Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-1992-D6149 CH2M Hill / I-82 / Professional ServicesRESOLUTION NO, D 6 1 4 9 OA RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager and City Clerk of the City of Yakima to execute Supplement #1 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 #1 to the agreement document; and the City Council deems it to be in the best interest of the City that the Supplement #1 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 #1 to the agreement with CH2M-Hill for the purpose mentioned above, a copy of which Supplement #1 to the agreement is attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this E4T"- day of July, 1992. ATTEST: CI TD -10 DC.7 5 - 7/'9"92 C ERK MAYOR K MHILL July 7, 1992 SEA685.15 Engineers Planners Economists Scientists 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 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, `7:25 .00M1---4ILL. Consultant's Signature Approving Authority City Manager 7/ 19 CITY OF YAKIMA Date ATTEST: City Clerk (ITV CONTRACT N6: nt/dt004/yaksuppl `p-l.�l4Q 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 Total $ 403,247 677,457 529,931 593,776 88,611 108,876 $1,498,092 $1,783,356 73,298 73,298 TOTAL $285,264 $1,571,390 $1,856,654 DOT 140.003 REV 3H1 Pape 2 a12 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 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 7/7/92 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 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 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 1-3 Enclosures 1-4 Review Comments 2 Preliminary Design and Environmental Impact Evaluation Task 1—Project Management Task 2—Quality Control Senior Review Task 3 --Community Relations 2-1 2-1 2-1 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 .:.:..:.:.:...:.:.:.. 4 5 Final 1002152Aq.SEA 1002152Aq.SEA/1 7/7/92 :�:N::is�i:�:•:isti:!ii:�Ii)ii:�i:•.:i'::is�%:�:r:-::-:i:-:i:•ii:-:i:�:i:�:i:�:i:�:�Yi:i:•:i:�:i:- :-. 1:?t�i:�v:�i:(':�v:1iC('isii<�-?(isi4:(�itb:�'r:i-:?(is(^:�^:�i-:(•it�i:hi(iA-Y.(•X(. . I-S2/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 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 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 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 7n/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.SEAI7 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(f) property (Yakima Greenway or Kiwanis Park). This scope or the accompanying budget does not include preparation of a separate Section 4(t) 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) Type, size, and location of recommended retaining walls (retaining wall working drawings) 1002152Cq.SEAJ10 7/7/92 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 7/7/92 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/"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 7/7/92 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 scommodated 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 1' = 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.SEAT16 717192 2-16 i 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. ntersextions. 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 c 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.SEAI18 7/7/92 2-18 I-82/Yaldma 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/19 717/92 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 7/7/92 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 • Geometries • 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 7/1/92 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.SEA22 717)92 2-22 r 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. 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.SEA/23 717192 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. stivity. 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 7/7/92 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.SEAI26 7/7/'92 2-26 c 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.SEA/28 7/7/92 2-28 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 7n/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 7172 2-30 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 Project Schedule ykmsch Yakima Gateway Project _ Phase 11 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 Acc Rp & Rrbv P1 Scope Phase III 1992 1993 JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAVIJUN JUL IAUGISEP i I OCT I i ;NOViDEC 1 t I I ' 1 DES/_A HRG I * DRAFT FINAL. 1D FINA_ RiW I 1 IACC.RPT DRAFT A.HRG PL., F&O i ENCLOSURE B PROJECT SCHEDULE PHASE 11 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 Ert cl oso n. J� MEMORANDUM q MHILL TO: Patt O'Flaherty/SEA FROM: Doug Kunkel/SEA DATE: April 9, 1992 SUBJECT: Yaldma 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. Y kima: Gateway:Project Area lunnber :: :.Description :Potential Environmental :Concerns 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, J,44 ,,4,4,1 Douglas Kunkel fl -N. _As NA.," Nurmoo tre, • exor KS PARK SE CASCADE Mui PROPOSED MUM ?MEM*. RETAIL t 1 lEal iSnw.E.r THE CITY OF YAKIN THE YAKIMA GATEWAY PRI FUNCTIONAL PLA ALTERNATIVE II "svatiaw". PENH 1 L In associatson wan NI leREGTSE , LCtIMAN A Discipline or Job Title ENGINEER 0 CH2M HILL EXHIBIT D-2 CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION -SUMMARY SHEET (SPECIFIC RATES OF PAY) FEE SCHEDULE 1992 1I III IV V VI VII VIII IX TECHNICAL AIDE TECHNICIAN I II ITT TV NT OFFICE Hourly Overhead Profit Rate Rate @ i jR'' @ 27% PerHour 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 70.17 14.27 • 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 or Job Title Principal Engineer Registered /Engineer Project Engineer Sr. Engineering Tech. PnginePring TPrh_ FPg Lar,fi Surveyor RPaidPnt Engineer 4ttrI7Py Party thief Survey Technician Word Processing Tech. 1992 Hourly Overhead Profit Rate Rate @ 165.56 @ 27 PerHour 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 11.00 16.53 1.65 29.18 CADD Operator 16.00 24.05 2.40 42.45 Designer 9.00 13.53 1.35 23.88 Administrative 9.00 13.53 1.35 23.88 • TECH STAFF, INC. Discipline or Job Title Sr. Ge 1ngi St 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 Prost Rate Rate @ 41.23 @ 14 Per Hour 15.00 14.45 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 PINT -10-7G 1-K1 [ECH SRVCS 2068277903 P.02 ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN SERVICES EXHIBIT D-2 CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION — SUMMARY SHEET (SPECIFIC RATES OF PAY) FEE SCHEDULE Hourly Overhead Profit Rate Discipline or Job Tide Rate @ 1.66 015% 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 . 