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.