Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
WWP272986(4)
ry l J rPy con z l J «® � +� � ~� y � »� <�� : cn / \ n )\ \ � �± m -v m CD $� k CD \ / /CD 3 CO CO 3 a) cv ca O a� a Cl) -a ca c 3: a cu W LL D v O n n O o x = W m �/1� 13 c� �Dm CON - s � m n to o m — � 0 — mru r N co2 °0 m 30 „M m D m m n m x — < O WAW m D m ru m OcnO A J A Z O U, O 16 W W O N J N U1 N (D D) 0 0 UI 2»Rg2■ 2Em /® n=■ 0z;; $ we* /®n ;R o ,>�»22 \zz n $ ODoo oE \{( 7)§ A| yco c® ;J ±2 Ln / §2 ,a Ln $} ` :� %& e/ %_ wE \� ( § � do\ $ tt B7{ _ o /j/� k « Ln 3 m o p m ID ?e �to n 00 2�p A, , d o o '< 3 co — v (Avi 01 m 0 O _ to ° mw �r � 10 -n 01 x N 7C 1,0. 7 7o N d�I A CP O ao 0o C u rV+ tvn 00 rt r4W •< 10/12/2004 09:32 206H41710 PAGE 02/02 KC AIH e ld —52 C2zz- TIA`IIf�iD - (20cl;� k-76-4 ""&Nbp- a6mr) non- r-62 John Hobson RE: Sewer Testing Page 1 ..-...... -. From: "Brian Vanderburg" <BVanderburg@paceengrs.com> To: "Maling, Matt" <Matt.Maling@METROKC.GOV> Date: 03/14/2005 11:04:57 AM Subject: RE: Sewer Testing Hi Matt: Thanks for your response. John H. tells me that absence of infiltration into the newly laid pipe will be used in lieu of air testing for the pipe section between the existing MH and MH No. 1. TV inspection still needs to be performed on all pipe sections. Air testing will be performed on all sections of pipe upstream of MH No. 1. Brian -----Original Message ----- From: Maling, Matt [mailto: Matt. Mali ng@METROKC.GOV] Sent: Monday, March 14, 2005 7:12 AM To: Brian Vanderburg Cc: John Hobson (E-mail); Seelye, Evan, Daggs, Victor Subject: RE: Sewer Testing Brian, I think Evan has information on the sewer testing. Evan, can you please forward any sewer testing info to Brian? Thanks, Matt -----Original Message ----- From: Brian Vanderburg [maiIto: BVanderburg@paceengrs.com] Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 4:56 PM To: Maling, Matt Cc: John Hobson (E-mail); Evan Seelye (E-mail) Subject: RE: Sewer Testing Matt: I visited the site yesterday. I see that the Contractor is installing storm drain pipe over the top of the sewer pipe. Does the Contractor have a schedule for air testing the sewer? Brian -----Original Message ----- From: Maling, Matt [mailto: Matt. Maling@METROKC.GOV] Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 7:40 AM To: Brian Vanderburg Cc: John Hobson (E-mail); Seelye, Evan; Daggs, Victor; Jaramillo, Larry; Lee, Robert-K Subject: RE: Sewer Testing ok. Thanks, Brian. We'll make sure the Contractor tests the lines within the spec'd time period. -----Original Message ----- From: Brian Vanderburg [ maiIto: BVanderburg@paceengrs.com] . ......... ... .... . ............ . .... . ..... . ....- John Hobson - RE. Sewer Testing Page 2 Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 4:06 PM To: Matt Maling (E-mail); Evan Seelye (E-mail) Cc: John Hobson (E-mail) Subject: Matt and Evan We understand that the Contractor plans to suspend work, possibly before testing the sewer lines. The specifications require that testing occur soon after backfilling. Should the Contractor elect to suspend work before testing, we request confirmation that the Contractor will test the section of sewer line installed to date within 10 working days of recommencing work. This requirement may be found in the following specification section: Section 7-17.3(2)A General All work involved in cleaning and testing sewer lines between manholes..... shall be completed within 15 days after backfilling of sewer lines and structures. Thanks, Brian CC: "John Hobson (E-mail)" <Jhobson@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Seelye, Evan" <Evan.Seelye@METROKC.GOV>, "Daggs, Victor' <Victor. Daggs@METROKC. GOV> LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL To: Utility Systems Division Renton City Hall, 5th Floor 1055 Grady Way Renton Washington 98055 Attention: John Hobson Date: November 16, 2004 Subject: Elliott Bridge Sewer Job No. 02838 We are sending you the following: ❑X Attached ❑ Under separate cover via: Surface Mail ❑ Shop Drawings ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specification Copies Date No. Description 1 Oct. 2 1 " to 28th Photos of Drop connection area to MH No. 1. Ain 1. k�n's sFNTo THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑Approved as noted li-I As requested ❑Returned for corrections ❑For review and comments ❑ Remarks: Signed: Brian Vanderburg Copy To: If enclosures are not as noted, please notify us at once Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers, Inc. Symonds Consulting Engineers Engineering Planning Surveying Consulting 1601 — 2"d Ave., Suite 1000 Seattle, WA 98101 Phone: (206) 441-1855 Fax: (206) 448-7167 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM TO: Brian Vanderburg, P.E. /Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers, Inc. PREPARED BY: Lorne Balanko, P.E. /HWA GeoSciences SUBJECT: DROP CONNECTION EXCAVATION PLAN SUBMITTAL Elliott Bridge No. 3166 Replacement - Sewer King County, WA PROJECT NO.: 96143-1400 DATE: August 2, 2004 As requested in your transmittal dated July 27, 2004, we have reviewed the contractor submittal attached thereto in respect to geotechnical considerations relative to the proposed excavation plan. Our observations and comments are as follows: 1. We understand that the contractor proposes to excavate near the existing King County Metro manhole SSMH #R10-52 to effect construction of a sewer drop connection tie-in, which will be cored into the side of the manhole at depths of between 12 and 17 feet below existing grade level. This manhole is located on the alignment of 1541h Place SE, immediately to north of the Renton Maple Valley Highway (SR169). Cedar Hills Scrubber vaults exist immediately to the south of the manhole at a distance of some 3.5 feet. 2. The submittal sketch plans indicate that the proposed excavation depth is some 17.5 feet, immediately adjacent to the manhole, with the upper 9.5 feet of the excavation proposed to be sloped back at 1.75H:1 V. The lower portion of the excavation will be vertically sided and supported by an 8-foot square trenchbox or manhole shield. The contractor has indicated that he proposes to use Speed Shore Manhole Shield Model MHS 88SW, for which he has provided specifications. We have not, however, reviewed the specifications provided with respect to expected soil loading conditions. 3. We have examined geotechnical information for this location and note that borehole BH-1 lies in relatively close proximity (about 10 to 15 feet south) of the manhole location. Although it is recognized that the manhole structure is likely surrounded by backfill materials of unknown extent and origin (but likely granular), the borehole observations suggest that cobbly gravel, comprising recent alluvium deposition, exists ` August 2, 2004 HWA Project No. 96143-1400 at this location at a depth of the order of 10 feet (3 m). At the boring location, the alluvium was observed to grade to a gravelly sand from about 14 feet to 18 feet, and is in turn underlain by gravel with silt sand and cobbles to the depth of the boring (27.5 feet). At the time of the boring, the ground water level was observed at about 13.5 feet (4.11 m) depth. The recent alluvium deposit appears to be in direct hydraulic connection with the nearby Cedar River channel. 4. Essential to the success of any excavation plan at this location is the effectiveness of a dewatering program to depress the water below the level of the excavation sufficiently to ensure that excavation is performed in the dry. Any amount of hydrostatic head above the level of the excavation would be expected to result in running sands (and likely backfill materials), that would enter through openings in the shield. Thus, a dewatering plan should be tendered in advance or concurrent with the excavation plan. In the absence of an approved adequate dewatering plan, we would have to say that the proposed excavation plan is unworkable. 5. The proposed excavation plan also results in an imbalance of earth pressures on the manhole and adjoining vault structures. Whereas we have not computed the imbalance loading, the net result is an over -turning moment on the existing vaults and manhole structures, which might cause some tilting. The level of such tilting is impossible to predict, but might contribute to some distress in piping tying into these structures. Unless sufficient bracing can be achieved with the shield, we recommend that an alternate approach be considered that would eliminate or reduce lateral earth pressure imbalances. 6. We suggest that the contractor might give consideration to advancement of a large diameter casing from the surface, from which he could undertake the tie-in. The casing could be progressively advanced by removal of soil from the interior, after the site is properly dewatered. This would prevent the loss of ground and any imbalance in soil pressures on the existing structures. Backfilling requirements would also be substantially reduced. In consideration of the foregoing, we recommend that the submitted plan be rejected and the contractor be requested to resubmit a combined dewatering and excavation plan for this facet of the project work. We trust that you will find the above comments straightforward, but if you have any questions, or require clarification on any item, please do not hesitate to call our office. Excavation Plan submittal Memo Ldoc 2 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. :.John Hobson Construction Report No. 9 Pa en 1 From: "Brian Vanderburg" <BVanderburg@paceengrs.com> To: "John Hobson (E-mail)" <Jhobson@ci.renton.wa.us> Date: 10/25/2004 4:38:31 PM Subject: Construction Report No. 9 John: Please find attached Construction Report No. 9 for Friday, October 22nd. Spoke with Tom Malcolm of Gonzales Boring and Tunneling (503) 647-2218. He does not recommend blowing sand into plastic pipes with only 2 to 4 inches clearance in the annular space. He says there is too much chance of abrading a hole in one of the pipes due to the abrasive nature of the sand that is typically used. He says that lightweight cellular concrete (200 psi) is a better choice. Brian Vanderburg Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers Office: (206) 441-1855, Ext. 218 Cell: (206) 396-6229 <<fieldobs 9.doc>> John Hobson - Elliott Bridge Drop Connection Pa e 1 From: "Brian Vanderburg" <BVanderburg@paceengrs.com> To: "John Hobson (E-mail)" <Jhobson@ci.renton.wa.us> Date: 10/13/2004 3:55:41 PM Subject: Elliott Bridge Drop Connection John: I have been talking to Mark Boyd of Ferguson about an HDPE cross. Mark can be reached at (253) 437-5141. Mark said that if this fitting was ordered early Thursday morning, it should be possible to have it to the job site by sometime Friday. Mark said that the cross would cost about $1,000 not including shipping. The cross would be fabricated in Washougal. In order to obtain the inside diameters that we are looking for, the pipe would need to be 20" on the run and 16" on the branch. The run dimension from end to end would be about 48 inches. I would suggest that the pipe that would connect the pipe to the MH, the conc. box and the cleanout be HDPE as well. In order to support the vertical portion of the pipe during backfilling, a Meg -a -lug restraint could be used as you suggested. Another option would be to fusion weld HDPE pipe restraints to the outside of the pipe. Gary: Would it be possible for you to forward this message to Mark? I will be available by cell phone tomorrow morning. Brian Vanderburg Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers Office: (206) 441-1855, Ext. 218 Cell: (206) 396-6229 CC: "Evan Seelye (E-mail)" <evan.seelye@metrokc.gov>, "Gary Burback (E-mail)" <gary. burback@ferg uson.com> John Hobson RE Elliott Bridge Pie 1 From: "Mating, Matt" <Matt.Mali ng@METROKC.GOV> To: 'John Hobson' <Jhobson@ci.renton.wa.us> Date: 10/04/2004 9:48:21 AM Subject: RE: Elliott Bridge Thank you, John. We will inform the Contractor and proceed with the work. -----Original Message ----- From: John Hobson[mailto:Jhobson@ci.renton.wa.us] Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 9:41 AM To: matt.maling@metrokc.gov; victor.daggs@metrokc.gov Cc: David Christensen Subject: Elliott Bridge Matt, Victor, After reveiwing the project specs, bid tab, and the site conditions, we concur with King County and the Contractor's assessments that the groundwater quantities far exceed those anticipated by anyone. We therefore' authorize the additional costs for dewatering (those over the original contractors anticipated costs), shoring, and gel grouting to be tracked and paid per force account. Call me if you have any questions or unused funds that you would like to donate. John This message has been scanned by the City of Renton's filtering gateway. CC: David Christensen <Dchristen@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Daggs, Victor" <Victor.Daggs@METROKC.GOV>, "Lee, Robert-K" <Robert-K.Lee@METROKC.GOV>, "Jaramillo, Larry" <Larry.Jaramillo@METROKC. GOV>, "Markus, Jim" <Jim.Markus@METROKC.GOV>, "Brater, Rick" <Rick.Brater@METROKC. GOV>, "Abrams, Alan" <Alan.Abrams@METROKC.GOV>, "Seetye, Evan" <Evan.Seelye@METROKC.GOV>, "Fox, Chris" <Chris.Fox@METROKC.GOV> 10/13/2004 13:35 2064487167 Engineering Planning Surveying PenhallegonAssociates Consulting Engineers, Ina 1601 Second Avenue, Suite 1000 Seattle, Washington 98101-3511 Phone:206.441,1855 - Fax:206.448.7167 F_� IST 7 2- 0 N SGpL PACE SEATTLE PAGE 01/02 ,1OB FLLIOTT QRff)6: . SHEET NO. R OF CALCULATED BY 17V DATE —13-04 CHECKED BY DATE SCALE Post -it" Fax Note 7671 Dato jo-u3 pageSZ Tb ifoG 7 r •�GJ From BRIAR CeJDopL Co. Phone # Phone a Vj ,e $"5' 7 Fax M Fax # post -if Fax Note 7671 Date pt�01 To From Co./Dept. Co. Phone N PhonoZ� Q5 V Fax A Fax R ToF, 9 LFV ? 