HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-06-26; City Council; 5894; Carlsbad Boulevard Bridge Consultant AgreementCITY OF CARLSBAD
AGENDA BILL NO. 5f4C/
DATE : .June 26, 1979 .
Initial :
f '. Dept. Head t
C. Atty $F& .
?
Engi neeri ng . C. ~gr. 7 I DE PAR TM E NT :'
SUBJECT: CARLSBAD BOULEVARD BRIDGE APPROVING CONSULTANT AGREEMENT
STATEMENT OF THE MATTER
I
Funds have been authorized by the City Council to design a replacement Carlsbad- Boulevard Bridge over Agua Hedionda Lagoon Inlet.
The Engineering Professional Service Fund has approximately $28,000 remaini ng.
In response to a request for proposals, five engineering firms submitted proposals to the City for consideration. In order to provide a better definition of the project, it was decided to break the design into an initial and final stage.
Based on methodology, qualifications and cost, staff is recommending for the first stage that a contract to provide tentative plans and application criteria be awarded to the firm of Kercheval and Associates for a lump sum fee of $16,732. It is recommended that this sum come from the Engineering Professional Services Fund. d - --
EXH I B ITS
1. Staff report dated June 20, 1979.
2. List of Consultantswho responded to the request for proposals.
3. Kercheval and Associates' summary of technical approach to project. (Complete proposal is on file in the Engineering Department.)
4. Statement of qualifications of Kercheval and Associates.
5. Agreement for Consulting Services between the City of Carlsbad and Kercheval and Associates (including the Scope of Work).
6. Resolution No .q2/ approving agreement and authorizing Mayor to execute on behalf of tFFEty.
RECOMMENDATION
If Ci ty Counci 1 concurs , adopt Resol uti on No .3d%!/ approvi ng the agreement with Kercheval and Associates and authorizing the Mayor to execute the agreement on behalf of the City.
Council Action:
6-25-79: Council adopted Resolution No, 5821
MEMO RAN DUM
EXHIBIT 1
TO : City Manager
FROM: Ci ty Engi neer*$q
DATE : June 20, 1979
SUBJECT : CONSULTANT SELECTION - CARLSBAD BOULEVARD BRIDGE
Proposals to provide engineering services necessary to design a replacement
bridge on Carlsbad Boulevard ov er the Agua Hedionda Lagoon Inlet were received
from five consultants.
apparent that we could not get comparable proposals or a quote on a fee without better project definition.
These proposals were reviewed by staff and it became
At the same time the above review was in progress, the City was notified by CALTRANS that the project may be eligible for funding under the 1978 Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program. The first step in applying
for these funds is to complete a Field Review Form and an Initial Study of
Environmental Impact. Completion of these two forms requires information
available only after a conceptual design of the bridge is completed.
For the above two reasons, it was decided to seek an initial design and environ- mental assessment prior to proceeding with final plans and specifications. This two-stage approach has the following advantages:
1. The scope of work for the final plans and specifications will be defined.
2. Information will be obtained sufficient to complete our application for bridge replacement funds enhancing our chance for success.
3. Environmental considerations can be worked out at an early stage so that problems can be avoided once we are into detailed design.
A rereading of the five proposals with a view to seeking only a preliminary effort disclosed the fact that the proposals fell into two categories: three were from
f i rms speci a1 i zi ng in structures and two had general civi 1 engineeri ng capabi 1 i ti es .
From a preliminary design point of view, a general civil capability is desirable.
At this level, detailed structural analysis is not required, but items other than
the structure itself are involved, such as roadway approaches, site plan, right-
of-way requirements and coordination with state officials.
The two firms with this capability were VTN, San Diego and Kercheval and Associates. Kercheval and Associates had two advantages over VTN. broke the project into two phases as we are now proposing and made an excellent presentation for a preliminary effort. Additionally, Mr. Kercheval's experience as Director of Engineering for MTDB for two years and previous experience with San Diego County gives/him valuable knowledge of CALTRANS criteria, application procedures and environmental requirements.
Their proposal clearly
- 2-
In summary, staff recommends the selection of the firm of Kercheval and
Associates based on the following:
1 . They have a general civi 1 engineering capabi 1 i ty required
for an initial design level.
