HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 05/07/2001 (7) MAY 0 3 2001
;Lem , ,
•
To: Paul Marangella
Front BryantR. Moynihan
CC: PCDC, City Manager City Clerk, Finance Director
Dates 5/1/2001
Ran PCDC Agenda`Bill'2
In reviewing the PCDC Agenda Bill Z for'the,May 7, 2001 meeting:.date_ I.had.a number of
questions and observations to which I would appreciate-a response to advance of the meeting
date.
1. What action by the Conirnission initiated this project9
2. What was the rational behind including some segments of the River Enhancement
Plan and eliminating-;others in':the scope of work?
3. Do we have a cost estimate.for'the design`and engineering of the other segments?
4, Do we.have a "ballpark" cost`estimatefortheconstruction.costs? Land acquisition
costs? Anneal operating and maintenance costs?
5. Would you please provide the Commission'with a copy of the RFP.
6. How much of this work'is not;directly associated with'the proposed river trail?
7. Are the Water.Street;infrastructure upgrades included in.the Downtown Project
Segment? Ifso please provide a site map of the project that shows all properties
within a 500 footradius'so we may determine potential contlicts•ofinterest.
8. What other grants and funding sources`"are potentially available for this work?
9. Has the City or PCDC applied for any regionaL;state; or federal funding:sources for a
portion of this;project?
10. What is the precedent for implementing a,Specific,Plan which has not undergone
public review or adoption?
11. While the proposed PCDC 5 Year Implementation`Plan was included in the April 16,
2001 Commission'packet, I do not believe it was discussed or adopted. Would'you
please,provide the Commission with the minutes of the meeting showing otherwise.
12. What portions of this project are included'm the Draft 5 Year Capital Improvement
Plan (CIE)? When is the 5-Year CIP scheduled to.beadopted bythe City.Council?
Thank you in advance for your time and efforts..
• }2iC4/
`JLLL) - `L- L )
•
MAY 0 7 2001 2 PCDc
•
CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
Fetaluma,Community Development Commission
AGENDA BILL
Agenda Discussionand Actionpp Agreement
for Meeting Date:
Services with.CSW/Stuber"Stroeh for Final Design,Planning and May 7, 2001
Construction Engineering/Bid Preparation and Documentation for
the Construction of Several Seg mentsof the Petaluma Riven
Access & Enhancement Plan
Department: Director: - ContactPerson:, Phone,Number:
PCDC/Redevelopment Paul Marangella Paul Marangella 778-4581
. Costof Proposal: $875,000 Account Number:
901=9792 & 902-9876
Amount Budgeted: $158;500 in FY2000-01 Budget Naine.of'Fund:
$875,000 in FY 2001-02 Proposed Budget ,PCDC Funds (901 & 902))
•
Attachments to Agenda Packet Item:
1. Agenda Report
2. Council Resolution
3. Design/Engineering Schedule
•
•
4. CSW/Stuber=Stroeh's Scope of Services &Proposal -
5. Summary of"Five-Year Implementation Plan"Projects and Funding
6. Questions.& Answers Concerning the Implementation of the,River'Plan/CPSP
Summary Statement: Since 1987, the City of Petaluma_has been actively planning to improve .
the corridor along the Petaluma River. Numerous studies and plans have been ,prepared.
Thousands of volunteer and City staff hours have been ,spent formulating polices, goals,
objectives and plans to implement a vision forthe river corridor.
The next step in the implementation of River Plan is to complete the final design and
engineering/construction specifications necessary for the?construction of several segments of the
plan beginning in May 2002.. A Request for Proposals was issued' fora comprehensive design
solution consistent with[the scope and intent of the Petaluma River Access& Enhancement Plan,
including, Final Design. and' Construction Engineering Plans in sufficient detail to issue
construction bids for several different segments of the River Plan. Two companies responded.
The Redevelopment and Engineering staff interviewed both firms, and, after a comprehensive
evaluation, determined that CSW Stuber-Stroeh was the most qualified. Several meetings were
then held to refine the scope of work and corresponding budget.
Funding for both,design and construction of several segmentsof the River Plan is available and
included in the PCDC's revised "Five-Year Implementation Plan'' adopted on April 16, 2001.
The purpose of this item:is,to approve an Agreement for'Services with CSW Stuber=Stroeh to
complete the Final Design and Construction Engineering_Plans for several segments of the River
Plan; with the objective of beginning construction in May 2002 and to approve a preliminary
• budget for the project.
•
1
Council Priority: THIS AGENDA ITEM IS CONSIDERED TO,BE.PART.OF, OR NECESSARY TO, ONE OR
MORE OF THE 1999-2000 PRIORITIES'ESTABLISHED BY Tin CITY COUNCIL ON JANUARY 30, 1999
AND MARCH 18, 2000.
Priorit y(s): Im lementationof Plans: Acq uisition of ProP erties, Im
leement•River„Plan Segments,
Im qlement
Central Petaluma Specific Plan
Recommended City Council Action/Suggested Motion: Consistent with the adoption of the PCDC
"Five-Year Implementation Plan” on April 16, 2001,. it is recommended that they PCDC adopt the
attached resolution to approve an Agreement for Services with CSW/Stuber-Stroegh for final ,design,
planning and construction engineering/bid preparation and documentation required for'the construction
of several segments of the Petaluma River Access;& Enhancement Plan and appropriate 5,000 :to. '
fund.the-agreement and related'costs:
Reviewed by Finance Director: Reviewed Attorne ;: Approved by City Manager
Date: •jaPP Date:
Today's Date:t Revision # and Date Revised. File Code:.
•
•
•
•
•
•
2
CITY. OFIPETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
Petaluma Community Development Commission
MAY 7,;2001
•
AGENDA REPORT
FOR
Discussion and Action'to Approve Agreementfor Seryices,with CSW/Stuber-Stroeh for Final
Design, Planning and Construction,Engineering/Bid Preparation and Documentation for the
Construction of Several Segments of the Petaluma River Access &Enhancement Plan
1. EXECUTIVE'SUMMARY:-
Since 1987, the City of Petaluma has been actively`planning to improve the corridor
along the Petaluma River: Numerous studies'and plans,have been prepared. Thousands
of volunteer and City staff hours'have been spentformulatings'polices, goals, objectives
and plans to itnplernenta viSion,--for the river corridor.