5.1Q 39.77 Manual Draftsperson 10.00 16.60 3.99 30.59 Field Technician 10.00 16.60 3.99 30.59 Tra fir+ Con1-rel F1 aggprg . on _ 19.92 4.79 _ _ 36.71 JGL ACOUSTICS, INC. EXHIBIT D-2 CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION — SUMMARY SHEET (SPECIFIC RATES OF PAY) FEE SCHEDULE Discipline orJob Title Acoustical Consultant 1992 Appendix IN -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 ExwfiRir 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:IEXCELIFILESU-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 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 $179,638 4 Fixed Fee (DSC) 27.00% $18,.264 5. Reimbursables HLA $31,139 6. Subconsultants Costs MBE WBE OTHER TOTALS (No subconsultants) Totals 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% $0 7 Escalation Costs $4,948 8. GRAND TOTAL - Estimated Fee $233,989 9. Management Reserve Fund SO 10. GRAND TOTAL - Estimated Fee $233,989 NOTES: PER A. Escalation tactors: 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: 10.17% B. Other factors: Overhead: 165.56% Fixed fee on DSC: 27.00% Labor 100.00% Multiplier 292.56% Page: 1 of 1 RUN DATE: 7/7/92 RUN TIME: 5:21 PM C-6,6kbtr 4-/ SUB 2 SUMMARY SHEET CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION CITYOFYAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 SHIMONO FILE: CAEXCEL\FILESII-821PHASE2.XLS DATE: 717192 SEA 685.15 1. Direct Salary Cost (DSC) 1992 Average Houry Raw Labor Class Role Hours Rate Cost Rate PIC Principal in Charge 192 535.00 $6,713 P2 Professional 2 546 $17.00 $9,275 P1 Professional 1 0 $11.00 $0 CADD CADD Operator 0 516.00 $0 DS Designer 53 510.00 $528 AD Administrative 70 59.00 $634 0 $0.00 $0 0 50.00 $0 0 50.00 $0 0 $0.00 $0 0 50.00 $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% 526,154 Subtotal $43,304 4 Fixed Fee (DSC) 15.00% 52,573 5. Reimbursables SHIMONO 54,590 6. Subconsultants Costs MBE WBE OTHER TOTALS (No subconsultants) Totals 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 50 7. Escalation Costs 5459 8. GRAND TOTAL-- Estimated Fee 550,926 9. Management Reserve Fund 50 10. GRAND TOTAL - Estimated Fee 550,926 NOTES' PER A. Escalation factors: DIEM 1993 labor rates over 1992: 5.00% 1 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 tee on DSC: 15.00% Labor 100.00% Multiplier 267.50% Page: 1 011 RUN DATE. 7/7/92 RUN TIME. 5:24 PM t #y8iT 6 "/ SUB 3 SUMMARY SHEET CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION CITY OF YAKIMA 1.82/YAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Design and EnvironmentalAssessment Phase 2 TECHSTAFF FILE: C: EXCEL\FILESU-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) 4123% $11,924 Subtotal $40,844 4. Faced Fee (DSC) 14.00% 54,049 5. Reimbursables TECHSTAFF 50 6. Subconsultants Costs MBE WBE OTHER TOTALS (No subconsultants) Totals 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% SO 7. Escalation Costs 51,122 8. GRAND TOTAL - Estimated Fee $46,015 9. Management Reserve Fund 50 10. GRAND TOTAL - Estimated Fee $46,015 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: 9.91% B. Other factors: Overhead: 41.23% Fixed fee on DSC: 14.00% Labor 100.00% Multiplier 155.23% Page: 1 of 1 RUN DATE: 7/7/92 RUN TIME: 5:30 PM 'tc't6 cl (—1 SUB 5 Page: 1 of 1 SUMMARY SHEET CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION CITY OF YAKIMA i-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 ETS FILE: CAEXCEL\FILESII-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 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 $18,165 d. Fixed Fee (DSC) 15.00% 81,024 5. Reimbursables ETS SO 6. Subconsultants Costs MBE WBE OTHER TOTALS (No subconsultants) Totals 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 80 7. Escalation Costs $480 8. GRAND TOTAL - Estimated Fee $19,669 9. Management Reserve Fund 80 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 fee on DSC: 15.00% Labor 100.00% Muttiplier 281.00% Page: 1 of 1 iUN DATE: 7/7/92 RUN TIME. 5:28 PM b\l(Gl3i7 l `( SUB 4 SUMMARY SHEET CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION CITY OF YAKIMA I=82/YAI4MA AVENUE Preliminary Design. and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 JGL ACOUSTICS, INC. FILE: C:\EXCEL\FILES\I-82\PHASEZJCLS DATE: 7/7/92 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 50.00 $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% 50 5. Reimbursables JGL ACOUSTICS, INC. 5690 6. Subconsultants Costs MBE WBE OTHER TOTALS (No subconsultants) Totals 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 50 7. Escalation Costs $0 8. GRAND TOTAL - Estimated Fee 58,043 9. Management Reserve Fund SO 10. GRAND TOTAL - Estimated Fee $8,043 • NOTES: PER A. Escalation factors: DIEM 1993 labor rates over 1992: 0.00% 1 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 fee on DSC: 0.00% Labor 100.00% Multiplier 100.00% Page: 1 011 Aar Von _ AM. JIM 4;14-1,1,11-Ink LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNERS RECREATION 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 I-82\oh92 150.29% 375 118TH AVENUE S.E. SUITE 100 BELLEVUE WASHINGTON 98005 (206)454-1500 MAY -15-92 FRS 10:59 tNh1NttKINL iti_.i JKVCS 206827 r9b.5 r. 0.D ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN SERVICES EXHIBIT G-2 BREAKDOWN OF SUB CONSULTANT'S OVERHEAD COST Fringe Benefits FICA 7% Unemployment 1.93% Medical Aid and IndustriallInsurance Company Insurance and Medical 2.76% Vacation, Holiday, and SickLeave 3.42% Commission, Bonuses/PensionPlan .6% Total Fringe Benefits 20.71% General Overhead State B &O Taxes 16% Insurance i 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 14% Rent 22% Equipment Support 15% Office Miscellaneous ,Postage 5% Total Generated Overhead 145.3% Total 166.0% JUL-07-1992 02:13PM FROM JGL ACOUSTICS INC EXHIBIT G-2 JGL Acoustics, Inc. TO CH2M HILL (SEA) P.02 1505D 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 joer 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 mill of my projects (public or private) including the following: :.. =.. Willow Lake WWIP (Salem, -OR .: _ USA Sludge Storage Facility (Hillsboro, OR) Alki/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 Very truly yours, JGL Acoustics, Inc. • Jerry G. Lilly, P.E. President Member, INCE close re. E A. ir CO A. / ?