The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutR-1996-129 Amendment to an Agreement / CH2M Hill / I82 Gateway ProjectRESOLUTION NO. R-96-129 A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager and City Clerk of the City of Yakima to execute an amendment, as provided in the existing consultant agreement with CH2M Hill Inc., to allow for the adjustment of the specific rates of pay for consultant services on the I82 / Gateway Project.. WHEREAS, The City of Yakima contemplates the completion of the design of the I82 / Gateway Project, and, WHEREAS, The City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City that the attached amendment document be executed by the City of Yakima, accordingly, now therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA: The City Manager and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute a specific rate of pay amendment with CH2M Hill Inc., for the purpose mentioned above, a copy of which agreement is attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 174- day of September, 1996 ATTEST: j a s --e A,t62 .J) c c__ . City Clerk 2 — September 13, 1996 Lynn Buchanan, Mayor LL Ce lebialing 50Yea,s September 9, 1996 117482.7A Glenn Rice Assistant City Manager City of Yakima 129 North 2nd Yakima, Washington 98901 Dear Mr. Rice: Subject: I-82/Yakima Gateway Project 1996 Specific Rates of Pay CITY OF 1' K E?ti^t\ CH2M HILL 777 108th Avenue NE Bellevue, WA 98004-5118 SSP 1 3 1996 Mailing address: PO Box 91500 g$ ANA Bellevue, WA ,„ 98009-2050 Tel 206.453.5000 Fax 206.462.5957 As requested, I have modified our May 12, 1996, letter requesting adjustments to the specific rates of pay. In accordance to Section V of our Consultant Agreement for the I-82/Yakima Avenue Interchange and Fair Avenue Project, executed November 12, 1991, the specific rates of pay for CH2M Hill and our subconsultants are subject to negotiation for calendar year 1996. Accordingly, we request the City's approval of the revised specific rates of pay for CH2M Hill, as shown in Table 1. The revised rates of pay for our subconsultants will be submitted under separate cover when available. CH2M Hill rates have been adjusted to reflect firmwide, overall rates for 1996. The rates are inclusive of direct salaries, payroll additives, overhead, and fee. CH2M Hill's 1996 overhead rate has not been modified from that accepted by the City with the execution of the original Consultant Agreement. The City's approval of these revised rates for 1996 will not change the maximum amount payable under our original agreement, as currently supplemented. With this letter, CH2M Hill hereby requests that the hourly rates, given in Exhibit D-2 to the original Consultant Agreement, be increased by approximately 3.0% and that these increases be made effective October 1, 1996. If the City concurs, please sign in the space provided below and return a copy of this letter to us at your earliest convenience. Mr. Glenn Rice Page 2 September 9, 1996 117482.7A Table 1 (Exhibit D-2, Original Agreement) Consultant Fee Determination - Summary Sheet (Specific Rates of Pay) Fee Schedule -1996 Class/ Job Title Role Hourly Rate Overhead @ 168% Profit @ 27% 1996 Rate Per Hour 1995 Rate Per Hour EN9 Principal 88.81 149.21 23.98 262.00 254.37 EN8 Senior Consultant 55.23 92.79 14.91 162.93 158.19 EN7 Senior Reviewer 48.47 81.44 13.09 143.00 138.83 EN6 Senior Lead Engineer 39.63 66.57 10.70 116.89 113.49 EN5 PM/Lead Engineer 34.35 57.70 9.27 101.33 98.38 EN4 Task Lead Engineer 29.60 49.74 7.99 87.33 84.79 EN3 Project Engineer 25.83 43.40 6.97 76.20 73.98 EN2 Design Engineer 22.88 38.43 6.18 67.49 65.52 EN1 Designer 20.56 34.55 5.55 60.66 58.90 ENO Designer 17.22 28.92 4.65 50.79 49.31 1E5 Task Lead Technician 26.81 45.04 7.24 79.09 76.79 TE4 Design Technician 22.70 38.13 6.13 66.95 65.00 TE3 Lead Drafting Tech 19.27 32.38 5.20 56.86 55.20 TE2 Drafting Technician 16.32 27.42 4.41 48.15 46.75 TE1 Technician 13.60 22.85 3.67 40.13 38.96 TEO Technician 10.44 17.53 2.82 30.79 29.89 OA Office Clerk 13.35 22.42 3.60 39.37 38.23 Mr. Glenn Rice Page 3 September 9, 1996 117482.7A If you have any questions or would like additional information, please to call me at (206) 453- 5005, ext. 5552. Sincerely, CH2M Hill, Inc. XtA;,‘ Tat, Kevin S. Nichols, P.E. Project Manager cc: Fred French/City of Yakima bls/1996RATEv2.DOC Approved, City of Yakima 1 enn Rice Assistant City Manager Date: 10/ / 7/9. 6 Dick Zais, City Manager Attest: Karen S. Roberts, CMC City Clerk g6 -9 (R -Q6 -N9) City Contract Number BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT Item No. For Meeting Of September 17,1996 ITEM TITLE: I82/Gateway 1996 Consultant Specific Rates of Pay SUBMITTED BY: Department of Community and Economic Development Engineering Division CONTACT PERSON/TELEPHONE: Fred French, City Engineer / 575-6096 SUMMARY EXPLANATION: The consultant for the Gateway project, CH2M Hill, has requested to adjust the specific rates of pay for the project, as provided in the existing consultant agreement. This adjustment of the specific rates of pay will not affect the maximum amount payable under the existing consultant agreement as amended. Resolution X Ordinance Contract Other (Specify) Funding Source APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL: g ,AP. anager STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the attached resolution BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH CH2M HILL FOR THE I-82 PROJECT COUNCIL ACTION: Resolution adopted. RESOLUTION W. R-96-129 September 13, 1996 SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT #4 PROJECT NO. AGENCY NAME OF PROJECT AGREEMENT NO. Gentlemen: 106510 (NPT32984) City of Yakima I-82/Yakima Avenue Interchange and Fair Avenue Project 91-103/D-6015 The City of Yakima desires to supplement the agreement entered into with CH2M Hill, Inc., executed on November 12, 1991 and identified as Agreement No. 91-103/D-6015. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the parties hereto have previously entered into a agreement for professional services; and WHEREAS, the CITY has requested, on behalf of the Washington State Department of Transportation, South Central Region, hereinafter referred to as the STATE, that the CONSULTANT assist the CITY and STATE by performing construction engineering services related to the PROJECT; and WHEREAS, Section XIV, EXTRA WORK of the AGREEMENT provides for payment by supplemental agreement for additional work; and WHEREAS, both parties desire to supplement said AGREEMENT by expanding the Scope of Work and increasing the maximum total payable to cover the cost of the construction engineering work on the PROJECT, NOW THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed that the terms, stipulations and conditions of the original November 12, 1991 AGREEMENT shall be binding upon the parties hereto except insofar as amended by this SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT as follows: I Section II, SCOPE OF WORK, shall be amended at the end of the section, on Page 1 of the AGREEMENT, by adding the following thereto: The CONSULTANT shall perform the work tasks necessary to complete the construction engineering work for the PROJECT as further detailed in Exhibit B, Supplemental Agreement #4, Phase IV - Construction Engineering Services attached hereto, and by this reference, made a part of this AGREEMENT. II Section IV, TIME FOR BEGINNING AND COMPLETION, shall be amended to change the COMPLETION DATE, shown in the heading of the AGREEMENT to read August 1, 1996. Yakima Gateway Project 7/18/95 Supplemental Agreement #4 Page 2 III Section V, PAYMENT, shall be amended on Page 2 of the AGREEMENT after the first sentence, by adding the following thereto: A Summary of Payments under the original AGREEMENT, Supplemental Agreement #1, Supplemental Agreement #2, Supplemental Agreement #3 and Supplemental Agreement #4, is set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto, and by this reference made a part of this AGREEMENT. The maximum amount payable for completion of work under the original AGREEMENT, as shown in the heading of the AGREEMENT, shall be increased by this SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT to four million seven hundred seventy thousand fifty and zero one-hundreth dollars ($4,770,050.00), inclusive of all fees and other costs. A detailed breakdown of the CONSULTANT's cost proposal for this SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT is attached hereto as Exhibit B-1, and summarized in Exhibit D-1 attached hereto, and by this reference made a part of this SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT. EXECUTION If you concur with the provisions of this SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT and agree to the changes as stated above, please so indicate by affixing your signature in the appropriate spaces below and return to the CITY'S office for final action. Sincerely, CH2M . , Inc. CITY OF J MA By: r �■r Richard A. Kuehn, P.E. Transportation Manager Date: 9) 7 / 95 yaksup4.doc By: Richard A. Zais, Jr. City Manager Date: A'IThSTED: By: fhtlGjCity Clerk Date: City Contract No. q-5-qa R- 4S'/0 Yakima Gateway Project 7/18/95 EXHIBIT A Supplemental Agreement #4 SUMMARY OF PAYMENTS Phase IV - Construction Engineering Services Fee Itemization/Status Phase I (OriginalAgreemeat) Phase II (Supplement#1) Phase M (Supplement #2) Phase II & III Extra Work (Supplement#3) Phase IV (Supplement #4) Totals Fee Itemization: Direct Salary Cost S75,057 $328,190 $378,341 5311,618 577,300 51,170,506 Overhead S126,097 $551,360 $635,613 5523,519 $129,864 $1,966,453 Direct Non -Salary Costs 563,845 $529,931 5509,400 $272,480 $25,750 51,401,406 Fixed Fee 520,265 $88,611 $102,152 $84,137 520,871 $316,036 Subtotals $285,264 $1,498,092 $1,625,506 $1,191,754 $253,785 $4,854,401 Optional Services SO $73,298 $322,000 (5322,000) $73,298 Escalation 50 $0 $0 $0 54,561 $4,561 Fee Totals $285,264 $1,498,092 $1,625,506 $1,191,754 $258,346 - $4,932,260 Fee Adjustments: Fixed Fee Credit (520,265) (588,611) (553,334) $0 $0 ($162,210) Adjusted Fee Totals $264,999 $1,409,481 $1,572,172 $1,191,754 $258,346 $4,770,050 SUPP4EXA.XLS 7/18/95 EXHIBIT B Supplemental Agreement #4 SCOPE OF WORK Phase IV - Construction Engineering Services YAKIMA GATEWAY PROJECT CITY OF YAKIMA CH2M BILL July 1995 Yakima Gateway Project 7/18/95 Page 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The scope of work described herein consists of providing construction engineering services (Phase IV) for Stage 1 of the PROJECT titled `Yakima Gateway'. The major features of the PROJECT to be constructed in Stage 1 are as follows: 1. Widening of Yakima Avenue including one new bridge, one bridge widening and one bridge modification. 2. Fair Avenue extension from Spruce to North Tenth Streets. New Lincoln Avenue as the permanent westbound leg and restripping and signing B and North Tenth Streets as the temporary eastbound leg of the Lincoln/B Street couplet. 3. New bridge overcrossing Fair Avenue on the CL Line and replacement rails on the existing CL Line Overcrossing I-82. 4. Ramp widenings at the Yakima Avenue terminals of the BR, CR, BL and EL Lines. 5. New TAR Line ramp from southbound I-82 to Fair Avenue and new J Line ramp from Yakima Avenue to Fair Avenue. 6. Storm drainage; illumination; traffic signalization at three intersections; signs and pavement markings; and utilities including water and sewer lines. ENCLOSURES A. LincolnB Street Couplet Layout Plan PHASE IV CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING SERVICES Provide construction engineering services as described hereinafter to assist the STATE, as the CITY' s advisor, in the construction of the PROJECT. ASSUMPTIONS The scope of work described herein is premised on the following assumptions: 1. The level of effort for a given work task is limited to the amount of labor and expenses indicated in Exhibit B-1 and summarized in Exhibit D-1. Additional services beyond these limits will be considered extra work. 2. This scope of work has been prepared on the basis that the CONSULTANT will generally supplement STATE staff as an advisor on behalf of the CITY in providing construction engineering services. The CITY and the STATE shall be responsible for the overall construction observation, scheduling and other resident work tasks. 3. This scope of work has been prepared on the basis that the CONSULTANT will generally supplement CITY water and sewer staff in providing construction engineering services related to the utility work 4. The duration for providing construction engineering services will be through August 1, 1996. Yakima Gateway Project 7/18/95 Page 2 5. Change order and/or force account work preparation assistance performed as part of Tasks 3 and 6 will be limited to: 1) evaluation of feasibility and potential impacts; 2) revisions to contract plans, specifications, and quantities (red -and -green mark-ups); and 3) assessment of cost implications. 6. The amount of labor and expenses indicated in Exhibit B-1 for Task 6 Optiiral On-call Services will rot be exceeded without written authorization from the CITY. Additional on-call services beyond these limits will be considered extra work WORK TASKS The CONSULTANT will perform the following major task assignments: TASK 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT. This task includes the work necessary to manage the CONSULTANT's efforts, administer the contract, monitor progress and provide direction on the tasks itemized in this section. The project manager will facilitate communications between team members and the funding partners regarding progress on the tasks listed below, maintain team continuity and arrange for additional staff as appropriate to respond to schedule revisions. The project manager will be responsible to the CITY to ensure that the tasks listed hereinafter are technically competent and meet the CITY's needs and expectations. TASK 2 PRECONSTRUCTION ASSISTANCE Task 2.1 Services During Bidding. Provide technical assistance to the CITY and the STATE during bidding of Stages 1A, 1B, and 1C of the project including but not limited to responding to Contractor questions and preparation of contract addendums for distribution by the STATE. Task 2.2 Partnering Sessions. Participate in up to three (3) partnering sessions attended by the CITY and STATE staff, the contractor, and the CONSULTANT's project manager. Task 2.3 Preconstruction Conference. Prepare for and attend the preconstruction conferences for Stages 1A, 1B, and 1C of the PROJECT. Provide designer representation, interpretation and clarification of contract documents, and assistance in coordinating construction activities between the Contractor, utility franchises, and the other agencies present. TASK 3 CHANGE ORDER PREPARATION ASSISTANCE Task 3.1 Sewer Redesign (Change Order 1-1). This change order request was initiated by the Target site developer and is necessary to accommodate sanitary sewer elevation constraints at the proposed grocery store on the site. Revise the Stage 1 contract documents and prepare an Engineer's estimate to incorporate sanitary sewer revisions at F -Line Station B212+65. Task 3.2 Target Utility Connections (Change Order 1-4). This change order request was necessary to coordinate utility work between the PROJECT and the Target site development. Revise the Stage 1A contract documents and cost estimates to redirect the responsibility for the Target site utility connection work from the developer's contractor to the STATE's contractor. Task 3.3 Drainage Revisions (Change Order 1-6). At the CITY's request on February 10, 1995, revise the design of portions of the proposed Fair Avenue Stage 1 drainage system to discharge to existing CITY storm sewer and eliminate runoff treatment basins B and E. Prepare revisions to the drainage system on Fair Avenue in the vicinity of F Line Station 234+00 to Station 243+50 to reduce construction costs and conform to the CITY's proposed Comprehensive Storm Water Plan. Prepare the necessary revisions to the contract documents Yakima Gateway Project 7/18/95 Page 3 to assist in the change order preparation. Revise the affected drainage design calculations, quantities, Engineer's estimate, and Hydraulics Report Supplement. Task 3.4 Marti's Water Line (Change Order 1-7). This work was originally designated for inclusion in the Stage 1B contract. Revise the Stage 1A contract documents to incorporate a 12 -inch water main along the Y Line and BL Line adjacent to the Marti's Restaurant site. Engineering work for this task has been completed but inclusion in the Stage lA contract documents has been deferred, pending action by the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB). Task 3.5 Stage 1A Detour 1 Revisions (Change Order 1-8). At the STATE's request, evaluate the feasibility of revising Stage IA Detour 1 to enable the Yakima Avenue Overcrossing Fair Avenue bridge to be constructed in one stage. Determine necessary revisions to the alignment, channelization, and detour roadway cross sections. Develop quantities, Engineer's estimates, and prepare a list of associated potential impacts of revised detour alignment. This change order proposal was not incorporated into the Stage IA work. Task 3.6 LincolnB Couplet (Change Order 1-10). At the direction of the CITY on June 20, 1995, revise the temporary tee intersection between Fair Avenue and North 10th Street as shown in Figure 1 by: 1) including the permanent configuration of the LN Line from North 9th Street to the F Line; 2) modifying the TF Line for eastbound traffic; and 3) including signing and striping on B Street and North 10th Street to make B Street one- way eastbound and North 10th Street one-way northbound. No paving will be provided on B or 10th Streets. Approximately nine (9) plan sheets will be revised and a list of quantity revisions provided. The STATE will prepare the narrative and execute the change order. Task 3.7 Grading Revisions at CR/DR Lines (Change Order 1-11). Revise the Stage lA contract documents to reduce the quantity of stockpiled material and associated project costs. Prepare revisions to earthwork, grading plans, roadway sections, drainage plans, and quantities. TASK 4 CONSTRUCTION OFFICE ASSISTANCE Task 4.1 Construction Schedule Review. Review the Contractor's critical path construction schedule for Stages 1A, 1B, and 1C to confirm consistency with the design intent of the contract documents. Task 4.2 Clarification and Interpretation of Contract Documents. At the request of the CITY or the STATE, provide technical assistance to clarify and interpret the contract documents. Assist in answering Contractor questions and trouble -shooting problems encountered in the field. Task 4.3 Bridge Technical Advisor. Provide technical assistance to review proposed construction methods, contractor submittals, and proposed revisions to the contract documents as they apply to the design and construction of the bridge structures. Work performed under this task will be coordinated through the STATE Bridge and Structures Office (Contact person: Mr. Yum M. Tam, P.E.). Task 4.4 Review of Changed Conditions. Review the impacts of changed conditions encountered in the field on the design and construction of effected project elements, including but not limited to variable subsurface conditions and differing as -built conditions of structures and utilities. Task 4.5 Reference Drawings. Document field revisions to the Plans based on clarification/interpretation requests, approved field design changes, and other information supplied by the CITY, the STATE and the Contractor. Task 4.6 Public Relations Assistance. Assist the CITY in preparation of periodic news releases, weekly project status reports, and bi-monthly project briefings with the CITY Council and County Commissioners. The STATE will provide monthly oblique aerial photographs of the project site for use in preparation of news releases and status reports. Yakima Gateway Project 7/18/95 Page 4 Task 4.7 Cost Reduction Incentive Proposal Review. Review Cost Reduction Incentive Proposals (CRIPS) to confirm consistency with the design intent of the contract documents. A total of ten (10) proposals are anticipated throughout the duration of construction. Task 4.8 Project Cost Management. Facilitate the integration of the project scope with available project funding by providing management of potential cost issues that may impact the total project cost. Determine cost implications and provide tracking of each cost issue that impacts PROJECT cost. Task 4.9 Issues Resolution. Provide Level 4 participation in issues resolution as defined in the Partnering Workshop Minutes, dated March 9 & 10, 1995. TASK 5 CONSTRUCTION FIELD ASSISTANCE Task 5.1 Construction Observation. Provide periodic field observations during specific stages of construction to confirm conformance with the design intent and the contract documents. Prepare field observation reports for submittal to the CITY. A total of ten (10) site visits are anticipated throughout the duration of construction. TASK 6 OPTIONAL ON-CALL SERVICES. At the request of the CITY or the STATE, provide on-call construction engineering services in excess of those previously described under PHASE IV Construction Engineering Services Tasks 1 through 5. Work performed under this task may include but not be limited to the following: Task 6.1 Construction Surveying. Provide surveying services to facilitate construction of the project and/or preparation of the record drawings. Task 6.2 Construction Meetings. In conjunction with the CITY or the STATE , attend periodic meetings at the construction site to discuss construction -related issues and/or review the Contractor's progress and construction schedule. Task 6.3 Contractor Submittal Review. Review Contractor submittals to confirm consistency with the design intent of the contract documents. Task 6.4 Construction Observation/Resident Services. Supplement CITY and/or STATE field staff by providing a resident observer during construction. Task 6.5 Change Order / Force Account Assistance. In the event that the provisions of the contract documents need to be revised, assist in the preparation and/or review of change orders and/or force account work orders, other than those listed in Task 3. Task 6.6 Utilities Assistance. Provide assistance to resolve conflicts that may arise between proposed and existing utilities and provide coordination with utility agencies. Task 6.7 Idea Definition and Development. Review time and cost saving proposals as outlined in the Partnering Workshop Minutes, dated March 9 & 10, 1995. Task 6.8 Miscellaneous On -Call Services. Perform miscellaneous construction engineering services as requested by the CITY or the STATE. Yakima Gateway Project 7/18/95 Page 5 5 0 A 0 ?+, LIE - - „ 1 34r R.19E,4 14,(..11,4. ---.1 • 41. ' 1L1 1.1 ! ; 1 I i (1 -- it It :1 1,Ls • • , , „ • .. E. LINCOLN AOC: • - ---t ,4. • I • IL. 1,11 0 • 1, I 1 1,1 LJ:1 I ' C:1 • I ---• c-,1 1 1' 1---1 L-."'2--..1, 11 . 'f"'"'" .,--.-1 •_,..1 i 1 i 1 *1-‘,..,'„; 1 . 1 • 63 1 I 1 71, 11 I I I; i t) • t I 1 r, I I 41 SO 200 SCALE IN FEET LJ o r St 4..4 rj 7 - ! CifM HILL DESIGNED BY 8.P. Shinn ENTERED BY E.C. 815077 CHECKED BY 10 TATE WASH PROJ. ENGR. E Biome JOS DIST. ADM. R.L. Ler on DATE DATE REVISION or C1114..11C1 NO. FED. AID PROJ NO. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT DIVISION DITOIVAIJA CITY OF YAKIMA Allik Washington State Department of Transportation FIGURE 1 LINCOLN/B COUPLET CHANGE ORDER PLOT C01400011 115.JUL-1166 1407 sixan CAD CCoTROL DA TE, 111-JUL -1595 14156117 CAD 5672 265001CH.500 SUP4FEE2.XLS EXHIBIT B-1 Supplemental Agreement #4 FEE ITEMIZATION Phase IV - Construction Engineering Services 7118/95 Task/[temZM RILL L fours by Grade Summary E9 ' E8 E7 E6 ES E4 E3 E2 El T5 T4 T3 T2. T1 OA SERVICES Total Task Hours Percent Of Total Hours Total Labor Costs Approx. Total Expenses Total Labor and Expenses Phase IV CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TASK 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT. Task 1.1 Project Management 180 40 220 7.3 $19,238 $1,924 $21,1 Task Subtotal 0 0 0 0 180 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 220 7.3 $19,238 $1,924 $21,1o. TASK 2 PRECONSTRUCTION ASSISTANCE Task 2.1 Services During Bidding. 12 40 40 24 116 3.9 $7,414 $741 $8,155 Task 2.2 Partnering Sessions. 48 6 54 1.8 $4,952 $495 $5,447 Task 2.3 Preconstruction Conference. 60 6 66 2.2 $6,132 $613 $6,746 Task Subtotal 0 0 0 0 120 0 40 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 36 236 7.9 $18,498 $1,850 820,348 TASK 3 STAGE 1 CHANGE ORDER PREPARATION ASSISTANCE Task 3.1 Sewer Redesign (Change Order 1-1). 2 4 2 2 1 11 0.4 $822 $82 $904 Task 3.2 Target Utility Corms (Chan. e Order 1-4). 2 2 4 0.1 $366 $37 $403 Task 3.3 Drainage Revisions (Chane Order 1-6). 1 112 188 1 48 6 356 11.9 $24,096 $2,410 $26,506 Task 3.4 Marti's Water Line (Change Order 1-7). 4 2 31 12 49 1.6 $3,170 $317 $3,487 Task 3.5 Stage lA Detour 1 Rev. (Change Order 1-8). 4 16 20 0.7 $1,577 $158 $1,735 Task 3.6 Lincohs/B Couplet (Chan. a Order 1-10). 24 180 174 12 390 13.0 $29,394 $5,886 $35,280 Task 3.7 Grading Rev. @ CR/DR (Chan • e Order 1-11). 4 8 1 13 0.4 $952 $95 $1,047 Task Subtotal 0 0 0 0 41 300 16 0 221 1 244 0 0 0 20 843 28.1 560,378 $8,984 869,362 TASK 4 CONSTRUCTION OFFICE ASSISTANCE Task 4.1 Construction Schedule Review. 16 4 20 0.7 $1,727 $173 $1,900 Task 4.2 Clarif./ Interpretation ofContract Documents. 80 80 80 12 252 8.4 $18,961 $1,896 $20,857 Task 4.3 Bridge Technical Advisor. 8 40 16 8 72 2.4 $4,995 $499 $5,4' Task 4.4 Review of Changed Conditions. 8 16 16 16 8 64 2.1 $4,576 $458 $5,0_ Task 4.5 Reference Drawings. 20 40 60 2.0 $4,927 $493 $5,420 Task 4.6 Public Relations Assistance. 40 40 20 20 120 4.0 $8,960 $896 $9,856 Task 4.7 Cost Reduction Incentive Proposal Review. 24 80 40 20 164 5.5 $11,252 $1,125 $12,378 Task 4.8 Project Cost Management. 160 80 40 280 9.3 $23,189 $2,319 $25,508 Task 4.9 Issues Resolution. 80 40 120 4.0 $9,400 $940 $10,340 Task Subtotal 0 0 0 0 436 16 376 0 112 0 20 40 0 0 152 1152 38.4 $87,988 58,799 896,786 TASK 5 CONSTRUCTION FIELD ASSISTANCE Task 5.1 Construction Observation. 160 20 180 6.0 $14,330 $1,433 $15,763 Task Subtotal 0 0 0 0 0 160 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 180 6.0 $14,330 81,433 $15,763 TASK 6 OPTIONAL ON-CALL SERVICES. Task 6.1 Optional On-call Services 30 60 60 60 60 40 40 20 370 12.3 $27,604 $2,760 $30,364 Task Subtotal 0 0 0 30 60 60 60 0 60 0 40 0 40 0 20 370 12.3 527,604 $2,760 830,364 Phase IV - Construction Engineering Totals 0 0 0 30 837 536 492 0 433 1 304 40 40 0 288 3,001 100.0 $228,035 825,750 $253,785 (Excluding Escalation & Contingency) EXHIBIT D-1 Supplemental Agreement #4 CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION Phase' JY = Construction Engineering Services 1. DIRECT SALARY COST (DSC) Classification EN9 EN8 EN7 EN6 EN5 EN4 EN3 EN2 EN1 TE5 TE4 TE3 TE2 TE1 OA Role Principal Senior Consultant Senior Reviewer Senior Lead Engineer PM/Lead Engineer Task Lead Engineer Project/Resident Engineer Design Engineer Designer Task Lead Technician Design Technician Lead Drafting Technician Drafting Technician Technician Office Clerk 2. TOTAL DIRECT SALARY COST (DSC) 1995 Hourly Hours Rate ($) 0 86.23 0 53.62 0 47.06 30 38.47 837 33.35 536 28.74 492 25.08 0 22.21 433 19.97 1 26.03 304 22.04 40 18.71 40 15.85 0 13.21 288 12.96 3,001 3. OVERHEAD COST (OH) - Including Salary Additives (Based on Federal Audit) DSC x 168.00% 4. FIXED FEE 5. REIMBURSABLES: Service Center: Travel Costs: Miscellaneous: 7/18/95 SUP4FEE2.XLS DSC x 27.00% Computer Printing/Reproduction/Graphics Word Processing Equipment Rental Photogrammetry Equipment Communication Charge Subtotal Fleet Vehicle (250 mi/trip * 20 trips * $0.28/mi) Lodging (15 nights @ $50/night) Meals (40 days @ $25/day) Subtotal Postage/Freight Supplies Subtotal Cost ($) 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,154.10 27,913.95 15,404.64 12,339.36 0.00 8,647.01 26.03 6,700.16 748.40 634.00 0.00 3,732.48 Average Labor Rate $77,300 $129,864 $20,871 $9,878 1,600 2,980 0 0 3,492 $17,950 $1,400 750 1,000 $3,150 $750 600 $1,350 $25.76 Outside Services: Temporary Help Other Outside Services Subtotal Reimbursables Subtotal 6. SUBCONSULTANT COSTS $1,400 1,900 $3,300 $25,750 $0 17. SUBTOTAL FEE - CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING SERVICES (PHASE IV) $253,785 8. ESCALATION COSTS: 1996 Labor rates over 1995: Current work planned in 1996: 1997 Labor rates over 1995: Current work planned in 1997: Salary escalation factor: Escalation Costs Subtotal 4.00% 50.00% 8.16% 0.00% 2.00% $4,561 19. TOTAL FEE - CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING SERVICES (PHASE IV) $258,346 10. MANAGEMENT RESERVE FUND (City Contingency) $0.00 Iii. GRAND TOTAL - CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING SERVICES (PHASE IV) $258,346 7/18/95 SUP4FEE2.XIS Project No. 9E-180(001)-1 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT ACCOUNT (TIA) URBAN CONSTRUCTION PROSPECTUS DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS #3 How wiH the project improve existing conditions? ANSWER: 1.) Relieve congestion on E. Yakima Ave/Terrace Heights Way and at the 8th/9th St. intersections with Yakima Ave. 2.) Improve access from the Fairgrounds/Sundome/Ball Stadium to 1-82. 3.) Promotes economic development by preserving access to existing businesses and providing access to the Northwest quadrant of the interchange area. 4.) Improves air quality. 5.) Reduce the number of accidents. 6.) Provide bicycle/pedestrian safe access across 1-82. #4 Date the project will be advertised for bids and the estimated project completion date. ANSWER: Key Milestone Dates Stage 1A Advertise December 19, 1994 Bid Opening Februaty 1, 1995 Award March 7, 1995 Start Construction March 17. 1995 Fair Avenue Opens in Front of Target August 16. 1995 Sewer Service to Target November 6,1995 Construction Complete January 24. 1996 Stage 1 B R/W clears August 30, 1995 Advertise September 4, 1995 Bid Opening October 13. 1995 Award November 10. 1995 Start Construction November 29, 1995' Ramp J Opens April 4, 1996' Construction Complete July 1.1996' Stage 1C R/W clears December 1,1995 Advertise December 4,1995 Bid Opening January 10, 1996 Award February 9, 1996 Start Construction March 19, 1996' Complete UncolnB Couplet October 10, 1996' Construction Complete October 10,.1996' 'To be verified by Contracts construction schedule YAKIMA GATEWAY REDEFINED PHASE 1 CROSS SECTIONS UNCOLN - 'B' / LN UNE COUPLET B UNE R/V R/V R/V 60' TYP. s 5' 30' 3.3' 2 LANES SDVK SDVK 75' TYP. R/V FAIR AVE / F UNE EXTENSION (LOOKING SOUTH) RAMP J YAKIMA Y UNE AVENUE YAKIMA / Y UNE AVENUE (UNDER EAST STRUCTURE) R/V 36' 3 LANES 73' TYP. SDVK R/V SDVK DIKE R/V f00' TYP. DIKE SDVK R/V -. 1J i- 7.7 10' 3 LANES 2 LT TUR!! LANES SDVK DIKE R/V f00' TYP. DIKE SDVK R/V 24' 2 LANES 12' 24' LT TURN 2 LANES DIKE 3.s' 10' I3' A GATESECT.DVG 6-21-% 24' 24' 24' 3.5 10' 2 LANES 2 LT TUR!! LANES 2 LANES 24' 2 LANES 12' 24' LT TURN 2 LANES DIKE 3.s' 10' I3' A GATESECT.DVG 6-21-% WASHINGTON Yakima Com oro:ion Cintir Yakima Omicron% TERRACE HEIGHTS WAY Terrace Heights Central Washington Stab Fairgrounds Union Gap VICINITY MAP .►�9E •1 8 0( 001-1 rill Transportation Improvement Account , TIA) URBAN CONSTRUCTION RUCTION PROSPECTUS Funding Sources Local match is considered to be eligible in-kind contributions and all tuns other than Transportation Improvement Account (flA) funds a Urban Arterial Trust Account (UATA) funds. The minimum local match is 20% of the total eligible project cost. List all funding sources and the amount of funds pledged for the project. 1 • Source Private or Public? Amount of Funds City of Yakima (bond 1/n gas tax, STP) Public $2,336,041 City of Yakima Transit Funds Public $ 218,168 Yakima County STP Funds Public $ 654,503 WDOT (SCR) Funds Public $2,556,270 Local Developer R/W Dedication Value Public $1,190,363 TOTAL LOCAL MATCHING FUNDS $ 6,758,058* List al agencies ands private groups involved in the project Describe their involvement. City of Yakima - Lead Agency, Local Match Yakima County - Co -Partner, Local Match WDOT, S.C. Region - Co -Partner, Local Match Gary Lukehart - Co -Partner, Local Match *An additional $197,287 is available in local matching funds for match to TIA contingency funds. 118 r .t,0014 N.r:.e ea+ Pala 2 of 6 N <•1 No. 9 E _ - 1 8 0 (0 01 ) -1_ Transportation Improvement Account ( riA) 1 URBAN CONSTRUCTION PROSPECTUS Project Cost Estimate Total Environmental Design Pre design Study �[ Study Cost Predesign Phase $ 156,245 ; $ 1,591,533 $ 1,747,778 • Special Design Studies Design , Engineering Total Right Design of Way Cost Phase $ 387,781 $2,149,549 $ 2,404,878 $ 4,942,208 Contract Construction Amount ; orher Total Construction Construction Engineering cost Phase I $10,988,761 -- $ 1,096,037 j $12,084,798 TOTAL PROJECT COST � $18,774,784 Value Engineering, Environmental, or Other Special Studies. Work performed by the local agency's own forces, and/or negotiated contracts with Utilities & Railroads ... Minimum Local Matching Ratio is 20% 1A. TOTAL ENGINEERING ( Design Engineering + 1B. MAXIMUM EUGIBLE ENGINEERING (25%x Contract 1C. NON-EIJGIBLE ENGINEERING COSTS (1A • 18 1D. TOTAL BJGIBL.E PROJECT COSTS (Total Project tE Line P of Phase Increase Worksheet 1F. TIA FUNDS (Total Project Cost -1 E) _............... 1G. TIA FUNDS SHOWN IN DESIGN PROSPECTUS............................................... lit BALANCE (1G • 1F)( Surplus is •I-, Delta is •) 11. REQUEST IS SUBMITTED FOR AN INCREASE IN (Attach an explanation for The increase.) Construction Engineering Amount) —...... )(If less than 0, enter 0) Cost -1C ) ). $ 3,245,586 $ 2,884,195 $ 361,391 $ 18,413,393 _ TLA FUNDS OF $ 663,126 _,, $ 6,758,058 $ 12,016,726 $ 11,353,600 — -$663,126 , TIB Form 1104164 Aloud 0351 Page 3of6 Item A B C D E F G H I J K L M N 0 P Q R PHASE INCREASE WORKSHEET 6/21/95 Application/Design Review Total Project Cost* Application/Design Review Total TIA Funds* Application/Design Review TIA Matching ratio (B/A) Phase Total Project Cost Phase Total Eligible Project Cost Application Phase Total RNV Cost** Design Phase Total RNV Cost** RNV Cost Increase (G - F)** Allowable R/W Increase (C x H)** Eligible Project Cost Increase (E - A) Eligible Project Percent Increase (J/A) x 100 Increase Factor (1.0 .K/100) min. = .5 Allowable Project Increase (C x J x L) Total Allowable TIA Increase (I + M) Total TIA Funds (B + N) Total Local Funds (D - O) Local Matching Ration (P/D) TIA Matching Ratio (O/D) Request is submitted for an increase in TIA funds of $663,126 (Attach an explanation for the increase) A $17,333,740 B $11,353,600 C .655 D $18,774,784 E. $18,413,393 F. G. H. L J. $ 1,079,653 K. .62282 L. .9377138 M. $ 663,126 N. $ 663,126 O. $12,016,726 P. $ 6,758,058 Q. .36 R. .64 * Use application costs for FY 90 & FY 91 projects and design rev for FY 93 & FY 94 projec ** For projects selected after the FY 90 program no special allowance will be made for any increase in RNV costs. Do not complete items F, G, H, & I. If item J is more than $500,000 or item K is more than 20% above the application or design revie estimate a TIB subcommittee must review the reason for the increase prior to design phase appr N.9 E -1 8 0 001 1- 1 1� Transportation Improvement Account (f IA) 1"� URBAN CONSTIZUCi ION PROSPECTUS MB F«. 01164 liwicact 03M Page 4of6 TLA Funding Analysis Predesign Phase Cost 0X4POSITE Environmental Study 714 Funds Design Study 71A Funds Total Predesign 71A Funds Predesign Loca! Funds Total Predesign Cost fill 4 Load) APPROVED $ 99,997 $ 1,018,581 $ 660,818 $1,118,578 $ 283,206 $ 629,200 $ 944,025 $1,747,778 ACTUAL Design Phase Cost SpecialStudies Right of Way TIA Funds Design ineenng Funds Total Design 714 Funds Design Local Funds Total Design Cost (n4 i Local) APPROVED $1,676,560 $1,022,570 $2,699,130 $1,266,1021 $3,965,232 ACTUAL $ 248,180 $1,539,122.. $1,375,711 $3,163,013 $1 779,195j $4,942,208 Estimated Construction Phase Cost Construcflon Contract TIA Funds Construction Odd n4 Funds Construction Engineering 71A Funds Total Constnucdon I 71A Funds I Construcion Local Funds Total Construction Cod (OA a Loeat) $7,032,807 $ 701,464 $7,734,271 $4,350,527 $12,084,798 ---- Estimated Total Project Cost Total Predesign T(AFunds Total Desig„ 71A Funds Total ConstructionPra�'.ct 77A Funds Total 714 Funds Total Local Funds Total Protect Cod (M s LocaQ $1,118,578 $3,163,013 $7,734,271 $12,015,862 $6,758,922 $18,774,784 Use ACTUAL FUNDS when calculating Estimated Total Project Cost. MB F«. 01164 liwicact 03M Page 4of6 No 9 E - 1 8 _Q(001'- 1 Transports an Improvement Accoun` TIA) 1 URBAN CONSTRUCTION PROSPECTUS T!A Funding Analysis Predesign Phase Cost STAGE 1A CONSTRUCTION Environmental 714 �s Design I 77A Funds I Total Predesign14 F Predesign Locad Total PnC st (714 i Loos!) APPROVED 1 ACTUAL ! + Design Phase Cost Special Studies TL4 Funds I Right of 714 Funds Design ErrginFeuen g T1A Funds Total Design TM Funds Design Local Funds Total Design g (714 s Lead) APPROVED ACTUAL Estimated Construction Phase Cost Construction C radsf acl 7171A Couubuction Othsr Finds Construction ETA ineering j Total Construction 1 Construction Local Funds j Funds Total Construction Cost (14 a Local) 4,212,658 18,176 421,266 1 4,652,100 I 2,616,806 7,262,906 Estimated Total Project Cost Total Predesign 714 Funds Total Design 714 Funds Total ConstnectionP 7L4 Funds Total eet n4 Total Low Funds Total Project Coat (714 £ L.oa9 Use ACTUAL FUNDS when calculating Estimated Total Project Cost T(g Fans 1104S4 Page 4 of 6 J a E . 1 8 0 ( 001)- 1- 1 1" Transporfatton Improvement Account I. !A) 1 URBAN CONSTRUCTION PROSPECTUS TMA Funding Analysis Predesign Phase Cost STAGE 1B CONSTRUCTION Environmental 71 AFunds Design Study TL4 Funds Tota! Predesign TM Funds Predesign Local Funds Total Predesign Cost (M£Loco APPROVED J _ ACTUAL Design Phase Cost Special Studies TUI Funds Right of Way TLA Funds Design Enggineering T1A Funds Total Design TL4 Funds Design Local Funds Total Design Cod (7146 L=4 APPROVED I ACTUAL Estimafed Construction Phase Cost Construction Contract 114 Funds Construction Other TUI Funds Construction Engineering TL4 Funds Tote! ) Construction Construction 1 Local TIA Funds i Funds Total Construction Cost OK t Lang 2,523,573 -- 252,358 I 2,775,931 1 1,561,461 4,337,392 Estimated Tota! Project Cost TTotal Predesign TL4Fulls Design TUI Funds Total ConstructionPro TL4Funds Total ect & ends Total Local Funds Total Project Coni (114 a Use ACTUAL FUNDS when calculating Estimated Total Project Cost. TIB r i,oc64 PrAsiee 0381 Pogo 4 o16 Stszog E 1 8 0(001).1 Transportation improvement Account , IA) r URBAN CONSTRUCTION PROSPECTUS TIA Funding Analysis Predesign Phase Cost STAGE 1C CONSTRUCTION Environmental Study T1A s DesignI Study DA Funds Total Predesign 71A Funds Predesign Local Funds Total PrsdssIgn Coat APPROVED ACTUAL I Design Phase Cost Special Studies rut fords Right of Way 71A funds Design Engineering lTA funds Total Design T!A Funds Design Local Funds Total Dssign Cost (114 i Lcc4 APPROVED ACTUAL• Estimated Construction Phase Cost Consbvcfion Contract TTA Funds Consf Ober TR heck Construction Engineering 71A Funds Total Construction Constructor 1 Local TIA Funds ! Funds ' Total Constructlon Cost (ma Taco 278,400 27,840 306,240 1 172,260 478,500 -- Estimated Total Project Cost Total Predesig 714 s Total Design TIA funds Total Construction 7/4 Funds ToW P TIA= Total Local Funds Total Project Cod (714 6 Load) Use ACTUAL FUNDS when calculating Estimated Total Protect Cost. TIB corm 11010WW ar.;s.a 03.91 Page 4 of 6 12.4 �e.tectNo 9 E- 1 8 0 (001)- 1 Transportation Improvement Account w. IA) URBAN CONSTRUCTION PROSPECTUS Demand for TlA Funds COMPOSITE List demand for TIA funds for the time period shown. Time Period predesiyn Sp cia! phase Studies Design Right Construction Total Engineering of Way Phase TIA Funds 1991 50,000 ' 50,000 1992 320,000 ' 320,000 1993 716,000 • 716,000 1994 32,578 150,000 905,000 239,122 1,326,700 1995 98,180 470,711 1,300,000 5,000,000 6,868,891 1996 ! 2,734,271 2,734,271 i TOM 1,118,578 248,180 1,375,711 1,539,122 7,734,271 12,015,862 TIB Fora lIoas+ fumed OM Page 5 of 6 Pmts.:* No 9 E_ 1 8 0 (001) . 1 Transporta )n Improvement Account ''IA) Lai URBAN CONSTRUCTION PROSPECTUS Certification of Funding Certification is hereby given that Local and/or Private Matching Funds and Other Funds associated with the construction phase of the project are available to coordinate with the proposed project development. This project has been reviewed by the Legislative Body of the Administering Agency or agencies or its designee, and is consistent with the Agency's comprehensive plan for community development. An Environmental Impact Analysis has been conducted and an Environmental Impact Statement or Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact as appropriate, has been circulated pursuant to RCW 42.21C, and that the results have been utilized in arriving at the decisions reflected in the prospectus. The project is completely designed and ready to be advertised for bids for construction. All project right of way required for the project is available, or if the right of way remains to be acquired, a Possesion and Use Agreement has been obtained for the parcels in question. All right of way for this project has been acquired in accordance with WAC chapter 468-100. City of Yakima Lead agency TIB Fa% 1104764 Revised OM Papa6o(6 w 9E . 1 8 0 P01 ). 1 Transporta ..)n Improvement Accoun TIA) 11,ALU URBAN CONSTRUCTION PROSPECTUS General Information Lead Agency City of Yakima Project Name arrdTermin• Yakima Avenue/I-82 Interchange Area and Fair Avenue Project length in Min 1.7 Miles Functional Classification g#ii a pcieet must be on h Statue* FJ_:riCeessetears Srshen.,1 Principal X Minor Collector X Federal Route Number 4628, 4611 4648, 4694 Can<aaPe"°"Dennis E. Covell &Mess 129 North 2nd Street Yakima, Washington 98901 Teteflhone Number (509) 576-6313 Description of Proposed Improvements 1. Attach a legible vicinity map showing the project location. 2. Attach a sketch al the proposed roadway section. right of way to right of way, conforming to applicable design standards. 3. Describe the type of work planned for this project kt the space below and how It will improve the existing conditions, r necessary, attach additional sheets. 4. Indicate the data the project will be advertised for bids and the ssdrnated project con .Jon dale. #3 Phase 1 of the ultimate project has been refined because of the Value Engineering Study, accelerated development in the Terrace Heights area causing new traffic impacts on the project, and design changes due to right-of-way acquisition negotiations with HUD. The type of work now planned for Phase 1 is: • Extend Fair Ave frau Lincoln/B Couplet to Spruce St, crossing under Yakima Ave and existing fly -a -way ramp (Ramp F). Three lanes will be constructed with future widening to 5 lanes. Bridges will be fuilt for ultimate configuration. • Rags G & H, and C & E will be revised. • Ramp I providing access to I-82 southbound from Fair Ave will be constructed • Ramp J connecting Fair Ave and Yakima Ave will be constructed. • Temporary Ramp B providing I-82 southbound off ramp access to Fair Ave will be constructed. • Yakima Ave will be widened to provide 2 lanes per directional travel with a double left turn lane to access I-82 southbound frau Terrace Heights Way the southside of Terrace Heights Way. • 2 Traffic signals will be constructed. 9 Water/Sewer Utility adjustments. • Landscaping/Irrigation. Tf6Form RMI.d 0401 Page 1 of 6 CITY OF YAKIMA DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING & UTILITIES (509) 575-6111 SCAN 278-6111 FAX 575-6105 129 NORTH SECOND STREET YAKIMA, WASHINGTON 98901 July 13, 1995 Transportation Improvement Board P.O. Box 40901 Olympia, Washington 98504-0901 Attn: Mr. Rod Diemert, TIA Program Engineer Re: Transportation Improvement Project TIB No. 9E-180(001)-1 1-82 Interchange Area City of Yakima Dear Rod: �REo EYAKr� ; A JUL 2 01995 OFFICE OF CITY MANAGER This letter is in response to your and Pat O'Neils' requests for more information regarding the June 23, 1995 submittal of a request for additional TIA funds. Enclosed with this letter is a copy of the Department of Transportation's bid tabulation for the Gateway Project contract 1. The unit prices are the basis for the present cost estimates for future contracts 1B and 1 C. Overall the bids for contract 1A caused an increase over the Engineers Estimate by $368,991. The projection of contract 1A unit bid prices, excluding water and sewer costs is estimated to cause an increase of $441,471 for the remaining 1B/1C contracts. The increase estimate of cost of the utilities in the project is $332,167. These costs total to a $1,142,629 increase over available funding. The City will utilize the accompanying prioritization list to bring project costs in line with the current additional funding request and existing approved TIB funds. The current revised construction prospectus requests and additional $663,126 in TIA funds. The landscaping costs for phase 1 of the Gateway Project that is proposed to be accomplished under contract 1C is currently estimated to be $210,000. Three percent (3%) of the current estimated total construction cost of $10,960,361 is $328,811. The current estimated cost is within the 3% allowed. The Gateway Project disrupted the old water/sewer sysiems in the project area. In 1993 it was estimated that it would take approximately $500,000 to replace these systems. $500,000 was appropriated in the City of Yakima budgets over the years 1994 and 1995. This funding was over and above local funding used to match TIB funding. Current engineering estimates based on contract 1A unit prices now project the cost of these system replacements to be $832,167 or $332,167 above the 1993 estimate. The City used an engineering cost for construction of 6% in the 12/94 construction prospectus which we felt, considering the size of the total construction project, was reasonable. The Department of Transportation is managing the construction contracts and requires 10%. Accompanying this letter is a copy of my service agreement with the City of Yakima outlining my responsibility as the Yakima Gateway Project Coordinator. 616dL Dennis E. Covell Yakima Gateway Coordinator cc: Dick Zais, City Manager Brad Stein, CH2M-Hill Mr. Dennis E. Covell, P.E. Supplemental Agreement #4 Page 2 July 18, 1995 106510.1A Included as part of Supplemental Agreement #4 are: 1) Exhibit A, Summary of Payments, that provides a breakdown of the maximum amount payable under Agreement No. 91-103/D- 6015, as currently supplemented; 2) Exhibit B, Scope of Work, a description of the Construction Engineering work tasks; 3) Exhibit B-1, Fee Itemization, a task -by -task listing of the hours and expenses; and 4) Exhibit D-1, Consultant Fee Determination, a summary sheet of the compensation for providing the requested construction engineering services. It is our understanding that the City Council will address this request at their regularly scheduled meeting on July 25, 1995. If you have any questions about the attached Supplemental Agreement #4 or would like additional information and/or clarification, please do not hesitate to call me at (206) 453-5005, extension 5181. Sincerely, CH2M HILL, Inc. Bradfor . . Stein, P.E. Project Manager bls/sup041et.doc/d 16 7 11111111 Engineers 11111111 Planners Economists Scientists CFfMHILL July 18, 1995 106510.1A Mr. Dennis E. Covell, P.E. Gateway Project Coordinator City of Yakima 129 North 2nd Yakima, Washington 98901 Dear Denny: Subject: I-82/Yakima Avenue Interchange and Fair Avenue Project Services During Construction (Phase IV) - Supplemental Agreement #4 Transmitted herewith is Supplemental Agreement #4 that provides compensation for the Construction Engineering Services to be performed by CH2M Hill as requested by the WSDOT South Central Region in a letter dated September 20, 1994. The scope of work for the services during construction (Exhibit B) was developed from the directions received at the City/WSDOT/CH2M Hill Partnering session held on February 21, 1995. We understand our role during construction of Stage 1 to be essentially an extension of the WSDOT Construction Engineering staff, headed by Rick Gifford, and an advisor to yourself, as the City's Yakima Gateway Project Coordinator. The specific construction services that we provide will be as directed by either the WSDOT or City staff. The total cost for the Gateway Project will not have to be increased to cover these construction engineering services because these costs have already been budgeted as part of the 10 percent over the bid price allocated by the City to the WSDOT for managing the construction phase of the project. The maximum amount payable under our current Agreement No. 91-103/D-6015 will be increased by transferring funds from the construction budget. CH2M Hill has been providing said construction engineering services to the City and the WSDOT since the Stage 1A contract was advertised on December 19, 1994. Through June 24, 1995, we have provided to the City and the WSDOT $45,230 in construction services, primarily associated with Tasks 1, 2 & 3 of the attached scope of work. However, to complete the remaining engineering tasks for Phase III, Final Design and Right - of -Way Acquisition, necessitates that this supplement to our existing agreement be executed to reimburse us for those costs already incurred on Phase IV work tasks. Seattle Office 777 108th Avenue NE, Bellevue, WA 98004-5118 206 453-5000 P.O. Box 915010, Bellevue, WA 98009-2050 Fax No. 206 462-5957 BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT Item No. /3 For Meeting of July 25. 1995 ITEM TITLE: Yakima Gateway Project: Supplement #4 - Construction Engineering Support SUBMITED BY: Department of Community & Economic Development - Engineering Division CONTACT PERSON/TELEPHONE: Dennis E. Covell, P.E. / 576-6313 / • & . G , SUMMARY EXPLANATION: The Department of Transportation has requested retainage of CH2M - Hill during the construction stages of Phase I of the Gateway Project to provide clarification and answer questions relating to the design. Also, in cases where changes are required during the project CH2M - Hill would be available to evaluate change orders and, in some instances, provide change order design modification. The total cost for the Gateway Project will not have to be increased to cover these construction engineering services because the costs have already been budgeted as part of the 10 percent over the bid price allocated for managing the construction phase of the project. Presently stage 1A contract has $658,228 set up for engineering. The estimate for stage 1B & 1C contracts are $212,876 and $20,853 respectively. The current total estimated construction engineering cost for phase 1 of the Gateway Project is $891,957. Supplement #4, which is for all construction stages of phase 1 is for up to $253,785. Resolution X Ordinance Contract Other (Specify) 1) Supplement #4 2) WDOT 07/11/95 letter 3) CH2M-Hill 07/18/95 APPROVAL FOR SUBMITTAL City Manager STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the resolution authorizing the City Manager and City Clerk to execute Supplement #4 to the agreement with CH2M - Hill COUNCIL ACTION: Resolution No. R-95-101 FILE No. 321 07/11 '95 11;3c .WSDOT SO CENTRAL REGION 509 57511 Washington State �,1. Department of Transportation Sid Morrison Secretary of Tr,ncport: i; n July 1 I , 1995 Mr Dick Zais City of Yakitna 9 North \Frond Street Yakima, WA 98901 Distnct 5 2809 Hudkin Road. Union Gar) P n Box 12560 Yelnme. WA Ao9019-?5c0 (509) 575-2510 RE: MS 1790, SR 82 Yakima Gateway Project Agreement GC -9263 t'onstniction Support by CH2M Hill I )ear Dick. ft is my understanding that the City is negotiatins with CII2M Hill for thcii sci vices during construction F•rnm rhe Department's past experience this is a very wise and prudent course of action. As discussed with (filen Rice and Dennis Covell, it is very important that the design consultant be retained to work with our project engineer during the construction phases of .the project. CH2M Hill is needed to provide clarification and answer questions relating to the design. Also. in cases were changes are required during the project CH2M Hill would be available to evaluate any impacts associated with the change and make sure that the changes meet the intent of the project design• if you have any questions please call me at 575-2282 and we can discuss them. Sincerely, ^ RICHARD L. LARSON, P E Regional Administrator KLL•eh gatcl87d cc- Dennis Covell Filc Post -It- Fax Note /b/1 Data lLrt !q 5 uesi. 1 To RR n/� iiGnny Cj+t�-C From..p E(er� D,pr3 c;ojuept. C.1-1 of 141,:,...4..,". wscor Phone tl Phono fr Fec5.7 S -410 S Fax R REStoLUTION NO. R-95,-101 A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager and City Clerk of the City of Yakima to execute Supplement #4 to the agreement with CH2M - Hill for professional services. WHEREAS, it is necessary to engage professional services for the Yakima Gateway Project; and WHEREAS, CH2M - Hill has offered to perform those professional services in accordance with the provisions of the attached Supplement #4 to the agreement document: and the City Council deems it to be in the best interest of the City that the Supplement #4 to the agreement document be executed by the City, now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA: The City Manager and the City Clerk of the City of Yakima are hereby authorized and directed to execute Supplement #4 to the agreement with CH2M - Hill for the purpose mentioned above, a copy of which Supplement #4 to the agreement is attached hereto and by reference made a part thereof. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this ATTEST: CITY CLERK 26th day of July, 1995. MAYOR Pro Tern (7 SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT #3 Project No. NPT32984 Agency City of Yakima Name of Project I-82/Yakima Avenue Interchange and Fair Avenue Project Agreement No. 91-103/D-6015 Gentlemen: The City of Yakima desires to supplement the agreement entered into with CH2M Hill, Inc., executed on November 12, 1991 and identified as Agreement No. 91-103/D-6015. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the parties hereto have previously entered into a agreement for professional services; and WHEREAS, the CITY has requested that the CONSULTANT assist the CITY by performing additional engineering services related to the PROJECT; and WHEREAS, Section XIV, EXTRA WORK of the AGREEMENT provides for payment by supplemental agreement for additional work; and WHEREAS, both parties desire to supplement said AGREEMENT by expanding the Scope of Work and increasing the maximum total payable to cover the cost of the extra Phase II and Phase III work on the PROJECT, NOW THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed that the terms, stipulations and conditions of the original November 12, 1991 AGREEMENT shall be binding upon the parties hereto except insofar as amended by this SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT as follows: I Section II, SCOPE OF WORK, shall be amended at the end of the section, on Page 1 of the AGREEMENT, by adding the following thereto: The CONSULTANT shall perform the work tasks necessary to complete the added engineering work for the PROJECT as further detailed in Exhibit B, Supplemental Agreement #3, Phase II - Predesign and Environmental Impact Evaluation, Phase III - Final Design and Right -Of -Way Acquisition attached hereto, and by this reference, made a part of this AGREEMENT: Supplemental Agreement #3 Page 2 II Section IV, TIME FOR BEGINNING AND COMPLETION, shall be amended to change the COMPLETION DATE, shown in the heading of the AGREEMENT to read November 30, 1995. III Section V, PAYMENT, shall be amended on Page 2 of the AGREEMENT after the first sentence, by adding the following thereto: A Summary of Payments under the original AGREEMENT, Supplemental Agreement #1, Supplemental Agreement #2 and Supplemental Agreement #3 is set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto, and by this reference made a part of this AGREEMENT. The maximum amount payable for completion of work under the original AGREEMENT, as shown in the heading of the AGREEMENT, shall be increased by this SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT to four million five hundred eleven thousand seven hundred four and 00/100 dollars ($4,511,704.00), inclusive of all fees and other costs. A detailed breakdown of the CONSULTANT's cost proposal for this SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT is attached hereto as Exhibit B-1, and summarized in Exhibit D-1 attached hereto, and by this reference made a part of this SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT. IV Section VI, SUBCONTRACTING, shall be amended by the addition of the attached Exhibit G, Supplemental Agreement #3, attached hereto, and by this reference, made a part of this AGREEMENT. Supplemental Agreement #3 Page 3 EXECUTION If you concur with the provisions of this SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT and agree to the changes as stated above, please so indicate by affixing your signature in the appropriate spaces below and return to the CITY's office for final action. Sincerely, CH2M Hill, Inc. CITY OF YAKIMA By: l tW*i.