The next step in the implementation of River Plan'is to complete the final design and
engineering/construction specifications necessary for , the construction of several
segments of the plan beginning:iii May A q, est for Proposals was'issued for a
Ma 20021 A,�Re ue
comprehensive design solution consistent with the scope and intent of the Petaluma River
Access & Enhancement Plan including, Final. Design and Construction Engineering
Plans in sufficient detail to issue construction bids for'several different segments of the
River .Plan. Two •companies responded. The Redevelopment and Engineering staff
interviewed both firms and, after a comprehensive, evaluation, determined that CSW
Stuber-Stroeh was the most qualified. Several meetings were then held to refine the
scope of work and corresponding budget.
.
Funding for both design and construction of several segments of the River Plan is
available and included in the PCDC's revised "Five-Year.Implementation Plan" adopted
on April 16,-200.1.
The purpose of this.item is to approve, an Agreement for Services with CSW Stuber-
Stroeh to complete the Final Design and Construction Engineering Plans for several
segments of the River Plan, with the'-objective of beginning construction in May 2002
and to approve apreliminary budget for ithe project.
•
2. BACKGROUND:
A. Planning;
• The.Petaluma General Plan 1987-2005 recognized the Petaluma-River as one of the city's
principal assets and as an underutilized local resource. The General Plan recommends
enhancement of the river as the centerpiece for a more active downtown. The Plan
3
•
specifically recommended the preparation of a comprehensive'river plan to address the •
many related;issues concerning the river.
In 1990-a Petaluma River CitizenAdvisory Committee (CAC) was appointed,by:the City
Council in order to guide the preparation of a plan for the river. 'The CAC held a series of
thirteen neighborhood meetings for riverfronf property owners: Numerous additional
meetings and site visits were made to resolve site-specific issues. 'The CAC also hosted
three community-wide public workshops;at,different stages of the project, including one
with a bus and walking ,tour of the river corridor. In addition, a Technical.Advisory
Committee (TAC) .consisting of a loose-knit group; of 2I governmental agencies and
:other'interest;groups`with;special technical expertise:was formed to review andicoipment,
on the emerging plans
The result of this effort was the ,formulation of the "Petaluma River Access
Enhancement Plan' also referred to as,the "River Plan". The River Plany'is:formulated as
an Area Plan and is a reference document for the General, Plan: The River Plan is
consistent.with and expands upon the policies contained in the'General Plan. Ttcis the
most comprehensive statement of the conununity's vision for the river andriverfront-
development.
•
B. General Plan Goals:for:.the River
The General.Plan describes thelPetaluma:River assaresource'to be preserved, seen,
and used as provided in several of the Central`Goalsof the General P_lamand in the
three•spedific River Goals from General Plan,Chapter 5, as follows:
• Central Goals,of General Plan
• IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF NEW DEVELOPMENT,AND ADD
CHARACTER TO.EXISTINGNEIGHBORHOODS, AND PRESERVE;
HISTORIC DISTRICTS AND•STRUCTURES
• ENHANCE'THUPETALUMA RIVER AS A RESOURCE TO BE
PRESERVED, SEEN AND USED
• PURSUE MITIGATION OF THE 100-YEAR FLOOD
• ATTRACT JOBS THATWILL EMPLOY ENHANCE
DOWNTOWN AS THE COMMUNITY'S:BUSINESS CENTER; NEW
DEVELOP-MENTSHOULD PAY FOR ITSELF
• MAKE'IT EASY TO TRAVEL IN AND AROUND:PETALUMA; TIE
ALLOWABLE DEVELOPMENT INTO' CAPACITY OF
ROADWAYS; PREVENT INTRUSION OF"NON-NEIGHBORHOOD•
TRAFFIC INTO NEIGHBORHOODS; DEVELOP'COMPREHENSIVE
TRANSIT AND BIKEWAY SYSTEMS.
• CREATE A SYSTEM THAT PRESERVES OPEN SPACE WITHIN AND
OUTSIDE,OF PETALUMA, USE THE SYSTEM-TO TIE TOGETHER •
`OPEN/SPACES(AND ACTIVITY'CENTERS. •
4
• River Goals
• DEVELOP RECREATIONAL AND CULTURAL OPPORTUNITIES
ALONG THE`PETALUMA RIVER:IN A MANNER SENSITIVE TO THE
ENVIRONMENT.
o PRESERVE AND PROTECT THE PETALUMA RIVER AND STREAMS
IN THEIR NATURAL. STATE AS OPEN SPACES, NATURAL
RESOURCES AND HABITATS.
• MAINTAIN THE PETALUMA RIVER AS A NAVIGABLE RIVER TO
THE HEAD OF NAVIGATION.
•
C. Economic Development,
After the adoption of'the..General 'Plan in.1987, the City Council embarked on an
evaluation of the Plan's economic development policies`and recommendations. The
product of this effort, Market Outlook and Economic'Development Report (March,
1991), reinforced the :General-;Plan's presumption that-proper treatment of the river
would attract and support business opportunities, particularly in the downtown,
contribute to the town's considerable charm; and provide strong incentives for
business choosing to locate in Petaluma. The report states'in part:
"Petaluma''" strongest long term•economic development strategy
1111 is;the detailed master planning and staged construction of a first
class river ,park along the banks 'Rif the Petaluma River
includingaMcNear's Island (Peninsula)... This park,should not
only have walking paths along the river butshould have major
active and passive recreation areas for the local population. It
should become Petaluma's;central amenity and:a focal point for.
future commercial; tourist retail, office and multi=family
development. A great river, park will .enable' Petaluma to
become on of the most desirable places to_"live and work in all of
Northern California."
D. River Segments
In the River Plan the river corridor is divided into six segments.as follows:,
• Upstream Segment: Old Redwood Highway to Lynch Creek
• Payran Residential Segment: Lynch Creek to Lakeville RR Bridge
• Lakeville,Industrial Segment: Lakeville RR Bridge'to E. Washington,Street
• Downtown Segment: E. Washington Street to "D" Street
• Warehouse Segment: West Bank of"D" Street'to "H" Street
• Downstream Segment: EasfiBank'of"D" Street to Highway 101
E. Implementation Element:
The River Plan:contains an Implementation Element identifying measures to
implement the plan's goals, objectives, policies and programs. The Element states in
part:
5
City of Petaluma, California
A. �nl x, City Manager's Office
?,�;, 11 English Street, Petaluma'CA 94952 •
(7.07)778-4545 FAX(707) 778-4419 •
c J From: (':9 - - -
Fax#: S I 'O "' -S -q.L(-g I Pages: ,(including1�cover) I,`I -
Phone: Date: (� I -2 y 0 1
Re: • 'CC:, I-2 \< 1M 6- `-
t
Urgent , orReview Q Please Comment ❑ Please Reply ❑ 'Please'Recycle
"If the'docuinent you are receiving;contams privileged and/orconfdential`information.fumishedi'in connection .
with 9our;ofcial duties;further releaseiof this information by you may only be accomplished in accordance with
applicable'7statute,.court order or other lawful process;
The accompanying;docuument(s)-is/are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which`this.
transmission is addressed and may contain'information,:which is privileged; confidential;,and'exempt from
disclosure:under applicable law.,If you are not the intended recipient,dissemination,distribution or copying of tfiis
communicatiomis stnctly.;prohibited.,If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately 0'
' by telephone and return the'.original to us at the above address by the U.S. Postal Service. We will reimburse any
costs incurred.Thankvou for:your consideration:"
•Comments: ❑ Hard'Copy to Follow
lC _ ' .P I ra \re-L.? ' - L e i coat- .