� `'e0 /¢ STI? u6 SCCGE Ci -www, RZIOCA %Lv YPKIMAPI4E° l • GREEN'NAY BOISE CASCADE MILL Eut.vERT Err 1E00 Fa,v_ loo R.7500 r g.126' Mir PROPOSED YAKIMA AVENUE RETAIL 0 Ell 0 U 2 w N. 9th sTPEEr tu w Lir 46, KIWANIS PARK THE CITY OF YAK IMA THE YAKfMA GATEWAY PROJECT FUNCTIONAL PLAN ALTERNATIVE II EPG IL 1992 Cfaf HILL in asSOC,ar'On wUh HUIBREGT EE, MAN ASS^C:AIES. ma. *Wawa ittiaNdattaVai . / 10021536q.SEA 10021536q.SEA/1 7/6/92 3-1 I-82/Yakima Avenue mid lamb assistance , Plawnen Geotee ePo ........................ ..................... ;.::>:<"<. :'• 10021538q.SEA/1 716i92 n ain c 4-1 I-82/Yakima Avenue .................................... eths p;.`" 1:?rvlsoS Load ests Dewa UIQ tea ctrt at. 10021538q.SEA/2 7/6/92 tis I-82/Yakima Avenue 61i4 Qgth 0.14 1 4-2 • 10021539q.SEA 10021539q.SEA/1 7/6/92 5-1 RUN DATE: 7/7/82 RLJN TIME: 4:19 PM CH2M HILL SUMMARY:SHEET :CONSULTANT FEEDETERMINATION •CtTY OF YAKIMA : f AIQMA ►VENUE Prel)mtnary Design and Envinonn►entat=Assessment >Phese 2 . ... . . .CH2M HILL FILE:_ C:IEXCEL\FILE51.1.82 PHASE2XLS DATE: .:717192 SEA 685.1.5 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 1,784 *30.52 $53,849 E4 Lead Engineer 373 $26.84 $10,006 E3 Design Engineer 1,660 $23.19 $38,484 E2 Design Engineer 896 *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) 168.0016 $537,046 Subtotal $856,716 . Fixed Fee (DSC) 27.00% *86,311 5. Reimbursabies CH2M HILL $171,289 6. Subconsuttants Costs MBE WEE OTHER TOTALS HLA SHIMONO CHSTAFF L ACOUSTICS, INC. ETS SUB 6 SUB 7 3.40% 1.31% 3.07% 0.0096 15.62% *233,989 $50,926 $46,015 0.54% *8,043 *19,669 SO 0.00% *0 Totals 7. Escalation Costs 4.71% 3.07% 18.18% $358,642 $70,594 548,015 *242,032 (1992 to 1993) $25,134 8. TOTAL. :$1 ,498;092 9. Management Reserve Fund $73,298 0: GRAND TOTAL- Estimated Fee $1,571,390 NOTES: PER A. Escalation factors: DEM 1993 labor rates over 1992: 6.00% I:... 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 of 1 EA/G40 v 1Q E A PAGE/ RUN DATE: 7/7/92 TIME: 4:57 PM WKSP: C:\EXCEL\FILES\I-82\PHASE2.XLW FILE: C:\EXCEL\FILES\I-82\PH2EXP.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 $83154 I 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 Telephone $1,779 Supplies $4,340 Temporary Help $34,882 Subconsultants $358,639 TOTAL $529,927 Page 1 011 F_Ncc.o$o,e A- PA E Z WKSP• C:\EXCELF,FILESV-82THASE2XLW FILE. C:\EXCELIFA.ES1.1-82WHASE2.XLS DATE 07-Ju1-92 SEA 685.15 HOUR , LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OFYAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Preiminary Design and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 TASK CH2M HILL TASK DESCRIPTION HOURS PROJECT MANAGEMENT• --- 2 QUALITY CONTROL SENIOR REVIEW 4 TCOMMUNITY RELATIONS VCJUSTIFICATIONREPORT 5 ENVIRON.ASSESSIvMENT 6.___. PRELIMINARY DESIGN - LABOR AND - EXPENSES HLA SHIMONO .LABOR AND EXPENSES HOURS 1,450 $132,139 F 0 $0 404 542.712 36 $3294 866$90.616 236 519.561 200 $15,559 I 0 $0 839 _.82_- .____ 56,642 9,953 5764.952 3,441 5194,541 5t.:3TOTAL- HOURSI 13,711 51,114,323 3,795- "••'. ,795'b CF TOTAL HOURS' 67.3%b 1 _w... 1 _ 573298 50 . OFTIOHAi.SERVICES .-..-......__._......_-.-- --.� _ 525,135 54947 1 -----'SALARY ESCALATION ---__-. ... - - MASTER 50 50 ...__-- .. TOTAL HOUls, 13,111 51,212.+ 6 I 3,796 4233,965 :6 OF TOTAL HOURS", 67.8% a 18,8.6 >' 0 TECHSTAFF LABOR AND EXPENSES 0 HOURS LABOR AND- EXPENSES- TASK NDEXPENSES 501 0 50 [ 0 50 50 57.987 783 542.479 Jim 5" ,038'11 881 550,466 4.3'0 0 0 0 1,157 1,157 50 SO 50 50 $0 $44.897 5.7'6 544,897 0 5459 50 50 51,122 50 661 550,925 1.1 546,019 4.3% 5.7'6 V .4- - • V Pfd 6'c: 3 ESTIMATED HOURLY LABOR RATE (1992) LABOR PLUS OVERHEAD i ETS :LABOR • PROJECT TOTALS- 'LABOR'i PERCENT OF �:1G631COUSTtCS,'fNC.. HOURS LABOR AND: EXPENSES: HOURS- 0 LABOR .; AND EXPENSES -- 50 HOURS LABOR AND EXPENSES HOURS: .; AND EXPENSES HOURS AND TOTAL EXPENSES HOURS - $0 0 $0 1,450 $132,139 72°' - 0 50 $0 0 50 440 $46,006 22%J $110,177 5.51 0 S0 0 $0 1,102 0 50 0 50 0 50' 0 $0 200 $15,559 1.01 0 50 0 50 50 1,076 $91,017 5.3°'_ 77 0 $8,043 $0 0 618 - 50 $19,187 0 -- _ 50 0 -- _ - - -_ 78.9'. 0 50 0 $0 15,951 $1,071,056 77 58,043 618 i 3.1% 519,187 0 0A% 50 0 0.0 d 50 - b 20,219 400.0% 51,465,954 - - - 100.07'1 0.4% • --- -' -- - -- ' $0 50 $73298 500 $0 $480 50 $0 $32,143 -$0 -._ .. _ 50 50 $0 $0 - -._ 50 100.01' r 77 56,043 618 3.1% 19,66 0 0.ff0.0%0.0 40 0 50 t 20,219 100,0% 51,571,395 • 0.4% ESTIMATED HOURLY LABOR RATE (1992) LABOR PLUS OVERHEAD i WKSP CADCCEL\FILES\I-82WHASE2.XLW FILE C.19CCEL\FLES\I-82WHASE2XLS DATE- 074s1-92 SEA 6E15.15 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OF YAKIMA 1-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Prefirnnary Design and Enworvnental Assessment Phase 2 PAcc q /T - • _-, -_ TASK . TASK DESCRIPTION - -- - PROJECT SUMMARY PHASE SUMMARY PEA SHEET ANALYSIS TASK. CH2M HILL 4-11011 ANALYSIS CH2M HILL .HOURS BY GRADE :PERCENT TOTAL. OF' TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL. TOTAL LABOR & EXPENSES 13dTr NO: :HOURS COST. PENCENT -' - - E3 "E6" E5" EC 53' E2 E1 T4 273 T2' OA TASK: TOTAL. -LABOR: HOURS HOURS. 'COSTS EXPENSE LABOR AND COSTS EXPENSES 1992 199S•-1994 .SHEET _ OF. PER PER 001.19" SHTS: SHEET SHEET -OF' TASK . - COMMENTS -:PR6IECT MANAGEMENT Pagect Management 500 400 -I 150 400 1,450 10.6% 51220,954 511,185 5132,139 552856 579.283 0 0 0 SO 100.0% -1 0 00% SO SO 50 S3 SO 0 0 0 SO 00% -PROJECT MANAGEMENT SUBTOTAL 5.03 i . 400 t 0 0 I 150 0 i _ 0 i 0 400 1 450 106% 012220954 S11 '05 S122.129 552856 57928311 0 1000% 2 CKLILITY CONTROL SENIOR REVIEW " Osatity Cartrol Senior Review .... 