HomeMy WebLinkAboutSWP272899(16) August 21, 2001
Mr. Gary Schimek, PE
Project Engineer
City of Renton Public Works Department
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, Washington 98055
SUBJECT: TRANSMITTAL OF FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR
THE MAPLEWOOD GOLF COURSE PROJECT
CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
G&O#01657
Dear Mr. Schimek:
We are pleased to submit the final plans and specifications for the Maplewood Golf
Course Regrade project. We have made several revisions to the plans and specifications
in accordance with your latest comments. These are detailed below. We are transmitting
one (1) set of full-size mylar drawings and one(1) set of the Special Provisions. In
addition, you will receive an electronic copy of each.
Plans
1) The note has been revised to reflect that the trees designated for removal are to be
removed and replanted elsewhere on the golf course,per direction from the city.
2) The drawings have been changed to reflect 6 inches of topsoil over the structural fill,
since the structural fill will have more than 20% fines.
3) An owner-supplied PVC sleeve has been called on the drawings for the 4-inch
drainpipe.
4) The plans now reflect the requirement to provide sod rather than seeding.
5) The city's benchmark information has been added to the plans.
Specifications
6) The quantities in the Schedule of Prices have been changed to reflect the completed
design.
7) Section 1-07.16(3) Private/Public Property has been deleted since this section was
typical for road-type projects and not applicable for the golf course project.
8) The bid item for mobilization, etc., has changed to reflect the same item in the
Monterey Drive Storm Drainage project. Please note that the item is not verbatim of
the Monterey project,but contains the same content.
9) The bid item for clearing and grubbing has changed to reflect only clearing and sod
removal. Tree removal has been placed in a separate bid item.
10)A new bid item has been added to describe the tree removal and replanting.
11)The bid item for storm sewer pipe has changed to reflect the PVC sleeve.
12)Section 2.01 has changed to delete tree removal since this will be covered under a
different item. Also, the spec. identifies that the contractor is to salvage all topsoil
and sod and store in a holding area as directed by the city.
13)Section 2-02 has changed to reflect the compaction testing and inspection
requirements for the structural fill. Also added is the requirement of the contractor to
protect the work from weather.
14)Section 7 has changed to include trench backfill as part of the unit cost for the 4-inch
storm pipe.
15)All portions of the spec. have changed to reflect the requirement for 6 inches of
topsoil.
16)Section 8 has changed to reflect sod installation rather than seeding; watering by the
golf course rather than the contractor; delete reference to Poa Anna grass; and
references to specific suppliers.
17)Section 9 has changed to reflect the contractor's responsibility to protect the work.
Thank you for the opportunity to serve the City of Renton. Should you have any
questions or comments, please call Matt Winkelman or me at (206) 284-0860.
Very Truly Yours,
014 -QUL
�°� Roger Kuykendall, P.E.
CITY OF RENTON
MAPLEWOOD GOLF COURSE REGRADE
Based on Field Survey
ENGINEER'S PLANNING LEVEL COST ESTIMATE
August 20,2001
G&O#01657.00
NO. ITEM QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT
GRADING AND LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS
1 Mobilization,Cleanup&Demobilization 1 LS $ 12,000.00 $ 12,000.00
2 Locate and Protect Existing Utilities I LS $ 500.00 $ 500.00
3 Clearing and Grubbing 1.5 AC $ 6,000.00 $ 9,000.00
4 Removal of Structures and Obstruction 1 LS $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00
5 Tree Removal and Replanting 7 EA $ 200.00 $ 1,400.00
6 Temporary Water Pollution/Erosion Control 1 LS $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00
7 Construction Surveying,Staking,and As-built Drawings 1 LS $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00
8 CPEP Storm Sewer Pipe 4 In.Diam. 30 LF $ 20.00 $ 600.00
9 Structural Fill for Cart Path 4,500 TN $ 9.00 $ 40,500.00
10 Crushed Surfacing Top Course 150 TN $ 18.00 $ 2,700.00
11 Asphalt Conc.Pavement Cl.B 90 TN $ 70.00 $ 6,300.00
12 Topsoil Type A 1,100 TN $ 14.00 $ 15,400.00
13 Sod Installation 6,200 SY $ 5.00 $ 31,000.00
14 Irrigation Revisions 1 LS $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00
Subtotal(Items 1-14): $127,900.00
Sales Tax @ 8.8%: $11,255.20
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $139,155.20
30%Construction Contingencies $41,746.56
Subtotal $180,901.76
ENGINEER'S PLANNING LEVEL COST ESTIMATE $181,000
DATE: August 20,2001
PREPARED BY: Matt Winkelman,E.I.T.