Dk
"As funding becomes' available;, incorporate in the
appropriate CIF's river corridor improvements advocated
. by the river, Plan, including but not limited, to the
following:
• Trail and boardwalk design and construction.
• Right-of-way acquisition.
• Landscaping, lighting, and other improvements .:.
• Park.site,acquisition,design and;construction.
• Habitat enhancement.
• Bank stabilization."
•
F. Petaluma.Specific Plan:
In late 1996, the City initiated a planning process,fortthe»central portion
of the city adjacent to downtown and extending along the Petaluma
River. A 25-member Advisory Committee, appointed by the City
Council, guided''the°preparation of the Plan, that took several years,
numerous monthly meetings, and two community-wide workshops to
complete. The Plan specifically responds to the following major
concepts: •
• Redirect growth into Central Petaluma
• Reconnect theCity to and along the River-
• • Encourage diversity In transportation modes, .
• Reinforce the;workingchar after of Petaluma's,waterfront
• Enhance physical structure and identity
While the Plan has;not yet been adopted, the City Council.has directed the
Community Development Department to use the draft document as an interim
guideline for future development in the area..
G. Final Design,'Planninwandl',ConstruetioiEngineeringBid,,Preparation:
The FY 2000-0.1;PCDC Budget contained funds for the,design and construction of a
pedestrian/bike trail frorn,the Lakeville Bridge td "C" Street. Subsequently, as the
engineering staff began to'draft°the Request for Proposal (RFP) for design services, a
more comprehensive solution to pedestrian, access and traffic circulation began to
emerge. When the RFP was issued, it asked for; a comprehensive design solution
consistent with the scope and intent of the-Petaluma River Access & Enhancement
Plan. Included in the request were Final Design and Construction Engineering Plans
in sufficient detail to issue construction bids for:several, different segments of the
River Plan.
•
The RFP was issued to four companies based upon the breadth and depth of
experience'in;working with the City of Petaluma as well as their capacity to handle all
elements of the RFP. Two companies responded. The .Redevelopment and
Engineering staff interviewed both firms and after a comprehensive evaluation
determined that CSW Stuber-Stroeh was>the most qualified. Several meetings were
then held to refine the scope of work and corresponding budget
6
H. PCDC "Five:Yearimplementation Plan": •
On April 16 2001, the PCDC Adopted the "Five-Year Implementation Plan This
action provided policy direction:,to fund, design/engineer, and construct the•segments
of the River Enhancement Plan contained in this report. Attached is asummaryof the
estimated appropriations -for-all of the major projects to be undertaken by the PCDC
from FY 001-02'through FY 2006-07.
•
3: ALTERNATIVES:
A. Revise Scopeof Project
It-should.be noted that under the current proposal, three segments of the River Plan are
• .
excluded. Under this alternative, the PCDC may choose to;further exclude work on the
design on one,or more of the three proposed'segments of the River Plan. 'Theiadvantage
of the alternative is,that reduces`the;cost.of the current project The disadvantage is;that
deferring the design.increases the ultimate'cost. Also, opportunities,to secure alternative
funding/grants would be more difficult without an actual design and accurate cost
estimates.
B. Negotiate an Agreement with Winsler &Kelly
The JPCDC could direct the Executive Director to•negotiate an agreement with the firm of
Winsler &Kelly, the other qualified`bidder: There are no clear advantages to•this'option. •
The disadvantage is that the Agency would lose time in entering negotiations'with the
firm when this`has already been'accomplished with-the`recommended''firni:
C. Reject.All Proposals •
The•,PCDC-could`reject all proposals and defer the.project to-a later date Tins would
delay, the implementation of the project and likely result in higher costs when the project
is finally built
4. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: •
The proposed agreement for services with'CSW'Stuber-Stroeh'for the final'design;and
construction'documentation of three phases of the River Plan is for $681,180, asfollows:
Up stream,Segment; Estimated
(Old Redwood Highway to Lynch`Creek) Construction Cost
• .Design Phase . $0
• Construction"Documentation Phase• $0..
Subtotal for Segment` $0
Payran Residential'Segment (Area 3):
(Lynch.Creek to Lakeville RR Bridge)
• Design Phase $ 41,400
• :Construction Documentation Phase $ 87;500
Subtotal.for Segment: $128;900 5 650,000 1111-
•
7
Estimated
Lakeville Industrial'Segment (Area 2) Construction Cost
(Lakeville RR Bridge to E.Washington Street) •
• Design Phase $'.';39,580
• Construction Documentation Phase $ 70,700
Subtotal for Segment: $110;280 $ 468;000
Downtown Segment(Area 1): '
(E.Washington Street to"D"'Street) •
• Design,Phase $137;000
• Construction Documentation Phase $177,700
Subtotal for'Segment: $314700 $3,600,000
Warehouse Segment:
(West Bank of`D"'Streetato"H"Street) •
• Design Phase $0
• Construction Documentation Phase $0
Subtotal for Segment: $0 $4,000,000
Downstream Segment:
(East Bank of"D"Street to Highway 101)
e Design Phase $0
• • Construction Documentation Phase $0
Subtotal for Segment: $0
"D" Street to McNearPeninsula (Area 4):
• Design Phase Only $' 16,500 --
Project Management Services: $ 20,800
Subtotal CSW/SS;Agreement for Services: $591,180
Additional Ou"t'side,Servicesby,CSW/SS: $ .90;000
• Appraisals: $25,000
e SWPPP $ 5,000
• Intergovtl. Coord: $•2,500
• Utility Design: $15;000
• Environment Review: $30;000
• Contingency: $12;500
Contingency for Citizen Participation: $ 63,800
(Design Phase Only) $255,200 x 1:25%0=$63,800
Easement Purchases: $ 39,775
(Path from E. Washington to Lynch Creek)
City Administration, Planning,,& Engineering: $ 90,245
Grand Total Design, Engineering & Admin: $875,000
Grand Total'Construction Estimate: $8,718,000
8
The total estimated cost'of final engineering design, contract.management; City planning
and engineering review and administration, contingency, and easements for three phases
of the River Plan.is $875,000 of which $591,180 is being awarded to CSW/SS with the
addition of a $90,000 allowance for outside engineering, environmental review and
appraisal services, The allowance,for outsid"e:services will be used on anaas needed basis
with prior approval necessary from the `City staff. A•balance of $9,800 will be
separately reserved for contingencies. Also, .$39;775 is ,provided for the purchase of
easements for the pedestrian/bike path froth East Washington St. to Lynch, Creek.