1% 13/2004 13:35 2064487167 Engineering Planning Surveying PenheNegonAssocistes ConsuldngEngineers, Inc, PACE SEATTLE jOB F-LLIOTT B906E PAGE 02/02 SHEET NO, OF �L CALCULATED BY E> DATE 1 a 3 —OT 1601 Second Avenue, Suite 1000 °'o CHECKED BY DATE SAMIA. Washinntnn GRIM-1,;11 In 1�;/12/2004 09:32 2066941710 t PAGE 02/02 FLAN khN-4 C2kt_ I�AN�FD - f2Dc;) Ga// - t-�61 KC AAH f?16 -52 "aN)OP 96ND C501RAK.GV- 1q/12/2004 09:32 2066841710 PAGE 01/02 KING 000M Wastewater Treatment. Division Asset Manageme.ut Department of Natural Resources & Parks Kiag Street Building * 20l South Jaclsoa Stroct, Fifth Floor x Seattle, WA 98104-3955 s (206)684-1280 F+A,CSIMILE TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET DATE SENT: 12 ©crtrJE - 2d0 TRANSMITTED TO: ,So�+n7 gso� i� E1.1"iO1C� , ` ii BLtG �`�i�LS 7-2Y I TRA,NSMI1 T'1;D FROM: EP-tL VA-JIS0t.) I<5�-- NQ--05Cg ((name) (Mail Stop) (206) CeO4-1-7 (Plionc) FAX NUMBER: (206) 684-1710 NO. OF PAGES TRANSMI7`I'I1D: 2 (Including Cover Sheet) NOTCS: ja 1-E to C 2v �jr 10/08/2004 08:54 2066841959 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PAGE 01/01 John Hobson fietdobs 5.doc P _ _ . ... NAME: B. Vanderburg SITE VISIT DATE: October 7, 2004 PROJECT NAME: Elliott Bridge Sewer PROJECT NUMBER: 02838 LOCATION: Renton CLIENT/OWNER: City of Renton WEATHER: Sunny. CONTRACTOR/SUB: Pacific Road & Bridge COMMENTS: I (Brian) arrived on site at 7:35 AM to observe progress to date on the excavation for the drop connection. All four dewatering pumps are still operating. The contractor has done some additional excavation on the north side of the existing manhole since the last visit. The bottom of the excavation is about 4 meters deep with the bottom at an elevation of roughly 27.5 to 28 meters. No groundwater was present in the excavation. The General Contractor was working on the bike tunnel wingwalls. Gelco Services Inc. was on site but not working. Gelco was represented by Steve Jacobsen (Jake) Superintendent. Les Banas of HWA arrived on site at about 8:00. He explained that grouting was halted until a letter regarding the protection of the existing sewer was signed by the City of Renton. Jake said that the other impediment to work yesterday (October 6") was that the trench box did not arrive on site until 1:00 PM yesterday. Left the site at 9:00 AM. This report represents opinion formed as a result of our observations of the contractor's activities relating to site facilities engineered by our office. We rely on the contractor to comply with the plans and specifications throughout the duration of the project irrespective of the presence of the Penhallegon Associate Consulting Engineers (PACE) representative. The presence of our field representative will be for the purpose of providing observation. Our work does not include supervision or direction of the actual work of the contractor, its employees or agents. Neither the presence of our representative nor the observation by our firm shall excuse the contractor in any way for defects discovered in its work. Our firm is not responsible for job or site safety on this project. i P:\P02\02838\Civil\ConstructionTieldobs-5.doc 10/07/2004 07:30 2062967724 KING COUNTY CONST PAGE 01 KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION" ROAD SERVICES DIVISION FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET TO: PR,OM: COY. /MPANt DATE: FAX NUMB. I TOTAL NO.1 PAGES INCLUDING COVER �— PRONE NUMBER: SENDER'S REFERENCE NUMBER: RE: RGENT ❑ FOR REVIEw ❑ PLEASE COMMENT ❑ PLEASE REPLY ❑ FOR YOUR INFO NOTES/COMMENTS: ------------ CA TICE' This message and any document transmitted herewith is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed; it may contain infor`ion that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the =&'r of this message is not the intended recipient, you axe hereby notified that any diseemination, distribution, or copying of this eomtnutumdon is strictly prohibited, If you have received this communication in error, Please notify us immediately by telephone and return the original message to the sender with any documents amclied, CONSTRUCTION SERVICES GROUP S 2 7 7 T H S T PH III FIELD O F F I C I3 .PHONE 206-423-1152 FAX 253-856-3118 10/07/2004 07:30 2062967724 KING COUNTY CONST PAGE 02 ul, l -U f—eUU4 I HU U t : 44 AM FAX NO, P. 01 PACIFIC ROAD & BRIDGE COMPANY P-O, BOX 3393 - ARLINGTON, WASHIN13TON 913223-3393 King County Department of Transportation Road Services Division 201 S. Jackson Street Seattle, WA. 98104-3856 Mail Stop KSC TR 0224 Attn: Victor Daggs Serial Letter #12 Re: Elliott Bridge Replacement, Contract C43011C Pacific Road and Bridge Job # 0405 Dcwatering of Manhole Drop Connection PRB Serial letter #10, Dated October 1, 2004 Victor, OFFICE: 360.403-7563 - FAX:360-403-0120 Last week, we submitted two estimatesiproeedures for dewatering the drop connection into the exi4ling sanitary Sewer manhole. One approach, estimated by Hayward- Baker, was to backfill the present excavation, allow the ground water to rise to its natural level by tuminb off the four (4) devvatering pumps and then grout a block of soil in situ approximately 25' x 25' x 25', excavating for the drop connection after the grout setup in the ground. This proposal was between $100,000 - $120,000, Second, a ground freezing proposal was submlued by RKK Soil Freeze in the estitnated amont between $90,000 - $110,000, plus elecirlety for the chillers. Again, the present excavation would be backfilled, the Pumps turned off and the ground water allowed to rise to its normal level. In fact, our office suggested that the existing manhole be cored at the upper level and a vertical drop connection inside the manhole be accomplished, avoiding all of the above. All of the foregoing was rejected by the County In favor of a "cheaper" method by Gelco, who is at present working at the site, at the request of King, County. Be advised we do not believe the Gelco procedure can or will produco the desired results previously required by the County. Already, traces of the gel have appeared in the pumps discharge creating a milky turbidity. Excavation inside a shoring box will certainly dirty the water entering the pump casings. [n orde:r to continue this operatio0; 1. The County agrees that all efforts to dewater the referenced sanitary sewer drop connection will be paid for on a forge account basis in accordance with Section 1-09 of the Standard Specifications. For King Cuunry Date AN EQUAL OPPORTUNt1Y EMPLOYER 10/07/2004 07:30 2062967724 KING COUNTY CONST PAGE 03 I u 1 cvu4 i nu u(.44 nu hHIS NU, P. 02 2_ King County assumes all liability for damages to the environment, equipment(pumps; etc.) and adjacent properties, For King County, Date Very truly yours, Gary L. Weimer, P.E, Project Manager 0 1 w OCT-07-2004 THU 11:04 AN PACIFIC ROAD AND BRIDGE FAX NO, 360 403 0120 F. 02 OOT-07-2004 THU 10,62 AM FAX NO, F, 01 10/07/2004 07:31 2e62967724 KING COUNTY CONST r�� Ui Wds CJCT-07-2004 THU 01144 W FAX K PACIFIC ROAD & BRIDGE COMPANY PA, BOX 33e3 • ARUNWON, WAaHINGTON S8223.3393 • 13FFIM; 3B0-403�7565 - FAX 3130-403-0?I:[] iGift County 04pertmegt Of'Fian4pOttation Rudd Servlda t�lvlalort 201 S, joctsow Street Sartre, WA, 98104-3856 ivla� Stop KSC TR 0224 Aim: Victor Daus finial Later #112 der post•ie Fax Noce 7571 Pole -00 Phone Y pwne Ir 3—IOC-3 Ra: Ellio tbridge Replamment. Contra« C43011C Pocift Road and lirldge Job 4 NOS Dawitering of Mkihde prop Cohmeaiae PR9'Salai Low # 10, Dgted OaaW 1, 2004 Vloter, Lan week, we tu6miitad two es6mdenproaeAm for dvwe w%9 the drop owmmorion Into du Wdmg sertitary WWW MOW & One approach. atiimtued by Hayward. Baker, was to WWI the presaai wwavatim. allow the around water to rise to its natural level by lumina Othe tout (4) dowatarbtg pumps and thm W0ut a b(o& of soil (n situ approdmwly 25, x 25' Y 211, cuava4nS far the drop odrmcaion . after the grout setup 1n dto Crowd, This dtopoesl was between 51 AW - $120,000. Sacond, a CrouM frvuz ng proptaal was 9ubrnaW by RKK Soil Preen in the asthnmd vWVx bOWW W'600.9110,000, piyn eteovlety for tha chilieriL AgaM, the would be haekfi lled, the pwnps rumed off and to ground water allowed to rise to its rl mal level. in bc4 our Act suagtsEed last The exits ai mtote M tuned at the uPM level and a venial drop oannGodun insidethernwholOw a000tmpl►shed, avoiding all of the above, All of the fategaix,p was rojesas+d by rho Curvy in favor of a "chs$W' medtod by Gelt'o, *to Is at prWAM wwL;4C pt to site, at the rcqucst of King County. Be advimd the der not believe the Gelco procodurts cut or will produm 16e desired reeulp previously toquired by the County. Already, tracers of Cho gel have appeared In the pttrnps dilxhwga aratfrtC a M114 turbidity. Excavation inside a shoring boat wilt certainly dirty the walla+ etmcrmH tha pump C"I,gs- 11 a4a to oortt111uQ,hie p [u1; I. Tho CoLm y aWocs that all efforts to downer the refm. 4xd o—i wy scwur drop aomaosion wiU be geld ft oA a fora a000tm[ bane in ssoordartee with Seetian 1-09 of Standard Sperltloatinnt, For King County _ Ode AN MAL 0"dWWW V EMPt"p ti OCT-07-2004 THU 11:04 AM PACIFIC ROAD AND BRIDGE FAX N0, 360 403 0120 OCT-07-2004 THU 10!62 AM FAX N0, 1e/07/2ee4 07.31 2e92967724 KING COUNTY CON5T OGT-07-2004 THU 07c44 AM FAX NO, 2. TCin� Ceunry a�ainas all I�bitty far dape�s � tho environm�� egtdpmeatl�aP� �) wd sdjacentpcapa�_ '��-+�rt¢a `ice '"iw� D+►��, ��+� �L i ►ram �'yoH �NNs'�C�i1�r� Fat Koss County Doe Vwy ")y yous, Gay , Wemor, M Pra wt ma waor cc. Vik P. 01 P, 02 p�G�uL83/03 1&,,07/2004 07:31 2062967724 KING COUNTY CONST PAGE 01/03 KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ROAD SERVICES DIVISION FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET TO: FR`O,M: N COMPANY: DATE: FAX �NUMBER: TOTAL NO. I PAGES INCLUDING COVER: " t,� tl �f - PHONE NUMBER! c SENDER'S REFERENCE NUMBER: RE7 RGENT ❑ FOR REVIEW ❑ PLEASE COMMENT ❑ PLEASE REPLY ❑ FOR YOUR INFO NOTES/COMMENTS: C.4� M,C -CO" V(,o ` -t ' t-y't Q C0NPTbE1, 'tAT *rY NOTIt-F- This message and any document transmitted herewith is intended only for the use of the individual or critity to which it is addressed; it may contain information that is privileged, eonfidenkial, and exempt from disclosure tinder applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this commutumnon in error, please notify us immediately by telephone and return the original message to the sender with any documents attached. .e. CONSTRUCTION SERVICES GROUP S 277TH ST PH III FIELD OFFICE PHONE 206-423-1152 FAX 253-856-3118 P. 01 TRANSACTION REPORT OCT-07-2004 THU 10:52 AM FOR: DATE START RECEIVER TX TIME PAGES TYPE NOTE NO DP OCT-07 10:51 AM 8-3604030120-3369088 39" 2 SEND OK 052 It/07/2004 07:31 2062967724 KING COUNTY CONST PAGE 02/03 OCT-07-2004 THU 07:44 AM FAX NO, N, U1 PACIFIC ROAD & BRIDGE COMPANY PA. BOX 3393 • ARLIN(3TON, WA5HINGTON 98223-3393 - OFFICE: 3130-403.7565 - FAX: 360-403-0120 King County Department of Transportation Road Services Division 201 S, Jackson Street Seattle. WA. 98104-3856 Mail Stop KSC TR 0224 Attn: Victor Daggs Serial Letter # 12 Post -it" Fax Note 7671 Date 10-7 pag°Aes0-2-- To�s a-A-Uc ut From V((CSf[ V�r-&j -C Co./Dept. i!�%i p'�� ?F-6 `7�'t1b�- Co. KL p� Phone # Phone # "7 (- C3- Fax # Fax # _ -8 Re: Elliott Bridge Replacement, Contract C43011C Pacific Road and Bridge Job # 0405 Dewatering of Manhole Drop Connection PRB Serial Letter # 10, Dated October 1, 2004 Victor, Last week, we submitted two estimate-,i/procedures for dewatoring the drop connection into the exiKting sarritary Bawer manhole. One approach, estimated by Hayward- Baker, was to baekfill the present excavation. Allow the groundwater to rise to its natural level by turning off the flour (4) dewatering pumps and then gout a block of soil in situ approximately 25' x 25' x 25', excavating for the drop connection after the grout setup in the ground. This proposal was between 5100,000 - $120,000, Second, a ground freezing proposal was submitted by RKK Soil Freeze in the estimated am ant between $90,000 - $110,000, plus alectrlety for the chillers. Again, the present excavation would be baekfilled, the pumps turned off and the ground water allowed to rlsc to its normal level. In %ct, our office suggested that the existing manhole be cored at the upper level and a vertical drop connection inside the manhole be accomplished, avoiding Ull of the above. All of tho foregoing was rejected by the County in favor of a "cheaper" method by Qdco, who is at present working at the site, at the request of King County. Se advised we do not believe the Gelco procedure can or will produce the desired results previously required by the County. Already, traces of the gel have appeared in the pumps discharge creating a milky turbidity. Excavation inside a shoring box will certainly dirty the water entering the pump casings. In order to contiialJ_e this oppmtion- The Coctnty agrees that all efforts to dewater the referenced sanitary sewer drop connection will be paid for on a force account basis in accordance witli Section 1.09 of Standard Spedfloations. For King Countyl Date i c 7 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER A/07/2004 07:31 2062967724 KING COUNTY CONST PAGE 03/03 OOT--07-2004 THU 07:44 AM FAX NO, e. U� 2. King County assumes all liability for damages to the environment, equipment(pumps, etc) and adjacentproperdes. 