� b , V4,0 By � A Timothy I. King, P.�. Richard A. Zais; Jr. Transportation Manager City Manager Date: 1oi X11 Date: q )/ 5761'i ATTESTED: By: c�4�,•�✓."�.'��-°�-' City Clerk Date: 5/q City Contract No. Cif r ((. (K-(7(1-1161) EXHIBIT A SUMMARY OF PAYMENTS City of Yakima Yakima Gateway Project Supplemental Agreement #3 Fee Itemization/Status Phase I (Original Agreement) Phase II (Supplement#1) Phase III (Supplement #2) Extra Work (Supplement#3) Totals Fee Itemization: Direct Salary Cost $75,057 $328,190 $378,341 $311,618 $1,093,206 Overhead $126,097 $551,360 $635,613 $523,519 $1,836,589 Direct Non -Salary Costs $63,845 $529,931 $509,400 $272,480 $1,375,656 Fixed Fee $20,265 $88,611 $102,152 $84,137 $295,165 Subtotals $285,264 $1,498,092 $1,625,506 $1,191,754 $4,600,616 Optional Services $0 $73,298 $322,000 ($322,000) $73,298 Fee Totals $285,264 $1,571,390 $1,947,506 $869,754 $4,673,914 Fee Adjustments: Fixed Fee Credit ($20,265) ($88,611) ($53,334) $0 ($162,210) Adjusted Fee Totals $264,999 $1,482,779 $1,894,172 $869,754 $4,511,704 DRAFT I-82/Yakima Avenue EXHIBIT B Supplemental Agreement #3 Extra Work SCOPE OF WORK Phase II - Predesign and Environmental Impact Evaluation Phase III - Final Design and Right -of -Way Acquisition YAKIMA GATEWAY PROJECT CITY OF YAKIMA CH2M HILL August 1994 August 24, 1994 Page 1 DRAFT I-82/Yakima Avenue Section i PROJECT DESCRIPTION In addition to the major work tasks performed in Phase II - Predesign and Environmental Impact Evaluation, Supplemental Agreement No. 1, and Phase III - Final Design and Right -of -Way Acquisition, Supplemental Agreement No. 2, several items of extra work have been or will be performed in connection to the I-82/Yaldma Avenue Interchange and Fair Avenue Project. The extra work tasks can be grouped into four categories as follows. WSDOT's Naches to Beech Project To facilitate construction sequencing and avoid `throw away' work elements, portions of the WSDOT South Central Region's Naches to Beech project will be constructed in the Yakima Gateway Project. Task 1A Incorporate Bridge 82/122N -W & Roadway Work Value Engineering (VE) Team Study The Value Engineering Study was conducted in July 1993. The Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) selected value engineering team concluded that the overall design was adequate and no significant cost savings could be realized. The VE team made several recommendations regarding the staging of the project which were subsequently adopted by the City and are the basis for the extra work tasks listed below. Task 2A Task 2B Task 2C Task 2D Task 2E Task 2F Task 2G Task 2H Task 2I Project Management & QA/QC CR Line and DR Line PS&E Traffic Signals Frontage Road Study Y Line and Frontage Road PS&E Multiple PS&E Packages Design Report Revisions Environmental Assessment Revisions Early Stage 1A Contract Document Growth Impact Enhancements During the last year, increased development in the Terrace Heights area has precipitated the need to construct more elements of the ultimate project in Stage 1. The County expanded water system along with the Corps of Engineers removal of most of the industrial zoned property from the flood zone has made development attractive and resulted in several new generators of traffic through the interchange including a new WalMart store to the east of I-82. The following extra work tasks address the growth impacts of this development on the Yakima Gateway Project. Task 3A Task 3B Task 3C Task 3D Task 3E Task 3F Project Management & QA/QC Redefine CR Line and DR Line Configurations Environmental Assessment Revisions Right -of -Way Services Bridge Design Design Report Supplement August 24, 1994 Page 2 DRAFT I-82/Yakima Avenue General City Requests Over the duration of the project, the City has requested various engineering tasks be performed to: address and resolve unanticipated project constraints; assist in obtaining additional funding; respond to other agency's processes; and prepare PS&E on additional work elements to be constructed in Stage 1 of the project. Task 4A Utilities Task 4B Access to Yakima Retail Area Task 4C Hazardous Materials - Phase 2 Investigation Task 4D STP Funding Application Task 4E Wetlands PS&E Task 4F PS&E Surveys Task 4G Federal Demonstration Funding Application Task 411 TIB Funding Assistance Task 4I Environmental Assessment Revisions Task 4J Project Management Task 4K Bridge Design Task 4L WSDOT Region 5 PS&E Review Process Task 4M HUD Modifications August 24, 1994 Page 3 DRAFT I-82/Yakima Avenue Section 2 VALUE ENGINEERING (VE) TEAM STUDY TASK 2A Project Management & QA/QC Project Management This task includes the work necessary to manage the CONSULTANT's production efforts, administer the contract, monitor progress and provide direction on the tasks itemized in this section. The project manager will facilitate communications between team members and the funding partners regarding progress on the tasks listed below, maintain team continuity and arrange for additional staff as appropriate to respond to schedule revisions. The Yakima Gateway Project Schedule is to be periodically revised to reflect the processes for and the progress on the VE related revisions, specifically: 1) THE CR/DR Line PS&E; 2) the Frontage Road Study; 3) the Y Line/Frontage Road PS&E; 4) development of three construction packages; and 5) preparation of the design report revisions. The project schedule was extended to address the VE Study recommendations adopted by City Council. This resulted in additional costs for salary escalation which is itemized under TASK 4J herein. OA/QC The project manager will be responsible to the City to ensure that the tasks listed hereinafter are technically competent and meet the City's needs and expectations. TASK 2B CR Line and DR Line PS &E The VE Study recommendation VEP #3 adopted by the City, is to construct the DR Line (Ramp I) as part of Stage 1. This necessitates rebuilding a portion of the existing CR Line (the I-82 southbound on-ramp from Yakima Avenue) and the I-82 mainline. One additional plan sheet for each type of plan is required to cover the subject area. The affected plan types are the roadway sections, site preparation, alignment and right-of-way, profiles, temporary water pollution control, drainage, drainage and ditch profiles, landscaping, irrigation, paving, intersection grading, retaining walls, channelization, illumination, and signing. Also affected are the special provisions and the engineers estimate. This work will be included as part of the Stage 1B contract package. TASK 2C Traffic Signals The VE Study recommendation VEP #6 adopted by the City, is to defer several traffic signals until Stage 2 of the project, when the traffic warrants will be stronger. The signals deferred are at the Y Line/J Line, J Line/F Line and at the northbound I-82 ramps/Y Line. A temporary signal is to be provided for traffic control purposes during construction at the EL Line and Terrace Heights Way intersection. The Fair Avenue/Pacific Street signal work will be transferred to Huibregtse, Louman and Associates Inc. as part of a separate consultant agreement directly with the City for the Spruce Street to Pacific Street section of Fair Avenue. August 24, 1994 Page 5 DRAFT I-82/Yakima Avenue Section 1 WSDOT's NACHES TO BEECH PROJECT TASK 1A Incorporate Bridge 82/122N -W & Roadway Work At the request of WSDOT South Central Region, the Naches to Beech Street Project PS&E for the rehabilitation of the CL Line flyover ramp, including existing Bridge 82/122N -W, will be incorporated into the I-82/Yakima Avenue Interchange and Fair Avenue Project. This will reduce the impacts to the public by minimizing the closure time for the CL Ramp. One additional drawing will be required for each type of plan set to cover the area. In addition there are work items required to include the WSDOT design onto the Yakima Gateway Project plan sheets. The affected plan types are the roadway sections, site preparation, paving, drainage, intersection grading, channelization, illumination and bridge plans. Also affected are the special provisions and the engineers estimate August 24, 1994 Page 4 DRAFT I-82/Yakima Avenue TASK 2D Frontage Road Study This task was authorized by the City in a letter dated September 14, 1993, and is based on the VE Study Comment #3 to eliminate the frontage road along the south side of E. Yakima Avenue. A design study was prepared to determine the feasibility of eliminating or reducing the frontage road along E. Yakima Avenue. Community contacts were made, plans and cost estimates prepared, and a recommendation developed for consideration by City Council. TASK 2E Y Line and Frontage Road PS&E The City Council adopted the recommended alternative for the frontage road (Alternative No. 3) contained in the Frontage Road Study, dated October 1993, prepared under TASK 2D. The VE Study recommendation VEP #5 adopted by the City, was to extend the merge length of the CL Line onto E. Yakima Avenue (Y Line). These revisions necessitated additional design work for E. Yakima Avenue and the frontage road from N. 10th Street to Pitcher Street. One additional plan sheet for each type of plan will be required to cover the area. The affected plan types are the roadway sections, site preparation, alignment and right-of-way, profiles, temporary water pollution control, drainage and ditch profiles, landscaping, irrigation, paving, intersection grading, channelization, illumination and signing. Also affected are the engineers estimate and the special provisions. This work will be included as part of the Stage 1B contract package. TASK 2F Multiple PS&E Packages The VE Study Comment #4 adopted by the City Council, was to package Stage 1 of the project into multiple construction contract documents. This resulted in duplication of information presentation, additional design work and the necessity to prepare multiple sets of other items such as the special provisions. Several additional drawings for each type of plan will be required. The affected plan types are the general plans, site preparation, alignment and R/W, profiles, temporary water pollution control, drainage, utilities, landscaping, irrigation, grading, paving, channelization, illumination, signing, and traffic control. Also affected are the costs for plan assembly, special provisions and engineers estimate. In addition to the affected plans, there is additional work to provide PS&E Surveys, itemized in TASK 4F, and Hydraulics Report modifications. TASK 2G Design Report Revisions Authorized by the City in a letter dated September 14, 1993, under this task numerous revisions to the Design Report will be prepared to reflect the changes as a result of the City Council adopted VE Study recommendations specifically the frontage road study, three construction packages and inclusion of the CR/DR Line, including Fair Avenue in Stage 1A. TASK 2H Environmental Assessment Revisions Since the Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f) Evaluation was completed and submitted in October 1993, a number of project elements have been revised as a result of the VE Study recommendations. The Environmental August 24, 1994 Page 6 DRAFT I-82/Yakima Avenue Assessment has been continuously updated to reflect these revisions. The additional work required has included but was not limited to the following: • Revisions to the text to reflect the changes in the project description. • Tracking the status of the IAC letter and providing additional information to assist the IAC in their process. Repeated attempts by the City, WSDOT and Consultant to get a formal response from the Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation so as to meet the U.S. Department of Interior's request, proved unsuccessful. Because of the need to conclude the EA review process, the City directed us in a letter dated June 14, 1994, to prepare a summary of the attempts to solicit IAC input and the verbal indications that IAC does not disagree with the proposed mitigation measures. • Noise and air quality analysis related to extending the CR Line and DR Line south adjacent to the Kwanis Park. • Producing a "near final" EA incorporating extensive review comments from the FHWA and the WSDOT Headquarters, Environmental Section on the October 1993 preliminary Final EA. The ultimate resolution to several of the comments as addressed in our letter dated April 6, 1994, is the basis for the extra work associated with the EA as listed in TASK 4I hereinafter. TASK 2I Early Stage 1A Contract Document To address the initial VE Study recommendations and the subsequent comments generated through the combined design/access hearing process, has resulted in the right-of-way not clearing until February 1995, or 3 months after the Stage 1A construction document will be completed and ready for advertisement. To meet one of the project objectives of preserving and encouraging economic development, the PS&E will be revised by adding a retaining wall adjacent to the BL Line and providing a temporary connection of Fair Avenue to 10th Street, thereby eliminating the right-of-way from Stage 1A and allowing the earliest possible advertisement. Approximately 50 plan sheets will be effected by these revisions. August 24, 1994 Page 7 DRAFT I-82/Yakima Avenue Section 3 GROWTH IMPACT ENHANCEMENTS TASK 3A Project Management & QA/QC Project Management This task includes the work necessary to manage the consultant's production efforts, administer the contract, monitor progress and provide direction on the tasks itemized in this section. The project manager will facilitate communications between team members and the funding partners regarding progress on the tasks listed below, maintain team continuity and arrange for additional staff as appropriate to respond to schedule revisions. The Yakima Gateway Project Schedule is to be periodically revised to reflect the processes for and the progress on the `Growth Impact Enhancement' related revisions specifically: 1) the PS&E on the CR Line and DR Line; 2) the right turn lane on Y Line to the CR Line; 3) the double left on the BR Line to the Y Line; and 4) preparation of the design report supplement for these changes. The project schedule will be extended to address the growth impact enhancements This work will result in additional costs for salary escalation which is itemized under TASK 4J herein. Urgent Project Requests Over the last several months issues have arisen that, if perceived by the City to have a potentially adverse impact on the project cost and/or schedule, were dealt with and resolved with the utmost of urgency. Effectively and efficiently performing these "fire drill" tasks were and will continue to be essential to meeting the objectives of the Yakima Gateway Project as established by the Steering Committee and adopted by the City Council. Generally, these types of urgent issues can not be anticipated let alone budgeted for. To place the highest priority on the resolution of these issues, results in deferring work on other project tasks. Issues related to the unanticipated growth east of I-82 that have been addressed to date include: 1) revised traffic projections; 2) air quality analysis; and 3) a prioritization of Stage 1 construction elements. Overtime Changes in the project schedule as a result of `Urgent Project Requests' and other scope of work revisions, have necessitated specific staff to work overtime in order to perform the original and additional scope of work tasks by the scheduled milestone dates. Overtime for certain staff was authorized by the City in a letter dated March 3, 1994. QA/QC The project manager will be responsible to the City to ensure that the tasks listed hereinafter are technically competent and meet the City's needs and expectations. August 24, 1994 Page 8 DRAFT I-82/Yakima Avenue TASK 3B Redefine CR Line and DR Line Configurations To address the unanticipated growth east of I-82 and yet provide a Level of Service (LOS) for the E. Yakima Avenue/I-82 interchange equal to or better than the existing through the year 2008, requires that the following revisions be made to the intersection of E. Yakima Avenue and the SB I-82 ramps: • Two left -turn lanes will be provided from E. Yakima Avenue onto the CR Line. • To provide ample distance for the two left -turn lanes to merge, the CR Line ramp will be widened further to the south. • The taper lengths of the CR Line and DR Line will be extended along southbound I-82 to the Beech Street Undercrossing. • The BR Line terminus will be revised to provide two left -turn lanes onto eastbound E. Yakima Avenue. • A right -turn lane will be provided from eastbound E. Yakima Avenue to southbound I-82 via the CR Line. Plan sheets that will require additional work are the roadway sections, site preparation, alignment and right-of-way, profiles, temporary water pollution control, drainage, drainage and ditch profiles, paving, intersection grading, retaining walls, channelization, illumination, signing, and bridge plans (refer to TASK 3E). Also affected are the special provisions and the engineers estimate. This work will be included as part of the Stage 1B contract package. TASK 3C Environmental Assessment Revisions Since the Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f) Evaluation was completed and submitted in October 1993, a number of project elements have been revised as a result of the `Growth Impact Enhancements'. The Environmental Assessment has been continuously updated to reflect these revisions. The additional work required has included but was not limited to the following: • Revisions to the text to reflect the changes in the project description. • Traffic analysis to respond to the JEM Development Company's letter dated January 26, 1994. • Air quality analysis to respond to the same JEM Development Company's letter. • Remodelling of the noise impacts to reflect the new traffic volumes. TASK 3D Right -of -Way Services To include the VE Study recommendations adopted by City Council, as discussed in Section 2 above, and subsequently modified on the basis of growth, additional land acquisitions will be required in Stage 1 of the Yakima Gateway Project. The public comments received at the combined design/access hearing were directed at the manner in which the project will address the growth impacts on the existing parcels of land. Before the land acquisition process can begin, an extensive amount of work (Phase II) has been performed to address the public concerns so August 24, 1994 Page 9 DRAFT North Tenth Street Project To address the noise, vibration and traffic concerns at this project will involve: I-82/Yakima Avenue • Develop PS&E to relocate the access point for the project to the south, joining it with the existing access for the adjacent retirement facility and other site modifications for circulation and handicap access. • If structurally feasible, the four eastern units of the existing eight-plex building will be demolished and rebuild in-kind. SUP3SCP2 August 24, 1994 Page 19 DRAFT I-82/Yakima Avenue that the right-of-way plans can be approved. Additional Phase III right-of-way services: true cost estimate; relocation assistance; appraisals; negotiations will be effected. There are twenty-seven (27) additional parcels to appraise and negotiate and two (2) additional relocations than originally anticipated. Two of the parcels to appraise involve the Yakima Housing Authority, Parcels 5-YG044 and 5-YG050. Phase III work effected by or directly the result of the public comments received at the combined hearing are as follows: • Revised drainage design due to the elimination of the right-of-way required for the biofilter swales. • Provide a cul-de-sac at the end of Pitcher Street closed by the construction of the J Line. • For safety, revise the sidewalk configuration along LN and B Lines. • For safety, revise the bicyclist/pedestrian barrier configuration on the southeast corner of the CR Line/E. Yakima Avenue intersection. These items of work will be performed as part of TASK 2F. TASK 3E Bridge Design To address the unanticipated growth east of I-82 required several revisions to the intersection of E. Yakima Avenue and the SB I-82 ramps, (refer to listing in TASK 3B). One of these revisions, to provide a right -turn land from eastbound E. Yakima Avenue to southbound I-82 via the CR Line, necessitated that the E. Yakima Avenue Overcrossing of Fair Avenue be widened to the south. For construction staging purposes, consideration was given to constructing two side-by-side bridges instead of one much wider bridge. The Bridge Preliminary Plan had to be revised and resubmitted to the WSDOT Headquarters, Bridge Section. The final design, special provisions and the engineers estimate were affected by this change. TASK 3F Design Report Supplement The Design Report, finalized in December 1993, will be supplemented to incorporate the revisions made to the interchange design concepts by providing the `growth impact enhancements ' specifically the changes enumerated herein to the CR, BR, DR, EL, and Y Line. Also addressed in the design report supplement but not associated with the growth impact enhancements will be the access revisions made to the Yakima Avenue Retail Area and the Fair Avenue widening to six lanes to accommodate the close proximity of the access to the AR Line and Fair Avenue intersection. August 24, 1994 Page 10 DRAFT I-82/Yakima Avenue Section 4 GENERAL CITY REQUESTS TASK 4A Utilities Utility Study The original scope of the utility study, as described in Task 2AC, Supplemental Agreement No. 2 to the original agreement, dated September 14, 1993, was limited to addressing the existing conditions and proposed improvements for the water and sewer utilities. In that there are other utilities affected by the construction of the Yakima Gateway Project, the scope of the utility study was expanded to include information on the existing conditions and proposed relocations, revisions and betterments for power, telephone, gas, irrigation and cable. A utilities coordination meeting was conducted on April 21, 1994 with representatives from each of the utilities present to provide an overview of the project scope, collect information on existing systems and identify potential conflicts that needed to be resolved. This information will be documented and summarized in the utility study and forms the basis to the utilities PS&E as described herein below. Utilities PS&E This task was originally authorized by the City in a letter dated September 14, 1993, the scope being submitted and approved by the City in a letter of authorization dated May 20, 1994. This task will prepare the plans, specifications and engineers estimate (PS&E) for the utility relocations, revisions and betterments that are to be constructed in Stage 1A and Stage 1B of the project. This work will be ultimately funded by Public Works Trust Funds but in the short term will be funded out of the Capital Improvement Program. Assumptions 1. Utility permits, easements, funding agreements and other similar documents will be coordinated and processed by the City and/or the WSDOT South Central Region and are excluded from this scope of work. 2. Where practical, utility work should be deferred to the Stage 1B construction contract which is scheduled to be awarded after the May 1, 1995 Public Works Trust Fund loan execution date. 3. The Stage 1A utility components shall include the following: Fair Avenue Water Main. Extend the existing Fair Avenue water main north and west along the F Line from the intersection of Spruce Street and Fair Avenue to 10th Street between the LN Line and B Line couplet. • Fair Avenue Gravity Sewer. To serve the proposed Yakima Retail Area, provide a 10 -inch gravity sewer parallel with the Fair Avenue water main. • 10th Street Water Mains. Lower the existing 12 -inch and 8 -inch water mains that run along 10th Street in the area between Lincoln and B Streets to provide sufficient cover for protection against heavy traffic loads and severe winter temperatures. Water Main Abandonments. On the west side of 10th and 12th Streets, terminate the existing water mains that currently cross the proposed Yakima Retail Area. August 24, 1994 Page 11 DRAFT I-82/Yakima Avenue • Water Main Crossing of 1-82. Provide a 12 -inch water main across 1-82 within the project area to connect the City's major water system west of 1-82 with an existing 12 -inch dead-end water main east of 1-82 along Terrace Heights Drive. This main is part of the City's master plan for the area. Two route alternatives will be considered for the 1-82 water main crossing: 1) a jacked crossing beneath 1-82 and a pipeline along the east shoulder of the BL Line; and 2) within the proposed widened portion of the Y Line Overcrossing 1-82 bridge structure. 4. The Stage 1B utility components shall include the following: • Fair Avenue Water Main. Complete the Fair Avenue water main from Terrace Heights Drive to Spruce Street. Provisions will be made at the intersection of Fair Avenue and Spruce Street for a future extension of the Fair Avenue water main to the south. Fair Avenue Gravity Sewer. Complete the south portion of the sewer system that will serve the proposed Yakima Retail Area. This portion of the gravity sewer will extend from Terrace Heights Drive to an existing manhole in Spruce Street, east of Fair Avenue. Flow patterns along Fair Avenue between Chestnut Street and Spruce Street will be reconfigured to abandon the existing sewage pump station and force main currently serving this area. • TAR Ramp Water Main. Reestablish and connect the existing 8 -inch water main disrupted in Stage lA by construction in the area of the TAR Ramp. • Pitcher Street Water Main. Reestablish the existing 6 -inch water main along Pitcher Street that will be disrupted near the center of the J Ramp. Pitcher Street Gravity Sewer. An 8 -inch gravity sewer along Pitcher Street will be disrupted near the center of the J Ramp and will be reestablished and connected to the Fair Avenue gravity sewer. Specific items of work to be performed in this task include: Task 4A.01 Utility Coordination. Continued coordination will be performed to identify the existing utilities in the project area and on the design efforts for utility relocations and improvements. Task 4A.02 Design Drawings. Prepare the design drawings for the Stage 1A and Stage 1B contract documents. Seventeen (17) drawings are anticipated for Stage 1A; fourteen (14) drawings for Stage 1B. Task 4A.03 Corrosion Engineering. Evaluate existing soil resistivity data to determine pipeline corrosion protection requirements. Task 4A.04 Special Provisions. Prepare the special provisions for the water and sanitary sewer construction based on the 1994 edition of the Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction and as supplemented as necessary by the City of Yakima standard specifications. Task 4A.05 Utility Permits and Agreements. Utility permits, easements, funding agreements and other similar documents will be coordinated and processed by the City. Task 4A.06 Cost Estimates. Prepare a construction cost estimate for the utility work based on WSDOT's bid tabulation database, supplier contacts and other industry recognized sources as required. August 24, 1994 Page 12 DRAFT I-82/Yakima Avenue Task 4A.07 Senior Review/Quality Control. Monitor and provide an overall review of the final utility design by a senior utilities designer. Perform a design check by a mid-level utilities designer. Task 4A.08 Submittals. Prepare utility design drawings, special provisions and cost estimate for submittal along with the other Stage lA and Stage 1B PS&E plan types. Task 4A.09 Lead Engineer Activities. Provide staff coordination, scheduling, supply client requested information and perform other general activities associated with the utility design. TASK 4B Access to Yakima Retail Area One of the `urgent project requests' by the City, as defined in TASK 3A, was the revisions to the points of access into the Yakima Retail Area. To facilitate the developer's desired access locations and yet satisfy the limited access requirements of the WSDOT, required modifications to the location, number and configuration of the accesses. The section of Fair Avenue between the Lincoln/B couplet and the AR Line intersection had to be widened to six lanes to accommodate the revised access locations. Several drawings required modifications as a result of these revisions including the roadway sections, site preparation, alignment and right-of-way, profiles, paving, intersection grading, channelization, and illumination. TASK 4C Hazardous Materials - Phase 2 Investigation This task was authorized by the City in a letter dated February 28, 1994. The objective of the Phase 2 investigation is to 1) confirm the presence of total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH) constituents above its respective regulatory action and cleanup level according to Washington's Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA - WAC 173-340); 2) to define the extent of identified contamination (and constituents); and 3) to develop an appropriate corrective action response to any confirmed, actionable contamination, that is consistent with the activities and schedule of the I- 82/Yakima Avenue Interchange and Fair Avenue Project and with MTCA cleanup priorities and requirements. This investigation is to satisfy the requirements for appropriate inquiry under the Superfund Amendment Reauthorization Act (SARA) Section 107(b)(3), which is that section of the Superfund law that addresses standards and requirements for property owners in investigations of environmental liability. Specific items of work to be performed in this task include: Task 4C.01 Additional Land Use Research and Site Reconnaissance. Collect information on land parcels 5-YG006 and 5-YGO1 1 to be used in the development of a focused, purposeful sit sampling effort. The types of information that will be collected includes precise locations, types and quantities of materials, knowledgeable contacts, access authorization, duration of use and construction details. Task 4C.02 Surficial Soil Sampling Effort. Collect from each parcel, surficial soil samples (from 0 to up to 3 feet below ground surface). The total number and precise location of samples will be determined in Task 4C.01. Deliver the samples under standard chain of custody procedures to an approved and Ecology -certified analytical laboratory for analyses. The proposed analyses will include, at a minimum, U.S. EPA Method 418.1 for TPH and Ecology Analytical Methods for petroleum compounds as appropriate for the type of constituents identified in the Task 4C.01 research effort. Research analytical results will be validated for accuracy and overall representativeness. Task 4C.03 Corrective Measures Identification. Prepare a technical memorandum and submit to the City that summarizes the results of the field efforts and identifies what remedial actions (if any) are needed for each parcel. August 24, 1994 Page 13 DRAFT I-82/Yakima Avenue Remedial actions if needed, will be developed in light of the highway development project needs and will likely concentrate on excavation and disposal options that are consistent with applicable environmental regulations. Persistent data gaps (if any) will be identified which may affect the project and the steps that should be taken to answer these data needs will be outlined. TASK 4D STP Funding Application This task was authorized by the City in a letter dated February 14, 1994. An application for Statewide STP Competitive Program funding for the Yakima Gateway Project was prepared for and submitted on behalf of the City of Yakima to the WSDOT Local Programs Division in March 1994. The application was for $1,000,000 in STP Competitive funds on the basis of the primary objectives of the project. TASK 4E Wetlands PS&E A wetland study, as described in Task 2AE, Supplemental Agreement #2 to the original AGREEMENT, dated September 14, 1993, was performed and concluded that wetland mitigation is required for the Yakima Gateway Project. The plans and details for wetland mitigation shall be prepared in accordance with the approved Design Report, approved Wetlands Study, WSDOT Design Manual (DM) and the WSDOT Project Production Manual (PPM). The wetland mitigation plans will show the grading and planting, sections and other applicable items. A vegetation planting plan will include species specifications, planting locations and instructions, and site preparation. TASK 4F PS&E Surveys The VE Study recommendations adopted by the City, the growth impact enhancements and the general City requests have all necessitated that additional PS&E surveying be performed. Recognizing that it would be difficult to itemize individual surveying efforts in accordance to the source of the request, the additional surveying services have been collected under this one task. Field surveys will be conducted to develop cross sections and topographic data for the following project components: • Frontage Road • E. Yakima Avenue between 8th Street and the CL Line intersection • CR Line to the south • DR Line • Pitcher Street cul-de-sac • EL Line to the south for the temporary detour modifications Supplemental ground surveying will be performed to locate the above and below ground existing utilities including power, telephone, water, sewer, cable, irrigation and gas. August 24, 1994 Page 14 DRAFT I-82/Yakima Avenue TASK 4G Federal Demonstration Funding Application This task was verbally authorized by the City on April 26, 1994. By 12:00 p.m. on April 28, 1994, responses had been prepared and faxed to the WSDOT Local Programs for numerous "HIGHWAY CRITERIA" questions; a requirement to continue competing for Federal Discretionary funding for Stage 2 of the Yakima Gateway Project. TASK 4H TIB Funding Assistance This task was verbally authorized by the City in June 1994. Documentation was developed and supplied to the City for the preparation of a Design Prospectus for additional TIA funding for the construction of the Yakima Gateway Project, Stage 1. The funding increase request was based primarily on the VE Study recommendations that increased the amount of Stage 1 construction. The request for increased TIA funding was presented to the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) on July 21 & 22, 1994. The TIB granted the requested $1,160,568 increase, thereby raising the TIB share of the project funding to $11,626,721. TASK 4I Environmental Assessment Revisions Since the Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f) Evaluation was completed and submitted in October 1993, the following new issues were discovered or requested that have required additional analyses and supplements to be prepared for the EA. The EA originally scoped for the Yakima Gateway project was to focus on a limited number of environmental issues including air quality, drainage and floodplains, noise, hazardous waste sites, land use, relocation, visual quality and transportation. Other issues including wetlands were neither scoped nor addressed in the EA for a number of reasons which have been addressed in previous correspondence. Wetland The drainage area adjacent to the Boise Cascade mill yard has been identified as a potential wetland area. A wetland study was conducted (Task 2AE, Supplemental Agreement No. 2) and the area confirmed to be a wetland. This task prepared the necessary documentation for a supplement to the EA for the wetland and was authorized by the City in a letter dated June 10, 1993. In addition to preparing the wetlands section for the EA other requests have been received including: 1) preparing cross sections from the Yakima River through the Boise Cascade property; 2) preparation of a Wetlands Finding; and 3) preparing a section in the EA on avoidance options and mitigation plans. Historic Preservation Documentation was prepared and provided to the WSDOT for submittal to the Western Regional Office of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. A letter of concurrence from the ACHP will have to be included in the Final EA. Endangered Species Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, requires federal agencies to ensure that their actions do not jeopardize endangered or threatened species or their critical habitats. A list of candidate, proposed, threatened and endangered species was requested from the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) in response to a request from the FHWA as part of their comments on the draft EA. The response received from the USFWS on May 17, 1994, August 24, 1994 Page 15 DRAFT I-82/Yakima Avenue identified the bald eagle and peregrine falcon as federally listed threatened or endangered species and three candidate species in the project area: the bull trout, the loggerhead shrike and the western sage grouse. The USFWS requested that a Biological Assessment be prepared to address: 1) the level of use of the project area by bald eagles and peregrine falcons; 2) the effect of the project on eagles and falcons primary food stocks and foraging areas influenced by the project; and 3) the impacts of the project construction and implementation which may result in disturbance to eagles and falcons and/or their avoidance of the project area. A letter of concurrence from the USFWS is required in the Final EA. Stormwater The Washington State Department of Fisheries and the FHWA requested that a quantitative analysis of cumulative stormwater drainage impacts be performed. Typically, a more qualitative analysis is appropriate at the EA level. TASK 4J Project Management Project Management This task includes the work necessary to manage the consultant's production efforts, administer the contract, monitor progress and provide direction on the tasks itemized in this section. The project manager will facilitate communications between team members and the funding partners regarding progress on the tasks listed herein, maintain team continuity and arrange for additional staff as appropriate to respond to schedule revisions. Extended Project Duration The original contract duration for Phase II was 13 months from July 1992 to August 1993. Based on the current Yakima Gateway Project Schedule, Revision No. 15, dated July 11, 1994, the contract duration for Phase II has now increased to 28 months with the projected completion date: November 22, 1994. Similarly, the original contract duration for Phase III was 20 months from September 1993 to April 1994 but has now been increased to 27 months with the projected completion date: November 17, 1995. The project schedule has undergone extensive revisions primarily to account for: 1) the VE Study recommendations (Section 2); 2) the growth impact enhancements (Section 3); 3) revised construction sequencing, and 3) process, be it the right-of-way acquisition, SEPA adoption, WSDOT PS&E review or the EA approval processes. These schedule extensions have created an overlap between Phase II and Phase III work tasks where the two phases were originally intended to be performed in sequence. Certain prerequisite Phase II predesign activities to Phase III final design work tasks have not reached closure such as the Design/Access Deviations approval, the FHWA EA approval, two Bridge Preliminary Plans, approved Right -of -Way plans and the Design Report. This task provides for the extra work and salary escalation associated with the continuation and extension of the Phase II and Phase III contracts and the coordination necessary to perform the work tasks out of sequence. The increased Specific Rates of Pay were authorized by the City in a letter dated March 3, 1994. Salary escalation for the work remaining to be completed, is listed in Exhibit B-1 under Task 5. Project Schedule Development The Yakima Gateway Project Schedule has been periodically revised to reflect the processes for and the progress on: 1) the incorporation of the WSDOT Naches to Beech project (Section 1); 2) the VE Study related revisions (Section 2); 3) the growth impact enhancements (Section 3); and 4) the general City requests listed herein. This task provides the resources for performing the schedule revisions and updates. August 24, 1994 Page 16 DRAFT I-82/Yakima Avenue Urgent Project Requests Premised upon the definition in TASK 3A of what constitutes an `urgent project request', the issues of a general nature that have arisen and been addressed to date include: 1) R/W acquisition process revisions; 2) interchange landscaping modifications; and 3) revisions to the points of access into the Yakima Retail Area. Overtime Changes in the project schedule as a result of `Urgent Project Demands' and other scope of work revisions, have necessitated specific staff to work overtime in order to perform the original and additional scope of work tasks by the scheduled milestone dates. Overtime for certain staff was authorized by the City in a letter dated March 3, 1994. QA/QC and Constructibility Review The project manager will be responsible to the City to ensure that the tasks listed hereinafter are technically competent and meet the City's needs and expectations. At the request of the WSDOT South Central Region and as verbally authorized by the City, CH2M Hill's QA/QC Team performed WSDOT's Constructibility Review as part of review of the 70 percent PS&E submittal and provided documentation in the format and to the extent that satisfied the WSDOT's internal requirements for the project. TASK 4K Bridge Design The bridge PS&E is on the critical path of the project. Resolution of issues that could have a potentially adverse effect on Task 2U progress (Supplemental Agreement #2), are considered to be `urgent project requests' by the City, as defined in TASK 3A. The extra work performed to maintain the bridge PS&E on schedule is as follows. Bridge 82/123N -W At the WSDOT Headquarters Bridge request, the north abutment will be rebuilt to reduce the risk associated with widening Terrace Heights Way underneath existing Bridge 82/123N -W. A retaining wall system was recommended in the Structures Report submitted in December 1993. A bridge preliminary plan was prepared for the abutment modifications. At the WSDOT request, the falsework system will be design as part of the abutment modifications PS&E rather than have the Contractor provide this service. A credit has been given for the elimination of the PS&E for the retaining wall beneath this bridge. Bridge 82/123 The original concept for widening existing Bridge 82/123 (E. Yakima Avenue Overcrossing I-82) was to provide a new structure adjacent but unconnected to the existing bridge. To save the existing Bridge 82/123N -W, required a shift in the Yakima Avenue roadway centerline thereby causing the longitudinal expansion joint between the structures to fall in the middle of a traffic lane; a undesirable situation. In addition, to accommodate this widening and provide a new standard roadway cross -slope, required a variable depth overlay to be placed over the existing deck. Because of these revisions, the new and existing bridge will be connected together. The existing bridge was analyzed for an increased vertical load attracted from the new bridge and evaluated for seismic vulnerability. The new widened portion of the structure was designed to reduce the seismic forces to be resisted by the existing structure, thus minimizing the impacts of the existing bridge's seismic deficiencies. August 24, 1994 Page 17 DRAFT I-82/Yakima Avenue CL Line Deviation #8 The preliminary bridge plan for the CL Line Overcrossing of Fair Avenue shows a bridge width that matches the existing CL Line Overcrossing I-82 (Bridge 82/122N -W), after constructing the rail replacements as designed by the WSDOT Headquarters for the Naches to Beech project. Deviation #8 proposes a substandard width for both the existing Bridge 82/122N -W and the proposed new CL Line Overcrossing of Fair Avenue. On April 5, 1994, the City gave verbal authorization to prepare a technical memorandum that responds to the WSDOT Headquarters request to evaluate the existing bridge to determine if it can be widened to design standards. Analysis of the existing bridge was performed and a cost comparison prepared. The technical memorandum was prepared and submitted to the WSDOT South Central Region on May 3, 1994. TASK 4L WSDOT South Central Region PS&E Review Process The WSDOT South Central Region PS&E review process differs from that originally defined by the WSDOT in December 1992 and upon which the schedule and scope of work were subsequently premised. Initially, one set of consolidated review comments were to be received back from the WSDOT Region on the 90% PS&E submittal. The revised review process will involve multiple sets of comments being received back from the WSDOT Region and up to three (3) iterations being required on some plan sets until being sent out as a 100% submittal to the WSDOT Headquarters. Additional engineering, CADD and production effort will be required. In a meeting on August 11, 1994, the City verbally authorized CH2M Hill to provide the engineering services necessary to respond to the WSDOT South Central Region's revised PS&E review process of Stages 1A, 1B and 1C submittals. TASK 4M HUD Modifications Based on the July 8, 1994 meeting between the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the Housing Authority of the City of Yakima (HA) and the City of Yakima, the proposal to mitigate the potential impacts of the Yakima Gateway Project on the HA -owned public housing properties will require additional engineering services. Pending legal agreements, the scope of work is presented herein for completeness. Fair Avenue Project To resolve the safety, parking and access concerns at this site will involve: Preparing PS&E for a short concrete retaining wall and fence along the west side of Fair Avenue for the entire length of the HA property. Crash -through type barriers would be provided across the fire access lanes. • Prepare PS&E for a paved access into the existing HA maintenance facility and the HA project. • To safely load and unload school children, provide a bus turnout on the south side of E. Chestnut Avenue in front of the newly acquired parcels. August 24, 1994 Page 18 RUN DATE: 8/22/94 Rt,, TIME: 2:19 PM WKSP- C:\EXCEL\FILES0-82\SUPP3\SUPP3.XLW FILE: C:\EXCEL\FILES\I-82\SUPP3\SUPP3.XLS MACRO: C:\EXCEL\FILES\FEEMAC6.XLM DATE: 22 -Aug -94 NPT 481.HW EXHIBIT B-1 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OF YAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Supplement 3 Page: 1 of 2 _..t -_TASK I. - .. ...... . -TASK DESCRIPTION ... . .... CH2M HILL HOURS BY GRADE E7 - . E6 E5... E4 %3 ... E2 ......:E1: . .. T4:.... T3:. T2 - BA...: PRO-JECTS M .. cH2MHILL . _PERCENT. TOTAL OF TOTAL TASK 'TOTAL .LABOR : ' . HOURS HOURS COSTS: _ TOTAL TOTAL • EXPENSE :LABOR:AND: . COSTS: ..:EXPENSES: WSDOT NACRES TO BEECH: 9nr<orp Bi:82/t22NW&&:road.Work (2-1.8)... 0 2 26 0 106 0 176 95 26 140 31 602 43% $33,756 $8,872 $42,628 1 '`NACHESTQ:BEECHSUBTOTAL ..- .-, _ 0 2 j 26 0 106 0 176 _ 95 j 26 140 31 602 4.3% $33,756 $8,872 $42,628 [ S : Y- A 4ProjectManagementand QA)QC, 36 0 378 0 96 0 0 0 ; 0 j 0 190 700 5.0% $52,536 53,020 $55,556 B C.DR. Eine PS&E(130)... ....:.... ...: 0 0 T 50 0 160 0 289 163 45 I 202 45 954 6.9% $53,903 514,499 $68,402 (84) -0.6% ($4,405) (52,652) (57,057) ....R .. ..:. .... C-1Traffic.:Sig11a16. 0 0 (7) 0 (22) 0 (50) 38 l 0 •• (36) (7) 2 0 2 0 52 0 4 32 0 I 0 8 100 0.7% 56,450 5604 $7,054 D: !Frontage Roel Study. E • ;'s,YLine/Frontage Road PS&E :(1.29) _. F 18101001ePS8E Packages: (2=7,:11,12):: . 0 0 42 0 142 0 299 139 45 I 201 45 913 6.6% $50,990 $14,175 365,165 0 0 127 0 336 0 798 336 0 587 123 2,307 16.6% 3128,521 $51,782 3180,303 G Design Report Revlsians _ , _ ., • ' 0 0 60 0 208 0 36 152 j 40 0 8 504 3.6% $33,264 $11,119 $44,383 H ; EA.Revisions ... 10 62 0 6 64 48 0 0 12 I 0 6 208 1.5% 516,448 33,747 320,195 jEariyStr1AGontracl__ , 0 0 68 0 153 0 194 90 0 136 35 676 4.9% 339,931 $4,774 $44,705 ___ _, ,,.._... 1- ":VESUBTOTAI 48 62 720 6 1,189 48 1,570 950 142 i 1,090 453 6,278 45.3% $377,638 3101,068 3478,706 , lT A. P,,tojecf Managementand QALQC _ .... _ 20 20 206 0 124 0 14 74 : 0 8 98 564 4.1% 841,101 51,229 $42,330 0 0 12 0 32 0 76 32 0 i 56 12 220 1.6% $12,245 $2,578 314,823 B :Redefine CR)DR.Con8gurations C• ;)EARevisfons 0 12 0 96 0 32 0 0 j 18 i 0 8 166 1.2% $11,981 $3,926 315,907 ... ... ... ©.:RLW.Seryi09: 208 0 76 0 76 0 8 12 0 j 8 24 412 3.0% $41,359 367,311 3108,670 E. _iBridgeDesign, ,-. ........ ...__. .... 0 0 0 24 0 66 0 132 66 I 0 I 96 24 408 2.9% 322,960 32,179 $25,139 ....., F' iDeslgq:Re0.0:Supplenr9M . „ , 0 0 15 0 45 0 105 45 0 , 15 15 240 1.7% 314,111 $5,913 $20,024 ...T...r GROWTHENHANCE.:S.U.BTOTAI. 228 32 333 96 343 32 335 229 18 1 183 181 2,010 14.5% 3143,757 583,136 3226,893 .IG:CITY REQUESTS ..: ..:.... . :.:. ... ... ._ ... 'ENERAL A :11161itleti _ 0 104 40 386 18 0 40 722 642 1 27 73 2,052 14.8% $128,731 321,791 $150,522 0 0 0 0 50 0 0 34 40 48 0 172 1.2% 39,626 31,225 310,851 8 14casst0Yakiin4.Reta11_Atea . ...... .................. C: :iHa? _Mtls:l:Pti.:2lfivestigation.. . . ... . 0 0 54 0 172 0 0 0 i 12 0 84 322 2.3% 320,357 $8,644 329,001 D: STP Appltoation __. 10 0 4 0 0 0 0 2 I 0 0 4 20 0.1% $1,918 $2 31,920 E- rWe11andsPS&E 0 40 1 0 48 0 116 48 ' 0 I 22 17 292 2.1% 318,413 35,971 324,384 F iPS&ESurvey&_ 0 0 6 0 12 0 32 12 l 0 24 5 91 0.7% 35,069 325,078 330,147 G ;Federal Gimonstratittif Funding....._ 12 0 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 7 51 0.4% $4,721 $279 $5,000 H.:.1TI8 Funding_ 8 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 I• 0 8 41 0.3% 33,601 3399 $4,000 1 'EARevlsions 0 30 20 0 48 0 0 0 i 14 16 14 142 1.0% 310,200 31,479 311,679 J:. Projec .61804emeM 24 24 248 0 110 0 164 92 0 120 68 850 6.1% $58,008 $1,773 $59,781 K iBridye Design, , ,_ ._ . ,. - . , .. .:... . 0 21 25 0 39 0 90 36 0 62 13 286 2.1%S17,433 $1,626 619,059 .,. _ , ._. _. _.. _ ... L. 1South.Centre1:Reg10n,ReviewPooces6:.... . . ... ..::: 0 0 26 0 82 0 190 82 0 134 26 540 3.9% 330,104 36,666 $36,770 ,Ut ModifioatiOn(! ••••••••••0 M.:H 0 8 0 19 0 31 26 j 0 24 8 116 0.8% 36,630 $824 37,454 is GEN.-C1TY-REt]UESTS.SUBTOTAL 54 219 489 386 598 0 663 1,054 i 708 477 327 4,975 359% $314,811 $75,757 $390,568 SUBTOTAL HOURS .... "%"OF TOTAL:HOUR 330_ ' :315-. -... 1;568,.. _ 488:.. -...:2,236 , _ 80: ::... 2.744...: :::2328 :' ;894 #'- . 1;890-.. 992 3,865 100,oN $8s9,962> 1. 268838: 81;138,795; :76.4%:... :23,6% .. :100.0% - . ... 2.3% ...: .11.3%..::.. 3.5% . :-..:16.1.% ' .:. ..0.6%. .: ' . 19.8%: 16.8%. i:. ;6,4%:.. # .13.6% .:... 7.2% 5' . . 'IOPTIIDNAL SERVICES . .... ..... ........ . : . ,,. ,-, ` 0.00% 50 50 . SALARY ESCALATION ..... ... ....... 5.67% $49,320 $3,647 $52,967 IdASTER:' _ 0.00% L 1 $0 $0 30 TOTAL. HOUR- %-OF:TOTAL HOUR 330 _... 315 .... 1;568. ... :488 .... 2,236 ........ 8fi 2744 2,328 ! :894- : `.. 1,890 99.2. ... 13,865 100.0% :$91,9,282:.... -$272,489 $1;191,752; .. .. ;77,10-.... 22.9% _. :100:0% 2.38% 2.27% :. 11.31%.: .:3;62% - . . 16:13% 0.58%> ; > ,.19 79%_ .:: 16.79%. .! .. 6.45%_.. 1 1363% . 7.15% - ESTIMATED HOURLYLABORRATE:.(1993) 013,011 PLUS OVERHEAD.. ...:.. . ,5..43:72. :..: $35:74:.::..'$30.98:..:_.926:70' *23.30...: 920.63 .::..'918,55: 520.47 :917.38..:1.....$14.72 :. 91204.... MULTIPLIER g.95.- ....... :2.95 9128.97. $105.43 591,39: 978.77... $88..74 :..: .560,86 854.72.. 660.39 . 451.27 .,1 .. 543.42 052:. PHASE $UMIIMAR`' TOTAL :LABOR &:EXPENSES 1993: 1194 -995 REMARKS $42,628 $4 2,628 60 (524,912) 37,054 $0 $0 $44,383 311,126 $0 355,556 568,402 317,855 $0 $65,165 3180,303 $0 59,069 $44,705 $37,651 $44.. 1055 $0 30 325,139 $0 $42,330 $14,823 515,907 3108,670 520,024 325,139 $201,754 5150,522 $0 $10,851 30 529,001 50 30 $0 30 $1,920 $24,384 530,147 $5,000 30 $4,000 50 $11,679 $0 $59,781 $0 519,059 $0 $36,770 $0 37,454 $0 3390,568 $62 790: 9076,005 :65% . ...:94.5% $0 $0 60 $0 852,967 56.2,790. $?028,972, 5.3.% - -...94:7% RUN DATE: 8/22/94 r; :N TIME: 2:19 PM WKSP' CSEXCELIFILES11-82lSUPP3ISUPP3.XLW FILE: C: EXCEL\FILESU-82\SUPP3ISUPP3.XLS MACRO: C:\EXCELIFILESIFEEMAC6.XLM DATE: 22 -Aug -94 NPT 481.HW EXHIBIT B-1 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OF YAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Supplement 3 Page: 1 of 7 PROdECTS.DMMARY ._..., PFIASESt1MMkR\'.PER SHEET ANALYSIS TASK , ANALYSIS: N COMMENTS TASk : ff . TA$KDESCpIPTIDN .... .. CH2M_:HILL HOBBSBY:GRADE £7: E6 ES ...:E4 E3-_.. : E2 El:. T4 .... T8: . T2- . OA CH2M HICi: ; TOTAL LABOR &EXPENSES•_., 4=High 1=LOW NO. HOURS COST COMP . SHS. SHEET SHEET :PERCENT TASK . PERCENT: TOTAL OF :TOTAL TASK :TOTAL. H UR SS . HOURS C STS TOTAL. TOTAL, -COSTS ... EXPENSES 1993 19895 ............ /j /'WSDOTNACHESTOBEECH: A:. f; If fmt ip. EM .8g122NW6i fbsd work 010.. _ :// a, ..... t. RoadweYEAt-K086.(1):: �� ' 2 6 12 14 ! 2 ! 8 1 45 0.3/ $2583 $884 $3,467 $0 $3,467 0 1 61 $3,467 8.1% I :j .Site. PreparatonPlaris:. , 2 4 8 4 i 2 I 6 2 28 0.2% $1,571 $882 $2,453 $0 $2,453 0 0 0 $0 5.8% I :.Drainage Plans.. ;. �� 4 18 36 16 i 4 28 6 112 0.8% $6,173 $1,071 $7,244 $0 $7244 0 0 0 $0 17.0/ :0.7% Pav)rrgDetaits:(1) jjj/ 4 16 28 14 ; 16 j 18 4 100 $5,587 $2,338 $7,925 $o 7925 $ , 0 1 146 2 5 $ 186% 0 0 0 $0 12.3% 68 0.5% $3,721 $1538 $5259 $0 $5,259 IntersectioOGiading:Plens 2 12 16 12 2 20 4 t ChanneltzationPfans 2 6 12 7 10 2 39 0.3% $2,180 $571 $2,751 0 $3,942 60 0.4% $3,300 $0 $0 $2351 $3,942 0 0 0 90 0 0 0 $0 _. _. _. . 6.5% - . " 9.2% _.. I i. :IlluminatiorPlaits ��/ 2 10 20 I-- 18 8 2 t SpecialProvlslonS �� .. - - { - .$642 0' 0.0% $0: . 0:-.......... .:$ft 24 0.2/ $1,309 $228 $1537 $9 $0 . .. $Q $1,537 0 Q..:-... 0 $0 0 0 0 $0 t:-- i : - 0.0% 3.6/ :. I Draft / : 1 3 8 4 6 2 1- . Final �/ 1 3 8 4 6 2 24 0.2% $1,309 $228 $1,537 $0 $1,537 0 0 0 $0 3.6% .... ....... .. ... _..... ...... ... .. Engineers Estimate ��// } .. . - . a .. 0:0% . - , _.: $0; . .90 .. .$0- - $0 0 . Q 0 10 0.0% . r Summaryof{10.m! .4es 3 6 14 6 10 3 42 0.3% $2356 $212 $2,568 80 $2568 0 0 0 $0 6.0% l:. r . _,.... :EngineersEstimate: 3 6 14 6 10 3 42 0.3% $2356 $212 $2968 $0 $2,568 0 0 0 $0 6.0% _ _ . - -Incorporate RalFReplacementPlatis 16 1 18 0.1% $1311 $66 $1,377 $0 $1$77 0 0 0 $0 3.2% 0 0.0% $0 $D $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 0.0% ice. -._ ...... - --*.-4..Br.82/.1.7tNW>z:$oadWvrlcSubtgt$L ; j/jj 0 2 26 0 106 0 176 95 I 26 I 140 31 602 4.3°/< $33,756 $8,872 $42,628 $0 $42628 2 1000% tt f ....... :"NACHES:TO BEECH SUBTOTAL ..... . .. 0 2 26 0 106 0 176 I 95 i 26 ; 140 31 602 4.3% $33,756 $8,872 $42,628 $D $42,628!!!2/ 2 2. I:.A. . ., ,... -iVLUEENGiNEERINGSTUDY A. 1Project Management and 0Af0C ProJectManagement...:.- ; � 342 96 I 190 628 4.5% $44 603 $2,772 $47,375 . % 7,933 ,18 72 05/ $ $248 $8 1 $0 $0 $87,181 0 0 0 $0 i4. /< .', :DA/OC j/% i I 1_:.'':PM.A-OALOCSubtotal-..,,. , ,.., .,,,, ,.:..:..- / 36 0 378 0 96 0 0 0 0 j 0 J 190 700 5.0% $52,536 $3,020 $55,556 $0 $55,556 - 0 100.0% B',OR10R130_PS&E:(1-30).:.. .: RoadwaySections(f)_.---"" 12 8 j 2 8 1 39 0.3% $2,220 $884 $3,104 $0 $3,104 0 1 55 $3,104 4.5% She.PreparaUorl,Plan .11)„_ .._ .., �� 2 4 8 4 2 i 6 1 27 0.2% $1936 $884 $2,420 5o $2,420 0 1 43 $2,420 3.5% :... A)lgnmentandR/W:Plans41>:... �� 8 18 36 16 I 4 24 4 110 0.8% $6,294 $1,406 $7,700 $0 $7,700 0 1 136 $7,700 11.3% :: N14110s(1}:__. �J 1 2 6 2 I 2 1 4 1 18 0.1% 8990 $602 $1,592 $0 $1,592 0 1 28 $1,592 2.3% .... _ is TWPC:Plans(t) ��/ 1 4 4 4 1 1 1 4 1 19 0.1% $1,087 $462 $1,549 $0 $1,549 0 1 27 $1,549 2.3/ . .. .... :.::_Alia y, �rainageP(ana(1), � 4 18 36 18 4 26 6 112 0.8% $6,207 $1,071 $7,278 $0 $7,278 0 1 128 $7278 10.6% DralnageandDttefoProfiles(1)' : %/// 4 24 38 16 i 4 1 24 6 116 0.8% $6,521 $1,071 $7,592 $0 $7$92 0 1 132 $7$92 11.1/ 7:.paving:Psns(1): /� 4 20 44 26 I 4 i 32 6 136 10/ $7926 52011 $9637 $0 $9,537 0 1 174 $9$37 13.9/ i (ntersechon Grl-010 Plans(1). 2 10 24 i 164 - I 16 4 76 0.5% $4,192 $2011 $6,203 $0 $6203 0 1 114 $6203 9.1% • 1 AAAA Chanhelt2atiot4Plans(1). 3 8 17 7 i 2 i 12 3 52 0.4% $2,907 $884 $3,791 $0 $3,791 0 1 68 $3,791 5.5% Reta(nnlgWallP18ns;(1::_...,,. 8 16 12 I 36 0.3% $2,556 $324 $2,880 $0 $2880 0 0 0 $0 4.2% .11 inaf Pen (wm ton I &(1) f 2 8 18 12 ; 2 12 2 56 0.4% $3,137 $1271 $4,408 $0 $4,408 0 1 80 84,408 _.....o 6.4% AAAA..• _... . : ,..."... .. AAAA , StgningPlans.. �� , •.:.:.....:.:., :." .......... ....,.,...,.......,..: ... _0 I ( AAAA :$0,-. . `�: AAAA. � � :............�� fl_'$0. AAAA ".............._ AAAA. � loo ___l?.................. AAAA _.. . _....:....: :_ _alga Spacificatlo'rls ; : ; ��J 1 4 4 4 I 2 I 4 2 21 0.2% $1,174 $324 $1,498 8D $1,498 0 1 21 $1,498 22% , _(1) ..::..:. .