CHECKED BY: Roger Kuykendall,P.E.
Roughly 1,250 TN of fill material will be used for landscaping feature. At$9.00 per TN,this cost is$11,250.
The additional landscaping features will also add approximately 1,200 SY of topsoil and sod.
At$14.00 per TN,the golf cours's share of the cost for 6"of topsoil is$8,400.
The difference in cost between sod and hydroseed is approximately$3.50 per SY.
Over 1,200 SY,the golf course's share of the cost for sod is$4,200.
The cost of relocating and replanting trees is also added into the golf course's portion.
The total amount to be paid by the golf course is$11,250+$8,400+$4,200+$1,400=$22,850 or$23,000.
8/21/01 9:06 AM Page 1 of 1 M:\Renton\01657\fin cost.xls
To /`pp rT Coo rJi na It)
Maplewood Golf Course Regrade o
Design Review Comments on 8/8/01 Submittal i3ta/i n 9,5
PC., PT s, Pr
Sheet 2 . 0115G4-
2-1 Why are we beginning stationing at 2+50?
2-2 Include note that golf course cart path outside of the construction area must be protected
from damage. If damaged, it must be replaced in kind. v Ord-14-<
�.
2-3 Identify locations of cross sections with typical cross section cut symbol. p�U0
� �1 � v
2-4 Show construction limits. e1 I
/2-5 Identify the point of curvature between the edge of the new cart path ant the 83 ft NGVD
contour line on both sides of the path. Use dashed line or something similar. Otherwise it will
not be clear to the contractor how to shape the berm between the edge of cart path and first '
contour line.
2-6 Do we want to call out slope values at certain cross sections? It may be difficult because
the cross section slope various between the cart path to the slope toe.
2-7 The footprint of the berm should be increased by about 10 feet on both sides to decrease
the side slopes. It may also be beneficial to make the cart path towards the west between station
4+00 and 6+00;this would allow for a reduced slope on the river side of the berm at the location
of the 60 in and 40 inch trees. In addition,the slope toe can be extended on the golf course side
near station 6+00;the golf course manager noted that these relatively large diameter trees can be
replanted(if possible)somewhere else on the golf course or waste hauled if need be.
Sheet 3
V 3-I Top of berm shall be minimum of 83.5 ft NGVD.
V'33-2 Note(3) is unclear just east of station 4+00.
V3-3 Cannot read the call-out for Note 1 east of station 4+50.
v -4 Identify the distance of the cart path width. Also,as above on Sheet 2, show a line that
represents the slope break at the top of the berm.
3-5 Sprinkler test and line flushing will be required after berm construction. This could
either go on as a note or in the specifications or both.
Sheet 4
4-1 Are we replanting the 3 diameter fir near station 6+50 and 34(diameter maple near
station 8+00? Note 2 does not specify.
4-2 Filter fabric or equivalent erosion control shall be required between top of bank and
berm. Also, include note to ensure that existing plantings along the top of bank shall not be
disturbed.
1
Sheet 5
5-1 ZSpecify minimum distance between the edge of the cart path and the slope break.
5-2 Number detail sections 1 to three and show detail cuts on plan view.
5-3 Include radius of curvature to direct contractor at edge of berm.
5-4 Note that final grading will need to be approved by City or approved representative.
5-5 y Indicate that slopes will vary along section.
Sheet 6
6-1 Is tree replacement detail needed? Not clear on plan view if we are replacing any trees.
6-2 Remove trench section.
6-3 Note that elevations to be top of topsoil after compaction,not top of sod.