'Pa-ATo-n 'T '- Far King County Date Very truly yaws, Gary L. Werner, P.E.. Project Manager cc: File P" " lnnova)ions in lnfrasvruciur•e Repair 7ec•hnoloiv" PRIME RESINS, INC. 01'FICE:(770) 388-0626 / FAX (770) 388-0936 2381 Rockaway Industrial Boulevard Conyers (Atlanta), Georgia 30012 SECTION 1 - IDENTITY INFORMATION 111WI)I;( I N:Ati1i_ HYDRO GEL 970 SF MANI'I AC"I (IRl R PRI\'IL RESINS, INC. ADDRESS 2381 ROCKAW\Y INDU.S'I"RIAL 13OUH:VARD I AMII.I'/('1IIiMICAI. NAMI: I; W H IANI: ('I I Y 0)NY1:RS IA I'LANIA) S'I A l k GIiORGIA %II' COUI{ 30012 PRODUCT I YI)k URI TI IANI. I I I I I1 IONL (770) 388-0626 I-AX (770) 388-0936 DO'I' (AT1:GOR)'. NO'I REGULA11J) I IlEMTRIA (800) 424-9300 I)RI:PARI{D H),' A'IO WILBI:RPORCE SECTION 11 - HAZARDOUS INGREDIENTS ,UVli•uAI.,NIS (( H] \IIC V. IUISI IY,.(-OAMW, NANII(A) I.INil Is ('AS M \IBP.R iZ!:I I I:AA'I: PItI:PULI'M1:R ACGIII('n.V) NOT ESTABLIS1-11-D �3426-99-6 r OSIIA(1'I:L) NOT I'STABLISI IED 2A - DnSOCYANATL ;R4_84.9 ACGI11(TWA) 0.00� PPM 2, 6 - DIISOCYANATG >84-84-9 ACGIIi(TI.V) NOT LISTED �u[ R('I: OI Ii.XPOSURI: 1 IMFIDATA ACGII I AMLiRICAN CUNPI?RI NCI: OI' (iOVlil'(Nh11iN'I AL INDUSTRIAL I WGII:NIS'I S Tllls PROUI'("T CO.NI ALNS "fill•; FOLLO\\'ING TOXIC 'lll::\IIC:�L OR CI11;\II(::U.S Sl'13J1•:(""I"'rO'I'IIF RI•:1'OR'I"ING I(I:()l lRl'9Il{\I's OF SI•;Cl'[ON 313 OF'ITH.E III OF TI I.- SI!I)1?IZF(!ND ;1:\1ENDiNIENTS AN'D RI•:-:k1'l'IIORIZATION WI OF 1986 AND 40CFR PART 372: TOLUENE 2 4 - DIISOCYANATE,, TOLUENE 2, 6 - UIISOCNANATE, SECTION III - PHYSICAL DATA G'ultl'io- ,I RP(:AIR 1) 268°1' ISOMM BOILING POINT %I80° F PIIK(TNI'vOI.,Arju. NIL. u<ur slrN�(-\IR I) ?K-,/1. �\mI.RSOlulsu.rry SOL(JA131_1.-RkACTSW/WATI'R WIMI.rORGANics .Nc)NI-. ul \,u) NOl- DL I'I`.RMINI:D sreclru' clanvrry nl o=D 20° C 1.038 AI'I'i. AKAM E(SOLID.I.IOUIDj;AS,( OLOK) AND ODOR AM1311R, SWI;L-:T SMIiI.LING LIQUID VORM[)\ RA I LIM i)I Ace IAll. I) SI.OWI:R"II IAN I:TIi I:R SECTION IV - FIRE AND EXPLOSION DATA V,,I POIN 1 -180' P PI:NSKY MARTIN CLOSL I) CUP ,u rD I(,,NI I IOV II NIPEKAIUR6 NOT DFTERMINED �.r�(�rI�uIN,, �n:nlA CO2-DR1' CIiLN1I('AL-LOAM-1VA IliR Sl'RAY L:�M9I,�IiLI_ Llnv"rs--LGI. UNKNOWN rIRI PRO( -I DrIU.S l'til{ SGI.I - ('ON..I"AINH) I3RLATI IIN(; APPARA'It!S rI.ANnIABLr: I-INBTs --ura UNKNOWN ,I (I rlKr VND rsP1 01,10N If vAlzDs OV'I[R111:,1'I I:D- CLOtiIfD C'ON'I AINIfRS :1D.IA('I N I fO IIRI: COULD I:XPLOIA: 1)(11: TO PRIaSI IRII IR ILD-UI, HEALTH 11 FLAMMABILITY 11 REACTIVITY 11 PERSONAL PROTECTION 11 i SECTION V - REACTIVITY DATA HYDRO GEL 970 SF PACE 2 sr\Ilu.n'Y STABLE X CONDITIONS TO AVOID REACTS WITH MOISTURE UNST:\BLE II,\/:\RDOIS POLY:MERIZA I ION \I:\1- (KCCI( NII-I- MOT O('('UR C 10v11'-vIIBB_n'Y W'AI'I'R OR MOISILJR1: PRIOR'TO LJSF: II \Z:\RDOUS DECOMPOSITION CARBON MONOXIDE, CARBON DIOXIDE AND NITROGEN DECOMPOSITION PRODUCTS INCLUDING THE POSSIBILITY OF I ICN. SECTION VI - HEALTH HAZARD DATA RUL H of 1)I Il\Ikl SKI' s INGESTION X EXPOSURE EFFECTS IRRI"IA"TION, SENSI'TIZA'I�ION, DERMA"IITIS EYIiS .\ INHALATION X \(I I I IIAZARDS WILL CAUSE 13URNS TO SKIN AND EYES. HIGH CONCENTRATIONS OF VAPOR CAUSE IRRITATION OF RESPIRATORY TRACT. ( HRmI(" HAZARDS PROLONGL'D OR REPI A'I'ED EXPOSURE MAY CAUSE ASTHMA AND SKIN SENSITIZATION OR OTI IER ALLERGIC RESPONSE. EYES: INI,NIEDIATELY FLUSH EYES WITH WATER FOR AT LEAST FIFTEEN MINUTES. PROMPT MEDICAL CONSULTATION IS ESSENTIAL. SKIN: PROMPTLY WASH WTI'H MILD SOAP AND WATER, I:\1 ERG ENCY \.N D FIRST INIIA1.:\TION: 14E.\IOVE-10 FRESII AIR. GIVE 0XYG F.N IF NECESSA RY. G E'I M E D I CA 1. Al-I'ENTION. \I1) PRO( EDI RES INGESTION: IF CONSCIOUS, GIVE. LARGE AMOUNTS OF WATER. GET MEDICAL AT'fENTION. 0 HIER: \\'ASII CONTAMINATED CLOTTING BEFORE REUSE. DISCARD CONTAMINATED SHOES ANA) OTHER LEATHER ARTICLES. SECTION VII - PRECAUTIONS FOR SAFE HANDLING AND USE S"I I: I'S ]'A KEN FOR SPIL LS OR I2 ELEASF.: OBSERVE PREC I I I IONARY INFORMATION IN ALL SECTIONS. PREVENT MATERIAL FROM ENTERING DRAINS, USE DIKING OR COVER FLOOR DRAINS It \FCESSARY IF AIA-I-LKIAI. FNI FRS DRAIN, FLUSH WI ITT LARGE AMOUNTS OF WATER. COVER sPILL WITIf AN ADSORDF_NT NIAIERIL. COLLECT IN OPENHEAD DI2L'\1 01( PAIL. S-I IR I\ \N 1IIMATF.D EQUAL AMOUNT OI' VVAl'ER AND LET' SI'I I/21TOUR \\ \S IE. DISPOSAL METHOD: IF WAS"I'E IS FULLY C LIRED (BY MIXING WITH SUFFICIENT WATER), THE GEL COULD DE BURIED IN A SANITARY LANDFILL UNCURED LIQUID WAS+ SHOLLD BE i>ISI'OSP.D OF BY' CFI C: A11 C:AI, I,N('INERATION OR AI A DISPOSAL FACILITY CAPABLE OF HANDLING FLAMMABLE WASTES WASTES SI-IOULD BF DISPOSED IN ACC'ORDAN(E W1TH LOCAL. \\D STAFE REGCLAIIO\S PRE( 'A UTION'S FOR ll,\NDI.IN(;.Sllll'I'ING,STORING,:\ND OTHER; AVOID CONTACT WITH EYES. SKIN OR CLOTHING A\'OLD BREA'TI-IINC' VAPORS, MIS"T, OR SPRAY USE WITH GOOD POSII'IVE \ [.\III.:\1'10\ , 10RI IN \ COOL. 012Y :\RF.A IN CLOSED ('ON'IAINF.RS. OBSERVE CONDITIONS OF GOOD INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE AND SAFE WORK PRACTICE. \\ :\RUING: MA) - CAUSE IRRITATION AND/OR SKIN REACTION. SECTION VIII - CONTROL MEASURES kl \I'IR:\ IOR1 PROTE(CIION NIOY I APPROVED RESPIRA I ORY PROTECTION REQUIRED IN'IHE ABSENCE OF GOOD GENERAL MECHANICAL VENTILATION AND LOCAL EXHAUST PROTEC'1 J\ L: I EYES SPLASH TROOP GOGGLES OR SAFETY GLASSES WITH SIDE (1.01HIM; I GLOVES IMPERVIOUS GLOVES, NEO SECTION IX -"REGULATORY INFORMATION CLOTHING LONG LEGGED AND SLEEVED CLOTHING. ISTANT LEATHER i,S(I DATE: I DO"ICI.ASs NOT REGULA1 ED I CFRCLASTAIUs 2'%TDI (CAS. NO. 584-84-9 AND 91-08-7) I I %S196 :I\ Isla\ I RCI(A SIATus NOT LISI1'D I ISCA INVEN"IORY Sl'ATUS CIiGMICAL C'OMPONI'NTS LISTED ON INVI:N"I'OR)' 1 I V96 (IT'NNSYLVANIA RIGHT TO KNOW ACC) ['HIS INFORMATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE BASED UPON DATA BELIEVED TO BE CORRECT. HOWEVER, NO GUARANTEE OR WARRANTY OF ANY KIND EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED IS MADE WITH RESPECT TO THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN. Z w 2 W U Q J a W ol W 0 p m 0 J W Q p Z W C9 Q C9 Z H W W J Y W W Z a a. m 0 U W U` p � m 0 w z o 2 Q Q ~ w -le O U 0 E O U �t Y ~ CDJ N W LU Z U W W u d 3: Cl) M a N O r N F N iL O r � r � N = o f � r p o W N O r i C/) a) W r o X F- r Z 00 0= X O H ca Q o in r _ _LO U C k iL o r tt r O r pM CD x fn cV W r O A � Z r r 0 u o o Q o (n r O iL o p o 2 r. F- r \ i w 3 y Y 7� 0 3 Z O U p iL 0 W H C0 D Q CO w D O w 0 Z O m w O Q Z w Weekly Meetings Date: /j /d 7l�2 Name Company - Elliott Phone Number 443--1d6 ^ii6 ci S 6- 9 7 7 SEP-28-2004 TUE 10:13 AM PACIFIC ROAD AND BRIDGE FAX NO, 360 403 0120 P. 01 PACIFIC ROACH & BRlDGE Co. P.O. E30X 3393 • ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON SS233 • (360) 403-7565 • FAX (3601 403-01'20 FAX TRANSMITTAL DATE: `l-? S=�2- ATTN V � GT`o?:, DAc 6v G S FAX: COMPANY: Y�4 ► (_, e.c)() rJ T�f FROM: s9tiaCji�7 VtE:i C- NUMBER OF PAGES TRANSMITTED INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET: l IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THE PAGES, PLEASE PHONE 360.403.7565"" MESSAGE: C_ = W A-iZ—p i �� rat err ATITIONETR waqc—am r � � s. � � C cir, Y��t-tea Weekly Meetings - El Date: �-- t- Name Company I iott Phone NumhPr 3 T ..Az�'� �. '�✓L' +30'�� ��. John Hobson - Exist Metro MH at Elliott Bridge Page 1 From: "Brian Vanderburg" <BVanderburg@paceengrs.com> To: "John Hobson (E-mail)" <Jhobson@ci.renton.wa.us> Date: 09/29/2004 8:18:51 AM Subject: Exist Metro MH at Elliott Bridge Hi John: I asked Chris Fox of King County to measure the O.D. of the top slab on the existing MH. Chris says that the top slab measures 7'. This is consistent with a 72" dia. MH with a top slab O.D. of 86". 1 looked at the dimensions of an 18" x 18" D.I. Tee. The fitting has a laying length of 27". The overall length including glands, bells and other MJ accessories is about 36". This is for an AWWA C153 compact fitting. The fitting weighs 490 lbs. Brian Vanderburg Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers Office: (206) 441-1855, Ext. 218 Cell: (206) 396-6229 John Hobson - RE: Elliott Bridge Contract C43011C City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Work Page 1 From: John Hobson To: Maling, Matt Date: 09/30/2004 1111:02 AM Subject: RE: Elliott Bridge Contract C43011C - City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Work Definitely, the "hydro gel" is actually what I meant when I said grout. I misplaced my copy of the "hydro gel" information (which I found just minutes ago) and I couldn't remember the name of the product. >>> "Maling, Matt" <Matt.Maling@METROKC. GOV> 09/30/2004 10:57:48 AM >>> Thank you, John. We will have Pacific Road and Bridge pursue obtaining costs for the grout injection for dewatering at the drop connection. At the 9/28/04 meeting we also discussed the possibility of using a "hydro gel" injection method to aid in the dewatering effort. Les Banas of HWA indicated that there could be cost savings for using this method as opposed to grout injection. Would the City be amenable to this method as well? Thanks, Matt -----Original Message ----- From: John HobsonfmaiIto: Jhobson(a-)-ci.renton.wa.usl Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 10:46 AM To: Matt. Maling(cD-METROKC.GOV Cc: BVanderburg(@-paceengrs.com Subject: Re: Elliott Bridge Contract C43011C - City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Work Matt, As per the meeting on Tuesday, Sept. 28, 2004, the City of Renton is willing to pay the extra costs incurred for additional shoring required to install the drop connection. These additional costs will be paid on a time and materials (Force Account) basis. Concerning the dewatering issue, the construction document includes specifications stating "All costs involved to perform dewatering measures shall be considered incidental to and included in the various structure items in the contract, including the implementation and preparation of the dewatering plan and contingency plan; no further compensation will be made" (Section 2-09.3(5) page 98 last chapter). Section 7-17.3(1)(page 199), 1st paragraph, states that "dewatering may be required during construction of the sanitary sewer lines". It further states that "dewatering may consist of a combination of trench pumping, well points, and/or wells". Section 7-17.5 Payment (page 201) lists inclusion of dewatering costs for the "Drop Connection to Existing Sewer Manhole". The specifications state (Section 2-09.0(5) page 98, 3rd paragraph) that "the project geotechnical report shall be consulted to design proper dewatering wells". The contractor had the same information about groundwater and soil conditions as the City of Renton. The City was not made aware of excessive groundwater issues until the weekly meeting on August 19, 2004 when Eric Davison of KC-WTD explained the dewatering issues associated with the construction of the existing sewer John Hobson -- RE Elliott Bridge Contract C43011C - City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Work Pale 2 , interceptor. However, given the information in the geotechincal report and the proximity of the Cedar River, we believe that the contractor should have anticipated significant amounts of groundwater during the sewer work and bid these items accordingly. The City of Renton is willing to review costs that were in "addition" to what the contractor had originally anticipated when they bid the project. These additional costs should be in excess of what a prudent contractor would have bid given the available information at the time of bid. If these additional costs are found to be justified, the City will reimburse the Contractor for the extra costs. This would also include any additional costs associated with a new shoring/dewatering plan that may include grouting etc. as discussed at the September 28, 2004 meeting. Since the meeting, Dave Christensen has contacted several people at KC-WTD in regards to allowing an "inside drop connection". We are still waiting on a decision about the inside drop so I believe that the contractor should pursue getting costs for the possibility of using the grout injection method to solve the dewatering problem. >>> "Maling, Matt" <Matt.Malinq(a�METROKC.GOV> 09/27/2004 9:44:39 AM >>> John, This is to confirm discussions on the additional work for installation of the City's sanitary sewer as a part of the Elliott Bridge Replacement project, Contract C43011 C. The Contractor has notified the County that there will be additional costs associated with dewatering for the installation of the sanitary sewer drop connection. The additional costs will be paid for under "Force Account", as outlined in the contract documents and the WSDOT Standard Specifications. It is the County's understanding that the City of Renton will reimburse the County in full for the additional contractor costs as well as the additional costs incurred by the County for staff and consultant review time pertaining to the additional dewatering necessary for the sanitary sewer drop connection installation. Please respond with your concurrence to the above; or, if your understanding differs from the above, please outline those items that will need further discussion. We appreciate your help on this project. Sincerely, Matt Maling 206-296-8883 John Hobson - RE: Elliott Bridge Contract C43011 C - City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Work Pale 3 This message has been scanned by the City of Renton's filtering gateway. — .