2. Their methodology. was superior in that they presented a very clear outline of a separate preliminary design phase.
3. Mr. Kercheval is uniquely qualified to assist the City in completing its application for funding through CALTRANS.
Les Evans Ci ty Engineer
LE: RHA:mmt
EXHIBIT 2
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD BRIDGE
The following firms submitted proposals for the design of the proposed
Carlsbad Boulevard Bridge over Agua Hedionda Lagoon Inlet:
KERCHEVAL AND ASSOCIATES
9420 Farnham Street, Suite 113
San Diego, CA 92123
VTN, SAN DIEGO
4845 Ronson Court
San Diego, CA 92111
Mc DANIEL ENGINEERING COMPANY
4649 Cass Street
San Diego, CA 92109
BLAYLOCK-WILLIS AND ASSOCIATES
1909 McKee Street
San Diego, CA 92110
ATKINSON, JOHNSON AND SPURRIER, INC.
4121 Napier Street
San Diego, CA 92110
- --
EXHIBIT 3 -
The following is a brief summary of our approach to the project:
The Technical Approach
The first order of the work would be to address the requirements for
the finished project.
required for the roadway and bridge starting with the scope provided
information and expanding that to include horizontal and vertical con-
trol, tentative bridge span length and beach parking.
These requirements would include the geornetrics
Next, an analysis of a1 ternative schemes for traffic control , staged
bridge construction, bridge removal and utility relocations would be
conducted.
type, span lengths and aesthetics would be performed.
Simultaneously, an analysis for determining the bridge
The bridge type selection process will include evaluating the following
'list of concerns:
costs local desi res
construction time requirements utilities acceptance
construction difficulty maintenance -
speci a1 ty needs aesthetics
fa1 senork or precast sui tabi 1 i ty
existing conditions corrosion protection
des i gn d i .f f i cul ty/ t i me
future expansion
Our approach would then be to conduct or to finish the preliminary land
surveys, conduct and obtain hydraulics and tidal action information and
have a foundation and soils investigation report made.
This completes the first of two phases in the preliminary design effort.
- ..
I
-.
EXHIBIT 4 -
BRIEF RESUME OF PRINCIPAL
NAME & TITLE:
ALBERT A KERCHEVAL P.E.
Presi dent
Chief Engineer and Construction
Manager
3
1
RESPONSIBILITY IN FIRM:
Responsible for overall management
of Engineering and Construction
Division
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE:
With this firm - 1 Year
With other firms - 17 Years
U
a
EDUCATION:
B.S. Civil Engineering - Masters in Public Administration
Candidate for Doctorate in Public Administration (Urban Transportation)
ACTIVE REGISTRATION:
State of California Civil Engineering RCE 19807
As president of Kercheval and Associates, Ai Kercheval started the Company's work in sub-contracting
with large Engineering Corporations and then moved into the public agency contracts while providing
services to construction contractors,
Recently as Oirector of Engineering for the San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board for
a two year period, Mr. Kercheval was responsible for engineering feasibility studies, route locations,
environmental impact studies, pmlimina~ engineering, contract management and special design proj-
ects for mass transit.
He has 18 years of broad engineering experience covering both the public and private sector of design
and construction. Prior to joining MTDB, Mr. Kencheval-as Chief Bridge Engineer and Chief of General
Design-was responsible for bridges, parks, landscaping facilities and engineering standards for the
County of San Diego Department of Transportation. Earlier Mr. Kercheval obtained flood Control
experience and Bridge and Highway Resident Engineer experience for the County of San Bernardino,
the California Division of Highways and the Nebraska Oepartment of Roads.
and Registered Construction inspector NO. 81
BRIEF RESUME OF ASSOCIATE
LEE S. WOOTEN, P.E.
V ice-President
Senior Project Manager
RESPONSIBILITY IN FIRM
Responsible for management of
projects and engineering staff.
EDUCATION
c
B.S., Civil Engineering - San Diego State University
Pursuing M.S., Civil Engineering - San Diego State University
EXPERIENCE
He has over ten years experience in engineering and oonetructbn in both the public and private
sectors. Lee is a Registered Civil Engineer in the State of California, RCE 26142.
Recently as project engineer with the 8ridge and General Design group of the County of Sen Diego,
he has been responsible for the design of b- and related drunrge structures, airport nrrmrays and
lighting systems. This has included both rttuctunl rml highmy design, cust .Ithating and prepera-
tion of construction specifications.
Lee Wooten began his experience in the cortst~cth industry an I aw. Then, joining the County
of San Diego as a civil engineer in the Building Inqmetion Dqwbr#nt, he Olined O%prrhcS in
checking building plans and building construction as they oonfoem to th. Building C0d.r md con-
struction practices.