-.- Al li t Plans (1) 2 30 0.2% $1,658 $884 $2,542 $D $2,542 0 1 46 $2,542 3.7% 7 EriglnesrsEatfmaie/�� 0 Q:0°Jp' $o.. $0... 80 - S0 '90 0 0 4 90> :. 0.0% SrrmmaryofOuantdtes ; 10 4 1 3 j 6 2 31 0.2% $1,732 $95 81,827 $0 $1,827 0 0 0 $0 2.7% : EngineersEstimate. /�� 2 4 10 4 3 6 2 31 0.2/ $1,732 $95 $1,827 $0 $1,827 0 0 0 $0 2.7/ Spedal Provlslons %�� ... AAAA - . ... 0 _ Q:0%.. $0.. 10.: ... .- •$0 . $0:. 80 0 :0 .. ... 0 $0:: 00% . •j Draft ��/ 1 3 7 3 I 2 5 1 22 0.2% $1,217 $110 $1,327 $0 $1,327 0 0 0 $0 1.9% 'Final_; 1 3 7 3 2 i 5 1 22 0.2% $1,217 $110 $1,327 $0 $1$27 0 0 0 $0 1.9% ._, ,-_ _._..-. ,-. �� 1 ."*:PR/DR Line.PSESUbtotal % 0 0 50 0 160 0 289 163 45 I 202 1 45 954 6.9% $53,903 $14,499 $68,402 $0 - $68,402 13 100.0% - RUN DATE: 8/22/94 kuN TIME: 2:19 PM WKSP: C:\EXCEL\FILESII-82\SUPP3\SUPP3.XLW FILE: C:\EXCEL\FILESU•82\SUPP3\SUPP3.XLS MACRO: C:\EXCEL\FILES\FEEMAC6.XLM DATE: 22 -Aug -94 NPT 481.HW EXHIBIT B-1 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OF YAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Supplement 3 Page: 2 of 7 .TASK I TASKDESCRIPT10N....TASK 6H2M HILL HOURS BY GRADE El- •E6 E5 ... E4 E3 E2 .... .. Et 74 T8: T2 ... OA " PROJECT SUMMARY ; _.. - PHASE SUMMARY PER SHEET ANALYSIS TASK ANALYSIS": COMMENTS, CH2M NILL- TOTAL LASOR&.EXPENSES ",. 4=High :i=.t.oiv NO.. HOURS COST` SHEET OF ,PER: PER:.: :COMP," "--SHTS: SHEET SHEET " :.PERCENT OF : TASK `PE#ICENT TOTAL OF TOTAL TOTAL :LABOR_ ;HOURS .. HOURS .� COSTS- TOTAL TOTAL • EXPENSE LABOR:AND." ... -COSTS: EXPENSES: '1993: 1994• 1995" C ITrafNc:Signais.. " . ... f/%��//� ':: Deiete"Y/J, J/F, andY/EL 117311 x-- (20) (60) (140) ( (100) (20) (340) -2.5% ($18,666) ($6246) ($24,912) ($24,912) $0 0 0 0 So 353.0% 1 Add Temporary. Signal at 13 38 90 38 i 64 13 256 1.8% $14,261 $3,594 $17,855 $0 $17,855 0 0 0 $0 -253.0% .... j� 1 }:" *` Ttaific Signals Subtotal. , _ " ... %/%�/ 0 0 I (7) 0 (22) 0 � (50) 38 ! 0 ! (36) 84 •0.6% $4,405 $2,652 $7,057 $24,912 $17,855 0 100.0% D" "`•Ftantage;Road"WO: .... ..... - tags • j 2 2 52 4 32 8 100 0.7% $6,450 $604 $7,054 $7,054 $0 0 0 0 $0 100.0% -t-• - - -- •udy: .. ._ ..._... ....... I 0 0.0/ so $0 so $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 0.0% (- "Fiontage Road:Study Subtotal / 2 0 2 0 52 0 4 32 j 0 i 0 8 100 0.7% $6,450 $604 $7,054 $7,054 $0 0 100.0% E • fY C1ne)Fioritage Road PS&E :(1.29): i h. RoadwaySections(i). ••••j��4 2 6 12 6 j 2 8 1 37 0.3% $2,100 $884 $2,984 27 0.2% $1,536 $884 $2,420 $0 $0 $2,984 $2,420 0 1 53 $2,984 0 1 43 $2,420 4.6% 3.7% I:. Slte Preparation Plans (1) /�� 2 4 8 4 2 6 1 I• AllgnmentandflWPians(1) ��/ 8 18 36 16 4 ! 24 4 110 0.8% $6,294 $1,406 $7,700 $0 $7,700 0 1 136 $7,700 11.8% I Peach{1)/ " ." 1 2 6 2 2 4 1 18 0.1% $990 $602 $1,592 $0 $1,592 0 1 28 $1,592 2.4% I - TWPC Plans (t; �� _- 0.1% 0 1 128 $7278 ° 112% :.l" Drainage Pfans (1):. ��/ 4 18 36 I 18 4 I 26 6 112 0.8% $6,207 $1071 $7,278 $0 $7,2782 �Dra!nageant101fciiPiofiles(1) ' ��j� 4 24 38 16 ! 4 24 6 116 0.8% $6,521 $1,071 $7,592 $0 $7,592 0 1 132 $7,592 11.7% I___Paviri Plans(1),... ,.., . ,., 4 18 44 18 I 4 1 28 6 122 09% $6,732 $2,011 $8,743 $0 $8,743 0 1 160 $8,743 13.4% Infersectio*Gradtng.Plans:(1) . 2 10 24 12 I 4 i 16 4 72 0.5% $3,950 $2,011 $5,961 $0 $5,961 0 1 110 $5,961 9.1% .;i "ChannelizatiooPlans"(f)., _, ______ 3 8 17 7 I 2 i 12 3 52 0.4% $2,907 $684 $3,791 $0 $3,791 0 1 68 $3,791 5.8% 'illurpnetion_Plans(1). "_,." _ "." , � / 12 j 2 2 56 0.4% $3,137 $1271 $4,408 $0 $4,408 0 1 80 $4,408 6.8% :• S nin :Plans tg 9. �j /_- 111111M8EllE „12 } 6,.:....,Q.OY..:::.:.:...:$0 .. $l1:. ... ,::..:..;$t) . . . 30 02% $1,633 $324 $1,957 :. .. ...$6 $0 ..$0 $1,957 0 -..:.Cb:...""::....,0"... ......[:$0.:.:: 0 1 30 $1,957 "tDA% 3.0% :.:...... .. _........ ..... .. a tIo s .... .._ ... "� ..:Stgn..Speclficatlo»a_(1) ....... ..:... �� 4 10 4 2 7 2 3s 0.3% $1,998 $884 $2,882 $0 $2,882 0 1 52 $2,882 4.4% Pfans:(1} . .. " " """ j��-- 2" 4 12 6 2 i 8 2" i EngineersEstfmate' " " i. " 6' Q.Of $0 .. .,." :SP: so '-• n"" "" " 0, - :, . 0 .. $0 - , 0.0% 31 0.2% $1,732 $95 $1,827 31 0.2% $1,732 $95 $1,827 $0 $1827 0 0 0 $0 2.8% -- Summery of5uantities : � EngmeersEstimate .rf, 2 2 4 4 10 10 4 ! 3 j 6 4 3 6 2 2 $0 $1,827 0 0 0 $0 T 2.8% #" $pedatProvis%ns: j�� ... _ .... .. _... - . 0. -0:0%., _. ... `$0 $0:.. "......:$0:" $0 -.... .$0 .. 0 ..... 0.... 0 ...:$0 0.0% �/ Iheit_ .... "__""" " " """"" " " _ ,". "." " _ .. .:: ��/- 1 3 11111111=. 3 2 I 5 1 22 0.2% $1,217 $110 $1,327 $0 $1,327 0 0 0 $0 2.0% Final _..... :..:. :......... ..... 1 3 7 3 2 5 1 22 0.2% $1,217 $110 $1,327 $0 $1,327 0 0 0 $0 2.0% "'* Y:Ltete/Froitta.0 Rd. PS&E:Subtotal ...... ....:.. ' %/A 0 0 42 0 142 0 299 139 45 201 45 913 6.6% $50,990 $14,175 $65,165 $0 $65,165 13 100.0% F :IMuttlplePS&E:Packages:(2-;7, 11 ,121: j//, I:" Fitial:Nydraultc.Repoit ' • ' / 1 4 10 4 i 7 1 27 0.2% $1,495 $123 $1,618 $0 $1,618 0 0 0 $0 0.9% 1 "Getleral PIans (4)/ 3 8 18 8 i 12 3 52 0.4% $2,920 $1,344 $4,264 56 0.4% $3,156 $1,903 $5,059 $0 $0 $4264 $5,059 0 4 17 $1,066 0 6 13 $843 2.4% 2.8% (; :$&e:Freparation Pens (4` _ 4 8 20 8 i i 12 4 1:,-.r Alighm. "ent end R/W Plans. (7) " ` 8 22 54 22 40 8 154 1.1% $6,548 $3873 $12,421 $0 $12421 7 $1,774 0 29 • ° 69% . ..... ::;Proliles{3)'_... _ _ _ _ .... ___ _ A 2 4 t0 4 i 8 ! 2 30 0.2% $1,665 $819 $2,484 $0 $2,484 0 3 13 $828 1.4% t TWPC -... -.: -. ......... /� 2 4 12 4 1 10 2 34 0.2°k $1,861 $981 $2,842 $0 $2,842 0 7 7 9406 1.6% . Drainage NO (10). .% �� 14 38 92 38 1 68 8 258 $14458 $6337 $20,795 1.9% $0 $20 795 0 10 34 $2,080 11.5% 11% 5 x. 7trigat(onpfans": _ 1 2 4 2 2 1 12 0.1% $691 $1,474 $2,165 $0 $2,165 0 0 0 $0 1.2% :Grad(ng Plans.(2)'. r .4 1 4 8 4 L- 1 7 1 25 0.2% $1,385 $683 52,068 156 1.1% $8,615 $3,948 $12,563 $0 $0 52,068 $12,563 0 2 17 $1,034 0 7 30 51,795 1.1 % 7.0% ? :Pavii�gP.lans(7) . j/ 10 20 54 20 i ! 40 12 Ghanneliiati4rr Platte (7) .. ��/ 5 12 30 12 t 24 5 88 0.6% $4,868 92271 $7,139 114 0.8% 56,381 $2,700 $9,081 $0 $7,139 0 7 17 $1,020 4.0% $0 $9,081 0 6 25 $1,514 5.0% 9lu0i(Iatlon.P1ans(6).:. /- 6 18 38 18 28 6 , Sgning Pans (9)" 'f/y/, 4 12 26 12 21 4 79 0.6% $4,392 $2,842 $7,234 $0 $7234 0 9 13 $804 4.0% �Trsttic.Caittrol4Plaps(3¢):J_ j 20 58 134 58 j 1 98 20 388 2.8% 921,616 99,938 931,554 $0 931,554 0 36 14 5877 17.5% ��/�// ;•: Plan Asseinlilq " " " 28 76 172 76 I I 124 28 504 3.6% $28,164 $6,131 $34,295 $0 $34,295 0 0 0 So 19.0% 154 1.1% $8,548 $2,467 $11,015 $0 $11,015 0 0 0 $0 6.1% ;1.-. petla 1SpecialProvisitirls. "_. , _ .... .... / 8 22 54 22 ! r 40 8 ,. Engineers.Estimate ��/ 10 24 62 24 46 10 176 1.3% $9,759 $3,948 $13,706 $0 $13,706 0 0 0 90 7.6% /---_--_ 1:. 0 0.0% $0 $D $0 $D $0 0 0 0 90 0.0% ry 1 RUN DATE. 8/22/94 V TIME: 2:19 PM WKSP' C:\EXCEL1F1LES\I-82\SUPP3\SUPP3.XLW FILE: C:\EXCELIFILESU•82\SUPP3\SUPP3.XLS MACRO: C:\EXCEL\FILES\FEEMAC6.XLM DATE: 22 -Aug -94 NPT 481.HW EXHIBIT B-1 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OF YAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Supplement 3 Page: 3 of 7 is is I: TASK t _.:. TASKDESCRIPTION CH2M`HILL. HOURS BY GRADE E7:... E6.... E5 E4..... - ..E3 .... E2 E7: .... 74: .... T3 : T2 .OA PROJECT SUMMARY _ .._ PHASE SUMMARY PER SHEET ANALYSIS TASK ANALYSIS:: : ' .. _ .. COMMENTS .... .. CH2M HILI, . TOTAL TO'fAt: EXPENSE LABOR.AND -COSTS.EXPENSES TOTAL TABOR 4 -EXPENSES 4=High 1=Low. HOURS` :OF PER: SHEET :SHEET CUSP PER :. PERCENT TOTAL OF- TASK TOTAL HOURS.. - " HOURS . TOTAL. LABOR COSTS. PERCENT _ OF' • .TASK - .::. 1993 1994, 1995. : SHEET ;COMP...:SHTS,-:COMP.. Mulfiple:PS&E Packages Subtotal: : /�/ 0 0 127 0 336 0 798 336 � 0 i 587 1 123 2,307 16.6% 8128,521 $51,78 5180,303 $0 $180,303 104 100.0% GJ. G:::Iesigg;ReporE Revisions jjD i :OR-410isioi�s_(2-20) _ , ' •j V 60 208 36 152 j 40 ; 1 8 504 0 3.6% 0.0% $33,264 $0 $11,119 $0 $44,383 50 $44,383 $0 $0 So 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 100.0% 0.0% DesignReportRevisions Subtotaf %�%%%//; 0 0 60 0 208 0 36 152 40 0 8 504 3.6% $33,264 $11,119 $44,383 $44,383 $U 0 100.0% H .E::ReepensetoCorpmett4119/93}_ ;':: lEA:Revistort6. ..... ...: :.. .. r.': 77. ... -. --- 10 12 4 4 42 ievi o (:ReWsionsto.Text: -_, �/ ----- ----_ 6 64 32 16 11 ! 1 I I j j 2 25 0.2% 51,900 $162 $2,062 $D 52,062 0 0 0 $D 10.2°/> is Tracking FAC Letter : ��,- 2 4 41 0.0% 0.3% $422 52,542 $87 $201 5509 52,743 50 $509 0 0 0 50 2.5% ,.. A tdf lonal.Air-Quality Analy'is , .._ ��X $0 $2,743 0 0 0 $0 13.6% : 'Remodefiag o1 -Noise Impacts.�� 2 6 0.0% $493 $3,262 53,755 50 $3,755 0 0 0 50 18.6% . " ., ,_", . _ j� L 132 1.0% $11,091 $35 $11,126 $11,126 $0 0 0 0 50 55.1% � 0 0.0% $0 $0 80 80 50 0 0 0 50 0.0% ""EA:Revtsions.9ubtotal _, .._ : :.: :._ ._ :..:. %��%4 10 62 0 6 64 48 0 0 j 12 0 6 208 1.5% $16,448 $3,747 $20,195 $11,126 $9,069 0 100.0% E -.#EartySt.:.1A:Conirect::. a:. t r- _- .. .. . . .. ... .. .. - 1" " v :.. .. t TemporaryConnecttontotenth .. ��.... .. .. .. .. .._ ..... ... is .. .- - .. 0 . ..... 4,0! $0 .. .. 50. $8 $t) - $0 . . _. C 0....... Fi..:. 50.:..: 0.0% 1 GeneralPlana (2) Roadway Sections.(.1).... ��/ 2 2 2 4 4 6 6 14 4 8 9 12 2 4 4 4 3 6 7 j ! 4 i 16 01% 5963 . $159 $1122 $0 $1122 0 2 8 $561 2.5% 1 27 0.2% $1,571 $179 $1,750 50 $1,750 0 1 27 $1,750 3.9% _ :Stte Preparation Plans"(2). 7 1 1 1 29 39 0.2% 0.3% $1,669 $2,435 $195 $307 $1,864 $2,742 50 51,864 0 2 15 $932 4.2% 1 .Altgnmentand:RlW.Ptaos(3) $0 52,742 0 3 13 $914 6.1% "P)ofiles "{2) __ / %-- -- 2 2 6 2 6 6 4 4 4 10 4 4 5 20 4 T 2 I 3 16 0.1% 5963 8159 51,122 50 51,122 0 2 8 5561 2.5% 1WPCPlans:(t):...... - 2 i 2 8 14 2 3 1 16 0.1% 5974 $143 $1,117 $0 $1,117 0 1 16 51,117 2.5% Drainage Pians (5); .. A 3 61 0.4% $3,528 $313 $3,841 $0 53,841 0 5 12 $768 8.6 "".. Drainagg:antl:Ditch;PtoflIes{2)- _._ X-- 1 16 0.1% $963 $159 $1,122 $0 51,122 0 2 8 $561 2.5% #: i- {` r UtilityPlens{4);_ �� 10 10 20 20 8 1 14 8 j 1 14 3 61 0.4% $3,528 $297 53,825 50 $3,825 0 4 15 $956 8.6% Paving Plans (5) 3 61 0.4% $3,528 $313 $3,841 50 $3,841 0 5 12 $768 8.6% "Intersecttoii:Grading Plane.(3) j/- �� /- 14 12 4 4 1 39 0.3% $2,435 5210 $2,645 $0 52,645 0 3 13 5882 5.9% Channeltzat(on Plans.(Sj . - . • ......... �� 4 2 8 6 14 8 6 4 i 10 2 44 0.3% $2,549 5277 52,826 $0 $2,826 0 5 9 $565 6.3% . Igumination:Platts(2); ��/-- : ; 6 1 27 0.2% $1,571 $195 $1,766 50 $1,766 0 2 14 5883 4.0% Signiii010ns :.............. _.: ��i: -- 2 2 2 4 �� 4 4 4 :: ::: ::;:....:.: :: ':: - 2 3 0:" ::0,0^1: . 50: $0: $n_ .._ _. _ $ ... .. $0.. o 0< $0: ':00/ :.... _........ ... . Sign Speclflcations (1Q) j� 1 16 0.1% $963 $153 $1,116 $0 $1,116 ... . - . 0 .0" ... 10 2 $112 2.5% .. _. Pians {3) j/- 4 2 ! 3 1 16 01 % 5963 $159 $1 122 $0 51 122 0 2 8 X61 . , 2 5 Ttaffc Control.Plans (2)-. /IBVIIIIIIIIIMIIIIIMIIMIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIInillIlIllaIIIIIENMIIIIIIIIIIMHIMIO0.. z- 4 6 4 10 2 i 3 5 i I 8 1 2 16 35 0.1% 4:0%... 0.3% 5963 ..... 50 $2,046 8159 . .. $0.:.. $106 $1,122 ......Sd:.. $2,152 50 51,122 0 2 8 0.. 0 $561 " `50:. 50 2.5% .. :0.0% 4.8% :. .... ..... .. .a .. ":Engirieera£stfmate .... ......... ._:.. 'Sri $0 :.. 0: 0 .0 _ 0 SummaryofQuantlt(es. $0 $2,152 :EggigeersEstirnate j/ j - 4 6 10 4 5 2 8 ± 3 2 1 35 16 0 0.3% 0.1% 0.06'54 $2,046 5963 $106 $72 50 : ... ..... $2,152 $1,035 -.. $0 $0 $0 .... 50 52,152 $1,035 .... .$0 0 0 0:.. 0 0 0 ... 0 0 .. 8: $0 50 80. 4.8% 2.3% 0.06' 1 S ., at Pr6visions- P� 2 4 RetalnInalo g Wa11 ng BL ��/ ......:.... .. .:. ... ... .. -:..... Roedway Sections (1) 1 3 2 2 3.. 1 12 0.1% $694 $159 $853 $0 $853 0 2 6 $427 1.9% .... ... . Ajfgnmentardat(H421.". : 1 4 3 2 1 3 1 14 0.1% $817 $159 $976 $0 $976 0 2 7 5488 2.2% :Pavttlg(1)._ 1 1 4 6 3 4 2 1 3 2 I 3 1 1 14 17 0.1% 0.1% $817 $1,009 $159 $159 $976 $1,168 $0 $976 0 2 9 $488 2.2% A Wall PlaniDetai&E)sv'(if _ ... _ ".. _ ..: j , 80 51,168 0 2 9 5584 2.6% .Rd. .-.SumnieigofQuaritit(Cs._ �� 1 2 1 3 2 3 --- 2 2 2 --I 2 I 2 1 11 0.1% $650 $159 5809 $D 5809 0 0 0 $0 1.8% i :Engineers:Estimate 1 4 2 2 2 i 2 1 11 0.1% $673 $159 $832 50 $832 0 0 0 $0 1.9% ::.. Special Provisions Vx-- 1 11 0.1% $650 $159 $809 $0 $809 0 0 0 50 1.8% .. _......��X-_ - j i 0 0.0% $0 50 $0 $0 50 0 0 0 $0 0.0% 1. _. " Earl _:S1.1A Contract Subtotal . ." 0 0 68 0 153 0 194 90 0 136 35 676 4.9% 539,931 $4,774 $44,705 $0 544,705 59 100.0% '.`VE:SUBTOTAL V j 48 62 720 6 1,189 48 1,570 950 142 1,090 453 6,278 45.3% 5377,638 $101,068 5478,706 $37,651 $441,055 189 RUN DATE: 8/22/94 RUN TIME: 2:19 PM WKSP• C:\EXCEL\FILES\I-82\SUPP3\SUPP3.XLW FILE: C;\EXCEL\FILES\I-821SUPP3\SUPP3.XLS MACRO: C:\EXCEL\FILES\FEEMAC6.XLM DATE: 22 -Aug -94 NPT 481.HW EXHIBIT B-1 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OF YAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Supplement 3 Page: 4 of 7 { .._ TASK "I: TASK DESCRIPTION CH2M:H111. HOURS BY GRADE -E7 ES E5 E4" E3•... E2 . Ei: .. .:T4 .... T3: " T3.. OA . : PROJECTSl1MMARY ,." PMASE SUMMARY' PER SFEEfANALYSIS . TASK .ANALYSIS COMMENTS" " .. ' CH2M HILL TOTAL. LAHQRlF_£XPENSES """ 4=High i=Lbw. NO,. HOURS COST SHEET OF 'PER: PER :" SHTSS " " SHEET" :SHEET , - "PERCENT. OF : . TASK-" `PERCENT- TOTAL flF" TOTAL : TASK TOTAL .LABOR ": HOURS " " " .HOURS" " COSTS : TOTAL TOTAt. `EXPENSE :LABOR:"AND •C©STS:: " " EXPENSES:" :1903: ' " .. INC:, • 19257.7•7 ---COMP:. 3 �GROWTH IMPACT ENHANCEMENTS A. IProjesi Management and ©AIDC (4,ProjectManagement �� 4 4 56 32 14 18 I 8 8D 216 1.6% $13,297 5430 $13,727 50 $13,727 0 0 0 $D 32.4% : "UrgentProjectRegtiests..... . . 2 2 110 80 i 194 1.4% 516,021 5669 $16,690 50 516990 0 0 0 $0 39.4% 1• Overtime�� 2 2 56 18 78 0.6% $4,490 $35 54,525 $0 $4,525 0 0 0 $0 10.7% 76 0.5% 57,293 505 $7,388 $D 57,388 0 0 0 SO 17.5% _; QA(Qc 12 12 40 12 i t! PM 3' GA/OO Subtotal :: :., .,. . . %% %/A 20 20 206 0 124 0 14 74 0 8 98 564 4.1% $41101 $1229 $42,330 $0 G42 3330 _ 0 100.0% B IReilefine CRl6R Configurations"" ... jY .:Redefine CR/DR:Configurations . " .... _ 7 12 32 76 32 56 12 220 1.6% $12,245 52,578 514,823 $0 514,823 0 0 0 $0 100.0% j / 1 0 0.0% $0 SO $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 0.0% -Redefine CR/DR:Config.Subtotal A 0 0 12 0 32 0 76 32 0 1 56 12 220 1.6% 512,245 $2,578 $14,823 $0 $14,823 _ 0 100.0% C 1EA:Revlefone Revisions:toText : ��j 8 _- j 12 2 22 0.2% $1,530 5162 51,692 $o 51,692 0 0 0 So 10.6% __ ",___„ sis- � .AddmonalTraffic;A.haly�� . 88 I 4 4 96 0.7% $7,278 $301 $7,579 $0 $7,579 0 0 0 $0 47.6% " #> : Additional" Ali duality Anajyefe `, '. % j /// 8 32 2 2 44 0.3% $2,751 $201 $2,952 $0 $2,952 0 0 0 $0 18.6% . . '�emodeting of Nbtse ltnpai:ts:. " .: 4 -_ ! 4 0.0% $422 $3262 $3,684 $0 $3,684 0 0 0 $0 23.2% '*:EA"Revisioiis:Stifitgtai, 0 : / 12 0 96 0 32 0 0 18 ! 0 8 166 1.2°! 511,981 $3,926 515,907 SO $15,907 0 100.0% ....... t..: [; : Riw Services:.... ; 0,.. 0.0% " . $0:" $0"... 58 .:. .. _.. ... - ", so " 0 .... 'O 0` " $D::.: . :4.0% ..... _" " " . ....._........ .. _..-.... True Coet£etjmate.... /,/58 32 32 3 ^' 6 131 42 0.3% $5,417 $224 $5,641 $0 $5,641 0 0 0 SO 5.2% 42 I 72 0.5% 57,601 $12,704 $20,305 $0 $20,305 0 0 0 SO 18.7% ;Appraisals"... _ _ - "_ " . " / 42 12 2 f 4 .. : Negotiailotte r 42 12 1 1 2 69 0.5% $7,470 $2,479 $9,949 $0 $9,949 0 0 0 $0 9.2% . Reiacaiiop-SPppoit: /� 16 !.....: I:.. 16 01 % 52,064 $1,681 $3,745 $0 $3J 0 0 0 $O 3.4% Acte, Heedg :.. it' 0D% $o " $0. 59 ... ... .$t • $o 0 0 0 $0 - .;0,0%: 4.8% : i..,. Access Hearing:/ z 8 8 8 4 4 4 4 40 0.3% 53,089 $2,127 $5,216 50 $5216 Findings and Order ��/ 0 0.0%,. • 50- - SD. 59 :. $p' 0, 41... .:. p .. '50: U:0 j . . .. Findings and:Ordee �X / 12 12 2 4 8 42 0.3°k $2,719 $2,170 $4,889 50 $4,889 0 0 0 $9 4.5% .HUD Apptalaels_ : i 0 0.0% 50 $9,006 $9,006 $0 59,006 0 0 0 SO 8.3% :'-•: " ..'. ". i . "e. . % <.: Addfdorial7ipe Reports: ��. I 0 0.0% 50 $34,000 $34,000 50 $34,000 0 0 0 SO 31.3% ---- 1:. ' 0 0.0% $0 SO $0 50 $D 0 0 0 SO 0.0 / ".RAN Set* Subtotal- :. ..:. .. . v % 208 0 76 0 76 0 8 12 0 I 8 24 412 3.0% $41,359 $67,311 5108,670 00 5108,670 _ 0 1009% C" j : Bridge -Design : .............. ,WideningofY:tinebVeiFair" " 24 66 132 66 96 24 408 2.9% 522,960 52,179 $25,139 $25,139 $0 0 0 0 $0 700.0% 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 $O $0 0 0 0 SO 0.0 ":BridgeDesign"Subtotai" . % A 0 0 24 0 66 0 132 66 1 0 96 24 408 2.9% 522,960 $2,179 $25,139 $25,139 $D 0 100.0% _ F lDeeign ReporfSupplenrent: ;'s• ... Desigrt.RepoitSupplement " ":" .:.: , �A 15 45 105 45 1 1 15 15 240 1.7% 514,111 55,913 $20,024 $0 020,024 0 0 0 $0 100.0% DR:Su''.IehientSubtotal . _��/ 0 0 15 0 45 0 105 45 I 0 15 15 240 1.7% 514,111 $5,913 $20,024 $0 520,024 0 100.0% I . `"' GROW* ENHANCE,.SUBTOTAL 4 228 32 333 96 343 32 335 229 18 I 183 181 2,010 14.5% $143,757 $83,136 $226,893 $25,139 $201,754 0 RUN DATE: 8/22/94 RUN TIME: 2:19 PM WKSP• C:\EXCEL\FILES\I-82\SUPP3\SUPP3.XLW FILE. C:IEXCEL\FILES\l-62\SUPP3\SUPP3.XLS MACRO: C:\EXCEL\FILES1FEEMAC6.XLM DATE: 22 -Aug -94 NPT 481.HW EXHIBIT B-1 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OF YAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Supplement 3 Page: 5 of 7 is Tk$K ±:.. 7ASKi)ESCRIRTIQN CH2M`HILL. HOURS -BY GRADE- E7 E6:.. ES' E4:... . ! $ - E2 ... E1 .. 74:.... T3 .. T2 ._ - OA... PROJECT SUMMARY. PNASESUMMARY PER SHEETANAGY$IS TASK Wan HILI;: 4=High . i .ANALYSIS TOTAL LABOR &;EXPENSES:....... 1 --.Low. NO HOURS COST PERCENT TOTAL .OF TOTAL TASK TOTAL 'LABOR HOURS ... HOURS COSTS: TOTAL. TOTAL EXPENSE. LABORAND COSTS ... EXPENSE$ 1993 5994. 1£95.. SHEET- OF :PER PER: COMP. :SHTS: . SHEET-. ..:SHEET OF . TASK .. COMMENTS:: .. 4•iGENERALC17`f 'REQUESTS .... ... .. : A. ;lt)tilities. :..... Udiity3tu8Y_:. �� 6 18 40 16 I 27 5 112 0.8% 56,291 $211 $6,502 $0 $6,502 0 0 0 $0 4.3% -...:... .........: , UlAities PS&E / �� 1 0 0 0/ $0 $o; $0 SO .. $0 ;0_ 11 . 0 $0 0,4 _ $0: $0 Q R . .. . 0' _ _ 80 :... 0.0% .. i - t- Desigh OrawiQgs / I 0 o $0 -.. $.0 80 Notes (4) �� 4 1 54 54 112 0.8% $6,345 $410 56,755 $0 $6,755 0 4 28 $1,689 4.5 % .Structsue 2 18 18 r 38 0.3% $2,167 $410 $2,577 $0 $2,577 0 2 19 $1289 1.7% 80 $39,572 0 10 56 $3,957 26.3% __ _:Qu8htityTadu(atiohs(2j.._. •j Utpfty.Plana:(t0): �/ 84 234 I 241 i 559 4.0% $33,103 $6,469 $39,572 Wily Ptofl(es(7) 156 158 I 372 2.7% 522,089 $6,499 $28,588 240 1.7% 814,628 $4,083 $18,711 $0 SO 828,588 $18,711 0 7 53 $4,084 0 8 30 52,339 19.0% 12.4% 8 458 / 92 94 I ..-1.1,104.061.* i Con'oeion Friyineenng � �� 4 5 i 9 0.1% 8622 5131 $753 80 8753 0 0 0 $o 0.5% Speoisl;Provieions �� • 44 I 32 92 0.7% $5,054 $391 $5,445 $0 $5,445 0 0 0 $0 3.6% 1 ........ . ......... :P AerrettsJAgieements � j I I 0.0 % $0 $0 $0 $0 $D 0 0 0 $0 0.0% EnglneereEstmate j 30 36 I 66 0.5% $4,916 $224 $5,140 104 0.8% 510,965 8108 811,073 $0 80 $5,140 811,073 0 0 0 $0 0 0 0 $0 3.4% 7 4%• .,, _...._........._....... :Sonia RavieivltiC. //� /// 104 i 1 . •.• . SubmittaislFikoli �� 24 72 72 ! 19 187 1.3% $10,605 52,356 812,961 $0 812,961 0 0 0 $0 8.6% . - Utilities Coord.li.ead Engr: Act, 144 1 I 17161 12, 1.2% 811,946 $499 $12,445 $0 $ 445 12, 0 0 0 $0 8.3% :. �/ I I 0 0.0% so 80 So $0 $0 0 0 0 50 0.0% 1 "Udllties:Si1ttotaF ` - %A 0 104 40 386 18 0 40 722 642 ! 27 73 2,052 14.8% $128,731 $21,791 $150,522 30 5150,522 31 100.0% B.:Mew*/0Yakiina:Retail:Atea. •,,, - $0 $428 - • 0 0 O L 0.4% 3.9% 6 0.0% $344 $84 $428 eoNohs::,:.. A 4 j 2 i ;,:Roadway ........ ..... ........: 'i: Site.:Rreparaflort.Rtari's:. , / �/ 6 2 I 8 0.1% $465 $84 $549 $0 $549 0 0 0 $0 5.1% ...n. _ n..... AUgnmentarilHIIK-- - --. %/ ��/ 34 I 22 j 32 88 0.6% $4,855 $466 $5,321 80 85,321 0 0 0 $0 49.0% ;t.,,.Profilea 12 8 I 12 32 0.2% $1,756 $227 $1,983 $0 $1,983 0 0 0 $0 18.3% t_ y e I 2 I•:1- 10 0.1% $586 $107 $693 80 8693 0 0 0 $0 6.4% _Pe... ..ns (ntersecdon:Gtadlnq:Plaris 10 2 i 12 0.1% $706 $107 $813 $0 $813 0 0 0 So 7.5% 1 ChannellielleitPlans �� 4 1 4 8 0.1% 8449 $66 $515 8 0.1% $465 $84 $549 $0 $0 $515 $549 0 0 0 $0 0 0 0 $0 4.7% 5.1% t> . # •i1lumine4on Pians �� _ 6 2 r.. . { WA I 0 0.0% 80 80 $0 $0 $D 0 0 0 90 0.0% ...:..: ...... `1.`"':Aceessta.Yakliaa.Ret;Subtotal :...... �� 0 0 0 0 50 0 0 34 I 40 I 48 I 0 172 1.2% $9,626 $1,225 $10,851 $0 $10,851 0 100.0/ .. ...: C' :'HaZ::Mtle.. Ph, 2.lnve9tigatlott j ..: Task 1'=.Add. Latid Use.Researeti i �� ! o.o% $0 $0 80 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 0.0% ( ... ... Records Reviewnntergiews,.,.,, �� 24 24 0.2% 51,650 80 $1,650 80 81,650 0 0 0 $0 5.7% ._. :SheRecofinatssatce 12 t L 12 0.1% $825 $260 $1,085 $0 $1,085 0 0 0 $0 3.7% I - . - ..... - t4SP7SARPlans -- j / / 36 - - , 18 54 0.4% $3,114 $160 $3,274 $0 $3274 0 0 0 $D 11.3°/> 80 $1,769 0 0 0 $0 6.1% . tinl . NTeihoterMum ��/ 18 J 12 30 0.2% $1,663 $106 $1,769 .. :.....-..... _ ..;T.eehhLcal ..... e_ ltickoffA7eetlBg. /��% 4 I I 4 0.0% $366 $0 $366 $0 $366 0 0 0 $D 1.3% ... ....... PeojectMat lent % I I 12 0.1% $1,097 $0 $1,097 80 81,097 0 0 0 $0 3.8% j ,Adminstrative Assistance l / 12 12 0.1% $426 $0 $426 $0 $426 0 0 0 $0 1.5% a - • jj 0.0/ $0 50 $0 0 $0 50 0 0 0 / i _.... .. . // / f(e1d Prepafatiori -` - - 12 12 0.1% $615 $0 $615 $0 $615 0 0 0 $0 2.1% }}` ..: Field lnxestigatian ; r� 46 46 0.3% $3,162 $405 $3,567 $0 $3567 0 0 0 $0 12.3% is ;: la6 Allowance �� 1 0 0.0% $0 $5,000 55,000 80 $5,000 0 0 0 So 17.2% -, t: :... . • FxgaYationAllowahce.--...... 0.0% $0 $2,500 82,500 18 0.1% $1,645 $0 81,645 $0 $0 52,500 $1,645 0 0 0 $0 0 0 0 So 8.6% 5.7% _ -DalaReviewNalidat<od:.% �%�� 18 I ...... / �j//i 10 L 10 0.1% $914 $0 $914 $0 $314 0 0 0 $o 3.2% $0 $426 0 0 0 $0 1.5% <;..:.-roject;Mapagement ... 1 AdminsttativeAasiatance' •, j 12 12 0.1% $426 $0 $426 , •,.. Task 5-CotrectiveMeasures . �� , 0 0.0% 30 30 $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 30 0.0% TecfiniealMetnotandum_. %36 � I 24 60 0.4% $3,327 $213 $3,540 $0 $3,540 0 0 0 12.2% 1: - _P1naTMeeting - - ��/ - -- ---- -- ---- -- - 4 - - - -- -- -- - - - - -- --- - - - --- - � ( 4 0.0% 3366 $0 $366 $0 $366 0 0 0 50 1.3% RUN DATE: 8/22/94 WKSP• C:IEXCEUFILESI1-821SUPP3\SUPP3.XLW FILE: C:IEXCELIFILESII-821SUPP3ISUPP3.XLS MACRO: C:IEXCEL\FILESIFEEMAC6.XLM DATE: 22 -Aug -94 NPT 481.HW HUN TIME: 2:19 PM EXHIBIT B-1 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OF YAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Supplement 3 Page: 6 of 7 TASK; : ASKDESCRIPTiQN... CH2M HILL HOURS BY GRADE E7 ... E6 ... E5 E4 ES..._.. E2 E1:. T9: . T3:... . T2: OA PROJECT SUMMARY , _. .,, PHASE SUMMARY PER SHEET ANALYSIS TASK ANALYSIS ' .... COMMENTS, ..... .. CH2MHILL.. TOTAL LABOR &EXPENSES 4 -High . 14.0w N0.- HOURS COST -::PERCENT SHEET OF PER -PER' COOP ...SHTS:.. SHEET _.:SHEET OF TASK .. . `PERCENT TOTAL OF TOTAL. TASK. TOTAL :LABOR: HOURS . - . HOURS -COSTS:COSTS TOTAL TOTAL EXPENSELABOR AND EXPENSES 1993 1994• 1490. f ...... . - . -T ......- �� 6 ---_ 1 6 0.0% $548 50 $548 50 $548 0 0 0 50 1.9% .Prtijeet-Management Adminstrattve Assistance .:��--_----- 6 6 0.0% 5213 50 5213 $0 5213 0 0 0 $0 0.7% / ,��-��_� I r o o.o% $o $o 50 $o $0 0 0 0 $o o.o% t " Hei. Kttls. Ph.21riyest, subtotal: _...... X 0 0 sa o 172 0 0 0 12 j 0 84 322 2.3% $20,357 $8644 $29,001 $o 529,001 0 100.0% :j... [} ;+STP:AppliGetloa'..... 1 ___.... .......... 'STP•Apptication.. 10 4 2 ! T 4 20 0.1% 51,918 32 51,920 $0 51,920 0 0 0 $0 100.0% _....... .. ... j I 0 0.0% $0 $0 50 $0 $0 0 $0 0 0 00/ 50 STP ApplicationSubtataf %%%% 10 0 4 0 0 0 0 2 0 ! 0 4 20 0.1% $1,918 $2 51,920 $0 51,920 0 100.0% E. jWettandsPS&E r Coordinate:wi. logy �/// 24 - -- f ! 24 0.2% $2,530 $120 52,650 50 $2,650 0 0 0 $0 10.9% . . _ . _. _..., _ . _ wetland Plane jai. %16 44 108 44 16 16 244 1.8% 514,541 55,785 520,326 50 320,326 0 0 0 $0 83.4% SpeclalProvislons :.....:::::...::: ' 1 4 8 4 1 6 1 24 0.2% $1,342 566 51,408 $0 $1,408 0 0 0 $0 5.8% _..;._..:: jj 0 0.0% 50 $o 50 $o $0 0 0 0 $0 0.0% l %% 0�� 1 "'.Wetlanda PS &E Subtotal: 116 48 0 22 i 17 292 2.1% 518,413 $5,971 $24,384 $0 $24,384 0 100.0% P _ PS&E Surveys...... .: vex' .-, . ,......... , PS&ESurvev6 4-- 6 12 32 12 24 5 91 0.7% $5,069 525,078 530,147 $0 530,147 0 0 0 $0 100.0% ,--_---- 0 0.0% 50 $0 50 $o $0 0 0 0 $0 0.0% i. PS&ESurre sSubtotal: . - ........ r , 0 0 6 0 12 0 32 12 1 0 i 24 5 91 0.7% $5,069 525,078 $30,147 $0 -$30,147 0 100.0% .:I- 6.Federal.Demonstration.Furidin¢ j/ is FedoralDernonetratlonFunding.___ 7� 12 32 _ I 7 51 0.4% $4,721 $279 $5,000 $0 55,000 0 0 0 $0 100.0% ;j .. .. ... _ .._ .. . �------- i 0 0.0% $0 50 50 50 $0 0 0 0 50 0.0% .. ... ... ..... I � .: »:yea: WOO..Funding Subtotal %% 12 0 32 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 7 51 0.4% $4,721 $279 55,000 $0 _ $5,000 0 - 100.0% H: TIB:Ftinditig j :. _. ... :......: . TIB,Fundfiig:...............��, 8 25 ---- 1 i 8 41 0.3% $3,601 $399 54,000 $0 54,000 0 0 0 SO 100.0% j 0 0.0% SO $D $0 $0 SO 0 0 0 $0 0.0% ^TISFunding -Subtotal:: , A 8 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 41 0.3% 53,601 5399 $4,000 $0 $4,000 _ 0 100.0% t:.Wetiehd: � j 30 8 4 8 50 0.4% $4,031 $980 $5,011 $0 $5,011 0 0 0 $0 42.9% Htstorie Preaervatioti 8 i 2 10 0.1% $802 $99 $901 $0 $901 ' 0 0 0 $0 7.7% _ -• i 'Endaagr$red:Spactes:, A 12 ! 2 14 0.1% $1,168 $99 51,267 50 51,267 0 0 0 $O 10.8% ::.. i :StorrhWatel �, �/ 48 -- 6 i 12 2 68 0.5% $4,199 $301 54,500 50 $4,500: 0 0 0 53 38.5% , 0 0.0% $0 $0 50 50 50 0 0 0 $0 0.0% "EA Rovisions Subtotal'.... .. %//,, 0 30 20 0 48 0 0 0 14 1 16 14 142 1.0% 510,200 51,479 511,679 50 511,679 0 100.0% J IProject Management j i ProjeCCManagetiterit. �° ��/_ -- Eiiterideiifto t Dnrafioil: 44 20 66 -_ 164 i 120 68 � � 32 20 76 0.5% $5158 5545 $5 703 $0 $5 703 0 0 0 SO 9 5 458 3.3% $25,366 3199 525,565 50 525,565 0 0 0 50 42.8% Project ScheduleDevelopmeat:.. 132 I 132 1.0% $12,064 5640 512,704 50 512,704 0 0 0 50 21.3% I , lirgeMProjectiie10818. ///� 44 44 � 16 104 0.8% 57,614 5199 57,813 $0 57,813 0 0 0 50 13.1% 1 ___ Ogertime....._...........__ �j/ 24 i 24 0.2% $1,449 560 51,509 50 51,509 0 0 0 $0 2.5% :.t}A1OCandonstrattibllitv8eview �� 24 24 8 56 0.4% 56,357 5130 56,487 50 $6,487 0 0 0 $0 10.9% ''ProjectManagement:Subtotal= .::.::: ::. %/// 24 24 248 0 110 0 164 � 92 I 0 1 120 68 850 6.1% 558,008 51,773 559,781 $0 $59,781 0 100.0% RUN DATE: 8/22/94 n,JN TIME. 2:19 PM WKSP- C:IEXCEL\FILES 1-821SUPP3ISUPP3.XLW FILE: C:IEXCELIFILES11-821SUPP3ISUPP3.XLS MACRO: C:IEXCELIFILESIFEEMAC6.XLM DATE: 22 -Aug -94 NPT 481.HW EXHIBIT B-1 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OF YAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Supplement 3 Page: 7 of 7 t •1 TASK ... .. _.. .:... TASK DESCRIPTION ....... CH2M'HILL HOURS BY GRADE = ET E6:.. E5... _.... E4 E8....-. _ET E1 . T4..... T3 .... T2 . OA: - PROJECT SUMMARY ... _ .. PHASE SUMMARY PERSHEETANALYSIS:....... TASK ":. ANALYSIS.: : ... ..COMMENTS. .... ' CH28,1 HILL TOTAL +:LABOR &;EXPENSES 4..High 1=Low. NQ. HOURS COST -PERCENT- TOTAL OF TOTAL. TASK TOTAL LABOR .. [HOURS...... HOURS.. ,COSTS, '�:.. TOTAL. TOTAL EXPENSE LABOR AND:: COSTS::. EXXPENSES:.' PERCENT, :OF TASK.. 1993 ... - 1994- 1995' SHEET OF PER PER • COMP... :SHTS:. .:SHEET.. :SHEET [f. ;Bridge Dssigti //z z 1 :80dge.82/123NW , . _ 6 14 36 14 1 24 5 99 0.7% $5,546 9624 $6,170 $0 $6,170 0 0 0 $0 32.4% Brides 82f133 . ••/ 8 24 54 22 ! i 38 8 154 1.1% $8,599 $872 99,471 90 99,471 0 0 0 $0 49.7% :, CL Line Devfation_IIS 21 11 1 i 1 33 0.2% $3,288 $130 93,418 $0 93,418 0 0 0 $0 17.9% 0.0% 90 $0 90 $0 90 0 0 0 $0 0.0% "'.Bridge Design Subtotal 0 21 25 0 39 0 90 36 0 { 62 13 286 2.1% 917,433 91,626 $19,059 $0 519,059 0 100.0% L. South;Centratt Region'Revlew Process ( I Stage lA /�� ■ 14 42 100 42 I 72 14 284 2.0% 915,799 93,382 $19,181 $0 919,181 0 0 0 $0 52.23 I Slap 113 .,... _...-_ -,- ...: ..,.. StagelC �� 8 26 60 26 ! 42 8 170 1.2% $9,480 $2,152 911,632 90 311,632 0 0 0 $0 31.6% 14 30 14 20 4 86 0.6% 94,825 $1,132 $5,957 90 95,957 0 0 0 $0 16.2% 0 0.0% 90 90 90 $0 90 0 0 0 $0 0.0% S,C.-R...Review ProcessSubtotal ��/ 0 0 26 0 82 0 190 82 0 134 I 26 540 3.9% $30,104 $6,666 $36,770 $0 $36,770 0 100.0% M .HUUModiflcations 1 Fair Avenue ��/ /j �� j D: D.0°lo $0 10 $D 51T $0 D 0 D $0 D.D'IA .. } I.::Site PrepPlens 2 4 4 g 1 15 0.1% $855 $99 9954 $0 9954 0 0 0 $0 12.8% ,, Paving -Plans _ , , 1 4 4 4 3 1 17 0.1% 9993 $99 $1,092 90 91,092 0 0 0 $0 14.6% t lnierseCNolY6radilig Flails/ _ _II,IumU09.1.1 lays , _ ,.__ . __ ._ Signs , S z--zmn9_Pfans_ --- 1 2 4 4 � 3 1 15 0.1% $855 999 $954 90 $954 0 0 0 $0 12.8% 1 2 4 2 i 3 1 13 0.1% 9734 $99 $833 90 $833 0 0 0 90 11.2% 1 4 4 2 3 1 15 9872 $99 9971 $0 X71 $D '0.0°/a :TehtliStreet ...............__ _..... _..... ��/.-_ .. .. . . 9:010............ t3 0.1% .... $734. $99 ... $833. $D $833 0 ..........00........ D........ ... 0 .......0 .. . . 0 .. c ; . ... 11.2°/ :..... _. .. Ai�nment_apd.RIWPI8n9::... 1 2 4. '':::.. 3 Z 1 Paving Plebs _ 3 1 15 0.1% $855 $131 $986 $0 $986 0 0 0 $0 13.2% 1: ,-,;Grading PianB' ..,: ... ��/ 1 1 3 4 i 3 1 13 0.1% $732 $99 $831 10 $831 0 0 0 $0 11 1% 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $D 0.0% { i I :HUD-ModificatIons'Subiotal //� ////%% 0 0 8 0 19 0 31 26 0 24 8 116 0.8% $6,630 $824 $7,454 $0 $7,454 0 100.0% "'.GEN.: CITY:REQUESTS.SUB.TOTAL .. 54 219 489 386 598 0 663 I 1,054 708 477 327 4,975 35.9% $314,811 $75,757 $390,568 , $0 $390,568 31 SUBTOTAL HOURS %OF.TOTAL:HOURS ...... :..;330 315.•• 1,568' 488... 2,236 •... 80'...::'..:2,744 . :-..2328 _ :!: -894 I. _ :1;810:' 992. 13;865 100:0% ' 9869,982 .3268.836. $1,138;795 76:4% ;23:6% 100:119_6 562790:11470;905. . .. .:6:5% _ 94:5% 223 . 3:4%.... 23%.. 1ti3% .:{... } '3.5% 16:1% .. :0.6%.....:.:..19.8%. 168% :5439 1:. .136%. :.. 7,2%:.: 5 ...:.:.lOPTfONAl.:SE.RVICES. , , . ... .. 1: Optional Services 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 D o 0 0 0 0 0.0% $o $o $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 0.0% I , 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 0.0% '•':OPT10NAL SERVICES SUBTOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% $D $0 $0 $0 $0 0 0.0% 1SALARY:ESCALATION , 4166 Eecalatlop •' • 5.67% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 j 0 ; 0 0 0 0.0% $49,320 93,647 952,967 $0 852,967 0 0 0 $0 100.0% .i:...:.. .. I 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 0.0% SALARY`ESC SUBTOTAL: 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% $49,320 $3,647 $52,967 $0 652,967 0 100.0% MASTER:.. -. .-.. -.. I: Fixed.Fee', 0.001/4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60% $0 $0 SD $D $D 0 0 0 $D 0.0% I ..... ! 0 0.0% 10 $0 90 $0 So 0 0 0 $D 0.0% ......... . t° MASTER SUBTOTAL: _. D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0 0.0% TOTAL HOURS %OP:TOTAL :330 :: 315.:.: .1,568: 488......._2236'..._ . :80'... . 2,744 _..:2,328' 894 1 1,890: 902- 981.3g .100.0% S919,282: 5272980` 54791;762 .:7.7.1% 22i9.i' 1000% 862Z90 5:3% 54028,972... 232. . 94.7 •HOURS :. 2.38% 2.21% _ : . 11;31%9 952% 16.13%- ." _. 0:58%; 1979% 16.79% 6:45% :1: 13.633' 7.15% ESTIMATED HOURLY: LABOR:RATE,(1993). $43.72:_ :..:535.74_.,:::..:$30.9$.......526.70: .;52930 $20.63...:-:. S16-55:. :: $2047 517.38:.:!...'814.42._ :$1204:... MULTIPLIER. 2.95 LABORPLUS OVERHEAD . .. 2:95: $12897' �'. 510543. 591,39 578.71 .:. 56674 56086. 15472'_ 560.99.. 551,27' 543.42.. ..53552.. . RUN DATE: 8/22/94 RUN TIME: 2:20 PM EXHIBIT D-1 SUMMARY SHEET- SHEET.:,.. CONSULTANTFEEDETERMINATION, .. ...,. . ..„. -cir/ OF.vAIUMA` .142LYAI(IMA AVENUE :............:.. $uppiement 3.. , .. : . ....... ..: C.H2M HILL..:.. _.::..... ..::......... FILE:, CSIEXCELIFILESU-821SUPP915.UPP3:XLS DA?E: 8722144 NFT 481.HWV• 1. Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 1,993 Average Hourly Raw Labor Class Role Hours Rate Cost Rate E7 PNVSr. Reviewer 330 $43.72 514,428 E6 Task Lead Engineer 315 $35.74 511,258 E5 Lead Engineer 1,568 530.98 548,577 E4 Lead Engineer 488 $26.70 513,030 E3 Design Engineer 2,236 $23.30 552,099 E2 Design Engineer 80 $20.63 51,650 El Designer 2,744 $18.55 $50,901 T4 Lead Design Tech. 2,328 520.47 $47,654 T3 Lead Drafting Tech. 894 517.38 $15,538 T2 Design/DraftTech. 1,890 $14.72 527,821 OA Technical Assistant 992 512.04 $11,944 2. Total Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 13,865 $294,900 $2127 3. Overhead Cost (OH) - Including Salary Additives (Based upon Federal audit) (DSC) 168.00% $495,432 Subtotal 5790,332 4. Fixed Fee (DSC) 27.00% 579,623 5. Reimbursables CH2M HILL 5122,498 6. Subconsultant Costs MBE WBE OTHER TOTALS HLA 5.17% 561,580 SHIMONO 0.11% 51,264 TECHSTAFF 4.96% 559,061 ETS 0.00% 50 CARLA KEEL GROUP 0.00% 50 RAN OUTSIDE CONSULTANTS 2.36% 528,076 SUB7 0.00% 50 SUB8 0.00% $0 SUB 9 0.00% 50 Totals 0.11% 4.96% 7.52% 5149,982 7. Escalation Costs (1993 to 1995) 549,319 a. TOTAL.:.... . ;$1091,7E4,. . ,. :..:.. . 9. Management Reserve Fund 50 10 QRANDTOTA1z=:Estimated Fee _, :. 1. . NOTES: LUMP A. Escalation factors: SUM 1: . 1Y.ES . 1994-1995 labor rates over 1993: 6.00% Current work planned for 1994 - 1995: 94.49% Salary escalation factor. 5.67% Includes fixed fee noted above: 10.07% B. Other factors: Overhead: 168.00% Fixed fee on DSC: 27.00% Labor 100.00% Multiplier 295.00% Page: 1 of 1 BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT Item No. 1 0 For Meeting Of September 13. 1994 ITEM TITLE: Gateway Project - Supplemental Agreement #3 SUBMITTED BY: Department of Engineering & Utilities - Engineering Division CONTACT PERSON/TELEPHONE: Dennis E. Covell, P.E. - Director - 576-6313 SUMMARY EXPLANATION: Since September 1993, the scope of work for Phase 1 of the Gateway Project has been revised to: • Implement Value Engineering (VE) recommendations • Address impacts on the project resultant from increased growth activity in the Terrace Heights area. • Incorporate portions of the W.S.D.O.T.'s Naches to Beech project into Phase 1 of the Gateway Project. Resolution X Ordinance Contract Other (Specify) Supplement # 3 Funding Source Fund 143 - Transportation Improvement Board APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL: CP -e -f --v City Manager STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute supplement #3 to the agreement for engineering services with CH2M-Hill for the Gateway Project. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: COUNCIL ACTION: Resolution No. R-94-119 TD -14 .11.16 1 --91744 Agenda Statement September 13, 1994 Page 2 of 2 The cost of Phase 1 has increased as a result of the scope of work revisions. However, Phase 1 is now funded without an increase in cost to the City of Yakima, Yakima Transit, Yakima County or developer, Gary Lukehart by the most recent successful funding increase efforts in which the WSDOT increased their funding participation. by $1,225, 582 which resulted in $1,160,568 additional and associated ImprovementmoneyBoard now(TIB) totals $17,754,950.dThe analysis Phase I of involvingthatfunng isTIB u shown as associated local match follows: Funding Source Original Funding % Split July, Funding 1993 % Split August, Funding 1994 % Split City of Yakima 1,691,689 12.62% 1,836,041 11.95% 1,836,041 10.34% WDOT 924,717 6.90% 1,003,572 6.53% 2,229,154 12.55% Yakima County 603,076 4.50% 654,503 4.26% 654,503 3.68% Yakima Transit 201,026 1.50% 218,168 1.42% 218,168 1.23% Developer 600,000 4.48% 1,190,363 7.74% 1,190,363 6.70% Local Totals 4,020,508 30.00% 4,902,647 31.90% 6,128,229 34.50% TIA Funds 9,381,185 70.00% 10,466,153 68.10% 11,626,721 65.50% Total Funds 13,401,693_ 100.00% 15,368,800 100.00% 17,754,950 100.00% In Supplement Agreement #2, executed September 14, 1993, several optional services were identified. These tasks were listed as optional because the exact scope and cost of the services could not be determined at that time. The scope and cost for these services has now been defined and are summarized in the accompanying Table 1. The total cost is $869,754 as reflected in Supplement #3 and is included in the funding now in place for Phase 1 of the Gateway Project.. TD -14 .Ni.16 2-91394 Table 1 Project Scope Revisions Yakima Gateway Project Escalation * I 552,967 I $52,967 Extra Work Totals 5322,000 I $1,191,754) 5869,754 Supplemental Agreement 02 Optional Services Credit Supplemental Agreement #3 Total I $322,000 1 I $869,754 1 • Escalation is salary costs for extended contract duration of up to 15 months. Task Description Cost Comparison Cost Task 1 Supplement 82 Optimal Services (MVO) Supplement 13 (V22ll4) Difference (Sap/i�i tD Supp<eseat p1) WSDOT Naches to Beech IA. 11icop. Bridge 82/122N -W & Rdwy Work $O 542,628 542,628 WSDOT Neches to Beech Subtotals - $0 $42,628 $42,628 Value Engineering Team Study 2A 2B 2C 2D 2E 2F 2G 2H 2I Project Management & QA/QC CR Line and DR Line PS&E Traffic Signals Frontage Road Study Y Line and Frontage Road PS&E Multiple PS&E Packages Design Report Revisions Environmental Assessment Revisions Early Stage 1 A Contract Document 50 5173,000 (518,000) 535,000 50 591,000 516,000 50 50 555,548 568,402 (57,057) 57,054 565,165 5180,303 $44,383 520,195 544,705 555,548 (5104,598) 50 (527,946) 565,165 589,303 528,383 520,195 544,705 Value Engineering Team Study Subtotals 5297,000 $478,698 5181,698 Growth Impact Enhancements 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F Project Management & QA/QC Redefine CR Line and DR Line Configurations Environmental Assessment Revisions Right -of -Way Services Bridge Design Design Report Supplement 50 50 50 50 50 50 542,330 $14,823 515,907 5108,670 525,139 520,024 $42,330 514,823 515,907 5108,670 525,139 520,024 Growth Impact Enhancement Subtotals SO - $226,893 5226,893 General City Requests 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E 4F 4G 4H 41 4J 4K 4L 4M Utilities Access to Yakima Retail Area Hazardous Materials - Phase 2 Investigation STP Funding Application Wetlands PS&E PS&E Surveys Federal Demonstration Funding Application TIB Funding Assistance Environmental Assessment Revisions Project Management Bridge Design WSDOT South Central Region PS&E Review Process HUD Modifications 525,000 50 50 50 50 50 SO 50 50 50 50 50 50 5150,522 510,851 529,001 51,920 524,384 530,147 55,000 54,000 511,679 559,781 $19,059 536,770 $7,454 5125,522 510,851 529,001 51,920 524,384 530,147 55,000 54,000 511,679 559,781 519,059 536,770 57,454 General City Requests Subtotals $25,000- $390,568 5365,568 Escalation * I 552,967 I $52,967 Extra Work Totals 5322,000 I $1,191,754) 5869,754 Supplemental Agreement 02 Optional Services Credit Supplemental Agreement #3 Total I $322,000 1 I $869,754 1 • Escalation is salary costs for extended contract duration of up to 15 months. RESOLUTION NO. R-94-119 A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager and City Clerk of the City of Yakima to execute Supplement # 3 to the agreement with CH2M Hill for professional services. WHEREAS, it is necessary to engage professional services for the Yakima Gateway Project; and WHEREAS, CH2M Hill has offered to perform those professional services in accordance with the provisions of the attached Supplement # 3 to the agreement document: and the City Council deems it to be in the best interest of the City that the Supplement # 3 to the agreement document be executed by the City, now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA: The City Manager and the City Clerk of the City of Yakima are hereby authorized and directed to execute Supplement # 3 to the agreement with CH2M Hill for the purpose mentioned above, a copy of which Supplement # 3 to the agreement is attached hereto and by reference made a part thereof. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 13th day of September, 1994. __C)214 MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT #2 Project No. SEA 32984 Agency City of Yakima Name of Project Yakima Avenue/I-82 Interchange & Fair Avenue Agreement No. 91-103/D-6015 Gentlemen: The City of Yakima desires to supplement the agreement entered into with CH2M HILL, Northwest, Inc. and executed on November 12, 1991 and identified as Agreement No. 91-103/D-6015. All provisions in the basic agreement remain in effect except as expressly modified by this supplement. The changes to the agreement are described as follows: I Section 1, SCOPE OF WORK, is hereby changed to add: The Scope of Work and project level of effort for Phase III of this project is detailed in Exhibit "B," Supplement No. 2, Phase III - Final Design and Right -Of -Way Acquisition attached hereto, and by this reference made a part of this agreement. II Section IV, TIME FOR BEGINNING AND COMPLETION, is amended to change date of completion of the work to read September 31, 1995. III Section VI, SUBCONTRACTING, shall be amended by the addition of the attached Exhibits G-1 for all subconsultants. IV Section V, PAYMENT, shall be amended as follows: A summary of payments under the Basic Agreement & Supplement No. 2 is set forth in the attached Exhibit A, and by this reference made a part of this supplement. The maximum amount payable under this agreement as supplemented, inclusive of all fees and other costs, is now $ 3,641,950 Supplemental Agreement #2 Page 2 If you concur with this Supplement and agree to the changes as stated above, please sign in the appropriate spaces below and return to this office for final action. Sincerely, Consultant's Signature Al 'EST: Approving Authority I`7, / 13 Date Date 4<.„, >s City Clerk City Contract No. Ct -7(-1) ) . c ntldt007/yaksup2b WKSP C:\EXCEL\FILES0-827HASE3\PHASE3.XLW FILE. C:\EXCEL\FILES11-82\PHASE3\EXHIBITA.XLS MACRO C:\EXCEL\FILES\FEEMACS.XLM DATE: September 8, 1993 TIME: 12:01:51 PM SEA 991.15 EXHIBITA.XLS •y Exhibit "A" Summary of Payments Notes: 1. Not used. 2. Direct Salary Cost, Overhead and Fixed Fee include salary escalation 3. In accordance with a letter dated August 3, 1993 to the Yakima City Council, CH2M HILL will give up $162,210 in Fixed Fee. Invoices for Supplement No. 2 will show a credit equal to the Fixed Fee for the invoice period until the total credit for the project reaches $162,210. 4. Includes payroll additives Run Date: 9/8/93 Run lime: 12:05 PM Page 1 of 1 Basic Agreement Supplement No. 1 Supplement No. 2 Total Direct Salary Cost (See Note 2) $75,057 $328,190 $378,341 $781,588 Overhead (See Notes 2 and 4) $126,097 $551,360 $635,613 $1,313,070 Direct Non -Salary Costs $63,845 $529,931 $509,400 $1,103,176 Fixed Fee (See Note 2) $20,265 $88,611 $102,152 $211,028 Subtotal $285,264 $1,498,092 $1,625,506 $3,408,862 Optional Services $0 $73,298 $322,000 $395,298 Fixed Fee Credit ( See Note 3). ($20,265) ($88,611) ($53,334) ($162,210) Total $264,999 $1,482,779 $1,894,172 $3,641,950 Notes: 1. Not used. 2. Direct Salary Cost, Overhead and Fixed Fee include salary escalation 3. In accordance with a letter dated August 3, 1993 to the Yakima City Council, CH2M HILL will give up $162,210 in Fixed Fee. Invoices for Supplement No. 2 will show a credit equal to the Fixed Fee for the invoice period until the total credit for the project reaches $162,210. 4. Includes payroll additives Run Date: 9/8/93 Run lime: 12:05 PM Page 1 of 1 FINAL I-82iYakima Avenue EXHIBIT B Supplement No. 2 SCOPE OF WORK FINAL DESIGN AND RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION Phase III YAKIMA GATEWAY PROJECT CITY OF YAKIMA CH2M HILL September 1993 C:\WP51 \DOCS14821PHAS E3.SCP/1 9/08/93 1.35pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue Section 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS DELIVERABLES AND ENCLOSURES PROJECT DESCRIPTION The work of this phase consists of acquiring Right of Way, and preparing the PS&E package for Stage 1 of the project titled "Yakima Gateway". The major features of the Stage 1 project are as follows: 1. Construction/reconstruction of the following elements as shown on Enclosure A, Alternative II. Widening of Yakima Avenue to two lanes in each direction, plus left turn lanes and a separated pedestrian/bicycle walkway. East Lincoln Avenue and East "B" Street/Fair Avenue from half way between North 9th and 10th Streets to Spruce Street. Three lanes will be constructed on Fair Avenue to accommodate future widening. • The bridges to be designed are: CL Line Overcrossing Fair Avenue E. Yakima Avenue Overcrossing Fair Avenue E. Yakima Avenue Overcrossing I-82 (Widening) • Retaining Walls: J Line Between the new CL Line Overcrossing of Fair Avenue and the existing CL Line Overcrossing of I-82 Under CL Line Overcrossing of Yakima Avenue • TAR Line from 1-82 to Fair Avenue. • Minor ramp widening at the Yakima Avenue ramp' terminals of the BR, CR, BL, and EL Lines. • J Line from Fair Avenue to Yakima Avenue. 2. Construction of storm drainage facilities. 3. Construction of illumination facilities • Yakima Avenue and Fair Avenue only at the intersections • Interchange ramp terminals per the WSDOT Design Manual. 4. Construction of traffic signalization at six intersections: • Yakima Avenue/BL/EL • Yakima Avenue/BR/CR • Yakima Avenue/J C-\WP5 RDOCS11-82\PHASE3.SCP/2 9/08/93 I.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue • Fair Avenue/J • Fair Avenue/Pacific Street • Fair Avenue/TAR 5. Installation of signs and pavement markings. 6. Acquisition of necessary right of way for Stage 1 construction. 7. Installation of landscaping and irrigation. 8. Pavement design based on previous City designs. 9. Installation of a pedestrian and bicycle path. 10. Inclusion of the WSDOT PS&E for widening of the CL Line(M-Line) 11. Current program budget of $15.4M in 1994 dollars: • Right of Way $2.6M • Construction $9.7M • PE $3.1M (Does not include $0.2M in WSDOT funds for the construction of the CL Line improvements.) PROJECT DELIVERABLES • Final Geotechnical Report • Final Hydraulics Report • • One set of reproducible bidding and contract documents (plans, special provisions, and engineers estimate only) in WDOT format for the roadway, structures, drainage, illumination, landscaping, irrigation, traffic signalization, signing, channelization, and traffic control. One set of reproducible bidding and contract documents (plans, special provisions, and engineers estimate only) in CITY format for the traffic signalization at Fair Avenue and Pacific Street. • Utility Study technical memorandum • Wetland Study technical memorandum • Technical support for environmental permit applications • Community relations support FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue Right of way True Cost Estimate. Right of way Relocation Assistance Plan. Right of way appraisals. RJW acquisition, including signed right of way agreements, including negotiation diaries, acquisition instruments, relocation assistance documents, or condemnation reports. A. Interchange Conceptual Layout B. Schedule ENCLOSURES ABBREVIATIONS • AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials • BDM WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M23-50 • DR Design Report • DM WSDOT Design Manual M22-01 • DEA Draft EA • EA Environmental Assessment • EPA Environmental Protection Agency • FEA Final EA • FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency • FHWA Federal Highway Administration • I/C Interchange • LOS Level of service • NEPA National Environmental Protection Act • NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System • RJW Right of Way • PPM WSDOT Plans Preparation Manual M22-31 • PS&E Plans, specifications, and estimates • SEPA State Environmental Protection Act • TS&L Type, size, and location • USF&WS United States Fish and Wildlife Service • V/C Volume to capacity • WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation • WSP Washington State Patrol GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS C:\WP51\DOCS 1-82\PHASE3.SCP/4 9/08/93 1.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue The following assumptions have been made during preparation of the scope and fee estimates: • Upon submittal of the 100 percent plans to HQ, the STATE will take over responsibility of the mylars and complete the assembly of the final Contract Plans for bidding. Upon submittal of the special provisions run list, the STATE will prepare the draft special provisions. The STATE will update the special provisions for the 90 percent and 100 percent submittals through the use of the 'red and green' process. The STATE will assemble the final Contract Provisions, including all boilerplate, the contractor proposal, prevailing wage rates and other information required for bidding. • Upon the 90 percent submittal of the engineers estimate and the summary of quantities, the STATE will enter the information into the Contract Administration and Payment System (CAPS). The STATE will assemble the final Engineers Estimate. • The traffic signal at the intersection of Fair Avenue and Pacific Street will be a separate construction contract. It will be designed and packaged to CITY standards. Final compilation of the plans special provisions and engineers estimate will be performed by the CITY. C- \ W P 51 \D O CSU -82\P H AS E3. S CP/5 9/08/93 I.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue Section 2 RIGHT OF WAY SERVICES AND FINAL DESIGN TASK 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT Subtask 1A Project Management The current project schedule (Enclosure B) will be updated and maintained for the project. One month "horizon" schedules will be developed to plan the day-to-day activities of the project team. The schedule will be updated periodically to reflect the current status of the project. Direction of the staff and review of their work over the course of the project will be provided. This is for the overall project rather than a specific task and will provide guidance to the entire team. This task will also prepare the monthly progress reports. Progress reports will discuss the work in the previous month, the status of individual tasks, meetings attended, and outstanding information. Monthly invoices will be prepared in accordance with the format setup for Phases I and II. This task provides for the preparation, attendance, follow-up, and documentation of meetings over the course of the project. These meetings will be the forum for the agencies to provide input and guidance for the direction of the project. They will also be used to discuss project issues, approve submittals, and develop potential solutions. Periodic monitoring of the budget will occur over the course of the project. Current status as well as projections to complete will be developed. This task, is intended to help monitor costs and budgets and to propose corrective actions. These actions could include formal requests for budget increases or scope modifications or reductions. Drawings and documents received and generated over the course of the project require management This information will be filed and logged to facilitate ready and selective retrieval. A status of requested information will also be maintained. This project will be developed in several phases. This task provides for developing the scope for Phase IV (services during construction). Subtask 1B Quality Control The quality control and peer review program has particular emphasis on technical aspects resting with the various technical disciplines (e.g., surveying, drainage, electrical, etc.). The overriding strategy of the program is to eliminate major defects in project work products and limit minor defects so as not to impact client acceptance or contractor progress, and to minimize liability exposure. The program entails the periodic review of study criteria, design, assumptions, and concepts and presentation of product format. This determines that the overall project objectives are being fulfilled. C \W PS I\DOCS U-82\PHAS E3. SCP/6 9/08/93 1 .27 pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue Quality control includes technical discipline review, lead designer review, and senior review. Discipline reviews will be performed while the detailed technical work is in progress (Le., when computations are completed, when sketches and preliminary drawings have been prepared but not yet submitted for drafting, and when specifications and special provisions are ready for typing). Lead designers will review specific products such as plans, reports, specifications, and other documents, at which time these products are completed. Senior reviews will be performed for an overall task when and as defined in the quality control program. Such reviews will be performed after project packages are assembled and before they are submitted for review to the City of Yakima and affected agencies. All scheduled senior reviews will be documented in a memorandum format to the project manager. The project manager will be responsible for adjudication of comments/responses with respect to the project scope, budget, and schedule. TASK 2 PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES Subtask 2A Geotechnical Report Assumptions The following assumptions have been made during preparation of the scope and fee estimates: • Field Explorations and Laboratory Testing Test pit excavations, rather than borings, can be used to define infiltration characteristics of soil at drainage structure locations. No more than 2 days of test pit excavations, field infiltration testing, and field pH testing will be required. Traffic control will be provided at selected location. No hazardous, dangerous, or contaminated soil will be encountered during the field exploration or laboratory testing programs. No special restoration procedures (e.g., hydroseeding, plantings, etc.) will be required after test pit explorations. Foundation Design Studies Interchange geometry does not change more than 25 feet, and embankment elevations do not change more than 5 feet following completion of field explorations. WSDOT prequalified walls will be used where structural earth (mechanically stabilized earth -- MSE) walls are selected. Bridge foundation design and construction does not deviate from methods described in the Design Report. Field explorations confirm that soil at the site generally consists of relatively dense to dense C:\ W P51 \DOC S\1-82\PHAS E3. SCP// 9/08/93 1.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue sand, gravel, and cobbles below a depth of 10 feet. • Administration No more than 5 meetings with WSDOT HQ are required to review the foundation design studies. Project Setup and Data Review The CONSULTANT shall review CITY and WSDOT data relevant to the design and performance of existing bridge foundations and retaining walls. Requirements for the design of bridge foundations and retaining walls shall be discussed with CITY and WSDOT staff. Final plans for field explorations and laboratory testing shall be established with WSDOT. Foundation Design Studies The CONSULTANT shall perform engineering studies necessary for the design and construction of bridge foundations, retaining walls, signal pole and sign foundations, and drainage facilities. A review of construction staging requirements shall also be made. The bridge foundation studies shall include evaluations of foundation types (e.g., pile foundations, drilled shafts, or spread footings), foundation bearing capacity, and foundation settlement. Where appropriate, recommendations shall be prepared for response of bridge foundations during seismic loading. The retaining wall studies shall identify the applicability of wall types based on soil conditions, alignment geometry, height, and backslope requirements. The wall selection shall consider various wall types, including standard concrete cantilever, structural earth, geotextile, rockery, and gabion. Wall pressures shall be determined for each wall. General stability for sliding and overturning, bearing capacity, and settlement shall be evaluated for the preferred wall. Retaining wall data sheets shall be prepared m accordance with WSDOT requirements. The signal pole and sign foundation studies shall be carried out for each location of signal poles or cantilevered signs. Information about soil conditions shall be used to select the foundation type and the depth of the foundation. The drainage studies shall involve reviewing soil conditions and field data at location of drainage structures. This information shall be used to make recommendations on infiltration characteristics of the soil. The construction requirements for bridge foundations, abutment fills, and retaining wall shall consider the use of preloads and surcharges, temporary support requirements, and embankment construction methods. Geotechnical Report C:1WP5I\DOCSV-82\PHASE3 SCPIS 9/08/93 1.