Town of Moraga Canyon Road Bridge Reopening Project October 12, - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

town of moraga
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Town of Moraga Canyon Road Bridge Reopening Project October 12, - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Town of Moraga Canyon Road Bridge Reopening Project October 12, 2017 Town Council Presentation Edric Kwan, P .E. Public Works Director/Town Engineer Presentation Agenda Background (Edric) Construction Completed to Date (Shawn)


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Town of Moraga

Canyon Road Bridge Reopening Project October 12, 2017 Town Council Presentation Edric Kwan, P .E. Public Works Director/Town Engineer

slide-2
SLIDE 2

10/12/17

Background (Edric) Construction Completed to Date (Shawn) Remaining Construction (Shawn) Cost Escalations (Lance) Project Budget (Edric) Funding and Recommendation (Edric)

Presentation Agenda

2

slide-3
SLIDE 3

10/12/17 3

Vicinity Map and Affected Communities

Canyon Road Bridge Background

slide-4
SLIDE 4

10/12/17 4

Location Map and Affected Communities

Canyon Road Bridge Background

Adjacent Hill and Residents Joaquin Moraga Intermediate School Pear Orchard Adjacent Residents Canyon Road Bridge Lafayette-Moraga Regional Trail/Fire Trail Moraga Creek and Larch Creek Canyon Road

slide-5
SLIDE 5

10/12/17

Preliminary Landslide Interpretation

Landslide and Existing Bridge Condition

5

slide-6
SLIDE 6

10/12/17

TWISTED SUPPORT BEAMS

SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SOUTH ABUTMENT 4/23/2017

Landslide and Existing Bridge Condition

6

slide-7
SLIDE 7

10/12/17

April 17, 2017 Bridge damage observed April 18, 2017 Bridge closed to the public. Emergency

Service Providers notified

April 24, 2017 Town staff host informational community

meeting at Canyon school

April 27, 2017 Town Council declares local emergency

and allocates initial $500,000 budget

April 25, 2017 Town submits request for FEMA Public

Assistance

June 7, 2017 FEMA denies Public Assistance request

Background

slide-8
SLIDE 8

10/12/17

June 14, 2017 Town Council approves installation of

temporary bridge plan and revises project budget to $2,060,000

May 9, 2017 Town submits Damage Assessment Form

(DAF) requesting FHWA Emergency Relief funds to reopen bridge to essential traffic

July 7, 2017 FHWA approves DAF setting budget at

$2,060,150

September 15, 2017 FHWA approves revised DAF

increasing budget to $2,339,799

Background

slide-9
SLIDE 9

10/12/17

Begin Engineering, ROW and Environmental

Clearances

Complete Phases on Critical Path Track

Relocate Utilities Demolition and Removal Bridge Lease Bridge Construct Bridge Abutments, Pilings,

Roadway Transitions, Install Temporary Bridge and Traffic Control System

Temporary Bridge Plan

slide-10
SLIDE 10

10/12/17

AT&T Begun June 14, 2017 Sprint Utility Relocations

slide-11
SLIDE 11

10/12/17

Sprint – Fiber Conduits

slide-12
SLIDE 12

10/12/17

Directional Boring

Sprint

slide-13
SLIDE 13

10/12/17

Sprint – New Manholes for Fiber lines

slide-14
SLIDE 14

10/12/17

W.C. Maloney - Contractor 148,000 Base Bid Removal Cost $7,900 Change Orders Started September 18, 2017 Completed October 3, 2017

Demolition and Bridge Removal

slide-15
SLIDE 15

10/12/17

Moraga Creek Protection Measures

slide-16
SLIDE 16

10/12/17

Saw Cutting Bridge Deck

1 6

slide-17
SLIDE 17

10/12/17

Removing Bridge Deck

slide-18
SLIDE 18

10/12/17

Large Crane Operation

slide-19
SLIDE 19

10/12/17

There were four bidders on the project and lowest

bidder at $1,787,375 was over the Engineer’s Estimate (EE) by 39% or $503,275.

$1,787,375 Low Bidder - Myers & Sons Construction The Low bid through Bid No. 3 were fairly closely

spaced at 39%, 44% and 56% over EE, respectively.

Caltrans will approve the higher construction costs as

reimbursable ($445,549 FHWA and $57,725 Town).

Bridge Construction

slide-20
SLIDE 20

10/12/17

$228,840.32 Mabey, Inc. (Low Bidder) $357,833.00 Acrow Bridge

Bridge Lease

slide-21
SLIDE 21

10/12/17

There is currently a great deal of work being performed by local

contractors and subcontractors due to many spring 2017 storm- related damages. This has led to higher bids as contractors had more options on projects to bid on. For example, Quincy Engineers, the project’s design team, is currently working on, or has recently completed, storm damage projects for Contra Costa, Monterey, Lake and Santa Cruz Counties. Additionally, Humboldt and Del Norte Counties will be bidding out construction contracts

  • soon. Exact increase in costs cannot be determined since the

increase would be spread among different bid items.