144 96 • 104 j 32 I 28 404 2.9% 540 458 55.542 546.006 St 8 4002 527,604 0 0 0 SO 100 0% _ 3 T 0 0 0% 50 53 50 50 SO 0 0 0 IO 0 0%f : "O'CSENIOR PR EVIEW SUBTOTAL !44 i 56 - 104 f __ 0 i 0 0 i _ 0 0 29 404 25% 140458 555=0 545513051 St8402 52750411 0 1C00%l 3 COIMUNITYRELAT10NS Steeling Commutes Meenngr C�Councll 3 County Corpmisclon trl.Angc 99 � 22 26 : 24 •4 8 182 1 3% 519.567 55 707 524.334 519.467 54.867 0 0 0_ SO 22.1% 16 ---,_;_ 4 4 2 26 0 2% 52634 52 049 54683 53-'46 S937 0 --0 0 - SO - -4 3% ----- .__-_---_-__-_ •Spans interest Grows 5itdic Hearin a Praect Information - _ ... 56 . 14 : 80 0 6% 58.935 S6 68.3 515,818 512.654 53.164 0 0 0 SO 14.4% : _ __-_:: -.:.- -. �: :-:_:-_-.:::: . .. .': : -... _ __.{..-' .... .. - 0 00% . SO SO 50 SO 50 0 0 0 SO 0.0% 44 18 96 6 164 1 2% 513,000 55198 518.2298 514 638 53 660 0 0 0 SO 16.6% Oflitini Mailing.- Llct ?-lnimri$ionMateaalo • 72 72 0 5% 54,327 5742 55.069 54,055 51,014 0 0 0 SO 4 6% «� -:"7-:-.-- �.......:_ ::-::: - :- -- • • ; t. - • "'�� - -- _ _ 0 0-0% -. 30 SO SO SO SO - - 0 0 0 SO 0.0.4 -- ' - - VMadia Releacet Pmie tNexs.tensrs 2 6 3 22 3 36 0 3% 52401 5602 53,003 52.402 5601 0 0 0 SO 2.7% 12 r 6 18 56 6 1 3 101 07% 56,916 51.132 58.048 56,438 51 610 0 0 0 SO - Pialed Fact Sheets 10 10 6 22 i 6 64 0 5% 54,636 51.048 55.684 S4 547 51 137 0 0 0 SO _7.3% 5.21/4 - " . Oflctal PuStle Hearing Notice 8 3 7 i 1 8 i i 1 28 0 2% 52.499 5857 53,3566 52.595 5671 0 0 0 SO 10% ••SYfc Protect Ol&play* 2 i 1 i 8 22 1 4 ! 37 0.3% 52.364 5581 52.945 52.356 5589 0 0 0 SO 27% t See Presereatton NrtwAals 10 2 i 4 14 30 02% 52.386 5581 52.967 52.374 5593 0 0 0 SO 2.7% IAil9 123 10 } 13 .41 1 35 0 3% 52.759 55.018 57,777 56 272 51.555 0 0 0 SO 7 1% llettN 2 I 1 4 1 5 i 11 0 1% 5750 Sr 445 58.195 56.556 51.639 0 0 0 SO 7 4% y 1 0 00% 50 50 SO SO SO 0 0 0 SO 00% "SOMMUI8TY RELATIONS SUBTOTAL 282 1 25 60 0 0 36 0 269 a6 0 29 866 66 3% 572 174 538 003 5110 177 592 442 522.035 0 100 0% 4 - YC33BTIF CATION REPORT I DifFBCJus05catlon Report 8 32 i 52 E ! 48 ---- t6 156 1 tX 510.944 St 159 542.103 S12.103 SO 0 0 0 SO 778% 2 8 14 1 r 18 i 1 4 .44 03% 53,016 5440 53,456 53.456 SO 0 0 0 SO 22.250 ;Met .FlUCJuati*cation Report 1 -1 0 00% SO SO SO SO SO 0 0 0 SO 00% '•"E JUST. REPORT SUBTOTAL 1 :o i 40 0 0 c6 ., 0 1 54 1 0 20 200 1 5% 513960 Si 59,9 515559 515559 SO 0 1000% 5 IENVfON. ASSESSMENT 19 F18 • ' 38 18 - ` 18 18 1 r 126 0 9% 510.262 55 887 516 149 516.149 1 10 0 0 0 SO 100.0% A EProlatt Orlenta0on . 1 t 0 00% SO SO SO 50 50 0 0 0 SO 00% t `•yrofetl On ant rttan 50010121 ' 8 1 19 0 1 _6 19 i 18 18 1 _ 0 1 0 0 1 26 0 9% 510 262 55 69 516.149 1 516 149 5011 0 100 0% 13 13r*REA 1 18 15 0 1% 51.856 5523 52.379 --5-2.379 50 0 0 0 50 4 3% = - a acrtpllon of • opossd 6005 10 to 0 1% 51,031 5451 51 492 51 492 50 0 0 0 50 27% -lts�aose end Need 10 • •10 O 1% 51 .031 ---5461 57 452 51 .492 50 I 0 0 0 50 2.7% --. li arrairvet s ., irivacts 18 88 55 44 04 300 2.2X. 520.742 5 i 3 659-534 400 534 400 50 0 0 0 50 62.0% 10 10 0 1% 51 031 5772 51.803 11.903 50 0 0 0 50 3.3% z-- L`aamems and C.0' O43 tilerkn 56 46 26 180 1 3% 512.595 it 297-113.892 513.892 50 0 0 0 50 25.0% - aPreparnian Y ----- 0 00% SO 50 50 50 SO 0 0 0 SO 00% ^MA Subotaf 1 122 0 88 56 I +4 84 1 00 3 0 26 528 3 9% 538286 517 ' -2 S55 458 S55 458 50 0 100 0% C flra4EA - Rat EA 3500% 0 43 0 31 23 15 29 34 0 i 0 9 185 1 3% 513.400 56.010 519,410 519,410 SO 0 0 0 SO 100 0% I 0 0 0% SO SO 50 50 501 0 0 0 SO 0 0% -1=A Sulwlar 43 - _ 31 - 23 ! 15 29 I 24 - - 1 0 9 185 _ 513 400 05 010 519 410 519 410 501 0 100 0% F 1 ! 1 ^'t*iVIRCN_ ASSESSMENT SUBTOTAL 1 i 153 _ 155 07 ,. - 131 32 = I 0 25 539 61% 51 948 5295:9 51 011 53101, SOI 0 , e PREIDAINARY{ESIGN I Mese__ =_ : :::::: = - - ;�,v,.-,.,,,•- :-r': 0 0 0% 50 So 50 So 501 0 0 0 50 0 0% ' -5t. ... Aoperxia �.•.4:: ---. -' ,-.; :,. ,,c-::-;:. :"":-:::-.":0.:21.:"44..:::- : : - :: ..,-.:..-...,, ,.;c.:_:.... „.:..,.Y..-.., ,,w•.� .. ; - - Y o_ox to s3 50 10 SO 0 0 0 to 00% L.. 13 67 10 �1 13 _o _ 103 08% SB_458 5565 59023 54512 54512i1 0 0 0 SO 70% rats Collection 4 52 • 46 72 0 5% 55.746 5734 56.480 53240 i 53240 li 0 0 0 SO 5 1% �....Csti9l' Eveusatton Crtterta- 17 18 142 y 5 182 13% 516,905 51058 517963 58.962 58982 0 0 0 50 14050 Alec nalrvs Study 17 119 32 99 50 40 398 2.9% 5228.7.5 57 767 536.542 518271 518.271 0 0 0 SO 205% • _ traneep1ual Deeign. 41 79 28 __It 148 1 1 % 513 874 53 355 517,229 58 615 58.615 0 0 0 SO 13.4% 30ec4al Slructtrat Studies 4 5 42 16 : 16 83 0 6% 5515 56.971 S3 486 53 48661 0 0 0 SO 5 4% ILL SInxturat Summary prepare Crnt Structural Appen143 FmfetructraIAppendix 13 5 45 9 12 11 _566.456 94 0 7% 58.010 51 527 59537 54.759 54 7E9 0 0 0 50 7 4% 9 84 10 • 1 32 35 170 12% 512287 52.456 514743 57.372 57.3721 0 0 0 SO 11.5% 4 30 I 4 5 43 0 3% S3.609 5572 S4 281 52.141 52.144 0 0 0 SO 3 3% Pr44imi nary Design Report Input. Elul Dsu9n Report Inpia .- ___. _-- .-. 4 30 r.. _ _ 10-� 8 • 13 65 0 5% S4 679 5690 55,369 52.585 I2.685 0 0 0 SO 4 2% t ' 0 00% SO 50 SO SO SOI 0 0 0 SO t 00°A - nscturrs Subtotal' 40 5 c=0 t .. 28 157 15 1 =, 40 7 :25 358 3 5% 5108759 51 5 _ _9 5129.138 554 564 1 864 059 t 0 100 0% B .DeEAIDOgicri 8 "--_<a.--`i_'--- --'_ 8 24 9 412 0 61/4 56.Y64 -51 -.-.T.,' 56.501 54251 54 2'51 0 0 0 50 2.3% • truer t5wgc. & Coc.4 549031.4 _"Deign P.epon Mockup -)siiisminary Design Report --------' .'.. _><letktjCanottlon. *TWO:6 al"::'` - DevWlorts Design Tear - --It-mimic-410n Slapmp 4 ._•"--14 30 _ • 4 _ _....._.4 _._-..-._r..... CS." -'--0 5% f3 5Y 3' 5124+ 55.317 ----Q.655-5_2.659 0 0 0 5o 1 5% - ..: __-_ :' -: _:•: : : ' : O.-...-.0 0% 5- 53 50 r 5 _ .. 7 ___ 0'- ••40 50 50 O 6 0 0 0% to .. .. 2s i c0 1 1 I36'-'-.-770x1:Ey2 -..la.i99 5 tioosi - --' • ft:04s 55 :046 _50 - _..0 0..- 30" 2.9% 0 -:?}r ._;..-: . .- _. S -i.� 0 .. 00'5. 50 17 10 S0 SO 0 0 0 50 00% i-4 •.. 4p 92 .'. _.,_-..• ._.,. .,.,.,.,.��, .,.,_,...__..-100 t 5% 512026 -344;,+ 516.30 53.215 .._-YA213 p�'.._O 0 50 45% o 1..-. . _- -2-6 .-. 1 12 b ' 64 0 5% 53.851 512_ 55.062. 31.531 ...- 52.531 0 0 0 50 1 4% - - '- : - •-- -: T.:............. -._--.-3 --0 ii 10.._. .5o__ 5o 5o So o d 0 3o 00%J 18KSP C3EXCEL\FlLES\I-82WHASE2.XLW GALE. C.