HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/18/1999, C2 - SANTA ROSA STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT, SPECIFICATION NO. 93-44F Counat y 18, 1999
j Apenba Report
CITY OF SAN LUIS 0 B I S P O
FROM: Michael D. McCluskey,Director of Public Wor
qo
Prepared By: Barbara Lynch, Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: SANTA ROSA STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT,
SPECIFICATION NO. 93-44F
CAO RECOMMENDATION
1. Approve plans and specifications for"Santa Rosa Street Bridge Replacement Project,
Specification No. 93-44F."
2. Authorize staff to advertise for bids and authorize the CAO to award the contract if the lowest
responsible bid is within the Engineer's Estimate.
3. Authorize the CAO to execute an amendment to the agreement with Quincy Engineering to
provide construction engineering.
'4. Appropriate $93,300 from the unappropriated balance of the General Fund and $170,800 in
grant revenue and move it to the Santa Rosa Street Bridge constructionaccount
DISCUSSION
The Santa Rosa Street bridge over San Luis Obispo Creek is one of several bridges identified by the
State of California Department of Transportation as deficient. The bridge was constructed in 1910
and identified for replacement because of the narrowness of the bridge and the undermining
occurring at the foundations. As with the other bridges,80%of the design and construction for this
bridge will be funded through the Federal Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation
program. The project had been planned to be completed next summer after the completion of the
Higuera Bridge downtown. With the delay in the Higuera project,Santa Rosa Bridge was moved
forward to this summer.
The project design started in early 1997 and was completed last summer except for inclusion of the
Army Corps of Engineers permit conditions. Permits were obtained during the spring of 1999.
Part of the Army Corps of Engineers conditions necessitated the purchase of additional temporary
construction easements and significant mitigation planting and maintenance. This has resulted in
increased construction costs. Because the planting is a requirement for project completion,it will
be eligible for Federal fimding.
When the project is completed,it will provide continuous sidewalks on both sides from Pacific to
Marsh streets as well as bicycle lanes. Currently there is only a narrow sidewalk on the easterly
side of the street which was built on top of the deck many years after the bridge was built The
bridge will have conduits for future undergrounding of all existing utilities as well as some spare
conduits for additional future needs.
C2-1
Council Agenda Report—Santa Rosa Bridge Replacement
Page 2
Public Art:
In March of 1999, the City Council approved an agreement with a local artist to complete public
art for the project. The art work is an outline of the "Seven Sisters" peaks to be incorporated
into a standard bridge railing thereby maintaining current bridge railing safety features while
including public art. The specifications incorporate the necessary coordination between the
general bridge contractor and the artist.
CONCURRENCES
Community Development prepared a mitigated negative declaration. The Federal Highway
Administration reviewed the project and the environmental assessment and determined the project
met the conditions for a "Categorical Exclusion." The mitigated negative declaration was made
available for public review. No comments were received during the review period. After the
review period,the City Council passed a resolution approving the mitigated negative declaration.
The environmental mitigation has been incorporated into the plans along with mitigation specified
by the Army Corps of Engineers, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Fish and
Wildlife,Department of Fish and Game and Office of Historic Preservation.
At the time of the environmental review,the possibility that the large sycamore on the northwest
creek bank behind John's Battery shop would not survive the construction was anticipated and
mitigation established. The designers reviewed options to save the tree which entailed building a
narrow bridge. The bank is vertical on the creek side of the tree adjacent to the trunk. The only
thing stabilizing this area is a wall of gabion baskets. It did not appear the tree would survive the
bridge work taking place so close to the trunk with the construction access taking place on the other
side of the tree. It appeared judicious to remove the tree now, prior to having it sicken and fall
over. In this way, replacement trees can be started now and maintained under the contract. The
tree was posted for removal in accordance with the City's established procedures and ultimately
approved for removal.The project will be planting four new trees to replace the existing one. The
new trees will be in the mitigation planting area and so will receive three to five years of
maintenance to ensure they are established.
Prior to advertising the project,the City must receive authorization from California Department of
Transportation indicating the funding has been obligated by the Federal Highway Administration.
Staff will not advertise the project until that authorization has been granted. There are two issues
still outstanding which staff is working to resolve in order to obtain the necessary clearance for
advertising. The first is the final acquisition for the area to be used for mitigation planting. The
second is the final plans for the relocation of overhead utilities during construction. We anticipate
these issues will be resolved in the very near future.