-W.G-J_X 1-I --- ---- Yl l_r/I Page No. ? of 4 Pages GG]cO Gel co /.IglaeefMe�itt P Services Division of Michels Corp OR-CCB %114278 ❑ P,O. Box 17370 ® P. O, Box 1124 ❑ 1296 E. Gibson Rd.,#186 WA-CCB #M/CHEC'999Ja Salem, OR 37305-7370 Kent, WA 98035-1124 Woodland, CA 95776 CA-CCB #R553612 (503) 364-1199 (253) 804-1199 (530) 406-1199 ID-CCB 013755-AAA-4 FAX (503) 391-8317 FAX (253) 876-9932 FAX (530) 406-7001 MT-CCB #7784 ATMNTION JOB NO. P.O.B , NUER CELL pE{ONE Chris Gan le ntzol'o SLMMITMD TO PHONE 360-403-7565 DATE Pacific Road & Bridge Co. Feu 360-40"120 September 30, 2004 �T JOU NAME PO Box 3393 CITY, STATE, Z1P CODE JOB 40CATION Arlin ton, WA 98223 152nd Ave SE We hereby submit swcificatlons and eotlmates for. Gelco Services, Inc. will provide labor & equipment to put a grout curtain around trench boxes that will be approximately 14 feet deep by 8'x8' Mobilizationl0emobilization $1,200.00 -/' 00 Labor & Equipment per 8 hour shift $3,000.00 (estimate 5 days) Chemical Grout $80.00 per gal 4 (estimate 600 gallons) Minimum Charges $550.00 The above rates do not include Washington State Sales Tax, (If you are tax exempt, and have not already done so, please fax us a re -sale certificate) Any standby time beyond Gelco's control will be charged at $ 375.00 per hour, CLIENT TO PROVIDE: Legal access to work site. A mutually agreed upon schedule. Traffic Control beyond normal signs & cones On Site Contact Digging and setting trench box Removal of grout pipes Dewatering of trench box Payment shall be made within 15 days fallowing data of Involce or oomplellon of work, whichever le earlier. A late charge of 1-1/2 percent per month will be assessed on unpald balances, In the evenisult aracdon, Including any appeal ftrafrom, la brought to enforce any terms ofthls agreement, the pmvalling party shall be endued to such reasonable attorney's fees and coats as may be awarded by the trial and appellate courts. lVe SMage hereby to furnish material and labor - complete in accordance with above specifications, for the sum of; dollars $ Payment to he made es follows: As shown above Net 15 days Authorized Signature: Henry"Hank" Celigoy AM rnatarltd le guaMntead to be es apealued. All work 1p bk comr jmed In s workmarms manner accorong to standard preGicaa. Any anarsuon or daNagon from above speclnomiona InvaMng extra cove wNl be execoad only upon writton ordure, and w7l beeame on sxga charge over end above the wilmate, AP e6nementE oontlnaent upon tykes. Aeddenb or daimA am beyond our conm, OWrwr to carry Are. tornado, and -(her nornsaary Insurance. Our workers are fully covered by Woridnen'e CCmpftM1aU0rl IMuranca, 2"- 7hfs proposal maybe tylrhdrawn by us if r7ot accepted wfthfrl 90 days. 'gmcphour RM' 11x above prices, specification and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authorized to do the worlt as spectfled. Payment 5lonature will he made as ouUlnetl a)ove. Date of Acceptance: SlQmtuTg Join Hobson - RE: Elliott Bridge Contract C43011C - City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Work _Page 1 From: "Mating, Matt" <Matt.Maling@METROKC.GOV> To: 'John Hobson' <Jhobson@ci.renton.wa.us> Date: 09/30/2004 11:20:58 AM Subject: RE: Elliott Bridge Contract C43011 C - City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Work Sounds good. Thanks, John. -----Original Message ----- From: John Hobson[mailto:Jhobson@ci.renton.wa.us] Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 11:11 AM To: Matt. Maling@METROKC. GOV Subject: RE: Elliott Bridge Contract C43011C - City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Work Definitely, the "hydro gel" is actually what I meant when I said grout. I misplaced my copy of the "hydro gel" information (which I found just minutes ago) and I couldn't remember the name of the product. >>> "Maling, Matt" <Matt.Maling@METROKC.GOV> 09/30/2004 10:57:48 AM Thank you, John. We will have Pacific Road and Bridge pursue obtaining costs for the grout injection for dewatering at the drop connection. At the 9/28/04 meeting we also discussed the possibility of using a "hydro gel" injection method to aid in the dewatering effort. Les Banas of HWA indicated that there could be cost savings for using this method as opposed to grout injection. Would the City be amenable to this method as well? Thanks, Matt -----Original Message ----- From: John Hobson[mailto:Jhobson@ci.renton.wa.us] Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 10:46 AM To: Matt.Maling@METROKC.GOV Cc: BVanderburg@paceengrs.com Subject: Re: Elliott Bridge Contract C43011C - City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Work Matt, As per the meeting on Tuesday, Sept. 28, 2004, the City of Renton is willing to pay the extra costs incurred for additional shoring required to install the drop connection. These additional costs will be paid on a time and materials (Force Account) basis. Concerning the dewatering issue, the construction document includes ... .. m Jortin Hobson - RE: Elliott Bridge Contract C43011 C City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Work Page�2 J specifications stating "All costs involved to perform dewatering measures shall be considered incidental to and included in the various structure items in the contract, including the implementation and preparation of the dewatering plan and contingency plan; no further compensation will be made" (Section 2-09.3(5) page 98 last chapter). Section 7-17.3(1)(page 199), 1st paragraph, states that "dewatering may be required during construction of the sanitary sewer lines". It further states that "dewatering may consist of a combination of trench pumping, well points, and/or wells". Section 7-17.5 Payment (page 201) lists inclusion of dewatering costs for the "Drop Connection to Existing Sewer Manhole". The specifications state (Section 2-09.0(5) page 98, 3rd paragraph) that "the project geotechnical report shall be consulted to design proper dewatering wells". The contractor had the same information about groundwater and soil conditions as the City of Renton. The City was not made aware of excessive groundwater issues until the weekly meeting on August 19, 2004 when Eric Davison of KC-WTD explained the dewatering issues associated with the construction of the existing sewer interceptor. However, given the information in the geotechincal report and the proximity of the Cedar River, we believe that the contractor should have anticipated significant amounts of groundwater during the sewer work and bid these items accordingly. The City of Renton is willing to review costs that were in "addition" to what the contractor had originally anticipated when they bid the project. These additional costs should be in excess of what a prudent contractor would have bid given the available information at the time of bid. If these additional costs are found to be justified, the City will reimburse the Contractor for the extra costs. This would also include any additional costs associated with a new shoring/dewatering plan that may include grouting etc. as discussed at the September 28, 2004 meeting. Since the meeting, Dave Christensen has contacted several people at KC-WTD in regards to allowing an "inside drop connection". We are still waiting on a decision about the inside drop so I believe that the contractor should pursue getting costs for the possibility of using the grout injection method to solve the dewatering problem. >>> "Maling, Matt" <Matt.Maling@METROKC. GOV> 09/27/2004 9:44:39 AM >>> John, This is to confirm discussions on the additional work for installation of the City's sanitary sewer as a part of the Elliott Bridge Replacement p John Hobson - RE: Elliott Bridge Contract C43011C City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Work Page 3 project, Contract C43011C. The Contractor has notified the County that there will be additional costs associated with dewatering for the installation of the sanitary sewer drop connection. The additional costs will be paid for under "Force Account", as outlined in the contract documents and the WSDOT Standard Specifications. It is the County's understanding that the City of Renton will reimburse the County in full for the additional contractor costs as well as the additional costs incurred by the County for staff and consultant review time pertaining to the additional dewatering necessary for the sanitary sewer drop connection installation. Please respond with your concurrence to the above; or, if your understanding differs from the above, please outline those items that will need further discussion. We appreciate your help on this project. Sincerely, Matt Maling 206-296-8883 This message has been scanned by the City of Renton's filtering gateway. This message has been scanned by the City of Renton's filtering gateway. CC: 'Brian Vanderburg' <BVanderburg@paceengrs.com>, "Daggs, Victor" <Victor.Daggs@METROKC.GOV>, "Seelye, Evan" <Evan.Seelye@METROKC.GOV>, "Jaramillo, Larry" <Larry.Jaramillo@METROKC.GOV>, "Lee, Robert-K" <Robert-K.Lee@METROKC.GOV>, "Fisher, Earl" <Earl. Fisher@METROKC.GOV> JokNobson - Re: Elliott Bridge Contract C43011C City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Work Pagee11 .� _ ..... v .w....._ From: John Hobson To: Maling, Matt Date: 09/30/2004 10:46:10 AM Subject: Re: Elliott Bridge Contract C43011C - City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Work Matt, As per the meeting on Tuesday, Sept. 28, 2004, the City of Renton is willing to pay the extra costs incurred for additional shoring required to install the drop connection. These additional costs will be paid on a time and materials (Force Account) basis. Concerning the dewatering issue, the construction document includes specifications stating "All costs involved to perform dewatering measures shall be considered incidental to and included in the various structure items in the contract, including the implementation and preparation of the dewatering plan and contingency plan; no further compensation will be made" (Section 2-09.3(5) page 98 last chapter). Section 7-17.3(1)(page 199), 1st paragraph, states that "dewatering may be required during construction of the sanitary sewer lines". It further states that "dewatering may consist of a combination of trench pumping, well points, and/or wells". Section 7-17.5 Payment (page 201) lists inclusion of dewatering costs for the "Drop Connection to Existing Sewer Manhole". The specifications state (Section 2-09.0(5) page 98, 3rd paragraph) that "the project geotechnical report shall be consulted to design proper dewatering wells". The contractor had the same information about groundwater and soil conditions as the City of Renton. The City was not made aware of excessive groundwater issues until the weekly meeting on August 19, 2004 when Eric Davison of KC-WTD explained the dewatering issues associated with the construction of the existing sewer interceptor. However, given the information in the geotechincal report and the proximity of the Cedar River, we believe that the contractor should have anticipated significant amounts of groundwater during the sewer work and bid these items accordingly. The City of Renton is willing to review costs that were in "addition" to what the contractor had originally anticipated when they bid the project. These additional costs should be in excess of what a prudent contractor would have bid given the available information at the time of bid. If these additional costs are found to be justified, the City will reimburse the Contractor for the extra costs. This would also include any additional costs associated with a new shoring/dewatering plan that may include grouting etc. as discussed at the September 28, 2004 meeting. Since the meeting, Dave Christensen has contacted several people at KC-WTD in regards to allowing an "inside drop connection". We are still waiting on a decision about the inside drop so I believe that the contractor should pursue getting costs for the possibility of using the grout injection method to solve the dewatering problem. >>> "Maling, Matt" <Matt. Maling@METROKC. GOV> 09/27/2004 9:44:39 AM >>> John, This is to confirm discussions on the additional work for installation of the City's sanitary sewer as a part of the Elliott Bridge Replacement project, Contract C43011 C. The Contractor has notified the County that there will be additional costs associated with dewatering for the installation of the sanitary sewer drop connection. The additional costs will be paid for under "Force Account", as outlined in the contract documents and the WSDOT Standard Specifications. It is the County's understanding that the City of Renton will reimburse the County in full for the additional contractor costs as well as the additional costs incurred by the County for staff and consultant review time pertaining to the additional dewatering necessary for the sanitary sewer drop connection installation. Johr�Hobson - Re: Elliott Bridge Contract C43011C City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Work — Page 2 Please respond with your concurrence to the above; or, if your understanding differs from the above, please outline those items that will need further discussion. We appreciate your help on this project. Sincerely, Matt Maling 206-296-8883 CC: Vanderburg, Brian Weekly Meetings - Elliott Date: o i9 D Name Company Phone Number �d(+til 013 di C—IT't ?-e)j 7Z 7 v 6 4 n d0, I<C D UT �`��c� �� . �c�� O� N 16 - 71 C� I Oho VtTG 360-1-0S--7�Gs - pigt3_ _ZZS- C.'�R�S Fes,- � � Zd6 -�Z3 • +365 TD 200-} .John Hobson - Elliott BndgeyDrop Connection , ,,._.,�... Page 1 From: John Hobson To: Vanderburg, Brian Date: 08/20/2004 4:07:55 PM Subject: Elliott Bridge Drop Connection Brian At the meeting concerning the drop connection King County indicated that it would be the City's responsibility to provide a shoring and dewatering plan for the drop connection. I believe that per special provision 2-09.3(5) (page 96) and 7-17.3(1)(page 199), it is the contractors responsibility to provide a dewatering plan. However, the contract plans do note that the contractor shall excavate on all sides of King County's manhole to prevent unbalanced loading (sheet 152). This will not be possible due to the location of the Cedar Hills Landfill scrubber vaults just south of the manhole. Since unloading the manhole though excavation alone is not possible, we are probably going to incure additional costs to shore this portion of the excavation. Although the County believes that the City should prepare a shoring plan, I believe it would be more prudent to have the contractor revise his plan or provide a new one and pay these additional costs. I'll be out of the office until Monday, August 31 so please contact Dave Christensen at 425-430-7212 dchristen(a�ci.renton.wa.us ) as soon as possible to work out a plan. Also the contractor plans to install the casing pipe under the ped tunnel on Tuesday and Wednesday (Aug. 24-25) so we'll need someone for the inspection on that. CC: Balanko, Lorne; Christensen, David Weekly Meetings - Elliott bate: .9 - Name Company Phone Number V\ L-�f� v 4 7). 