\EXCEL\FILES\I-82\PHASE2XLS E7ATE 0741-92 695.15 L/WL)f1 F111LJ CAF"CIVOC GO 11IY1/-1I G CITY OF YAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE PreIimmary Design and Enworxnental ASsesSment Phase 2 PA c; 5 TASK TASK DESCRIPTION - - - _ CH2M HILLL, .HOURS BY GRADE - --_= E7 ES E5 " E3 E2 Et- TA 73 T2 OA f PROJECT SUMMARY PHASE SUMMARY - PER SHEET ANALYSIS TASK -ANALYSIS C4-12MHILL .4�11gh PERCENT TOTAL. OF TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL . L",BOR'3 EXPENSES 10w ' - NO: HOURS COST PERCENT -OF' .. TASK ----'66 fi"A-- COMMENTS -'-'--'-'--'-'- TASK: TOTAL LABOR- HOURS HOURS COSTS - EXPENSE" LABOR AND COSTS EXPENSES' - 1992- .6993.1994.. SHEET -CIF.- :PER PEff COMP. 614TS. SHEET SHEET Sequencing Utb l=zpontartcy 22 S6 2< - ---. '----8 ll8 02.-d.a5.4 a_ c:.0 a1 c3a a�_ , ---71.164 ---r-"-'--u ---au _.- 28 02% 31.691 i:� 32.328 51 1 71,167 0 0 0 SO •,_�.--.-.•- i <" o . 12 6 2 120 0.9% 57220 351 8 51 2,488 S6<44 36.244 2 5 24 32,488 10 28 64 8 0 3 4% 1 4% Tii-fAe COMra Plans (3) Pd6Tr Tonnetion=Campeipn - - "-'1'ilridGiq liepuiramenii 56 0.4% 53.382 51 7".35 171 52.%6 52.586 ' 0 0 0 SO -..ip 4 i 2 - • 24 12 i4 56 0.4% 33,382 -52.047 55,429 52.715 --34820 32.715 0 0 0 5°6 26% -- --..--.- 4 12 : 24 12 : 4 92 0 7% 55,548 54 92 59.640 34,820 0 0 0 30 bedgn -- - . S 8 18 : 40 18 7 8 88 0 6% 55289 34.728 510.017 $5.009 35 009 _ 0 9 10 -31 ,i 13 ---2i % '-- 00% 12 2% *----1-6-A, ,-.____1.6'b 3Ta q 0 0" 45°.b --- 1 0% .---.----_--.__---_-.-. ----'-..'---'-'-- _..-'------•-_-.--. - -. _--_--__-----_-- _ '._-... __---'.---- --'-- .-. - ._.- ' - -- --- _ -_-- -Pavement Roadway to -ethnic (9}--- -_ '•-'- ' - Rte--_-- Amatr»a}addVerticai?sli---"aFll 45altimal... r b.E --....�.-.. 8 '--• •- - '`' - 'T�Y.•-"- •:. - , :-.. :_-_:•::- - -=� • -. - 20 ................ • :: 48 ., ..,, - .=.r.r_.- - - - 9 _ - '-'-'3o SO ---30 So ---_.-.....-30 0----Q.__.._. o--._.30...-._..-00%_ £0 SO 30 SO 30 0 0 0 30 468 3 4% 527,869 512 344 767 £22.°84 522,384 - 0 0 0 30 32 92 220 60 10 32 68 0 5% 54.012 32 640 56.652 53.325 540 I3.326 -__33.319 0 0 0 SO .. a 14 32 4 t 0 4 C}tameliiatlnrt - _ - _ ApccelfafieoucXfariaip - -.. ---... _ 68 05% '$J Ott 32x,28 56.639 23319 _ _ 0._0 0 - -- _'-'-< "-----` -_ U. ...- : 32 4 10 4 104 08% 56.231 S7 2:6 313,507 56.754 5•s75J _---3 _..__. 0 20 S- $675 8 24 60 4 8 CADD(Ei1612V)' �' - -- 0 0 0•' S.0 SO 50 SO q -X8.256 SO 0 0 0 SO •-• ---...- "-.... - - -- ..1.. _ �Z4� 4 i ----'.- .. _._. .- -- i E V� 172 1 3% 510253 Si158 316511 58.256 0 0 0 30 .., 3 10 36 80 "" 12 10 -... CAE C1,5 Charneu7atmn --� "_'_•. ��'••Xficceliarlaouc kl'ariatp -� •••� 42 03% 52505 St 15x6 53E63 51 832 31,832 0 0 0 SO I - -- 4 8 19 4 4 4 42 03'6 32.505 Si 144 33549 �t 625 -14203 31,825 0 0 0 SO 10% - 4 9 t8 4 r 4 4 60 0 5% 54,095 54 311 38 706 54,203 0-14 5 5600 2.3% _ ..-..-._._.-�.: _ _ _25% 0,4°A 6 16 .::: �::: ::•- ... .. :: -- �..__� � 36 ,�_,..._-- _... • - 4 i ^' .. ��- t. ': 6 6" T 8 . - _- ' OAbb kill& eV) ..--... ^-•'������-� _ 0 00% -5.0 -30 30 "-'--_._-..30 0.�._0'--....- 0 ..-.. 30.._---00% --_--Felt Averxts ---. III `--`-"- Chime'iiiatton -5'u 88 0 6% 53.281 53 699 39.9 0 -34 455 34,485 0 0 0 _ 50 14 O f% 5846 5492 31.338 1669 _ '---- $669 0 0 0 30 " �0• --"$p'•--- 1 3 6 3 i 1 ._ .. _..._ -'--... 04%.. 14 al 3846 ��:8 31.324 i7 --34247 3662 0 : 1 i 3 6 3 I __ .--XUcc.Nanaou M&ktp 2.3% '12 0 5% 54 378 34 175 50.493 34,247 0 14 5 5607 ` ?-CAOD(SN d e\f} -___ '---lsti lclnters.ecil oils "•"•-Tratifi'S4mcea- - ,, , .---_.-. 6 16 40 4 6 52 Oa% 53.125 5:.190 36.315 33,158 53,158 0 0 0 30 17°q -.i.-___.-..--.--..-- I 4 .._ t0 } 24 10 i ' 4 52 04% 53,12225 5099 54 014 --52007 -39.101 52.007 0 0 0 3o 1 1% 4 10 24 10 ` 4 --- 50% __.-__---.-._---_-.---_ 0 0^� 52 04°b 53.125 3150:: 518202 39:101 0 0 0 50 --Norxnotor1Zed'Tranaportat(on -^--r. 4 10 • • . • - ,- - - e - --� Y 8 : 22 24 -- - -- -- : � --�' • ""�`-o • •�� 52 •� 10 _ -- - - - - 4 -.1t' 4 _ . 8 - ----- •-• - o f0 3� 30 30 - _.• `30 0 0 -' 0 30 .._. Mimed anew* j-Lanocc:pirp r Zits Cartrol ()- 9 8% _ 61 0 7'.'s 35,678 330 2+9 3'3-5 6T' 517.939 - - 31.6.839 0 i 24 59.969 06% 29 02°.6 51.691 -3532 32.223 31,112 31 112 0 0 0 50 i 2 6 t 12 $ 2 - Condn4ctib)e and Alain( atnabra 28 0 2% 51 691 •-34 152 55.843 -32.922 32.922 0 0 0 30 t 6% t 2 6 12 5 i i 2 -_.-_ grabs-of-WiY - 2 2% 26 02'4. 51.691 36 331 39.222 -3a,t t t 34 111 0 0 0 50 ? 2 i 6 •12 6-1 ,- 2 th1Iltl.. "'-'- I - 13fi 1 o% 58.170 33 137 311.30-55�65J 55.654 0 0 0 3O -71 :r 1% i , -• --_--- , •-'-'A"-- 41s 150 12% 59604---35752 515.156'-37615 51619 0 0 50 10 32 '76 -32--( 10 €€ itrrpre rynbminarytac(gn Report u _----- e1% 00% 299 263'X3'i'Y9e3ii5?+o333.238 ib..-"'..333.fj8 �_-.`_.7.."...-45--53�.63s 0 0 { 22 � 62 o 141 44 r 9 0 22 .. !""-Phial"bas(gnHeport '"-..-..-. .-. ._-. 1+100%. 0 00% 50 SJ SO SO SO 0 0 0 SO _ -.'4-' _-" "_ • " Datlgn Report 64./864x1 1 0 240 0 580 1 0 1,551 496 86 i 0 240 3<<"82 239% 6196821 51566.32 5365622 5166192 5199 430 73 1030% C .Traftle Anaivt Is R soon ..^-ti _ T.A___: __.._.�.__... _ _ - 6 j 16 � i 40 ____' .- 16 T 32 T 6 _. 83% O� 00% 30 •--30 38-50 30 O00f0_00% DratTnfa[Analyaa Report i Acctd.rt Analysis: E TtaNle Mod:Clog i Traffic Ansysls 116-+--•• 08% 56491 5641 57.092 57.092 -�- SO 0---0-�••�•-0--S0 - ._ _-------------_--_ 47 3% - 648 4 7% 336.451 53 899 540.350 SO 0 0 0 IO 1 32 , i 96 1 229 5E 1 164 1 32 _540350 352 2.6% 519818 St 306 521.124 521,124 50 0 0 0 _SO - _ - 18 I i 52 i 124 52 888 -I 18 _248% _ _----_-.- 9 3 124 0 954 566.860 5_969 57.928 57.929 -S0 0 0 0 IO 6 18 ; 44 18 1 32 i 6 Prepare Oran TretaArleyc Ay tis. Repoct Finer TraMc Anatyds Amort Finer_ 10 3% 140 1 0% 57.920 I906 58,928 58.828 50 0 0 0 SO _ _ _ 6 - 22 52 22 i 32 6 0 00% SO SO 50 SO s0 0 0 0 SO 00% ---- ) J - Millie AnaNas Report Subaa : I J 58 3 _04 1 468 S j4 0 348 c8 1380 10 1% 577 630 S7 593 585.323 585_323 SO 0 100 0% 0 'Sells Report t ,..,. 4 1 8 -: 13 0 1% 5935 5118 61,053 51.053 50� 0 0 0 SO 2.4% Pre ad Review 2.5% 16 01% 5955 5118 51073 51.073 50 0 0 0 s0 `„Pr'oojject Geo ow 4 8 4 38.1% 84 0 7% 55 689 110 805 516.494 516.494 SO 0 0 0 IO ----'-- - Field ExptpMlona .. 66 20 Z 19 0_1% 51.295 12.424 53.719 53.719 SO 0 0 0 SO 8 6% _ -•" „•Taeitnq 3 2 14 : 58 04% 53.851 5.203 64.054 54,054 10 0 0 0 50 94% EnInearIngAnai7aeg 2 0 48 32 02% 52.258 5.2203 - 52.461 52.461 SO 0 0 0 30 57% .