Finally; $90,245 is appropriated for;prbeessing plans through various commission and
'many in and supervision.
providing... .management, planning. P islon.
Preliminary Project;Budget
•
Fund 901 Fund 902
FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 01=02 • FY'02?03
CSW°Engineering: $341,200 $ 0 $ 0 $249,980 $ 0
Outside Services: Si 45,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 45;000 :$ • 0
Contingency: $ 43,555 $ 0 $ 0 $ 20,245 $ 0
City Admini $ 70,245 $ 0 $ 0 $ 20,000 $ 0
Easements: $ 0 $ 0' . $ 0 $, 39,775 .$ 0 •
Construction: $ 0 $3,300,000; '300,000 $ 0' $1;1.18,000
$500,000 $3,300,000 $100,000 $375,000 $1,1.18,000'
5. CONCLUSION:
Since 1987, the City of Petaluma has been actively planning to improve the corridor
along the Petaluma River, Numerous studiessand plans have been prepared. Thousands
of volunteer and City staff hours have been,spent formulating polices, goals, objectives
and plans to implement a vision for the river corridor, The Cityds now on the:threshold
of implementing this vision. Funding is availableand staff and consultant resources,are
available to complete the final design and engineering specifications that'will enable the
PCDC to put lonb awaited projects out to bid and be under construction by May 2002.
By approving the,Agreement for Services with CSW Stuber-Stroeh„the PCDC will move
the Agency's;approved "Five-Year Implementation;Plan" forward.
6. .OUTCOMES OR PERFORMANCE:MEASUREMENTS THAVWILL IDENTIFY SUCCESSOR
_COMPLETION:.
The final design engineering for threesegments of the River Plan is complete and
construction bids have been received by June30, 2002.
•
•
• 7. RECOMMENDATION:
Consistent with the adoptionaof the PCDC `"Five-Year Implementation Plan" on
April 16, 2001, it is recommended that the Council adopt the attached resolution
to approve an Agreement for Services.with CSW/Stutter-Stroeh for Final Design,
Planning and Construction Engineering/Bid,Preparation and Documentation for
the construction of several segments of the .Petaluma River Access &
Enhancement Plan and appropriate $875,000'to fund.the agreement and related
costs.
•
•
• •
•
.10
_ Attachnment:Il •
•
A RESOLUTION`OF THE PETALUMA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'COMMISSION
APPROVING AN AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES WITH CSW/STUBER=STROEH FOR
,FINAL DESIGN,:PLANNING.AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING/BID
PREPARATION AND DOCUMENTATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SEVERAL •
SEGMENTS+OF THE PETALUMA RIVER ACCESS & ENHANCEMENT PLAN
•
.•
11
Resolution No. N.C.S.
Of the Petaluma Community Development Commission
'Petaluma, California
•
A RESOLUTION OF THE PETALUMA COMMUNITYDEVELOPMEN,T COMMISSION
APPROVING AN AGREEMENT FOR.SERVICES WITH CSW/STUBER-STROEH FOR
FINAL DESIGN,,PLANNING.AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING/BID
PREPARATION AND.DOCUMENTATION.FORTHE,CONSTRUCTION OF SEVERAL
SEGMENTS OF THE PETALUMA`RIVER ACCESS &ENHANCEMENT PLAN
•
WHEREAS, the City of Petalumahas been actively planning to improve the corridor along the
Petaluma River since 1987; and
WHEREAS, numerous studies and plans have been prepared and thousands of volunteer and
City staff hours have:been spent formulating polices; goals, objectives and d plans to implement a
vision'for,the river corridor; and
•
•
WHEREAS, nearly $1,000,000 of public finding has been spent on the Central Petaluma
Specific Plan ($685,217) and the Petaluma River Access &, Enhancement Plan ($300,000) to
plan for the redevelopment of the river;corridor;
WHEREAS, funding is available and staff and consultant resources are available to complete
the final design and engineering specifications that will enable the PCDC to put long-awaited
projects out to bid and be under construction by May 2002; and
WHEREAS, by approving:the:Agreement.for Services with CSW Stuber-Stroeh, the PCDC will
begin the first step toward the implementation of the PCDC-approved "Five-Year
Implementation Plan."
NOW, THEREFORE, the Petaluma Community Development. Commission does hereby
resolve as follows:
1. An agreenient for services with CSW/Stuber-Stroeh for final design, planning and construction
engineering/bid preparation and documentation for the construction of several segments of the
Petaluma River,Access & Enhancement Plan is approved in the amount of$681,180, noting that
this includes a $90,000 allowance for outside engineering, environmental review and appraisal
services,
•
12
2. An appropriation;and budget for the project for the projectis established as follows: •
• .Preliminary. Project Budget
Fund 901 Fund902
FY 01-02 FY 02-03_ FY 03.04 FY 01-02 FY 02-03
CSW Engineering:. :$341,200 $ 0 $ 0 $249,980 $ 0
Outside Services: .45,000 $ 0 $ 0 $. 45,000 $ 0
Contingency: $. 43,555 $ 0 $'. 0 $.20,245 $ 0,
City Admin: ::$ 70,245 $ 0 $ 0 $ 20,000' $ _ 0.
Easements: $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 39,775 $ 0
Construction: $ 0 $3,300,000 $ 300,000 $ 0 $1,118,000'
$500,000 $3;300,000 y$ 300,000 $375,000 $1,118,000.
* * * *,
•
I hereby certify-that the foregoing:Resolution No., was dilly 1introduced;and
adopted by the Petaluma Community Development Commission at a regular meeting held on, •
May 7, 2001 )ythe;following vote:
•
Commissioner Aye. ._ No . Absent
Thompson •
Cader-Thompson
Healy
•
Maguire
Moynihan
•
O'Brien,
Torliatt
E. Clark Thompson, Chairman •
ATTEST:
Beverly J. Kline,,Recording Secretary
I
Attachment III
CSW Stuber-Stroeh Project Timeline
( 3y River Segment)
•
1 A
Oa
?..:4,; N - O t0 0 J W m a V N + 0
1r .