6-4 Determine 4" or 6" of topsoil to be used.
Section 7
7-1 The gravel backfill has not worked well in the past for the silt fence barrier. Either use
staking or make it explicit that contractor is responsible for removing all gravel from trench and
from backside of fence.
V"7-2 Show construction entrance on the plan view.
Schedule of Prices
/SP-1 Remove seeding, fertilizing and mulching and replace with sod.
Division I
D1-1 City has not adopted 2000 DOT specs. Cite 1996.
D1-2 Place division#prior to each section and call out division title(Division 1 -General
Requirements).
VD1-3 Where is protection/restoration of existing road and path covered?
F
DI-4 Under Section 1-07.16(1) include the following paragraph: "Such removal and restoration
shall be considered incidental to the bid item "XXXXX" per lump sum and no further
5ompensation will be made". See specifications for Monterey Drive NE for example.
�D1-5 Review attached section A in the mark-up package. Determine if this should be included.
/b1-6 Truck hauling hours in section 1-08.1(3)should be changed to allow maximum possible.
2
D1-7 If order of work under 1.08.3 is an option for contractor,why is it included?
�ID1-8 Bid item 1 is slightly different from the Monterey Drive NE specification. Why were
changes made?
D1-9 Bid item 10 references crushed gravel surfacing in last paragraph. Shouldn't this be
ACP?
V61-10 Bid item 13 refers to project completion date. What will be the project completion date?
Division 2
62-1 Shall wording be included in this section for final grading?
D2-2 Should chain link fence be specified rather than the orange fencing?
132-3 Only one type of structural fill should be specified. Identify a fill that has less than or
equal to 20%fines. This should work for turf growth according to Golf Course Manager.
Determine if this type of fill would be suitable for the river side of the berm. If a fill type is
required that has greater than 20%fines, go with 6"of top soil rather than 4".
�D2-4 Include requirements for percent passing at various sieve sizes for the chosen fill
material.
VD2-5 What about compaction of fill?
1d)2-6 In relation to wet weather work,who decides when these conditions apply?
A2-7 Where did section 2-07 come from?
Division 7
D7-1 Remove this section.
Division 8
'
D8-1 In regards to topsoil,make sure that the mix is readily available from at least two sources.
Also,remove the reference to Pacific Topsoil.
�/D8-2 Golf Course will take over the maintenance of the turf after installation.
V°)8-3 Remove restriction on Poa Anna.
rt � .
3
August 13, 2001
Gary, I had a conversation with Ralph Boirum of HWA GeoSciences, Inc. this afternoon
regarding the Maplewood Golf Course Regrade project. Below are his responses and
recommendations:
1) Can material with less than 20%fines be used throughout the berm?
Ralph stated that at least 20% fines is required to provide the necessary erosion resistance
on the river side,but that more permeable material (less fines) can be used on the golf
course side. He specifically is looking for glacial till as the cheapest, most available, and
best material to resist erosion. He felt that utilizing two different types of material on the
project would not be too complicated. I think we have the following options:
a) Use the material currently specified (15-35%fines)on both sides and cap with 6
inches of topsoil, both sides.
b) Use material with less than 20% fines for the berm with a cap of glacial till (one
foot thick) and 6 inches of topsoil on the river side and 4 inches of topsoil on the
golf course side.
c) Use glacial till capped with 6 inches of topsoil on the river side for the berm and
material with less than 20% fines for the berm on the golf course side with 4
inches of topsoil.
Ralph was partial to c)because the berm would be resistant to erosion on the river side
and the golf course side would be suitable for growing grass without the fear of"soft"
spots during the wet season. The cost would be somewhere between using exclusively
glacial till or a well graded material. On the river side, it may be possible to use only 4
inches of topsoil, since the quality of the grass is not as important.
2) Can we write a gradation spec for the material?
Ralph did not want to write a gradation spec for the material because he felt this might be ++��
too restrictive. He recommends that a soils expert be on the site to observe the material
coming onto the site and verify its placement. All material should be approved by the
soils expert, rather than letting the contractor provide a specified material withoutd^,5
fulltime inspection.