-_ .. rttie Enquteegn9e gnBscortlmclda8rns ; TS TS 16 40 03% 52.891 5203 53,094 53.094 SO 0 0 0 IO 7t% - ---. Construction Conaideretione 24 16: 114 0 8% 57.053 6731 17,754 57754 IO 0 0 0 SO 17 9% Prtpare brans s R4po s ... 8 : 4 i4 40 : 24 : 24 52 0 4% 53.145 5438 53.633 53633 SO 0 0 0 SO 8 4% ........ i Final Soils Revert- 12 4. 24 9 8 00% t 030%J 0 00% SO SJ S0 50 SO 0 0 0 SO '�"'�•"••' ''''• " Seas. Report SUbtt:42A •0 7 ca 0 24.3 - 0 3 `-2 I 0 39 438 32% 528072 5:5253 543335 543335 SO 1 n F ftydnealce Recon 'So 00% 0 00X, 50 so So 50 30 0 0 0 _' .a:. : -: .-: -,. _ __ _•- - .. -_ - - .r _.. _ .. ° naH oraultcr RepData - Data Realer • 8 24 56 24 40 8 160 1 2% 59,012 5.924 58936 59.936 SO 0 0 0 SO 10 2% 100 a7% 55,632 5=,97 26.329 56.329 SO 0 0 0 50 6 5% S 15 ` 35 15 25 S Hy 'sI c LYRerfa 11 2% 11 7% 184 1 3% 510313 5556 510,949 310949 SO 0 0 0 30 Conceptual Hydracatcs Deeign HycYologlc Evaluation- - : 8 : 28 54 a 46 - 10 • 194 1 4% 510.927 5528 511.455 511 455 IO 0 0 0 SO '--- 10 29 58 30 48 _ 10 -- 21 7% 372 27% £20.937 5340 521,277 521277 SO 0 o O 10 HyerauIle Slructurs EvaluaflOrl aydrauucc Revert Drrt Ff - t8 56_ 130 56 t 94 18 478 3 5% 526924 5:33 527.657 527.657 - s0 0 o "---o -----10- 82% '-'-' - 24'24' 72 - 166 72 120 e 24 .; _.._..-'---' --1-6-5% 105% 00.6i 7416 510288 13% 19.872 . 510 88 ----__20 SO 0 0 0 SO - 8 I 28._-_ 24 -_.,_ 44 '10 ---_--176 _Prepare PreNminary Deelm Report MINA_ 0 00% SO 5J S0 SO SO i 0 0 0 SO -_62--_-_ r - 1 - Hydrauicc Reoort Subt 61x6 3 01 - ' 251 - - 581 248 - ,47 85 t 564 2 1 % 593 617 54 <4 597 891 597 891 SO II 0 103 0% G - Irttsrehanoe Plan for Approve .---E6 5b _-----__-----__• •.___--.- __.-_•_35%1 -__-_------_.---_ -. 00% 1 88 0 E% 55189 23 475 59.694 SO 59,694 0 2 as 54 347 8 1' 20 a8 4 ( 9 - -.1 - ---4---03% Dna ICFFA 124 FIncIICPFA(2)- 44 -�--•• 52644 51 741 54385 SO 14.385 I 0 --_ 2 22 £2,193 - 4 t0 : 24 2 : 0 00% -.. SO S3 SO SO i0 r 0 0 EO -;... .- , -'7CPFASubau 12 , . - _0 72 - t2 132 4% 5:933 _: '46 5130,9 SJ 51307011 4 :00% H Decal twrveve and Mappm 132 _-- -_..__---..._---...-... .._ 20 6'6• 36 3% ._-_,_^--._.._..______ -_ 1 1 ... 00% 435 ?Z% 526.066 318542 544608 Su 606 IO 0__________.___ 0 -_ - ..-.- 20 24 4 52 1' 24 Zc 128 ' -'---' t Mapptnq 0 7% 15.640 723'°=- 528.647 514 324 __ ___ _ _ 514 324 0� -0 _..._--0 SO � 14 i : 35 _... 5 31I- 4. -' t a .- ---�-_....-..._. 24 6 _'--.._-...� Design Surveys 1 Rtgteol-Way Sweys Title Retwrtc 4 7 % 55 640 544 p74 550.614 525.307 125.307 0 o -.._ 0 SO _ 6 .-- 1 4 1 . 36 14 24 ' _-_- 6.__..-. .----".- -.._.-.100 ------ t 4s57.730 0 00% SO 3. _ 459 115. 9 n 30 0 o o so ..0 -- '- t 0 00% 20 S0 30 SO .. 50 0 0 0 IO _'-�----�-'.-----'-' '-"--'-..;.__..-_.._.�. .J.,-- - 5eu an Surveys and Mapping Sucoal - _3 35 1 :2 :9 24 , _ :55 4 : 5 12 635 4 G% 537 346 5104 992 1139.328 591 98 1 547 360 0 00 0% WKSP CEXCEL\FILES\I-927PHASE2.XL4V tILE. CEL\FLES\I-82'PHASE2XLS BATE. x-92 SEA 685.15 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OF YAKIMA 1-82/7 AKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Oeslgt and Environmental A6iaa4 Phase 2 Ct'I«o v ►2 L A ?A,c c ... - _. .. ._ ... .. .... - -_ .. .. ................ ....... ..... ._. .._.-.----. __._-..._.._.__.- --'--." .. - - 1- • . .-'---._.. ... .... CHZM HIL .- 6Y GRADE PROJECT SUMMARY PHASE BUMMARY ...�i-PER � A -SHEET ANALYSIS TASK ANALYSIS • -..... .. __.. .... -M HILL CN2 TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL. LABOR s EXPENSES d�l'tgh ' 1 .,aw > NO: HOURS COST. PERCENT TOTAL. OF .TOTAL : PERCENT TASK = TASK DESCRIPTION - E7 ES .HOURS ES EA E3. 62 Es T4 T3 T2 OA TASK: TOTAL- HOURS 'HOURS 'LABOR. . COSTS EXPENSE' COSTS L ABOR AND 1992 EXPENSES x'3993.1994 : SHEET : COMP' OF. SHTS. 'PER 'SHEET -PER SHEET OF' TASK COMMENTS 1 Aaass Room-I/Plan SO 238.981 0 4 16 59,745 59.745 SO 9091 --"--91'.e----- 001 - '--' ._.._ --__-. .-_._. BtaRAccecuflsportPlantd} ; 4 0 .-......_..._. E 8 0 i ._....-- _ • 24 0-�---2'-- 8 16 1 .- p--._ 2 4 -..__o.._�..`.-._._6Y 64 0.5% 53589 535."92 539.981 - 3fnalAccvcuReoonPtaa(4�: - - "1000'6 ,......... ..�...... ... ...-.-...............- - 0 ..--..__. , -0 - .. 0.0% 0 0-0% 2359 SO 53.539 -53.898_ SO 53:898 -.. 0 .- 0 ----ifi 0 '--. ..--- _ -. SJ 50 50 50 0 0 " "'AccassReport/Ran SUbotat 0 I 0 4 1 0 9 i 0• 26 i 9 0 J 18 ; 4 70 05% 53,948 S29921 542,979 SO 542.8791 4 1000%1 1. _ Hearing -- - 0 ._-_. 0 0 0 0 _ SO SO SO SO SO .-._27A_ .-- 22.OX 1 " 33.6% 3 0 0% ---___.-----_---_- -___. ---'- ;Cmnbined0esipniAccecs 0 0.0% SO 524.514 524,514 SO SO _524.514 St 9,398 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - - - -;Kccecs 14 awing imdingc CrderAnaNsis- - y t 6 E 48 104 44 72 -•"- 16 "-___. ----• 300 2."% 516.977 S2 alt St 9,398 _-_ 0 00'b 50 1 <t � and P..ndings and Order Plan ...._._.. .. ...."..�..............- ---"- mei ocatton Assistance tnformatlon ; 1 - "- 52.51612'219 S2 5 240 - .' ; i529.432 I 24S� 0 1O BX - ---------28¼---..__.._......- "�7 229 6 . 99 SO 629 6 99 0 0 0 Y f 0 0 OX SO SO SO SO 50 0 -Corn. 0 est 0rYAcce sa Nean ria Subatai 240 1 0 - 16 ( 0 48 , O 104 ++ 0 j 72 . 16 540 39% 746.409 541 937 588.346 S0 588.3461 0 1C0.0% is 3R4S•o1•WayPlan. ' '-Riyitto4-W - - Dail AlrjA-o4Way Plan Hem' Al¢ttol•Way Ptah 1000% .__. _._._. ., 0---! 2 0 _...-. 8 0 I_-_- -_-.�.--_ _- i6 9 72 2 48__0.4% 52,717 516032 St 603 248,743 SO 518.743 0 0 0 --_ 0 o 0 SO S0 90.9% 0 o 2.--- t 0 1 _ _--- 0--"T---�S__-0.0% . 0 00.6 5277 SD 51,8'44 SO 51.874 TO 0 -.•_0 --- 10009.001:4'1 TO SO S0 0 0 0 av Plan Subotat 0 0 2 0 9 1 0 18 I 9 - 0 ! 3 • 2 53 0 4 b 52.982 517 635 620 617 SO 20.617 52501.'68751704 i• V ks 40 1 i I i .40 03X S4,8o5 53.390 8 285 S . SO 58.285 0 0 0 SO 51 5X YuwEnpr»snngStudy Yalu* E ginsan 7islWEnglneMrtgSllPPort 72 -..._. __. ._._.__: i2 i 12 i2 ! 72 I 12 i 16 88 06X .._`_.-' 56.044 51.753 37.797 50 57,797 0 0 0 SO 485%I .. ... .- ._- ..__._.._...._ T. --'_. 0 00% SO TO TO SO SO 0 0 0 SO 00% 'Value EnQtneennq Subaal 52 1 0 ! 2 0 12 I 12-'+ 0 1 12 ! 2 1 0 16 128 0 9% 510 949 55 133 516 082 SO 516 082 0 100 01/4 41 !Hazardous ` l'•'^-'-'• 1 L_.--. - I-Urn-0.110g I r 4 8 68 1 76 0 6% Mat.MalsSurvsy Records Review • ' " "" v0.w ' -"i . fig, d Land Uss Agenty Rsct(dr RsvNw .... .._.