\.
I
As a civil engineer with the Drtpertinent of Ttrrwgortrtion, he wy hvduul kr both trmu’t planning
and operations, and traffic signal design. He was rlm with the MotmpHtwr Transit 0.urkpment
Board, representing the County in the plmning and dankpnnm of tmdt hr tirn Ohgo. He dm
gained experience in the ares of surveying, acbocbling cmtml d Ind -t hi& with the
County of Sen Diego. From a pasition of Pmkt 6r- Ow&ur WMI l)n County, he joined
Kercheval& A~atusrs Senior Prom Engineer.
i a'
c
.. ..-.
-
BRIEF RESUME OF ASSOCIATE
JACK B. EVE
Cost Estimator Project Manager
RESPONSIBILITY IN FIRM:
Responsible for cost estimating.
EDUCATION:
U.S- Armed Forces Institute U.S. Navy Communications School Pre-Engineering, San Diego Junior College Engineering, Mesa College Engineering, San Diego State College
REGISTRATION :
Certified Construction Cost Estimator # 0291
i
EXPERIENCE
Mr- Eve is a certified heavy construction cost estimator and project resident engineer.
He specializes in quantity surveying and cost estimating for heavy general engineering projects, and is the resident engineer on the Lawrence Welk development project near Escondido. I
He has performed cost estimating services for contractors, architects , civil engin- eers, and municipal agencies. tractor level. He has experience in land clearing, grading, sewer and sanitation facilities, water, storm drain; gas, ,and utility trench work.
Mr. Eve has underground project experience in freeway structures, pipe lining and telephone installations. subdivisions, shopping centers, recreational facilities, wastewater tpeatment plants, service stations and military .barracks.
MI.. Eve is also a part-time instructor in heavy engineering at the University of California, San Diego and teaches ExtensSon course X-432 "fkneral Engineering Cost Est i mat i ng . 'I
His.wk has been at the prime contractor and subcon-
He has performed cost estimating for major freeways,
I
EXHIBIT - 5
AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTING SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of the day of
, 1979, by and between the CITY OF CARLSBAD, a municipal
corporation, hereinafter referred to as 'lCity," and the firm of KERCHEVAL AND
ASSOCIATES hereinafter referred to as "Consul tant. I'
* WITNESSETH:
. WHEREAS, the City requires the services of an engineering consulting
firm to provide the necessary engineering services for provjding tentative plans
and appl icati on criteria for the proposed Carl sbad Boulevard Bridge over Agua
Hedionda Lagoon Inlet;
WHEREAS, Consultant possesses the necessary skills and qualifications
to provide the services required by the City;
WHEREAS, Consultant has submitted a proposal to the City to perform
the .professional services in connection with the preparation of said tentative
plans and application criteria; and
WHEREAS, City desires to accept the scope of services as set forth
in Exhibit "A" attached hereto,
a4 NOW, Therefore, the parties hereunto agree as follows:
Article I: Scope of Consultant Services
a. City engages Consultant to perform the scope of services
described in Exhibit "A".
.Article 11: Scope of City Staff Responsibilities
City shall make available all records, reports and other documenta-
tion deemed necessary by Consultant to properly perform the services required by
the City.
- 2-
Article I11 : Conipensation
City shall Compensate Consultant for services performed under-
Article I as follows:
a. Consultant agrees to perform said services upon the terms
and conditions herein set forth. Consultant shall perform all such services in
a thorough, competent, professional 'and workmanlike manner, for a lump sum fee
of $16,732.00.
b. City shall compensate Consultant for the services performed
hereunder in four equal installments within thirty (30) days of receipt of
Consultant's invoice for the services rendered.
Article IV: Time for Completion
The City and Consultant have agreed that services described in
Exhibit A will be completed within four (4) months of the Notice to Proceed.
Delays not caused by the Consultant shall be considered justification for
extension of time for completion. The Consultant shall submit a schedule of
work to the City.
Article V: Representation
Consultant shall designate a representative acceptable to City
who may be changed by giving the City at least two (2) weeks' prior written
notice of said change.
such request, change Consultant's representative to a representative of Consul t-
ant who is acceptable to City. In ,the event of said request, City shall give
Consultant at least thirty (30)days' prior written notice of such request for
City may request, and Consultant shall, upon receipt of
.
change.