'.a
'O
iii C1 GI fl fl F:fil m
a� _N p T 0...i? O Nf r O 9 .A m
p -'.ti W g 'A 4 O JJ
mF m a:O o• w '' ° < N. m 9, y3:
•
. :0Z Om. e 'e D 613. x>._ ..t
,.0 N2 1D' p 1p
O •
_. C? .
p. 1D
Z ,
m
o' _ A• :A
. m! �5A .
9' z
•
-
5: .
. p..
. pC
. vv.._.
0
- aj m a m ,ie : m
•
A m 3 `2 0 >' o.. 0 0 K. o• o' co �o N.
FD- 3 N o .N-, co N J. (g O
: O 5 0.
O D 2
s j T T T
:, -r2 T l T' 7I. N T T:
a 31 m.: a 21 N s-
.4* C nS m a a-. c N r 'Q.
;N N N: O I O O" O p:
Z.
n-o 9y
— cr
A A D
3 m C AA b -
N A• 0C
L°
A- A o £ n Ai
Q, aC m — H H
o a' o N
- m
�;. �, z in
m,
m o
c ''-'' Z
N
N
U m o, m
y �
m
m
4
m
N
V
p N
N 0
N C
P
Z a
cn
■0
O '
1.5,
•
. m
y: Z. Z
o . - .. m• m
Z n, S
ZZ' N
U N 9 T
3 _ - m A
y • y 4
• O. Z
z
. O
. O'. .
y
• 0
'
a 01. O . O' Ol
. i
o• w g a. `• o,. > > a s
3 6 a e. N a' 3 0
a 9 c >,. N ,OJ O O' O O O. O O. O a.
4
✓ _ I j: T; T. 'T -I rA: m m
WN O4
%
n
m
m
-i D
g
-DI:.r3
m -DI:.
N O m
' o 0 o p F
ti-.
aaa ��.
c 9c 9c- m r
- 0 r
T 6 m Z
3 = - m
u H .
0
U
o
1 K
on
3 u
3
•
ai. .
^0
0
• ii o
cr
T
lC
0
C O N, , Q CO p, ; J N 0 A N -7 0
111 ra n n::n rt n CD
NW y. T n' N n co; r n p A d
•
p m O A A m an
l
d
D o w m' m 8. a co,. y: n 3
m; m
O 8.. m. m
. Z, n' 3
O: N '
U w m '-1 y
' o r
H. D
' O:. Z
• Z,
. : 0
. fy
0
3 3
0. O o 0
. N
6
3a , o. 3 cc,,, m J 10 n
x
o'' o 8 8. 0 o o' o o,J o
s.. *-'. m, m. 7 z. .U11 m, :m' N m m
CO/
N N' N•_ N N 5'
ei' .: T (O A.. A A p 'Cl
d
NV N N v '2 Oi. E 2.
n_9
mm
o 'at
.
Ill
C Dc
....: ._ _ T aD.
m ,9
2 !`mm
;2J 31 -A A.
y.yjy,
•m N N
m; .v. ?r'
t' m = m
F,- —
H _ 11.'
m,
—
w
m m.
a p
,_ —
cn " as
p
—
j
•
.... IC
.o Cr
•
Z
N N
V
m
N' TO
1, 7;: .
®®®®�11�®11®�®�
cti AW 3
in, 1. m 3 1 1 0, , 3:1•.. oer' R S n O O
ti w m.: o m 5' m m
' �
. .021. 0. i
, m m
A' HI 8 I.
_ D yDy r.
O O O
z'. p n
z z
m N m -g m
O
O:
z.
•
5
0
p. a
aI ,, F F ... I F II
3
A N
° .. , W.- -. °
N
_ 3 m N, o -4.
m o 'T-
n I a o o 0O \ o ti"
ry N
_ -
N �! 92I 8I 92
® C' n' N m o j u C
N N N' O[ O O O p
2
mm
•
_ I . -min
cr
D3
... .. mD
A ... A A
o — O<
a m
m a m - O m
-1--i H
n A
o C o Ill r
o = 0 z
m
co 0 O. .
v m
0
ii 'a i
-i 1A
•
• p
N
N
' ' i
z
O
J i
CO
70
om
d0- N. N 8 0 J
glii
A u. �. V. m w rn. A cl O
H
ID n n n;n n n: n o
to
m! n T n: n G. n of ;v x
•o o m n 'xi ° m e g m m1 m z Er2 of ° <, - m >- a> _
Z; A ,O. I M" : D, '.a ">, >
• c N m.
Z
z Z•
m N FI. . �'. 'm
3' , C' -1• .5. D
. :z 0
v
0:
0 z
n _.
N.
C
A: J. a Off: N O) -.j N 47'.
Co .N• E' t S_ S. € F F g■ • of
•
0 7: < 3 K . N„ �:to
o N 3 m. o. o o =.
n3. '�` �'. N v '
3: o, o:• a a 3, a. • of p 3L o: Q
v, o 0
m
•
p' 04
. N: m
N' O O .-:' � S
0 N, N 3 6. to 0 ': O• 6"'":8'V .O,
.. 2,
mm
N yCr
— 3 I:p,
N .. im:`.
0 0 0 0 mA
~~
n n' n
y
m.
'o g N f r:
a
m° w m
0 , •
i
D m 0.
o
4M .
N,
3 m.. .
•
I_
-- U
O
N
O
•
m
d
d O. A !NJ' N: N N Q 0.
F, N
. y2 .
n i': n nn FA; n n0
J_, H> _y y 1 A A N
a�. A d" < < c? n O. O s
-a. !CO o: A o A • m. m w
z 9 d.• G G m � ! y" y
.+ m m D D
C: m,. N- - a: ny
C. N.. -o ' *.
y: N. c
O O O
z:
O. O
z z
- m -. -.
T•o - d _ C y
C by
• O
F
. . z: 5
. . : '
0
O: Z 0
. N
. • a
s'- a: co 0 0 Tr, o: m �.
0'
A m m d O
O' N
�. 3 N O O. O O'.. O O 8
d ] N O
- `2 N - -..- -..- v -.-. .� .
COI
'0' - 71' is w m m
` . . N I O, i
N . O J
N OO O O OO
0 N z
nv
•
• . . - mm
R's ac
r.g
— -o T.