FISCAL EWPACT
Funds for this project were approved in the 1997-99 Financial Plan Supplement, during the
1998-99 budget request period. At the time the budget request was made, the estimate for
construction from the designers was$730,000. Since that time,the project has been modified and
refined. The most significant increases/additions for construction have been realized in the areas
of mitigation planting,the need for numerous conduits in the bridge to accommodate utilities and
C2-2
Council Agenda Report—Santa Rosa Bridge Replacement
Page 3
additional protection for the bridge to prevent future undermining of the foundations such as is
occurring today.
The next significant addition to the project budget is an amendment to the agreement with the
designers for inspection during construction. At the time the project was budgeted, the City had
available a qualified inspector for the project. The level of construction anticipated to occur this
summer will require that individual to manage multiple projects and contract inspectors making
them unavailable to inspect this project. The bridge requires a full time inspector. Construction
inspection is eligible for reimbursement at the same ratio as construction, up to 15% of the
construction costs.
Construction: Construction Management:
Engineer's Estimate: $834,000' ConstructionInspection: $115,000
Contingencies: $41,000 Environmental Monitoring: $40,000
Public Art: EaLog Geotechnical Services: $10,000
Total: $876,500 Total: $165,0002
I) ApproximatelyS8,000 of the construction is not eligible for reimbursement-Mission Style Sidewalk.
2) Construction Management costs are limited to 15%of the construction costs or approximately$123,900. The City
must assume any additional costs without Federal participation.
Construction Budget Needed: $1,041,500
Funds Available: $777,400 $10,000 design acc't/$767,400 construction acc't
Additional Funds Needed: $2649100 $93,300 City funds/$170A00 grant funds
The actual construction and construction management costs will determine the extent if any of
additional costs the City will have to bear beyond the normal 20/80 split for grant funding. Until
construction is complete, the final costs will not be known. What is shown here is an estimate
based on the best knowledge available at this time.
ATTACHMENTS
Amendment to agreement
The Plans and Specifications are available in the Council office for review.
l\958 rtrorm\sve\proupelpwwla\an�_c7utont %WW9W\9304 ants ma\etsff rMW344f Wv.dw
C2-3
AMENDMENT THREE TO AGREEMENT
THIS AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT is made and entered in the City of San
Luis Obispo on this day of , 1999, by and
between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation, herein after
referred to as City, and Quincy Engineering hereinafter referred to as Consultant.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, on December 31, 1996 the City entered into an Agreement with
Consultant for design services for the Santa Rosa Street Bridge; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to amend the scope of services to include
additional design services as outlined on the attached work scope;
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations and
covenants hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1 . The scope of services and related compensation is hereby amended to
include construction engineering as set forth below:
a. Provide full time construction inspection to insure completion of the
construction in accordance with the contract documents. Inspectors
shall be qualified to complete work for the HBRR program.
b. Provide technical support for inspector, including plan and specification
clarifications and false work checking.
c. Provide necessary geotechnical testing per the City's adopted Quality
Assurance Program.
d. Compensation for construction engineering in a total sum not to exceed
$125,000
2. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement remain in full force and
effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be
executed the day and year first written above.
Pit 4f 2
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO,
A Municipal Corporation
By:
City Administrator
APPROVED AS TO FORM: CONSULTANT
4!:�;0444.1o--Lt By:
Ci me
\\956 morroWslprouWlpwoilmlmprl_amam RgxR1E'IQpaf19341 wrta romWespn�3.Ooc
PIEV Sf 2
MEET AGENDA
DATE STEM # C
ela se3a o ,o
ela iun o ,a
From: James Lopes <jlopes@fix.net> Ella 03N0 PIV31�1 W❑
• To: jmarx <jmarxmci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us>, jew <I&A0110d❑ JIHO/HFl3�0
Date: 5/17/99 11:15pm .........IQMd❑ CY0
A3NF
Subject: Consent Agenda: Santa Rosa Creek Bridge �y�
C.,p
Dear Mayor and City Council Members:
RE: Consent Agenda Item: Santa Rosa Street Bridge Replacement
I am concerned that no hearing is being held on this, so that I might
identify an alternative project that would be an improvement on the
proposed bridge. Would you please hold a separate hearing for this
project?