3) What is special with the 92%compaction?
Ralph stated that 90%is not adequate to get good erosion protection and 95% is not
necessary for non-road applications. 92% is better than 90% and more easily achieved
that 95%.
4) How often should the material be sampled from the trucks and how often should the
density be tested?
�91PRalph stated that it is very easy to see if the material is of the glacial till variety and an
�expert should be on the site observing every delivery. Without a gradation spec, you
can't perform a sieve analysis anyway.
As far as testing the compaction, it is important to verify the contractor's methods of
° compaction (for example, 6-inch lifts with 4 passes of a vibratory roller)by careful
observation and density tests. From that point forward,the inspector observes the
(a Q method and probes the material and requests random density tests (for example 1-2 tests
per day plus any areas of suspicion). Once again,this requires an expert to be onsite.
L
Sh 5) How will the bumps be compacted?
a�
Using a dozer to track-walk the bumps and slopes is not good enough to get 92%. Using
a double drum walk behind roller,hoe-pack, or small roller is typical for compacting
small areas. The contractor should do it whichever way is most suitable for him, with the
performance spec. being the ultimate test of adequacy.
Gary,please respond with some direction on Number 1 at your convenience. Also, we
were going to put something in the spec that stated there was not going to be room for
trucks to turnaround on the golf course, thereby forcing the contractor to back every truck
to the dump area. This will decrease his productivity. Do you see a way for the trucks to
turn or is this restriction acceptable?
CITY OF R-ENTON
..at Planning/Building/Public Works Department
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
June 5, 2001
Gray& Osborne
Mike Jauhola, Project Manager
701 Dexter Avenue North, Suite 200
Seattle, WA 98109
SUBJECT: NOTICE TO PROCEED—MAPLEWOOD GOLF COURSE CART PATH
BERM—CAG-01-090
Dear Mike:
I am pleased to inform you that the Mayor and City Clerk have executed the consultant
agreement, between Gray & Osborne and City of Renton, for the Maplewood Golf Course Cart
Path Berm Project. As such, this letter serves as the Notice to Proceed. Gray& Osborne's
original copy of the signed consultant agreement is enclosed.
If you need any additional material or information from the City in the next two weeks, please do
not hesitate to contact me at 425-430-7248 or at rstraka(oDci.renton.wa.us. Gary Schimek will be
returning from leave on June 181h, after which you can contact him for additional information at
425-430-7205 or at «schiniek!�L)ci.renton.wa.us.
We look forward to working with the Gray& Osborne team during this project.
Sin ely,
Ronald J.�fraka, P.E.,
Surface Water Utility Engineering Supervisor
Enclosure
Cc: Gary Schimek
Leslie Betlach
Randy Leifer
LaitO
fthl
H:\DI VI SION.S\UTILITIE.S\DOCS\2001\2001-322,doc\RJS\GMS\tb
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 }� 1'1
0 This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer �l h ten�,�
City of Renton
PLANNING/BUILDING/
fih PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
N p� Utility Systems - Fifth Floor
1055 South Grady Way Date: 4/30/2001
Renton, WA 98055
TO: Roger Kuykendall FROM: Gary Schimek
Gray & Osborne Surface Water Utility
Project Engineer Project Manager
Phone: (206) 284-0860 Phone: (425) 430-7205
Fax Phone: (206) 283-3206 Fax Phone: (425) 430-7241
ISUBJECT: Control Points Number of pages including cover sheet
REMARKS: ❑ Original to ❑ Urgent ® Reply ❑ Please ❑ For your
be mailed ASAP Comment review
Roger -
Attached is information on vertical control points that were recently established for an on-going floodplain
mapping project on the Cedar River. The vertical control points were established by Horton Dennis and by
PACE. Please review the information and let me know if the available data may be used to reduce the
required base map survey work as outlined in the Scope of Work for the Maplewood Golf Course Berm
Project.
Also, I want to ensure that you know 2-ft contour maps (generated from aerial surveys) are also avialble for
the project area.