_ A xif
2
0
C
R o A nMp
a n N` -"D•
to 9C 9C _'_ o mr
U N C
3 = - m
r . ....
ii
v m'
o g
n
N n1
3 —
3 m
n
is a
• - Na ,
k 0 .- m
-4
o, .
o N
N
o N
N
z m
co 0
R
°m m
•
nn
o-o
°i'O' m °'' o w ro o m ON m N o
c �
8 111 : - I� 1.1:1 W.I ffl N1 1,1. 1=@ Co,.
AW V GN i. o . 'p•. V -1
m -1 m O A' ° A m m m z
y
•
G '. i° yt n 3
ogin; .m' ° 2
y'. m•A. ;0. '�''e m m
z: ! m m
o
i O r0
N
ro. _ O
9: -1' m
-I A '9
y ^
z yry
2 ' O Z
r
a, >: co: ml ml m; ° 6-a , .
° 3 m f • O1. �m N. N, N _• m m' s5 a�g z.
J N N' N N' j N 0,F • r.
N, N N.. 8 0. O.. O O Oi Z:.
a9 mm
cr. :
r=
3
CD 0
Tiy
n - - AA
m Om
$ o -Q o u. (`m m
F F u 4 y n n ~'g
a c c c' 3
a
an 17
d _N! co NJ
CO
m c - _. 3 m
0 io
N
.m m m m
3 u
co d °
J
3 C' m
j
m
J
o v
..> �D
' —m
z
O
•
°
ol
per _ .. . . _
iN.p; W m N W N! -, 0. co -j O N N N
O.
n
' ID I
fl RI: f°1 ID fl f1 r6 O
• AN W O m' O T O: A: O CYN'I O A' A v
NN Sl: C C Ci C n 6 O; O s
o o. m. H m , a:. a 2.., = m, m z
.S ,� m m n;.
y O T m < m N ° > >
D z a m m. m. y m ID. Dm
D, j A' m. N', -1
O
a' o. m'. m
z m' m•
A .
Z.. 0 0
•
a m' -1 n. Z z
m O
m y,
$ x y : a: a
N C C -.
,�. -1- y
O r
p.
. O 5
O'
m
C
'o. . CO .. o f CO m. CO 0 P g
o T, o o = o o 0 o , o > ' o y
A Ca 3 0 rn N J N y
IA" N"o ' m: N.
3 6n pi (-D. N: N' 9' N. w O
0. Q m .. .
� N N
m
0: _' 3.
• T T: T T
0. En C.4. N: N ' o: 0: 0- m m
N; N N- 1C. N
O 0 'a, 6' 0. 0 0 O O 0. O. a' 00 = 0.m. z
O 9
hO
m — r 3 A z
° .
m e m <
m
A o A 0 a
H-I
a a a. - ~D
tC. DC TC m r—.... .... .. m
M M m r
o - =
• m
N _ . . _ w o
O ° o
o
m°
0
a m —
'o co z
8 '3' ~°cl
co -4 n 3
3 H
s
m
N
hr; l _ _ 'o
ti3
9
Nm
co
N
• m
N
—4—r N—
z
0
CO
�.
0 1
^� -: N N A. W N. -. O 0 m hi m (NT O
Hg
° G III _ .. n fl Ell- fl NT n n m•
v w 0 T 0 A O m r n T v.S•
m- - ti m p• A o A
24- p' O v' < < �. b y .my 3:
p
al
: p m: m
•
T C' .
O . O. CO
C:.
A 0 �, m 'T. IT
%
p.
Z'' m m
y, w • n Z. i
C C:
�0
A p
'
DA1 Z` E•
z O.
-0.
•
f O,
• ...< en. m .rail
Q 71 7 _ _. ? g: O" 3: O j.m
_3: a: N Nt -. r a w.
N }
2 ° ; ; : ; ;; , o• o o o o
-
J N. N W N., R. (D N ' 'Q N
i N N' OI O
. --' Z
n'V
mm
; R3 Dg •
co
o o-
•
c,2 �m
—2 y
A
m .¢ a N• Z A•
.O � T.
a n . M
A ''g, to v r
c. 9 .,.: Z
e = T ▪ 0
0 v
t
A m m
A
W a
3 m =
3
R
a
A
CI
m
p
w
co
•
i.
Q m
co
• 23
•
Cs '
Date; February 23, 2001 [S t)2
File; 7.771.495 J
PETALUMA.
•
RIVER/TRAIL ENHANCEMENT
• SCOPE OF SERVICES:
A. PROJECT AREA ONE:; WATER STREET,/THE•TRESTLE
1. PRELIMINAR -DESIGNPHASE
1.1 Preparationaof Project Area One•Base Maps:
1.2 Site Surveying to-generate additional topographic information.
1.3 Review all existmg,.applicable plans,maps;and.reports.
1.4 Perform geotechnical°investigations.
1.5 Site structurali observations.
1.6 Site•ivorkfor-additional'borings.
1.7 'Lab testing of site conditions.
1.8 Preparation,of Preliminary.Site Designs (2 to 3 alternatives).
1.9 Preparation;of cost estimates.
1.10 Review alternatives,with Citystaff.
1.11 Present altematives to'publie at Workshop No. 1.,
1..12 Review results of Workshop'No. 1 with'City'staff.
1.13 Refine alternatives into Preferred Plan based on input from Workshop No 1.
1.14 Refine cost projections per.Preferred-Plan.
1.15 ReviewP.referred Plan-and associated,costlestimate-with:City staff.
1.16 Present Preferred Plan,and cost estimate,to public at Workshop No 2.
1.17 Present Preferred Plan •and costa estimate to SPARC, Planning Commission,
Recreation Commission, and CityCouncil:
1.18 Prepare staff akenda:packetsfor diatribufion.to public officials,with assistance from
City staff.'
2. CONSTRUCTION+DOCUMENT_PHASE
Preparation offinal construction'"documents oftheselected alternative from the Preliminary
Design:process.
2.1 Coordination;meeting with City staff and design-team. •
• 2.2 Preparation ofDemolition Plan •
2.3 Pi-eparation of Sewer and:Water'Systems Plan and Profiles.
2.4 Prepafation of Parking Layout and Striping Plan
2.5 Preparation of Site Furnishings and Lighting Layout Plan.
2.6 Preparation,of Grading„and Drainage Plan.
2.7 Preparation of Structural Plans and Details:
2.8 Preparation;of•Planting Plan.
2.9 Preparation;oflrrigationPlan.
2.10 Preparation--of Construction;:Details.,
5Wd3I\DATA\Ad-Nan\WP60\75Dmald3-01.495 Page l
i
Petaluma River/Trail Enhancement rS l�2
Scope of Services 1 L
February 23, 2001
•
2.11 Preparation of Structural Plan and Details.
2.12 Coordinate relocatiowof utility services With sub-consultant.
2:13 Preparation of Specifications.
