Planning Committee STAFF REPORT May 6, 2015 Page 2 of 4 Background In November 2011, the City of Walnut Creek applied for Measure J Program 12 TLC fun

Transcription

1 Planning Committee STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: May 6, 2015 Subject Summary of Issues Recommendations Approval of Resolution G for Construction of Northwest Walnut Creek Pedestrian and Bicycle Access (Project ) The City of Walnut Creek is requesting an appropriation of $915,000 for construction of the Northwest Walnut Creek Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Project (Project ). The project will close pedestrian sidewalk gaps on San Juan Avenue and improve access to Buena Vista Elementary School, close pedestrian sidewalk gaps and install bicycle facilities to connect neighborhoods in Northwest Walnut Creek to transit and the downtown areas, and repave Buena Vista Avenue and also replace the roadway striping and signage to incorporate bicycle facilities. A peer review committee reviewed the design of the project at the 65% and 90% design stages and, after review of the City s proposed revisions, recommended approval of the design of the project. Approve Resolution G Financial Implications The Measure J TLC and PBTF Programming Plan programed $1,000,000 for the project. Options Attachments 1. Modify conditions outlined Resolution G A. Resolution G B. Comments and responses to 65% design peer review C. Comments and responses to 90% design peer review D. Letter from Angela Villar, Contra Costa County, dated April 6, 2015 E. Memorandum from the City of Walnut Creek, dated March 24, 2015 F. Funding Appropriation Request from the City of Walnut Creek dated April 16, 2015 G. Project Fact Sheet Changes from Committee S:\05-PC Packets\2015\05\08 Brdltr NW Walnut Creek Proj docx 8-1

2 Planning Committee STAFF REPORT May 6, 2015 Page 2 of 4 Background In November 2011, the City of Walnut Creek applied for Measure J Program 12 TLC funding for the Northwest Walnut Creek Pedestrian and Bicycle Access project. In its application, the City proposed adding approximately 2 miles of bicycle-pedestrian improvements in Northwest Walnut Creek on the west side of I-680. These improvements include bicycle sharrows, signage, sidewalk improvements, installation of curb ramps, traffic calming through means of correcting non-conforming perpendicular spaces in the frontage of a school, pedestrian signal and sidewalk installations. The project originally had two components: 1. A 1.5-mile long set of bicycle and pedestrian improvements along Buena Vista Avenue, Parkside Drive and Hillside Avenue that would provide safer and more comfortable connections to the Walnut Creek BART Station; and 2. Pedestrian improvements to Buena Vista Elementary along Alvarado and San Juan Avenues. In May 2012, following the earlier recommendations of TRANSPAC, the Authority allocated $1 million in Measure J TLC funds in the Program 12 and 13 Programming Plan. About two years later on April 22, 2014 the Authority approved Resolution G which appropriated $85,000 for the design of the project. Through the design process, the City divided the project into three components: 1. The San Juan Avenue Street Improvement project will close pedestrian sidewalk gaps on San Juan Avenue and improve access to Buena Vista Elementary School; 2. The Hillside Avenue Street Improvement project will close pedestrian sidewalk gaps and install bicycle facilities to connect neighborhoods in Northwest Walnut Creek to transit and the downtown areas; and 3. The Buena Vista Avenue Rehabilitation project will repave Buena Vista Avenue and also replace the roadway striping and signage to incorporate bicycle facilities. All three were part of the original application, but would be implemented through separate contracts. The San Juan Avenue and Buena Vista Avenue projects would be done during the S:\05-PC Packets\2015\05\08 Brdltr NW Walnut Creek Proj docx 8-2

3 Planning Committee STAFF REPORT May 6, 2015 Page 3 of 4 summer of 2015, while the Hillside Avenue project, which requires a Caltrans encroachment permit, would be completed summer of On November 3, 2014, the Authority convened a Committee to review the 65% Plans, Specifications and Estimate (PS&E) for the project. The Committee consisted of Angela Villar (Contra Costa County), Miki (Carlson, Barbee & Gibson, Inc.), and Rick ( Engineering). At that time, the City forwarded materials for Hillside Avenue and San Juan Avenue projects only, and informed Authority staff that the rehabilitation project on Buena Vista Avenue would be funded entirely with local funds. The comments on the 65% PS&E and the responses to those comments are included in Attachment B. At the end of January 2015, the City and its consulting engineers forwarded the 90% PS&E design package to the Authority and the Committee. Comments on the 90% PS&E and the responses from the City are included in Attachment C. A letter from Angela Villar, Contra Costa County, who served as Chair of the Committee, recommending approval of the peer review is included in Attachment D. In reviewing the project, Authority staff noted that portions of the San Juan Avenue project included rehabilitation elements that are not eligible for Measure J TLC funding. Specifically, the rehabilitation of San Juan Avenue did not meet the TLC program objectives, which are to encourage bicycling and walking and to foster transit-supportive, walkable infill development. In response, the City has suggested using some of the TLC funding on the bicycle and pedestrian components of the Buena Vista project. Originally, the City saw the Buena Vista project as primarily a rehabilitation project with a relatively minor portion of project funding to be used to improve bicycle facilities along the roadway. As they went through design, the City revised the Buena Vista project substantially, adding sidewalk repair, crosswalk bulbouts, and more substantial bicycle improvements. Staff agrees that these components are eligible for Measure J TLC funding, and because they were included in the original project application, allocating funding for the Buena Vista project would be consistent with the Authority s original approval. The City, however, has already completed the 90% PS&E design of the Buena Vista project and asks that the Authority exempt this project from the peer review requirements. Staff has previously exempted projects from peer review when design had already been completed and recommends that an exemption be granted for the Buena Vista project. S:\05-PC Packets\2015\05\08 Brdltr NW Walnut Creek Proj docx 8-3