Ahead of the curve
. May-25-00 03: 59P northwest hydraulic consu 206 439 2420 P . 01
northwest hydraulic consultants inc.
16300 Christensen Road, Suite 350 Fax Message
Seattle Washinuton 98188-3418
206-241-6000 phone 206-439-2420 fax
lucln»r.\�r)»hc.-.tic n.ru»r. e-mail
TO. Gary SClliniek
Company: City of Renmn Date: "Thursday, May 25, 2000
City: Renton Project Dumber:
Fax #: 425► 430-4241 Project Nance: Cedar River Surveys
From: Lea Adams Original in Mail: No
ToAal Pages: 4 Please call immeciiatel-y it you dO not receive all pikes (If this transmission.
H i C-rarv.
I'll] laxiWU u\cr a couplC oCsjlccts From Horton Denims wit.h their vertical control lur llic CCd!u-
River surveys. 1'vc i(lculilicd two bcnchmarks with Arrows as possibly beim— liSOCUl lur tllc
proposed suI•vcy.job: HV-1S and HV-19. I think we may already have information gin a third (HV-
[6). NHC also sct a f K nail at the Rivcrvic\w Apartnicrits liar the inmi d Ced,)r {fiver stu'veys. I've
Ideiltlfled the locatioll of CaCh I1L-11Chnlark us hest I Carl oil the :.iccompanving map. G"'C me it call it
YOU hUVC any questions or want to discuss the slu-vcys Curtner.
Thaliks,
Lea
RIVFR FN(ilNFI'.RI\(i I H)UKAUL1C NLO O 1,TF$TIN(, .'IIYI)R,AI:LI('AN,AI.lSIN ANU ULNI(I\ t COAST \1 r CINFFRING
HYUROLQ(�Y ;SLWmr�T,\TION FVGINFFRIN(i 1 M.NiLRR:nL NPIULLA( (; r ATTI.Irr)RFSFAR('H FORENSIC
L'461NCERIN(.
May-2S-00 04 : OOP northwest hydraulic consu 206 439 2420 P _ 02
u� tnun uy: vu 4'15b"'''d/58 HURT&r' DENNIS HALE 05
STATION NORTHING EAS7ING ELEVATION DESCRIPTION
HV-8 171,27k86 1,127,117.93 154.046 Set PK nail m p Dtrd p l--Ml*on
MUM 6bouldcr of SR-169 130't e=
of driveway to"Target Equlpmeml
_ Co."
HV-9 173,445.75 1,325,104.5E 367,7 Set rdW&mp in vinylpacmark
south of aouthVAWt Lcaoc 0MUCr nt
boost 0 14913,all at south cod of
cul-de-cat on 175'"Ave. S.E.
HV-10 171,646.71 1,327,681.15 141.890 Sat Pik nail inpaimted prrrawk af
umth shoulder of SR-169 0,4 mi.t
F1V of 161`Avr- S.E.
HV-11 173,826.08 1,321,029.90 356.2 PajtAW Premark over amcd 4"sq.
a m►c, mamrmew of inouvwbum of
S_E. 149'h St & 161`Ct S.E.
HV-12 170,322.87 1,320,145.22 501.7 Painted premirk over southweste0y
of two Cased 4-sq-cant. monumients
in cul-de-sac at N.W. end of 1590 Pl.
S.E.in'Tairwood."
HV-13 172,429.48 1,317,746.29 106.42 PnmtMKmg Cmmtybran cap in
(a.k.a. (Published valum) pointed premark in soudmm comu
"KC- of inwrvactiou of SR-169 AM 152"'
3961') Ave-S.B.
HV-14 171,675.32 1,314,910.10 287.0 Paiamd pr=&rk over cased 4"Sq.
0onc.mounment in Anne of S.E.
i se St.,30"f S&ab*,m of
onetime of 140"Way S.E_
HV-15 175.143.89 1,314,542.92 355.1 Set PK nail to paime4 pr�in
Cul�c�sC at Worth end of 142nd Mr.
S.E.