- I3Ns -try Reconnsi sante r li -_. ._..----....-- .._..._._...._ Smmry Msmomdum ^^^"•• '•' """'-"'^" --"' - "-" j 55.285 52.167 S7 452 62566 SO S7 452 0 0 0 SO 24 5% 8i 4 ; 24 i ! I 28 0 2% 51 559 1707 SO 52.666 0 ._. 0 0 0 __.... . 0 0 SO SO 9 BX --__._.__. .�-... 48% . . i f a -,- '" 4 ! 12 I i 16 01% r 51,138 533551473 212,521 SO -_ _S1473 __612521 , 0 8 1 52 4 ! 1 68 0 5% 54 791 n 730 SO 0 0 SO 41 ZX 207% t6 32 � 1 84 0655 55.859 4444 56.303 SO 56303 0 0 0 SD 0 00% SO 50 SO SO SO 0 0 0 SO 00% -Hazardous mot*dais Survey SUbdai J I 0 - 12 1 40 7 68 0 =_• 0 0 0 272 201 519 032 511 793 530.4 5 SO 120 415 0 700 0% I� - -PRELIMINARY DESIGN SUBTOTAL "a :-9 -a - -...ter E0 E6 486 3 73 _ 912 . c 5 '0 1 744 518 9 953 . 2 5% 5633 539 5437 518 61 071 056 55487-8 5522.279 81 S:JBTOTAL HO OF TOTAL HOUR - 7,353 9.9`4 422 � w1". - ' 1,764 373 : 1,660 696 3,043 1 1.926 - 400 1,044 .- .-_.,_-.2 2 1^ 4X � 27^G 727'4 i a,tx 2Z 2`c 116+: --22" -�-" --- 7.t7�4 1,131 13,711 100.OY. 7 0.2'J. 4943,032 54.3:4 3522,922 35-7-c 01,465,354 t00.U!G 4314,754 SS6x 3631,200E 41.1X7 31 7- OPRIN4ALSERVICES 532,5600 0 SO 100 0% _ 640.738 0 0lgarsal Services. 5 OOX 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 { 0 0 O 0% SO SO 573.298 0 OX { - { 0 0 01 SO SO TO SO 50 0 0 0 SO -OPTIONAL SERVICES SUBTOTAL - O 0 o I 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 00'w SO S3 373298 540729 232560 0 1000% 1 ' SALStRY ESCALATION O OX 525.135 57.0013 532.143 532.143 SO 0 0 0 S0 100.0% Satiny Eccal stain 267% ^-' •"-" •"' •"`-'-"""•"• "" 0 - 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50b SO SO S32 143 50 0 SO 1 0 0 0 SO 0 0% 'w 0% -'- 0 001 SO "SALARY ESC. SUBTOTAL . 0 - n r - J 0 I ! _ 0 ! ) 0 0 001 52^5135 57 :28 532.143 °MATTER SOr 0 0 0 0 0 0 S0 SO 0.0% 00% SO SO TO >..-. FindFss - 000% 0 0 . 1 r . _ o 0 o- 7......__O _ - . - r 0 0 1 o . 0 I o . 0 0 001 0 001 SO SO LJ so 50 So - I f-�--" ASTER SUBTOTAL - 0 ; k 3 ! n 3 = 0 i 3 0 0 00% S0 S3 50 SO S01 00h :.r'. OTAL. n 1,3:3 ... ......-.... ^:OF TOTAL HOUR 9.87!4 422 t 3.08*: 1,764 373 1,660 } 694 3.64' 1 :3-26 306. 1,,,44 7. 1. . .,.. ....... 8.._. ..._ .....,.4-...___...-_._..7- . 12b7"i 2.72: 1210!4 S.OBY. 2220"4, i TIGSti 2-t9K T.67'G 1,151 f3,%11 55-3.4`. 824 4 "-^ 3964,567 8t.6% 3529,930 337ti 41,071,J93 706.0 4 3887.636 553 4 $64Tar. 13 S .t - `T- 81 ........ .... ES71MA7EDtOURLY LABOR HATE (1994 [ 3{7.57 } LABOR PLUSOVERHEAD - •~•2.96[ 272293 LABOR } 33796 ,..•f YtOe.tII___- 330.52 • 326:84 323.19 ...t 320.99 316.86 T_-32037- = 317.89 Y- v 31S 2T 3 :.....-.. ....... ...:..... 390.0E 7 979.18 568.47 46Y.42 35570 ! $60.07 35278"-346.05 21215 MULTIPLIER 335.84 295 WKSP: C AEXCELIALES!-82\PHASE2XLW FILE C:\EKCELWFLESJ-82\PHASE2.XLS DATE 07 -Jul -92 SEA 685.15 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OF YAKIMA 1-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 TASK _- _- _ - =" TASK DESCRIPTION- - - - ~. .HLA 11DURS BYGRADE- PR RE" PE SET ET 1i.S RS' "BPC ST WPT PROJECT SUMMARY PERCENT TOTAL OF - TASK' 'TOTAL HOURS: HOURS TOTAL. LABOR COSTS: TOTAL. EXPENSE 'COSTS `.TOTAL :LABOR."AND EXPENSES: 1 so PROJECT MANAGEMENT . -- 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 j 0 i 0-' 0 0 0 0.0% $O $0 2 3 4 5 QUALJTY CONTROL SENIOR REVIEW COMMUNITY RELATIONSM VCJUSTIFICATION REPORT 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 i 0 36 0.9% $3,044 5250 53294 $19561 162 74 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 236 62% $18,026 51,535 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 50 50 50 _ ENVIRON- ASSESSMENT-"". 47 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 82 22% $8,036 5806 56,642 6 PRELIMINARY DESIGN- -._... -1 - 235 750 0 919 0 900 0 470 • 154 12 0 3,441 90.7% 5170,793 528,748 5199,541 - 1 -' SU$TQT3L. HOUR HOURS 11 '6 OF TOTAL HOUR I 380 853 0 979 0 400. -- 12.7% r 226 u" i Q.0 n i 24.2% i_-_ 0.0.6 23.7%b 0 0.0% 470 124% 154 4.1% 12 0.2 0 t 3,795 1000:4 t $197699: 8 4'0 431,139: 13.6% .4229,033 100.0• O0 -__ 7 ; i .............-. - ._.-_ OPTIONAL SERVICES SALARY ESCALATION: 0.00% 2.50% t $4,947 50 $4,947 MASTER 0.00% 10 TOTAL HOUPS1 ::OURS OF TOTAL HOUR--- '6 S 460 859 0 919 t 0 900 .1,- y -_- 12.65 22.53% OAO:o t. 24.22'G t 0.00%" 23.73.6 e" 0" 0.00%- 470 12.40% 164 42 0 4.06'6" i ",o 4.32 a -0.00%"8S $,795 100.0'6 r 5202,846- 7'h" .531,139- "13;3':0 4233,985 7D0.0'o ESTIMATED HOURLY LABOR RATE(1$92) LABOR PLUS OVERHEAD 2.93 428.90 1 $8455 420.00 1 416.00 -' 513.00 3.5.851 -1-146.81 338.3 411.00� 418.00 $3218 '• $3286 ' 418.00 352.86 ;: 414.00- is $40.96 ' _411.00 i. 513.00 I.. 50.00 -�T 532.18 i' 338.03 ,: ^$0.00 •MULTIPLIER 2.93. WKSP: C:\EXCEL\FLES\I-82\PHASE2.XLW FILE: C:\EXCEL\FI.ES\I-82\PHASE2.XLS DATE. 07 -Jul -92 SEA 685.15 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OF YAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 TASK TASK DESCRIPTION .HOURS PIC P2: Pt CADD DS: SHIMONO- BY GRADE. AD PROJECT SUMMARY PERCENT L "TOTAL OF- TASK TOTAL HOURS' HOURS TOTAL. LABOR COSTS TOTAL- EXPENSE COSTS' ':TOTAL LABOR AND EXPENSES PROJECT MANAGEMENT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0•0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 30 30 30 2 ? QUALITY CONTROL SENIOR- REVIEW 0 0 0 0 0' 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 30 30 30 30 3 4 :COMMUNITY RELATIONS - VC JUSTIFICATION REPORT 0 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 0.0% 30 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 5 6 `-PRELIMINARY ENVIRON_ ASSESSMENT DESIGN 77 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 77 9.0% $7,247 3740 $7,987 114 548 0 0 53 70 i 0 0 0 0 . 0 783 91.0% 338,629 33,850 $42,479 SUETOTAL. HOURS; HOURS192 ..... o •0 OF TOTAL HOUR .1.— 223" .. 546 j 0 j 0 ... j I 0.0•b 64"0.0%• 3 j 53 70 0 0 0. 0 0 0.0'0 0.0',v 0.0'e 0.0'6 861 100.0%- 345,876 90.9'0 54,590 4.1% $50,466 700.0=,0 j 8.1%. ---- 82'v 0,0% 7 — OPTIONAL SERVICES 0.00% y 30 30 30 $459 — —_ SALARY___ --- MASTER 1.00% i 1 3459 $0 0.001t r 30 30 $0 TOTAL HOUR HOURS 192 j 546 0 0 % OF TOTAL HOUR 1 22.29% 1 63.40% t 0.00% 0.00% f 6,14% 70 0 0 0 0 : 8.18% I 0.00'. 