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue The CONSULTANT shall prepare a Geotechnical Report that summarizes the results of field and office work described above. The report shall present A summary of field exploration methods, including test pit logs and water level measurements A summary of laboratory testing methods including tabulated data • A summary of engineering studies, including material property assumptions, descriptions of computational methods, results of computations, and conclusions regarding design • A discussion of geotechnical issues related to construction methods and sequencing, including special provisions and drawing details that will be necessary for fmal design. The CONSULTANT shall provide the following copies of a draft of the Geotechnical Report for review and approval: • 1 City of Yakima • 1 Yakima County • 13 WSDOT Upon receipt of written review comments from the CITY, the County, and WSDOT, the CONSULTANT shall finalize the draft report, incorporating the review comments where appropriate. The CONSULTANT shall deliver the following copies of the fmalized report: • 1 City of Yakima • 1 Yakima County • 13 WSDOT Subtask 2B Final Hydraulics Report The CONSULTANT is preparing the Preliminary Hydraulics Report under Supplemental Agreement No. 1. The fmal Hydraulics Report shall be completed under this supplemental agreement and shall incorporate project changes requested by WSDOT after their review of the Preliminary Final Design Report The Hydraulics Report shall not be changed to reflect changes that occur during the PS&E phase. However, the submittal dates of the final Hydraulics Report shall be included in the project schedule. The CONSULTANT shall deliver the following copies of the final Hydraulics Report: • 2 City of Yakima • 15 WSDOT Subtask 2C PS&E Surveys CAV/P51 \DOCS \1-82 WHASE3.SCP/9 9/08/93 1.27pm FINAL Control Surveys This task shall perform horizontal and vertical control surveying along the route to establish centerline align- ment and elevation control. The design surveys shall be tied into the control monumentation. I-82/Yakima Avenue Topographic Surveys Topographic surveys shall be completed along the route. These surveys shall locate and provide for mapping of significant existing physical features not sufficiently defined by the aerial mapping. Supplemental Cross Sections Supplemental cross-section surveying shall be performed along the route. This will establish existing elevations of the ground surface in critical project areas and at locations that were not observed in the photogrammetric mapping. Additional R/W Surveys Proposed right of way locations shall be staked as necessary during acquisition process. Utility Locations Public and private utilities affected by this project shall be identified and located. Utility subsurface elevations that can be obtained without excavation (i.e. pipe, catch basin and manhole invert elevations, elevation of top of water valve operating nut, etc.) shall be measured. Utilities that do not have existing visible features or as -built information shall be identified for possible potholing and discussed with the CITY. Up to three days of backhoe operation for potholing is included. Foundation Locations The CONSULTANT shall provide the horizontal and vertical control, and locations of borings, test pits etc. in support of the geotechnical explorations. Subtask 2D General Plans Cover and Index The CONSULTANT shall prepare a cover and index listing of plan sheet titles as they appear on the plan sheets and in accordance with the Plans Preparation Manual M22-31 (PPM). C:\WP5I\DOCSU-82\PHAS E3.SCP/ I O 9/08193 I.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue Vicinity Map The CONSULTANT shall prepare a vicinity map showing the PROJECT limits in accordance with the PPM. The plan will include but not limited to mileposts of the PROJECT, beginning of and ending of construction, equations and exceptions, distance in miles to nearest cities or towns, location of railroads, waterways and underpassing roadways. Subtask 2E Roadway Sections The CONSULTANT shall prepare the roadway section plans in accordance with the approved Design Report, STATE Design Manual M22-01 (DM), PPM and other CITY furnished information. Roadway sections shall provide the geometric information on the roadway cross section to be constructed. Subtask 2F Site Preparation Plans The CONSULTANT shall prepare the site preparation plans in accordance with the PPM. The plans will be used to depict removal and demolition and other such related items that can not be clearly addressed on other required plan sheets. The CONSULTANT shall prepare quantity takeoffs, tabulations and backup calculations in accordance with the PPM, and current STATE bid item listing. Subtask 2G Alignment Data and R/W Plans The alignments prepared in the Design Report will be fmalized using information gathered in the PS&E surveys task. The CONSULTANT shall prepare the alignment and R/W plans in accordance with the PPM. The alignment tables will show curve data and coordinates necessary to construct the PROJECT. The align- ment and R/W plans will show existing and proposed alignment, existing and proposed R/W with stationing and distance ties, construction permits and easements, proposed fencing, monumentation and other applicable items as described in the PPM. The CONSULTANT shall prepare quantity takeoffs, tabulations and backup calculations in accordance with the PPM, and current STATE bid item listing. Subtask 2H Profiles The CONSULTANT shall provide the mainline roadway and ramp profile sheets in accordance with the PPM. The profiles will show existing and proposed profile alignment data along with proposed superelevation diagrams, embankment and excavation quantities, roadway section references, clearing and grubbing quantities and other applicable items as described in the PPM. Subtask 2I Temporary Water Pollution Control Plans C:\WP51 \DOCSU•82WHASE3SCP/1 I 9108/93 1.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue The CONSULTANT shall prepare the temporary water pollution control plans. The water pollution control plans will show items necessary to restrict construction runoff from entering drainage facilities, creeks or rivers without first being treated in a manner that is acceptable to the CITY, STATE, and approving agency. Such acceptance will be depicted on the project schedule and serve as a critical project milestone. A brief memorandum describing the concept will also be prepared. The CONSULTANT shall submit the temporary water pollution control plan to the STATE for approval 60 days in advance of the planned advertisement date of the PROJECT. The CONSULTANT shall prepare quantity takeoffs, tabulations and backup calculations in accordance with the PPM, and current STATE bid item listing. Subtask 2J Drainage Plans The CONSULTANT shall prepare the drainage plans, profiles, details and structure notes in accordance with the Hydraulics Report, the PPM and other CITY and STATE provided information. Appropriate drainage and water quality facilities shall be designed to effectively drain the PROJECT. Subtask 2K Utilities Plans No utility plans will be provided as part of this supplement. The required work that results from the conclusions developed in the Utility Study task will be included in a later supplement or as part of Optional Services under this supplement. A tentative scope for this future work is: The CONSULTANT shall prepare the utility plans, profiles, details and structure notes in accordance with the Design Report, the PPM and other CITY and STATE provided information. The CONSULTANT shall include in the plans existing and proposed utilities. The CONSULTANT shall obtain "as -built" information and place this information onto the plans. The CONSULTANT shall determine if a utility will need to be field located and shall cooridnate such location from the CITY. Subtask 2L Landscaping Plans The CONSULTANT shall prepare the landscaping plans and details in accordance with the approved Design Report, approved Landscape Concepts, DM and the PPM. The landscape plans will show the grading and planting, sections, pedestrian/bicycle activities and the "Gateway" treatment and other applicable items. The CONSULTANT shall prepare quantity takeoffs and backup calculations in accordance with the PPM, and current STATE bid item listing. Subtask 2M Irrigation Plans The CONSULTANT shall prepare the irrigation plans and details in accordance with the approved Design Report, approved Landscape Concepts, DM and the PPM. The irrigation plans will show all service connections, distribution piping, and control systems. The CONSULTANT shall prepare quantity takeoffs C:\WP51\ CS\I.82\PHASE3.SCP/12 9/08/93 1.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue and backup calculations in accordance with the PPM, and current STATE bid item listing. Subtask 2N Grading Plans The CONSULTANT shall prepare the grading sections and/or plans for the PROJECT in accordance with the PPM. The plans and/or sections will be used to depict unique grading, interchange contour grading, embankment preloading, slope drainage, slope re -grading, and other such related grading items that can not be clearly addressed on other required plan sheets. Subtask 20 Paving Plans The CONSULTANT shall prepare the paving plans and details in accordance with the approved Design Report, the approved roadway sections, approved Interchange and Channelization Plans, DM, PPM and other CITY provided information. The paving plans shall include, but not limited to, paving limits, grinding locations, pavement type (full depth, overlay etc.), barrier type and location, guard rail type and location, guard rail anchor type and location, ramp gore and intersection grading, bridge overlay locations and other applicable items. The CONSULTANT shall prepare quantity takeoffs, tabulations and backup calculations in accordance with the PPM, and current STATE bid item listing. Subtask 2P Channelization Plans The CONSULTANT shall prepare the channelization plans and details in accordance with the approved Design Report, approved channelization plans, approved interchange plans, DM and the PPM. The channelization plans will show the beginning and ending of lane tapers and transitions, pavement markings including type and location, channelization features (such as raised traffic islands and painted traffic islands) and other applicable items. The CONSULTANT shall prepare quantity takeoffs, tabulations and backup calculations in accordance with the PPM, and current STATE bid item listing. Subtask 2Q Retaining Wall Plans Assumptions The following assumptions have been made for the preparation of the Retaining Wall Plans scope of work and fee estimate: Retaining Wall Type, Size and Location As listed in the PROJECT DESCRIPTION, three retaining walls will be included in Stage 1 of the PROJECT C:1WP51 \DOCS\-82\PHASE3.SCP/13 9!08/93 1.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue Wall 1, located along the west side of J Line between E. Yakima Avenue and Fair Avenue, is anticipated to be a cast -in-place concrete cantilever wall approximately 360 feet long with an average height of 6 feet. Wall 2, located on the north side of E. Yakima Avenue beneath the existing CL Line Overcrossing, is anticipated to combine two walls into one system, a temporary tie -back pin pile wall with timber lagging located in front of existing Pier No. 1 footings and a permanent cast -in-place concrete cantilever wall, located along roads' edge. The temporary we! will be approximately 70 feet long with an average height of 15 feet. The permanent wall will be approximately 96 feet long with a average height of 21 feet. Wall 3, located between the new CL Line Overcrossing of Fair Avenue and the existing CL Line Overcrossing of 1-82, is anticipated to be a cast -in-place concrete cantilever wall approximately 50 feet long with an average height of 10 feet. • Quality Assurance/Quality Control Since an 'independent design check' by another consultant is not required, the scope of the quality assurance/quality control for the wall designs and plans, will be limited to an 'overall review' at the 50 and 90 percent levels of completion and a 'design check' at the 90 percent level of completion. Retaining Wall Data The CONSULTANT shall prepare the retaining wall data for each of the non-standard walls included in Stage 1 of the PROJECT in accordance to the requirements of the DM, Section 510.05. Retaining Wall Engineering The CONSULTANT shall perform the appropriate structural analyses and design on the PROJECT retaining walls and prepare plans and special provisions in accordance to the approved Design Report, the Geotechnical Report, the PPM, pertinent sections of the Bridge Design Manual (M-23-50) Volumes 1 and 2, AASHTO 15th edition, applicable WSDOT/APWA Standard Specifications, and guidelines set forth in the DM, Sections 1130 and 510.05. As a minimum, retaining wall plans will show the geometric layout, elevations, typical section(s), and pertinent details. The CONSULTANT shall be responsible for detailing the walls that use the STATE Standard Plans. Quality Assurance/Quality Control The CONSULTANT shall provide Quality Assurance/Quality Control on the retaining walls including a senior overall review of the design performed, details developed and plans prepared. Estimate The CONSULTANT shall prepare quantity takeoffs, tabulations and backup calculations in accordance with the PPM and the current STATE bid item listing. This information will be used to prepare the Profile, C \WP51\DOCSU-62WHASE3.SCP/14 9/06/93 I.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue Quantity Tabulation and Summary of Quantities sheets. Subtask 2R Illumination Plans The CONSULTANT shall prepare the illumination plans, details and specifications in accordance with the STATE Traffic Manual M51-02, DM, MUTCD, and the PPM. The CONSULTANT shall submit to the CITY a preliminary set of illumination plans to the STATE showing existing illumination, existing electrical hardware locations, proposed locations for the new illumination, wiring diagrams, and electrical hardware. The CONSULTANT shall prepare quantity takeoffs and backup calculations in accordance with the PPM, and current STATE bid item listing. Subtask 2S Traffic Signal Plans The CONSULTANT shall prepare the signal plans, interconnection plans, and details in accordance with the STATE Traffic Manual M51-02, DM, MUTCD and the PPM. The CONSULTANT shall submit a preliminary set of signal and interconnection plans showing existing signals, existing electrical hardware locations, proposed locations for the new signals, electrical hardware, and wiring diagrams 60 days in advance of the PS&E turn in date noted in the schedule. The CONSULTANT shall prepare quantity takeoffs and backup calculations in accordance with the PPM, and current STATE bid item listing. Subtask 2T Signing Plans The CONSULTANT shall prepare the signing plans, details and sign specifications in accordance with the STATE Traffic Manual M51-02, DM, MUTCD and the PPM. The CONSULTANT shall submit a preliminary set of signing plans showing existing signing, sign removal specifications, proposed locations for new signing and sign specifications 60 days in advance of the PS&E tum in date noted in the schedule. The CONSULTANT shall prepare quantity takeoffs and backup calculations in accordance with the PPM, and current STATE bid item listing. Subtask 2U Structures Plans Assumptions The following assumptions have been made for the preparation of the Bridge Plans scope -of -work and fee estimate: • Bridge Type, Size and Location As listed in the PROJECT DESCRIPTION, three bridges will be included in Stage 1 of the PROJECT. Bridge No. 1, the CL Line Overcrossing Fair Avenue, is anticipated to be a three span cast - C \ W P 51 \DOCS\I -82\P H AS E3. S CP/ I5 9/08/93 1.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue in-place conventionally reinforced flat slab structure with the abutments and piers supported on spread footings. The total length of the bridge, including 15 -foot wingwalls at the west end only, is approximately 166 feet. The width will be a uniform 32 feet from edge -to -edge of deck. Bridge No. 2, the E. Yakima Avenue Overcrossing Fair Avenue, is anticipated to be a three span cast -in-place conventionally reinforced flat slab structure with the abutments and piers supported on spread footings. The total length of the bridge, including 15 -foot wingwalls at both ends, is approximately 161 feet. The width will vary, with the average being 90 -feet 6 - inches from edge -to -edge of deck. Bridge No. 3, the E. Yakima Avenue Overcrossing 1-82, will match the type and size of the existing mainline overcrossing at this location. The bridge is anticipated to be a four span cast -in-place conventionally reinforced box girder with the abutments and piers supported on spread footings. The total length of the bridge, including 15 -foot wingwalls at each end, is approximately 286 feet The combined width of the new and existing bridge is a uniform 98 feet from edge -to -edge of deck; the new bridge being approximately 53 feet wide. • Submittals A informational submittal consisting of one (1) set of 1/2 size plans will be provided to the CITY, WSDOT District 5 and WSDOT Headquarters Bridge at the 50 percent level of completion. At the 90 percent level of completion, one (1) set of 1/2 size plans and draft special provisions will be submitted to the CITY, WSDOT District 5 and WSDOT Headquarters Bridge for review and comment. Additionally, one (1) set of design calculations will be provided to WSDOT Headquarters Bridge. • Quality Assurance/Quality Control Since an 'independent design check' by another consultant is not required, the scope of the quality assurance/quality control for the bridges, will be limited to an `overall review' at the 50 and 90.percent levels of completion and a `design check' at the 90 percent level of completion. Site Data for Structures The CONSULTANT shall prepare site data for each of the bridges in Stage 1 of the PROJECT in accordance to the requirements of the DM, Section 1110. Preliminary Plans Based on the Preliminary Geometric Approval, the CONSULTANT shall prepare preliminary plans for the bridges included in Stage 1 of the PROJECT' in accordance to the provisions of the BDM, Volume 1, Section 2.2. Bridge Engineering The CONSULTANT shall perform the appropriate structural analyses and design on the bridges included in C \WP51\DOCSV-82\PHASE3.SCP/16 9/08/93 117pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue Stage 1 of the PROJECT and prepare plans and special provisions following applicable regulations, codes, and professional practices including, but not limited to, the BDM Volumes 1 and 2 and AASHTO 15th edition. Bridge designs will adhere to the provisions of the approved Geotechnical Report, and Design Report. The CONSULTANT will be responsible for modifying the STATE Standard Bridge Plans, as applicable to the PROJECT. Quality Assurance/Quality Control The CONSULTANT shall provide Quality Assurance/Quality Control on the bridges including a senior overall review of the design performed, details developed and plans prepared. Estimate The CONSULTANT shall prepare quantity takeoffs, tabulations and backup calculations in accordance with the PPM and the current STATE bid item listing. This information will be used to prepare the Profile, Quantity Tabulation and Summary of Quantities sheets. Subtask 2V Traffic Control Plans The CONSULTANT shall prepare the traffic control plans and details in accordance with the DM, PPM, MUTCD and other CITY and STATE provided information. The construction signing shall be shown on the traffic control plans. The CONSULTANT shall submit a preliminary set of traffic control plans 30 days in advance of the PS&E tum in date noted in the schedule. The CONSULTANT shall prepare quantity takeoffs, tabulations and backup calculations in accordance with the PPM, and current STATE bid item listing. Subtask 2W Plan Assembly Reviews and Submittals One complete set of the PS&E on 12 x 18 bond paper sheets and applicable backup data shall be submitted to the CITY for reproduction and distribution at each review stage. The preliminary PS&E will be reviewed initially by the CITY and at the District level, and finally at the STATE'S Headquarters Project Development Section. The following review process will be followed: 1. CITY and WSDOT District Review of Preliminary 2, CONSULTANT Revisions to Preliminary PS&E 3. CITY and WSDOT HQ Standard Review of Final PS&E 4. CONSULTANT Revisions to Final PS&E 3 weeks 3 weeks 6 weeks 2 weeks The CONSULTANT shall submit 1 original set of stamped final plans in a reproducible mylar format to WSDOT, as outlined in the PPM. On set of full-size blueline plans will be submitted to the CITY. CAWP51\DO \1-82\PHASE3.SCP/t7 9/08/93 1.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue Computer technology shall be used by the CONSULTANT at its discretion as may be appropriate to help expedite the design and plan preparation process. Computer generated drawings that are included in the final plans shall be done in accordance with the PPM for CADD plan preparation. The CONSULTANT is not required to submit electronic deliverables. Post PS&E Submittal Assistance Once the PS&E for the construction contract is fmalized, the CONSULTANT shall remain "on-call" until the contract has been awarded to the successful bidder. This normally occurs within three months of the advertisement of the contract. Subtask 2X Special Provisions The CONSULTANT shall prepare the contract provisions (amendments, general special provisions and special provisions) for the PROJECT. The contract provisions shall be prepared in accordance with the PPM. The CONSULTANT shall submit 1 preliminary set of contract provisions (ASCII format and hardcopy) 30 days in advance of the PS&E turn in date noted in the schedule. Subtask 2Y Estimate Groupings Map The CONSULTANT shall prepare a groupings map in accordance with the PPM. Work shall be coordinated with WSDOT and the CITY to determine the delineation of the funding groups and subgroups for the project. Earthwork and Cross Sections The CONSULTANT shall prepare earthwork runs and cross sections. Slope staking information will not be prepared. Information from this task shall be used to prepare the Profile, Quantity Tabulation and Summary of Quantity sheets. Summary of Quantities The CONSULTANT shall prepare the summary of quantity sheets. The quantity sheet format will be prepared on a STATE approved spreadsheet layout. The summary of quantities for the PROJECT shall be broken into columns within groups and groups within funding sources as directed by the CITY in consulta- tion with the STATE and in accordance with Chapter 3 of the PPM. The CONSULTANT shall determine the quantities of each item to be included in each group. C -\W P5I \DOCSU-82\PHASE3.SCP/ I8 9/08/93 I.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue Engineer's Estimate The CONSULTANT shall prepare an engineers estimate for the PROJECT. The estimate shall be prepared using the Summary of Quantity sheets with unit costs, lump sum prices and back up. The CITY in consultation with the STATE will provide unit cost data for standard bid items. The CONSULTANT shall 'submit documentation, for STATE approval, of unit prices for non-standard items of work. The estimate shall be prepared in accordance with the PPM Section 3-5.B.1. Subtask 2Z Environmental Permits Assumptions Shoreline Permit - Application submittals for the City and County programs shall meet the State -mandated minimum requirements. The submittals shall be identical in order to provide consistent information for the Washington State Department of Ecology review. Hydraulic Project Approval - No new stormwater outfall to the Yakima River (which would require this permit) is anticipated for this project. According to the April 10, 1993 draft of the Hydraulic Code Rule Revision (Departments of Wildfrfe and Fisheries), this project is excluded from the HPA. The project is excluded because no conveyanceor release to surface waters of the state is anticipated. If an outfall is required it is expected to be provided by the City in conjunction with recommended improvements in the forthcoming City Comprehensive Stormwater Plan, in which case the City would apply for the HPA. This assumption also holds for the related federal permits required under Section 404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act See the task for Wetland Study and Permits for wetlands permits. Permits The CONSULTANT shall provide technical assistance and agency consultation services for an initial submittal package for the following permits: • Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit (includes variance request and drainage analysis) (City of Yakima and Yakima County) • Department of Ecology National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Permit Associated with Construction Activities The CONSULTANT shall prepare the drainage analysis in support of the Shoreline permits. No additional analysis beyond that which is contained in the Environmental Assessment (EA), Design Report and/or other previously prepared materials is assumed to be required by the permitting agencies. If additional information or assistance related to other permits is determined to be required, this scope of work and accompanying budget will be amended to reflect the additional effort. C.\wPS I\DOCS0-82\PHASE3.SCP/19 9/06/93 I.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue Subtask 2AA PS&E Documentation PS&E Checklist The CONSULTANT shall fill out Form 272-065 "District Plans Preparation Checklist" and submit with the PS&E. PS&E Transmittal Letter The CONSULTANT shall prepare a draft PS&E transmittal letter from the CITY to the STATE's district plans engineer. The letter shall be in the format and provide the applicable information shown in Appendix 3-1 of the PPM. It will be submitted with the PS&E. Project Design Files The STATE will provide the CITY a listing of the design information required by the STATE construction office. The CONSULTANT shall assist the CITY in preparing the required materials on a task order basis. Upon receipt of the approved task order, the CONSULTANT shall reproduce the listed design information for transfer from the CITY to the STATE. CPM The CONSULTANT shall prepare a CPM depicting time frames for the construction activities of the PROJECT. The CPM shall be prepared in a manner that will be used only to estimate the number of working days for the construction of the PROJECT. The CPM shall be turned in as part of the PS&E. Subtask 2AB Fair/Pacific Traffic Signal Plans Assumptions The following assumptions have been made during preparation of the scope and fee estimates: • An attempt will be made at setting the signal control equipment in their ultimate location to provide 5 lane sections on Fair Avenue and Pacific Street. Cantilever mast arm mounted traffic signals shall be designed. • No curb and gutter, drainage, sidewalk or paving will be performed. Plan information will be limited to that required to situate the temporary poles and locate the control equipment in their ultimate location. • Plans, specifications and estimate will be to the City of Yakima Standards. City of Yakima boilerplate specifications and general conditions will be supplied by the CITY. C:\WP5I \DOCS\I-82\PHASE3.SCPf20 9/08/93 I.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue Irrigation or other utility relocation work is excluded. It is anticipated that WIN will be required for the signal project The CONSULTANT shall provide 20 scale base mapping obtained from field topographic surveys. The CONSULTANT shall prepare the signal plans and details in accordance with CITY traffic standards and the MUTCD. Temporary illumination shall also be provided on the span wire poles. The CONSULTANT shall submit a preliminary set of signal plans showing existing electrical hardware locations, proposed locations for the new signals, electrical power source, and wiring diagrams. The CONSULTANT shall prepare quantity takeoffs and backup calculations in accordance with the CITY standards and current CITY bid item listing. Special provisions and the engineers estimate shall be prepared in the CITY format. Subtask AC Utilities Study The City would like to extend, relocate or modify existing utilities prior to or in conjunction with the proposed street and roadway modifications. This task provides a study to determine the existing conditions and the future requirements. The CONSULTANT shall collect data on existing conditions of the water and sewer lines, discuss with the CITY their requirements and obtain information regarding the utility services to be required by the retail area north of Terrace Heights Way. Investigation of the feasibility of extending a 12 -inch water main under I-82 and a 16 -inch sewer along Fair Avenue between Race Street and Pacific Street shall be provided. Alternative solutions shall be provided. A technical memorandum shall be furnished to the CITY summarizing the results of the study. The preparation of any PS&E for utilities will be negotiated as part of a future supplement or as part of the Optional Services under this supplement. Subtask AD TAR Ramp This task provides for the design of the TAR Ramp and the associated signal at the intersection of the TAR Ramp and Fair Avenue. Additional sheets, as described in Subtasks 2D through 2V will be required to include this ramp in the design package. This means an extra 30 plan sheets, sections, profiles and special provisions work. Two additional plan sheets are required to cover the ramp area. Subtask AE Wetland Study and Permits This task prepares a technical memorandum summarizing the work Listed below: Prepare and submit a request to the Corps of Engineers to make a formal determination as to the areas qualifying as a federal jurisdictional wetland. Should areas be identified, then identify the applicable federal permits. • Should jurisdictional wetlands be identified, then investigate the conceptual project alternatives that would minimize and/or mitigate the impacts to these areas. C \WP5I\DOCSU-82\PHAS E3.SCP/21 9/08/93 127pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue • Prepare an opinion of cost for the construction of the alternatives, including any property acquisitions. • Prepare the required permit applications (Section 401 and 404) including the formatting of drawings to the Corps special requirements. Subtask AF Value Engineering Value Engineering Study This project meets WSDOT's criteria for a value engineering (VE) study. A study will be required, using the 70 percent PS&E submittal. The CITY will notify the CONSULTANT within a minimum of six (6) weeks' notice before beginning the VE study. The CITY will be responsible for establishment of the VE team and will appoint the VE team leader. The VE study will be coordinated through the WSDOT VE coordinator. The study will take approximately four (4) days. The CONSULTANT will provide one qualified VE team member who is not involved in the project design. The CONSULTANT staff will be available to answer questions during the study. The CONSULTANT must include all VE recommendations into the project unless a waiver is approved by the CITY. Upon the CONSULTANT's receipt of the VE recommendations, the CITY and the CONSULTANT will jointly assess the impact of executing the recommendations upon the remaining budget and schedule. Value Engineering Support This task includes support to the VE study team by the CONSULTANT. The CONSULTANT will be available at the beginning and throughout the study to brief the VE team and to provide information or answer questions. The VE study will be held at CH2M HILL's Bellevue office. The CONSULTANT will provide office support to assist the VE team. TASK 3 COMMUNITY RELATIONS City Council and County Commission Briefings Two joint council/commission briefing meetings will be conducted. The CITY will make arrangements, notifications, and receive confirmations for the meeting. The CONSULTANT will provide project information materials and visuals as necessary for the meeting. Public Meeting Prior to beginning right of way appraisals and negotiation, one public meeting will be conducted for this project with adjacent property owners to describe roadway design, ingress/egress policies, and specifically C- \ W P51 \DOCS\1-82\P HAS E3. S C P/22 9/08/93 1.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue describe improvements and right of way acquisition procedures. City Staff Briefings Meetings will be held with City Staff twice each month to discuss project status. Monthly Bulletin The CITY will prepare and mail a monthly bulletin of the project activities to all interested parties. TASK 4 RIGHT OF WAY SERVICES All right of way acquisition is to be performed in accordance with Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act and City of Yakima right of way acquisition procedures approved by the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). True Cost Estimate Assess, evaluate, and prepare True Cost Estimate, including professional service costs, for right of way needs via preliminary research, knowledge of project area, and preliminary appraisals. Include preliminary assessment of Relocation Assistance Costs. Identify potential appraisal problems. Relocation Assistance Plan Assess, evaluate, and prepare Relocation Assistance Plan for right of way acquisition and relocation assistance plan via research, familiarity with Yakima area, and knowledge of relocation assistance needs and requirements. Submit True Cost Estimate and Relocation Assistance Plan to City and WSDOT for review. Appraisals The CONSULTANT shall furnish appraisals on all affected parcels in the project to the CITY. The CITY shall provide for appraisal review. The appraisals will conform to the form shown in the Local Agency Guidelines Manual, Washington State Department of Transportation, which by reference is made a part of this Contract. Secure 'cost to cure" bids for appraisals. Work with property owners/occupants and right of way acquisition staff regarding ingress/egress, parking C \WP51\DOCS\1-82\PHASE3.SCP23 9/08/93 1.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue facilities, and retaining walls, during cost to cure, appraisal, and negotiation processes. Negotiations Upon notification to proceed and receipt of Determination of Value and a Fair Offer Letter from the CITY, the CONSULTANT will commence negotiations. If it becomes apparent that negotiations have reached an impasse, the CONSULTANT shall provide the CITY with written notification. The filing of condemnation proceedings shall be the responsibility of the CITY. Upon completion of negotiations with property owners, the CONSULTANT shall transmit to the CITY all instruments for their acceptance or rejection. Legal services, escrow services, and the recording of instruments and payment to property owner will be the responsibility of the CITY. CONSULTANT shall assure that no less than three personal contacts are made with each interested party (owner) to negotiate for title to needed property rights as shown on the right of way plan or as instructed in writing by the CITY. CONSULTANT shall on the first contact explain the CITY'S offer orally and in writing and request execution of appropriate conveyance by the owner to the CITY of needed right of way in consideration of the amount of the offer made. CONSULTANT shall assure that negotiations shall be performed only to the limit of authority delineated by the title reports, project maps, determination of fair market value, manual of procedures, acquisition schedule, or written instructions issued by the CITY. CONSULTANT shall assure that a complete, legible diary of each contact be kept, to include the time, place, amount of offer, to whom offer was made, all parties present, and owner's response in a form furnished by the CITY and to be returned to the CITY for permanent records. CONSULTANT shall furnish diary, miscellaneous correspondence, vouchers, and valid conveyances for all negotiated transactions or written recommendations pursuant to future negotiations in those cases where negotiations failed. All work shall be submitted as completed to the CITY for acceptance or rejection. Relocation Assistance CONSULTANT shall perform relocation assistance services for persons or businesses that will be displaced, compute relocation benefits, monitor progress of individual relocations and work within the requirements of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act. CONSULTANT shall work such days and hours as may be necessary to meet with interested property owners who may not be available during regular working days or hours. CONSULTANT shall be available for consultation with CITY, STATE, and -federal representatives after completion of this Agreement, should the need arise. Said CONSULTANT shall be contracted for by supplement agreement. C: \ W P 51 \D O C SV - 82\P R A S E 3. S CP/2i 9/08/93 I.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue TASK 5 OPTIONAL SERVICES This task provides optional services that may be required to complete the project, which are not otherwise included in this scope of work. All optional services performed under this task must be authorized in writing by the CITY. If sufficient funds are not available, an addendum to this agreement may be required. Areas of anticipated optional services are listed below: Utilities The PS&E required for the implementation of the conclusions in the Utility Study may be developed under this task. DR Line The PS&E and R/W acquisition required to incorporate Value Engineering (VE) Proposal No. 3. It is proposed to add the DR Line and delete the signals at Yakima Avenue/J Line and Fair Avenue/) Line. CL Ramp Lane Revision The PS&E required to design the lane realignment and 35:1 taper (VE Proposal No.5). Temporary Signal at the Terrace Heights Way/EL Line The PS&E required to change from a permanent signal to a temporary signal at Terrace Heights Way/EL Line intersection (VE Proposal No. 6). Eliminate Frontage Road along Terrace Heights Way Prepare a design study to determine the feasibility of eliminating or reducing the frontage road along Yakima Avenue. The results would be considered by the City Council. Three separate Construction Contracts Prepare PS&E for three separate construction contracts: Structural and grading, surfacing and paving, and Landscape and irrigation. Design Report Revisions Prepare revisions to the Design Report to reflect the changes resulting from the adoption of the VE team CAWP51 I)OCS\1-82\PHAS E3.SCP/25 9/08/93 I.27pm FINAL recommendations. TABLE 1 OPTIONAL SERVICES I-82/Yakima Avenue Utilities PS&E $25,000 Add DR Line $173,000 Delete Two signals -$18,000 CL Line Taper $0 Delete permanent signal -$9,000 Add Temporary signal $9,000 Frontage road study $35,000 Three separate PS&E contracts $91,000 Design Report Revisions $16,000 TOTAL $322,000 C:\W P51 \DOCSU-82\PHAS E3.SCP/26 9/08/93 1.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue Section 3 PROJECT PROCEDURES AND STANDARDS Project Preparation Requirements The PS&E shall be prepared in conformance consistent with standard practices of the STATE for plans prepared by its own staff. Without written direction, the guidelines in the PPM will apply. The CON- SULTANT shall make such changes or amendments in the detail of the work as may be requested by the CITY or the STATE during the course of the work. Changes and amendments will be discussed as noted under the section Review Comments. Work may also include furnishing recommendations on various aspects of the design in order to achieve a cost effective PROJECT. When alternates are being considered, the STATE shall have the right of selection. Addendums Need may arise for addendums to be prepared after the submittal of the completed PS&E. The CITY and the CONSULTANT will assess the level of effort required of the CONSULTANT to respond to the addendum. A determination with respect to the intended level of effort and the impacts upon the project budget and schedule will be made by the CITY and the CONSULTANT prior to executing the addendum. Review Comments This section describes the review and comment process to be followed for all submittals. The goal is to expedite the response to review comments received from the CITY and the various agencies. A review comments sheet will be used. All review comments by the various agencies will be shown on these sheets. For each submittal review, the CITY will assemble comments for review with the CONSULTANT. The CONSULTANT will jointly assist the CITY in the determination of the appropriate disposition of each comment. All conflicting comments will be resolved jointly by the CITY and the CONSULTANT with the final disposition given by the CITY. The CONSULTANT will not commence work on response to comment(s) without a final CITY disposition. Each submittal is expected to be reviewed one time before proceeding on to the next deliverable. Reviews are expected to be timely and occur within the scheduled time. Subsequent review iterations of a given transmittal may be considered extra work. The decision will be based upon a joint CITY and CONSULTANT assessment of the impact to the budget and/or schedule for receipt of comments beyond the scheduled review periods. The CITY and the CONSULTANT will assess the level of effort required of the CONSULTANT to respond to the review comments. A determination with respect to the intended level of effort for the overall magnitude of the task(s) being reviewed will be made by the CITY prior to executing the responses. Such determination will also include any additional effort by the CONSULTANT to modify previously completed and technically correct work. Manuals The design and the PS&E shall be developed in accordance with the Latest edition, amendments and C:\W P51 \DOCS\I-82\PHAS E3.SCP/27 9/08/93 1.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue revisions of the following publications where applicable: 1. STATE Publications: a. "Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge and Municipal Construction" (1991) (M41-10) b. "Standard Plans for Roacls, Bridge and Municipal Construction" (M21-01) c. "Design Manual" (M22-01) d. "Hydraulic Manual" (M23-03) e. "District 1 Hydraulic Report Guideline" f. "Plans Preparation Manual" (M22-31) g. "Bridge Design Manual," Volumes 1 and 2 (M23-50) h. Amendments and General Special Provisions - i. Standard Item Table J• Standard drawings prepared by the STATE and furnished to the CONSULTANT shall be used as a guide in cases where they fit design conditions. k. "Traffic Manual" (M51-02) 1. "Water Quality Manual" (M22-15) m. "Utilities Manual" (M22-87) 2. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Publications: a. "A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Street" (1990) ("Green Book") b. "Guide for the Design of High Occupancy Vehicles and Public Transfer Facilities" (1983) c. "Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, Twelfth Edition" (1977) d. "A Guide for Highway Landscape and Environmental Design" (1970) e. "Highway Design and Operational Practices Related to Highway Safety" (1974) ("Yellow Book") f. American Association of State Highway Officials policy applicable where said policy is not in conflict with the standards of the Washington State Department of Transportation. 3. U.S. Department of Transportation Publications: C:\W P5I\DOCSU-82\PHAS E3.SCP/28 9/08/93 I.27pm FINAL I-82/Yakima Avenue a. Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways" b. 1985 Highway Capacity Manual 4. Other Publications: a. "National Electrical Code" b. "Standards of the American Waterworks Association" c. "Book of American Society for Testing and Materials Standards" d. "Local Agency Guidelines" (M36-63 (PA)) e. City of Yakima Standards f. Yakima County Road Standards All documents, exhibits and final CADD drawings and related files including photographic negatives used in the PROJECT, shall become and remain the property of the CITY or STATE as appropriate and may be used by them without restriction. Such unrestricted use, unrelated to the design basis and intent of this PROJECT, will be without liability or legal exposure to the CONSULTANT. C-\ W P51 \DOCSU-82\P H AS E3. S CP/29 9/08/93 1 27pm i I ID 367 391 394 397 Name Yakima caateway Yrojecr CH2M HILL Opt. Master Schedlis (Rev. No. 5 3) $ 0 II J 1fr: A Y A E CLO5 URE B 1995 A A PHASE III - FINAL DESIGN PROJECT MANAGEMENT QUALITY CONTROUQUALITY ASSURANCE FAIR/PACIFIC TRAFFIC SIGNAL or 402 406 411 70% Preliminary PS&E 90% Preliminary PS&E EMI 100% PS&E 419 UTILITY STUDY 425 WETLAND STUDY 429 447 457 GEOTECHNICAL REPORT (Structures) HYDRAULICS REPORT COMMUNITY RELATIONS 458 Council and Commtssloner Briefings ( 462 487 475 489 Public Meetings City Staff Brislings RIGHT-OF-WAY SERVICES PS&E SURVEYS 494 502 503 611 GENERAL PLANS ROADWAY PLANS Alignments DRAINAGE AND UTILITY PLANS 517 LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION 523 624 529 TRAFFIC PLANS ChannellzMion Plans i0uminatlon Pians y i 534 540 Traffic Signal Plans Signing Plans 548 Traffic Control Plans 554 555 556 562 570 571 577 584 STRUCTURE PLANS Retaining Wall Pins Retaining Wall Data Retaining Wall Design Bridge Plans Site Data for Strictures Bridge Preliminary Plans Final Bridge Design 601 602 607 619 WSDOT CONTRACT -PLAN ASSEMBLY 70% Preliminary PS&E 90% Preliminary PS&E 100% PS&E HQ Review Process 630 633 639 647 648 POST PS&E SUBMITTAL ASSISTANCE WSDOT CONTRACT - SPECIFICATIONS WSDOT CONTRACT - ESTIMATE PERMITS NPDES Construction Permit (Verify) 652 653 656 663 670 671 675 Shoreline Substantial Development (SSD) Yakima County SAO/SSD Process City of Yakima SAO/SSD Process DOCUMENTATION ADVERTISEMENT AND BIDDING CITY CONTRACT WSDOT CONTRACT j 686 AWARD l I L 1 1 1 I I 1 Schedule Type: Optimum Master Critical Noncritical mosismiganai Milestone • Summary Negative Slack Target Opening ® RUN DATE: 9/8/93 RUN TIME: 11:45 AM SUMMARY SLEET C044S131TANT FEE.OETEAMIi47l:PO f .. . _ . . C1TY:Of:YAK1MA: 1671YARif,4A AVENUE 'Mil AC.1190i0e stiff! p:M6 Deidpit: ... . initials* .CH MH»L::•. ...,---.-. :; :. -:_:.. fll.p .RfCE1AF1144/1 R1PHA5E31PHASE3JlS OATE:: • *W99 SEAOO1.t8:........................------ ::..::.::--- .:.:.::, ::.: .. •......:..-...:.::..:. _.:.::::..:..., 1. Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 1953 Average Hourly Raw Labor Class Role Hours Rab Cost Rafe E7 PMISr. Reviewer 1,179 543.72 551,546 E6 Task Lead Engineer 710 535.74 525,375 ES !sed Engineer 1,59D $30.98 549258 E4 teed Engkreer 312 526.70 58,330 E3 Design Engineer 3,321 523.30 577,379 E2 Design Engineer 458 520.63 59,449 51 Designer 3,598 518.55 566,743 T4 Lead Design Tech 2.557 520.47 55:.342 T3 Lead Drafting Tech 290 517.38 55,040 T2 Design/DraftTech. 1,126 514.72 516,575 OA Technical Assistant 1,197 512.04 514,412 2. Total Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 16,338 5376,449 $23.04 3. Overhead Cost (CH) - Including Salary Addl9ves (Based upon Federal audit) (DSC) 16800% 5632,434 Subtotal 51,608,883 4. Fixed Fee (DSC) 27.00% 5101,641 5. Reimbursables CH2M HILL 5229,658 6. Subconsultant Costs MBE WBE OTHER TOTALS HLA 2.86% 546,487 SHIMONO 3.46% 556,256 TECHSTAFF 2.05% 533,375 ETS 1.02% 516,529 CARLA KEEL GROUP 2.93% 547,626 RAW OUTSIDE CONSULTANTS 4.85% 579,459 SUB 7 0.00% SO SUB B00% SO SUB 9 000% SO Totals 4.48% 4.98% 7.75% 5279,742 7 Escalaicn Costs (1993 b 1994) $,562 &:TOTAL. ... .. . - 4i; .. 9. Management Reserve Fund 11322,000 10.GRAND TOTAL:*EspmatedFee . . ,_: .... :-.: 44250.5 . ...:::: NOTES: LUMP A Escalation factors: SUM 1994labar rats over 1993: 200% J:.... YES Current work planned for 1994: 25.13% Salary escalation factor: D50% Includes foxed fee need above: 10.07% B. Other taaas: Overheat 16850% Fared fee on DSC: 27.00% t.abor 100.00% Multiplier 295.00% Page: 1 of 1 Exhibit G Subcontracted Work Yakima Gateway Project Phase 3 A brief description of the subconsultant work follows: HLA HLA will provide the field and office work required to complete the PS&E surveys task. This includes control surveys, topographic surveys, supplemental cross sections, additional right of way surveys, utility locations and foundation locations. They will also complete a utilities study task to determine the location of several utility line extensions and how these are impacted by the Gateway project. Shimono Don Shimono and Associates will provide the landscaping and irrigation design for the project. They will complete the plans, special provisions and estimate for these elements. Techstaff Techstaff will provide at least one design engineer and design technician, along with numerous drafting technicians. These personnel will be involved on a number of tasks. ETS ETS may provide at least one design engineer. As of this date, they were unable to determine if they could fill the position. The current fee estimate includes only supplying drafting technicians. These personnel will be involved on a number of tasks. C•\WP51\DOCS\I-82\SUBCON.001/1 6/09/93 4:31pm Carla Keel Group Carla Keel will supply one drafting technician whose focus will be primarily on the structures plans. R/W Outside Consultants This not a specific subconsultant company, but rather a group of individual appraisers and negotiators that will be hired during the completion of the R/W Services task. The names of the individuals are unknown at this time. C:\WP51\DOCS\I-82\SUBCON.001/2 6/09/93 4:31pm RUN DATE: 7/21/93 E4c66r1- 6—I RUN TIME: 11.47 AM .SUMMARY. SHEET CONSULTAttrEEEDETERMMNAi16N ''.._, ...... .- . PiY OF.YAKIMA: . 42*.d1MA AYEtiUE GSI A; u(silt4+i gapto-Rimi{q W 91:e Ox9E4194SW8AP14ASE7fFHASl:U S: :: RATE': :.7111141:`::. SFA89116.:..... i .:. 1. Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 1993 Average Hour/ Raw tabor Class Rola Hous Rase Cost Rats PR Principal Engineer 214 $31.93 $6,634 RE Registered Engineer 27 $20.80 $552 PE Project Engineer 0 $16.93 $0 SET Sr. Engineering Tech. 64 $13.93 $832 ET Engineering Tech. 0 $11.45 93 RLS Reg. land Surveyor 46 $1820 $837 RS Residers Engineer 0 51820 50 SPC Survey Parry CNet 140 $14.00 $1,960 ST Survey Tech. 264 $12.00 $3,168 WPT Wad Processing Tech. 20 51320 $264 0 $0.00 93 _ Total Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 775 $14,257 $18.40 3. Overhead Cost (OH) - Including Salary Additives (Based upon Federal audit) (DSC) 165.56% $23,604 &Motel x37,661 d. Feed Fee (DSC) 27.00% 0,849 5. Reimbursables HLA :2,900 6. Subconsultant Cams MBE WBE OTHER TOTALS (No subcansutfank) Touts 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 50 7. Escalation Costs VIM 8: TOTAL. - ::.... _. ,., 46.407-.. - . 9. Management Reserve Fund 50 10.aiFiANDTOTAE:EitimaredFee .: ; ..., .`446,:- NOTES: LUMP A Escalation }atlas SUM 1994 labor rates over 1993: 5.00% YES Current work planned for 1994: 90.00% Salary escalation factor: 4.50% Includes toed fee noted above: 10.17% B. Other factors: Overhead: 165.56% Feed lee on DSC 2760% Labor 100.00% Multiplier 292.56% Pape: 1 of 1 RUN DATE: 9I8f93 SUB 2 Eh1hot 4- G—t RUN TIME: 11:48 AM :SUMMARY.SHEET. CONSULTANT E OEfER0 ATION.:: ; . <.::. .:.;:;.::....: CJFY OP.TAMA: 10.Y.AlciaAAvENUE: .................... ::3i Aagtltalt[att rriaat D$1 & :::`$H1MONO: ;::.::.;. [SATE.: >: 1. Direst Salary Cost (DSC) Gass Role 1993 Average Hourly Raw tabs Hous Rate Cost Rate PIC Principal in Charge 70 535..00 $2,450 P1 Professional 70 *17.00 51,190 P2 Professional 2 0 513.00 so CARO CARD Operator 652 $17.00 *11,084 DS Designer 74 $10.00 *740 AD AdministralNa 42 *8.50 *367 0 SOHO 30 0 $0.00 60 0 $0.00 so 0 60.00 s0 o 60.00 s0 2. Total Direct Salary Cosi (DSC) 908 615,821 *17.42 3.Overhead Cost (014) - including Salary Additives (Based upon Federal audit) (DSC) 16300% $25,788 Subtotal 641,609 4. Reed Fee (DSC) 15.00% 62,173 5. Reimbusables SHIMONO *10,065 6. Subconsuitent Costs MBE WBE OTHER TOTALS (No subconsuttants) Totals 7. Escalation Costs O00% 0.00% 0.00% m $2,199 8: TOTAL: 9. Management Reserve Fund SO 10:13RAN.TOTAL �:Eabsnakal. NOTES: A. Escalation Won: 1994 labor rates ober 199:1 Cunt work planned for 1994: Salary escalation factor Includes feed lee noted above: B. Other factors: Overhead: Faced fee on 050 Labor Multiplier LUMP SUM 5.00% .....TES' 100.00% 5.00% 5.70% 163.00% 15.00% 100.00% 278.00% Pape: 1 of 1 RUN DATE 7 21 /93 RUN TIME: 11:50 AM wV SUMMARY SHEET :. CONSULiANT;FEEDETERMlHATION: . ,.. -... ; . .......: • ' ' clri.:OF YAKINA: ' ' :f YAK1MAAVENUE :R11Y:Aaqu141gi iiiitc10 oeskiik .. ,TECHSTAF .. _:, Fp;E:. .0F..GEA.W4ESWs F+tASE71P A E3;XtS DATE; WO.: SEA591:15 :. :. 1. Direct SaEary Cost (DSC) 1983 Average Hourly Raw Labor Class Role Fours Rafe Cost Rata 5G Senior Geologist 0 535.00 13 SPC Survey Party Chet 0 530.00 $3 JG Junior Geologist 0 $25.0 SO PDT Pitied Design Tech. 34 $25.00 5850 CADD GADDOperabx 0 5'25-00 =0 IP betument Person 0 5200.00 s0 RC8 RoiChalaBrusher 0 515.00 30 JDT Junior Design Tech. 0 saw s0 JCAD Junior CADD Tech. 884 52200 519.668 o 50.00 30 o 50.00 s0 2. Total Direst Salary Cost (DSC) 929 $20518 U2.11 3: Overhead Cost (OH) -in9 Salary Additives (Based t4xn Federal gill) (DSC) 28.66% $5,eaD Subolal 326,399 4. Faced Fee (DSC) 27.00% 56,540 5. Reimbusabies TECHSTAFF f0 6. SubconsraaM Casts MBE WBE OTHER TOTALS Totals 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 30 7. Escalation Costs 51,437 II Trick: •433 05: .-. 9. Management Reserve Fund 50 10OFIA ft ltir./ . Estuoafad Fee :- . -:. 5 - . NOTES: W MP A Escala0on!actors: SUM .. YES:. 1994 labor rates over 1993: 5.00% j Current wort planned or 1994: 90.00% Salary escalation lector: 4.50% Includes teed lee noted above: 20.99% B. Other !odors Overheat 2866% Fixed lee on DSC: 27.00% labor 100.00% Multiplier 155.66% 4(kio;I- —1 RUN DATE: 7/21/93 RUN TIME: 11:52 AM SUB SUMMARY &HEET' CONSULTANTS E OETER140(Ai1ON • WY. 0:TAKNiA: 1.410ii.i4AVENUE- itiy AcgUH l* iitiptiii Detfae . ........... .. Fl4E . C.,'1EXCt1. lt.ESltd2i6v4.APRASF.S,X1 S TE .7#19$. 119t:i5 1. Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 1993 Average Nouly Rav Labor Class Role Hous Rafe Cost Rale PM Pt nc p. Manager 0 817.00 90 TA Tech Administrator 0 815.00 SO CADD CADD Operator 433 813.00 85,529 DRFT Manual Drafter 0 810.00 SO FT Field Tech. 0 510.00 SO TCF Traffic Control Flogger 0 812.00 SO DE Design Engineer 0 $25.00 80 0 80.00 SO 0 $0.00 SO 0 80.00 SO • 0 30.0O SO '2. Tota Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 433 $5,1329 813.00 3. Overhead Cost (OH) - Including Safety Additives (Based upon Federal aurid) (DSC) 166.00% 69,344 Subtotal 814.973 4. Fired Fee 5. Reiirbursabies ETS (DSC) 15.00% 1944 s0 6. SLbconsuhant Costs MBE MBE OTHER TOTALS (No srbcansuttarth) Totals 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% SO 7 Escalation Costs 8712 9.TOTAL_ ,. .....:.. . 818.529:. ' ... . 9. Managemerd Reserve Fund SO i0;tiRIt1S3:TATALstinated fes ... .. 31652$: NOTES: LUMP A. Escalation factors: SUM 1994 labor rates over 1993: 5.0D% If . YES:..•. Current work planned for 1994: 90.00% Salary escalation tactor: 4.50% kmkrdes faced fee noted abode 5.64% B. Other factors: Overhead: 166.00% Feted fee on DSC: 15.00% labor 100.00% Multiplier 281.00% Pape: 1 of 1 RUN DATE: 7/21/93 e►,bb, >*- U -( RUN TIME: 11:54 AM SUMMARY. SHEET cotts00,041 FEE DETERY81AT101! >!nY OF YAKt11A: :42ti iKOMAAYENUE: OfAoltiiiitid k8ffiialAet* Plias _ •:. . ,_ .. - CAfl :KEEL GROUP :. .� ...:.:... ; < .... FN;E. C,'IEl(CEL3F3lES1t321P{tASEAPIUISEi:X1S DATEt'. 73:04 sEAa91.is::..... 1. Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 1993 Average Hoist/ Raw Labor Class Role Hous Rafe Cost Raba PR Pdnckel 0 $36.00 SO SSE Senior Sauekr al Engr, 0 52:110 $0 PM Project Manager 0 $26A0 SO SE Snuctsal Engineer 0 521.50 $0 JSE Junior Shuctrral Engr. 0 $19.95 SO CAE CAE 0 520.00 SO CAD CAD 870 518.40 518006 0 $0.00 90 0 50.00 $0 0 50.00 50 0 50.00 93 2 Total Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 810 516,006 $18.40 3.Overhead Cost (OH) - Including Salary Ad66oes (Based upon Federal suit) (DSC) 157.70% $25245 Subtotal $41,253 4. Foxed Fee (DSC) 27.00% 54,372 5.Reimdusabes CARLA KEEL GROUP 50 6. Subconsuhant Costs MBE WBE OTHER TOTALS (No subconscltants) Totals 000% 000% 0.00% 50 7. Escalation Costs 52,051 8i'PTA -' ..-. ::. ....... 347628:... 9. Management Reserve Fund 50 t0i0iaANAIP. 0—F-11k141!3dFei .:-: .. • .4474E6; ....... - NOTES: LUMP A Escalation factors: SUM 1994 labor rates over 1993: 5.00% I -.. YES:; . Cunene wok plamed b 1994: 90.00% Salary escalation lactic 4.50% Includes feed lee nosed above 10.48% B. Other lactorz Overhead: 157.70% Fixed be on DSC: 27.00% Labor 100.00% Multiplier 284.70% Page: 1 oft RUN DATE: 721/93 ex►tihri- G-1 RUN TIME: 11:55 AM SUB :SUMMARY SHEET CONSU(TANT:FEEi3ETERMfNATION :... -DTTY OF YAKIMA: 424YAK1MA71NENUE .01 AegUbi6OP indFfnal toesfye PAa&9: - ' RNTOUT$IDE.CONSULTAWS FK,f; cg*F.tuiL sv z.4.3f AtHw4..)ps OAT; •7#I3 SEAa9ts...:..................:......_.................:...:.............. . 1. Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 1993 Average Hourly Raw Labor Class Role Hours Rat Cost Rafe EST Estimator 50 565.00 93.250 APP Appraiser 2,338 $79.50 305,633 RA Relocation Agent 336 328.50 59,576 0 30.00 50 0 60.00 93 0 30.00 93 0 30.00 30 0 $0.00 50 0 $0.00 SO 0 60.00 50 0 $0.00 50 2 Total Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 2,724 679,459 529.17 3. Overhead Cost (OH) - Including Salary Addttires (Based Wan Federal audd) (DSC) 0.00% 50 Subtotal 979,459 4. Raid Fee (DSC) 0.00% 30 5. Reimdnsables RM/ OUTSIDE CONSULTANTS 30 6. Subconsuhard Costs MBE WBE OTHER TOTALS (No subconsultants) Totals 0.00% 0.00% 010% 60 7. Escalation Costs 913 ti; TOTAL. . 379,459: 9. Management Reserve Fund m 10.:aRANDTTTAL':Estima 8 Fee .. 