HV-16 174,018.15 1,312,407.16 90.60* Sat PK nad in pain°°d PTA in =
14.W,come of old bridge over Cedar
Rrnr, 13 0"f enact of inlet 0tiOn Of
149"'St& 135"Ave. S.E.
HV-17 173,832.79 1,309,239,09 260.0 5d teiw A cW in vtayl Parmwk
under ursnsmi sion lives. 150"t cast
of nart)seM end of Royal Hill Dr.
S.B.
HV-19 176.342.49 1,309,974.77 65.6 Sa m na11 in Pau"Pmmart in
S.E. 50 St,S0"f VMg of writ line of
Golf Coauva
2
r . u.3
. May-25-00 04 : OOP northwest hydraulicHOPT014 DENt jconsu O6 439 2420 PAGE 06
dj/2n/2uvlj by:UU 415>j226/5B
STATION NORTHNG EASTING ELEVATION' DESCRIPTION
HV-19 177,088,33 1,305,566.53 34.00' Sct M��w on�in of upba -4
SR-169, 100"t CM Ofnogtbout
cog=cf"B
HV-20 180,539.87 1,303,029.43 39.19• sin a �of in
ink of Pactary Avamso&N.
3.4 St
HV-21 177,993,08 1,301,116.94 43.12• Set PK Md 3n PaiDw PCM&fk in
asPhaft Meet in wxdr red cmaet of
inn art Wc1h Ave.&S. V4 St
pr.l b3:`\9Y96-wAOC
3
1 1CY` Wei` �W fir► WAW maw �r uw
;tt ��)5 MAP _ —G- f•YIIrXIArT 1991 AcoKrWJ-811.A 0s.Jff4
-
i.
UectnAlC'te AV t .w l +` ,� .�c L j
Acl,ij AV
12
4-.-
l',t I14Y.. AV a 5a
n�p _ ,M` wSFWrALIMO AvSli•�— L N V •� = rq. r r�'µj,
MnAyhVA LEY Op96 g 'kr .rall
Ji W 3T� E> ■ SIU IY.Ktrvtl Q+••.E. .- .W I z O coa.
law
/OY,i AY� ^4< O .1nt A t'SS <
r N}5 _ u 'Ess _� DrAN Ay S !e ^-, •i � a V1G Av �"_� �9L^..... .i...7 `- .. �r S " !. urvg - .-
aS 'Al�+„I.r N `�Ar l v+1 .tt. AV`1 I � (:M11T• lblm � e " "Y_.!•.SAr U: ,yp " � un w 11:rri.Y �111q, �y ;� ti7 .M n\ r :,irdIHI +' =- u.ul AYpr nva' .n . i� e � 11 H e +� � h. f`It u.»0AV
r1JitRtAvrAY 9 `a r �T1.... , Yph r<In .r(. Ci .rur .u.,Q; l R p k ., F,AtT, • t
, sa ,a«at� ,1 • ? � r '�tl � r• t,'IR
lIt ^AV • + ', : •. , P* •lu1at." AYwEU rr rr
AV
./ AvSr/h, sTl )•// K,.tin p• Itsue,_,'I7. "' ' -/''.. ' 114TH p 't /` � 1 � 128TH AV Sr
,0 '� i N II t`''t uth . Iv•>d, t n d _+vJA` � " µoIrfeu AI ie -1 ` v/ �M' c ,�%q: �'1I/41H _. A � u`i Y •'i`:l.YY •'' a �' �r :( r sE I utt,lt I A•'� 'n'rJ � � .. Ar �
y ,/ ., . ISAPIJ\, ) .. aY '+ 2 lip i 49711 %7
t
V�
. v
�
a� •i'r i�/'�ly"Yy� O I ! �1 1VlN n.t t• ' J r 1 .+, ,.111„ Ar g Itrtill AV LI Ef t
P19 33s M 9NI ..
170 d OZVZ 6Eb 90E nsuoo aL Lne_ApiCy gsar+tg4_Aou d00 = b0 00-sZ-x-pw
EXHIBIT A
CEDAR RIVER VERTICAL CONTROL DIAGRAM
VICINITY MAP
S.E. 5th ST. S�
'------ Gbh
— _ S.E
r ,\ S.E. 142n�
_/
SF \ MAPLEWOOD —
CEDAR ��t\ _
144th ST.