Article VI : Responsi bi 1 i ty of Consultant
The Consultant is hired to render a professional service only, and
any payments made to Consultant are compensation solely for such services as
Consultant may render and recommendations Consultant may make in the course of the
. ..
I
-3-
project.
to Consultant's findings, recommendations, or professional advice other than they
were promulgated after following a practice usual to the consultant profession.
The Consultant makes no warranty, either expressed or implied, as
Article VII: Suspension or Termination of Services
This agreement may be terminated by either party upon
thirty (30)days' written notice to the other party. In the event of
tendering
terini na tion,
the Consultant shall be paid for the work accomplished to the date of termination.
Upon request of the City, the Consultant shall assemble the work product and put
same in order for proper filing and closing and deliver said product to the City.
In such event, the Consultant shall be paid for said final work in accordance
with Article 111.
Article VIII: Status of the Consultant -
The Consultant shall perform the services provided for herein in
Consultant's own way as an independent consultant and in pursuit of ccnsultant's
independent calling, and not as an employee of the City.
under control of the City only as to the result to be accomplished and the
Consultant shall be
'
representative assigned to the City.
Article IX: Ownership of Documents
All plans, stud-ies, sketches, drawings, reports and specifications
as herein required are the property of the City whether the work for which they
are made be executed or not. In the event this contract is terminated, all
documents, plans, specifications, drawings, reports and studies shall be delivered
forthwith to the City. The Consultant may retain copies.
Article X: Hold Harmless Agreement
The City, its agents, officers, and employees shall not be liable
for any claims, liabilities, penalties, fines, or any damage to goods, properties,
or effects of any person whatever, nor for personal injuries to or death of them
caused by or resulting from any act of negiligence of Consultant or Consultant's
..
-4-
agents, employees or representatives.
and save free and harmless the City and its authorized agents, officers, and
employees against any of the foregoing liabilities and claims therefor, and any
cost and expense that is incurred by the City on account of any claim therefor,
including claims by reason of defects in any plans and specifications.
Consultant further agrees to indemnify
Article XI: Assignment of Contract
- The Consultant shall not assign this contratt or any part thereof
or any monies due or to become due thereunder without prior written consent of
- Article XII: Subcontracting
If the Consultant shall subcontract any of the
under this contract by the Consultant, Consultant shall be fu
* the City.
1
work to be
ly respons
the City for the acts and omissions of Consultant's subcontractor and of
perf omed.
ble to
the per-
sons either directly or indirectly employed by the subcontractor, as Consultant
is for the acts and omissions of persons directly employed by Consultant.
contained in this contract shall create any contractual relationship between any
subcontractor of Consultant and the City.
tractor and every subcontractor of a subcontractor by the terms of this contract
applicable to Consultant's work unless specifically noted to the contrary in the
subcontract in question approved in writing by the City.
Article XIII: Prohibited Interest
Nothing
The Consultant shall bind every subcon-
No official of the City who is authorized in such capacity on
.behalf of the City to negotiate, make, accept, or approve, or take part in
negotiating, making, accepting, or approving of any architectural , engineering
inspection, construction, or material supply contractor, or any subcontract in
connection with the construction of the project shall become directly or indirectly
interested personally in this contract or in any part thereof. No officer,
2
-5-
Employee, architect, attorney, engineer, or inspector of or for the City who is
authorized in such capacity and on behalf of the City tsexercise any executive,
supervisory , or other simi 1 ar functions in connection wi th the performance of
thi s contract shall become directly or i ndi rectly interested personal ly i n this
contract or any part thereof.
Article XIV: Verbal Agreement or Conversation
No verbal agreement or conversation with any officer, agent, or
employee of the City, either before,'during,, or after the execution of this
contract, shall affect or modify any of the terms or obligations herein contained,
nor such verbal agreement or conversation entitle the Consultant to any additional
payment whatsoever under the terms of this contract.
Article XV: Successors or Assigns
Subject to the provisions of Article X, all terms, conditions
and provisions hereof shall inure to and shall bind each of the parties hereto,
and each of their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and
assigns .
. Article XVI: Effective Date
This contract shall be effective on and from the day and year
first above written.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and seals.
CITY OF CARLSBAD KERCHEVAL AND ASSOCIATES
ATTEST:
..
