c
a
P
a
s
t
a
a
0
d
e contract specifications for the im provement of Third Avenue,
" Street to "K" Street requires the installation of the latex
.tra Pave 70 in the 1-1/2 inch surface course of the asphalt
~ncrete pavement to be placed. The specifications also require
fog seal and sand blotter be placed after completion of the
Lacement of the surface course. On previous projects where
~phalt concrete has been placed with the Ultra Pave 70 latex,
'al coat has not been required. It is the normal procedure for
~e City to place a chip seal on the pavement surface 2-3 years
.ter the pavement has been placed. The contract specifications
Aso states that after completion of the surface course, the City
E Chula Vista will stripe the street for traffic control. By
Lacing the seal coat, this procedure would be delayed by 2:3
Sys. By eliminating the seal coat, the City has performed their
triping in conjunction with the placement of the asphalt surface
purse, thereby providing a safer means of traffic control for
he pedestrian and vehicular traffic. We have reviewed this
roposal with the State Department of Transportation who has
greed with us that the removal of the seal coat will not be
Page 2, Item $
Meeting Date 10-13-81
de rim ental to the project, and has approved the Change Order for
approval by the City. City Council policy 800-03 requires
Council approval of all contract change orders in excess of
$1,000.
C an e Order No. 13
Since the Hong Kong Orchid Trees have a different characteristic
t an the palm trees they cannot be placed in clusters like the
p lm trees have been. This has created a problem several
1 cations on Third Avenue in that there will be some tree wells
t at have been installed in the sidewalks that now cannot be
u ed. We have looked at two options:
0 tion One: Plant 65 Hong Kong Orchid trees, 15 gallon size,
a d leave 7 trees wells and grates in place as presently
c nstructed.
0 tion Two: Plant 72 Hong Kong Orchid trees, 15 gallon size, in
t e existing tree wells.
W have discussed this proposal with CalTrans' Construction
L aison Officer, Mr. Dewey McNeil. He believes that FHWA would
a prove either Option One or Two. It was his opinion that should
t e City decide to destroy the 7 tree wells constructed by
r moving the grates and filling the tree wells with dirt or
c ncrete, he doubted the State would authorize for participation
t e cost of the original installation of the tree wells.
H wever, once the project has had field inspection by the State
a d approved for acceptance, the City may be free to abandon the
t ee wells in an appropriate manner determined by the City. If
w did decide to remove the grates and fill the tree wells with
b ick or concrete after the contractor has left the job, it is my
e timate that the cost that would be disallowed would be $1670.
S by not touching the tree wells, it is my opinion that our cost
w uld range from $0 to $1670 depending on the final determination
b the State during the field inspection of the project. The
o her alternative would be to install Hong Kong Orchids in all of
t e tree wells and after the acceptance of the project to remove
t e Hong Kong Orchid trees. This alternative would cost us $245
more now than leaving them empty, but would guarantee approval
f r participation of federal funds.
I recommend Option No. One because 1) it is the least expensive
a ternative at this time, there is a very strong possibility that
e would get participation for the empty tree wells and 2) I feel
it would be impractical to install the trees now and then remove
hem at a later date.
~/a 65~
Page 3, Item 8
Meeting Date 10-13-81
IAL STATEMENT:
~tion One:
Delete 72 Palms at $107.00 each. Credit $7,704.00
Plant 65 Hong Kong Orchids at $35.00 2,275.00
each
TOTAL Credit $5,429.00
~tion Two:
Delete 72 Palms at $107.00 each Credit $7,704.00
Plant 72 Hong Kong Orchids at 2,520.00
$35.00 each
TOTAL Credit $5,184.00
AL FINANCIAL STATEMENT
sed on my recommendation for Option One.
hange Order No. 13
ity Council Authorized Expenditure $1,820,940.00
riginal Contract Cost 1,667,805.05
otal Change Orders to date - 1,007.70
evised Contract Cost, Change Orders
1 through 11 1, 666, 797.35
hange Order 12 - 5,287.00
hange Order 13, Option One - 5,429.00
evised Contract Cost $1,656,081.35
ISCAL IMPACT
n two to five years the City will chip seal Third Avenue from
~" to "K" Street. This procedure is normally accom plisnea on all
avement placed with the latex additive, and will be included
nder the C.I.P. for the Chip Seal Program.
M H: n r/ A P- 014 t"'~„`..°°~,°---@-~~.._..~ .:_-,.,.~,. ~...~..,~.,
i '~ Q
~-
v~
_____ ___
~ sy