2.14 Preparation of Construction Cost'Projections.
2.15 Submit plans for City review..
2.16 Revise plans per City review.
2.17 Preparation of Bid'-Documents.
B. PROJECT AREA TWO: WASHINGTON STREET'TO LAKEVILLE STREET
1. PRELIMINARY DESIGN'PHASE
1.1 Review'City plans, maps, and reports related to the Project Area'.,
1.2 Preparation of base maps•for.Project;Area.
1.3 Site surveying to generate additional topographic information!for Project Area
1.4 Gebtechnicalinvestigations..
,1.5 Site,structural-observations.
1.6 Prepare Preliminary Plan:and Preliminary Projection of Probable Costs.
1.7 Review Preliminary Plan and Cost Projections with City;staff:
1.8 Present Preliminary Plan to public (may incorporate with Workshop No 1)
1.9 Review results'of public hearing With City staff.
1.1.0 Present Preliminary Plan to appropriate City committees and commissions.
1.11 Prepare agenda packet with assistance of City staff:
2. CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT'PHASE
Preparation of final construction documents of the selected alternative from the Preliminary
Design process
2.1 Coordination meeting with City.;staff and design team.
2.2 Preparation of Demolition Plan.
2.3 Preparation of Sewer and Water Systems Plan View (as applicable).
2.4 Preparation of Paving Layout and Details, and:SigningPlan.
2.5 Preparation of SiteFurmshings and Lighting`Layout Plan.
2.6 Preparation of Grading and Drainage Plan an Plan View.
2.6A 'Drainage Plans shall route stormwater overland via existing drainage patterns
withoutpiping,or via piping to existing City maintained outfalls. See"Additional
Services" for stormwater routing•outside of'this, of Services.
2.7 Preparation of Structural':Plansand:Details.
2.8 Preparation of PlantingPlan.
2.9 Preparation of Irrigation Plan..
2.10 Preparation of Construction Details;
• 2.11 Preparation of Specifications. •
2.12 Preparation of Constriction Cost Projections for._approved plan.
2.13 Submit plans for'City review(2 submittals.incl`uded).
2.14 Revise,plans per Cityreview (2 revision cycles included).
\\Ods l\DATA\Ad-Nov\NP6a7\Data:23-01.+95 Page 2`
CS V'V'
- Petaluma River/Trail Enhancement [St 2
, Scope.of Services
� J
February 23.,2001
2:15 ,Preparation of Bid Documents:,
2.16 Preparation of Agenda Packet,,with assistance of City staff,;and attendance at one
publiahearing.
•
2.17 Coordinatenght-of way appraisal and;acguisition.
2.18 Preparation,'of ErosioruControl Plan. .
C. PROJECT AREA THREE: LAIcEYILLE STREET TO.PAYRAN STREET
1. PRELIMINARY`DESIGNPHASE
Note: Preparation of Preliminary Plans for Project,Areas Two and`Three':are described
separately,since both are part,of two distinct project phases. However,since both are very
similar in scope and size,the Preliminary Plans may'beprepared simultaneously. If this is
the case, Preliminary Plans for both areas may be`presented to the general public at the
same time inorderrto save time-and money.
, 1.1 Review City plans, maps, and reports related to the-Project Area
1.2 Preparation of base map for Project Area
1.3 Site surveying to generate•additional topographic information for Project Area
lb1.4 Geotechnical-investigations.
1.5 Site,structural observations.
1.6 Prepare Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Projection of Probable Costs.
1.7 Review Preliminary-Plan and.Cost Projections with City staff.
1.8 Present Preliminary Plan:to public (may incorporate with Workshop No 3).
1.9 Review results of publichearing with City=staff.
1.10 Present PreliminaiyPlarito-appropriate City coinmittees and.commissions.
1.11 Prepare agenda packet with assistance of City staff`/ meeting attendance at one .
City Council'hearing:
2. CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT PHASE
Tasks:for this Phase will be<the:same-as'detailed in Project Area Two, Items 2'.1 through
2.18.
D. PROJECT AREA FOUR: "D"STREET
1. PRELIMINARY DESIGN PHASE
1.1 Review all City maps,plans,,andseports•related3o Project-Area.
1.2 • Preparation of base inap for'Project'Area..
1.3 Preparation of Site:Analysis Maps.
• 1.4 Review all site data with City staff
1.5 Preparation of Preliminary Plans.
1.6 Preparation of Preliminary projection ofprobable,constructionrcosts.
1.7 Review of Preliminary Plans and costprojections with City staff.
kb I\DATA4 d-No0WP6&7\Daa\333-01:495 Page 3
CSW
•Eetaluma'River/Trail'Enhancement \¢
• �
Scope,of Services ►J 1
February 23, 2001
1.8 Present Preliminary.Plans and costs to public(may try to incorporate this item with
one of the prior Workshops,;if possible.)
19 Review results of.public Workshop with.City staff.
1.10 Refine Preliminary into Preferred Plan.
1.11 Review•Preferred Plan with City staff
1.12 Present Preferred Plan to appropriate City committees and'commissions.
2. CONS 1 RUCTION DOCUMENT'PHASE
At this'tinie,,per City direction, we have not provided a scope-to prepare construction
documents for this Phase.. At such time it.is requested by City staff we°will°provide:the
necessary scope of services
E PROJECT AREA FIVE: PROVIDE PROJECT MANAGER
1. PRELIMINARY DESIGN AND FINAL PLAN PHASE
1.1 'Provide"in-house"Project Manager,/liaison to City staff for:four hours per week
• during the project. The`allowance•shownin the fee schedule-assumes 52 weeks. •
F. ADDITIONAL SERVICES
•
The following services are specifically excludedfrom the Scope of Services. These,services to.be
provided'on hire and expense basis, or fixed fee based on a;defined,scope of work.
1. PRELIMINARY DESIGN PHASE •
a. Preparation.of studies or documents not specifically disclosed in the.Scope,of
Services.
b. Designs or studies inireference to modifications to the selected Preliminary Design
or Preferred Plan
c. Design,or studies of storm drain routing,other thanshee •flow across the path, or
pipe routing,(where feasible) to existing storm drainoutfalls.
d Preparation of Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan'(SWPPP).
e. Preparation of right-of-way maps or appraisals. G:F: Homsby. and Associates is.
available to proceed with this portion of the Scope of Services after a specific land
plan is delineated. The City may choose to enter into a direct contract with.them-for
each phase of the project.
f Coordination with State or Federal agencies for jurisdictionalissues.
g. Utility coordination or joint trench design in areas other than Water"Street.