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF WORK
TENTATIVE PLANS AND APPLICATION CRITERIA FOR THE CARLSBAD BOULEVARD BRIDGE OVER AGUA HEDIONDA LAGOON INLET
1. SITE PLAN
Prepare a base topographic map and site plan showing existing ground
contours, topographic features such as existing roadway and bridge and 1 imi ts
of the lagoon inlet and jetties.
Tamarack Avenue to the north and sufficiently far south to include the bridge
The limits of the site plan should be from
approach and any roadway realignment.
2. GEOMETRI CS
Prepare the preliminary horizontal and vertical alignment for the
proposed bridge structure and roadway approaches.
3. BRIDGE DESIGN
Prepare a preliminary design report recommending the best bridge design.
At least two alternatives Bridge type and span lengths should be determined.
should be investigated and primary consideration should be given to cost-effect-
iveness. Other factors to consider are: (a) structural elements , (b) materials,
.(c) construction cost, (d) maintainability and (e) aesthetics.
4. CONSTRUCTION METHOD
Primary consideration should be given to the feasibility and desirability
of a partial demolition of the existing structure and staged construction of the
new bridge.
adjacent to the old one and construction of a temporary detour structure, removal
Alternatives to investigate are Construction of the new bridge
of the old bridge and construction of the new bridge in the same location.
. to consider are: (a) maintenance of traffic, (b) right-of-way requirements,
Factors
(c) environmental considerations and (d) roadway 'a1 ignment.
EXHIBIT A -2-
5. RIGHT-OF-WAY .
A prel imi nary ri ght-of -way map s ha1 1 be prepared showi ng exi s ti ng
highway right-of-way, adjacent property owners, and right-of-way requirements
for the proposed project including temporary construction easements. Identify
any relocation assistance requirements.
6. UTILITIES
Existing utilities in the bridge structure and any other utilities to
be affected by construction should be determined.
ating utilities and maintaining service should be developed.
7. COST ESTIMATE
A conceptual plan for reloc-
A preliminary cost estimate shall be prepared for construction of the
bridge.
CALTRANS Field Review Form. The cost estimate should include the following
items:
The cost estimate shall be adequate to meet the requirements of the
right-of-way acquisition, uti1 ity relocation, roadway approach construction,
bridge construction, existing bridge removal, bridge detour (if required) and
construction engineering.
8. FIELD REVIEW
A. Field Review Form
Complete CALTRANS "Field Review Form" using the results of the above
data. Include attachment sheets as required according to the instructions of the
"Field Review Form."
B. Initial Study
Complete the CALTRANS "Initial Study Form", the "Initial Study
Supplement" and the "Environmental Significance Check1 ist" to determine the
nature and category of environmental impacts of the project.
EXHIBIT A -3-
C. Field Review
Attend the field review of the project along with City, CALTRANS and
other agencies' representatives. Be prepared to explain and describe proposed
project and discuss possible modifications if requested by CALTRANS.
9. COORDINATION
Assist the City with its application to CALTRANS for fundjng under the
1978 Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program, by:
a. Determining affected and interested agencies.
b, Holding discussion with CALTRANS and City Officials on alternative
proposals .
c. Securing agreement with CALTRANS on design features and exceptions
to standards .
d. Determi ni ng pub1 ic heari ng requirements.
e. Assisting the City in determining methods of funding and Federal
parti ci pati on.
Recommending a method for advertising, awarding and administering f.
the project.
Providing schedules to a target advertising date. g.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
EXHIBIT 6
RESOLUTION NO. ,5821
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD AND KERCHEVAL AND ASSOCIATES FOR ENGINEERING
SERVICES NECESSARY TO PROVICE TENTATIVE PLANS AND APPLIC- ATION CRITERIA FOR THE PROPOSED CARLSBAD BOULEVARD BRIDGE OVER THE AGUA HEDIONDA LAGOON INLET
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad does hereby resolve
as follows:
1. That that certain agreement between the City of
Carlsbad and Kercheval and Associates for engineering services
necessary to provide tentative plans and application criteria
for the proposed Carlsbad Boulevard Bridge over Agua Hedionda
Lagoon Inlet a copy of which is attached hereto, marked as
Exhibit 5, and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby
approved.
2. That the Mayor of the City of Carlsbad is hereby
authorized and directed to execute said agreement for and on
behalf of the City of Carlsbad. an adjourned
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at 1 regular meeting of
the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, held
the 25th day of June , 1979, by the following
vote to wit:
AYES: Mayor Packard, Councilmen Skotnicki, Lewis, Anear and
NOES: None Councilwoman Casler