Emergency Construction in California

slide-22
SLIDE 22

10/12/17

Due to utility relocation delays (caused by encountering granite

rock during directional bore operation), an extremely short time frame for contractors to prepare bids was implemented to assist with offsetting the delay. This caused higher bids, especially for subcontractor work, as the prime contractor would not have time to bid shop. This is why the cost of erecting the temporary prefabricated steel bridge was much higher than anticipated despite the design engineer’s feedback from bridge manufacturers and comparable other temporary bridge installations (increased by $240,000). Examples of other bridges that the design team reviewed included Harbin Springs Road Bridge, Lake County; Foard Road, Lake County; Branch Mills Road, San Luis Obispo County; and 11th Street Bridge, City of Tracy.

Shortened Bidding Period

slide-23
SLIDE 23

10/12/17

As a federalized project, DBE requirement for the work affected

  • costs. An example is the reinforcing steel, where the prime

contractor used DBE suppliers and the costs were twice as expensive as originally estimated. Another example is a current large demand for structural concrete causing orders being placed in advance by many other contractors (increasing costs by $35,750). This may also be a reason why the cast-in-drilled-hole (CIDH) piles cost was higher than anticipated (increased by $82,000). For reinforced steel, the costs were much higher than normal (increased by $129,000).

Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE)

slide-24
SLIDE 24

10/12/17

Originally, the demolition of the existing bridge was part of site

preparation contract; however, to assist with offsetting the utility relocation delay, demolition was separated to start work earlier than originally scheduled. Having a separate contract for the demolition costs increased the original estimate due to having two mobilizations and two clean ups (increased by $90,000).

Separating Demolition from Site Preparation for Temporary Bridge

slide-25
SLIDE 25

10/12/17

To assist with offsetting the utility relocation delay, the demolition

and site preparation contract increased working hours and included weekend work. Increased work crews and overtime increase construction costs. Exact increase in costs cannot be determined since the increase would be spread among different bid items.

Increased Construction Hours and Expanded Weekend Work

slide-26
SLIDE 26

10/12/17

Staff time was not previously accounted for the

project budget.

Higher than anticipated staff time used for public

information requests and background for lawsuits.

Staff time as related to the construction project is

reimbursable.

Legal services are not reimbursable.

Staff Time

slide-27
SLIDE 27

10/12/17

Proposed Project Budget

Project Expenditure Plan Estimate to Date Projected Costs FHWA (88.53%) Town (11.47%) Temporary Bridge Design (Quincy Engineers and Hultgren-Tillis – Bridge Design & Geotechnical) $ 359,700 $ 359,700 $ 318,442 $ 41,258 Temporary Bridge Design Support (NV5 – Environmental Clearances, ROW & Utilities Coordination) $ 130,000 $ 170,367 $ 150,826 $ 19,541 Construction Management/Inspection $ 137,000 $ 92,065 $ 81,505 $ 10,560 Temporary Bridge Construction $ 1,250,000 $ 2,210,760 $ 1,957,186 $ 253,574 Construction Contingency $ 125,000 $ 221,076 $ 195,719 $ 25,357 Town Staff Time $ 58,300 $ 240,420 TBD TBD Total Project Estimated Cost Estimate $ 2,060,000 $ 3,294,388 $ 2,703,678 $ 350,290

slide-28
SLIDE 28

10/12/17

Project Funding Sources Budget Fund 100: Palos Colorados (Budgeted)1 $ 500,000 Fund 100: Palos Colorados (Budgeted)2 $ 500,000 Fund 101: General Fund Reserves (Budgeted) 2 $ 1,060,000 Approved Budget $ 2,060,000 Fund 101: General Fund Reserves (Requested) $ 1,000,000 Fund 210: Measure J (Requested) $ 234,388 Requested Budget $ 1,234,388 Total Funding $ 3,294,388

Proposed Project Funding Sources

slide-29
SLIDE 29

10/12/17

Project Funding and Next Steps

Requested Actions by Town Council

Adopt a Town Resolution to 1) Appropriate an additional $234,388 from Measure J (Fund 210) and $1,000,000 from General Fund Reserve (Fund 101) towards the Project for a total budget of $3,294,388.

29

slide-30
SLIDE 30

10/12/17

Canyon Road Bridge Web Page:

http://www.moraga.ca.us/Canyon-Bridge-Closure-2017

NIXLE: https://local.nixle.com/register/ NextDoor: https://nextdoor.com  About Town: http://www.moraga.ca.us/dept/townclerk/abouttown Contact Moraga Public Works Department staff:

Phone (925) 888-7026 or at publicworks@moraga.ca.us

Where to find Project information