379,459: : NOTES: LUMP A Escalation factors: SUM 1994 tabor rats over 1993: 0.00% ....YES.. Crarent nark planned for 1994: 0.00% Salary escalation tactor. 0.00% Includes ixed to noted above: 0.00% B. Other tactors: Overhead: 0.00% Feed lee an DSC. 010% Labor 1011.00% Multiplier 100.DD% Page:1 of 1 Minority/Women's Business Participation The City of Yakima's Minority and Women's Business participation goals of 10 percent will be met for this project. Table A shows our plan for meeting these goals. Table A Yakima Avenue Interchange/I-82 And Fair Avenue Minority/Women's Business Participation Firm Role Percent of Participation Phase I Phase II Phase III Total MBE Shimono Landscape, Pedestrian 1.74 3.40 3.46 3.40 ETS Drafting/Document Production 0.00 1.31 1.02 1.10 WBE Techstaff Design, Drafting 1.41 3.07 2.05 2.50 Carla Keel Design, Drafting 0 3.50 2.93 3.00 TOTALS 3.15 11.28- 9.46 10.00 nt/dt007/gatsup3b The percentages for Phase III reflect the inclusion of all optional service dollars under CH2M HILL. The appropriate M/WBE participation in these services is not known at this time. When these optional services are negotiated with the City, M/WBE participation will be identified and the dollars will be reallocated, as necessary, to meet the 10% M/WBE requirement. M/WBE SUMMARY ENCLOSURE B E�iMsue EMA�iI�en1 111 !I!IiII!I!I!I!!!I!PII!!I!!I!I!IIiMI!i!II ID� lummummommummummuunii !.I!!I!I!IiIIiIP!!iIJIIIJPiWPPflIJIiIPIIII1 MEMPERIPPEPINIPPINWINIEN IIHIIIIIIIIIIHIH1HIIIIIII1IIIIIIIIIII!1111P111 IIIMMINIMINEMPINEMIPMEEIMMINIMMENIMEIMINEM19111311111111111111111111111111111 FORA11101111111111111111 1,1111111111 6 1 1 E 8 8 8 1 s m $ 8 a 1 S 8 8 8 * S 8 8 s 8 8 8 a 8 8 1 1 8 . 41 s • 8 3 e 11 88 R 8 8 8 a 8 8 a 8 8, 8 aha 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 a8 8 8 8 8 8 s ..8 a_33 8 8,88, It 11,93 8 .888 000 X 888 �a 818 8 888 1 8 8 S A 8 8 8 E 1f 8 0 000 8 888 a 88 € as 8 a Ylg 8 8 8 a 1 1 8 8 8 8 a 8 8 8 8 8 8 8888 88 8 8 oee 8388 888 8 S8s8 8 8 0 8 8 00100 8 a S 8 8 8E 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 888 1 1 T 1It 88 in88 98 11; .8 8 88 00 g 88 8 88 8 88 8 88 sa is 3 � {3 1 8 3 2 1tY R s 388 888 el X ea 888 8E8 888 00 CI 888 SEM 7 El if al 8 8 8 8 S 8 S 8 8 8 4 8 8 81 S 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 8 8 R 5 8 8 8 8 8 4 3 8 9 8 8 8 1 1 L.. $ 8 8 11 8 S a 8 8 9 4 s 8 8 S 8 V 1 1 1 T 1 8 9 a 8 8 1 s 8 a 8 1 8 8, 8 1 8 8 8 8 8 a a 1 1 1 1 8 8 8 es 8 1 S 8 8 P. 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 If 00 ZS 88 .8 9 SS 88, • Igi 1 5 555 5 5P55 5 55 5_ 8 555555 555; e 5;e 1 5 5;55 11 I 1C4 CAM rn I1 I A 1 ;I ; 1ff : s 41 if i ell 1 ; ill 1 it 11 MU £ r140 N s"ssr .1 same r0msbtmi0r i 1111111,11 V orgy y 4m-V _. 1 § : §8 i Aid 1 4's _ !!! � •! spy 'poi O S O 8==SS 1100 0 1100 8==88 0 0000000000000 8 8888888888888 0 8 100 -88 d000 8 O e� 88- 0O 8 888 0 8 0 8888 O 0 0 1100 0 1100000000000 00000e- 0e000 000 a 0000' 8 8=_88 S _.88 8 8888888888888 8 -VS 8 88- 8 888 8 8888 - 01100 Y i!00 8 0asa.0.0F38d00 8 100 0 001 Y .Te B 13di3a s 81188 11:: R `=as ..lice !C § 88 1 5ERE582g Y'� S liMsn51dxx o. �,. «..,ew. 0ee 8Sxx 8 88 8 .. a Es Tp 53S 8 o 8 :1! 88- ° ;8.=e ..,e 3 758 f3 B ..n YY &fi x �ttp b i 0 111101000 0-o°' 0 0000000000000 0 o 0 e 0 eee 0 oe e § s 11 is s =sas s ssssssssassss s -ss s ss- s ass s sass 0000 0 I00 0 00000000000000 100 0 000 0 000 0 00006 S 8--8ffi g =ffiS8 ffi SSSffiSaa88ffiffiffi8 8 888 8 888 8 888 8 8888 01100 a 1100e 0000000000000 0 100 0 001 a eee a delle __: a S1 ES8 88 8 8888888888888 8 .88 8 888 8 888 S 8888 e 01100 0 1100 0 0000000000000 a 100 a eee a eee a 00001 S 8-8a 8_8ffi 8 Sg8a8888affi8 ffi 88ffi 8 88 S ffiffia ffi ffiffiSa iij _.. e o II.. o 1100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 Sffi18ffi Ili. ffi € II82 -88 8 S 8888/588888888 sgalgmonsigioT 8 ni -38 lis 8 w 888 &10 8 V 8/48 tla 8 r 88851 $88H 14 :: 8 T yT S TT3RA ]ttTII=� " i�=q'" yp T^i: ill JJ . . EEE :i Ill i n4a e 1313 EN lRSe d = lib G 8 SG • • MAIX S'� R w - « w11 - - e e ... - -- 0. - e0 e e e 88 SaaSee - ::::: o oe o0e e ee Ea aS 888 a° -a8 :I a 8 a a , - - -oo- e e e e - - e e - - - 0 .03 g SS SSS 8 8 = 8 _ S I 4al 11x888 8888 _ 8813833 - -8888 -• 888 _ ES oeSogas 3 00000 - eeee 000000 - eeeee - 0ee _ ee _ 0000000000 it aaaaa - gaaa - 111181188 = 88888 _, 1138 _ SS 888E388888 i 0o,o 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000 - 00000 0 000 - 00 - 0000000000 i aaaaa 811381 8881188 aaaaa _ sEE _ Ea = saE11sasaaa i . eeeee eeee o o eeeee eeeee 00 0 0 0 ee 1 gig 11aa 11 E8118 8 81181188 SSSSS - S88 - S8 = 8888883888 i .. 00000 0 0001 0 0 00000 _ 00 000 - 000 - 00 - 0000000000 1 a111111 - 8888 - 888888 88388 X 3 _ SS = 8888888888 g 00000 0 0000 0 000000 00000 000 0 0 0000000000 - 88888 - 8888 8 888888 88888 - 8118 = S8 1388881311813E fCuse-se 1C s.na i an -alno dugs 8gg % 4g ESEVEgis'cU XP Ngag r a o :13.5 - SI XI § :22 1Nana ar r 8511 aga I3 ''N gas r..1rxxrr% a -2n .g ii ill. 0...00'7; K iKK u 555;25 .5a;5 .2 21* '• #Q 5555-5555; .. - - t — Is — a ,_. . 1P 1. " i1i1 1iia i g ,„l! 111 1, ,-41'11 1 11 ii !.I1 7I 14i.i 11 eEia ,i i at dt 2 3 kildeanotlitnite8aY8:S28313S it - .e V It 8e: V 2 g- 585E at ii? i 8 Ea 8 11 B l $ E a tlaulai717.sIPP-1111111"..W ip r s ! a 3 at, Yert:0 3 g 00 0 0 0 00000 0e 00000000000 3 UR a 0000tr ., .. s ., 0, sE-E 9 0 ss a s a assassassassaassassasa88 ¢ 5 Ds 1i 8 8888_.'"A I o eeee V o� ee e e 18 e•0oeoeeoooeeoo33.'!0 0 000O000 a sass 2 s as s a E Eessassaassassaatassaasa 8 88 8 8888..:.:.::._:.....: e eeee i 0 0 000N1e00e- 8 8888 8 V 8 88 8 8 r 2 SsalasEilialM a8t3153ZE a ss g 8 ss222 eeee $ a 00 e r 000.00»»»»e..»»eek .� .»» a ea a eee 0 a SaSB . a SS a a s 128833 8333381133812.1.113233 8 as a sass" 0 0000 'z 00 0 0 0 000 0000000000000000000 0 00 0 00001 p a aaas 3 a as a s a 838888888888888888888888 8 88 8 8888i: ' 0 0000 0 0 00 00 0 00000000000000 _ 00000000 0 00 0 0000/ ! a.. t ESSE a t 312 8 a 8888888883833833838881188 8 88 3 8388 11 o 0000 0 0110 •L 01 0 00000000000 eee e eeee 8 8888 S S SS 8' 8 8 S888888888838888888S8888 `I000000000000 8 88 8 8888. 0 0000 0 , 00 0 0, 000000000000000000000000 e e o o eee e" 88888 8 8 812 8 8 8 888a888888SSS8a88a888838 8 88 8 8888 iti . 0 0000 ,e 000 0 0 0 000000 000100 000000000 eee eeeee 8 Stas 8 8 88 SS 8 888888888888311838,8888883 8 88 3 8888::.:....,..." E ..E2a m 0 at 3 3 i aa... .tis3xoa'sr;'aas's'sruitte a sn 3 tiaHr3 A 9 or 8022 7 .1 7 2 8E Er. E 7 2 9 E $R . 213s_EsEril'ass06lao2*,*13kia ..p»X Im�XXIPtPr8p13R X F. rR set -02E0 ^ .: ; P K N 5 5 5 5 5 5AAP 5 A A t,� 5 PA r'"'* lg 1 r 4 1 1 i 1 F 1 1 1 • s . 4 , F 1 i i I i I f 1 1 1 f 8 8 8 8 1 8 8 8 8 8 8 5 1 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 1 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 13 8 8 13 8 8 8 8 5 1 8 8 8 8 8 8 1 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 5' 1 1 8 8 8 8 8 1 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 a 8 8 8 52 1 1 8 8 8 8 8 8 511 a: 14 P. g a 8 1 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 1 z 1 1 5. 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 { 5 1 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 1 5- 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 aP a 8 8 8 1 8 8 8 E 8 8 8 8 5 13 5 5 5 13 F s 13 5 5 5 X FPI O C w 9 'z m cnm 4 1 1 9 F.. -1; 1 1 1 1 a 1 52 52 1. i a a 1 A 1 a a 5 111 a a 1 la 1 f a I 12 3 51 51 1 1 a 1 a a a 1 a a ig6 5. a a 111 1 a a a a ri i 5- a a a �g6 t tt ;a al s a' 5 5 1 0 c o !I; x m z m m m m A RESOLUTION RESOLUTION NO. R-93- 98 authorizing the City Manager and City .C_erk, of the City of Yakima to execute Supplement #2 to the agreement with CH2M Hill for professiona3 services. WHEREAS, it is necessary to engage professional services for the Yakima Gateway Project; and WHEREAS, CH2M Hill has offered to perform those professional services in accordance with the provisions of the attached Supplement #2 to the agreement document; and the City Council deems it to be in the best interest of the City that the Supplement #2 to the agreement: document be executed by the City, now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY: OF YAKIMA: The City Manager and the City Clerk of the City of Yakima are hereby authorized and directed to execute Supplement #2 to the agreement with C} M Hill for the purpose mentioned above, a copy of which Supplement #2 to the agreement is attached hereto and by reference made a part thereof. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL tttis 1 t dday of -SEPTEMBER -1 1993. C2C/t MAYOR ATTEST: . k4J-L KA /G4 -x_ CITY CLERK SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT #1 Project No. SEA32984 Agency City of Yakima Name of Project Yakima Avenue/I-82 Interchange & Fair Avenue Agreement No. 91-103/D-6015 Gentlemen: The City of Yakima desires to supplement the agreement entered into with CH2M HILL, Northwest, Inc. and executed on November 12, 1991 and identified as Agreement No. 91-103/D-6015. All provisions in the basic agreement remain in effect except as expressly modified by this supplement. The changes to the agreement are described as follows: I Section 1, SCOPE OF WORK, is hereby changed to add: The Scope of Work and project level of effort for Phase II of this project is detailed in Exhibit "B," Supplement No. 1, Phase II - Predesign and Environmental Impact Evaluation attached hereto, and by this reference made a part of this agreement. II Section IV, TIME FOR BEGINNING AND COMPLETION, is amended to change date of completion of the work to read August 31, 1993. III Section VI, SUBCONTRACTING, shall be amended by the addition of the attached Exhibits G-1 for all subconsultants and G-2 for Shimono Associates and Engineering Technician Services. IV Section V, PAYMENT, shall be amended as follows: Exhibits D-2 are attached and are applicable for calendar year 1992. A summary of payments under the Basic Agreement & Supplement No. 1 is set forth in the attached Exhibit A, and by this reference made a part of this supplement. The maximum amount payable under this agreement as supplemented, inclusive of all fees and other costs, is now $ 1,856,654. Supplemental Agreement #1 Page 2 If you concur in this supplement and agree to the changes as stated above, please sign in the appropriate spaces below and return to this office for final action. Sincerely, . 0 ego Consultant's Signature Date ATTEST: City Clerk CiTV CONTRACT NO: nt/dt004/yaksuppl CITY OF YAKIMA Approving Authority City Manager 7/;)--01Gj Zm- Date Direct Salary Cost , Overhead (including Payroll Additives) Direct Non -Salary Costs Fixed Fee Subtotal Management Reserve Fund Exhibit "A" Summary of Payments Basic Agreement $ 75,057 126,097 63,845 20,265 $285,264 Supplement #1 $ 328,190 551,360 529,931 88,611 $1,498,092 Total $ 403,247 677,457 593,776 108,876 $1,783,356 73,298 73,298 TOTAL $285,264 $1,571,390 $1,856,654 DOT I 4046 REV 3/91 Page 2tl2 I-82/Yakima Avenue EXHIBIT B Supplement No. 1 SCOPE OF WORK PREDESIGN; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT EVALUATION; RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION; DESIGN FOR ROADWAYS, STRUCTURES, AND UTILITIES; AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT Phase II: Predesign and Environmental Assessment YAKIMA AVENUE/I-82 INTERCHANGE AREA AND FAIR AVENUE CITY OF YAKIMA CH2M HILL July 1992 10021528q.SEA/1 7/6/92 CONTENTS PHASE II I-82/Yakima Avenue Page 1 Introductory Materials 1-1 Project Description 1-1 Project Deliverables 1-1 Abbreviations 1-2 Manuals 1-2 Review Comments 1-3 Enclosures 1-4 2 Preliminary Design and Environmental Impact Evaluation 2-1 Task 1—Project Management 2-1 Task 2—Quality Control Senior Review 2-1 Task 3—Community Relations 2-2 Task 4—Interchange Justification Report 2-5 Task 5—Environmental Assessment 2-6 Task 6—Preliminary Design 2-8 Task 7—Optional Services 2-31 >::i:.::is•»;'a:.::i:.:i::a:.»:.»:.:�:.»; :.:�:;i:::;:i:;:::.:a:.:: �:.:>::;i::i:.:a::a:.:::�:.::.:>:�:.:>::•::is::i.:::i:.:�:.::.::.::;a:.s ,�i�i• ::?:•:i.;:'r'::�::::::l:>:M;:k:iF:::k::#::}:::}:::fc:.4.::1:::k:::l::::}:-�:s:::4::•:t:.l::.:i;: :::Y:.:a:.v>•a::a:•:'i;»:•:i>:a:.:a:.:a:.::.::.::•:i:.:i>::•:a:.::.:•i:.::.»:.:::;:i:t s:i:::;i a:i>:io:i::i::i:-:i;;ia::•:i•:i•:•::•:i•::i::i::i::i;:i:::;i:•:::i:;ia:i :'�ii�I�.��.i��::..:;i:..;i:.:�:ti::;i:;;:;i::�:.:;i:.:a:;i:.:::K:;i:';i:•:;i:.::K<;i:.::.:�::: .: .: .: .:..., ; ,: .: .; .: .: ... .: .: .: ..... .... ... .: .: . aittid 1002152Aq.SEA 1002152Aq.SEA/1 7/7/92 I-82/Yakima Avenue Section 1 Introductory Materials Phase II Project Description • Fair Avenue connection to Lincoln Avenue and "B" Street one-way couplet • Widening of Yakima Avenue Modifications to I-82/Yakima Avenue interchange to provide appropriate access to Fair and Yakima Avenues Construction of a new interchange at Lincoln Avenue/"B" Street Bicycle and pedestrian connection across I-82 Widening of Fair Avenue between Pacific Avenue and Yakima Avenue See Enclosure E for interchange conceptual layout Project Deliverables Phase II technical deliverables include: • FHWA Interchange Justification Report • Design Report • Traffic Analysis Report • Draft Hydraulics Report • Soils Report • Draft EA • Final EA • Design/Hearing • Access Report/Plan • Access Hearing Plan • Right-of-way Plans • Interchange Plan for Approval • Base Mapping • Hazardous Materials Survey Memorandum 1002152Bq.SEA/1 7/6/92 1-1 I-82/Yakima Avenue Abbreviations • AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials • DR Design Report • DEA Draft EA • EA Environmental Assessment • EPA Environmental Protection Agency • FEA Final EA • FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency • FHWA Federal Highway Administration • I/C Interchange • IDC Intra -departmental communication • IDT Interdisciplinary team • IJR Interchange Justification Report • LOMR Letter of map revision • LOS Level of service • NEPA National Environmental Protection Act • NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System • PS&E Plans, specifications, and estimates • SEPA State Environmental Protection Act • TS&L Type, size, and location • USF&WS United States Fish and Wildlife Service • V/C Volume to capacity • WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation • WSP Washington State Patrol Manuals The following manuals and their abbreviations will be used in the preparation of the work. AASHTO AASHTO Standard Specification for Highway Bridges, 14th Edition, and subsequent interim specifications • AB WSDOT Asbestos Abatement Manual (M 27-80) • BDM WSDOT Bridge Design Manual (M 23-50) • DM WSDOT Design Manual (M 22-01) • Docket FHWA Docket No. 89-23, "Additional Interchanges to the Interstate System," Federal Register 55, No. 204, October 22, 1990 • EPM WSDOT Environmental Procedures Manual (M 31-11) • Guide FHWA "Region 10 Guide for New/Revised Access Points and Inter- changes on the Interstate System" March 14, 1989 • HCM Highway Capacity Manual (TRB Special Report 209) 1002152Bq.SEA/2 7/792 1-2 I-82/Yakima Avenue • HM WSDOT Hydraulics Manual (M 23-03) • LAG Local Agency Guidelines (M36-63(PA)) • MUTCD Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (M 24-01) • PPM WSDOT Plans Preparation Manual (M 22-31) • SP WSDOT Standard Plans for Road and Bridge Construction (M 21-01) • SS WSDOT 1988 Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Munici- pal Construction (M 41-10) • SSP WSDOT Standard Special Provisions and Supplemental Standard Specifications • UM WSDOT Utilities Manual (M 22-87) • WQM WSDOT Highway Water Quality Manual (M 22-15) • CYS City of Yakima Standards • YCRS Yakima County Road Standards Review Comments This section describes the review and comment process to be followed for all submittals. The goal is to expedite the response to review comments received from the City and the various agencies. A review comments sheet will be used. All review comments by the various agencies will be shown on these sheets. For each submittal review, the City will assemble comments for review with CH2M HILL. CH2M HILL will jointly assist the City in the determination of the appropriate disposition of each comment. All conflicting comments will be resolved jointly by the City and CH2M HILL with the final disposition given by the City. CH2M HILL will not commence work on response to comment(s) without a final city disposition. Each submittal is expected to be reviewed one time before proceeding on to the next deliverable. Re- views are expected to be timely and occur within the scheduled time. Subsequent review iterations of a given submittal may be considered extra work. The decision will be based upon a joint city and CH2M HILL assessment of the impact to the budget and/or schedule for receipt of comments beyond the scheduled review periods. The City and the Consultant will assess the level of effort required of the Consultant to respond to re- view comments. A determination with respect to the intended level of effort for the overall magnitude of the task(s) being reviewed will be made by the City prior to executing the responses. Such determi- nation will also include any additional effort by the Consultant to modify previously completed work, defined as work previously accepted in writing by the city project administrator, or designee. 1002152Bq.SEA/3 7/6/92 1-3 I-82/Yakima Avenue Enclosures A. Labor and Expense Summary B. M/WBE Summary C. Field Exploration Program D. Hazardous Materials Site Reconnaissance E. Interchange Conceptual Layout 1002152Bq.SEA 1002152Bq.SEA/4 7/6/92 1-4 I-82/Yakima Avenue Quality control includes technical discipline review, lead designer review, and senior review. Discipline reviews will be performed while the detailed technical work is in progress (i.e., when computations are completed, when sketches and preliminary drawings have been prepared but not yet submitted for drafting, and when specifications and special provisions are ready for typing). Lead designers will review specific products such as plans, reports, specifications, and other documents, at which time these prod- ucts are completed. Senior reviews will be performed for an overall task when and as defined in the quality control program. Such reviews will be performed after project packages are assembled and be- fore they are submitted for review to the City of Yakima and affected agencies. All scheduled senior reviews will be documented in a memorandum format to the project manager. The project manager will be responsible for adjudication of comments/responses with respect to the project scope, budget, and schedule. Quality Control Senior Review This task conducts a review, as described above, at the following point of the project: • Prior to submittal of the DEA for review by the City of Yakima • At the 70 percent stage of preliminary design • At the 95 percent stage of preliminary design Task 3 Community Relations Steering Committee Meetings The City will revise the membership of the project steering committee as necessary and submit the names to the Consultant. The Consultant will revise the existing committee mailing list. Project infor- mation materials and visuals will be provided for 4 steering committee meetings. The Consultant will reserve a room for the meetings and will prepare and mail meeting announcements to the members of the committee. The 4 meetings scheduled during the project are: • Prior to formal EA scoping • After formal EA scoping • Prior to completion of the Design Report • Prior to the Combined Design/Access Hearing City Council and County Commission Briefings One joint council/commission briefing meeting will be provided. The City will make arrangements, notifications, and receive confirmations for the meeting. The Consultant will provide project informa- tion materials and visuals as necessary for the meeting. The briefing scheduled during the project is: • Prior to the combined design/access public hearing (approximately 1 week after the steering committee meeting) 1002152Cq.SEA/2 7/7/92 2-2 I-82/Yakima Avenue Section 2 Preliminary Design and Environmental Impact Evaluation Phase II Task 1 Project Management A schedule (Enclosure B) will be prepared and maintained for the project. One month "horizon" sched- ules will be developed to plan the day-to-day activities of the project team. The schedule will be up- dated periodically to reflect the current status of the project. Direction of the staff and review of their work over the course of the project will be provided. This is for the overall project rather than a specific task and will provide guidance to the entire team. This task will also prepare the monthly progress reports. Progress reports will discuss the work in the previous month, the status of individual tasks, meetings attended, and outstanding information. Monthly invoices will be prepared in accordance with the format setup for Phase I. This task provides for the preparation, attendance, followup, and documentation of meetings over the course of the project. These meetings will be the forum for the agencies to provide input and guidance for the direction of the project. They will also be used to discuss project issues, approve submittals, and develop potential solutions. Periodic monitoring of the budget will occur over the course of the project. Current status as well as projections to complete will be developed. This task is intended to help monitor costs and budgets and to propose corrective actions. These actions could include formal requests for budget increases or scope modifications or reductions. Drawings and documents received and generated over the course of the project require management. This information will be filed and logged to facilitate ready and selective retrieval. A status of requested information will also be maintained. This project will be developed in several phases. This task provides for developing the scope for Phase III (right-of-way services, final design, and services during construction). Task 2 Quality Control Senior Review The quality control and peer review program has particular emphasis on technical aspects resting with the various technical disciplines (e.g., geotechnical, hydraulics, structural, etc.). The overriding strategy of the program is to eliminate major defects in project work products and limit minor defects so as not to impact client acceptance or contractor progress, and to minimize liability exposure. The program en- tails the periodic review of study criteria, design, assumptions, and concepts and presentation of product format. This determines that the overall project objectives are being fulfilled. 1002152Cq.SEA/1 7/7/92 2-1 I-82/Yakima Avenue Special Interest Groups Up to fifteen (15) meetings with special interest groups will be attended by the Consultant to brief members on the project and to solicit comments and suggestions. Project materials and visuals will be provided as needed. Public Hearing One public hearing will be required for this project and is described in other tasks of this scope of work. • Combined Design/Access Hearing (see Task 6) Project Information Line The project information line in the City's Office of Housing and Neighborhood Conservation, estab- lished in Phase I, will be discontinued by the City during Phase II. Newsletters and fact sheets will publicize the Consultant's phone number. Information from callers will be recorded on a standard information sheet developed by the Consultant. A complete log of callers, their requests, and informa- tion given will be kept by the Consultant. Response by the Consultant will be made directly to the caller when appropriate. Official Mailing List The City will continue to be responsible for the official project mailing list. The Consultant will pro- vide the City in a timely manner, with names of the public who have requested placement on the list. Information Materials Information materials will be prepared for distribution to the community, media, and other appropriate agencies and groups. They will also be distributed to other individuals and groups later identified in the community relations process. The "Yakima Gateway Project" name and the logo developed for the selection interview will be used on all project information materials to provide a consistent, recognizable image for the project. The following information materials will be developed and produced by the Consultant and distributed by the City with Spanish translations prepared by the City when required in accordance with project schedule. Media Releases Three draft media releases will be prepared by the Consultant. These will be submitted to the City for translation, final typing, printing and distribution to the news media. The releases will be provided: Prior to EA scoping Following approval of EA Prior to Combined Design/Access Hearing 1002152Cq.SEA/3 7/7/92 2-3 I-82/Yakima Avenue Project Newsletters Three project newsletters will be prepared by the Consultant in the same format as Phase I. The Consultant will provide the City with a draft layout copy in English. The Consultant will provide the City with camera-ready originals of the layout for printing and distribution by the City. The newsletters will be 11 x 17 inches, to be printed both sides. Paper will be supplied by the City. The newsletters will be distributed approximately every 2 months or: • Prior to or during scoping • Following approval of EA • Prior to Combined Design/Access hearing Project Fact Sheets Three project fact sheets will be prepared by the Consultant in the same format as Phase I. The Consultant will provide the City with a draft layout copy in English. The City will submit spanish translation to the Consultant for final layout. The Consultant will provide the City with camera-ready originals of the Spanish and English layouts for printing and distribution by the City. The fact sheets will be 8-1/2 x 11 inches printed English and Spanish back to back. Paper will be supplied by the City. The fact sheets will focus on specific issues of concern related to the project and will be prepared at appropriate times throughout the project. Official Public Hearing Notice The Consultant will prepare drafts of official notice of the Combined Design/Access Hearing in English and submit to the City. The City will translate and advertize the notices in accordance with prescribed regulatory guidelines and City policy. Task 6 describes when notice should be given. Static Project Displays The three display units provided during Phase I will be updated to reflect project progress. One new panel to be inserted into each of' the three displays will be provided by the Consultant. City staff will make arrangements for, and move the displays to, appropriate locations. City staff will monitor and restock the displays. At least one of the displays will be brought to the public hearing by City staff. Slide Presentation Materials Photographic slides will be taken for use in presentations and public hearings. Miscellaneous project graphics will be made into slides as needed. Two sets of slides will be prepared for use by the Consultant and the City. Video Develop a video in both 3/4 -inch and VHS format that describes project background, purpose, selection process and illustrates the final preferred alternative -7 -minutes long, one English soundtrack, one Spanish soundtrack. The Consultant will provide shot sheets, shooting, and final scripts in English and provide technical review and review of scripts before final production. In accordance with project schedule, the City video production services will provide shooting crew—one cameraman, video and audio equipment and up to 1002152Cq.SEA/4 7/7/92 2-4 I-82/Yakima Avenue five shooting tapes—all post -production services, studio time and staff, including time coded master tape, working tape and logs for all tapes shot, graphics including titles, sound, and associated labor; five copies of each final video for use in public involvement program. The City will provide Spanish translation and Spanish voice over for final videos. The City video pro- duction services will provide English and voice over for English version tapes. The City video produc- tion service will provide one final copy of each video to the Consultant for review; the Consultant will then submit each video to the City Engineering and Utilities Department for final review and approval before distribution. Upon approval by City Engineering and Utilities, City video production services will provide the follow- ing copies: • 3/4 -inch format English Master and 5 copies Spanish Master and 5 copies • VHS format English Master and 5 copies Spanish Master and 5 copies Model One stick -built, 3' x 8' rigid contour foam table -mounted model produced at a scale of 1" = 100' showing preferred alternative of the I-82/Yakima Avenue interchange will be developed. It will include principal geographic features such as the Yakima River, Sundome, adjacent principal streets and structures. Task 4 Interchange Justification Report This task develops a draft and final interchange justification report for submittal to the FHWA for approval. Draft Interchange Justification Report This task prepares the draft interchange justification report. Requirements for an "interchange justifica- tion report" are set forth in the FHWA Guide and the FHWA Docket. A report complying with these requirements will be prepared for the preferred alternative selected in the EA. Twenty copies will be submitted for review and comment. The report will address the following issues: It will demonstrate that the existing interchanges and/or local roads and streets in the corridor can neither provide the necessary access nor be improved to accommodate 1002152Cq.SEA/5 7(7/92 2-5 I-82/Yakima Avenue satisfactorily the design -year traffic demands while at the same time providing the ac- cess intended by the recommended alternative. It will show that all reasonable alternatives for design options, location, and transporta- tion system management -type improvements (such as ramp metering, mass transit, and HOV facilities) have been assessed and provided for if currently justified, or provisions are included for accommodating such facilities if a future need is identified. It will demonstrate that the proposal does not have a significant adverse impact on the safety and operation of the interstate facility based on an analysis of current and future traffic. The operational analysis for existing conditions will include an analysis of sec- tions of interstate to and including at least the first adjacent existing or proposed inter- change on either side. Crossroads and other roads and streets will be included in the analysis to the extent necessary to assure their ability to collect and distribute traffic to and from the interchange with a new or revised access point. The report will specify that the interchange proposal connects to public roads only and will provide for all traffic movements. It will also show that the proposed access will be designed to meet or exceed current standards for federal aid projects on the inter- state system. It will demonstrate that the proposal considers and is consistent with local and regional land use and transportation plans. It will show that new or revised access generated by new or expanded development de- monstrates appropriate coordination between the development and related or otherwise required transportation system improvements. Final Interchange Justification Report This task prepares the final interchange report based upon the review comments received. Twenty copies will be submitted for approval. Task 5 Environmental Assessment The following scope of work is based on the NEPA Environmental Assessment Outline (M 31-11), as given in WSDOT Environmental Procedures Manual, dated July 1988 and the FHWA Technical Advi- sory T6640.8A, dated October 30, 1987. Project Orientation Key members of the Consultant team will meet with appropriate representatives from the City, WSDOT, and FHWA in order to review the project, finalize the issues of concern to be addressed in the EA, determine the appropriate level of analysis and methodological approach for each issue of concern, and to identify relevant studies and other background information that will be of value in preparing the EA. 1002152Cq.SEA/6 7(7/92 2-6 I-82/Yakima Avenue Draft EA/Client Review A draft EA will be prepared and provided to the City, WSDOT, and FHWA for review prior to formal publication. The draft EA will be organized on the basis of the following outline: Description of the Proposed Action A general discussion of the proposed action will be presented in sufficient detail to allow an accurate assessment of impacts. Information to be provided will include the project location, length, and termini, major design features (interchange configuration, number of lanes, typical cross sections, any HOV or mass transit provisions, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, signalization, illumination, landscaping, and right-of-way acquisition requirements), estimated cost and construction schedule, and likely permits re- quired. This discussion will be based on Alternative II that has been identified by the City as the Pre- ferred Alternative. Purpose of and Need for the Proposed Action This section will describe the transportation problem(s) that the proposed action is designed to address and how the problem(s) will be resolved. This section will be based primarily on information provided by the City. Alternatives to the Proposed Action Alternatives to the proposed action (preferred alternative), including No Action, will be discussed in this section. Details regarding these other alternatives and the reasons why they have not been con- sidered for further study in the EA will be presented. Impacts of the Proposed Action This section will describe the potential, significant impacts of the proposed action. For each element of the environment that is analyzed in the EA, the following material will be presented: Studies performed and coordination conducted Affected environment (existing conditions) Impacts (during construction and operation) Viable measures to mitigate identified impacts A discussion of why the impacts are not considered significant Based upon initial input from the City and WSDOT, the following elements of the environment will be addressed in the EA: • Air quality • Land use (including right-of-way acquisition, housing and business displacement, relo- cation requirements, community disruption, and shoreline issues). Based upon our current understanding of the proposed action and the nature of the project area, it is assumed that the following additional elements of the environment will also be addressed in the EA (to be confirmed through further discussions during the Project Orientation task): 1002152Cq.SEA/7 7/7/92 2-7 I-82/Yakima Avenue • Flood plain • Noise • Hazardous waste (including asbestos) • Recreation • Visual quality • Transportation It is possible that the proposed action will impact Section 4(1) property (Yakima Greenway or Kiwanis Park). This scope or the accompanying budget does not include preparation of a separate Section 4(f) evaluation. A determination of impact on Section 4(f) property will be made early in the preparation of the EA. The EA will list all other elements of the environment that will not be affected by the proposed action. Comments and Coordination This section will describe all early and continuing coordination efforts and summarize the key issues and pertinent information received from the public and government agencies. Twenty (20) copies of the draft EA will be submitted to the City, WSDOT, and FHWA for review and comment. Final EA The final EA will be prepared during this subtask, based upon the review comments on the draft EA received from the City, WSDOT, and FHWA. The review comments will be addressed and the do- cument resubmitted for approval to print. The Consultant will print 100 copies of the final EA for distribution to resource agencies and the public by the lead agency. Task 6 Preliminary Design Work within this task will be prepared on only the preferred alternative as identified in the EA. 6.01 Structures Reference DM 330 and IDC titled "Guide for Conceptual Structural Work for Environmental Docu- ments and Design Reports for WSDOT," WSDOT Bridge and Structures Office, April 18, 1991. This task provides the bridge services necessary for the preparation of the structural appendix to the DR and the DR structures section. The following is an outline of the anticipated structural work tasks. 1002152Cq.SEA/8 7/7/92 2-8 I-82/Yakima Avenue Draft Structural Appendix The structural appendix to the DR will provide documentation of the engineering work related to the structures that led to the results summarized in the DR. Data Collection This task assimilates the data necessary to perform the structural tasks and includes: • Review of the site survey and geotechnical data for each structure • Identify need for additional information or clarification • Review existing reports, maps, utilities, plans, and other data pertinent to the structures Meet with the City to discuss special conditions, considerations, and to develop site- specific design criteria • Verify proposed bridge and retaining wall locations Design/Evaluation Criteria This task reviews and confirms the roadway, geotechnical, and structural design criteria to be used for the bridges and retaining walls on the project. The structural criteria will be established in accordance with AASHTO, WSDOT, and City standards. Criteria will include, but not be limited to, the following: • Specific structural component requirements • Design loads • Material properties Geometrics Clearances Constructing staging A technical memorandum will be prepared summarizing the structural design criteria for the project. Ten copies will be submitted for review and comment. Review comments will be addressed and 10 cop- ies will be submitted for approval. Alternative Study This task evaluates the structural alternatives for the bridges and retaining walls based upon the struc- tural design criteria. A list of feasible structural alternatives will first be developed for each bridge and retaining wall location. From this list of structural alternatives, the advantages and disadvantages of the two most viable structural alternatives for each structure will be developed based upon such criteria as: • Initial and life -cycle costs • Aesthetics • Safety • Constructibility • Functionality • Special considerations 1002152Cq.SEA/9 7/7/92 2-9 I-82/Yakima Avenue Foundation considerations Construction phasing of each structure Traffic control measures required Right-of-way requirements Opinions of cost for each structure The scope and fee is based on a total of seven new or reconstructed bridges, and a total of 600 linear feet of retaining wall is anticipated. The individual retaining walls and bridges are not expected to fall in the FHWA "major or unusual category" and therefore will not require FHWA approval at the pre- liminary TS&L stage. Conceptual Design Conceptual -level design calculations will be performed using DM parameters on the structural alterna- tives as needed for comparative purposes. A plan and elevation sketch (one sketch per bridge or retain- ing wall) will be prepared for each of the two structural alternatives being considered. A conceptual level cost estimate will be prepared for the two most feasible alternatives. Special Structural Studies Special structural studies are defined as additional investigation of unusual or unique structural aspects of the project to ensure that the proposed structural system is feasible. Seismic considerations, founda- tion type, or constructibility issues are areas that may require a special study. Items identified as need- ing further investigation will be discussed with, and will not proceed, until the City has given approval to start work. Structural Summary From the structural alternative comparison, one of the two alternatives considered for each of the struc- ture sites will be chosen as the preferred alternative. A meeting will then be held with the City, WSDOT district and headquarters bridge and structures section along with the architecture section, to discuss the results of the alternative study. The purpose of this meeting is to obtain a consensus on the preferred structural alternative for each structure site prior to proceeding further. Prepare Draft Structural Appendix A technical memorandum will be prepared to summarize the results of the engineering work for the structures on the project. The content and format will include the following: • Identification of required structures (bridges and retaining walls) • Summary of structural design criteria • Summary of the alternative study • Type, size, and location of recommended bridges (bridge working drawings) 1002152Cq.SEA/10 7/7/92 Type, size, and location of recommended retaining walls (retaining wall working drawings) 2-10 I-82/Yakima Avenue • Summary of critical and/or unusual design and construction constraints, accompanied by a discussion of possible solutions • Construction phasing • Opinions of cost The draft structural appendix will be submitted for review and comment as part of the preliminary final DR. Final Structural Appendix This task revises the structural appendix to the design report based upon review comments received from the City. The review comments will be addressed and the final structural appendix will be submitted as part of the final DR. Preliminary Design Report Input This task develops the structural section of the design report. The intent of this section is to provide an overview of the structures on the project. Information contained in this section will include the following: • Data on existing structures Description of proposed bridges and walls (approximate length; overall width; lane, shoulder, and sidewalk widths; barrier and rail requirements; vertical profile; and hori- zontal alignment) • The total cost of each bridge and wall • Reference to the structural appendix of the design report This section will be submitted for review and comment, as part of the preliminary design report. Final Design Report Input This task revises the structures section and the design report based upon the review comments received from the City. 6.02 Design Report The Design Report will be prepared for the Preferred Alternative. Detailed discussion and plan prepar- ation will be prepared for two stages. The alternative attached as part of the scope (see Enclosure E) is the concept that will be more fully developed in the Design Report. • Stage 1 will provide a project within current available funds. • Stage 2 will provide for completion of the interchange. 1002152Cq.SEA/11 7/7/92 2-11 I-82/Yakima Avenue EA Design Level Drawings and Cost Updates The task refines the preliminary drawings during the early stages of the preparation of the Draft EA. Modifications planned are: • Pedestrian overcrossing • Realignment of Fair Avenue • Elimination of Ramp D • Possible combination of Ramps A and C, and Ramps B and G Conceptual opinions of cost will also be updated to support work on the Draft EA. Design Report Mockup This task prepares a mockup of the design report and associated plans. This will be used to reach con- currence upon the format and contents of the design report. Twenty copies will be submitted for review and comment. Preliminary Design Report This task provides the services necessary for the preparation of the DR. Existing Conditions This task prepares the existing conditions section of the design report. Proposal This task prepares parts of this section of the design report not specifically listed below. It also pre- pares the deviations requests, required justification, and costs to bring up to standards. Construction Staging This task prepares plans and text for the construction staging and will include: • Sequencing • Life expectancy (based upon traffic capacity) for each phase • Traffic control plans • Public information campaign • Funding requirements Plan sheets schematically showing the construction staging plans at 400 scale will be prepared. Pavement Design Reference 1985 AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures and Asphalt Institute Design Procedure. 1002152Cq.SEA/12 7/7/92 2-12 I-82/Yakima Avenue This task prepares the asphalt surfacing depths for the following: • I-82 (1 design) • Ramps (2 designs) • Local streets (up to 3 designs) The flexible pavement depths will be determined for a 15 -year pavement life. The 'Consultant will con- duct 16 -hour truck traffic counts at up to five intersections to determine existing volumes. Future truck volumes will be extrapolated using the same growth rate as the general traffic in the traffic modeling task. Roadway Sections Reference DM 330.07(2)J and K This task prepares roadway sections for the following: • I-82 • Ramps • Local streets • Other sections as appropriate Horizontal and Vertical Alignment Reference DM 330.07(2)L, M, and 0 This task prepares horizontal and vertical alignment plans and text for the following: I-82 Ramps Local streets Evaluation of minor alignment variations Plan sheets showing the horizontal alignments at 1" = 50' scale will be prepared. Also included will be access control, right-of-way channelization, and traffic data. Profile sheets showing the vertical alignments with superelevation diagrams at 1" = 50' scale hori- zontal and 1" = 5' scale vertical will be prepared. Public Intersections This task involves the following: Channelization Plans. Reference DM 330.07(2)N This task prepares the Stage 1 and full buildout channelization plans and text for each of the intersections within the project limits. Channelization detail will be shown on the horizontal alignment plans. 1002152Cq.SEA/13 7t7/92 2-13 I-82/Yakima Avenue • Traffic Signals. Reference DM 330.07(2)U and 850.03(3) This task also prepares traffic signal text for each of the signalized locations: • I-82 ramps/Lincoln Avenue/1'B" Street • I-82 ramps/Yakima Avenue • Fair Avenue/Yakima Avenue Traffic Services This task involves the following: • Traffic Volumes. This task summarizes the design traffic volumes for the project. Traffic Control. Reference DM 330.07(2)AA This task prepares the traffic control text for the project based upon the plan devel- oped in the Preliminary Alternatives Analysis task and will include: • Delineation • Traffic barriers • Pavement markings • Impact attenuators • Illumination. Reference DM 330.07(2)R and 840.06 This task prepares the illumination text for the project. This will include: • Status of existing illumination • Proposed illumination • Planned power source locations • Special considerations • Signing. Reference DM 330.07(2)T This task prepares the signing text for the project and will include: • Destination signs • Overhead signs • Overhead signs that are externally illuminated • Special signs • Guide signs • Sign bridges • Sign cantilevers Nonmotorized Transportation Reference DM 330.07(2)Z This task prepares a technical memorandum that discusses alternative pedestrian and bicycle routes and associated facilities and its relationship to the gateway concept. Connections with the Yakima River 1002152Cq.SEA/14 717/92 2-14 I-82/Yakima Avenue Greenway, surrounding recreation facilities and connection to the CBD area will be discussed. Potential areas where focal points can be created along the pedestrian and bicycle routes will be identified. Graphics for locations of alternative pedestrian and bicycle routes and treatment of focal points also will be provided. This task prepares the conceptual layout and text for the trails within the project. The modes to be ac- commodated are: • Bicycle • Pedestrian The following information will be shown on the horizontal alignment plans: • Schematic horizontal location • Locations of under- and overpasses • Connections with the Greenway Miscellaneous This task involves: • Landscaping/Erosion Control. Reference DM 330.07(2)P and Y, (3), and (5) This task prepares a technical memorandum that identifies landscape design issues that affect the visual quality of the intersection with emphasis on a gateway treatment and connection to the CBD area. It includes coordination with the Yakima CBD Redevel- opment Plan on landscape design and urban planning issues. It also includes discussion of methods to provide and enhance views and screening undesirable views from the interchange as well as views of the interchange from the surrounding neighborhood. Highway safety factors impacted by landscape treatment will be identified. Possible requirements for using an irrigation system will be discussed. Vegetation management of landscape treatment to provide a long-term maintenance program that will preserve the aesthetic quality and highway safety of the interchange also will be addressed. Graphics will be prepared that depict alternative landscape treatment for enhancement, erosion control, and screening. This task also prepares the landscape concept plan and text for the project and will include: • Vegetative types • Irrigation concepts and water source • Conceptual location of irrigation pipe sleeves • Contour grading of each interchange • Site for "Gateway" sculpture (sculpture not a part of this agreement) Environmental documents and commitments will be received and incorporated into the plan. 1002152Cq.SEA/15 7/7/92 2-15 I-82/Yakima Avenue Plan sheets showing the landscape concept development plans at 11 = 200' scale will be prepared. • Constructible and Maintainable. Reference DM 330.07(1)J The City will provide a statement from City and WSDOT operations engineers that the proposed design is constructible and maintainable. Right -of -Way Reference DM 330.07(2)C This task prepares the right-of-way and access control section of the Design Report. Utilities Reference DM 330.07(2)H This task will identify the existing utilities within the project limits. The utility companies and munici- palities will be contacted and relied upon to communicate the type, size, location, condition, and any planned upgrading or replacement of their facilities. The information will be requested from the util- ities on 100 -scale mapping and will include: • Power • CATV • Telephone • Gas • Water • Sanitary sewer • Storm sewer • Irrigation systems Funding Reference DM 330.07(1)H and I Order -of -magnitude opinions of cost will be prepared for the preferred alternative using DM Fig- ure 330-1. Costs for staged construction will also be developed. This task will also prepare an estimate of the yearly maintenance costs. The City will provide an esti- mate of the maintenance costs for the existing and proposed facilities. The estimates will identify WSDOT, City street, and City park maintenance responsibilities. Prepare Preliminary Design Report Reference DM 330.07(1)A, B, C, and D This task assembles and reproduces the preliminary design report. Text not prepared in other tasks will also be prepared. This will include: • Section 1—Introduction • Section 2 -Project Coordination • Section 4—Design Considerations • Parts of Section 5—Proposal not previously listed 1002152Cq.SEA/16 7/7/92 2-16 I-82/Yakima Avenue • Assembly of information for the Appendices • Section 8—Environmental Classification and Permits The preliminary design report will be prepared in accordance with the format specified in the District 1 format for design standards projects. The preliminary design report will be prepared for the alternative as defined in the EA. Twenty copies will be submitted for review and comment. Final Design Report This task prepares the final design report based upon the review comments received from the City. The review comments will be addressed, and twenty copies will be submitted for approval. Upon approval, twenty copies of the final report will be printed. 6.03 Traffic Analysis Report This task provides the services necessary for the preparation of the traffic analysis report. Draft Traffic Analysis Report Accident Analysis Reference DM 330.07(2)D This task involves review of City and WSDOT provided accident data within the project limits over the past 3 years. Intersection, main line, and mid -block accident rates and types will be compared with aver- age or typical conditions. Traffic Modeling 2010 traffic forecasts will be prepared from the Yakima Metropolitan Area Transportation Study (YMATS) regional traffic study. CH2M HILL will work with the local agencies to develop the existing 1990 and the 2010 data base. Design year forecasts will be estimated from the existing traffic volumes and the 2010 forecasts. The 2010 traffic forecasts will be used to support the development of design concepts and determine lane requirements. The City will provide necessary traffic counts for recalibra- tion of the model. CH2M HILL will provide 16 -hour truck classification counts at up to five intersec- tions. Future truck volumes will be extrapolated using the same growth rate as the general traffic. The existing conditions traffic model will be upgraded to reflect the 1990 conditions. This will entail the following tasks: • Enter land use data on household/population and employment for 1990 for each traffic analysis zone. • Review and revise network coding by link for correct speed, capacity, functional class, and number of lanes. 1002152Cq.SEA/17 7/7/92 2-17 I-82/Yakima Avenue • Review and revise trip generation equations where appropriate. • Develop an external to external trip table. • Recalibrate the gravity model and network. Preparation of the 2010 model will entail the following tasks: • Review land use data for 2010 and enter data into each traffic analysis zone. • Code committed projects into the network. • Review model forecasts for reasonableness. • Code alternative design concepts into the model for evaluation. Traffic Analysis Reference DM 330.07(2)A and B This task will assemble and prepare a summary of the traffic data for the project. Information noted in the DM will be gathered for: • Design year (2010) • Peak -hour speeds • Level of service • Average daily traffic • AM and PM peak -hour traffic Also included will be the transit, carpool, and vanpool projections as well as truck percentages. The methodology for determining these volumes will also be discussed. Prepare Draft Traffic Analysis Report Reference WSDOT District 1 Traffic Analysis Report Guidelines This task prepares the traffic analysis report. It will include summaries of the information prepared under the following design report subtasks: • Channelization plans • Signalization • Accident analysis • Traffic analysis For the draft report, twenty copies will be submitted for review and comment. Final Traffic Analysis Report This task prepares the final traffic analysis report based upon the review comments received from the City. The review comments will be addressed, and twenty copies will be submitted for approval. 