7Z,2!a vc- 4iV\JA- 0 ra= Hydro CeISX Prime -Flex Hydro Gel SX is a moisture -curing, hydrophilic polyurethane resin designed to stop leaks in below -grade structures. It reacts with water to form either a watertight foam or impermeable gel depending on the water to Hydro Gel SX mix ratio (Range = 1:1 to 10:1). Prime -Flex Hydro Gel SX is used in below -grade structures to stop water leaks in cracks and seals. It is typically injected using a multi -ratio two part pumping system. In the presence of moisture, Hydro Gel SX remains flexible and retains its tenacious bond with concrete or masonry surfaces. Hydro Gel SX can also migrate to the outside of leaking cracks and joints forming a watertight curtain and helping to stabilize the surrounding soil. This makes Hydro Gel SX ideal for stopping leaks in manholes, sewer pipes, and utility vaults. Applications for Prime -Flex Hydro Gel SX include stopping leaks and sealing: • Failed Seals in Sanitary sewer pipe joints • Cracks and Joints in Manholes and vaults • Cracks and Joints in Foundations and Below -Grade Structures • Cracks, Joints, and Failed Seals in Water storage tanks • Cracks in Tunnels and Dams • No V.O.C.'s • Versatility — Foam or Gel • Low Viscosity to Penetrate Tight Cracks, Joints, and Soil • High Elongation to Allow Thermal or Structural Movement • Economical to Use — Mixes With Up to 15 Parts of Water • Resistant to Chemicals Normally Found in Sewer Effluent • Non Flammable • Adding Reinforcing Agents, Fillers, and Accelerators Can Enhance Strength, Flexibilitv, and Set Time PAMAG CI • 5 Gallon Pail ANSI I NSF STANDARD 61 - 2000 DRINKING WATER SYSTEM COMPONENTS — HEALTH EFFECTS vP5SIP U LISTED 3P88 'Up L PRIME FLEX 970 SX Maximum Surface Area to Volume Ratio is 1 cm'lliter i Prime -Flex Hydro Gel SX TYPICAL PHYSICAL PROPERTIES AT 730 F (23 C) Appearance Solids Content Viscosity Weight per Gallon Corrosiveness Influence of PH Elongation Viscosity @ 8:1 Color @ 8:1 ASTM D 1010 ASTM D 1638 @ 70°F ASTM D 1638 F`CURED MATEMAL 8 (ASTM D-1564) Gel Time @ 70°F @ 8:1 (Accelerators available for cold water) Shrinkage ( 1 week @ 70°F / 100% RH ) Toxicity Light Yellow 77% 440 - 540 CPS 9.0 Lbs. / Gallon Non -Corrosive pH Acceptable Between 5-9 100%-150% 20 cps Milky White 45-55 Sec. 0% Non -Toxic in Cured Form Physical properties will be greatly enhanced with the addition of Gel Reinforcing Agent to the mix water. Impurities in mix water may affect properties of cured material. Prime -Flex Hydro Gel SX Installation Method: Prime -Flex Hydro Gel SX was designed to be used for sealing sanitary sewer joints using TV/Grout Sealing equipment. It can also be injected to seal leaks and fill voids around manholes, vaults, foundations, and other below -grade structures. Hydro Gel works best when pumped using multi - ratio pump systems, but may be injected with single component pumps as well. A strong Gel is achieved in mix ratio's of 3:1 to 9:1 (water: Hydro Gel SX). Mix designs should be determined for each application with adjustments if necessary. Standard mix ratio for sewer grouting is 8 parts mix water to 1 part Hydro Gel SX(8:1). Prime Resins' Gel Reinforcing Agent may be added to the mix water to increase the tensile and bond strength of the Hydro Gel SX as well as reduce the shrinkage. A solution of 1 part Gel Reinforcing Agent to 7 parts water (1:7) may be used to strengthen the gel. The mix water should then be pumped at normal ratios with the Hydro Gel SX. The pH of the mix water must be between 5 and 9. The temperature of the mix water should be below 75' F. Using Gel Reinforcing Agent: For best results and ease of mixing, a 1:7 (Gel Reinforcing Agent:Water) mixture is recommended. Add 5 gallons of Gel Reinforcing Agent into 35 gallons of clean water. This mixture will make enough solution for one 5-gallon unit of Hydro Gel SX yielding a total of 45 gallons of cured gel. The pH of the water must be between 5 and 9. Do not leave the solution in pumping equipment, hoses or tanks for extended periods of time. Flush equipment and tanks with clean water. Using Accelerator: Add Hydro Gel Accelerator to the mix water, never to the Hydro Gel SX itself. The quantity of Accelerator will vary depending on water temperature and desired set time. Usually 175 to 200 ml per 40 gallons of water (or water/Gel Reinforcing Agent solution) will achieve the desired result. Start with 175 ml per 40 gallons and test the solution by mixing 8 ounces of the solution with one ounce of Hydro Gel SX. Increase the Accelerator as needed. The solution may be diluted if it is too fast. Prime -Flex Hydro Gel SX is moisture reactive and should be flushed from equipment and hoses immediately after use. Open pails should be used as quickly as possible to avoid premature gelation. Exposure to humidity will cause increase in viscosity and / or gelation of material. Application equipment, hoses, and other dispensing equipment should have low moisture permeability. Hoses should be lined with butyl or polyethylene. Nylon liners are not recommended. Thoroughly flush equipment using Acetone, M.E.K. or Prime Resins' Pump Flush. NOTE: When using in confined spaces (such as a manhole) use adequate forced air ventilation. See MSDS for further information. Vapor overexposure may cause respiratory irritation, central nervous system depression, and allergic reaction. Avoid contact with skin, eyes, and clothing. Wear rubber gloves and safety goggles when handling or dispensing materials. Wash contaminated clothing before reuse. See MSDS for further information. FIRST AID: SKIN CONTACT- Wipe off contaminated area and wash with soap and water. EYE CONTACT - Immediately flush eyes with large amounts of water for 10 minutes. Get medical attention. INHALATION- Move to fresh air if symptoms occur. If breathing is difficult, seek medical attention. INGESTION- Seek immediate medical attention. CLEAN UP: Use Prime Flush cleaner, M.E.K. or Acetone to clean equipment. Use soap and water to clean skin. STORAGE: Materials must be stored in dry conditions below 80°F(260). Optimal storage conditions are between 400 and 80°F(4° and 26°C). All Prime -Flex materials are manufactured solely by Prime Resins at our Conyers, Georgia plant. Prime Resins has complete control over the quality and availability of the products. If you have any questions or comments about the Prime -Flex products or application techniques you may contact Prime Resins directly at 800-321-7212 Monday through Friday 7:00 AM — 5:00 PM Eastern Time. FOR INDUSTRIAL USE ONLY PROTECT FROM MOISTURE KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN OBSERVE PRODUCT CAUTIONS WARRANTY: Prime Resins warrants its products to be free from manufacturing defects and that products meet the published characteristics when tested in accordance with ASTM and Prime Resins standards. No other warranties by Prime Resins are expressed or implied, including no warranty of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. Prime Resins will not be liable for damages of any sort resulting from any claimed breach of warranty. Prime Resins' liability under this warranty is limited to replacement of material or refund of sales price of the material. There are no warranties on any product that has exceeded the "shelf life" or "expiration date" printed on the package label. TDS-HGELSX-4/01 "Innovations in Infrastructure Repair Technology" 2381 Rockaway Ind. Blvd. / Conyers (Atlanta), GA 30012 Office (770) 388-0626 / Fax (770) 388-0936 www.PrimeResins.com John Hobson - Dewatering Costs a Page 1 From: "Brian Vanderburg" <BVanderburg@paceengrs.com> To: "Evan Seelye (E-mail)" <evan.seelye@metrokc.gov> Date: 09/22/2004 3:03:14 PM Subject: Dewatering Costs Evan: Would it be possible for you to give John and I a very rough idea what dewatering costs might amount to for the drop connection and vicinity? I realize that at this point you probably have only raw data consisting of man hours and time that the equipment has been on site but that type of data would be of interest if no cost data is available. Brian Vanderburg Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers Office: (206) 441-1855, Ext. 218 Cell: (206) 396-6229 CC: "Larry Jaramillo (E-mail)" <larry.jaramillo@metrokc.gov>, "Matt Maling (E-mail)" <Matt.Maling@METROKC.GOV>, "John Hobson (E-mail)" <Jhobson@ci.renton.wa.us> C� z G - �. 51 f, S r� p G -1 V, 1 (4, ti r 0 C' S �D 721UD LI Q C" 0 'goa s � w IP rn of ..� 1. X s m ell rb c �^ o J v LV 0 CD `�� ,. o co � r ,� � N '� •► Ct3 tv ►� o � V) CNI N a � \ S (D (D •J N D � x N N 00 N N 00 rnrn orn m v Ln Ln n m -ap o :3 6 (D 7 n rt N O la (D _Ln• O m M O UO) 3cn=10 O (D 4 = n r�r C O O O O X un O 3 f+ tt ham+ N 0 teO &A I CL 7Fj 0 ;gel IrD t- am iz V> CD ILA All Q) fv -n VJ CD cn z :z CD 5� 4.L VN CL CL U, cl) V') 751 o 01� =r 0 CD �A VQ 1 ri --, --Tl X4 CD TL DO i r �l � O d' c �1 0 Q cn r, N N N c m C r 0 CD CD Ll v O_ (D CD •J O O O 'MD O CY) (D l l N N O O (n� � 01 O� lD Ooh � 3 rn �l LC (D ./ cn to (D U) o w 3 o cD C O O rt b r-trD y C O—Z � c O H O � 0 rD f NJ 10 N n � M n � � cn� a H n � o N r-+ O � + O N n W O 00 00 O King County Department of Transportation Road Services Division Construction Management Unit 201 S Jackson Street Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Fm amd pll'or'Ry - constr cti � �p111111- c - Date: May 17, 2004 Serial Letter: 2R Project: Elliott Bridge 3166 Replacement o �� O Contract; Project No.(s): Contract C4301IC; Project 401288; Fed. Aid BR -� Contractor: Pacific Road & Bridge Co. Ph.: 360/403-7565 Post Office Box 3393 Arlington, WA 98223-3393 FAX: 360/403-0120 Date, Time Wednesday, May 26, 2004. o:n 12:30 P.m. and Locaon: King Street Center, Room 3DE; 201 S. Jackson Street,lxd ti� Fl. What Will Be Needed: If they have not already been submitted, the Contractor must bring: • A Project Schedule • A Schedule of Submissions of Shop Drawings and other Submittals • Completed Requests for Approval of Material Source (RAMS) • Completed Requests for Approval of Subcontractors and Agents (RASA) • Project -specific Plans and Programs (see enclosed checklist). • Completed escrow agreements. We recommend that the Contractor's representatives include its field supervisor. Representatives of the utilities affected by the work are expected to provide firm schedules for relocation. Useful Information: The meeting should last approximately one hour. Metered parking and commercial parking lots are available. A vicinity map of the project is enclosed. If you have questions or issues concerning the project that you wish to have raised at the conference, please call Resident Engineer Victor Daggs at (206)423-1063. Sincerel Jim Markus Project Engineer Bridges and Structures Unit Enclosure cc: Paulette Norman, P.E., County Road Engineer NJ Rick Brater, P.E., Manager, Engineering Services Section 59 Jim Eagan, P.E., Managing Engineer, Construction Management Unit 19 Pacific Road & Bridge Co. May 17, 2004 Page 2 Vicinity Map Distribution: VJ Ainslie, R. U Fulwider, J. 19 Hulin, L. U Morehead, T. VA Archuleta, W. U Graham, C. mi Jaramillo, L. Nies, J. w Arima, D. U Granlund; J. Johnson, P. vj Nolan, M U Barga, L. U Hanks, S. Qj Ledbetter, T. U Ogershok, R. Christensen, D. A Hartley, J. FA Lee, B. V_A Packard, A. Vj Corwin, A. �� Hartwell, D. U Maling, M. Penhale, B. vj Daggs, V. & jl Henderson, E. McCreery, J. Popelka, L. U Davison, E. U Hintz, B. U McGrath, M. U Posey, N. U Dovey, D. vi Hoffman, D. U Metro Const. Coord U Reynolds -Jones, L. U Drangsholt, T Hoffman, T. Fj Miller, E U Sleeth, W. Fisher, L. Howell, G rj Mitchell, M. (DDFs) U Strauch, R. Ii Thibodeau, R. 0 Tnnono V Wheeler, M. W Wong, M. tt Wyman, L. Zimmerman, G. 6% .v King County Department of Transportation Road Services Division Construction Management Unit 201 S Jackson Street Seattle, WA 98104-3856 RECEIVE® MAY 18 2004 CITY OF RENTON UTILITY SYSTEMS Elliott Bridge 3166 Replacement s Req? Plan Reference ® Accident Prevention WAC 296-155-110(2) Each employer shall develop a formal Accident -Prevention program, tailored to the needs of the particular plant or operation and to the type of hazard involved. The Department of La- bor & Industries may be contacted for assistance in developing appropriate programs. Sec- tion 296-155-110(3-9) of the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) contains written guidelines for preparing an accident prevention program. Full text of the relevant section of the WAC can be found at: http://www.leg.wa.gov/wacfndex.cfm Submit 6 copies ® Traffic Control Standard The Traffic Control plan or plans appearing in the contract plans show a method of Specifications handling traffic. All flaggers are to be shown on the traffic control plan except for Section 1-10.2(2) emergency situations. The Contractor shall designate and adopt in writing the specific traffic control plan or plans required for their method of performing the work. ® Shoring Submit 6 copies Standard The Contractor shall submit working drawings and calculations