RIVER F1jp� GOLF
302-6A �\\
COURSE
NATURAL �
306-13A
PJ. 306-11 B
Oil
7
49th S �..
306-9A
LS P 306-12A CEDAR
a
RIVER 4i I
MAPS PARK 1 414
Vq� Vv :
6 c`Fti �t Le
Y H�
c�
S�cptiOq` m\ ZONE 306-9C
SF TIFFANY w� SF
N
\ PARK -
a
S'E• :5 SE 158th
158th a0
Sj
B.M. # DESCRIPTION ELEV.
302-6A SET R.R. SPIKE 1.0' NORTH OF SOUTH EDGE OF ASPHALT ROAD (S.E. 7TH ST.) 60.89
±105' EAST OF N.E. CORNER GARAGE FOR HOUSE #3225.
306-9A SET R.R. SPIKE 1.0' NORTH OF SOUTH EDGE OF PAVING ±10' SOUTH OF CENTER- 68.96
LINE INTERSECTION 130TH AVE. S.E. AND S.E. 151ST ST.
302-9C SET R.R. SPIKE IN NORTHWEST CORNER OF ASPHALT APRON FOR DRIVEWAY TO 76.14
HOUSE #13311, 15' SOUTH OF CENTERLINE OF ROAD & ±15' WEST OF C/L DR.
302-11B SET 5/8" ALUMINUM BAR (3' LONG) WITH PLASTIC CAP "PACE L.S.11691" IN 78.66
SANDY BERM NORTH OF SMALL CHANNEL ±10' SOUTH OF H.W.L. (ACROSS
RIVER FROM 72" C.M.P. BASIN.)
302-12A SET CHISELED SQUARE IN TOP OF 60" DIA. BOULDER (4' ABOVE H.W.L.) LEFT 86.95
BANK NEAR P.I. OF GRAVEL HAUL ROAD NORTH OF N.W. CORNER BALL YARD.
302-13A SET R.R. SPIKE IN N.W. FACE OF 30" COTTONWOOD 15't SOUTH OF H.W.L. AT 94.23
LEFT BANK t 500' WEST OF MOST WESTERLY HOUSE ALONG RIVER.
Engineering
wLw
Plan n nig
Surveying
Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers, Inc.
750 SIXTH ST S KIRKLAND, WA 98033 (206) 827-2014
NORTH SCALE: N.T.S. :\DWG= 0644EXBT DATE: 7/26/00 PROJ. NO.: 00644.10
EXHIBIT A
CEDAR RIVER VERTICAL CONTROL DIAGRAM I
VICINITY MAP
r
S.E. 5th_ST.
S.E ir
w* /� S.E. 142n
SF\ MAPLEWOOD
CEDAR �h — I
ST 144th ST.
RIVER \F�TON GOLF —
302-6A
COURSE
NATURAL 306-116 306-13A
S� 9fh S
306-9A
S Q 306-12A CEDAR
R!VER
NAPI fVAL PARK
a, n 1
��9CO m ZONE I 306-9C �40�
h
SF S TIFFANY w F
\ PARK
a
E• SE 158th
158th °0
Sl
B.M. #
DESCRIPTION ELEV.
302-6A SET R.R. SPIKE 1.0' NORTH OF SOUTH EDGE OF ASPHALT ROAD (S.E. 7TH ST.) 60.89
±105' EAST OF N.E. CORNER GARAGE FOR HOUSE #3225.
306-9A SET R.R. SPIKE 1.0' NORTH OF SOUTH EDGE OF PAVING ±10' SOUTH OF CENTER- 68.96
LINE INTERSECTION 130TH AVE. S.E. AND S.E. 151ST ST.
302-9C SET R.R. SPIKE IN NORTHWEST CORNER OF ASPHALT APRON FOR DRIVEWAY TO 76.14
HOUSE #13311, 15' SOUTH OF CENTERLINE OF ROAD & t15' WEST OF C/L DR.