0.00% 0.00% : 0.00% 1: -OM 461 100.0% $46,3'35 '91,0% 54,590 9.0% $50,925 100.0'.6 ESTIMATED HOURLY LABOR RATE (1992) Q 535.00 517.00 511.00 516.00 510.00 �• LABORPLUSOVERHEAD 2_68I 393.63_ 345.46 , 329.43 I 3,42B0 i $2675 -1 50.00 —+ 54.00.._....._.. ... .... _;`324.08 $0.00 50.00. 1. 50,00 :_50.00 ..1^.30.00 - .... .•,-,•.... — — 30.00 1Y40.00. I $0.00 1: 30.00 MUL7IPLIEA r — - 2,68 WKSP: C:\EXCEL\FILES\I-82\PHASE2.XLW FL E: C:\EXCEL\FILES\I-82\PHASE2.XLS DATE 07 -Jul -92 SEA 685.15 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE • CITY OF YAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 cLoscQE- A pAGE9 oVD o 'TEC HSTAFF }:OURS BY -GRADE. CADD IP 'RC - PROJECT SUMMARY TASK TASK DESCRIPTION SG SPC JG PDT - :PERCENT -TOTAL OF TOTAL. TOTAL.. TASK 'TOTAL -LABOR: EXPENSE: HOURS HOURS COSTS: 'COSTS: TOTAL LABOR AND EXPENSES. SO 30 30 30 30 $0 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 [ 00 0 0 0 0.0% $0 z0UAUTY CONTROL SENIOR -REVIEW (COMMUNITY RELATIONS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 l 0 0 0.0% $0 30 30 33 0 0 0 0 0 0 ! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% $0 ,4 VC JUSTIFICATION REPORT 0 0 0 0 0 0 ! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 ;..- . . .5 I ENVIRON.. ASSESSMENT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -y: 0 0 0 0.0% 30 Ile PRELIMINARY DESIGN 0 0 0 1,157 0 0 0 0 ! 0 0 -- 0 1,157 100.0% $44,897 $0 $44,897 SUBTOTAL HOURS! HOURS ;6 OF TOTAL HOURSR 0 0 J 0 1,157 j _ .. _-_-_- t__.. f' --'0.0'e I 0.0'0 0.0.6 T 700.0 + 0 O 0 _ f}..._. .- . % ..._6.6 ..:..... 0.0'7+ 0.0'e � 0.0'6 0.0'0 _._0.0 :6 �� D.tl'0 .. Q.._ _ 4.- - - C.- ._fl.fl'o 1,157 100.0% 344,897 'S00.0% 30 0.4.4 $44,597 100.0:4 OPTIONAL SERVICES SALARY ESCALATION 0.00% • 30 30 $0 2.50% i `: $1,122 $0 $1,122 MASTER 0.00% I I $0 $0 $0 TOTAL. HOUR HOURS % OF TOTAL HOUR 00 j 0 J 1.13'7 'S 00. 0.00% f 0.00% 1 o.o01 100 4 0 0 4 0 0 4 43% 0.00% . O.QO % axon:, 0.00% I OAO %o = .0 0 0.90% 1,157 100.0% $46,019 -TOMO% 30 O 0% 346,019 100'0•• ES11MATED HOURLY LABOR RATE (1992) __. __-... LABOR PLUS OVERHEAD- 1.55 5.00 } 354.33 I $30.00 525.00325.00 54657 338.81 I 1 325.00. 520.00 i .415.00 i . 30.00 t., 30.00 -:' 30.00 30' 30.00 ?' 3381 ? 531.05 .- 523.28 . 30.00 1 .00 8. .0 300_ 30.00 MUL11PUER 1.55 S38S1 cLoscQE- A pAGE9 WKSP: C:IEXCEL\FiLESV-82\PHASE2.XLW FILE C:\EXCEL\FILES\J-82\PHASE2.XLS DATE. 07Ju1-92 SEA 685.15 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CITY OFYAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 --• PROJECT SUMMARY TASK TASK DESCRIPTION .JGL.ACOUSTICS,'INC. .HOURSBY.GRADE. SE. PERCENT - TOTAL OF TOTAL. TOTAL. TOTAL TASK TOTAL -LABOR EXPENSE LABOR AND HOURS: -HOURS COSTS: COSTS: EXPENSES - I MANAGEMENT •• 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 0 _ 2- _- OUAPROJECT LITY CONTROL SENIOR REVIEW J 0 0 ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 .,. 3 iCOMMUNITY RELATIONS 0 0 I. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 4- t7CJUSTIFICATION REPORT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 77 100.0'5 $7,353 $690 $8,043 5_ ENVIRON. ASSESSMENT 77 0 � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 ___ '6 PRELIMINARYDESIGN 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 S'tJETOTAL. HOURS 'S OF TOTAL HOURS HOURS 77 0 0 a 0. 0 0 ? a 0: 4 .- .. -. -. a _ 77 100.0.0. $7,353 :5690: 48,043 8.6'0 7ao.o:� . .. 0 9 a0.0% S.To t� o.o•' c.o� on•497.a�s T 0.0.6 OA b 0 0.0 a.0 6 0 0's 0.0'6 0.0% I'7 lOPTIONALSERVICES 0.00% $0 $0 $0 SALARY ESCALATION' 0-00% $0 $0 $0 MASTER 0_00%I $0 $0 0 TOTAL. HOURS •6 OF TOTAL HOURS HOURS! 77 0 00 0 a 0 0 a a 0 7-0.00%0 0.00% �0.00T--6:00-4-1-- 0.00%6 i 0.00'0 3.00'6 4 0.00'0 0.00'.: OAO:o 4.00:G 77 100.0% $7,353 .$690 $8,043 97:4'3 $,60 100.0% 'ESTIMATED HOURLY LABOR RATE (1992) LABOR PLUS OVERHEAD 595.00 l $0.00 t so.0a isa.co 1.00 5951}0' t $0:-1 SO.oa . $o.00 5a.0o 50.00- ; . $a.0o. 33.0so)*- i so . 30.00 SOHO 1 $0.00 30.00 1:- $0.00- Sa.00 ' S0.a0. so -iii) = 5000 .MULTIPLIER 1.00 WKSP- C:\EXCEL\FLLE5\I-82\PHASE2XLW FILE C:\EXCEL\FILES''i-82\PHASE2.XLS DATE 07 -Jul -92 SEA 685.15 LABOR AND EXPENSE ESTIMATE CRY OFYAKIMA I-82/YAKIMA AVENUE Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessment Phase 2 TASK = = TASK DESCRIPTION ._ ETS 1•IOURS BYGRADE. PM TA CADD ORFT PT TCF PROJECT SUMMARY PERCENT _ TOTAL OF TASK TOTAL HOURS: HOURS TOTAL. LABOR COSTS: TOTAL. :EXPENSE- 'COSTS: 'TOTAL :LABOR AND EXPENSES: 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 s 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 2 'QUALITY CONI OL SENIOR REVIEW -_ _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 •: 0• 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 3 COMMUN1TY RELATIONS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 4 VC JUSTIFICATION REPORT - 0 0 0 0 _0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 50 50 50 5 ENVIRON. ASSESSMENT.. `_.'. .... 0 0 0 218-` 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% 50 50 50 '6 PRELIMINARY DESIGN: = 0 0 0 400 0 0 0 0 0 0 618 100.0% 519,187 $0 $19,187 SUBTOTAL. HOURS' HOURS 0 0 218 [ U 400 t 0 - a •0 OF TOTAL HOUi%Si 0-a'0 0.0'4- l 18.8.5 0.0'0.0'-'0•�- '34.6•e 0.0'n 0. O 0 O D.0 A 00'0 ?: ' 0.0 _ 'o :1 - 0 iLO A 618 100.0% $19;187 i00ao.o-� 0 $0. aab - $19,1871 100.0%i --- 7 OPTIONAL SERVICES 0.00% $0 -----._.. $0 50 . ..-5":480 __-. $480 SALARY ESCALATION _ 2.50% $480 $0 MASTER -- - 0.00% I $0 50 $0 TOTAL HOU -o HOURS ' 4 OF TOTAL HOU -_-. 0. 1 0 218 1 0 400. a 4 a a 0 0.00%. T 0.00% 3523' T OAO:. t 64.77% 0.00% .i.... 0.00% '- 0.00% 0.00% 0.00k .0 a518 .100.0% " 0.00•.671 $79,667 1:00;0% 50' 0:G% 519,567 .. 100.0'. 1EST1MATED HOURLY LABOR RATE (1992) } !LABOR PLUS OVERHEAD 1 517.00 1 515.00 513.00 347.77 , $42.15 1 $38.53 $10.00 512.00. .1H,-.$0.00 510.00 : i 525.10 533.72 < 50.00: $0.00:_„:4.50.00_; $0.00_ 30.00 2 30.00. q' .3000 ;' 50.00 MULTI PLIER 50.00 2.81 2811 $28.10 mse.woae RESor lbl/ _— B9 T YAKIMA ER GREEN`t'tAY �= o,a.s woe +0.,• 67500 4r awes 70450 p LOW BOISE CASCADE MILL PROPOSED YAKIMA AVENUE RETAIL 4 gth STREET AN -1 /Sw -Lo/�1 EXIST RQ w� KIWANIS PARK THE CITY OF YAKIMA THE YAKIMA GATEWAY PROJECT 107 FUNCTIONAL PLAN ALTERNATIVE II Z•IXT 300 APRIL 199 /n assoc,anon wan HUIBREGTSE LO[:MAN ASSOCIATES.