showing the proposed Specifications methods and construction details of structural shoring or cofferdams in accordance with Section 2-09.3(3)D Sections 6-01.9 and 6-02.3(16). The Contractor shall not begin construction of structural shoring or cofferdams, nor begin excavation operations, until approval of the structural shor- ing submittal has been given by the Project Engineer. ® Lead Health Protection/Compliance Submit 6 copies WAC 296-155-17611 Section 1-07.1(1) of the Contract Special Provisions requires that the Contractor prepare a Lead Health Protection/Compliance program (LHPP). Section 296-155-17611 of the WAC contains written guidelines for preparing a LHPP.. Full text of the relevant section of the WAC can be found at: Submit 6 copies htt ://www.l .wa. ov/wac/index.cfm Roadside Work Standard Before starting any work described in Sections 8-02 and 8-03, the Contractor shall Specifications submit a Roadside Work plan for approval by the Engineer. The roadside work plan Section 8-02.3(2) shall define the work necessary to provide all contract requirements, including plant area preparation, planting, plant replacement, irrigation, and weed control in narrative form. The roadside work plan shall include a progress schedule in accordance with Sec- tion 1-08.3, a weed control plan, and a plant establishment plan in accordance with Sec- tion 8-02.3(13). Submit 6 co ies Fall Protection Work WAC 296-155-24505 Section 296-155-24505 of the WAC contains written guidelines for preparing a Fall Protection Work plan. Full text of the relevant section of the WAC can be found at: http://www.leg.wa.gov/wacrindex.cfm Submit 6 copies ® Removal of Structures and Obstructions (Demolition) Special Provisions A Demolition plan is required and must be submitted in writing. The plan should be Section 2-02 prepared as described in Section 2-02 of the Contract's Special Provisions or as directed by the Engineer. Submit 6 copies Required Plans and Programs, cone Req? Plan Reference Falsework Plans and Calculations Standard The Contractor shall submit supplemental working drawings with calculations as required Specifications Sec - for the performance of the work. tions 6-01.9 and 6-02.3(17) ® Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures Submit 6 copies Standard Subsection 1-07.15(1) of the Standard Specifications requires, in part, that contractors Specifications prepare and submit a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures Plan (SPCC). Section 1-07.15 Washington State Department of Transportation's Hazardous Materials Program provides a number of documents and guidance materials to assist contractors in developing an SPCC Plan that satisfies the requirements of Section 1-07.15(1). Both an SPCC Plan Template and a Tools and Templates document are available in a PDF format that allows information to be entered into the form. The templates, as well as additional information and a sample SPCC, can be found at: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/environmenVeao/hazmaVhaz—docpubs.htm ® Erosion Control and Water Pollution Control Submit 4 copies Standard When a Temporary Erosion And Sediment Control (TESC) plan is included in the plans, the Specifications Section Contractor shall either adopt or modify the existing TESC plan. The Contractor shall pro- 8-01.3(1)A vide a schedule for TESC plan implementation and incorporate it into the Contractor's pro- gress schedule. The Contractor shall obtain the Engineer's approval on the TESC plan and schedule before any work begins. The TESC plan shall cover all areas the Contractor's work may affect inside and outside the limits of the project (including all Contracting Agency -provided sources, disposal sites, and haul roads, and all nearby land, streams, and other bodies of water). The Contractor shall allow at least five working days for the Engi- neer's review of any original or revised plan. Failure to approve all or part of any such plan shall not make the Contracting Agency liable to the Contractor for any work delays. Submit 6 copies ® CPM Schedule with updated progress schedules: Standard The Contractor shall submit a Preliminary Progress Schedule (first 60 working days) to the Specifications Section Engineer no later than five calendar days after the date the contract is executed. This pre- 1-08.3 liminary schedule shall show work to be performed during the first 60 working days of the contract. The Contractor shall submit five copies of the progress schedule (total working days) to the Engineer no later than 30 calendar days after the date the contract is executed. The Contractor shall submit Supplemental Progress Schedules when requested by the Pro- ject Engineer or as required by any provision of the contract. These supplemental schedules shall reflect any changes in the proposed order of the work, any construction delays, or other conditions that may affect the progress of the work. The Contractor shall provide the Pro- ject Engineer with the supplemental progress schedules within ten calendar days of receiv- ing written notice of the request. Submit 5 copies ® Disposal and Haul records Standard The Contractor shall provide the Engineer the location of all disposal sites to be used and Specifications Section also provide copies of the permits and approvals for such disposal sites before any waste is 2-03.3(7) hauled off the project. ® Training/Apprenticeship Utilization Submit 2 copies Special Provisions A Training/Apprenticeship Utilization plan is required and must be submitted in writing. The plan should be prepared as described in the Contract's Special Provisions or as directed by the Contract Compliance Specialist. Submit 2 copies m m z G) m O c G) U) D z O r m C) O z z m O z m 9 En O m v N n c U) T O z IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINIM IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHIMMM IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHIM IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHIM IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHIM IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHIM IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHIM IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHIM IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHIM IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHIM IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHIM w * 00 m m m� m T CDCD Om rn D m Z m O D v n O z -I D C) i 0 w 0 n KING CO'Oxing County Department of Transportation ROAD SERVICES ENGINEERING SERVICES SECTION 201 S JACKSON STREET SEATTLE, WA 98104,3856 MS KSC TR 0242 PORTATION n_[EcTcT[E[2 O(F cT[2kR6gM0UUZL 1g TO )ok�i N�/35 f C r T O>� /dfFNTd,,,S cyA-" lzl& � Tom / C.,2 A 7,p62S-,?-- WE ARE SENDING YOU.,�T Attached ❑ Under separate cover via_ ❑ Shop drawings ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order ❑ 1157-4,. L_ Joe NO. the following items: ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION G S THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑ For approval ❑ For your use ❑ As requested X For review and comment ❑ FOR BIDS DUE REMARKS ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Resubmit copies for approval ❑ Submit copies for distribution ❑ Return corrected prints 19 ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US f ���+4�L ✓d � Si'o�.,�.+� THY �� �T'� f4c ' ifs e COPY SIGNED: C/l/ If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once. Pacific Road & Bridge Co. P.O. Box 3393 Arlington, WA 98223 (360) 403-7565 TO: KING COUNTY WE ARE SENDING YOU: LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE: 8/26/2004 1OB NO.C43011 C ATTENTION: RE: Elliott Bridge #45 COPIES I DATE NO I DESCRIPTION 11 1 DROP CONNECTION EXCAVATION & DEWATERING PLAN THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑X For approval For your use [—]As requested For review & comment REMARKS: For a good laugh F—]Resumit Approved ❑ Rejected Approved as noted Other Returned for corrections ❑ Victor, As you are aware we have been working to get an approved plan together for the manhole drop connection for quite some time. Through the process we have developed several submittals which I have combined all into one in this document. I want to further clarify the current plan. #1 We will drill and install four dewatering wells prior to excavation and begin dewatering a couple days in advance of the work. #2 We will be excavating the connection per our original plan utilizing a manhole box, plus the added beam/steel plate drawing we provided last friday. #3 Dewatering plan contingent on an approved permit for discharging clean water into the existing manhole. #4 Changes will be made as conditions dictate. I apologize for the number of detail drawings you need to reference to put this all together, but time is of the essense and I wanted to get this approved as soon as possible so we can get started on the work prior to the fall rains. COPY TO: SIGNED: CHRIS GANGLE ems' � � � I I I i 69L US OAd 7 V N CA Z rA co J X 0 l J J o W 0 • JUL-15-2004 THU 12:11 PN UNITED RENTALS 425 424 0797 P. 02 anhole Shields Designed for manhole installations with optional cutouts for incoming utilities. Available in both single —wall and doubt= wall configurations to match the depth and capacities of your particular job requirement. MODEL l DIMENSIONS H 'Ft; L PIPE CLEARANCE i':n i WEIGHT Los SHIELD I CAPACITY i (PsG ALLOWABLE DEPTH ±F I by soil type ' - A 1 B 1C(fiO)1 C Angie-WaII MHS-0808-SW 1 8 1 8 1 45 1 3590 1200 149 29 124 ' 19 HS-0810- 4bbU 75T 32 1 e 5 1 MHS-0812-SW 1 8 1 12 45 5555 520 22 1 14 1 '1 10 Double -Wall MHS-0808-DW 1 8 8 45 4115 2000 50 147 36 29 MHS-0810-DW 1 8 1 10 45 5336 1750 MHS-0812-DW 1 8 1 12 45 6431 1200 1 49 ,29 124 119 Double -Wall W/Replaceable Gut -Outs* MHS-0808-RC 8 8 1 45 1 4295 1 2000 50 147 1 36 1 29 MHS 0810 RC i 8 0 45 1 5470 1 175C 50 141 32 25 MHS-0812-RC 8 '2 1 45 1 6565 1 120C j 49 129 24 19 PSI . %cunds Der squa'e ml. M^ S-eBCE-FC ca!-outs are 3c- y 26 .1HS JdiC-9' .'e 40' X 40 LtH;- i•'. °-4 ; cal-o n em ti_1 4_7 Fr:or !c use. !e_r :C.OSHAs c �F4. Par. 19�6 SL..par,, F; ar. K13nutaciurers labulatec a;a Ti JPIa;IPd ex;;lanal I:Des 31C F'•".0 CI aoplication -yDe A 3o 1 -.1 ID exc4eo :° ;1,I ;ar tout of oeplh: ryD- 6 SD' ID: exCeeo 45 Psi PN 1_cl v cect!l 'ne �i801 sod no; tc exceed 6C PS! ; er IOot of c ;h Type C Sod not to exceeo a; °5 ae"0D' el Cepl� Nn°e Aliowaole deolns are matec !? 3J feet iD; pac'i:.al axp ats C,)rac! S-yPPC StlDre'Y apD1ZJ;M; ex„ieC'.y pos:eJ allowab!e OPptns JUL-15-2004 THU 12:12 PM UNITED RENTALS 425 424 0797 P. 03 January 1, 1997 'FRENCH SHIELDS - I". TV' AND "MNS" MODELS _ TABLE TS-3 t "SW" MODELS SINGLE SIGN PLATE WALLS DEL CAPACITY SF. MAXIMUM DEPTH RATING FOR SOIL TYPES FEET VERTICAL PIPE CLEARA ES WE POUNDS A-25 B-35 B-45 C-60 C-80 SINGLE SKIN PL4 MALLS 46SW3 1,700 25 25 25 25 22 21 935 48SW3 910 25 20 16 13 21 1,147 410SW3 570 21 16 10 8 21 1,398 412SW3 510 19 14 12 9 8 21 1,758 66SW3 1,200 25 25 22 17 33 1,299_ 68SW3 820 25 24 19 15 12 33- 1,600 610SW3 510 15. 10 9 33 1,963 612SW3 430 17 13 11 9 8 33 2,412 86SW3 7 25 22 18 12 45 1,662 88SW3 560 23 18 15 12 0 45 2,052 810SW3 450 18 14 12 10 9 45 2,528 81 3 380 16 12 11 9 8 45 3,066 m TABLE TS-4 "MRS" MODELS MANHOLE SHIELDS MODEL CAPACITY P.S.F. DUVIENSIONS MAXINTUM DEPTH RATING FOR SOIL TYPES FEET WIIGHT POU?MS HEIGHT FEET LENGTH FEET A-25 B-35 B-45 C-60 C-80 SINGLE SKIN PLATE WALLS MHS-48-SW 1,270 4 8 35 35 28 22 18 2,834 MES-410-SW 800 4 10 30 22 17 14 11 4,233 NM-412-SW 560 4 12 20 15 12 10 8 5205 MHS-88-SW 1,200 8 8 35 33 28 22 18 3,590 MHS-1010-SW 750 8 10 30 21 18 15 12 4,648 MHS-1212-SW 520 8 12 21 1 14 13 11 10 5,541 DOUBLE SKIN PLATE WALLS MHS-4S 5,030 4 8 35 35 35 35 35 3,375 NM-410 2,940 4 10 35 35 35 35 35 4,966 M33S-412 2,030 4 12 35 35 35 34 26 6,093 M1iS-88 2,000 8 8 35 35 35 35 28 4,115 MHS-1010 1,750 8 10 35 35 35 32 25 5,336 MHS-1212' 1,200 8 12 35 33 28 22 18 6,431 DOUBLE SKINFLATE WALLS WITH REPLACEABLE CUT-OUTS MHS-89-RC 2,WO 8 8 35 35 35 35 28 4,241 MHS-1010-RC 1,750 8 10 35 35 35 32 25 5,469 MHS-1212-RC 1,200 8 12 1 35 33 28 22 18 6,564 COPYRIGHT. O.S.A., SPEED SHORE COAPO nDN. 1097 17-- • JUL-15-2004 THU 12:13 PM UNITED RENTALS 425 424 0797 P. 04 January 1. 1997 'FRENCH SHIELDS - "R", "Sri"' AND "OS" MODELS Notes to Table TS-4 1. Vertical pipe clearances for all Manhole Shields is 45 inches. 2_ Manhole Shields 8 feet long by 8 feet wide have end walls 2 feet long at each end., 3. Manhole ShTeTds 1 ( feet long by 10 feet wide have en wu1Ts 3 feet long at each end. 4. Manhole Shields 12 feet long by 10 feet wide have end walls 4 feet long. �o .. _ C. ROCHE 9 ~ O'Cr 4950 p°c� �GIS Ep4,,��wdo FS ., � S�ONAL. ►'` 97 COPYRIGHT, U.S.A.. SPEED SHORE CORPORA770N. 19W �' JUL-15-2004 THU 12:13 PM UNITED RENTALS 425 424 0797 P. 05 January I, 1997 TRENCH SHIELDS - "R", "SW" AND "MHS" MODELS UIV3 DOUBLE WALL SHIFT n MANHOLE SHIELD SINGLE WALL "Sw" SINGLE WALL SHIELD MANHOLE SHIELD DOUBLE WALL W/ CUT-OUTS COPYRIGHT. U.S.L. SPEED SUORE CORPOM110N, 1997 117 s` 0 J4- ' -ran-L- x 8 W x I" -r-H SiQEL P 1 i r W3oxIIL � SSA ,nff�oLE� /3o)c ��cp`,� %�E/47✓( }35� SFk.�/1 TDP of �CLAlkTIO ►J 4, / !