6.04 Soils Report Reference DM 330.07(2)E and K, and 510 1002152Cq.SEA/18 7/7/92 2-18 ( I-82/Yakima Avenue This task provides the services necessary for the preparation of the soils report. Maximum use will be made of existing soils information. The level of work done will be that necessary to provide general geotechnical site characterization, to establish final geotechnical design for cut and fill slopes, including any mitigating measures required to produce stability, and to make preliminary recommendations for re- taining walls and drainage. Bridge foundation assessments will be conceptual in nature. "Conceptual" is defined as determining which foundation types are feasible and whether low or high foundation bearing capacity can be used. "Preliminary" is defined as the development of typical soil cross sections to determine feasible wall types and evaluate culvert versus bridge tradeoffs. "Final" is de- fined as obtaining enough soils information and providing enough design analysis to develop the PS&E. The following is an outline of anticipated areas of geotechnical work. This geotechnical program in- cludes no testing for hazardous wastes, dangerous wastes, or contaminated soil. Draft Soils Report Project Review Project information from the City, County, and WSDOT will be reviewed to determine geotechnical site conditions and past performance along the alignment. Project Geology Published geologic reports will be reviewed to evaluate site geology. Field Explorations A Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing Program will be submitted to the City for approval. A scope for the proposed program is outlined in Enclosure C. This scope is based on visual reconnais- sance of the interchange area and preliminary review of information in WSDOT files. It will be revised where appropriate, following the project review and project geology tasks. All exploration work will be accomplished under the direction of a qualified geotechnical engineer or a geologist who will prepare all boring logs, make soil/rock classifications, and describe groundwater con- ditions. The boring layout, proposed sampling plan, and type of boring equipment to be used will be as described in the Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing Program. All boring logs will be recorded on forms provided by the Consultant. All soil samples will be retained by the Consultant for a period of 90 days after submittal of the final report, at which time the samples will be disposed of unless the City requests that they be made avail- able for pickup at the Consultant's office. The Consultant will provide traffic control during field operations, if required. Testing Tests will be conducted in the field and in the laboratory to characterize the engineering properties and corrosivity of the soil conditions. Field tests will include standard penetration tests (SPT) and ground- water monitoring. Groundwater measurements will be made on five different occasions during the 1002152Cq.SEA/19 7/7/92 2-19 I-82/Yakima Avenue DR phase of the project. Testing will also be conducted to establish the soil properties necessary for pavement design. Based on the Consultant's preliminary review of geotechnical conditions in the interchange area, the scope of the laboratory program will involve approximately 50 water content determinations, 5 Atter- berg limits measurements, 10 corrosivity tests, and 20 grain -size analyses. No consolidation tests or triaxial shear tests are currently proposed for the program. The final scope of laboratory testing will be developed and submitted for the City's review following the field exploration program. Engineering Analyses Geotechnical engineering analyses will be performed to identify critical design elements and provide a basis for geotechnical design recommendations. The analysis will consider the potential for slope stabil- ity and settlement along the alignment. Detailed assessments of bridge foundation types will be per- formed during PS&E. Descriptions of the analyses and calculations will be provided at the City's request. Engineering Design Recommendations Geotechnical engineering design recommendations will be given for preparation of the DR. The recom- mendations will be detailed and complete for establishing horizontal and vertical alignment, pavement design, cut slopes, and embankments; will be preliminary for drainage facilities and retaining walls; and will be conceptual for bridge foundations. Construction Considerations This task will involve an evaluation of geotechnical issues, including methods of construction and stag- ing of retaining walls, that may impact construction. When critical features exist, they will be disclosed and conceptual options given to deal with them. Prepare Draft Soils Report This task assembles the draft soils report. The findings and recommendations for the project will be presented in the form of a formal report. Twenty copies will be submitted for review and comment. Final Soils Report This task prepares the final soils report based upon the review comments received from the City. The review comments will be addressed, and twenty copies will be submitted for approval. 6.05 Hydraulics Report Reference DM 330.07(2)P, 1210.03, and the HM. This task provides the services necessary for the preparation of the hydraulics report. Draft Hydraulics Report Reference the HM and the HRG 1002152Cq.SEA/20 7t7/92 2-20 ( I-82/Yakima Avenue Data Review This task will assemble and review the available hydrologic and hydraulic data for the project. The Yakima Metro Plan will gather much of this information and will be available for use on this project. This will include, but not be limited to, review of the following information: • Topographic mapping and aerial photographs • Previous estimates of tributary drainage area runoff • Existing drainage facility locations and sizes • Flood plain and floodway data • Stormwater runoff and receiving water quality data Field review will also be performed to check uncertainties in the data base and to verify drainage basin area boundaries and hydrologic characteristics. An inventory of existing major roadway drainage fea- tures will be performed by field survey. This will be limited to: • Sizes • Geometrics • Control elevations Pertinent results of this data review will be incorporated into the Draft Hydraulics Report. Hydraulic Criteria Reference the HM This task summarizes the drainage and flood plain criteria to be used for the hydrologic and hydraulic evaluation and drainage facilities design. Criteria will include: • Design storm frequency and duration by type of hydraulic structure • Land use conditions for hydrologic analysis • Design criteria for each drainage facility type • Flood plain encroachment limitations • Erosion and sedimentation control • Water quality (including biofiltration) • Local jurisdiction drainage requirements Results of this task will be summarized by a technical memorandum. Twenty copies will be submitted for review and comment. Review comments will be addressed and twenty copies submitted for approval. Conceptual Hydraulics Design Reference DM 1210.03 (2,3,4) and the HM This task prepares the conceptual layout of the drainage system facilities for the EA alternatives. Drainage facility requirements for roadway drainage collection and conveyance systems, for detention storage and biofiltration channels to control runoff peak flows and water quality delivered to the Yak- ima River, and possible stormwater treatment uses will be considered. Plan sheets will be prepared at 1" = 200' scale showing the recommended conceptual layout for the drainage facilities consistent with each EA alternative and the extent of flood plain encroachment re- quired for the roadway section. 1002152Cq.SEA/21 7/7/92 2-21 ( I-82/Yakima Avenue Hydrologic Evaluation Reference the HM This task performs the necessary hydrologic evaluation as a basis for sizing of hydraulic structures for the project. It will include the following: • Delineation of tributary drainage basins including roadway drainage and adjacent tribu- tary drainage area • Tabulation of drainage basin runoff characteristics • Drainage system analyses for roadway runoff conveyance systems (rational method) • Hydrograph runoff analyses for evaluation of infiltration/detention/biofiltration swales Hydrology for the Yakima River will be from available FEMA study data, the 1987 to 1988 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers update and WSDOT 1991 aerial photographs. The results of this task will be documented for inclusion in the Draft Hydraulics report. An appropriate scale map will be prepared with delineation of drainage areas evaluated. Tables will be prepared to document hydrologic evaluation results for inclusion in the Draft Hydraulics Report. Hydraulic Structure Evaluation Reference the HM This task provides the hydraulic evaluation of drainage facility improvements for the project. Appropri- ate calculations or hydraulic modeling (consistent with WSDOT guidelines) will be completed for verification of the sizing of improvements. Required hydraulic data for the Yakima River will be from available FEMA data. This task will include: • Bridge crossing hydraulic design • Culvert crossing hydraulic design • Roadway drainage collection and conveyance system hydraulic design • Ditch and swale hydraulic and water quality design • Infiltration/detention storage/hydraulic design The results of this task will be documented for inclusion in the Draft Hydraulics Report. Prepare Draft Hydraulics Report This task assembles the draft hydraulics report. This task also prepares the preliminary design plan and profile sheets for project drainage system improvements. It will include the following: • Text, figures, and tables for presentation of the criteria, methods, assumptions, and re- sults of drainage system evaluation • Hydrology base map for documentation of tributary drainage areas evaluated • Hydrology and hydraulic calculations in WSDOT format 1002152Cq.SEA/22 7/7/92 2-22 I-82/Yakima Avenue • Plan and profile sheets with layout, sizing, and vertical alignment of project drainage facility improvements. The drawings will be at 50 scale horizontal and 10 scale vertical • Soil resistivity, pH, and infiltration measurement results and required treatment coat- ings for CMP pipe (as applicable) The hydraulics report will be prepared in accordance with the format presented in the HM and the HRG. Twenty copies will be submitted for review and comment. Preliminary Design Report Input This task will summarize findings and results of the hydraulics report for incorporation into a section of the design report. The content and format will be consistent with WSDOT DM requirements. 1 6.06 Interchange Plan Draft Interchange Plan for Approval Reference DM 940.03 This task involves the preparation of the interchange plan for approval for the I-82/Yakima Avenue and Lincoln/"B" interchanges. Each plan sheet will contain the following: • Interchange plan • Crossroad plan • Right-of-way and access control lines • Traffic volumes • Channelization Plan sheets will be prepared showing the interchange plans at 1" = 100' scale. Plans will be based solely upon those developed under the design report roadway task. Ten sets of full-size bluelines will be submitted to the City for review and comment. Final Interchange Plan for Approval Reference DM 940.03 This task prepares the final interchange plans for approval based upon the review comments received from the City. The review comments will be addressed, and one set of full-size mylars will be submitted to the City for approval. 1002152Cq.SEAI23 7/7/92 2-23 ( I-82/Yakima Avenue 6.07 Design Surveys and Mapping Mapping This task will provide aerial photography and planimetric and topographic mapping for the design re- port and final design. Mapping will be at 1"=50' scale with 2 -foot contour intervals. This task includes ground control surveying and premarking of photogrammetric targets. Design Surveys This task is for supplementary field surveys and calculations required to augment the design report ac- tivity. These include: • Verification of physical features • Locate design constraints • Location of geotechnical borings Right -of -Way Surveys This task is for completion of the fieldwork required for the right-of-way plans and will include: • Existing property corner and right-of-way ties • Research of city, county, and WSDOT records • Field staking of parcel lines • Work required to support the access hearing process • Field survey existing buildings as required • Staking of up to 25 parcels has been included in the estimate of fee. Title Reports This task involves procuring deed and ownership information for up to 30 parcels that are to be in- cluded in the access control report/plan. One update to the deed and ownership information will be provided during the access report process. Title reports will be obtained prior to preparation of the draft right-of-way plans. 6.08 Access Report/Plan Draft Access Report/Plan Reference DM 1430.02 and PPM 1-5 This task prepares the access report and will discuss the proposed route and principal access features. The following information will be collected from the City of Yakima, Yakima County, and WSDOT. • Right-of-way maps • Assessors maps • Plat maps • Conditions of development relating to access 1002152Cq.SEA/24 7/7/92 2-24 ( I-82/Yakima Avenue This task prepares the access report plan, and will delineate the points of public access and other right- of-way information. The plan will contain the following information: • Limits and type of access control • Interchange configuration • Corporate and subdivision boundaries • Local street network • Nonmotorized facilities • New right-of-way and relinquishments Plan sheets will be prepared showing the access report plan at 100 scale. Plans will be based solely upon those developed under the design report roadway task. Twenty copies will be submitted for review and comment. Final Access Report/Plan Reference DM 1430.02 This task prepares the final access report and access report plan based on the review comments received from the City. The review comments will be addressed, and one full-size mylar set of the plans will be submitted to the City for approval. Twenty copies of the report will be submitted for approval. 6.09 Combined Design/Access Hearing Plan Reference DM 1430.03(1) and PPM 1-6 This task prepares the access hearing plan and will expand upon the access report plan. The plan will contain the following additional information: • Topographic features • Ownerships • Access approach schedule • Access notes One set of original full-size mylars and one half-size set of bluelines of the plan will be submitted to the City for review and comment. Yakima County and WSDOT will each receive one full-size blueline set for review and comment. Combined Design/Access Hearing Reference DM 210.07 and 1430.03(2) and (3) 1002152Cq.SEA/25 717192 2-25 ( I-82/Yakima Avenue This task provides for the preparation and attendance of the combined design/access hearing. The Con- sultant will participate in the preparation of the prehearing information and packets. The City will make arrangements for the hearing and prepare the presentation information. The City will lead the hearing. The Consultant will also prepare the graphics required for the access hearing including the following: • Full-size foam core mounted copies of the access hearing plans • Vicinity map • Aerial photo maps • Other pertinent graphics that were prepared as part of other tasks Twenty prehearing packets will be submitted to the City 60 days prior to the anticipated hearing date. The prehearing packet will include: • Vicinity map • Capsule project description • Project history • Public support or opposition to the project • Plans for design alternatives with descriptions • Preliminary design report • Design/access information • News release • Hearing notice tailored to the needs of the project • Notice of Appearance • List of legislators • List of government agencies • List of property owners • List of news media • Hearing agenda • Hearing arrangements The Design/Access hearing packet contains: • Access hearing plan • Hearing notice • Notice of appearance • Approved access report and request to attend hearing (mailed to government jurisdic- tions only) The City will make the necessary copies and mail Design/Access Hearing packets to the following: • Legislators and appropriate elected officials (3 days before notice is given to the news media) 1002152Cq.SEA/26 7/7/92 2-26 I-82/Yakima Avenue • Government agencies, the Transportation Commission, FHWA, the Attorney General's office, and WSDOT's Public Affairs office • Property owners (abutting owners) (concurrent with publication of the newspaper advertisement) The City will also submit the Hearing Notice for publication in local newspapers as follows: • 31 calendar days prior to the hearing • 5 to 12 calendar days prior to the hearing For at least 1 hour immediately prior to the hearing, exhibits will be set up for public review. The Con- sultant will be present during this time to answer questions. The City will provide a Spanish -English translator before and during the hearing. The City will provide a court recorder to make a verbatim transcript of the hearing. Information on the action taken as a result of the hearing will also be distributed by the City. Findings and Order Analysis Reference DM 210.07(12) and 1430.03(3) This task evaluates the comments and suggestions made at the access hearing and prepares recommen- dations for City review. Ten (10) copies of the analyses and recommendations will be submitted to the City for approval. Findings and Order Plan Reference DM 210.07(12) and 1430.03(3) This task modifies the access hearing plan based upon the City's response to the Findings and Order Analysis. These modifications will result in the findings and order plan. One set of original full-size mylars and one half-size set of bluelines of the plan will be submitted to the City for approval. Relocation Assistance Information This task includes providing information about relocation laws and benefits to persons requesting that information. 6.10 Right -of -Way Plan Draft Right -of -Way Plan This task modifies the findings and order plan based upon review comments received from the City's re- view of the findings and order plan. These modifications will result in the right-of-way plans. One set of original full-size mylars of the plan and backup calculations will be submitted to the City for review and comment. 1002152Cq.SEA/27 7/7/92 2-27 I-82/Yakima Avenue Final Right -of -Way Plan This task prepares the final right-of-way plan based upon the review comments received from the City. The review comments will be addressed, and one set of full size original mylars will be submitted to the City for approval. 6.11 Value Engineering Value Engineering Study This project meets WSDOT's and the TIB's criteria for a value engineering (VE) study. A study will be required to be conducted by a VE team, independent of the Consultant team, before the completion of the DR unless the Consultant is advised in writing by the City that the VE study is not needed. The City will notify the Consultant within a minimum of six (6) weeks' notice before beginning the VE study. The City will be responsible for the establishment of a VE team and will appoint the VE team leader. The VE study will be coordinated through the WSDOT VE coordinator. The study will take approximately four (4) days. The Consultant may provide up to one qualified VE team member who is not involved in the project design. The Consultant project staff will be available to answer questions during the study. The results of the VE study must be included in the DR. The Consultant must incorporate all recom- mendations into the project unless a waiver is approved by the City. Upon the Consultant's receipt of the VE recommendations, the City and the Consultant will jointly assess the impact of executing the recommendations upon the remaining budget and schedule. Value Engineering Support This task includes support to the VE study team by the Consultant. The Consultant will be available at the beginning and throughout the study to brief the VE team and to provide information or answer questions. The VE study will be held at CH2M HILL's Bellevue office. The Consultant will provide office support staff to assist the VE team. 6.12 Hazardous Materials Survey This task provides a review of properties situated within or along the proposed project right-of-way for evidence of uncontrolled disposal or presence of regulated hazardous materials or wastes. The primary objective of this survey is to evaluate available site records (Part I) and to test selective soil locations (Part II) for possible contamination. Due to the nature of hazardous material contamination and the limitations of selective field testing, this survey cannot guarantee or assure that contamination will be located. This review will, however, serve as an appropriate inquiry into the use of these parcels in accordance with the Superfund Amendments Reauthorization Act (SARA) Section 107(b)(3), which is that section of the Superfund law that addresses standards of appropriate inquiry and due diligence for property owners in investigations of environmental liability. The elements of this review will cover both Part I and Part II of a due diligence investigation and are composed of five tasks as described below. 1002152Cq.SEAl28 7n/92 2-28 l I-82/Yakima Avenue Records Review CH2M HILL will obtain and review records of ownership from the Yakima County Assessors Office. The purpose of this review is to identify, wherever documented and evident from records of previous land ownership, the possible production, use, or disposal of hazardous substances. For parcels that may require further scrutiny, CH2M HILL will also contact current parcel property owners or other knowl- edgeable individuals to attempt to identify and further investigate possible past practices of concern. The results of this task will be evaluated to determine if any parcels are recommended for further investigation. This will include possible intrusive site characterization consisting of soil testing as out- lined under Sampling. CH2M HILL will review up to 30 parcels. CH2M HILL will also perform up to 4 chain -of -title searches from title companies in the event County records are not comprehensive. Regulatory and Land Use Agency Records Search In this task, CH2M HILL will continue the property records review of the project area by reviewing federal, state, and local government records. These records include: • EPA Region 10 CERCLIS Data Base • Ecology's Toxics Cleanup Program (MTCA) Site Inventories • City of Yakima and Yakima County Public Works Departments • Yakima County Health Department • Washington State Department of Transportation—Highway Spill Incident Logs In addition, CH2M HILL will obtain, if available, current and historic aerial photographs of the project area from the Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Washington State Department of Transportation, and local county and city governments. CH2M HILL will also contact a representative from Ecology's Central Regional Office to determine if they have any information concerning the project area that may be relevant to this investigation. Drive -By Site Reconnaissance CH2M HILL will perform a drive-by site reconnaissance of the project area to verify information ob- tained in the first two tasks and to identify any new issues/areas that may be of concern. Enclosure D presents our initial summary of parcels. This summary will be modified and expanded to include the parcels in the project's right-of-way. This task will also be used to identify areas that may benefit from the additional inspection of soil sampling. Sampling CH2M HILL proposes to complete up to four (4) soil boreholes in the project area using a hollow -stem auger drilling rig. The purpose of the boreholes will be to collect soil samples and have them analy- tically tested for contaminants -of -concern in order to further assess the possibility that regulated hazard- ous substances may be present. The location of the boreholes and precise type of contaminant to be characterized cannot be predicted until the first three tasks are completed. Up to 15 soil samples will be tested using various analytical methods. 1002152Cq.SEA29 7/7/92 2-29 I-82/Yakima Avenue Before CH2M HILL commences any field investigation work, a more detailed scope and level of effort will be prepared for the City of Yakima's review and approval. At minimum, however, the sampling field effort will include: • Preparation of a Health and Safety Plan in accordance with OSHA and WISHA requirements. • Preparation of a Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) that will specifically document field methods and procedures to be undertaken. This plan will involve a professional chem- ist and statistician to optimize study objectives. • Drilling • Laboratory analysis Summary Memorandum CH2M HILL will prepare a summary memorandum and submit it to the City of Yakima. The memo- randum will be submitted within 10 working days from receipt of analytical results (noted under Sampling). The memorandum will document the findings, including records review, interview, field reconnaissance and analytical results. Analytical results will be evaluated by a professional chemist to validate results and compare them to appropriate regulatory standards including WAC 173-303 (Wash- ington Dangerous Waste Regulations) and WAC 173-340 (Model Toxics Control Act—Reporting and Cleanup Levels). Task 7 Optional Services This task provides optional services required to complete the project, which are not otherwise included in this scope of work. As an example, the City may request the Consultant to assist in preparing grant applications to secure additional funding for the project. All optional services performed under this task must be authorized in writing by the City. 1002152Cq.SEA 1002152Cq.SEA/30 7/7/92 2-30 Th I-82/Yakima Avenue OtteAftrry' 10021536q.SEA 10021536q.SEA/1 7/6/92 3-1 11, ..:•:40010iitaN4 . . . . . . .. •amu:,cow mom ........................ .................. **e s 10021538q.SEA/1 7/6/92 4-1 I-82/Yakima Avenue cirt alio= strurng ctIO nimnl'44* end7tiG .. .. , .. 10..0400 :40# 'iitga pat „•00:0001t .1:44.50 thiOati-OVRO .citt /04 .00.4 10021538q.SEA/2 7/6/92 ee 4-2 msPondi evie I-82/Yakima Avenue 10021539q.SEA 10021539q.SEA/1 7/6/92 5-1 RUN DATE: 7/7/92 RUN TIME: 4:19 PM CH2M HILL :SUMMARY SHEET CONSULTANTFEE:DETERMINATION _. <CITY OF YAKIMA F#1/YAIQMA AVENtUE. :Preliminary Design and Enviionfnentat Assessment Phase:2 . ... CH2M. HILL FILE: C:\EXCELIFILESJ.82WHASE2.XLSS DATE:. :717192 SEA 685.15 1. Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 1992 Average Hourly Raw Labor Class Role Hours Rate Cost Rate E7 PM/Sr. Reviewer 1,353 $41.57 $56,244 E6 Task Lead Engineer 422 $34.95 $14,738 E5 Lead Engineer 1,764 $30.52 $53,849 E4 Lead Engineer 373 $26.84 $10,008 E3 Design Engineer 1,860 $23.19 $38,484 E2 Design Engineer 696 $20.99 $14,617 El Designer 3,043 $18.88 $57,459 T4 Lead Design Tech. 1,928 $20.37 $39,235 T3 Lead Drafting Tech. 300 $17.89 $5,363 T2 Design/Draft Tech. 1,044 $15.27 $15,939 OA Technical Assistant 1,131 $12.15 $13,736 2. Total Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 13,711 $319,670 $23.31 3. Overhead Cost (OH) - Including Salary Additives (Based upon Federal audit) (DSC) 168.00% $537,046 Subtotal $856,716 . Fixed Fee (DSC) 27.00% $86,311 5. Reimbursables CH2M HILL $171,289 6. Subconsuttants Costs MBE WBE OTHER TOTALS HLA 15.62% $233,989 SHIMONO 3.40% $50,926 CHSTAFF 3.07% $46,015 L ACOUSTICS, INC. 0.54% $8,043 ETS 1.31% $19,669 SUB 6 0.00% SO SUB 7 0.00% $0 Totals 4.71% 3.07% 16.16% $358,642 $70,594 $46,015 $242,032 7. Escalation Costs (1992 to 1993) $25,134 8. TOTAL .$1,498,092 9. Management Reserve Fund $73,298 10: GRAND TOTAL '.Estimated Fee $1,571,390 NOTES: PER A. Escalation factors: DIEM 1993 labor rates over 1992: 6,00% I. YES YES Current work planned for 1993: 44.42% Salary escalation factor: 2.67% Includes fixed fee noted above: 10.07% B. Other factors: Overhead: 168.00% Fixed fee on DSC: 27.00% Labor 100.00% Multiplier 295.00% Page: 1 011 EN<<.osvRE A PAGE/ WKS P. C:\EXCEL\FILESV-821PHASE2XLW FLE: C:\EXCELTFLES\J-82THASE2.XLS DATE: 07 -Jul -92 SEA 685.15 HOUR , LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OFYAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Preiminary Design and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 ErvcLocI,2C 4 PACe 3 TASK TASK DESCRIPTION CH2MHILL. ISHIMONO JGLACOUSTICS,INC, SUB 8- PROJECT TOTALS PERCENT HOURS LABOR AND: EXPENSES HOURS: LABOR AND EXPENSES I I HOURS LABOR AND EXPENSES HOURS LABOR AND EXPENSES +LOURS LABOR AND: : EXPENSES: HOURS - LABOR . ANO EXPENSES HOURS LABOR AND EXPENSES HOURS: .LABOR AND EXPENSES HOURS LABOR AND: EXPENSES :OF TOTAL HOURS 2__....._... • 3 4 5 PROJECT&SANAGEMENT 1,450 404 868 200 839 -9,953 5132,139 $42,712 - 590 616 $15,5591 568.345 5764.952 0 36 238 0 •_- -82 3,441 --- 50 - 53,294 $19.561 0..__.._ 0 .-. 0 0 0 0 0 0 77 0 0 0 $132,139 $48,006 $110,177 515,559 $91,017 51,071,056 72% 22% 5.51 1.0% 5.3% 78.9°6 0..._.__..__.0..._ 5 ....____0....- $0 $0 50 50 0 50 0 $0 1,450 QUALITY CONTROL SENIOR REVIEW COMMUNITY RELATIONS VC JUSTIRCATION REPORT ENV1RON. ASSESSMENT 50 50 50 0 50 0 50 440 50 $0 $0 0 0 50 0 50 0 50 1,102 50 56,642 5199,541 0 50 0 50 $0 $0 0 50' 0 50 200 77 783 57.987 0 50 58,043 0 618 50 0 53 0 50 1,076 - -- PRELIMINARY DESIGN 542.479 1,157 $44.897 50 $19,187 0 50 0 50 15,951 SUBTOTAL HOURS '4. OF TOTAL HOURS 13,711 67.3% 5-1:114,..i...133,795 18.8% .5229,038 881 4.31 550,466 m1,157 5,7% 544,897 77 0.4% 58,043 618 3.1% 419,187 , 0 0.0% $0 0- 0.0% $0 , 20,219 100,0% 51,465,954 100.0 7 tMASTER-- 573298 $25,135 $64._-._._.._ $1,212, r 3,495 13.6I% OPTIONALSERVICES SALARY ESCALATION $0 54,9471$459 50 so 77 0.4% so $0 - 50 5o 50 _ -. 20,219 T00.0% $73,298 532,143 $o.....__-.-.... 41,$71,395 100.0% $1,122 - $480 . So 419,667. 50 50 --$o 13, 11 67.3% .Sol So 5o $o'. 48,043 .- _--_-$u ...-... 4233,985 861 4.3% $S0` �! 1 5.7% 446,019 618 3.1'6 $0: TOTAL HOURS % OF TOTAL HOURS ESTIMATED HOURLY LABOR RATE (19921 LABOR PLUS OVERHEAD WKSP• CSD(CEL\FILES\1-821PHASE2 XLW FILE C.S1(CELFILESSIASPHASE2XLS DATE. 074/1-92 SEA 685.15 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OF YAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Design and Environmental Amassment Phase 2 Et✓c4!osU/e - A PA 6 q PHASE SUMMARY PER SHEET ANALYSIS TASK PROJECT SUMMARY -CH2M HILL 4 iyh ANALYSIS _ -- - - 'CH2M HILI.. -BY GRADE ':PERCENT .... TOTAL. OF' TOTAL .TOTAL TOTAL. TOTAL L5BOR & EXPENSES 13aw NO: •HOURS COST. PERCENT " • TASK DESCRIPTION :HOURS t7 E6 ES E4 E3 E2 Et T4 T3 T2' OA TASK: TOTAL. LABOR -HOURS HOURS COSTS EXPENSE LABOR AND COSTS EXPENSES 5992 5993,1994. SHEET. CF- •PER PER co'MPAHTS: SHEET SHEET -OF TASK COMMENTS TASK S - ';PRMIECT MANAGEMENTo 1111--..._.__. -10 S120,954 S t t 185 9132 1990 S52.BS3 579,28350 so Prgaq Management ni 500 400 150 ._.-1111-- 4 00 _-- --.. _...-. 1.450 6% _-_._._- ___. 0 6% -'- --_ 0 i0 .__• •0 0 0% -- -1111-'-1111- - >. ... _ .=-_._... .--. .-. - ... .-- : --'-__...-""- - ." -- -' -� _. 0... 40 SO 0 -PROJECT MANAGEMENT SUBTOTAL 500 i 0 400 1 u 0 150 0 i _ 0 0 400 1 450 106% 5120.954 511 .95 St32.139 552956 5792831 0 1000% =QUSLITYREVIEW 2CONTROL SENIOR _. .-_.._....._--'--.._.__.._.�... 284042 a 4588 006 940S 946 518 402 7 604 0 100 0°�, 1000 .- .-__.____.-_ dtailty Control Senior Review ...._ 144 - 96 ...._. 104 ... 32.-- -..__.... .-'( �-- _-'- -.._."'1911 • -"--'-.-_ ...... -_ : ._._-..111'1 --'_-- -'-- 0 0% 50 53 10 � 0 00 .._-. c0 0 0 _.-'- 0 SO 0,A "OC SE NIOR REVIEW SUBTOTAL 4eo 104 1 0 T 0 0 _ 0 I 0 28 404 29% 940458 55548 546006 St8402 527.041 0 1030% .._. ._...._.. .-.- 3 •CO-N.0UNI 1Y RE LA T1CN5 - 0 SO 21°6 18 567 S24 334 419 467 Sa 867 0 0 22.3%.._._. SLedng Committee Maettnga 98 24-'-.-_- 8 - 186 ,5 , _: _. ._0 -'SO .._._ .--'----_.-----'----- ... ._. ."_ . .- - ...__.-......-111'1 - ._22 ...:. .....6 _... ._. 1.911---11 '--. _._-___._.__..< 11---'--'-" . S S -_ X18 4.8SO 36SO S980 Ciaeounca d Count Commission Ea1.11n . 16._,. ._-......_,"_._._.__.. .._.. ._. ._-_...__-.____.".- 11'1'1'-'-- 1111-" -- ._ O6%52.634 663 54 0 0 0 0 44% 60 so 58.9350 -OS3 Speeta[irttet•st Grouts . ._ "_. ._. E6 __-___ti . - - - - . .v ... .i. -_---'--o'--'-'-00% - 0 0 O --•__100% rDe6 Heartnga :: -: : - : . J .. 6 - -- 164 1 2% 513 000 SS<"•9 918 <"98 ..-0 . ..____46%.._._. ._-____._-.-. .--.. 994055 Pnasctinfomtatlon 44 ......_.- . __. i.._...._.�.6 .._.-..-_._._.._._.._..-._ ...._'-_ -- -_ .-_._..-_.. _ 0 �__SO 51.060 ._._.y70 42 69 9-50 SS OSO.. . ._" ..._.. .._...._..-._.-.....__. OfRti,f Halling LW „ --. --__ - ._-_....._- 1,,,.........��.�.,,....�.:. :__....-'-' .. .�. rr . 72 1 - _�.... 2 0 5% _ _ _ __.__"- - -- -..- - - "--._... ._._ _... ._. ._____..'-'-'-- 00% SJ.3"8 .__ 50.. ... ...¢.p .. � 0 --Q"--Sp _.---00°A '----..____..__..---._..-'--- aic -......_. _...•.•.1.1.1..2.,. 7nibmaFle4ea --" .:..._. t .... ... ....:Li.... _ _ __..._..__.. • i:.� .... ... 52.4015602 5.3 003 52,402 5601 0 0 0 SO 2.7% es. MadIa RN•acg1 2 6 _...._..__-_..;.-'-'-"...._..._...- ! 3 : ..._-1111' _---__.--'._.__... --- 1111-- --- ....-1'111' - -..1.111 --106 51.132 S804B 16.438 51610 0 0 0 SO 73% .. __. ....----- Ptt>}ed Nerrsisn•rs ..-_..... ._...._.-_...._..._..---'. 12 i 6 18 _ 56 ;-__6^ --._.- !_ 3• - 07% 56,916 ._-- - - ._ _..._._-._._.-."..1119 '_-* 0 SO 5.2% _ 6 32 I i 6 64 O S% 54,636 5.1 048 55684 5.4 547 St 137 0 0 Plojld Fact Sheets ---•-"--'--" 10 '---------111'1'• ; t0 - ' -' t 1 28 0 2% S2 499 5957 S3 356 S2 685 5671 0 0 0 50 3.0% Oficial Hearing Notles 8 3 i• 8 1111 -•-• - ' ��37 5589 0 0 0 SO 2 7% •_._ T "• ^- • i 8 t 22 4 0-3% 42,364 5581 52,945 22.356 Sid. rof sot Dl sPlaya ProfPUMIct 2 1 : {- jf O2% S2.386 5581 52967 52.374 5593 0 0 SO 2.7% ... "_ . 6F lePr•saraatlunMaterials 10 : ' I 14 4 30 _- _ _0_ 71% --_-2 .--.! { 10 f 13 I 35 0-3% 52.758 55018 57.777 56222 51,555 0 0 0 SO yip 12 : 1 j 0 1% 5750 57 445 59.195 50.556 51.639 0 0 0 SO 7 4% --- -Mai � 2 1 4 1 5 11 SO 0 0 0 SO 0 0% ••. •--•••-••^•• •.•• •^•---•^••-.....• --••...- I-' 0 0 0% SO SO SO SO 1000% '•:COM MUSOTY RELATIONS SUBTOTAL :82 25 80 0 0 35 0 _68 46 T 0 29 - 866 63% 572,174 538003 5110177 589142 5220351 0 4 - WC3t6TIFICATION REPORT 52 46 r f-16 156 1 t% 510944 S1 t 5121 5121 3 8 32 •_-•• ._.�_.. .� _._ --18• 'j•Il -_.__-• 1 56 56 SO 0 0 0 SO 22% 54404 2 5.3 53 ,_...... .1'111'---.. Ph I/CJuttlflcatlonR•Dott fil>.l1(C Juetifcatlan Report .._.__.--...__.--.__.....-.._._..___.._...___._-�.-_-....-... 2 8 I I 14 I 44 03% 17.016 SO SO 0 0 0 50 0 0% '•••••-• ••• •- 0 0 0% SO 50 SO 100 0% '"'C JUST REPORT SUBTOTAL 10 40 0 0 co' 0 0 _ 64 1 0 20 200 1 5% 513 960 51 559 51 5 559 515 559 SO 0 5 £NVRON,ASSESSMENT r 126 0 8% 510,262 55 887 516 149 516.149 10 0 0 0 SO - 100.0% -- _ _ A Ptolad OrNntatlon 18 19 7 36 18 18 18 l SO SO 0 0 0 SO 0 0% .. r i 0 0 0% SO SO SO 100 0% •"#r0lect Onerl at on Subtotal ' 9 1 18 0 1 36 18 1 18 18 1 7 0 I 0 0 126 0 9% S10 262 S5 9957 516.149 516 149 r S01 0 111_. _o..__.-.6 --...._-.-__-...- _ -30 --Tz 0 o f0 A3% --f523 8 EtaltEA _ 0 ins fi:e5s 12.3 e T 9 -•---- -31492 3o-".'-'2.7%' eeavlptlon of • 0900.0 coon 19 10 01% 81,031 8261 81,492 to- o 0---0 `--PtmoeaendNiii 10 31 8461 81492 81 452 80 0 0 0 30 2.7% •••1.1lsroirves 10 - 10 0.1% 031 820,742 8-13 658 -334 400 -834 400 80 0 0 0 80 62.0% ""1r1 cja.-_ 18 60 88 e 44 84 J00 2.235 51.803 50 0 0 0-8o 33% �._. _._ --..- •----- . 10 01% 51,031 5772 51.803 CA i'ep r and Coordlnaticii' 10 26 180 1 3% 812.595 31X97- 13,892 813.892 30 0 0 0 80 25.0% " EliArepm-ulon So'•E9 10 0 0 0 SO 00% ••---- 4 0 00% SO SO SO SO I ( 100 0% ^MA SLbotal ,3 1 122 0 I 9e- .6 44 84 56 3 0 26 52B 3 9% 538.286 5.17172 S55 458 S55 458 SO 0 C final€A •u 0 0 0 SO 100.0% EliteliteEA 0 43 0 _ 31 23 15 29 i 3-4 - 0 0 I9 ~-9 185 1 3% 513,400 S6.010 119,410 51 9.410 SO SO 0 0 0 SO 00% .:±500%£00% t 0 00% SO 53 SO 50 100 01/4 • .F.A Subot at 7 1 43 3 1 31 - 23 i 15 29 1 54 7 1 0 185 3% 513 400 550010 519 410 St9 4,0 SOI 0 1 1 0 1 ^S1VIRON"ASSSSMENT SUBTOTAL 1 '93 '? 1 155 107 1 .• 131 ' _< 3 1 0 35 839 61% 161 948 529068 591017 531017 SO ':PREU'LIINARYDE 80 0.0% E SIGN .... } .... : rr.--T�.�. -- - ••�-- 0 00X. 0 $0 0 SO 30 0 0 _0 .. .l-;--•�_-: ' "-:: - ....:F: :. {{ ..rrr.,-.,.r•r: - - .•-.Y.w+vrr,-.• - ---• 0.0% 8o to to 0 o 0 3 -- 'tattsxtuce>t .. - ---.w-:,•r w:-.--.: nvrr w.•iv.•'rr.:.rrrr.wr.vrr "-' -----•---•# rr-.•rrrrrrrrr�.�.-M-r rrrrrrrrrrr•+• r r.•.rrrrrrrrr,$•.w0 _..`:_ ._ - 0 SO 70% Y - • .... ... _ . .. " : - ____�__..._......." .. 10 ... -- 14512 $4.512 Sa•4 5.9 023 13--• 103 08% SB,a58 S 0 0 lata Collection 13 E7 72 05% 55.746 5734 S6480 53240 53.240 0 0 0 SO 51% ---T,,AKISII•Eveivaclon C. -Merl& 4 52 16 0 0 0 SO 140% 5 182 13% S16,905 S1058 417,963 58.982 58,982 Alternative -Study 17 19 142 ...-. 2.9% S29.775 S77c, S36.542 518271 518271 0 0 0 SO 28,5° ___.: Sanceotuai Desist 17 119 32 99 50 40 11 398 ' so 15.4% ..........- ... _. ._..1111'- ._-....."-" '--'..__........_...._._.__ 28 tae 11 % S13.874 S3 _ < 615 SS6 486 3psc-al Structtrat St W{aa 41 _9 : ._ .. ..-. .. -- 515 979 S8 53 0 0 0 SO 3OIaD.'uatSwnma7 4 5 42 : 16 83 o fi% - - - 0 0 0 SO 74% . _.-__......_.---5^ -•- 94 5 54 c9 S47E9 2% 12 217 51 5r S1111' � ...•--- � ...- -- - - " .-. �, • a Oran 'Structural ApperWbc t 3 _-.__....-- --_.-" r 45 ._. ..._.._.HA ....__....____�._._. 8 12 --_" 1 sSz.2e7 42.456 614743 n -'z n.3; z 1 2 o _ o o io t t.s -..-----'-• -- _-- ___- Faat Slructral Append;z naI Strums! � 7 0 32 35 170 .. -' '-0 ----3608 1111 0 0_ .....�.._.......... 1111_ _..-_--- ...._. 3% SE72 54281 52.141 52,141 43 03% S .__. .-._ 5" _ •- 10_-_5.0 ._..._._33% .-.-- -----'----- ..- `-' -- - Design Roport Input ... ._ 4 30 ._- .-._._..." ._-..__." 4 ._._-.�.._. ...._...._.....__.-_.-. -'-'1119-' '-- 5.4 678 5690 55.369 S2.E85 S2.E85 0 0 0 SO 4 Z% 1111- '-- ..1'111---- -00% -P9INminary "_ .___. Fha10•ugnPsponlnpul ...-__. _..-. �__._._. 8 ._" ...• t.3"_.._.."__...._._._.65__...._V��'%b - 0 -._.0 ._0_ FO - .-.. _..._"_".-_-_. .... '0 _...._. "_.-'3'-.... ._._.._....... _...�� _. ._. .. "_ _-- _"-____.._."- so SO SO SO SO 0 100 0% "0ructur•a Subtota .0 1 =8 990 44 28 157 0 :5 4 .1 7 - ' 25 1 358 3 935 0108, 7 99 519 339 5129.138 564 C-69 564 0691 B lOewn Report - "-- --8-�•; i --�� 251......"._.._.84 251. ._. 0 0 ....•- _.. 3 - 2 3%'--.-- Coli Upo .....-_.. 24 j,---'3o.8o 48 Z4 8 112 0 8% 36 Y6� -4 -"52659.._._._82.659 -83 .- --30 ...__ __--__- '-._..o.- 0 '16----1-6% • E4ICvuQ Lav et Doc*, al•s 'Design .- _..._..."..._..._�_. --1911!'-`-' _.-..__._."" _-- 85.3 7 Ti 30 �--_.._--- 4 . Eo 0 5% 593 947 0 _ , Repoli Liodmp "_..-.___ Praxminary Nalco" R•port qn __-1'111 '''�-..' 4 :.. 14 . . # - o. 30 30 .. __._.. ..-1 0% 10 __.-1141646.-- r - - --310.091 '-_33".016 _ f 5'.b"4s G b __.. 0 80 0 0% ___..-----_._-.. 0 o _a . -- to .__-.2..oe� .. -- z4le.tinaCarattlane ... • 22.2.2, --.-..._......... - . _.: ...,.,. ., ..:-... 10 ,. .,.,.�- ,,.,..2.29.2. 2.2.2.2.,..� � � � � - 28 !'. � ,. .2.2.2.2...,.,.,92.2.2.. 2.2.2.2.,.,..,..,",__•_.._.,. ��„ -. , „ 92 ._._-j3 SO r -r ,� ��-._..._. 6 _.._.._t GX.- 9 ._-.-y2.50• ! ' . _ 80 O 5% 120 tBSJ i 34 0 00- 3.. 00% _-._-.-___.._.-..._._ ._...... _ - - 0 o o fo i " ,.roDoca " -- - Devtsiiorts ,..",.._1:.::"'I ..,.,.,.c::,.;., ,..,,.1.,.,.,. , 1.1 ................1.,.._.4.1. 4 -, ,.,.1.,....1... ;70 ,'� 1� .�.,_1---.�. �.,. �. ",.,. .,.�. .,� . 52 ' ,il -- t • ,4.� ,�� X80 _I s% 8;z.oz6 _f 4 , 4 3i s 130 _fee i s_ .- f'&.2'i 5 '--'- '-' - '.___....__.. - --------f.662.5 32.531 12.531 ..f3 0 0 0 86 t a°a _-- .._____ __-- ._.._.. ..-'-'..._.._-_. 8 "-.. -" - i 2 ' - -- - '- 29 2 -�` A 64 D 5.Y,'- ASi 31 .f.65 3o 6 o 86 6 6% Oman Text �n -- # { 1 v---^ 6. 0 o% 30 So 33 16 0 WKSP CAFJ(CEL\FlLES\I-82\PHASE2.XLW TILE. CAM EL1FIL ES\ 1-82 \PHAS E2.XLS DATE. 0741-92 SEA 685.15 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OF YAKIMA I.82NAKIMA AVENUE FYetiminary Design and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 &, AJCL. o S U ,2 e- PA66 5 TASK i TASK DESCRIPTION' _ CH2M -flLL HOURS BY GRADE _ E7 E6 'ES - - £4 E3. E2 El T4 73 72 OA PROJECT SUMMARY PHASE SUMMARY . PER SHEETANALYSIS TISK. ANALYSIS COMMENTS f CH2MHILL TOTAL TOTAL EXPENSE •LABOR"AND COSTS EXPENSES' TPTAL LA BOA -14 EXPENSES 4Hiigh thew - NO: HOURS COST SHEET OF :PER PE+ COMP, SHTS. SHEET SHEET PERCENT TOTAL. OF TASK TOTAL. HOURS HOURS TOTAL LABOR. .: COSTS PERCENT : OF TASK 1992. ' 'j993--1994 • • #I s�y} - 8oquoncmg _--- '-'i; i4 xpentancy. .._. i 8 2 .....-_..---!-...-- 22 6 ---------'- 56 '-'---_ 22 .-.__..._..-.. ? 8 2 lib ubq •b,a5� v c:.0 a 10ou3 12.328 o , ao.oi, 11 164 36.244 '---'52,686 32,715 u 0 u a0 '---0 -._.._..--0 ----. `,-,..-.._._.__.-. 0 6". 3 4°h .-----�'4% 15°6 2.6% 2.7°% 00°h 12 2°6 i B%• _'t 8°.6 ...3.7°6 O O a 4-5'a 1 0% 1.0°h _ 2.3% 0.0% _0 4% -_-0.d% 2.3% 17% 1 1 % 50% 00% -' 0 6x, -_.___.. ---' 12 6 28 0 2% 51.691 1E37 31.164 0 3o 2 5 24 52,488 ------ �- w-Treiflc CorlirdlNins (3) "___--__.._ Pu�ilu Tidomietlon=Campaign Y,-..4.•.Y..V ... Fiindln9iie 1Irbmentc ..-�ivemint Niro --. .------... Roadway Section (01-- ----- • •--Ho1 nt±Tan8Vort1ca(104imerii-'� lakimaVC Chameiliiilari- ... -___-__f4l�ccellarienuc.F.(ariaiP ____- ' --�- N4013 iaH 4 12V)' •- iUncotriV VC •-' '' ' • Chamettmhon lldliCellaoeouc7.I'arluil7 ._. .__..1). 8VY ._.----. • Pelt Avant» '--- - ----_.. - CAS - ti` ftimilliailon- ... ___ _- ... ------- -__... - ..-.-.... __.._. _._......_�.__... -"-..'. - __... ..._-.... ..-_-. • 10 -----`--._a �..'_ a : ... 8.._..... 8 ................. 28 64 8 . _.__-_ 10 ? 4 120 0 9% 56 04% 57220 13,382 35268 512,488 56 44 -_._---..___--__---_. . .-._. -_.._._._. - -- -------------.-_^. ----_--.__...--..-__--._-_- -- -.. .---_-.-- ,-_-_-...-. . ---. ... _...__. .._.... ------ _.... ._.._.._. - _ - _,.--.-. .�.---- 12 ; 24 t2 _' 31-69 55171 52686 0'..-'_._0._.____.0_._. i0.. - 12 24 12 4 56 0.4% $3.382 S2.o47 15x29 32715 '-S4 0 0 0 30 - ----4_---- 18 ....__ 20 40 J 18 • 8 B ... 92 55.548 54 092 19640 fl20 54820 0 0 -----_- 0 50 - ....,-.-.................,,...4........ 48 220 -... 4 60_32 •-�'- ._... ...----0.7% 88 .-- O6% -- 15.289 54.•28 510017 55 009 ..,..__. 5009 S 522.384 33.326 13.319 56.754 0 9 10 $1,113 50 SO x:22.-'84 0 0 0 30 -_-.50 ....... 2-:: 32 -_.. _ 4 ......._...-_._...-_. �.-......---__... ...._... .,...._.... 8..-._..__-._-_ _ ... --•- .....-- ._-. ._. , 82 ....__ ._._. 32 468 3 4°.6 527.869 316 ^�i8 344.76'7 0 0 0 14 14 ._._...._._ : ---24 .... _ -_.._. .......,_..,. -•- ---- j ': 32 4 10 4 68 0.5% 14.012 32 640 16.652 53.326 0 0 0 SO 0 0 0 '---so .1675 _... ! 32 4 10 4 68 05% $4012 12'526 36,638 53.319 - 60 4 - 12 8 • 10 104 0 8% 3fi.231 S: <6 313.507 16.754 0 20 5. ....... t 24 - • ooh 0 172 1 3% 1 o So 30 30 --SB256 so - 18256 1,832 ----f 1 825 0 0 0 0 510,253 -;x258 315.511 0 0 0 50 0 0 0 SO 0 0 0 0 i. 4 ----••---_._..-_...._. 4 -_.. ; -.._s _.. ,- . .. - .,. 8 W:.-•___'-"' 8 18 4 .4 4 4 42 03•h 12,505 it 158 57.663 51832 --31 825 �3+ ' - 8 38 4 42 0 3% $2,505 S1 144 33.E49 ....-----..- . -1' W__:_¢• 16 - -- _ .. : 18 .� 36 _ 30 ....' 4 !^ �. .12 _ b .. r. •_ _____ .... 6 B 68 0 5% 54 095 S4 311 58.406 203 50 --X4.485 1669 -62 14.203 30 14A85 ....-.._.' .3669 5662 14,247 � 3.3158 0 14 5 5600 0 0 0 S0 ....-_-25�'� -to 0 001/4 88 O6% 30 1$.281 30 30 _-------------..-... - ......._..-'-----'-'--------.. .-._.....-. ._. - 33689 58.910 0 o __.....- 0 ---. _...0 .10 1 ! 3 ; 6 3 1 14 0 1% 1846 3492 51338 0 -...0 0_'!.0 0.-.__--30 .. ... ._ ;. XlficsNartsouc Alarld4p -.._.._ --�--�� --'.... --- 4 i i , 3 6 3 • 1 i 8 to Ot% f8.16... 3470 31.324 CA -342+7 ._..__._----------.--- - --'- ...-.. 'GAMMA e4) Siu-6ticlrltarcaciloc "--' .,•.••••. ""`-" .. --- 18 40 4 92 0 5% 14,318 34 175 38.493 0 i 4 5 _ _ 3607 f 10 24 10 1 i+ 32 0+% 13125 13 190 -58139 56.315 57.158 --X2,007...-._'-32.007 0 0 0 0 _._.O _._....._ ..._ ! 10 24 10 1 4 52 0 4% 53,125 ._- 115077 54.014 O..-10 0 - ' 'Nonnotoilzad ianaportation :..- - . Tllscsilneous 3 ---- .. •roncirt4cil6liartd Ala+n(>rnabTe lSiq�'ttrof•Wiy - ---- ; 4 • 10 .. .. --- - 8 22 24 •, 52 52 12 10 - - - - - �-- - - 4 i 4 J .._.. Z .•• - -.. 52 04% 0% 33,125 118.202 39.101 59,101 So 31 t 13. 32.822 0 0 0 30 3. So 0 0 o to '-.0 .. ._.30 -0 0 29 0 2% ..... 3.8.-_'--02'6 5.698 � 1532 ± 2. 2 --31.1 12 -32.922 --34 '-'-'--•--.-.--..-_..__-. ..-... - .. l000• ! 2 .-_..... ( 2..--�._....-..-..;.-._._6..-..._ _..__ 1 -2 _...__.._.-_.t.-.._.t3.!.__28....__.... 6 5 11.691 532 32:523 0- 0 --.- i.-.._12..___._.._.-.5�._... _._ 31691 -3+152 3$.843 0 0 b 30 16h 2 2% -'-_.'a1;.6 1% 00% ._....--_...___._._.- _. ._. 1 'i7fuhlii ... ... __.. r-1~uriiin --' I............ q .. ..... .. __..........-.. . .. .-..__.- PMaiDaslpnH+Pa+ l .... 3 6 • 12 6 29 i �£--i ._ _. ...._. ,4 1 �_-_._-a.-.... 2 25 o 2x4 31 691 36 331 13137 - SS', �2- 59.222 511.307 -31$. 55 533:23e 111 --35-654 Sb SO 54.111 58,654 -71678 �..._3�'�_.238 - SO 0 0 _ 0 36 ' ' 9+ i6 '� 141 i 9 t 0 __.._2. z2- 136 I0X 18.176 39 604 SO 0_'' 0 Sb..... _� __0 ._. ^.__ - - --_-_ 1 1 b � 32 160 1 2'� ' o 0 62 0 29.9.33'X3'i'Y.�s�._---ft3?4s 0 00% __ _ _4 _ s 0 0- 0 SO _..._..---°_._..1__--Z�.--..... , i SJ SO " Design Report Suhotal 3 1 0 240 0 690 0 1 551 486 86 0 240 3.282 239% 5196821 S1E6902 5365622 5166 192 5199.430 73 1000% C Tr•sltle Analyela Rsoort "-- ... ..+ - •�_. 6 .- _. .. ; 16 F .. I 40 .. _ :- - --- -( �. .� 16 �_- _ ...' 32 .. . . 6 . .-__.-.. d 00'4 1 16 0 BX -^ ... _ 3 - - --. .-- - o _o 0 30... 0 _ _ 0__ _ 0 _ TO 0 0 0 - 50 0---0- .....0 S0�.._ _-. o 0 0 10 _. .-------'-'----- ----- : rticTryuciieport i Ac.._. .. Anaysls f 1Ya}4c Modsllnq Trafk Analysis - ._.30 564e l �0 50 3o o 6% ..____ 8 3% 47 3% 24 8% 9 3% ---- 10 3% ._.._.__..._.___.._-...---.. ____.._____ ___. _T.. _.. S611 57 092 57092 ^- -SO SO SO 50 •_-- i 32 ' 18 i 96 1 228 96 I ' 164 32 648 4 7% 536.451 53 899 540.350 540.350 521,124 ---...----_... _ _ ^-- _ _.-__.___. _ . .....---.-._- ----- 1 52 3 124 52 I 88 t 18 .._ 6 352 2.6% ._-------. S19 818 S1 306 - 121 124 PrapanOnflTretllcMafytlsRapm-.,.._.__.. ' Final Traffic AnaiYda Airport 6 6 18 44 t 8 I -'.__...._. 32 I ____._.. 124 0 9% 56860 5969 57829 57.929 ---- i 22 52 � 32 i 6 •---• 140 10% 57,920 2808 58.828 SH.828 IO �SO 0 0 0 SO '- - 0 00% SO SO SO SO 0 0 0 SO 00% ^ SranlC Arerlycia fleport Subolat I 0 69 3 504 488 274 0 348 68 1 380 101% 577 630 57 533 585.323 585 323 S0 0 1 CO 0% D .Soils Report VT ' - 30 .. 0 0 -` 0--3o -o o% __._.--.-------. as a s soon •---.._. R'o)edneview '---'-" ...__.- .... -• 1 •- -:- ... ....-,,.::::::-' •a - 'r............. _ 8 - -- �-.......... ........ 6 o 0% to to 3o --- --- -13 01% 7835 5118 51,053 51,053 SO 0 0 0 50 2.a% • "'protect Gsoian i 8 - 4 16 01% 7955 5118 51073 51.073 SO 0 0 0 SO 2.5% 38.1% 8 6% 9 4% 57% --._-_, PlaidEzptoMlona E 6620 2 94 07% 55689 510 905 516.484 516.494 SO 0 0 0 TO Tatting '"•' 3 2 14 19 0 1% 51.295 52.424 53719 53,719 SO 0 0 0 10 _ ' En9tranlnq Analyses 2 3 49 58 0 4% 53851 52133 54.054 54 054 --_SO SO 0 -- 0 0 50 • EogNrt Ingrt0st4 1Nacommsndal1ons 1S 16 - 32 02% _ - 52258 5203 • 52.461 52,461 0 0 0 SO Corlanrualon Coraideradonc 24 16 40 0 3% 52.891 5203 53.094 53.094 SO 0 0 0 SO 7 1% ______ 8"" 4 F4, 40 24 1_24 8 114 0 81/4 57,0.53 S%ot 57.754 57.754 SO 0 0 0 So 17 9% 4 0 0% : Prepare Dr-att Soils Report • F1na•i Soils Raport- _ . ! - ----- - 32 ,- .- 24 i 8 t 52- 0 4% 53.145 2488 53.633 53.633 SO 0 0 0 SO " •.- 0 0 0% SO S3 SO SO SO 0 0 0 SO ' ^ Sofia Report Subt of 24 I 0 03 0 24.3 0 3 `-2 0 38 438 3 2% 528 072 535..s.3 543 335 543 335 S0 0 100 0% E ' drald3cc Reoort ::::.z- 8 ::-- 24 ---- _ ' 56 :-...,-• _ _ 3o 3o So So 0 0 0 - o 00% 102% 6 5% 11 2% 117% _ 21 7% . <<"8 3% not rrauucr upon bat* Ravi err HytarsuAc Cniaria _ '_ 1.00% 24 to 40 8 160 12% 59,012 192+ 59b36 59.936 SO 0 0 0 SO _..-..._• 5..-.._...-'.-;.---15 8 10 18 '• 24 ..___...._ 28 35 15 ; 25 ! 5 100 0 7% 55,632 5657 56.329 56.329 SO 0 0 o SO .___.__.-._._...-_-_. .._.. ...._. - ConuPtwl Hyriatfiics Daslgn - Hydrologic Evaluation Hyeraulle Structure Evaluation - Prwxs Craft Ftydrauncs Report ..._. 64 ._. .. 28 ! 46 t 0 10 18 24 ----.. 10 184 t 3% ---.._-.. ..----... 510313 56"6 .. 510,9+8 510,949 SO 0 0 0 10 :28 ; E8 30 -�_._..-.---•-..._._._.._....-- 49 •194 1 4% 510.927 5_`28 S11A55 511,455 SO SO 0 0 0 SO 0 - 0 0 - _SO_ _ ! 56 130 5.6 - 94 372 2 7% .-------- _. 478 3 5% 520937 S�_40 521277 Sgt 277 - _ -_-__-__- _ :2 ' 28 ..._._.... •.. -. ; 166 72 ----------'-'---'----..._._..-._....... ------•....____...__.. 2-+ t ro 726.924 5733 527 65'r 527.E57 SO ...------- 10 0 . 0 SO - .- Prallml nary Deal gn Report Input_ 8 -..,._. ... .-.....----._-..:.-.__.. .--.._. 62 •..-_. ._.._._ .-_-:--. 44 � 176 13% 0 00% 59.872 1416 510289 510,2"88 0 0 0 SO 105% . ' So So SO SO SO 0 0 0 SO Hyorau,cc fl000rt Su4otal : 3 5t ! _ 251 0 8t 249 0 417 95 1564 :21% 593617 14274 197,891 597691 501 0 t 000°h G trltsrenan., Plan for Approval: ---. ....-. 9....-...r._.. ... ._. 4 ._... .:. .-_.....--- 20 t 0 -- ----.... ._. ....1 .- _.---._- ... .-- 4 '------.._... -_ ...88 .._._....0 ._._ 66 5% 3 5 b ..30.0 ti ---.-----...._-...._.---..-. . {kelt ICPFA (2) ring ICPFA (2) ._. > --... ._._. 4e 24 4 .__8-._-. 6% 44 03% .-- 0 00% 15.289 53 405 18694 SO .._--58.694 S .__4.31 O.I 0 2 44 54347 o - ____ 93 0 .-_..0 ... 20.._ 2.150.. ._- --... 2- ------ . 52644 St ; 53 S4. 385 5�...._. - -- ----• 10 SO -' 1CPFA Subaai t 2 i - - i3 1 72 i , 12 1 32 ; % 57 933 _ _ • 46 113 07 9 SO 513 0791 4 70 0" H t3esr. Surveva and Meoptn• 20 ! 24 - .... ._. ...6 --- 6 ---. €2 : ..__-.. .---•._._... ._. __.. 1 4 . t � ...._ ...__-- • ---. '- _._.... ... ...........----..-___435 6 _. --' - ._. fi .._..- 132 .__-_3204 ...--20 6% . 36 316 31 1% ._._ _ . 00% 0% ._.....-__..._.. '----.-.. ._.___._._._. ._'-_----... ... .----'--'- .__....... ___.__..-_.._-.. MapPlnq - ._..-------".. Dutgn survey* 14101-ol•Way Sways r .- - Ms Reports ..__..... -- 224 22' 14 1 4 --_ _._.. _ ..__ .._ _._ � 1 `� .. 24 ---- 24 3 Z% 526 066 - 518 542 _- _123_:0 544 y74 544 608 528,647 550 614 144 608 - __ __ _ IO 714.324 525.307 57,730 0 - 0 -__ 0 _ IO _ .0. •0_ -....._.._... 36 �6 ...__. _ --_. .- 100 _ 0 7% 15.640 514 324 525.307• 57.7 30 0 ... -__. SO 0 _... 0 --- 0 ---... 50. ...._�_... 0 7%� SS 640 _ _ -.. _ ..-..-.--.100 _ 00% --'---- - 0 00% SO 515 459 - 715.459 _o 0_ 0 SO .. .- -_- ---- 0- 0 0 SO ' SO SO SO SO SO •.,.e,*, ww..a ane 6laoana 8ubotal 3 36 1 •. 73 : 4 .. .55 ; :6 12 635 4 b% S37 346 5)5I tit 5139.328 991 968 547 360 J 107 WKSP C1EXCEL\FILES\I-82WHASE2.XLW RLE.. C'£ (CEL\FLES\i-82WHASE2XLS DATE. s&x-92 SEA 685.15 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OF YAKIMA I-827YAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Oesisn and Envronrnental A6aaea+lront Phase 2 �N«°S '2C; A ?Ac c - - - ? TASK DESCRIPTION E7 CH2M HiLi.. HOURS 8Y GRADE 85 E5 E4' E3 E2 ET TA 13 T2 OA PROJECT SUMMARY _...___ PHASE SUMMARY - PER SHEET ANALYSIS TASK ANALYSIS COMMENTS CH2M}-ILL. :TOTAL 'TOTAL ' EXPENSE LABOR:ANO COSTS EXPENSES" TOTAL. LIBOR & EXPENSES 44119h 1�;are NO: -HOURS '0067: SHEET OF. PER PERTASK : COMP" "SHTS. 'SHEET SHEET PERCENT 'TOTAL. OF TOTAL TASK TOTAL" 'LABOR. HOURS HOURS COSTS PERCENT TASK 1992 1.993•.1994.. 1. Report/Plan 8 0 1 .-. ... ._.':--'--.._'_-__...... 24 0 - 2 ..-_'- --------' __ _ - ._64 -._ �05% 53.589 _-,S_35 6 00% _ - - - 538,981 ----. ---. _. 16-59.745 _. •. 16 59745 0 50 90 9% .--, 91°a 00% ------.._._..---------.-" __--.___-__. ._. ...-.._.__- .Atoms f OOall Access R eporl Plan (4} 4 .0.-.--.-•-.:- 0 '..__. .--.....'-. _ __ 8 _ --_._. 16__ 392 _538881 SO 0 -_- 4 ._ 0 0 "E 9final Access/Report Plan(4-...•...•. . 1000%6-..-0 :...._. .. ......................- ... .'_. -__ 1 0 __. .4 2 0 S3.539--_---53898 SO _- S3.898 -_. _80 .--...-___. -. ._......__....._..._._....-'--0 -5_359-- 0005 SO SO SO SO 0 0 ' "Accass Report/Plan 9ubotal. 0 0 4 0 9 0 26 9 0 I 18 4 70 05% 53848 539931 542.579 SO 542879 4 1600% J Design/Access Hearin. - 0 SO .---.-0 ---SO 0 SO ....-- -- - 0 SO -- --' _._ . 0 . SO 0 SO _277% ---• .._.._._.__...___.-__-. -_-_22.0%-.-.----_-_-.-- --_-- 13.8% .-- ---_.---._.._. ._-.-----..-_ 2.8°b ----'- ----' ---- --------- ._.._.. 33 6% -__-_.._.__-.---_.-_----. 00% ,Csrabined - Access Hearing •,• :...»•. .. , ........-........_.._ .-._. . _indfngs and Order Analysis- >. $fidings and Order Plan • ..».. .. .... ....._..........-..- --.._.._ Welocatlon Assistant• Information .._.. : - -. i6--_-_.-._.-- _..- ----..;... _._..... 0 00% SO 224.514 524.514 582.421 SO 524.514 ---519.398 0 0 48 ....._..-..+-----'--•--' - ..---'-------......._..._. 44 72 • 16 -----.._._. 300 - 2.2% 516.977 - - -' 0 0O% SO _519.398- - ---- SO- - 0 - 0 - 240 --'-- __104----, +--....-.._. `- _- _...._...._.-- 512319 512219 ... SO 512219 _ 0 0 -_. 0 0 -- - - 0 0 0% SO -- - -- _ _- 240 18% 529.432 0 00% Io 52.516 S2.516 -' 51- SO 42 516 -__ ;_�_.-.._. _..:-_...-.._-...,._-_.- - 529.699529 5267 . SO •699 0 ..-- _0 SO SO SO So 0 0 ' - Crxll. Den4r/Access Heann9Subotai 240 I 0 16 0 48 0 104 44 0 72 i6 540 39% 546.409 541937 488.346 SO 588,346 0 100 0% IC .104- ..ol•W- Plan._._._6.6...6.A.,..._____.....__---- _.__. 0 _.-__50 0 ._._. SO 0 SO - .. _--.._.______._....-,_--. -9.105 -.. 0 0% ' titan Right -el -Way Plan .1 final RI ghtol•Way Ptah. .....1000%...- >...-... .. .. .-.-_._._ _ • 2 0 ' 0 ... .._.... +......_..-_. 816 0 .p..._-__1..-._.. ._..__-. 8 _ _- 1 12 ` _.... 2 _..__ 1_ _. ._.0 ....-....-_.-.-5- -- -..i. .. ...-..__... 48 0.405 - 52.711 516 032 518743 - SO 518743 Si 874 SO --. 0 0 ._ 0 0 0°. 0 ...... .-._ti _._ 0 --. 2._-_. 0-O% 52715160351:874 0 0 0% SO SO _.... SO SO_ _. _-._0._......_,- SO ' -Right-of-Way Pian Subs al 0 1 0 2 0 9 1 0 18 1 9 0 13 + 2 53 0 405 52.982 517 635 520.617 SO 520.6171 0 100 0% 9. !VatsEnc4Merin9 ' 3SIw Engineering Stud} 40 .. ,...... .. .,.. ......._........,...- ..._-. ._. - TAW* Englrleerfrlg SUPS 12 q..-.. .-----_.._._ .._... ... .... I .r 12 i i i 40 03X 54,905 53.390 58285 SO 48.285 0 0 _ 0 - 0 0 SO 515% i 12 + 12 t 2 ! t 2 I 16 88 56.044 51.753 57.797 SO 17,797 0 0 48 505 -_ 1- , 1 .0 '--.__..Y.-._.-.-..--'.--.... 0 00% SO SO SO SO SO 0 0 0 SO 00% : "Value Engmeenng Subotal 52 0 12 0 12 12 0 12 12 0 16 128 0 905 510,949 55 133 516.082 SO 816.082 0 100 0% 4 IHaardoutMaterials SUrvsy .- 8 8% 4805 Records Review I i j 4 1 8 ._._. ._..._;. ._. .-.. .. 68 1 I 76 0 6% S5.285 S2.167 S7 452 SO S7 52,6666 SI 473 0_...0 0 _ SO _. . _ _. 0 -.--SO ' 0 _ 0 S 0 SO .._._.__ _. ..-__---_. ........ ... ..._..__ 1. fig., ek Land Use AOMcy RecOrdt Rtv.....lsw Aeconl cant* -Dive .17.y. n ... ..--.__.... 4 i 24 4 ! 12 8 I 52 �- 28 0 2% S1 959 5707 52.666 SO 16 01X Si 138 5335 51.473 SO ymDryng ._ ._.__._..---- " '---.._.._. t. .9mmry Memorandum ...................... 4 I 69 O SX 54 791 57730 512,521 SO S12.521 ._. 0 0 - . 41 ZX 2 0705 00X, 16 ! 32 ! 28 1 84 0605 55,859 5444 26.303 SO 56,303 SO 0 0 -_----_•__ __ 0 00% SO 50 SO SO 0 0 ' -Hazardous Mat ectals Survey SUbotat 0 1 0 12 1 40 188 0 0 =2 0 0 0 1 272 2 0% 519.032 511 393 530 415 SO I30 415 0 100 0% II " "PR EUMINARY DESIGN SUBTOTAL 739 -8 1180 I +96 486 433 :912 Z.. +90 044 618 9953 7226X. 5633538 5437519 51071056 I548778 5522.2278 81 SUBTOTAL H0UR 1,353 . - .. K OF TOTAL HOUR 9.9+4 I 422 . 1,764 373 1,660 696 3,043 1.926 3-00 1,044 1,131 .. . .+- .... .. .._._... ._. .- i 37!'. 124% I 27'G 121`4 i.l^.L 222% It." 22^.'. 7.5`9 6.2+/. 3. 13,711 100.005 1943,032 3522,922 91,465,854 6137+ 35.7`G 100.05G $014,75.1 55505 1655,2001 01 14.4X{1 7 OPTIONAL SERVICES 0 _ 1000% OOX Op(onal Services.. ts. -SOOX . _I. 0 0 1.0 0 0 0 0 o !. 0 0 0 0 OOX SO SO 573,298 540.738 532.560 0 0 0 0 0 SO 0 SO 1. 00% 50 SO SO SO SO ' -OPTIONAL SERVICES SUBTOTAL 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 00% SO SJ 573298 540738 532 5601 0 1600.6 SALARY ESCALATION 0 0 _.__.._.._.... ... .-.._" -- . S�ryEscalation 2-67% 0 .•_.. ..........-.... ....................... .._-__-...... 1. 0 0 1 ----_-+.. i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OOX 525.135 57008 532.143 532.143 SO 0 0 0 SO 100.0% 0 0" SO 50 SO 0 45 SO 0 0 0 0 SO 0 0% ' "SALARY ESC. SUBTOTAL I 0 0 1 0 0 I 0 0 1 - 0 I] 0 0 00% 525135 S- _•:8 532.143 832143 SO 1 0 100 0°6 "MASTER • 0 -"--'--'' -: 1' - _ _ ._ ._ -- o 0% 0 o 0 [ 0 0 0 0 0 - - 0 00% SO SO IO SO S0, 0 0 o SO Fed Fite 000% 00 --' 0005 - - -' 0 0005 so So SO SO SO 0 0 0 SO _ - -MASTER SUBTOTAL -n-00% ' 0 v 0 1 0 0 I 3 ( 3 0 SO r3 SO 0 _ 50 SO1 0 ]0h TOTAL n06]n 1,333 K OF TOTAL HOUR 9 87!4 1 422 1,7€4 373 5 1,660 } e96 3,013 1, rib 300 1,644 1,13f , 3.08. 1201+: 1 2.72". 12t0^G r S.OSY. 2220"1 I-••1iGS�G 2 53;711 100.6+» 39 61 3329,935 11,571.395- 61.6% 4887,630 6693,764 al 11180R PWSOVERHEAD � 2.95 312263 53052317.84 315.27 R 31215 .. - ..,........3 .... ...+•..... 1 P ....:........ .....''-'1 ..___.._.-+..,,..3...?..._.-j , . t 5108.10 390,03 � 379.18 168.A7 r 36t_92 35570 � 360.07 33278 ('��345.05 333.84 _ MULTIPLIER 295 WKSP: C:\EXCEL\FILES\1-821PHASE2XLW FILE. C:\E(CEL RLES\I-82\PHASE2.XLS DATE 07 -Jul -92 SEA 685.15 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OF YAKIMA I-82fYAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 TASK TASK DESCRIPTION HLA. }TOURS BYGRADE. PR RE. PE SET ET RLS RS :SPC ST WPT PROJECT SUMMARY TOTAL TASK HOURS: -PERCENT OF 'TOTAL HOURS TOTAL. LABOR COSTS' TOTAL. .EXPENSE COSTS .TOTAL -LABOR AND EXPENSES' 1 2 3 4 5 6 'PRELIMINARYDESlGN PROJECT MANAGEMENT_ _ ?QUALITY CONTROL SENIOR REVIEW COMMUNFEY RELATIONS _.._.. GC JUSTIFICATION REPORT_ ENVIRON. ASSESSMENT - _ -_ - �...__.... ___ 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 E 0 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 36 0 0 0~ 0 0 • 0 1 0 i 0-; 0 '•: 0 36 0.9% $3,044 $250 $1,535 $3294 $19,561 50 56,642 182 74 0 0 0 0 0 TO 0 0 236 62% $18,026 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i 0 0 n.0% $0 $0 47 235 35 - - 750 0 - - - 0 0 0 0 . 0 +-- 0 0 - 470 0 r x54 . j _0 12 - i 0 82 22% 56,036 5606 919 -- - 0 -....._ 900 + ; 0 3,441 90 7% 5170,793 528,748 5199,541 SUBTOTAL HOURS HOURS 'S OF TOTAL HOURS' 480 859 0 919 0 12.7% 22.5" I 0.0'5 T 24.2%- I 0.0% 900 i 0 23.7% 0.0'0 470 124% 154- 4.1% 12 0.3, 0 A 3,795 0.0',I,- 100.0% 5197,899 86.41,S $31,139 136, .5229,03E 100.0•' 7 - OPTIONAL.SERVICES SALARY ESCALATIONS--� MASTER - 0.00% J i So $o $0 $4,947 2.50% I $4,947 50 0.00% r ? C SO $0 $0 TOTAL HOUR HOURS '6 OF TOTAL HOUR 480 1 859 1 0 1 919470 ------ - 1 0 900 0 - 1-2,65 / 22 63'6 O.Do'o 24,22% I 0.04)% T 23.73'6 ? 0.00'. 154 t212.40%4.08'6 12 0 022% i- 0.00%-1 3,795 100.0% 5202,846 86,7% 531,139 133'0 5233,985 700:0'0 ESTIMATED HOURLY LABOR RATE 0992) LABOR PLUS OVERHEAD 2.93 528.90-1-420.00 516.00 $_13.00_ 58455 558.91 1 546.81 538.03 511,00 -^: -132.18 518.00 ;..$18.00 i 552.66 1 552.66 1. $14.00 340.961: 511.00 : 532.18 1: 513.00 i.. 50.00_ MULTIPLIEA 338.03 i 50.00 283: WKSP: C:\EXCEL\FILESV-82\PHASE2-XLW FILE C:\IXCEL\FILES\I-82\PHASE2.XLS DATE 07 -Jul -92 SEA 685.15 SUB 2 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE • CITY OF YAKIMA 1-8,2/YAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 TASK TASK DESCRIPTION P!C P2. P1 CADD DS. SHIM ONO HOURSBY GRADE. AD PROJECT SUMMARY :PERCENT- PERCENTHOURS TOTAL OF TASK TOTAL HOURS HOURS TOTAL. LABOR COSTS TOTAL. EXPENSE COSTS TOTAL LABOR AND EXPENSES 1 2 3 _.