I would appreciate the opportunity to speak to the proposed removal of
an approximate 36-inch diameter syacomore tree, which I oppose as
unnecessary and to be avoided if at all possible. Other aspects of the
project are objectionable as well. If you do not wish to schedule a
hearing, please consider the following points that have been made
previously to the Public Works Department without any impact:
The bridge is a natural gateway to a quieter office and residential
neighborhood than downtown, due to the presence of the creek and
sycamore trees that frame each side of the bridge. The existing narrow
bridge also has a gateway effect, as it visually "necks down" the
street. The bridge replacement should not only preserve the best
features of the gateway but enhance it with other supporting features.
This is the basis for the following proposals that I wish the Council
would throw its weight behind and have staff investigate and report on
their feasibility to implement:
1. The bridge could be narrowed by using 11-foot travel lanes (the
same as a block away in heavier traffic) instead of the proposed 12-foot
lanes, and a five-foot sidewalk on the west side instead of the proposed
eight-foot one (same as on the east side and conducive to pairs of
people walking next to each other) . The resulting five-foot reduction
could provide enough room to retain the downstream sycamore. This tree
cannot be matched in size in just a few years, and the proposed
replacement trees will mature after most of our lifetimes,
unfortunately.
Additionally, the bridge could be relocated two to three feet east to
line up with the right-of-way, providing more room to retain the
sycamore. Staff has desired to remove the sycamore to be able to access
the creek bottom with vehicles. Perhaps access could still be
accomplished if the tree is retained.
2. The City should use a more coordinated effort to underground the
utility wires over the bridge, with this project, utilizing either
special project funds or the city's undergrounding fund. Imagine the
loss of the sycamore, and the retention of the utility lines and poles
as the visual result of this project, as the gateway to the
neighborhood. Wouldn't it speak better of the City if the tree werEC EIVE D
saved and the utilities were undergrounded?
MAY 1 8 1.999
SLO CITY ': . :RK
r -
3. The view upstream from the bridge is a well-known secret that •
could be given more attention, by providing a modest bench facing east
and upstream from the sidewalk next to the bridge, on the "Wright"side
of the creek.
4. Street trees should be planted from Marsh to Pacific Streets on
both sides of Santa Rosa (even in front of the Wright building) to
emphasize the approach to the bridge with a canopy and vertical
enclosure to help moderate traffic speeds.
If you agree even partially with these points, then they deserve further
consideration and implementation, not refutation, by staff. Some
projects like this are more than just a bridge in that they encompass a
whole block's, or neighborhood's, image and definition. Let's design
this gateway with a broader sensitivity to the main features that define
the area - the creek made evident by the sycamores, the natural
character of the creek, with the absence of utility wires, and a natural
enclosure to the street with more street trees.
Thank you for considering my request.
Respectfully,
James Lopes
2230 Exposition Drive #30
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 •
ph. 781-5975 (w)
jlopes®fix.net
AN 002-445-D! 6Mf
�
041 STOR� rz
ft( WINC
61.5
2, 4
WATCH
0 2.
< "cw
OR R.O.W.
U We
R04)
450mm➢
2 7
12 COV
77-
_F
FIBER'(
——————— -w—
OPT([M
Ir 0( *.L
`)HIV Jv T 71�
70
67 J1
7 fWgq C6771 All
a Bw
CS)
Ik
TEL- (1 6-DUCT
STRUCTURE
LBD% F Et 10
7
k 6Q A9 l2 05 5 In 21
T
6 0 _� DRKWt
12 a 66
2 dop(Ocs, 12 OV[RHw
2 W,R[
5 2 67
gL R.Ow+ �,q
LQ);D
U
66 i
40
If 01
___66
11-' PA111 1JRF4,[
0
(J 6-NK TR[;:s 7J
APh
ail ���, � I "------__._.�_
cIty ff lk
IS m ; 3ANTA ROSA 3TE
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PR(
5 N �
s �v
h �
ht
{
1
i
fi •
z �3
t
r
k� s
� 4p.
t
� S �
� t
s " 4
91
A
AC
4
s Y i s
a �
� b
44
� t
y
I �
� �� 4
x �
7 5,
n vh
t
y'i I 8c 4
v
A' r
t 44 I
lk
� I
N
f.«<t
�z
s 1 �
J t f
l N41 RIM
3
l
MY
xo
tW
g�
a
f §
; t
S 5'r
a
fq ,
a t
Y
o { f
J
f
^k
p}
d tY 4
y
j`.
c�
f:
� fik
/
y
r
z�
�s� r
4
F
Wt
U
A7
�a
� a
a �f.
ny k3f If,4' .
2