\\Ods I\DATA'Ad-Nov\WPGO'TData\2_3-01.495 - Page 4
cs
Date: Febniary 23, 2001 [StJ2
•
.PETALUMA.
RIVER/TRAIL ENHANCEMENT
REVISED BUDGET'
A. PROJECT AREA ONE: 'WATER?STREETV THETRESTLE:
L PRELIMINARY:DESIGN PHASE •
1.1 CSW/St'
1.1.1 Civil:Engineering $ 36,500
1.1.2 Planning:/Landscape•Architecture $ 44,000
1.1.3 Structural Engineering $ 27,000
1.1.4 Surveying $ 5,000
1.2 Subconsultants •
• 1,2.1 ,Archaeological Resource Service•(ARS) $ 2,500
1.2.2 Harding ESE $ 12,000
1.2.3 Patel.Boiing:and Analysis $ 10,000
Preliminary Design Phase Subtotal:. $ 137,000
2. CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT'PHASE
2.1 CSW/St2
2.1.1 Civil Engineering $ 64,500
2,1:2, Planning/Landscape•Architecture $ 30,000
2.1.3 Structural Engineering $ 55,000
'2.1.4 Surveying $ 2,500
2.2 :Subconsultants I
2.2.1 Harding ESE $ 7,500
2:2.2 Nor-Coast Utility Design (Joint Trench Coordination) $ 8,200
2..-2.3 VHS"(Cost Estimate) $ 10,000
2.2.4 G.F. Hornsby.and Associates,(Right-of-'way) $ T & E
• (See.AdditionaIServices Item G,5'.0)
Construction Document PhaseSubtotal: $ 177,700
+T& E
\\0,151\DATA\Ad-Nov\WF607\Damlb23-01.495 Page 1
CSW
Petaluma River/Trail Enhancement • [St
2
Revised Budget `/J 1
February 23, 2001
B. PROJECT AREA TWO: WASHINGTON STREET TO LAKEVILLE:STREET
L PRELIMINARY DESIGN PHASE,
1.1, CSW/St2
1.1.1 Civil Engineering $ 19,380
1.1.2 'Planning./Landscape.Architecture $ 5;000
1.1.3 Structural Engineerng $ 3,000
1.1.4 Surveying $ 2,500,
1:2 Subconsultants
1.2.1 Archaeological Resource Service•(ARS) $ 1,200
1.2.2 'Harding ESE (StructUral)'(Wall-repair for Washington
street bridge and crossing for utilities) $ 6,500
123 Harding ESE (Geotechnical) $ 2-;000
•
Preliminary-Designn Phase.Subtotal: $ 39,580
•
2. CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT PHASE (Ma •be-postponed tollater Phase).
•
2.1 CSW/St2
•
2.1.1 Civil Engineering $ 27;700
•
2.1.2 Planning/Landscape Architecture $ '8,500
2.1:3. Structural Engineering _$ 30,000
2.1.4 Surveying ' ,$ 2,500
2.2 Subconsultants
2.2.1 Harding.ESE $, 2;000
21.2 Nor-Coast Utility Design (see Additional Services, G. 7.0).$ T&:E
22.3 G.F. Hornsby and Associates (Right-6f-way) $' T B:,E
(See Additional"Services Item G. 5,0)
Construction Document Phase Subtotal: $: 70,700
TE•
\\Odz l\DATA\Ad-Nov\WP6O7\Data\133-01,495 Page 2.
cs [V�V
• •
Petaluma River/Trail Enhancement ®,tl 2
• Reyised Budget 1J
- February 23; 2001" •
• C PROJECT.AREA THREE: LAKEVILLE STREET TO'PAYRAN STREET
1. PRELIMINARYDESIGN PHASE •
1.1 CSW/St?
1.1.1 Civil Engineering $ 18,000
1.1.2 Planning/Landscape Architecture $ 5,000
1.1.3 Structural Engineering $ 3,000
1.1.4 Surveying • $ 1,500
•
1.2 Subconsultants
1.2:1 Archaeological Resource Service (ARS) $ 1,900
1.2.2 °Harding-ESE;(Structural) (Borings for abutment) $ 10,000
• 1.2.3 Harding.ESE(Geotechnical) 5 2,000
• Preliminary DesignPhase Subtotal: $ 41,400
2. CONSTRUCTION'DOCUMENT PHASE •
• 2.1 CSW/St2
2.1.1 Civil Engineering $ 36,500
2.1.2 Planning/Landscape.Aichitecture $ 8,500
2.1.3 Structural Engineering $ 39,000
2,1.4 Surveying $ 1,500
22• Subconsultants
2.2.1 Harding ESE $ 2,000
222 Nor-Coast Utility Design (see Additional,Services G.7.0)' $ T&;E
2.2.3 GE Hornsby and Associates (Right-of-way) $ T &E
(See Additional.Servica sItem.G. 5.0)
Construction Document Phase Subtotal: $ 87,500
+T&E
•
\l0ds I\DATA\Ad-Nov\WP507 Dam\2.23.01.495 Page.3
•
CS
Petaluma River/Trail Enhancement [St 2
Revised Budget
February 23,2001
D. PROJECT.AREA-FOUR: "D” STREET
1. PRELLMIINARY DESIGN PHASE (Does notinclude floating dock)
1.1 CSW/St2
1.1.1 Civil Engineeting' . '$, 5.000
. 1.1.2 Planning/Landscape Architecture. $ 6,500
1.1.3 Structural-Engineering $ 2,500
1.1.4 Surveying $ 2,500
1.2 Subconsulfants (None)
• 'Preliminary Design Phase Subtotal: $ 16,500
E. PROJECT AREA SIX: PROJECT MANAGER SERVICES
Cumulation of Project Manager?s time for one year period,
based on Tour.hours per week (Allowance) $ 20,800
F. PROJECTED TOTAL—All Four.Project Areas +Project Manager: $ 591,180
(Note: This Total do_ es'not include•the sub consultants' Construction
Phase liudgets)'
G. ADDITIONAL ALLOWANCES
1. 'Coordination with:State or Federal agencies on jurisdictional issues $ T &E
2. Wetlands delineation or biologic issues, $ 7,000
3: Phase"I HAZMAT.Invastieation $ 3,000
•
S
'40±I\DATA\Ad-Nov1WP9C\7`.Dam\2.23-01.495, 'Page 4