I
302-11B SET 5/8" ALUMINUM BAR (3' LONG) WITH PLASTIC CAP "PACE L.S.11691" IN 78.66
SANDY BERM NORTH OF SMALL CHANNEL ±10' SOUTH OF H.W.L. (ACROSS
RIVER FROM 72" C.M.P. BASIN.)
302-12A SET CHISELED SQUARE IN TOP OF 60" DIA. BOULDER (4' ABOVE H.W.L.) LEFT 86.95
BANK NEAR P.I. OF GRAVEL HAUL ROAD NORTH OF N.W. CORNER BALL YARD.
302-13A SET R.R. SPIKE IN N.W. FACE OF 30" COTTONWOOD 15't SOUTH OF H.W.L. AT 94.23
LEFT BANK t 500' WEST OF MOST WESTERLY HOUSE ALONG RIVER.
Engineering
e Planning
Surveying
Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers, Inc.
750 SIXTH ST S KIRKLAND, WA 98033 (206) 827-2014
NORTH SCALE: N.T.S. :\DWG= 0644EXBT DATE: 7/26/00 PROJ. NO.: 00644.10
i
Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Engineering • Planning • Surveying •Consulting DATE: JOB NO. J �/
750 Sixth Street South, Kirkland, WA 98033 ��7—O�
Phone: (425) 827-2014 or 1-800-945-8408 ATTENTION
Fax: (425) 827-5043 RE:
(
TO
i
WE ARE SENDING YOU [Attached ❑ Under separate cover via the following items:
❑ Shop drawings ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples Specifications
❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order ❑
COPIES DATE NO, DESCRIPTION
JUL 28 2
UTYOFRE
TEAS
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
❑ For approval ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Resubmit copies for approval
0 For your use ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Submit copies for distribution
❑ As requested ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Return corrected prints
❑ For review and comment ❑
❑ FOR BIDS DUE 19 ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US
REMARKS
—6,Z/ C/L Off'
a rJ L
COPY TO
SIGNED:If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once.
JOHN STEIDEL
Golf Course Architect -_--
P.O. BOX 6566 • (121 B S. ELY) KENNEWICK, WA 99336 (509)582-6706 FAX(509)582-6303 ASGCA
December 14, 2000
Mr. Gary Shimek
Surface Water Utility
CITY OF RENTON
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
PROPOSAL
It is hereby proposed to provide the following Golf Course Architectural Services to
assist the City of Renton Surface Water Utility in the design of flood control work along
the Cedar River, adjacent to the City of Renton's Maplewood Golf Course.
SCOPE:
1. Make a site visit to meet with representatives of the City of Renton's Surface
Water Utility and Parks and Recreation Department to discuss possible options for
Flood Control along the Cedar River, adjacent to Maplewood's 3`a Hole.
2. Using suitable topographic plans provided by the City, prepare two (2) conceptual,
schematic alternative designs for flood control work. Prepare a preliminary Cost
Estimate for each alternative. Make a second site visit to discuss the two
alternative designs if requested.
3. As directed by the City, revise one option and cost estimate and/or review final
plans and specifications as prepared by others.
FEES:
A. For Items 1-3 above, a sum not to exceed THREE THOUSAND DOLLARS
($3,000)without additional authorization, based upon my hourly rates of: Design &
Consultation @ $120/hour; Travel @ $90/hour; and Drafting & Clerical @ $60/hour
(maximum $1000/day), plus production and travel expenses. Travel time will be pro-
rated with other projects if possible.
B. Production expenses, as required for items 1-3, including fax, postage, printing,
telephone and testing, billable at 1.1 times direct cost, are estimated at $150.00.
C. Travel expenses for up to two (2) trips, as required for items 1-3, including if
necessary airfare, car costs, meals and lodging are estimated at $600.00. Travel
costs will be pro-rated with other projects if possible.
Respegtfully 7ASCYI
Jo R. SteidelA
f%
g0►1
6v+
oVI li OL .
�bvv} 45/000 -
�.e I�vO v l 8, be- iv
tk of rop1 I "i ta
ab, lk
A.