• •.-• 4�-- 5 _ 6 -- PROJECT MANAGEMENT 'QUALITY CONTROL SENIOR REVIEW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 i 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i 0 0 t 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,987 $42,479 COMMUNITY RELATIONS VCJUSTIFICATIONREPORT ENVIRON.ASSESSMENT - PRELIMINARY DESIGN114 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 77 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i 0 77 9 0% *7,247 $740 546 0 0 53 70 1 0 0 i 0 0 1 0 783 910°6 538,629 $3,850 SUBTOTAL. HOURS1 HOURS •6 OF TOTAL HOUR 94 192 22.3% 546 i0 634% I 0.0% 0 j 53 0.0.4 I 8.1% 70 82% 0 4 0.0'0 0.0% - 0. 0 0.0%, 0.0% 0 0.0V 861 100.0% 345,876 90.9% 54,590 9.1% $50,466 100.0% 7 OPTIONAL SERVICES SALARY ESCALATION 'MASTER.----- " 0.00°6 . i i : $0 $0 $0 $459 $0 1.00% 0.00% I 1 I $459 $0 1 I i I 1 i $0 $0 TOTAL HOUR HOURS :6 OF TOTAL HOUR 192 1 5460 0 s - 22.29% T 63,40% t 0.00% -1'i 0A0r 6.14% 70 8.18% o a 0.00% - 0.00% 1 4 Q 0.00% - 0.00% j 0 4.00% $611 100.0% 446,335 • 914r% $4,590 9.0% $50,925 100.01 ESTIMATED HOURLY LABOR RATE (1992) LABOR PLUS OVERHEAD 2.68 $35.00 $17.00 511.00 393.63' $49.48 1 $29.43 $16.00$10.00 $42.80 I 526.75 $9.00 524.08 .1.4$0.00 i $0.00 1 $0.00 ;. 5000 ?. 1 50.00 50.00 $0M0 1 $0.00 . 1. 30.00 $0.00 .pMW-11PLIER 2,68 WKSP: C:\EXCEL\FILESV-82\PHASE2.XLW FRE C:\EXCEL\FILES\I-82\PHASE2.XLS DATE. 07-Ju1-92 SEA 685.15 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CRY OFYAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 TASK TASK DESCRIPTION SG SPC JG PDT CADD TECHSTAFF ?TOURS BY GRADE. 1P RC PROJECT SUMMARY TOTAL TASK HOURS: PERCENT OF TOTAL _HOURS TOTAL. -LABOR COSTS: TOTAL. EXPENSE: COSTS: TOTAL :LABOR AND EXPENSES PROJECT MANAGEMENT0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ! 0 _� 0 0 i 0 0.0% $0 $0 $O $0 $0 $0 2 3 'QUALITY CONTROL SENIOR REVIEW -COMMUNITY RELATIONS 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 1 0 i 0 I 0 i 0 1 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 j 0 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 ;4 0 0 0 0 0 0 j 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 _VCJUSTIFICATIONREPORT :5 ENVIRON. ASSESSMENT . IPRELIMINARY DESIGN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t 0 1 0 j 0 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 $44,897 16 0 1,157 0 0 i 0 i 0 i 0 0 0 1,157 100.0% $44,897 $0 SUBTOTAL HOURS '0 OF TOTAL HOURS HOURS 0 ..._... 0.0'0 0 0 1,157 0- - 0.0•b I 0.0'n ]00.0'a0% 0.0'6 0 = - ._..-. 0.0* ti .. 0 0.0',0 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0.0',0 1,157 100.0'. 344,897 400.0% 40. 0.0% $44,897 100.0• $0 $1,122 $0 OPTIONAL SERVICES 0 00% j $0 $0 SALARY ESCALATION MASTER 2.50% i t I j i $1,122 $0 0.00% I I 1 ! $0 $0 TOTAL HOUR % OF TOTAL HOUR HOURS 0 0.00.6 0 0 1,157 4 0.00% I 0.00% 100.00 % I 0,00% 0 0_00'0 . 0 O.oO% . 0 0 0 0 0.00% 1 0.00% - 0_00'0 0.00% 1,167 1o0.0%e $46,01G -100.0% 40446,019 0A o . 100.0'' ESTIMATED HOURLY LABOR RATE (1992)535.00 LABOR PLUS OVERHEAD 1.55 55433 $30.00 0 54857 1 525.00 525_0 338.81 5388 1 52 5.00 $3 88-1 -� $20.00 1 531.05 .i 415.00 1 50.00 1.,,50.00 1 1323.28' i $0.00 }: $0A0 1 50.00 i. .$0_00 30_00 1: 3o AO MULTIPLIER 1.55 WKSP: C:\EXCEL\FILESV-82\PHASE2.XLW FILE C•\EXCEL\FILESV-82\PHASE2.XLS DATE. 07 -Jul -92 SEA 685.15 SUB 4 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OFYAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 TASK TASK DESCRIPTION - SGL cous-rlcs, INC. HOURS BYGRADE. SE. PROJECT SUMMARY .PERCENT TOTAL OF TASK" 'TOTAL HOURS: HOURS TOTAL. LABOR- COSTS: TOTAL. EXPENSE 'COSTS: 'TOTAL :LABOR AND EXPENSES 1 2 3 YCOMMUNITY 4 5 6 _ _PROJECTMANAGEMENT '. . QUALITY CONTROL SENIOR REVIEW 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 00 -� 0 0 0.0% $0 SO $0 RELATIONS VC -JUSTIFICATION REPORT _ •' ENVIRON. ASSESSMENT TPRELIMINARY DESIGN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,043 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $690 77 0 0 0 0 0 0 € 0 0µ • 0 0 0 0 77 100.0% 37,353 0 0 0 0 01 0 i 0 0 0 0 0.0% $0 50 $0 SUBTOTAL HOURS HOURS '6 OF TOTAL HOURS 77 6.7%. 0 1 0 0.0'6 0.0% i 0 _ 0 II 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% ="' a 0.0% 0 4 O n 0 OA'0 1. 0 n o 77 100.0% 57,353 91.450 $690. $,6'0 .$3,043 100.0Sa i OD" 7 • - -. OPTIONAL SERVICES 0.00% -+ $0 50 50 SALARY ESCALATION 0.00% $0 50 50 MASTER0.00 % $0 50 50 TOTAL. HOURS HOURS '6 OF TOTAL HOURS 100.00, o o 0 0 a a 0 a a t 0.00% '-0.0056 o.(o0'L t 0,00 % 0.00'0 0.00': 0.00'., 000/." ' o.0056 5 77 10x0% 0.00:.1 $7,353 91;4 % $690 L6% $8,043 100:0%1 ESTIMATED HOURLY LABOR RATE (1992) LABOR PLUS OVERHEAD _'• $95.00 so 00 $o. -- $95.00 f 50.00 5.00 ] 50.00 $O.00 $o oo. 50,00 ; . Sa o0 50,00 i$0.00. -50.00 50.00 I: 50.00 Sa.00- I: $0.00 '• .saw ' I SO.00 "MULTIPLIER 5a.o0 1.00. 1.00 $0.00 f EiVCLosuf.0 A PAGE /0 WKSP• C:\EXCEL\FLESV-82\PHASE2XLW FILE: C:\EXCEL\FlLES1-82\PHASE2.XLS DATE 07 -Jul -92 SEA 685.15 SUB 5 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OF YAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 TASK 'TASK DESCRIPTION - • :ETS HOURS-BY'GRADE. PM TA CADD DRFT FT TCF PROJECT SUMMARY PERCENT TOTAL OF TASK 'TOTAL HOURS HOURS TOTAL. LABOR COSTS: TOTAL. EXPENSE- 'COSTS' :TOTAL :LABOR AND EXPENSES: 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT '•.QUALITY CONTROLSENIORREVIEW 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 i 0 0 •0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 •: 0 0 0-0 -0 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 50 50 $0 50 $0 50 COMMUNITY RELATIONS - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ra VC JUSTIFICATION AEPORT0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 ENVIRON. ASSESSMENT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 )-0% $0 $0 $0 $19,187 6 1PRELIMINARYDESIGN 0 0 218 0 400 0 0 i 0 0_� 0 1 0 618 100.0% 519,187 50 SUBTOTAL. HOUR '% OF TOTAL HOUR HOURS 0218 0-0'4 i 0 _ I 0.0% 18.8% 0 400 0 1.. 0.0% ( 24.6% 0.0% : 0. 0.0% _ 0 0.0'•0 0 0.0•,0 0 0 0.0% 0.0'0 _ ---.y 618 100.0.6 519;187 '100.0;'. .. $0. 0.0% 519,187 100.0% 7 OPTIONAL SERVICES 0 00% i $0 $0 50 SALARY ESCALATION 2.50% 1 i 5480 50 5480 MASTER 0.00% I 50 $0 $0 TOTAL. HOU :% OF TOTAL HOU HOURS 0. 1 0.00% 0 21810 400 0 T 0.00% r 3523% o.00N, t 64.77% - 0.00.0 • 0 0 .0.00%. -`: 0.00 . : 0 0 0 0.00'4 ' 0.00;0 `- ,"0.00% 618 100.0% iMULTIPLIER $19,657 100.0% $0 0:0%0 419,667 100.0% ,ESTIMATED HOURLY LABOR RATE (1092) LABOR PLUS OVERHEAD _ 2.51 517.00 547.77 $15.00 542.15 573.00 536.53 $1000 i 528.10 I 510.00 ;.57200 i- 528.10 1' 533.72 1• 50.00 '•: 5000. 1 $0.00 • 50.00 50.00 ; 50.00 ;. 50.00- $0.00 =' 50.00 1: $0.00- 281 Minority/Women's Business Participation The City of Yakima's Minority and Women's Business participation goals of 10 percent will be met for this project. Due to the specialized nature of the work in Phase I, MBE participation was 1.74 percent and WBE participation was 1.41 percent, for a combined total of 3.15 percent. MBE and WBE subconsultant participation will be increased in Phase II, as shown in Table A, in order to achieve the overall City of Yakima goal of 10 percent. At the time of execution of Supplement #1, a subconsultant had not been selected for a portion of the M/WBE work. As soon as a subconsultant has been selected for the undesignated work, approval will be obtained from the City. Table A Yakima Avenue Interchange/I-82 And Fair Avenue Minority/Women's Business Participation Firm Role Percent of Participation Phase I Phase II Total MBE Shimono Landscape, Pedestrian 1.74 3.40 3.1 ETS Drafting/Document Production 0.00 1.31 1.1 WBE Techstaff Design, Drafting 1.41 3.07 2.8 Undesignated 0 3.50 3.0 TOTALS 3.15 11.28 10.0 nt/dt004/gatesup2 M/WBE SUMMARY ENCLOSURE B RUN DATE: 7/7/92 TIME: 4:57 PM WKSP: C:\EXCEL\FILESU-821PHASE2.XLW FILE: C:IEXCEL\FILESU-821PH2EXP.XLS DATE: 7 -Jul -92 SEA 685.15 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSE BREAKDOWN CITY OF YAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 EXPENSES Computer $83,154 Printing $17,364 Word Processing $9,981 Equipment Rental $8,650 Air Travel $1,400 Auto Mileage @ $0.275/mile $6,529 Meals/Lodging $3,210 a Telephone $1,779 Supplies $4,340 Temporary Help $34,882 Subconsultants $358,639 TOTAL $529,927 Page 1 of 1 Eivc[.osoRe PA 6,,C Project Schedule ykmsch Yakima Gateway Project _ Phase II Task Project Management Quality Control Community Relations I/C Justification Rpt. EA Preliminary Design Survey/Mapping Structural Apndx. Traffic Report Soils Report Hydraulics Rep Design Report AccRp&FON PI Scope Phase 111 1992 1993 JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAYS. UN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOViDEC � i i i 1 DES/_A HRG 1 * DRAFT FINAL D FINA_ RiW I t 1 DRAFT ACC.RPT A.HRG PL, F&O i11 1 1 1 ENCLOSURE B PROJECT SCHEDULE PHASE H I-82/Yakima Avenue Enclosure C Proposed Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing Programs for Yakima Avenue/I-82 Interchange Area and Fair Avenue Boring Layout Ten borings are proposed for the Yakima Avenue/I-82 Interchange project. The number of borings will meet requirements for both the DR and PS&E phase of the project. Drilling can be completed for both phases since a final alternative will have been selected before the field program is initiated. The benefit of combining the DR and PS&E-related field work is that field costs, such as mobilization, can be reduced. Proposed drilling locations for the borings are shown in Figure 1 of Enclosure C. Final locations for the borings will be selected once the alignment selection is finalized. The proposed boring locations were selected to satisfy WSDOT/FHWA guidelines, as discussed below. Borings B-1 and B-2 will be drilled in the vicinity of the proposed Fair Avenue under - crossing of Yakima Avenue and the I-82 ramp. The purpose of these borings is to evaluate soil and groundwater conditions in an area that will likely require below grade excavations, bridge structures, and walls. Borings B-3, B-4, B-7, and B-8 will be drilled at the abutments of the proposed ramps over I-82. Similar to the boring B-1 and B-2, these borings will be drilled in areas that will require large fills, bridge foundations, and, potentially, walls. Borings B-5, B-6, and B-9 will be drilled in the general vicinity of the proposed over- passes. Information from these borings will be used to evaluate embankment -fill and retaining wall related issues, including settlement and stability. • Boring B-10 will be located along one of the new roadways. The location and purpose of this boring, as with all borings drilled, will be discussed with the City. Proposed Field Sampling Plan The proposed sampling plan will involve the following: • Standard penetration tests (SPTs) will be conducted on 5 -foot intervals or at transitions in material types. Samples recovered in the SPT will be visually identified in the field and then stored for laboratory testing. Where appropriate, large -diameter drive sam- ples will be obtained to augment the SPTs. Shelby tube samples will be obtained at a limited number of elevations if soft cohesive soil is encountered. The purpose of this sampling will be to obtain samples to evaluate settlement and soil strength issues. Shelby tubes will be sealed and transported to a laboratory for testing. 1002153Aq.SEA/1 7/6/92 C-1 I-82/Yakima Avenue Borings will be drilled to a maximum depth of 30 feet or drilling refusal, whichever occurs first. Type of Field Equipment A rubber -tire, rotary -mud drilling rig is planned for the borings. This drilling method is recommended to avoid heave within the borings and to penetrate through gravel and cobble layers that will likely be encountered. Other Field Requirements Traffic control may be required during drilling depending on the selected locations. CH2M HILL will submit a traffic control plan to the City for review and approval before initiating the drilling program. Proposed Laboratory Testing Program The following laboratory tests are proposed • Moisture content 50 • Atterberg limits 5 ' • Grain size (sieve) 20 • Corrosion (pH and resistivity) 10 Final types and number of tests will be identified following the field exploration program. 1002153Aq.SEA 1002153Aq.SEA/2 7/6/92 C-2 as.nre._ C SEW IS* . to - Ads efovoGe" LexCLILar �ISp�t-INJ- 59 ��Jrl=Or .eaw t. BOISE CASCADE MILL 4!R Q U W E+/9) 20.w-' KIWANIS PARK THE CITY OF YAKIMA THE YAKIMA GATEWAY PROJECT FUNCTIONAL PLAN ALTERNATIVE II Icwrig "° ar APR IL 1932 C,a/HILL In assoc/at‘on w,th HUIBREGTSE LOVMAN ASSOCIATES. INC. MEMORANDUM CIDAHILL TO: Patt O'Flaherty/SEA FROM: Doug Kunkel/SEA DATE: April 9, 1992 SUBJECT: Yakima Gateway Project site reconnaissance PROJECT: Yakima Gateway Project Patt: Attached are the results of my March 31, 1992 site visit to the Yakima Gateway Project area. The attached map gives 11 locations of potential areas of concern on or near the proposed highway improvement. Descriptions of each area and reasons why this area may be a potential environmental concern are given below. Yakima. Gateway Project. Potential Environmental concerns , Area ::Number , :.Description 1 Trailwagons: manufactures van and truck conversions solvents, degreasers, fiberglass resins, adhesives, underground storage tanks, paints 2 Chinook: manufactures recreational vehicles solvents, degreasers, fiberglass resins, adhesives, underground storage tanks, paints 3 Un -named building: manufactures fiberglass parts for campers solvents, paint, fiberglass resins, adhesives, fiberglass dust 4 Northwest Aluminum Products: Manufactures aluminum window frames, etc degreasers, solvents, paints 5 Car dealer: Chevrolet paint, underground storage tanks, oil, gas, solvents 6 Gas station: Chevron underground storage tanks, solvents 7 U -Haul: gasoline and equipment rental underground storage tanks, solvents 8 Weaver Extermination and Kemi-K: exterminator and chemical supplier pesticides, herbicides 9 Yakima Housing Authority: shop possible UST's, solvents, paint 10 Empty lot: looks like there were buildings here at one time unknown 11 Wet area near log storage yard runoff from log storage area, organic acids If you have any questions about any of these areas please see me or call me at #5556. I will be going to the Yakima area again next week and could check on any specific areas that you would like to have investigated further. Sincerely, .44, ,,.,./f Douglas Kunkel A... WILL NWOO _marAsaour /.$ OWE CASCADE MILL • le 9 saor•nto. KMIA/13 RIRK PROPOSED YMOMA AVENUE PETAL THE CITY OF YAK IM, THE YAKIMA GATEWAY PRO 848 '"'"REET FUNCTIONAL PLAN ALTERNATIVE FE �IHIIL 8,1 assoc.non wah l•PBAEGTSf, LOUMAN AS BOISE CASCADE MILL Raow. .A.n � • CULVERT Ex, RE00 h—_�n.erl'•S. „cw R.7500 0 U w N. 9th 0. EXIST ROwJ KIWANIS PARK THE CITY OF YAKIMA THE YAKIMA GATEWAY PROJECT FUNCTIONAL PLAN ALTERNATIVE II APRIL 1992 Cfs761 HILL In assac, ar:o' w:tn HUIBREGTSE. LOJMAN ASSOCIATES. t ' CH2M HILL EXHIBIT D-2 CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION -SUMMARY SHEET (SPECIFIC RATES OF PAY) FEE SCHEDULE 1992 Discipline or Job Title ENGINEER 0 it 1I III IV V VI VII VIII IX TECHNICAL AIDE TECHNICIAN I II ILI TV OFFICE NT Hourly Overhead Profit Rate Rate @ -LER`/ @ 277. Per Hour 16.06 26.98 4.34 47.37 18.88 31.72 5.10 55.70 20.99 35.26 5.67 61.91 23.19 38.97 6.26 68.42 26.84 45.09 7.25 79.17 30.52 51.28 8.24 90.04 34.95 58.72 9.44 103.10 41.57 69.83 11.22 122.62 49.82 83.69 13.45 146.96 80.11 134.58 21.63 236.31 9.84 16.54 2.66 29.04 12.96 21.77 3.50 38.22 15.27 25.66 4.12 45.05 17.89 30.06 4.83 52.79 70.37 14.79 5.50 60.09 23.62 39.68 6.38 69.68 12.15 20.41 3.28 35.84 HUIBREGTSE, LOUMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. EXHIBIT D-2 CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION -SUMMARY SHEET (SPECIFIC RATES OF PAY) FEE SCHEDULE Discipline orJob Title Principal Engineer Registered /Engineer Project Engineer Sr_ Engineering Tech. Pngineering Tech Pog Land Surveyor RP¢irient P.nginePr SnrvPy Party Chief Survey Technician Word Processing Tech. 1992 Hourly Overhead Profit Rate Rate @ 165.56 @ 27 Per Hour 28.90 47.85 7.80 84.55 20.00 33.11 5.40 58.51 16.00 26.49 4.32 46.81 13.00 21.52 3.51 38.03 11.00 18 21 2.97 32.18 18.00 29.80 4.86 52.66 18.00 29.80 4.86 52.66 14 nn 71 18 3.78 40.96 11.00 18.21 2.97 32.18 13.00 21.52 3.51 38.03 DON SHIMONO ASSOCIATES EXHIBIT D-2 CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION —SUMMARY SHEET (SPECIFIC RATES OF PAY) FEE SCHEDULE 1992 Hourly Overhead Profit Rate Discipline or Job Title Rate @ 150.29 @ 15 Per Hour Principal -in -Charge 35.00 52.60 5.25 92.85 Professional' 15.50 23.29 2.33 41.12 Professional CADD Operator Designer Administrative 11.00 16.53 1.65 16.00 24.05 2.40 9.00 13.53 1.35 9.00 13.53 1.35 29.18 42.45 23.88 23.88 Discipline or Job Title Sr. ( en1ngi st TECH STAFF, INC. EXHIBIT D-2 CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION —SUMMARY SHEET (SPECIFIC RATES OF PAY) FEE SCHEDULE 1992 Survey Party Chief Jr. Geologist Project Design Tech. CADD Tech. Instrument Person Rod/Chain/Brusher Hourly Overhead Profit Rate Rate @ 41.23 @ 14 Per Hour 35.00 14.43 4.90 54,33 30.00 12.37 4.20 46.57 25.00 10.31 3.50 38.81 25.00 10.31 3.50 38.81 25.00 10.31 3.50 38.81 20.00 8.25 2.80 31.05 15.00 6.18 2.10 23.28 MAY -15-92 FRI 10:58 ENGINEERING TECH SRVCS 2068277903 ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN SERVICES EXHIBIT D•2 CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION —SUMMARY SHEET (SPECIFIC RATES OF PAY) FEE SCHEDULE P.02 Hourly Overhead Profit Rate Discipline or Job Tide Rate @ 1. 66 @15% Per Hour Principal Manager 17.00 28.22 6.78 52,00 Technical Administrator 15.00 24.90 5.99 45.89 CADD Operator 13.00 21.58 . .5.19 39.77 Manual Draftsperson 10.00 16.60 3.$9 30.59 Field Technician 10.00 16.60 3.99 30.59 Traffin Control Plaggprs 19 to 19.92 4.79 36.71 r JGL ACOUSTICS, INC. EXHIBIT D-2 CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION — SUMMARY SHEET (SPECIFIC RATES OF PAY) FEE SCHEDULE Discipline or Job Title Acoustical Consultant 1992 Appendix 1tJ.14 Hourly Overhead Profit Rate Rate @ * @ * Per Hour 95.00 95.00 *Overhead and profit included in Hourly Rate RUN DATE: 7/7/92 RUN TIME. 5:02 PM t2(ff<i3<T 6 -/ SUB 1 SUMMARY SHEET CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION CITY OF YAKIMA 1-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 HLA FILE: C:\EXCEL\FlLES\i-821PHASE2.XLS DATE: 717/92 SEA 685.15 1. Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 1992 Average Hourly Raw Labor Class Role Hours Rate Cost Rate PR Principal Engineer 480 $28.90 $13,878 RE Registered Engineer 859 $20.00 $17,174 PE Project Engineer 0 $16.00 $0 SET Sr Engineering Tech. 919 $13.00 $11,950 ET Engineering Tech. 0 $11.00 $0 RLS Reg. Land Surveyor 900 $18.00 $16,207 RS Resident Engineer 0 $18.00 $0 SPC Survey Party Chief 470 $14.00 $6,586 ST Survey Tech. 154 $11.00 $1,694 WPT Word Processing Tech. 12 $13.00 $156 0 $0.00 $0 2. Total Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 3,795 $67,645 $17.83 3. Overhead Cost (OH) - Including Salary Additives (Based upon Federal audit) (DSC) 165.56% $111,993 Subtotal 5179,638 4 Foxed Fee (DSC) 27.00% $18,264 5. Reimbursables HLA 531,139 6 Subconsultants Costs MBE WBE OTHER TOTALS (No subconsultants) Totals 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% $0 7. Escalation Costs 54,948 8. GRAND TOTAL - Estimated Fee $233,989 9. Management Reserve Fund 50 10. GRAND TOTAL - Estimated Fee $233,989 NOTES: PER A. Escalation factors: DIEM 1993 labor rates over 1992: 5.00% ( YES Current work planned for 1993: 50.00% Salary escalation factor: 2.50% Includes fixed fee noted above: 10.17% B. Other factors: Overhead: 165.56% Fixed fee on DSC' 27.00% Labor 100.00% Multiplier 292.56% Page: 1 011 RUN DATE. 7/7/92 RUN TIME. 5:21 PM C6.W16 4 4-/ SUB 2 SUMMARY SHEET CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION CITY OF YAKIMA 1-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 SHIMONO FILE: C:\EXCEL\FILES11-821PHASE2.XLS DATE: 7/7/92 SEA 685.15 1 Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 1992 Average Hourly Raw Labor Class Role Hours Rate Cost Rate PIC Principal in Charge 192 $35.00 $6,713 P2 Professional 2 546 $17.00 $9,275 P1 Professional 1 0 $11.00 $0 CADD CADD Operator 0 $16.00 $0 DS Designer 53 $10.00 $528 AD Administrative 70 $9.00 $634 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 2. Total Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 861 $17,150 $19.93 3. Overhead Cost (OH) - Including Salary Additives (Based upon Federal audit) (DSC) 152.50% $26,154 Subtotal $43,304 4 Fixed Fee (DSC) 15.00% $2,573 5. Reimbursabies SHIMONO $4,590 6. Subconsultants Costs MBE WBE OTHER TOTALS (No subconsultants) Totals 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% SO 7 Escalation Costs $459 8. GRAND TOTAL - Estimated Fee $50,926 9. Management Reserve Fund $0 10. GRAND TOTAL. - Estimated Fee $50,926 NOTES: PER A. Escalation factors: DIEM 1993 labor rates over 1992: 5.00% ( YES Current work planned for 1993: 20.00% Salary escalation factor 1.00% Includes fixed fee noted above: 5.94% B. Other factors: Overhead: 152.50% Fixed fee on DSC 15.00% Labor 100.00% Multiplier 267.50% Page: 1 of 1 RUN DATE: 7/7/92 RUN TIME. 5:24 PM EX M -G/3 <T 6-/ SUB 3 SUMMARY SHEET CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION CITY OF YAKIMA 1-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 TECHSTAFF FILE: C:IEXCELIFILESII-821PHASE2.XLS DATE: 7/7/92 SEA 685.15 1. Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 1992 Average Hourly Raw Labor Class Role Hours Rate Cost Rate SG Senior Geologist 0 $35.00 $0 SPC Survey Party Chief 0 $30.00 $0 JG Junior Geologist 0 $25.00 $0 PDT Project Design Tech. 1,157 $25.00 $28,920 CADD CADD Operator 0 $25.00 $0 IP Instrument Person 0 $20.00 $0 RC Rod/Chain/Brusher 0 $15.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 2. Total Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 1,157 $28,920 $25.00 3. Overhead Cost (OH) - Including Salary Additives (Based upon Federal audit) (DSC) 41.23% $11,924 Subtotal $40,844 4 Fixed Fee (DSC) 14.00% S4,049 5. Reimbursables TECHSTAFF $0 6. Subconsultants Costs MBE WBE OTHER TOTALS (No subconsultants) Totals 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% $0 7 Escalation Costs $1,122 8. GRAND TOTAL - Estimated Fee $46,015 9. Management Reserve Fund $0 10. GRAND TOTAL - Estimated Fee $46,015 NOTES: PER A. Escalation factors: DIEM 1993 labor rates over 1992: 5.00% ( YES Current work planned for 1993: 50.00% Salary escalation factor 2.50% Includes fixed fee noted above: 9.91% B. Other factors: Overhead: 41.23% Flxed fee on DSC: 14.00% Labor 100.00% Muttlplier 155.23% Page: 1 011 RUN DATE: 7/7/92 RUN TIME: 5:30 PM 64406 IT -/ SUB 5 SUMMARY SHEET CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION CITY OF YAKIMA 1-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 ETS FILE: C:\EXCELIFILESII-82\PHASE2.XLS DATE: 7)7/92 SEA 68515 1 Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 1992 Average Houry Raw Labor Class Role Hours Rate Cost Rate PM Principal Manager 0 $17.00 $0 TA Tech. Administrator 0 $15.00 $0 CADD CADD Operator 218 $13.00 $2,829 DRFT Manual Drafter 0 $10.00 $0 FT Field Tech 400 $10.00 $4,000 TCF Traffic Control Flagger 0 $12.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 2. Total Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 618 $6,829 $11.06 3. Overhead Cost (OH) - Including Salary Additives (Based upon Federal audit) (DSC) 166.00% $11,336 Subtotal S18,165 4. Fixed Fee (DSC) 15.00% $1,024 5. Reimbursables ETS SO 6. Subconsultants Costs MBE WBE OTHER TOTALS (No subconsultants) Totals 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% $0 7. Escalation Costs $480 8. GRAND TOTAL - Estimated Fee $19,669 9. Management Reserve Fund $0 10. GRAND TOTAL - Estimated Fee $19,669 NOTES. PER A. Escalation factors: DIEM 1993 labor rates over 1992: 5.00% 1 YES Current work planned for 1993: 50.00% Salary escalation factor 2.50% Includes fixed fee noted above: 5.64% B. Other factors: Overhead: 166.00% Fixed tee on DSC. 15.00% Labor 100.00% Multiplier 281.00% Page: 1 011 itUN DATE. 7/7/92 RUN TIME. 5:28 PM SUB 4 SUMMARY SHEET CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION CITY OF YAKIMA 1.82lYAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary DesignandEnvironmental Assessment Phase 2 JGL ACOUSTICS, INC. FILE: CAEXCEL\FILESO-82\PHASE2.XLS DATE: 7?/92 SEA 685.15 1 Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 1992 Average Hourly Raw labor Class Role Hours Rate Cost Rate SE Senior Engineer 77 $95.00 $7,353 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 2. Total Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 77 $7,353 $95.00 3. Overhead Cost (OH) - Including Salary Additives (Based upon Federal audit) (DSC) 0.00% $0 Subtotal $7,353 4 Fixed Fee (DSC) 0.00% SO 5. Reimbursables JGL ACOUSTICS, INC. $690 6. Subconsultants Costs MBE WBE OTHER TOTALS (No subconsultants) Totals 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% SO 7. Escalation Costs $0 8. GRAND TOTAL - Estimated Fee $8,043 9. Management Reserve Fund 50 10. GRAND TOTAL - Estimated Fee $8,043 , NOTES: PER A. Escalation factors: DIEM 1993 labor rates over 1992: 0.00% I YES Current work planned for 1993: 0.00% Salary escalation factor. 0.00% Includes fixed fee noted above: 0.00% B. Other factors: Overhead: 0.00% Fixed tee on DSC: 0.00% Labor 100.00% Multiplier 100.00% Page: 1 of 1 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL. PLANNERS EXHIBIT G-2 BREAKDOWN OF SUBCONSULTNAT'S OVERHEAD COST PROJECT: I-82 GATEWAY PROJECT OVERHEAD FOR 1992 DATE: 6-3-92 OVERHEAD ITEMS SUB TOTALS A. SALARY RELATED OVERHEAD Sick Leave 1.90% Vacation 6.40% Holidays 2.42% Payroll Taxes 7.01% SUBTOTAL 17.73% B. GENERAL OVERHEAD Automobile 3.36% Professional Dues/Publications 1.47% Education 0.47% Business Insurances 2.26% Outside Professional Services 2.00% Maintenance 1.35% Office Expenses 9.43% Office Supplies 9.50% Retirement Plan 11.00% Rent/Utilities 13.38% Business Taxes 25.73% Overhead Wages 52.61% Subtotal 132.56% TOTAL OVERHEAD EXPENSES 150.29% I-82\oh92 RECREATION PLANNERS 375 118TH AVENUE S.E. SUITE 100 BELLEVUE WASHINGTON 98005 (206)454-1500 MAY -15-92 FRI 10:59 ENGINEERING TECH SRVCS 2068277903 P.03 ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN SERVICES EXHIBIT G-2 BREAKDOWN OFSUBCONSULTANT'S OVERHEAD COST Fringe Benefits FICA 7% Unemployment 1.93% Medical Aid and Industrial'Insurance 5% Company Insurance and Medical 2.76% Vacation, Holiday, and Sick Leave 3.42% Commission, Bonuses/Pension Plan , 6% Total Fringe Benefits 20.71% General Overhead State B140 Taxes 16% Insurance 7% Administration and Time Not Assignable 28 . 7% Printing, Stationary, and Supplies 9.8% Professional Services 5.8% Travel Not Assignable 4% Telephone and Telegraph Not Assignable 10% Fees, Dues, Professional Meetings 1% Utilities and Maintenance 7% Professional Development Rent 22% 14% Equipment Support 15% Office Miscellaneous, Postage 5% Total Generated Overhead 145.3% Total 166.0% r CONSULTANT AGREEMENT CONSULTANT / ADDRESS / TELEPHONE CH2M HILL, NORTHWEST, INC. 777 - 108th Ave. NE P. O. Box 91500 Bellevue, WA 98009-2050 AGREEMENT NUMBER FEDERAL AID NO. A G p E M E T T Y P Esupplement h k n e LUMP SUM LUMP SUM AMOUNT $ PROJECT TITLE AND WORK DESCRIPTION Yakima Avenue/I-82 Interchange and Fair Avenue, Phase I, Concept Development Subsequent phases including Predesign, Environmental Impact Evaluation, Right of Way Acquisition, Design for roadways, structures and utilities, and Constructic Management are to be performed under a to this agreement. Q COST PLUS FIXED FEE OVERHEAD PROGRESS PAYMENT RATE % OVERHEAD COST METHOD ACTUAL COST FEDERAL ID NO. OR S.S. NO. 93-0723698 Do you require a 1099 for IRS? • ACTUAL COST NOT TO EXCEED % FIXe �� % YES NO ❑� FIXED FEE $ COMPLETION DATE MAXIMUM AMOUNT PAYABLE $ 285,265 Ell SPECIFIC RATES OF PAY • COST PER UNIT OF WORK May 31, 1992 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of . between the City of Yakima Washington, hereinafter called the 'AGENCY' , and the above organization hereinafter caliea the 'CONSULTANT'. WITNESSETH THAT: WHEREAS, the AGENCY desires to accomplish the above referenced project, and WHEREAS, the AGENCY does not have sufficient staff to meet the required commitment and therefore deems it advisable and desirable to engage the assistance of a CONSULTANT to provide the necessary services for the PROJECT; and WHEREAS, the CONSULTANT represents that he/she is in compliance with the Washington State Statutes relating to professional registration, if applicable, and has signified a willingness to furnish Consulting services to the AGENCY, NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms, conditions. covenants and performance contained herein, or attached and incorporated and made a part hereof, the parties hereto agree as follows: GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK The work under this AGREEMENT shall consist of the above described work and services as herein defined and necessary to accomplish the completed work for this PROJECT. The CONSULT- ANT snarl furnish all services, labor and related equipment neces- sary to conduct and complete the work as designated elsewhere in this AGREEMENT II SCOPE OF WORK The Scope of Work and project level of effort for this project is deta,ted in Exhibit "B' attached hereto, and by this reference made a pa~ of this AGREEMENT. 1 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Afi aspects of coordination of the work of this AGREEMENT, with outside agencies, groups or individuals shall receive advance approval by the AGENCY. Necessary contacts and meetings with agencies. groups or individuals shall be coordinated through the AGENCY. n The CONSULTANT shall attend coordination, progress and presentation meetings with the AGENCY or such Federal, Commu- nity, State, city or County officials, groups or individuals as may be requested by the AGENCY. The AGENCY will provide the CON- SULTANT sufficient notice prior to meetings requiring CONSULT- ANT participation. The minimum number of hours or days notice required shall be agreed to between the AGENCY and the CON- SUL T AF T and shown in Exhibit "B' attached hereto and made part of this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT shall prepare a monthly progress report, in a form approved by the AGENCY, that will outline in written and graphical form the various phases and the order of performance of the work in sufficient detail so that the progress of the work can easily be evaluated. Goals for Disadvan- taged Business Enterprises (DBE), Minority Business Enterprises (MBE), and Women Owned Business Enterprises (WBE) if required shall be shown in Exhibit 'B'. All designs, drawings, specifications, documents, and other work products of the CONSULTANT are instruments of service for this PROJECT, whether the PROJECT is completed or not. Reuse by the AGENCY or by others acting through or on behalf of the AGENCY of any such instruments of service without the written permission of the CONSULTANT will be at the AGENCY's sole risk. IV TIME FOR BEGINNING AND COMPLETION The CONSULTANT shall not begin any work under the terms of this AGREEMENT until authorized in writing by the AGENCY. All work under this AGREEMENT shall be completeet by the date shown in the heading of this AGREEMENT under completion date. The established completion time shalt not be extended because of any delays attributable to the CONSULTANT. but may be extended by the AGENCY, in the event of a delay attributable to the AGENCY, or because of unavoidable delays caused by an act of GOD or governmental actions or other conditions beyond the control of the CONSULTANT. A prior supplemental agreement issued by the AGENCY is required to extend the established completion time. V PAYMENT The CONSULTANT shall be paid by the AGENCY for completed work and services rendered under this AGREEMENT as provided in Exhibit 'C' attached hereto, and by this reference made part of tnis AGREEMENT. Such payment shall be full compensation for work performed or services rendered and for all labor, materials, supplies, equipment, and incidentals necessary to complete the work specified in Section II, "Scope of Work'. The CONSULTANT shall conform with all applicable portions of 48 CFR 31. VI SUBCONTRACTING The AGENCY permits subcontracts for those items of work as shown in Exhibit G to this Agreement. Compensation for this subconsultant work shall be based on the cost factors shown on Exhibit G, attached hereto and by this reference made a part of this AGREEMENT. The work of the subconsultant shall not exceed its maximum amount payable unless a prior written approval has been issued by the AGENCY. All reimbursable direct non -salary costs for the subconsultant shall be substantiated in the same manner as outlined in Section V. All subcontracts exceeding $10,000 in cost shall contain all appli- cable provisions of this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT shall not subcontract for the performance of any work under this AGREEMENT without prior written permission of the AGENCY No permission for subcontracting shall create. b AGENCY and subcontractor, contract or y between the AGENCY any ria... 3n� other relationship. Vii EMPLOYMENT The CONSULTANT warrants that he/she has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the CONSULTANT, to solicit or secure this contract, and that it has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the CONSULTANT, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or any other consideration, contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this contract. For breach or violation of this warrant, the AGENCY shall have the right to annul this AGREE- MENT without liability, or in its discretion. to deduct from the AGREEMENT price or consideration or otherwise recover the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or contingent fee. Any and all employees of the CONSULTANT or other persons while engaged in the performance of any work or services required of the CONSULTANT under this AGREEMENT, shall be considered employees of the CONSULTANT oily and not of the AGENCY, and any and ail claims that may or night arse under any Workmen's compensation Act on behalf of said employees or other persons while so engaged, and any and all claims made by a third party as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of the CON- SULTANTS employeesor other persons while so engaged on any of the work or services provided to be rendered herein, shall be the sole obligation and responsibi!4 of the CONSULTANT. The CONSULTANT shall not engage, on a full or part time basis, or other basis, during the period of the contract, any professional or technical personnel who are, or have been, at any time during the period of the contract, in the employ of the United States Depart- ment of Transportation, the STATE, or the AGENCY, except regu- larly retired employees. without written consent of the public em- ployer of such person. 2 VIII NONDISCRIMINATION The CONSULTANT agrees not to discriminate against any client, employee or applicant for employment or for services because of race, creed, cola, national origin, marital status, sex, age or handicap except for a bona fide occupational qualification with regard to, but not limited to the following: employment upgrading, demotion or transfer, recruitment or any recruitment advertising.a layoff or terminations, rates of pay or other forms of compensation, selection for training, rendition of services. The CONSULTANT understands and agrees that if it violates this provision, this AGREEMENT may be terminated by the AGENCY and further that the CONSULTANT shall be barred from performing any services for the AGENCY now or in the future unless a showing is made satisfactory to the AGENCY that discriminatory practices have terminated and that recurrence of such action is unlikely. During the performance of this AGREEMENT, the CONSULTANT, for itself, its assignees and successors in interest agrees as fol- lows: JUL-07-1992 02:13PM FROM JGL ACOUSTICS INC TO CH2M HILL CSEA) 01 EXHIBIT G-2 JGL Acoustics, Inc. P.02 1S05D Bellevue Way N.E. • Bellevue, WA 98004 • (206) 454.4823 • FAX: 454-9973 May 12, 1992 CH2M Hill, Inc. 777 108th Ave. N.E. Bellevue, WA 98009-2050 Attention: Mr. Donald Tranum Subject: I-82/Yakima Ave. EIS Gentlemen: The purpose of this letter is to verify my hourly billing rate for acoustical consulting services. As you may know, my firm is a one-man office, and I do not have a specified salary, nor do I have an overhead multiplier. My billing rates are based upon the prevailing market for my line of work. At the time that I submitted my proposal to your office for this project my billing rate was $95 per hour. On January 1, 1992 my billing rate increased to $110 per . hour. The $95 per hour rate was in effect for all new projects commencing between July 1, 1990 and January 1, 1992. Although this project has not yet begun, my - proposal specifies that the hourly billing rate for this project will be $95 per hour. The above hourly rates are being used on all of my projects (public or private) including the following: . - . • . Willow Lake WWTP (Salem, OR = - USA Sludge Storage Facility (Hillsboro, OR Aiki/Interurban Pump Station (METRO Seattle) Tri -City WPCP (Oregon City, OR) If you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to give me a call. Very truly yours, JGL Acoustics, Inc. rl Q.°AH Jerry G. Lilly, P.E. President Member, INCE KMHILL Engineers Planners Economists 111111111111 Scientists July 7, 1992 SEA685.15 Mr. Dennis E. Covell, P.E. Director of Engineering and Utilities City of Yakima 129 North Second Street Yakima, Washington 98901 Dear Dennis: Subject: Yakima Avenue/I-82 Interchange and Fair Avenue Agreement No. 91-103/D-6015 Supplemental Agreement #1 Attached, for your review, approval and execution, are two originals of Supplemental Agreement #1 for Phase II of the Yakima Gateway project. Please note that 3.5 percent of our Minority/Women's Business participation has yet to be assigned to a specific subconsultant. This is noted on Enclosure B as "undesignated." As we defined the scope of work for Phase II, and identified the capabilities of ETS and Techstaff, we found that there was insufficient work in their area of expertise to meet the City's M/WBE goals. We are currently negotiating with other M/WBE firms for other work in order to meet the City's goals. As soon as we have completed our negotiations, we will submit information on the firm and its role for your approval. Please obtain the City's signature on this Supplement and return one copy to us for our records. Sincerely, CH2M HILL M. Donald Tranum, P.E. Project Manager nt/dt004/gatesup2 Enc. CH2M HILL Seattle Office 777 108th Avenue N.E , Bellevue, WA 98004 206.453.5000 P 0 Box 91500, Bellevue, WA 98009-2050 Fax 206 462 5957 A. COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATIONS. The CONSULTANT shall comply with the Regulations relative to nondiscrimi- nation in the same manner as in Federally -assisted pro- grams of the Department of Transportation, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 21. as they may be amended from time to time, (hereinafter referred to as the Regula- tions), which are herein incorporated by reference and made a part of this AGREEMENT. B. NONDISCRIMINATION- The CONSULTANT, with regard to the work performed by it during the AGREEMENT, shall not discriminate on the grounds of race, creed color, sex, age, marital status, national origin or handicap except for a bona fide occupational qualification in the selection and retention of subconsultants, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment. The CONSULTANT shall not participate either directly or indirectly in the discrimination prohibited by Section 21.5 of the Regula- tions, including employment practices when the contract covers a program set forth in Appendix II of the Regulations. C. SOLICITATIONS FOR SUBCONSULTANTS, INCLUDING PROCUREMENTS OF MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT: In all solicitations either by competitive bidding or negotia- tion made by the CONSULTANT for work to be performed under a subcontract, including procurements of materials or leases of equipment, each potential subconsuttant or supplier shall be notified by the CONSULTANT of the CONSULTANT's obligations under this AGREEMENT and the Regulations relative to nondiscrimination on the grounds of race, creed, color, sex, age, marital status, national origin and handicap. D. INFORMATION AND REPORTS. The CONSULTANT shall provide all information and reports required by the Regu- lations, or directives issued pursuant thereto, and shall permit access to its books, records, accounts, other sources of information, and its facilities as may be deter- mined by the AGENCY to be pertinent to ascertain com- pliance with such Regulations or directives. Where any information required of the CONSULTANT is in the exclu- sive possession of another who fails or refuses to fumish this information the CONSULTANT shall so certify to the AGENCY, or the United States Department of Transporta- tion as appropriate, and shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the information. E. SANCTIONS FOR NONCOMPLIANCE: In the event of the CONSULTANT's noncompliance with the nondiscrimina- tion provisions of this AGREEMENT, the AGENCY shall impose such sanctions as it or the Federal Highway Ad- ministration may determine to be appropriate, including, but not limited to: 1 Withholding of payments to the CONSULTANT under the AGREEMENT until the CONSULTANT complies, and/or 2. Cancellation, termination or suspension of the AGREEMENT, in whole or in part. 3 F. INCORPORATION OF PROVISONS: The CONSULTANT shall include the provisions of paragraphs (A) through (G) in every subcontract, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the Regula- tions or directives issued pursuant thereto. The CONSULTANT shall take such action with respect to any subconsultant or procurement as the AGENCY or the Federal Highway Administration may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions including sanctions for non- compliance; provided, however, that, in the event a CON- SULTANT becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a subconsuttant or supplier as a result of such direction, the CONSULTANT may request the AGENCY to enter into such litigation to protect the inter- ests of the AGENCY, and in addition, the CONSULTANT may request the United States to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States. G. UNFAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES: The CONSULTANT shall comply with RCW 49.60.180 prohibiting unfair em- ployment practices and the Executive Orders numbered E.0.70-01 and E.O.66-03 of the Governor of the State of Washington. IX TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT The right is reserved by the AGENCY to terminate this AGREE- MENT at any time upon ten days written notice to the CONSULT- ANT. In the event this AGREEMENT is terminated by the AGENCY other than for fault on the part of the CONSULTANT, a final payment shall be made to the CONSULTANT as shown in Exhibit F for the type of AGREEMENT used. No payment shall be made for any work completed after ten days following receipt by the CONSULTANT of the Notice to terminate. If the accumulated payment made to the CONSULTANT prior to Notice of Termination exceeds the total amount that would be due computed as set forth herein above, then no final payment shall be due and the CONSULTANT shall immediatety reimburse the AGENCY for any excess paid. In the event the services of the CONSULTANT are terminated by the AGENCY for fault on the part of the CONSULTANT, the above formula for payment shall not apply. In such an event, the amount to be paid shall be determined by the AGENCY with consideration given to the actual costs incurred by the CONSULTANT in perform- ing the work to the date of termination, the amount of work origi- nally required which was satisfactorily completed to date of termi- nation, whether that work is in a form or a type which is usable to the AGENCY at the time of termination; the cost to the AGENCY of employing another firm to complete the work required and the time which maybe required to do so, and other factors which affect the value to the AGENCY of the work performed at the time of termina- tion. Under no circumstances shall payment made under this subsection exceed the amount which would have been made using the formula set forth in the previous paragraph. If it is determined for any reason that the CONSULTANT was not in default or that the CONSULTANT's failure to perform is without it or it's employee's fault or negligence, the termination shall be deemed to be a termination for the convenience of the AGENCY in accor- dance with the provision of this AGREEMENT. In the event of the death of any member, partner or officer of the CONSULTANT or any of its supervisory personnel assigned to the project, or, dissolution of the partnership, termination other corpo- ration, or disaffiliation of the principally involved employee, the surviving members of the CONSULTANT hereby agree to com- plete the work under the terms of this AGREEMENT, if requested to do so by the AGENCY. The subsection shall not be a bar to renegotiation of the AGREEMENT between the surviving members of the CONSULTANT and the AGENCY, if the AGENCY so chooses. In the event of the death of any of the parties listed in the previous paragraph, should the surviving members of the CONSULTANT, with the AGENCY's concurrence, desire to terminate this AGREE- MENT, payment shall be made as set forth in the second para- graph of this section. In the event this AGREEMENT is terminated prior to completion, the original copies of all reports and other data, PS&E materials furnished to the CONSULTANT by the AGENCY and documents prepared by the CONSULTANT prior to said termination, shall become and remain the property of the AGENCY and may be used by it without restriction. Such unrestricted use, not occurring as a part ofthis PROJECT, shah be without liability or legal exposure to the CONSULTANT. Payment for any part of the work by the AGENCY shall not consti- tute a waiver by the AGENCY of any remedies of any type it may have against the CONSULTANT for any breach of this AGREE- MENT by the CONSULTANT, or for failure of the CONSULTANT to perform work required of it by the AGENCY. Forbearance of any rights under the AGREEMENT will not constitute waiver of entitlement to exercise those rights with respect to any future act or omission by the CONSULTANT. X CHANGES OF WORK The CONSULTANT shall make such changes and revisions in the complete work of this AGREEMENT as necessary to correct errors appearing therein, when required to do so by the AGENCY, without additional compensation thereof. Should the AGENCY find it desir- able for its own purposes to have previously satisfactorily com- pleted work or parts thereof changed or revised, the CONSULT- ANT shall make such revisions as directed by the AGENCY This work shall be considered as Extra Work and will be paid for as herein provided under Section XIV. XI DISPUTES Any dispute concerning questions of fact in connection with the work not disposed of by AGREEMENT between the CONSULTANT and the AGENCY shall be referred for determination to the Director of Public Works or AGENCY Engineer, whose decision in the matter shall be final and binding on the parties of this AGREE- MENT, provided however, that if an action is brought challenging the Director of Public Works or AGENCY Engineer's decision, that decision shall be subject to the scope of judicial review provided under Washington Case Law. XII VENUE, APPLICABLE LAW AND PERSONAL JURISDICTION In the event that either party deems it necessary to institute legal action or proceedings to enforce any right or obligation under this AGREEMENT, the parties hereto agree that any such action shall be initiated in the Superior court of the State of Washington, situated in the county the AGENCY is located in. The parties hereto agree that all questions shall be resolved by application of Wash- ington law and that the parties to such action shall have the right of appeal from such decisions of the Superior court in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. The CONSULTANT hereby consents to the personal jurisdiction of the Superior court of the State of Washington, situated in the county the AGENCY is located in. XIII LEGAL RELATIONS AND INSURANCE The CONSULTANT shall comply with all Federal, State, and local laws and ordinances applicable to the work to be done under this AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT shall be interpreted and con- strued in accord with the laws of Washington. The CONSULTANT hereby agrees to indemnify and hold the and AGENCYthe STATE, and their officers and employees harm- less less from and shall process and defend at its own expense all claims, demands, or suits at law or equity arising in whole or in part from the CONSULTANT's negligence or breach of any of its obliga- tions under this AGREEMENT; provided that nothing herein shall require a CONSULTANT to indemnify the AGENCY and the STATE against and hold harmless the AGENCY and the STATE from claims, demands or suits based solely upon the conduct of the AGENCY and the STATE, their agents, officers and employees and provided further that if the claims or suits are caused by or result from the concurrent negligence of (a) the CONSULTANT's agents or employees and (b) the AGENCY and the STATE, their agents, officers and employees, and invlolves those action covered by RCW 4.24 115, this indemnity provision with respect to claims or suits based upon such concurrent negligence shall be valid and enforceable ally to the extent of the CONSUL TANT'e negligence or the negligence of the CONSULTANT's agents or employees except as limited below. The CONSULTANT's relation to the AGENCY shall be at all times as an independent contractor. The CONSULTANT shall obtain and keep in force during the terms of the AGREEMENT, or as otherwise required, the following insur- ance with companies or through sources approved by the State Insurance Vuliiiooio,' pu.vv...t ar..-._ as . Excepting the professional liability insurance the AGENCY will be named on all certificates of insurance as an additional insured. The certificates of insurance shall cover the work specified in or per- formed under this AGREEMENT. The AGENCY will pay no progress payments under Section V until the CONSULTANT has fully complied with this section. This rem- edy is not exclusive; and the AGENCY and the STATE may take such other action as is available to them under other provisions of this AGREEMENT, or otherwise in law. 4 Insurance Coverage A. Worker's compensation and employer's liability insurance as required by the STATE. B. Regular public liability and property damage insurance in an amount not Tess than a single limit of one million and 00/100 Dollars ($1,000,000.00) for bodily injury, including death and property damage per occurrence. C The CONSULTANT's professional liability shall be limited to the amount payable of this AGREEMENT or one million dollars, whichever is the lesser. All insurance shall be obtained from an insurance company authorized to do business in the State of Washington. The CON- SULTANT shall submit a certificate of insurance as outlined above within 14 days of the execution of this AGREEMENT to the AGENCY. No cancellation of the foregoing policies shall be effective without thirty (30) days prior notice to the AGENCY. XIV EXTRA WORK A. The AGENCY may at any time, by written order, make changes within the general scope of the AGREEMENT in the services to be performed. B If any such change causes an increase or decrease in the estimated cost of, or the time required for. performance of any part of the work under this AGREEMENT. whether or not changed by the order, or otherwise affects any other terms and conditions of the AGREEMENT, the AGENCY shall make an equitable adjustment in the (1) maximum amount payable; (2) delivery or completion schedule, or both; and (3) other affected terms and shall modify the AGREEMENT accordingly. C The CONSULTANT must submit any 'proposal for adjustment- (hereafter referred to as proposal) under this clause within 30 days from the date of receipt of the written order. However, if the AGENCY decides that the facts justify it, the AGENCY may receive and act upon a proposal submitted before final payment of the AGREE- MENT D Failure to agree to any adjustment shall be a dispute under the Disputes clause. However nothing in this clause shall excuse the CONSULTANT from proceeding with the AGREEMENT as changed. E. Notwithstanding the terms and condition of paragraphs (a) and (b) above, the maximum amount payable for this AGREEMENT, shall not be increased or considered to be increased except by specific written supplement to this AGREEMENT. XV ENDORSEMENT OF PLAN$ The CONSULTANT shall place his endorsement on all plans, estimates or any other engineering data furnished by him. XVI FEDERAL AND STATE REVIEW The Federal Highway Administration and the Washington State Department of Transportation shall have the right to participate in the review or examination of the work in progress. XVII CERTIFICATION OF THE CONSULTANT AND THE AGENCY Attached hereto as Exhibit 'A-1', we the Certifications d the Consultant and the Agency, Exhibit 'A-7 Certification regarding debarment, suspension and other responsibility matters - primary covered transactions, and Exhibit -A-3' Certification regarding the restrictions of the use of Federal funds for lobbying. XVIII COMPLETE AGREEMENT This document and referenced attachments contains all covenants, stipulations and provisions agreed upon by the parties. No agent. or representative of either party has authority to make. and the parties shall not be bound by or be liable for. any statement, representation, promise or agreement not set forth herein. No changes, amendments, or modifications of the terms hereof shat be valid unless reduced to writing and signed by the parties as an amendment to this AGREEMENT. XIX EXECUTION AND ACCEPTANCE This AGREEMENT may be simultaneously executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original having identical legal effect. The CONSULTANT does hereby ratify and adopt all statements, representations, warranties, covenants, and agreements contained in the proposal, and the supporting materials submitted by the CONSULTANT. and does hereby ac- cept the AGREEMENT and agrees to all of the terms and conditions thereof. In witness whereof, the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT as of the day and year first above written. By Consultant: DOT 140.089 5 By City/County of Principal EXHIBIT A-1 CERTIFICATION OF CONSULTANT Project No. City/WOW YAKIMA I hereby certify that I am and duly authorized representative of the fon of CH2M HILL, NORTHWEST, INC. whose address is 777 — 108th Ave . NE ; Bellevue , WA _ _. acid that neither I nor the above firm I here represent has: 98009-2050 (a) Employed or retained for a commission, percentage, brokerage, contingent fee or other consideration, any firrn or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely for me or the above CONSULTANT) to solicit or secure this contract. b) AAgreed, express or implied condition for obtaining t t the services of any firm or person in as an p in this contract, to Go.poy of =�,ai:. � = r connection with carrying out the contract. (c) Paid, or agreed to pay, to any firm, organization or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely for me or the above CONSULTANT) any fee, contribution, donation or consideration of any kind for, or in connection with procuring or carrying out the contract; except as here expressly stated (if any): I further certify that the firm I hereby represent is authorized to do business in the State of Washington and that the firm is in full compliance with the requirements of the Board of Professional Registration. I acknowledge that this certificate is to be available to the State Department of 'transportation and the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, in connection with this contract involving participation of Federal aid funds and is subject to applicable State and Federal laws, both criminal and civil. Date Signature CERTIFICATION OF AGENCY OFFICIAL I hereby certify that I am the AGENCY Official of the City/County of Washington and that the above consulting firm or his representative has not been required, directly or indirectly as an express or implied condition in connection with obtaining or carrying out this contract to: (a) Employ or retain, or agree to employ or retain, any firm or person, or n,) Pay nr none to pay to any firm, person or organization, any fee, contribution, donation or consideration of any kind, except as .