/ Aug 20 04 09:44a EISI 2062841236 p.1 EISI Consulting Engineers 1900 West Emerson Place suite 200 Seattle, Washington 98119-1649 Tel. (206) 284-1181 Fax (206) 284-1236 E-mail; kerry@eisi-engrs.com FAX TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET TO: Bruce Vetch DATE: 8/20/04 OF: Pacific Road & Bridge FROM: Kerry L. Complita, P.E. Tninsmitting (3) Pages Incl. Cover NOTE: If all pa us of this cl(xuinent are not recei't-ed, please cont;%cr the SE\'DER. Retcrence: Elliott Bridge Comment": Bruce, JOB No: 04-070 - FA X: 360403-0120 PHONE: Here are our calculations for the temporary manhole support scheme you suggested. Our calculations indicate that it will work well. To insure adequate passive bearing resistance at each end of the W30 beam, the beam should be at least 4' below grade each end (4' to beam web centerline as shown on the sketch on page MH-I of our calculations. Regards, Kerry C \DOCUM NTS AND SMINGSRERRY7MY DOCUNlENTSTAX FORM.DOC Aug 20 04 09:44a EISI 2062841236 p.2 Elliott Bridge 43166 Replacement Structural Calculations for Temporary Support of 8' Diameter Manhole for Pacific Road and Bridge by EISI, Consulting Engineeers August 20, 2004 .C, � l33.54 J �C) � ��S�aNAL�G` EXPIRES Bug 20 04 09:44a EISI 2062841236 p.3 AfflAffl consulting engineers 1900 W Emerson Place #200 Seattle, WA 98119 Phone (206) 284-1181 • FAX (206) 284-1236 f Job No.04'070 Sheet Af -/ Of Client: ��e, �� Project: Subject:y�h-k/a .Su 8Y �G' Date: l�r/3aX //6 x 55 r , I z z 7�op o� �xcc�a z`iar FLAN T ¢' w.30 x Gv3o E � 7, /6 — — j- 6'7 �- - - -50 3 S01r1.1 spy > <30 Rug 20 04 09:44a EISI 2062841236 p.4 HIA51 consulting engineers 1900 W Emerson Place #200 Seattle, WA 98119 Phone (206) 284-1181 • FAX (206) 284-1236 Job, No.0-14-a76 Sheet /V#-z Of Client: a e Project://ioi7` flrld4e Subject: By. _G' Date: g�.20104' k s@y .� o = f L = (3 o = 3.3 S ,e - S / -- J� 3z9 0-14� .�O ry G'�7 G tic ,QQSS iy e, y'ESi;S �s r� c e ¢ �e XL A `7.5- Hug 20 04 09:44a EISI 206284123E p.5 Job No.0`f-670 Sheet �-3. Of EIA61 Client: z ¢ R consulting engineers Project: 7�' 9,, dge Ex 0 a 211 4q,7,1 (r 4 - I L--L I --- SE 1 7- 4 1 2f Z-A./z 7UIZ lfeP I- /I Z-/) L LY--rt 7 C_) L. r Al/* 9-E,2- 712 1*4 I R:j Hobson -Drop Connection Excavation/Dewate ring Plan and Support Calculations Page 1 _, From: "Brian Vanderburg" <BVanderburg@paceengrs.com> To: "Matt Maling (E-mail)" <Matt.Maling@METROKC.GOV>, "Larry Jaramillo (E-mail)" <larry.jaramillo@metrokc.gov> Date: 08/30/2004 3:29:29 PM Subject: Drop Connection Excavation/Dewatering Plan and Support Calculations Matt and Larry: We have reviewed the Contractor's submittal for excavation and dewatering. We have marked the submittal "Comments Attached." The four review comments that follow are a preliminary version of the official copy that will be sent to you tomorrow. The comments are made with the understanding that the provisions contained in our submittal review stamp are applicable. 1. The Contractor must comply with the provisions listed in Eric Davison's memo dated March 8, 2004. 2. As detailed in the accompanying memo from HWA Geosciences dated August 30, 2004, a monitoring well consisting of a standpipe piezometer must be installed near the proposed excavation. Only when the water table has been lowered through continuous dewatering to the required elevation of 25.5 may excavation commence. 3. It is possible that the existing manhole could begin to separate at the joints during excavation. It may be necessary to attach vertical straps to the exterior of the manhole as the excavation progresses. The Contractor's engineer should be contacted to establish the size of the straps and the means of attachment. 4. King County record drawings appear to show a 24 inch diameter stub -out 10 feet long heading north from the existing manhole. At least a portion of this stub, if present, will need to be removed in order to install the drop connection. Brian Vanderburg Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers Office: (206) 441-1855, Ext. 218 Cell: (206) 396-6229 <<Excavation Dewateringt Plan Submittal Memo 2.pdf>> CC: "Eric Davison (E-mail)" <eric.davison@metrokc.gov>, "Les Banas (E-mail)" <Ibanas@hwageo.com>, "Lorne Balanko (E-mail)" <Ibalanko@hwageo.com>, "John Hobson (E-mail)" <Jhobson@ci. renton.wa. us> John Hobson Excavation Dewatenngt Plan Submittal Memo 2 pdf Page 1 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM TO: Brian Vanderburg, P.E. /Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers, Inc. PREPARED BY: Les Banas and Lome Balanko, P.E. /HWA GeoSciences SUBJECT: DROPCONNECTION EXCAVATIONAND DEWATERING PLAN RE -SUBMITTAL Elliott Bridge No. 3166 Replacement - Sewer King County, WA PROJECT NO.: 96143-1500 DATE: August30, 2004 As requested in your transmittal dated August 27, 2004, we have reviewed the Contractor's re -submittal forthe drop connection structure excavation and dewatering plan. Our observations and comments in respect to geotechnical considerations relative to the proposed plan are as follows: 1. The re -submittal addresses our comments, of August 2 and August4, 2004, regarding the original submittal. 2. Based on our review of the geotechnical aspects of the submittal, the proposed excavation plan appears workable under the condition that sufficient soil movement in the excavation is allowed in order to mobilize both active and passive lateral earth pressures. However, it is our understanding that King County specifically requested excavation design allowing no structure/soil movement in the excavation in order to protectthe existing structures. If this requirement is to be in effect, then, the design must be revised based on the at -rest soil conditions for both the active and passive lateral earth pressures. This would likely result in a longer and/or higher capacity beam section used as lateral support of the existing sewer manhole. 3. The proposed dewatering system consists of four dewatering wells to be installed prior to excavation near the existing metro sanitary sewer manhole. Because of the relatively high water table and highly permeable soils anticipated in the excavation, the dewatering wells will likely pump large quantities of water from the excavation area. The effectiveness of the proposed dewatering system can only be assessed after implementation on site. To this end, we recommend a monitoring well consisting of a standpipe piezometer be installed near the proposed excavation as an indicator of the Joh+Hobson Excavation Dewaterin t Plan Submittal Memo 2. df Page 2 August30,2004 H WA Project No. 96143-1500 groundwater table in the vicinity of the excavation. Only when the water table has been lowered through continuous dewatering to the required depth belowthe excavation base should the excavation commence. 4. We have not estimated the anticipated pumping flow rates from the proposed dewatering wells to be disposed of in the sewer system. The Contractor should provide these estimates to be approved by King County as compatible with the capacity of the sewer system. We are of the opinion that the current re -submittal can be accepted only if the above -listed items are addressed by the Contractor or King County, as appropriate. We trust this review meets your requirements atthis time. Should you have any questions, or require clarification on any item, please do not hesitate to call our office. Excaa3ion&Dev3aingtREnsA nittd Mom 2 HWAGEOSCIENCESINC. John Hobson RE: ElliottBridge Drop Connection Plan Submittal Supplement Page 1 From: "Maling, Matt" <Matt.Maling@METROKC.GOV> To: 'Brian Vanderburg' <BVanderburg@paceengrs.com> Date: 08/04/2004 11:48-42 AM Subject: RE: Elliott Bridge Drop Connection Plan Submittal Supplement Thanks, Brian. I'll forward this to our contractor... -----Original Message ----- From: Brian Vanderburg [mailto:BVanderburg@paceengrs.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 11:42 AM To: Matt Maling (E-mail) Cc: Larry Jaramillo (E-mail); Les Banas (E-mail); Brian Sperry (E-mail); John Hobson (E-mail) Subject: FW: Elliott Bridge Drop Connection Plan Submittal Supplement Matt: Our geotechnical subconsultant has reviewed the dewatering plan. The dewatering plan needs to be revised and resubmitted as noted below. The fax that we received for this submittal was rotated 90 degrees and cut off at the bottom making it difficult to read. We request that future submittals be submitted in a more legible form. Brian V. -----Original Message ----- From: Les Banas [mailto:lbanas@hwageo.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 11:13 AM To: Brian Vanderburg Subject: Elliott Bridge Drop Connection Plan Submittal Supplement Brian, As requested, we have reviewed the Contractor's dewatering supplement to the Drop Connection Excavation Plan Submittal of July 23, 2004. A copy of the supplement was faxed to HWA on August 3, 2004. We offer the following comments on the dewatering supplement: the dewatering supplement does not show the locations of the proposed dewatering wells in plan, it does not specify the method of installation of the wells, the sketch does not include any depths or elevations. In view of the above, we consider the supplement incomplete and reiterate the recommendation from our August 2, 2004, Technical Memorandum that a combined excavation and dewatering plan be submitted. The re -submittal should address the above comments as well as the observations and comments included in the August 2, 2004, Technical Memorandum. Please contact us if you have any questions or comments. Regards, Les Banas (i) King County Road Services Division Department of Transportation KSC-TR-0231 201 South Jackson Street Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Mike Benoit Wastewater Utility Public Works Department City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RECEIVED CITY OF RENTON iJ ITY SYSTEMS August 16, 2004 RE: Elliott Bridge 3166 Replacement, Project 401288'— Renton Sevier Extension Dear Mr. Benoit: Concerns over the City of Renton's proposed sanitary sewer drop connection arose during the most recent construction progress meetings with the Contractor, Pacific Road and Bridge (PRB), on this project. The Contractor submitted a plan for excavating and dewatering around the existing manhole where the connection would be installed. King County Road Services Division and Wastewater Treatment Division staff as well as the City of Renton's Engineer on Record, Brian Vanderburg of Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers (PACE), reviewed the Contractor's plan. Due to various issues and concerns the Contractor's plan was neither accepted by King County Wastewater Treatment Division nor by PACE. Because the Contractor's plan for installation of the drop connection was not accepted, construction work on the connection is postponed until an acceptable installation method is developed. Other work on the sanitary sewer line as well as bridge and roadway work will continue. In the interim we will be setting up a meeting with you, Brian Vanderburg of PACE, Wastewater Treatment Division's Eric Davison, our Contractor (PRB), and staff from King County Road Services in order to discuss and help the Contractor develop a feasible plan for the sanitary sewer drop connection. Please contact me at (206) 205-5230 if you have any questions. 1 appreciate your help on this matter. Sincer Larry Jaramillo, P.E. Engineer IV Bridge and Structural Design Unit LJ:MM:mp cc: Brian Vanderburg, Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers Eric Davison, Local Public Agency Administrator, Wastewater Treatment Division , ohn nobson - FW IJro Connec ion Excavation Plan Submittal Page 1 From: "Brian Vanderburg" <BVanderburg@paceengrs.com> To: "John Hobson (E-mail)" <Jhobson@ci.renton.wa.us> Date: 08/02/2004 11:0210 AM Subject: FW: Drop Connection Excavation Plan Submittal John: Here is the latest on the drop connection. King County wants to be sure that their MH is well protected. Brian > -----Original Message----- • From: Brian Vanderburg > Sent: Monday, August 02, 2004 10:50 AM > To: Larry Jaramillo (E-mail) > Cc: Matt Maling (E-mail); Brian Sperry (E-mail); Lorne Balanko (E-mail); Les Banas (E-mail); Eric Davison (E-mail) > Subject: Drop Connection Excavation Plan Submittal > Larry: > We (PACE & HWA GeoSciences) plan to mark the Contractor's submittal "revise and resubmit." We recommend that the Contractor be requested to resubmit a combined dewatering and excavation plan. have attached a copy of HWA's memo. > We understand that the Contractor hopes to start this work soon. We will review the resubmittal as rapidly as possible when we receive it. Please have the resubmittal sent to our office by courier or contact us and we will send a courier down to your office to get it. > Brian Vanderburg > Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers > Office: (206) 441-1855, Ext. 218 > Cell: (206) 396-6229 > > <<Excavation Plan submittal Memo 1.doc>> �J�ohn�'iobson -Excavation Plan submittal Memo 1 doc _ _ � Pale 1 ;; TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM TO: Brian Vanderburg, P.E. /Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers, Inc. PREPARED BY: Lorne Balanko, P.E. /HWA GeoSciences SUBJECT: Drop Connection Excavation Plan Submittal Elliott Bridge No. 3166 Replacement - Sewer King County, WA PROJECT NO.: 96143-1400 DATE: August 2, 2004 As requested in your transmittal dated July 27, 2004, we have reviewed the contractor submittal attached thereto in respect to geotechnical considerations relative to the proposed excavation plan. Our observations and comments are as follows: We understand that the contractor proposes to excavate near the existing King County Metro manhole SSMH #R10-52 to effect construction of a sewer drop connection tie-in, which will be cored into the side of the manhole at depths of between 12 and 17 feet below existing grade level. This manhole is located on the alignment of 154' Place SE, immediately to north of the Renton Maple Valley Highway (SRI69). Cedar Hills Scrubber vaults exist immediately to the south of the manhole at a distance of some 3.5 feet. The submittal sketch plans indicate that the proposed excavation depth is some 17.5 feet, immediately adjacent to the manhole, with the upper 9.5 feet of the excavation proposed to be sloped back at 1.75H:IV. The lower portion of the excavation will be vertically sided and supported by an 8-foot square trenchbox or manhole shield. The contractor has indicated that he proposes to use Speed Shore Manhole Shield Model MHS 88SW, for which he has provided specifications. We have not, however, reviewed the specifications provided with respect to expected soil loading conditions. 