�> here expressly stated (if any). available the Federal Highway Administration i t V DPpartmant of Transportation, in I acknowledged that this Certificate is to be a�17ttt3wW w the Federal ..w.......,.........., �.._. — _r_ ------ -- - -- - Transportation, with this contract involving participation of Federal aid highway funds and is subject to applicable State and Federal laws, both criminal and civil. Date Signature EXHIBIT A-2 CERTIFICATION REGARDING DEBARMENT, SUSPENSION, AND OTHER RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS -PRIMARY COVERED TRANSACTIONS 1. The prospective primary participant certifies to the best of its knowledge and belief, that it and its principals: (a) Are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or vohmtarily excluded from covered transactions by any federal department or agency; Have not within a three-year period preceding this proposal been convicted dor had a civil judgment rendered against them for commission or fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public (federal, state, or local) transaction or contract under a public transaction: violation of federal or state antitrust statues or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property; (c) Are not presently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity (federal, state. or local) with commission of any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph I.b. of this certification and (d) Have not within a three-year period preceding this application/proposal had one or more public transactions (federal, state, or local) terminated for cause or default. 2. Where the prospective primary participant is unable to certify to any of the its in this certification, such prospective participant shall attach an explanation to this proposal. (b) Consultant(Fum): CH2M HILL NORTHWEST, INC. (Date) President or Authorized Official of Consultant (Signature) 7 EXHIBIT A-3 CERTIFICATION REGARDING THE RESTRICTIONS OF THE USE OF FEDERAL FUNDS FOR LOBBYING The prospective participant certifies, by signing and submitting this bid or proposal, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that: 1. No federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any federal agency, a member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any federal contract, the making of any federal grant, the making of any federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. 2. If any funds other than federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any federal agency, a member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a member of Congress in cormection with this federal comract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form -LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its instructions. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by Section 1352, Title 31, U.S. Code, Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. The prospective participant also age= by submit ing his or her bid or proposal that he or she shall require that the language of this certification be included in all lower tier subcontracts which exceed $100,000 and that all such subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. Consultant (Firm): CH2M HILL NORTHWEST, INC. (Date) President or Authorized Official of Consultant (Signature) 0 I-82/Yakima Avenue EXHIBIT B SCOPE OF WORK PREDESIGN, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT EVALUATION, RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION, DESIGN FOR ROADWAYS, STRUCTURES, AND UTILITIES, AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PHASE 1: CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT YAKIMA AVENUE/I-82 INTERCHANGE AREA AND FAIR AVENUE CITY OF YAKIMA CH2M HILL October 1991 sea0885/044.51/1 10/17/91 CONTENTS I-82/Yakima Avenue Page 1 Introductory Materials 1-1 Project Description 1-1 Project Deliverables 1-1 Abbreviations 1-1 'Manuals 1-1 Review Comments 1-3 Enclosures 1-3 2 Preliminary Design 2-1 Phase 1 --Concept Development 2-1 Task 1 --Project Management 2-1 Task 2 --Quality Control and Peer Review _ ... 2-3 Task 3 --Community Relations . .. . . .2-3 Task 4 --Preliminary Alternatives Analysis 2-6 Subsequent Phases 2-11 Task'5-Ers :$0p g :.::...,..:.::. _ .. - :.:::...-,..:.::::...:::...: .......::>.:.: 2=11 241 'i'aslt`8=-i'ub >ivsevv.ss:: Task:.9 ?FE1s/ nt:.ire.tio :...::.:,.:..-,.::::.:::..:..:::.:.:,::....:..:....:.::.;. , 242 Task:1i--S ri ctures< (Su isequent worT :to::be:n of ated :::f.:. ;.....r...:...:2-1 Task.::12- tCte ihn gust n RqAtt. :: 2.13 Task L--Uxd cY: -Rrt. . Ur:.: >-,...,:+.. + « . +.... P 44 Task .15--Soi€s:::Repoli.. 244 �asx. �� rycirauues;..i�epf»:............,.............:.,...:.:...,.....:._, .. ........ ;.:.:.........:.::.._,::,_..., ... ;��1Y Task 7 --Interchange :Plait:.::::,...... . -1 Task -1 --Access:>Iteytirt ati ..:..:..., ask:20- Access:. Barin >.:.. *45 :x::1 - ..5 Task:22,-Valite...E4-einectint .„1,40 Task. 23= -Appraisal :(Subsequent:.' .York to he. NegOttated):.. -€ 'ask:25--Relocation: Assistance.:...:. ,..:_ - 34 sea0885l043.51/1 10/17/91 I-82/Yakima Avenue CONTENTS Page 4 Final •:I)esigQ> .:...:.,..r.:x.; :.;;...:x.; ..:.,.;,.;;:....:._._.--.., ....... ......: _...:. Task :26 --)*"mal Desi=:Surveyinga nd Nlapgi rg: _ . 4,1 Task 27-.- tee# cal Re i 5 :4- « «:« .; : �;t.� .:« « « . ;;� ..;� .: ;. :. :. 4-1 `:I:'ask.2Senieral Plays _ ..4-2 Task:.30--DT404e Pla :: {Subsequent- Work. t€ ::tie::Ne fiat ) .>:>-...:,:_.. side>`D elopment:Flamm;:.. . 4-4 ..45 Task::-S€ructure-:P -.:..:-:.-.:-:_->-::.:>.::-:::_::..::..;-:.:..:.._.........:_.:_. .. 4-5 14skS =Plan sem «:..::; :.:«:;.::>::•;.;:«:.::.:;«:: ;::.......:•::«::.;.:-:«.«:;:.:.:t::«:.:«;:«.t:<.4:-5 'ask::cifieatiins... 4 `ask 37 Est ii ate=:,-:::.;.:.::;;:-:.: ;;:..:., >:..:-.:,:.;.:..:.>:.:.;..::.;:-:::-;.;:..:.:-: >;:;:...:..;.:-;,;..:.:.;.. -,:.. 4,6 Task:-Permi€si.. _ 4�7 Services:Durhig:Oms ruction Task >4O Semica:: Main sea0885/043.5 1 sea0885/043.512 10/17/91 5 I-82/Yakima Avenue Section 1 introductory Materials Project Description • Fair Avenue connection to Lincoln Avenue and "B" Street one-way couple. • Widening of Yakima Avenue • Modifications to I-82/Yakima Avenue Interchange to provide appropriate access to Fair Avenue • Bicycle and pedestrian connection between the Greenway and Fair Avenue Project Deliverables Expected Phase 1 technical deliverables include, among others: • Public information and involvement plan • Design criteria • Summary of existing conditions • Evaluation of design concepts • Evaluation of selected alternatives Abbreviations • AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials • DR Design Report • DEIS Draft EIS • EIS Environmental Impact Statement • EPA Environmental Protection Agency • FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency • FHWA Federal Highway Administration • I/C interchange • IDC Intra -Departmental Communication • IDT Interdisciplinary Team • IJF Interchange Justification Report • LOMR Letter of Map Revision • LOS Level of Service • NEPA National Environmental Protection Act • NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System • PDEIS Preliminary Draft EIS • PFEIS Preliminary Final EIS • PS&E Plans, Specifications, and Estimates • SEPA State Environmental Protection Act sea0885/045.51/1 10/17/91 1-1 I-82/Yakima Avenue • TS&L Type, Size, and Location • USF&WS United States Fish and Wildlife Service • V/C Volume to Capacity • WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation • WSP Washington State Patrol Manuals The following manuals and their abbreviations will be used in the preparation of the work. AASHTO AASHTO Standard Specification for Highway Bridges, 14th Edition, and subsequent interim specifications • AB WSDOT Asbestos Abatement Manual (M 27-80) • BDM WSDOT Bridge Design Manual (M 23-50) • DM WSDOT Design Manual (M 22-01) • Docket FHWA Docket No. 89-23, "Additional Interchanges to the Interstate System," Federal Register 55, No. 204, October 22, 1990. • EPM WSDOT Environmental Procedures Manual (M 31-11) • Guide FHWA "Region 10 Guide for New/Revised Access Points and Inter- changes on the Interstate System;" March 14, 1989 • HCM Highway Capacity Manual (TRB Special Report 209) • HRG WSDOT Hydraulics Report Guide (District 1) (June 1991) • HM WSDOT Hydraulics Manual (M 23-03) • LAG Local Agency Guidelines (M36-63(PA)) • MUTCD Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (M 24-01) • PPM WSDOT Plans Preparation Manual (M 22-31) • SP WSDOT Standard Plans for Road and Bridge Construction (M 21-01) • SS WSDOT 1988 Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction (M 41-10) • SSP WSDOT Standard Special Provisions and Supplemental Standard Specifications sea0885/045.512 10/17/'91 1-2 I-82/Yakima Avenue • UM WSDOT Utilities Manual (M 22-87) • WQM WSDOT Highway Water Quality Manual (M 22-15) • CYS City of Yakima Standards • YCRS Yakima County Road Standards {T( rouiL v fic lYL i Vie VV i..iJaYYaalY.aYL This section describes the review and comment process to be followed for all submittals. The goal is to expedite the response to review comments received from the City and the various agencies. A review comments sheet will be used. All review comments by the various agencies will be shown on these sheets. For each submittal review, the City will assemble comments for review with CH2M HILL. CH2M HILL will jointly assist the City in the determination of the appropriate disposition of each com- ment. All conflicting comments will be jointly resolved by the City and CI -12M HILL with the final dis- position given by the City. CH2M HILL will not commence work on response to comment(s) without a final City disposition. Each submittal is expected to be reviewed one time before proceeding on to the next deliverable. Re- views are expected to be timely and occur within the scheduled time (Enclosure B). Subsequent review iterations of a given submittal may be considered extra work. The decision will be based upon a joint City and CH2M HILL assessment of the impact to the budget and/or schedule for receipt of comments beyond the scheduled review periods. The City and the Consultant will assess the level of effort required of the Consultant to respond to re- view comments. A determination will be made by the City prior to executing the responses, with respect to the intended level of effort for the overall magnitude of the task(s) being reviewed. Such determina- tion will also include any additional effort by the Consultant to modify previously completed work, de- fined as work previously accepted in writing by the City Project Administrator, or designee. Enclosures A. Labor and Expense Summary B. Project Schedule sea0885/045.51 sea0885/045.51f3 10/17141 1-' Section 2 Preliminary Design Phase 1 Task 1 Project Management This task involves the following: Schedule Development I-82/Yakima Avenue This task prepares and maintains the schedule for the project (Enclosure C). One month "horizon" schedules will be developed to plan the day-to-day activities of the project team. The schedule will be updated periodically to reflect the current status of the project. Direction and Review This task provides for the direction of the staff and review of their work over the course of the project. This is for the overall project rather than a specific task and will provide guidance to the entire team. Progress Reports This task prepares the monthly progress reports. Progress reports will discuss the work in the previous month, the status of individual tasks, meetings attended, and outstanding information. Invoicing This task prepares the monthly invoices. Project Meetings This task provides for the preparation, attendance, followup, and documentation of meetings over the course of the project. These meetings will be the forum for the agencies to provide input and guidance for the direction of the project. They will also be used to discuss project issues, approve submittals and develop potential solutions. Project Assistant This task provides for a project assistant or clerk to assist in the day-to-day activities including typing, filing, recordkeeping, correspondence, etc. Budget Review This task provides for periodic monitoring of the budget over the course of the project. Current status as well as projections to complete will be developed. This task is intended to help monitor costs and sea0885/046S1/1 10/17/91 2-1 I-82/Yakima Avenue budgets and to propose corrective actions. These actions could include formal requests for budget increases or scope modifications or reductions. Records Management This task provides for the management of the drawings and documents received and generated over the course of the project. This information will be filed and logged to facilitate ready and selective retrieval. A status of requested information will also be maintained. '7ivpe YF ivv elV1/111CUL This project will be developed in several phases. This task provides for developing the scope for Phase 2 (EIS, Design Report and Right -of -Way Plans). Subsequent phases will include right-of-way acquisition, final design, and services during construction. Task 2 Quality Control and Peer Review The quality control and peer review program has particular emphasis on technical aspects resting with the various technical disciplines (e.g., geotechnical, hydraulics, structural, etc.). The overriding strategy of the program is to eliminate major defects in project work products and limit minor defects, SO as not to negatively impact client acceptance or contractor progress, and to minimize liability exposure. The program entails the periodic review of study criteria, assumptions, concepts, and presentation of product format. This determines that the overall project objectives are being fulfilled. Quality control includes technical discipline review, lead designer review, and senior review. Discipline reviews will be performed while the detailed technical work is in progress (i.e., when computations are completed, when sketches and preliminary drawings have been prepared but not yet submitted for draft- ing, and when specifications and special provisions are ready for typing). Lead designers will review specific products, as plans, reports, specifications, and other documents, at which time these tro- t,..,,...., sucht.......,, -- pro- ducts are completed. Senior reviews will be performed for an overall task, when and as defined in the quality control program. Such reviews will be performed after project packages are assembled and be- fore they are submitted for review to the City of Yakima and affected agencies. All scheduled formal reviews will be documented in a memorandum format to the project manager. The project manager will he responsible for adjudication of comments/responses with respect to the project scope, budget, and schedule. This task conducts a review, as described above prior to delivery of the alternatives analysis report to the city. sea0885/046.512 10/17/91 2-2 I-82/Yakima Avenue Task 3 Community Relations Public Information and Involvement Program This task prepares the public information and involvement program. To learn about project related issues and concerns, interviews will be held with the following: • Representatives from project -funding agencies • Appropriate public agencies • Business • Local community groups Environmental groups Other constituents identified by the project team The city will provide a distribution list. The list will be reviewed and modified to include other inter- ested parties identified by the project team. A project mailing list will be developed. A technical memorandum will be prepared using the results of the interviews. It will provide an issues assessment and a community relations level of effort evaluation. It will also recommend community relations strategies, activities, and specific communication tools. Coordination with public involvement activities of the Yakima Metropolitan Plan will be considered in development of this plan. Ten (10) copies will be submitted for review and comment. The review comments will be addressed, and 10 copies of the final technical memorandum will be submitted. While the exact program for informing and involving the community will be developed during this task, the following work tasks have been assumed to establish a level of effort. Project Briefings Project information materials and audio visuals for three City Council briefings and three project steer- ing committee briefings will be provided. This will inform the members and funding agency representa- tives of project activities, report on public reactions and comments, and receive guidance and direction. The briefings scheduled during the project are: • Project startup • After Initial Alternatives screening • After completion of Alternatives Analysis Two information briefings for media representatives will be conducted. They will occur at the beginning of the project, and before the final alternative selection is announced to the public. Information materi- als and graphics will also be prepared. sea088S/046.51/3 10/17/51 2-3 I-82/Yakima Avenue Community Meetings Two general community meetings will be scheduled and coordinated. These meetings will inform the community groups and citizens about the project and solicit input and comments. Each meeting will be conducted in an "open house," exhibit -format in which attendees view a series of visual displays and project boards describing project activities. Project team members, as appropriate, will be available to answer questions. The City will provide a bilingual (Spanish -English) translator at each meeting. Infor- mation materials and graphics will also be developed. Meetings will be held: • Prior to Initial Screening • Prior to completion of Alternatives Analysis Three rounds of meetings with up to 10 special interest groups will also be head to brief members on the project and to solicit comments and suggestions. These groups will be identified as part of the commu- nity relations plan. Project Information Line A project information line will be set up and administered. This line will allow the Yakima community to ask questions and provide comments regarding the project. The line will provide information about upcoming project events and offer an opportunity for callers to tape commnents and questions in English and Spanish. The message will be updated as appropriate and provided on both an English and a Span- ish line. The Spanish line will be monitored and translated by a City staff translator. Two easily recognized telephone numbers will record all messages. Messages will be collected daily, transcribed, and answered by phone by appropriate project team members within three working days. Messages and responses will be filed as part of the information line notebook and distributed to project team members for information. information iviateriais Information materials will be prepared for distribution to the community, media, and other appropriate agencies and groups as identified in the community relations plan. They will also be distributed to other individuals and groups later identified in the community relations process. Project" ._ _ _ _�" and the logo for the selection interview will be The "Yh1CI Tila Gateway t'I(_)�GI:L name LIIG project developed �iiv uvava..ava. used on all project information materials to provide a consistent, recognizable image for the project. The following information materials will be developed and produced by the consultant and distributed by the City with Spanish translations prepared by the City in accordance with project schedule. • Media Releases and Project Newsletters --Prepare three media releases and three project newsletters: sea088S/04651/4 10/17/91 At project startup After initial alternatives screening After completion of Alternatives Analysis 2-4 • I-82/Yakima Avenue The consultant will produce the media releases and newsletters in English, and provide one camera-ready copy to the City. Media releases will be 1 -page, doublesided; newslet- ters will be 2 -page, 11 x 17, doublesided. Releases and newsletters will be translated into Spanish, copied, and distributed by the City. Project Fact Sheets --Prepare and produce up to three project fact sheets that focus on specific issues of concern related to the project. Fact sheets will be 1 -page doublesided. The consultant will produce the fact sheets in English, and provide one camera-ready copy to the City. The City will translate them into Spanish, copy, and distribute. Public Meeting Announcements --Prepare and produce two public meeting announce- ment posters in English and Spanish (Total: 4). Posters will be 11 x 17, 1 -color screened and printed in English and Spanish. One hundred copies of each poster (4) will be printed by the consultant. The City will distribute the posters. • City Mailing Project Information Inserts --As appropriate, the City will include informa- tion inserts in utility billings, using information from the Project Fact Sheets. • Official Meeting Notices --Prepare drafts of official notices of upcoming meetings in English to be distributed by the City in accordance with prescribed regulatory guidelines. • Static Project Display --Prepare and produce three static project displays with English and Spanish text that hold current project information (newsletters, fact sheets, meeting and hearing notices, and other pertinent project information). The display will be up- dated periodically throughout the project to reflect project progress. City staff will make arrangements for, and move the displays to appropriate public locations (Le., City Hall, library, malls, etc.). City staff will monitor and restock the displays located in public locations and consultant staff will maintain the displays in their offices. • Slide Presentation --Prepare and produce an initial 20 -slide package that will provide a project overview. The initial package will be updated to reflect the results of the alter- native analysis. This slide presentation may be used in briefings and community meetings. • Video --Develop a video in both 3/4 -inch and VHS format that describes project back- ground, purpose, selection process and illustrates the final preferred alternative -- 7 -minutes long, one English soundtrack, one Spanish soundtrack. The consultant will provide shot sheets, shooting and final scripts in English and pro- vide technical review and review Spanish translation of scripts before final production. In accordance with project schedule, the City video production services will provide shooting crew --one cameraman, video and audio equipment and up to five shooting tapes --all post -production services, studio time and staff, including time coded master tape, working tape and logs for all tapes shot, graphics including titles, sound, and asso- ciated labor; five copies of each final video for use in public involvement program. The City will provide Spanish translation and Spanish voice over for final videos. The City video production services will provide English and voice over for English version tapes. The City video production service will provide one final copy of each video to sea0885/046.51/5 10/17/91 2-5 I-82/Yakima Avenue the consultant for review; the consultant will then submit each video to the City Engi- neering and Utilities Department for final review and approval before distribution. Upon approval by City Engineering and Utilities, City video production services will provide the following copies: 3/4 -inch format English Master and 5 copies - Cnan"ish Master and 5 conies VHS format English Master and 5 copies Spanish Master and 5 copies Models --One stick -built, 3' x 8' rigid contour foam table -mounted model produced at a scale of 1# = 100' showing preferred alternative of the I-82/Yakima Avenue inter- change will be developed. It will include principal geographic features such as river, Sundome, adjacent principal streets and structures. Task '+ Preliminary Alternatives Analysis This task develops a series of alternative design concepts, evaluates them, and selects a preferred alterna- tive. This alternative will be carried into the environmental process. An Interchange Justification Re- port will also be prepared. This task consists of four elements: • Prepare geometric, operational, and traffic analysis • Develop and evaluate alternative design concepts • Refine and evaluate selected alternatives • Prepare an "Interchange Justification Report" Geometric, Operational, and Traffic Analysis Establish Design Criteria This task prepares the operationai/design criteria to be used throughout the planning and design phases of the project. It will be developed in consultation with the City, WSDOT, and other participating agen- cies. Criteria for elements of horizontal, vertical and cross section geometry will be established for arte- rial, freeway, and interchange portions of this project. A technical memorandum will be prepared sum- marizing the design criteria for the project. Ten copies will be submitted for review and comment. Review comments will be addressed and 10 copies will be submitted for approval. sea0885/04651/6 10/17/91 2-6 I-82/Yakima Avenue Assemble Existing Data The following material will be obtained from the City, Yakima County, and WSDOT: • Available traffic volume data including 24-hour volumes, turning movement counts, and ramp volumes • Available truck volume counts by classification • Available traffic accident data for the most recent 3 -year period • As -built plans and right-of-way plans for existing conditions • Photogrammetric maps, photomosaics, and related survey and mapping data • Related traffic and transportation reports • Other available data pertaining to geotechnical bridge and pavement conditions Analyze and Evaluate Existing Conditions An analysis will be made of geometric, operational, and traffic conditions of the existing facilities as follows: Geometric Elements. The CYS, WSDOT, and AASHTO design policies shall be used to evaluate: • Horizontal alignment and clearances • Vertical alignment and clearances • Stopping sight distance • Cross section • Decision sight distance • Exit and entrance design Operational Features. The following features will be evaluated: • Lane continuity • Lane balance • Ramp sequence • Freeway guide signing • Adequacy of merge and diverge areas • Traffic control and channelization at ramp terminals and arterial intersections Traffic Conditions. The analysis of existing traffic conditions will include: • Level of Service (LOS) for both arterial and freeway facilities • Accident analysis A summary memorandum and graphic display of existing conditions for both freeway and related aerial facilities will be prepared. This memorandum will identify existing deficiencies and serve as input to the sea0885/046.51/7 10/17/91 2-7 I-82/Yakima Avenue development of alternative design concepts. It will also aid in evaluation of the effectiveness of alterna- tive improvement schemes. Ten copies will be submitted for review and comment. The review comments will be addressed, and 10 copies will be submitted for approval. Traffic Modeling traffic forecasts n be d Yakima Metropolitan Area Transportation Study 2010 lr allll. Y1�111 prepared from the 1viVu v��r---^- Study ;YMATS) regional traffic study. Design year forecasts will be estimated from the existing traffic vol- umes and the 2010 forecasts. The 2010 traffic forecasts will be used to support the development of design concepts and determine lane requirements. The City will provide available traffic counts for re- calibration of the model. CH2M HILL will provide other counts as necessary, including 16 -hour truck classification counts. The existing conditions traffic model will be upgraded to reflect the 1990 conditions. This will entail the following tasks: • Enter land use data on household/population and employment for 1990 for each traffic analysis zone. • coding Wilk forcapacity, class, and revise network by Ulla correct speed, functional and number of lanes. • Review and revise trip generation equations where appropriate. riate. • Develop an external to external trip table. • Recalibrate the gravity model and network. Preparation of the 2010 model will entail the following tasks: • Review land use data for 2010 and enter data into each traffic analysis zone. • Code committed projects into the network. • Review model forecasts for reasonableness. • Code alternative design concepts into the model for evaluation. Traffic Analysis The traffic analysis will support the development and evaluation of the alternative design concepts. The traffic forecasts from the model will be assigned to each alternative design concept. Level of Service evaluation will be performed at ramp terminals, adjacent intersections; and merge, diverge and weaving points on freeway sections. sea0885/046.51/8 10/17/91 2-8 I-82/Yakima Avenue Develop and Evaluate Alternative Design Concepts Develop Design Concepts --Level One Screen Alternative design concepts for both the freeway and arterials will be developed and tested. Information gathered from interviews with community leaders and the first community meeting will be used to develop these alternatives. This stage in the project is the link between planning and design. A range of concept solutions will be developed at a scale of 1"=200' using aerial photography of the existing facility as a base. Approximately 20 design concepts including the one recommended in the "Traffic Alternative Study" will be developed in this task. The concept development will be accomplished using a single -line sketch technique. The sketches are developed rapidly, in freehand fashion, in accordance with a specific technique and an organized and controlled procedure, requiring scaling of certain dimensions and checking of critical radii and alignment elements. Future traffic will be assigned to the various components of each concept alternative to determine lane requirements. The concepts will reflect vertical alignment requirements. Special cross sections and structural sketches will be prepared as necessary, to illustrate solutions in critical areas. Phased imple- mentation concepts and planning level opinions of cost will also be developed for each concept. Evaluate Design Concepts --Level One Screen The design concepts will be evaluated using a comparative ranking or screening methodology. This will determine the alternatives to be carried forward to the next phase of engineering refinement. Both qual- itative and quantitative measures of performance or effectiveness will be used to differentiate between the alternatives. The following features will be addressed in the evaluation: • Operations and Level of Service • Safety and accidents • Delay and average speed • Ease of implementation • Right -of -Way and land use impacts • Environmental consideration • Relative opinions of costs The measures of effectiveness and amount of detail in the evaluation will be tailored to highlight major trade-offs among the alternatives. The evaluation results will be described in a summary memorandum and displayed graphically for public and agency review. Ten copies that be submitted for review and comment. The review comments will be addressed, and 10 copies will be submitted for approval. Develop Design Concepts --Level Two Screen Up to eight (8) design concepts will be further refined and developed at 1- = 200'. Single line draw- ings will be produced for use in the Level Two Screening. sea0885/046.51/9 10/17/91 2-9 I-82/Yakima Avenue Evaluate Design Concepts --Level Two Screen The refined design concepts will be subjected to a second screening using more refined criteria in the same areas as in Level One. A summary memorandum will be prepared and 10 copies will be submitted for review and comment. The review comments will be addressed and 10 copies will be submitted for approval. Refine and Evaluate Selected Alternatives Refine Selected Alternatives Up to three selected alternative design concepts will be developed in full functional form at a scale of 1"=100' on topographic mapping. The plan refinement task will include the following for each of the selected alternatives: • Typical sections • Functional plans (1"=100') showing geometries, pavement edges, bridged intersection channeiization, right-of-way, and retaining walls • Functional profiles (1"=100' horizontal and 1"=10' vertically) for new roadways and ramps • Representative cross sections to adequately determine side slope, construction quan- tities, approximate right-of-way, and retaining wall locations and heights • Guide signing plans indicating messages and approximate location and type of panel mounting • Refined level of service analysis including lane determination • Signal timing/phasing at intersections Sequence of construction and traffic maintenance plans indicating, in concept, a se- quence of construction and a scheme for handling traffic in each construction stage • Drainage concepts Utility concepts showing potential utility conflicts • Right-of-way requirements at the level of detail of the functional plans • Preliminary opinions of cost at the level of detail of the functional plans for each con- struction stage and for the entire plan seaO88S/046s1n0 10/17/91 I-82/Yakima Avenue Evaluate Selected Alternatives The selected alternatives refined will be subjected to a detailed screening using similar, but expanded, criteria from the initial evaluation. The results of this evaluation will be made available for agency and public review in the selection of a preferred alternative. A summary memorandum will be prepared. Ten copies will be submitted for review and comment. The review comments will be addressed, and 10 copies will be submitted for approval. TASK NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR Interviews/Public Information Plan Establish Design Criteria Assemble Existing Data Analyze Existing Conditions Traffic Modeling Traffic Forecasts Develop and Evaluate Design Concepts — Level 1 Develop Design Concepts — Level 2 (8) Evaluate Design Concepts — Level 2 (8) Refine Alternatives (3) Evaluate Alternatives (3) Brief Steering Committee Brief City Council Media Briefing Workshops Static Display Slides Video Model Scope Development — Phase II mow mow �maim ��mum unuumm F mmu F 111111111 F Scheduled Tasks mom Finalize Task F Meetings y Agency Review minium F r� uummF V V V .-,-- V V mIIIII uuuu V V 11111111F y V V ENCLOSURE B Project Schedule Yakima Avenue/I-82 Interchange and Fair Avenue EXHIBIT C-3 PAYMENT (SPECIFIC RATES OF PAY) The CONSULTANT shall be paid by the AGENCY for completed work and services rendered under this AGREEMENT as provided hereinafter. Such payment shall be full compensation for work performed or services rendered and for all labor, materials, supplies, equipment, and incidentals necessary to complete the work. The CONSULTANT shall conform with all applicable portions of 48 CFR 31. 1. Hourly Rates The CONSULTANT shall be paid by the AGENCY for, work done, based upon the negotiated hourly rates shown in Exhibits D and E attached hereto and by this reference made part of this AGREEMENT. The rates listed shall be applicable for calendar year 1991 and shall be subject to negotiation for each following 12 -month period upon request of the CONSULTANT or the AGENCY. The rates are inclu- sive of direct salaries, payroll additives, overhead, and fee. In the event renegotiation of the hourly rates is conducted, the AGENCY reserves the right to audit for any change in the over- head rate currently in use by the CONSULTANT and modify the hourly rates to be paid to the CONSULTANT subsequent to the renegotiation accordingly. Any changes in the CONSULTANT'S fixed hourly rates may include salary or overhead adjust- ments. 2. Direct Nonsalary Costs Direct nonsalary costs will be reimbursed at the actual cost to the CONSULTANT. These charges may include, but are not limited to the following items: travel, printing, long distance telephone, supplies, computer charges, and fees of subconsultants. Air or train travel will only be reimbursed to economy class levels unless otherwise approved by the AGENCY. Automobile mileage for travel will be reimbursed as the current rate approved for AGENCY employees and shall be supported by the date and time of each trip with origin and designation of such trips. Subsistence and lodging expenses will be reimbursed at the same rate as for AGENCY employees. The billing for nonsalary cost, directly identifiable with the PROJECT, shall be an itemized listing of the charges supported by the original bills, invoices, expense accounts, and miscellaneous supporting data retained by the CONSULTANT. Copies of the original supporting documents shall be supplied to the AGENCY upon request. All above charges must be necessary for the services provided under this AGREEMENT. 3. Maximum Amount The maximum amount payable for completion of work under this AGREEMENT shall not exceed the amount shown in the hcading of this AGREEMENT. No minimum amount payable is guaranteed under this AGREEMENT. This does not include payment for extra work as stipulated in Section XIV, Extra Work. 4. Monthly Progress Payments Progress payments may be claimed on a monthly basis for all costs authorized in 1 and 2 above. The monthly invoices shall be supported by detailed statements for hours expended at the rates established in Exhibits D and E, including names and classifi- cations of all employees, and invoices for all direct nonsalary expenses. 5. Inspection of Cost Records The CONSULTANT and his/her subconsultants shall keep available for inspection by representatives of the AGENCY, STATE, and the United States, for a period of three years after final payment, the cost records and accounts pertaining to this AGREEMENT and all items related to or bearing upon these records with the following exception: if any litigation, claim, or audit is started before the three-year period, the records shall be retained until all litigation, claims, or audit findings involving the records have been resolved. The three-year retention period begins when the CONSULTANT receives final payment. 6. Final Payment Final payment of any balance due the CONSULTANT of the gross amount earned will be made promptly upon its verification by the AGENCY after the completion of the work under this AGREEMENT, contingent upon receipt of all PS&E, plans, maps, notes, reports, and other related documents which are required to be furnished under this AGREEMENT. Acceptance of such final payment by the CONSULTANT shall constitute a release of claims of any nature which the CONSULTANT may have against the AGENCY unless such claims are specifically reserved in writing and transmitted to the AGENCY by the 1 CONSULTANT n__�r__�______. _�_..___.._ _ . _ .. AGENCY CONSUL 1 At\ 1 prior t its acceptance. Said final payment shalt not, however, be a bar to any claims that the may have against the CONSULTANT or to any remedies the AGENCY may pursue with respect to such claims. The rates and total price of the original contract and any additions or changes thereto shall be adjusted to exclude any significant stuns by which the AGENCY determines the contract pike was increased due' --o y to inaccurate, incomplete, or noncurrent wage rates or overhead rates, supplied to the AGENCY by the CONSULTANT. 7. Management Reserve Fund If the AGENCY desires the CONSULTANT to perform additional work beyond that already defined in this AGREEMENT, , the Agreement Administrator may authorize additional funds for this purpose. Such authorization(s) shall be in writing and shall not exceed the lesser of $50,000 or 1O% of the Maximum Amount Payable as shown in the heading of this Agreement. Any changes requiring additional costs in excess of the "Management Reserve Fund" shall be made in accordance with Section XIV, "Extra Work." 2 CONSULTANT prior to its acceptance. Said final payment shall not, however, be a bar to any claims that the AGENCY may have against the CONSULTANT or to any remedies the AGENCY may pursue with respect to such claims. The rates and total price of the original contract and any additions or changes thereto shall be adjusted to exclude any significant sums by which the AGENCY determines the contract price was increased due to inaccurate, incomplete, or noncurrent wage rags or overhead rates, supplied to the AGENCY by the CONSULTANT, 7. Management Reserve Fund If the AGENCY desires the CONSULTANT to perform additional work beyond that already defined in this AGREEMENT, the Agreement Administrator may authorize additional funds for this purpose. Such authorization(s) shall be in writing and shall not exceed the lesser of S50,000 or 10% of the Maximum Amount Payable as shown in the heading of this Agreement. Any changes requiring additional costs in excess of the "Management Reserve Fund" shall be made in accordance with Section XIV, "Extra Work." 2 EXHIBIT D-2 CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION -SUMMARY SHEET (SPECIFIC RATES OF PAY) FEE SCHEDULE Discipline or Job Title ENGINEER 0 1 r Hourly Overhead Profit Rate Rate @ 168% @ 27% Per Hour 15.12 25.40 4.08 44.60 17.78 29.87 II 19.76 III IV V VI VII VTTT IX TECHNICAL AIDE TECHNICIAN I II III IV V 21.84 36.69 25.27 42.45 28.74 48.28 32.91 55.29 39.14 65.76 46 91 78.81 75.43 126.72 9.27 15.57 12.20 20.50 14.38 24.16 16.85 28.31 19.18 32.22 22.24 37 16 4.80 52.45 5.34 58.29 5.90 64.43 6.82 74.55 7.76 84.78 8.89 97.08 10.57 115.46 12.67 138.38 20.37 222.52 2.50 27.35 3.29 35.99 3.88 42.42 4.55 49.71 5.18 56.58 6,05 65.61 OFFICE 11.44 19.22 3.09 33.75 1 RUN DATE: 10/16/91 RUN TIME: 5:36 PM CH2M HILL SUMMARY SHEET CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION CH2M HILL FILE CAEXCEL\FILES11-821REQ1.XLS DATE: 10/16/91 SEA 413:60 1. Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 1991 Average Hourly Raw Labor Class Role Hours Rate Cost Rate E7 PM/Sr. Reviewer 497 $39.14 $19,453 E6 Task Lead Engineer 182 $32.91 $5,990 E5 Lead Engineer 188 $28.74 $5,403 E4 Lead Engineer 168 $25.27 $4,245 E3 Design Engineer 768 $21.84 $16,773 E2 Design Engineer 250 $19 76 $4,940 El Designer 0 $17.78 $0 T4 Design Technician 239 $19.18 $4,584 T3 Lead Drafting Tech. 378 $16.85 $6,369 T2 Technician 246 $14.38 $3,537 OA Office Clerk 133 $11.44 $1,522 2. Total Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 3,049 $72,816 $23.88 3. Overhead Cost (OH) - Including Salary Additives (Based upon Federal audit) (DSC) 168.00% $122,331 Subtotal $195,147 4. Fixed Fee (DSC) 27.00% $19,660 5. Reimbursables $63,845 6. Subconsultants Costs (See Note D) MBE WBE OTHER TOTALS HLA 7.87% $22,462 SHIMONO 1.73%' $4,923 ETS 0.00% $0 TECHSTAFF 1.53% $4,372 JGL 0.00% $0 SUB 6 0.00% $0 SUB 7 0.00% $0 Subtotals 1.73% 1.53% 7.87% $31,757 7. Escalation Costs (See Note C) $6,612 8..GRANDTOTAL .-: Estimated :Fee .(See Note >C)..... $285:264. NOTES: LUMP A. Escalation factors: SUM 1992 labor rates over 1991: 5.40% YES Current work planned for 1992: 57.00% Salary escalation factor: 3.08% Includes fixed fee noted above: 10.07% B. Other factors: Overhead: 168.00% Fixed fee on DSC: 27.00% Labor 100.00% Multiplier 295.00% C. See separate table for breakdown. D. Costs included in Number 5. Page: 1 of 1 EXHIBIT E COMPANY PROPRIETARY CH2M HILL, INC. ESTIMATED ALLOWABLE OVERHEAD RATE (Federally Funded Projects) Projected for the Year Ended December 31, 1991 (000's rounded) PAYROLL TAXES AND FRINGE BENEFITS: Payroll Taxes Vacation, Holiday, and Sick Pay Group Insurance and Miscellaneous Pension Plan 15.6% 17.8 15.6 2.0 GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES: Indirect Salaries 61.9 Incentive and Retirement Pay 13.2 Buildings and Equipment 38.6 Taxes, Licenses, and Insurance 9.7 Professional Services 8.4 Travel and Subsistence 16.1 Office Supplies and Other Expenses 21.1 Professional Education 3.1 Recruiting Costs 4.9 Printing and Computer 17.2 Service Center Income (65.6) 51.0% 128.6 TOTAL ALLOWABLE OVERHEAD RATE 179.6 LESS - VOLUNTARY MANAGEMENT RATE REDUCTION (11.6) 1991 FORWARD PRICING OVERHEAD RATE 168.0% CH2M HILL's 1991 forward pricing overhead rate, as proposed to the U.S. Environ- mental Protection Agency, Office of the Inspector General for Audits, is 168% (50% salary fringe, 118% general and administrative) applied to direct labor costs. The above estimated breakdown has been prepared for informational purposes only, and has not been reviewed by U.S. EPA OIG. This document contains proprietary financial information. No portion of this document may be extracted or reproduced for any purposes without the advance written permission of CH2M HILL. saO561A8O31t1 517191 COMPANY PROPRIETARY RUN DATE: 10/16/91 FILE: C:\EXCEL\FILES\I-82\REQ1 XLS DATE: 16 -Oct -91 SEA 413.60 RUN TIME: 5:37 PM Page: 1 of 1 HOUR , LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OF YAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT HiA 2 .• ..... 4�...... PROJECT.MANAGEMENT. QUALITY: 'CONTROL 'AND:PEER.REVIEW COMMUNITY RELATIONS P• TASK DESCRIPTION .... ,..; HOURS' C,ABpR AND EXPENSES H0uRS RELIMINARY' ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS . ' :SUS'TOTAL ..... HOURS . %OFTOTAL HOURS 325 24 510 1,740 0 2,599 ,41,61% $34,177 $3,609 $67,728 $141,385 $0 .-;;46*9 SHIMONO :LABOR: HAIR' .::EXPENSES. HOURS 0 $0 0 10.._... ---.._ $850..._._. 0 140 $11,177 0 140 $9,808 48 0 $0 D 29(Y; 52'1,835 48 1.696 TECHSTAFF AN4 EXPENSES $0 $0 $0 $4,891 $0 HOURS AND .EXPENSES 0 0 0 112 0 $0 so $0 $4,346 $0 $4,891; 112 3.7% 54,346 • SALARY ESCALATION MASTER TOTAL • ...:.::..... . ... "HOURS %OFTOTAL:HOURS ESTIMATED' HOURLY LABOR :RATE{1991). LABOR PLUS::OVERH.EAA . $6,612 $0 $625 $0 $26 $0 2,599 85.2% 290: $22460: 4$ 1:6% $4 922: 112.: •3:7%. 54,372.: PROJECT VTALS .:PERCENT I.AHOR. OF AND TOTAL HOURS EXPENSES` HOURS. 325 34 650 2,040 0 • $,049 100:0% 3,049 100.0% $34,177 $4,459 $78,905 $160,430 10.7% 1.1% 21.3%, 66.9% 0.0% :'$27T,97111 ... ...1:Q0 096; $7,294 $0 $285,265:: • 1:00 O%, EXHIBIT F PAYMENT UPON TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT BY THE AGENCY OTHER THAN FOR FAULT OF THE CONSULTANT (Refer to Agreement, Section IX) Lump Sum Contracts A final payment shah be made to the CONSULTANT which when added to any payments previously made shall total the same per- centage of the Lump Sum Amount as the work completed at the time of termination is to the total work required for the PROJECT. In addition, the CONSULTANT shall be paid for any authorized extra work completed. Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contracts A final payment shall be made to the CONSULTANT which when added to any payments previously made, shall total the actual costs plus the same percentage of the fixed fee as the work completed at the time of termination is to the total work required for the Project. In addition, the CONSULTANT shall be paid for any authorized extra work completed. Specific Rates of Pay Contracts A final payment shall be made to the CONSULTANT for actual hours charged at the time of termination of this AGREEMENT plus any direct nonsalary costs incurred at the time of termination of this AGREEMENT. Cost Per Unit of Work Contracts A final payment shall be made to the CONSULTANT for actual units of work completed at the time of termination of this AGREEMENT. EXHIBIT G SUBCONTRACTED WORK The AGENCY permits subcontracts for the following portions of the work of this AGREEMENT: Huibregtse, Louman Associates: Arterial street system design, construction observation, community involvement Techstaff, Inc.: Engineering support services • Engineering Technical Services: Drafting and document production Don Shimono Associates: Landscaping concept and design, and visual analysis • Diversified Field and Land Services, Inc.: Right of way impact analysis, true cost estimate, appraisal, negotiation, relocation assistance 1 RUN DATE: 117/V1 NM Tim- re 8:41 M4 EXHIBIT G-1 ''':Zil'r-r,.1.--4:.'-::i4::::::Atkl, ...11.%A..q-'44.1.:): -•:. ,..,,. iT:Z • - . 1 Ali ' 41, •,, ''',,,''':'51•••tinl',..,-,!`-?,:6,,V.'nr,A°P.`, .`,:4,',.*AM.,..,a,a,g4:—.... 4,., .„. . , ,,,, 44144M44—T. . • •::,. ... .N,' "..., .%,:r• SEA 414G' 't- - ::: .. .... ---f-...-, ,----gg 1. Direct Salary Deaf (DSC) 1 alii Averago11 Hourly Raw Labor Cleat ma Hum Rats Coat P10 PeinolpaMo-Charg• 48 $35.00 Stew P Probational 0 815.00 1$0 CAD Oadd Operator 0 $16.00 SO D Desk -am v 1e,E0 ikAN ... OA AoWtiniatratea 0 110.00 10 0 110.00 SO 0 S0.00 10 0 30.00 SO 0 $0.00 10 0 $0.00 SO 0 10.00 10 2, Total Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 48 $1,880 835.00 ararbsod Cost 1,011 • Inotudno Salary Additives posed won Federal autht) (DSO 149.40% $2.510 --Subtotid $4,45. tFixed Fat rose) 15.00% $252 : Ralroburaablaw SOO Subcommittee* Oasts See Nola D 1 Subtotals 0.00% QM% 0.00% 7. Esoalaton Coats (See Note 0 131 'le' '4,44''f- 1-__ Mir:•,t,,,.-i•t, • ... ' • —111.,:a1?-1:!g'!''''.4:644:.,,J-s"...''''r'4, _ ifk NOTES: LUMP A. Escalation factors: 8111 14192 labor rates OM 1991: 7.06% Gurnent work planned for lint 10.00% &dory escalation factor: Q.71% Includes toted be noted above: 8.01% B. Other faders: Overhead: 149.40% Fixed tee on DSC: 15.00% Labor touters Multiplier 284.4014, C. Note not tssed D. No subconeultants ore on the team. RUN DATE: 10/17/91 RUN TIME: 8:46 AM EXHIBIT G-1 SUB 1 :SUMMARY SHEET CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION HLA LS FILE: CAEXCELNFILESi(-iIZRE41:XLS DATE: 10/17/91 SEA 413.60 1. Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 1991 Average Hourly Raw Labor Class Role Hours Rate Cost Rate PE Principal Engineer 180 $28.90 $5,202 RE Registered Engineer 110 $20.00 $2,200 PRE Project Engineer 0 $15.00 $0 SET Sr. Engineering Tech. 0 $12.00 $0 ET Engineering Tech 0 $10.00 $0 RLS Reg. Land Surveyor 0 $17.00 $0 RSE Resident Engineer 0 $16.00 $0 SPC Survey Party Chief 0 $13.00 $0 ST Survey Technician 0 $10.00 $0 WPT Word Processing Tech. 0 $12.14 $0 0 $0.00 $0 2. Total Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 290 $7,402 $25.52 3. Overhead Cost (OH) - Including Salary Additives (Based upon Federal audit) (DSC) 141.00% $10,437 Subtotal $17,839 4. Fixed Fee (DSC) 27.00% $1,999 5. Reimbursables $1,999 6. Subconsultants Costs (See Note D) Subtotals 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% $0 7. Escalation Costs (See Note A) $625 8. GRAND' TOTAL - Estimated fee tSee Note C) .... ..:$22,482:.... ...: NOTES: LUMP A. Escalation factors: SUM 1992 labor rates over 1991: 5.00% I .. 'YES Current work planned for 1992: 63.00% Salary escalation factor: 3.15% Includes fixed fee noted above: 11.20% B. Other factors: Overhead: 141.00% Fixed fee on DSC: 27.00% Labor 100.00% Multiplier 268.00% C. Note not used D. No subconsultants are on the team. Page: 1 of 1 HUIBREGTSE, LOUMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. Exhibit G-2 BREAKDOWN OF SUBCONSULTANT'S OVERHEAD COST BREAKDOWN OF OVERHEAD COST FICA 7.51% Unemployment Compensation 5.00% Medical Aid and Industrial Insurance 1.00% Company Insurance and Medical 3.55% Vacation, Holiday, and Sick Leave 8.80% State B&O Tax 6.00% Insurance 5.09% Administration and Time Unassignable 23.02% Printing, Stationery, and Supplies 7.06% Travel Not Assignable 11.53% Telephone and Telegraph Not Assignable 3.72% Fees, Dues, Professional Meetings 1.89% Utilities and Maintenance 5.19% Rent 7.03% Rental of Equipment 23.01% Office Miscellaneous, Postage 14.12% Professional Services 7.48% Total Generated Overhead 141.0% HLA3-18 RUN DATE: 10f17/91 RUN TIME: 8:47 AM EXHIBIT G-1 SUB 2 SUMMARY SHEET CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION SHIMONO FILE C:\EXCEL\FRLES8-92\REQ1.XLS DATE: 10/17/91 SEA 413.60 1. Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 1991 Average Hourly Raw Labor Class Role Hours Rate Cost Rate PIC Principal -in -Charge 48 $35.00 $1,680 P Professional 0 $15.00 $0 CAD Cadd Operator 0 $16.00 $0 D Designer 0 $8.50 $0 OA Administrative 0 $10.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 2. Total Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 48 $1,680 $35.00 3. Overhead Cost (OH) - Including Salary Additives (Based upon Federal audit) (DSC) 149.40% $2,510 Subtotal $4,190 4. Fixed Fee (DSC) 15.00% $252 5. Reimbursables $450 6. Subconsultants Costs (See Note D) Subtotals 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% $0 7. Escalation Costs (See Note C) $31 8:_. RAND TOTAL -.Estimated Fee {See Note. C) ..:. $4:923 .. . NOTES: LUMP A. Escalation factors: SUM 1992 labor rates over 1991: 7.05% I - YES Current work planned for 1992: 10.00% Salary escalation factor: 0.71 % Includes fixed fee noted above: 6.01% 8. Other factors: Overhead: 149.40% Fixed fee on DSC: 15.00% Labor 100.00% Multiplier 264.40% C. Note not used D. No subconsultants are on the team. Page: 1 of 1 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNERS EXHIBIT G-2 BREAKDOWN OF SUBCONSULTNAT'S OVERHEAD COST PROJECT: I-82 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS RECREATION PLANNERS OVERHEAD FOR 1991 DATE: 9-13-91 OVERHEAD ITEMS SUB TOTALS X A. SALARY RELATED OVERHEAD Sick Leave 1.9% Vacation 6.1% Holidays 2.3% Payroll Taxes 6.0% SUBTOTAL 16.3% B. GENERAL OVERHEAD Automobile Professional Dues/Publications Education Business Insurances Outside Professional Services Maintenance Advertising Office Expenses Retirement Plan Rent/Utilities Donations Business Taxes Overhead Wages 3.0% 1.4% 0.4% 4.6% 1.9% 1.2% 0.7% 18.9% 10.6% 13.9% 1.9% 24.5% 50.1% Subtotal 133.1% TOTAL OVERHEAD EXPENSES 149.4X \overhead\ohcalc.91 375 118TH AVENUE S.E. SUITE 100 BELLEVUE WASHINGTON 98005 `206)454-1500 RUN DATE: 10/17/91 RUN TIME: 8:48 AM EXHIBIT G-1 SUB 4 SUMMARY SHEET CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION TECHSTAFF FILE: C:\EXCELWILES1(-82\REQi.XLS DATE; 10/17/91 SEA 413.60 1. Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 1991 Average Hourly Raw Labor Class Role Hours Rate Cost Rate SG Senior Geologist 0 $35.00 $0 SC Survey Party Chief 0 $30.00 $0 JG Junior Geologist 0 $25.00 $0 PDT Project Design Tech 112 $25.00 $2,800 CAD CAD Tech 0 $22.00 $0 IP Instrument Person 0 $20.00 $0 RCB Rod Chain/Brusher 0 $15.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 2. Total Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 112 $2,800 $25.00 3. Overhead Cost (OH) - Including Salary Additives (Based upon Federal audit) (DSC) 41.23% $1,154 Subtotal $3,954 4. Fixed Fee (DSC) 14.00% $392 5. Reimbursables $0 6. Subconsultants Costs (See Note D) • Subtotals 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% $0 7. Escalation Costs (See Note C) $26 8. GRAND TOTAL - Estimated Eye See Note 0) $4,,372. :.. .. NOTES: LUMP A. Escalation factors: SUM 1992 labor rates over 1991: 6.00% 1: YES Current work planned for 1992: 10.00% Salary escalation factor: 0.60% Includes fixed fee noted above: 9.91% B. Other factors: Overhead: 41.23% Fixed fee on DSC: 14.00% Labor 100.00% Multiplier 155.23% C. Note not used D. No subconsultants are on the team. Page: 1 of 1 Mr. Don Tranum CH2M HILL Yakima Project BREAKDOWN OF OVERHEAD Based on 1990/91 sales and expenses through fiscal year, ending 3/31/91. SALES DIRECT SALARY COSTS/WAGES $3,778,042.00 $2,679,788.00 EXPENSES: % D.S.C. PAYROLL TAXES ON DIRECT WAGES $ 312,957.00 11.7 % TAXES B& LICENSES 73,622.00 2.7 RENT 37,310.00 1.4 % PHONE 18,007.00 .72% ADMIN. SERVICES (ADMIN P/R, LEGAL, CONSULTING, 536,713.00 20.0% INSURANCE) OFFICE (SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT, FIXTURES, POSTAGE) 126,228.00 4.71% TOTAL EXPENSES 1991 Escalation Factor for Direct Labor Rates: Limited to 6.0% $1,104,837.00 41.23% TECHSTAFF, INC. RESOLUTION NO, D-6015 A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager and City Clerk of the City of Yakima to execute an agreement with CH2M-Hill for professional services. WHEREAS, it is necessary to engage professional services for the Yakima Avenue / 1-82 Interchange and Fair Avenue Project; and WHEREAS, local and state law including RCW 39.80 to the extent required have been complied with the procurement of this contract, and WHEREAS, CH2M-Hill has offered to perform those professional services in accordance with the provisions of the attached agreement document; and the City Council deems it to be in the best interest of the City that the agreement document be executed by the City, now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA: The City Manager and the City Clerk of the City of Yakima are hereby authorized and directed to execute an agreement with CH2M-Hill for the purpose mentioned above, a copy of which agreement is attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 22nd day of October, 1991. ATTEST: CITY CLERK TD -10 DC.6 4 - 10/21/91 MAYOR CONTRACT NO. q/- /03 RESOLUTION NO.0- 667.5 CONTRACT/LEASE/AGREEMENT ROUTE SLIP & CHECK LIST Two copies for original signatures City Manager signature City Clerk signature City Attorney signature Make copy of above signatures Notification letter/obtain sign. Ind.iAidual/Organic tion COMMENTS: C44 l;� crrr� c14t.1 tU— DATE SENT COMPLETE i%3 14,13 ►01A3