3. We have examined geotechnical information for this location and note that borehole BH-1 lies in relatively close proximity (about 10 to 15 feet south) of the manhole location. Although it is recognized that the manhole structure is likely surrounded by backfill materials of unknown extent and origin (but likely granular), the borehole observations suggest that cobbly gravel, comprising recent alluvium deposition, exists -John ~Hobson - Excavation Plan submittal Memo 1.doc Pale 2 August 2, 2004 HWA Project No. 96143-1400 at this location at a depth of the order of 10 feet (3 m). At the boring location, the alluvium was observed to grade to a gravelly sand from about 14 feet to 18 feet, and is in turn underlain by gravel with silt sand and cobbles to the depth of the boring (27.5 feet). At the time of the boring, the ground water level was observed at about 13.5 feet (4.11 m) depth. The recent alluvium deposit appears to be in direct hydraulic connection with the nearby Cedar River channel. 4. Essential to the success of any excavation plan at this location is the effectiveness of a dewatering program to depress the water below the level of the excavation sufficiently to ensure that excavation is performed in the dry. Any amount of hydrostatic head above the level of the excavation would be expected to result in running sands (and likely backfill materials), that would enter through openings in the shield. Thus, a dewatering plan should be tendered in advance or concurrent with the excavation plan. In the absence of an approved adequate dewatering plan, we would have to say that the proposed excavation plan is unworkable. 5. The proposed excavation plan also results in an imbalance of earth pressures on the manhole and adjoining vault structures. Whereas we have not computed the imbalance loading, the net result is an over -turning moment on the existing vaults and manhole structures, which might cause some tilting. The level of such tilting is impossible to predict, but might contribute to some distress in piping tying into these structures. Unless sufficient bracing can be achieved with the shield, we recommend that an alternate approach be considered that would eliminate or reduce lateral earth pressure imbalances. 6. We suggest that the contractor might give consideration to advancement of a large diameter casing from the surface, from which he could undertake the tie-in. The casing could be progressively advanced by removal of soil from the interior, after the site is properly dewatered. This would prevent the loss of ground and any imbalance in soil pressures on the existing structures. Backfilling requirements would also be substantially reduced. In consideration of the foregoing, we recommend that the submitted plan be rejected and the contractor be requested to resubmit a combined dewatering and excavation plan for this facet of the project work. We trust that you will find the above comments straightforward, but if you have any questions, or require clarification on any item, please do not hesitate to call our office. Excavation Plan submittal Memo Ldoc 2 HWA GeoSciences Inc. ,John Hobson - RE: Elliott Bnd e_Dro Connection Plan Submittal Page 1 From: "Jaramillo, Larry" <Larry.Jaramillo@METROKC.GOV> To: 'Brian Vanderburg' <BVanderburg@paceengrs.com> Date: 07/27/2004 2:47:22 PM Subject: RE: Elliott Bridge Drop Connection Plan Submittal Brian, I will fax you a copy of the March 8, 2004 approval letter from Eric Davison to City of Renton, Dave Christensen. I have also reiterated to construction staff/contractor that any proposed dewatering plan for this area needs to be submitted to Eric five days prior to construction. -----Original Message ----- From: Brian Vanderburg [mailto:BVanderburg@paceengrs.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 1:11 PM To: Larry Jaramillo (E-mail) Cc: Brian Sperry (E-mail); John Hobson (E-mail); Les Banas (E-mail); Eric Davison (E-mail) Subject: Elliott Bridge Drop Connection Plan Submittal Hi Larry: I received a copy of the excavation plan submittal a few minutes ago. I'm planning to fax Eric Davison a copy of the section view portion of the submittal. I don't think that I received a copy of Eric's comments on the sewer drawings so I can't do a complete review without some input from him. Eric says that he is very interested in the dewatering plan also. Brian Vanderburg Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers Office: (206) 441-1855, Ext. 218 Cell: (206) 396-6229 CC: "Brian Sperry (E-mail)" <BrianS@abkj.com>, "John Hobson (E-mail)" <Jhobson@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Les Banas (E-mail)" <Ibanas@hwageo.com>, "Davison, Eric" <Eric.Davison@METROKC.GOV>, "Seelye, Evan" <Evan.Seelye@METROKC.GOV>, "Daggs, Victor" <Victor.Daggs@METROKC.GOV>, "Maling, Matt" <Matt. Maling@METROKC. GOV> John Hobson RFI No. 15, SS Casing Pipe Under Ped. Tunnel v Page 1 From: "Brian Vanderburg" <BVanderburg@paceengrs.com> To: "Matt Maling (E-mail)" <Matt.Mali ng@METROKC. GOV> Date: 07/27/2004 3:38:03 PM Subject: RFI No. 15, SS Casing Pipe Under Ped. Tunnel Matt: Our response to this RFI is as follows: The contractor may substitute PVC Pipe meeting the requirements of AWWA C905, SDR 25 for the specified casing pipe. The substitutes proposed by the Contractor are not acceptable. Per the specifications, we anticipate that the Contractor will provide submittal information for the casing insulators to be used inside the casing pipe well in advance of carrier pipe installation. We also request that submittal information be provided for the casing end seals. Brian Vanderburg Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers Office: (206) 441-1855, Ext. 218 Cell: (206) 396-6229 CC: "John Hobson (E-mail)" <Jhobson@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Brian Sperry (E-mail)" <BrianS@abkj.com> John Hobson - RE: Elliott Bridge Pa a 11 From: "Brian Vanderburg" <BVanderburg@paceengrs.com> To: "Brian Sperry" <BrianS@abkj.com>, "Luke Su" <LukeS@abkj.com> Date: 07/16/2004 10:12:48 AM Subject: RE: Elliott Bridge Brian: If 1/4 inch thick pipe wall is used, it should be possible to double the spacing of the supports. They could be placed every 5.1 meters. If the wall thickness is 3.42mm, I would prefer to stick with the support spacing shown on the plans. BV -----Original Message ----- From: Brian Sperry [mailto:BrianS@abkj.com] Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 9:18 AM To: Luke Su Cc: Brian Vanderburg Subject: FW: Elliott Bridge Hi Luke Can you investigate question #2 below and get back to me? Thanks Brian Sperry, P.E. Andersen Bjornstad Kane Jacobs, Inc. 800 Fifth Ave., Suite 3800, Seattle, WA 98104 Tel: (206)340-2255 Fax: (206)340-2266 brians@abkj.com Please visit our website: www.abkj.com -----Original Message ----- From: Maling, Matt[mailto:Matt. Maling@METROKC.GOV] Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 7:55 AM To: Brian Sperry Cc: Jaramillo, Larry; Daggs, Victor; Seelye, Evan; Lee, Robert-K Subject: Elliott Bridge Brian, A couple of other questions came up at yesterday's meeting: 1. Would it be possible to start updating the plan sheets that have seen changes due to RFI's (such as elevation changes) and cloud/bubble those changes? 2. The steel casing wall thickness for the sewer line across the bridge will be upsized from 2.66mm to either 3.42mm or 1/4" (p. 196 in specs; thinner -walled pipe not available). Will that affect the hanger/bracing spacing or have any other bridge structural effects? Thanks, Matt .,,John Hobson - RE ElliottBrid a Coordination Pa e 1 From: "Brian Vanderburg" <BVanderburg@paceengrs.com> To: "Goss,Kevin" <krGoss@rothhill.com> Date: 06/04/2004 1:04:44 PM Subject: RE: Elliott Bridge Coordination Kevin: Thanks for including us in your message. We too expect to be included in the submittal process. As far as flushing to the sewer, it is much too early to know if this might be possible or not. The existing METRO MH might be available for flushing but a permit is required and the MH is quite distant from the watermain work area. Brian -----Original Message ----- From: Goss,Kevin [mailto:krGoss@rothhill.com] Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 5:23 PM To: 'victor.daggs@metrokc.gov'; 'ed.henderson@metrokc.gov'; 'dave.hoffman@metrokc.gov'; John Hobson Qhobson@ci.renton.wa.us); Brian Vanderburg Cc: Tom Hoffman (kcwd90.tomh@comcast.net); 'Les Piele (kcwd90.lesp@comcast.net)'; Van Earwage, Phillip; Delmar, Jeremy; Fulton, Laurie; Goss,Kevin Subject: Elliott Bridge Coordination All, I'm sending this email to open up lines of communication for King County Water District No. 90's part of the Elliott Bridge project. I've included Brian Vanderberg of PACE and John Hobson of Renton because some of these issues affect them as well. Victor Daggs, I will call you to schedule a meeting with District staff and our construction observer; please let me know when you may be in the area. Do you have a schedule for the utilities coordination meeting? There was discussion of an environmental meeting, which I took to be about the permits for the project. The only permit the District secured was the King County Fire Marshal permit, which isn't really an environmental permit. I didn't think we or the District would need to attend the environmental meeting. Tom, Les, Victor, what do you think? If we don't go, it might be worth noting that there are restrictions on watermain flushing activities. The contractor might be able to flush to the sewer, if it is in by then and Renton says it is okay. We can go through that before they start the watermain work. The District in interested to know where the contractor may set up shop and what they need for water supply. Again, they can't get water from any hydrants without a backflow preventer and meter. Please let me know if you have other questions or comments. Dave Hoffman, I understand you will be processing progress pay estimates. We'd like to chat with you and Victor about the process of establishing quantities for the water work. Are you going to want or need anything in writing from us prior to your preparation of the pay estimates? Is the contractor signing them each month? Ed Henderson, I understand you will be processing material submittals. If you only get four copies from the contractor, it might be best if you fax, scan/email, or courier a copy to us and we can give you a faxed or emailed response. I can't imagine that mail to and from our office would be fast enough to turn these around very quickly. Does this sound okay with you? John Hobson RE Elliott Bridge Coordination Page� Please let me know if any of you have any questions or comments. I will try to answer them or redirect them as appropriate. Thanks, Kevin Roth Hill Engineering Partners, LLC Kevin Goss 2600 116th Avenue N.E., Suite 100 Bellevue, WA 98004 Tel. 425.869.9448 / 206.682.7426 Fax 425.869.1190 Public Works Solutions CC: "victor.daggs@metrokc.gov" <'victor.daggs@metro kc.gov'>, "John Hobson (E-mail)" <J hobson@ci. renton.wa. us> November 2003 Construction Plan Proposed Construction Dates - Utility reroutes to begin the end of 2003 and building demolition to begin early 2004. Hours and Days of Operation - The work will be accomplished during day light hours, typically starting at 6:30 AM. Proposed hauling/transportation routes — Contractors will apply for their own hauling permits related to this project. Storm Water — Boeing has developed a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the contractor to follow. During construction storm water will receive treatment through the use of silt fencing, catch basin filter inserts, straw bales, and other standards of practice methods noted in the SWPPP. Snow, Ice, Dirt and Mud Removal. - Contractor shall remove snow and ice to the extent necessary to perform the Work. The use of calcium chloride or other chemicals as aids or means to remove snow or ice will not be permitted. Contractor shall assure that vehicles are constructed, loaded, maintained and covered as necessary to prevent the deposition of dirt, mud or other debris on public roadways. Dirt, mud, and debris removal shall be undertaken on a continual basis. Dirt, mud, or debris dropped onto streets by vehicles involved in the Work shall be immediately removed. Dust Control. - Throughout the entire construction period, Contractor shall take all necessary steps to effectively dust -control the working area, unpaved roads used in the operations, and other portions of the Site. Such dust control shall not include application of calcium chloride or any other chemicals but shall be accomplished with intermittent watering and sprinkling at such frequency as will satisfactorily settle the dust. Contractor shall also comply with any requirements imposed by law to prevent fugitive dust emissions. Asbestos Abatement — A licensed asbestos abatement contractor will remove known all asbestos containing materials prior to starting demolition. Working Hours — The work will be accomplished during day light hours, typically starting at 6:30 AM. Protection of People and Property — The area of the work will be enclosed by a fence and will only be accessible to authorized personnel who will be governed by the contractor's job specific safety plan.