4 Planning Committee STAFF REPORT May 6, 2015 Page 4 of 4 The letter from Alex Wong, City of Walnut Creek staff, in Attachment E identifies the parts of the San Juan Avenue project that are ineligible for TLC funding. The City estimates that about $110,400 of the project s cost is not eligible. The letter also identified about $251,300 of the Buena Vista project bicycle improvements, bulbouts and filling gaps in sidewalks that are eligible for TLC funding. The following table shows the total cost of the three project components, based on the engineer s estimate and the estimated amount eligible for TLC funding. Total Cost Ineligible Eligible San Juan Avenue $664, $110, $554, Hillside Drive $358, $0.00 $358, Buena Vista Avenue $1,200, $949, $251, $2,223, $1,059, $1,164, The Program 12 and 13 Programming Plan allocated $1 million for the project, $85,000 of which has already been expended for design. The remaining $915,000 will be used to fund the eligible portions of the construction phase for all three components of the project. Attachment F includes the funding appropriation request from the City of Walnut Creek. Attachment G contains the project fact sheet. S:\05-PC Packets\2015\05\08 Brdltr NW Walnut Creek Proj docx 8-4

5 Attachment A RESOLUTION G RE: APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS TO CITY OF WALNUT CREEK IN ACCORDANCE WITH MASTER COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. 12C.06 WHEREAS, the Contra Costa Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan and Ordinance (hereinafter Expenditure Plan ) sets aside five percent of the Measure J revenues received annually for Program 12, Transportation for Livable Communities (CC-TLC), and 0.4 percent of the Measure J revenues received annually for Program 25b, Additional Funding for Livable Communities as part of the West County component of Measure J Subregional Projects and Programs; and WHEREAS, on March 21, 2012, TRANSPAC approved the use of $1,000,000 of its subregional share of CC-TLC funds by City of Walnut Creek (hereinafter City ) for Northwest Walnut Creek Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Project (hereinafter Project ); and WHEREAS, the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (hereinafter Authority ), on May 16, 2012, approved the Measure J Transportation for Livable Communities and Pedestrian, Bicycle and Trail Facilities Programs Programming Plan for Fiscal Years through (hereinafter Programming Plan ), which programmed $1,000,000 for the Project; and WHEREAS, the Authority and the City have entered into Master Cooperative Agreement No. 12C.06 regarding the funding of projects eligible under the CC-TLC funding category; and WHEREAS, on July 16, 2014, the Authority approved Resolution G which appropriated $85,000 for the preparation of plans, specifications and estimates; and WHEREAS, a peer review reviewed the 65% design plans, specifications and estimates in November 2014 and the 90% design plans, specifications and estimates in January 2015, and found the responses to their comments satisfactory; and WHEREAS, on April 16, 2015, the Technical Coordinating Committee approved the recommendation of peer review committee to approve the project s design; and WHEREAS, on April 16, 2015, the City has submitted a Request for Appropriation of Funds for construction and an overall financial plan for the project pursuant to 12C.06; 8-5

6 Resolution G May 20, 2015 Page 2 WHEREAS, the funds are included in the Authority s budget in Item CCMP12; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, 1. The Authority finds the Request for Appropriation of Funds consistent with the Expenditure Plan and with Master Cooperative Agreement No. 12C.06; 2. The Authority appropriates $915,000 from Measure J CC-TLC Program to the City pursuant to the scope of work and conditions set forth in Attachment A of this RESOLUTION, which is incorporated herein as though set forth at length; 3. Funds will be disbursed to the City after May 20, 2015, in accordance with the provisions of Master Cooperative Agreement No. 12C.06 but not to exceed, on an annual basis, the amounts programmed by fiscal year in the Measure J Transportation for Livable Communities and Pedestrian, Bicycle and Trail Facilities Programs Programming Plan, adopted May 16, 2012; and 4. This appropriation shall expire three years from the date of this resolution; and 5. This RESOLUTION is incorporated into Exhibit B of Master Cooperative Agreement No. 12C.06. Julie K. Pierce, Chair This RESOLUTION was entered into at a meeting of the Contra Costa Transportation Authority held May 20, 2015 in Walnut Creek, California Attest: Danice J. Rosenbohm, Executive Secretary 8-6

7 Resolution G May 20, 2015 Page 3 Attachment A Resolution G Date: May 20, 2015 Amount of Funds: $915,000 Appropriated to: City of Walnut Creek Program Category: Transportation for Livable Communities (CC-TLC) Specific Project: Northwest Walnut Creek Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Project Appropriated For: Construction Scope of Work: See attached detailed Scope of Work Other Conditions: Funding for the construction phase will be made available only following City completion of environmental clearance, right-ofway and PS&E phases of the project and the completion of peer review as required by the Authority s Resolution P and Local Agency Coordination Guide. Staff Comments: 8-7

8 Resolution G May 20, 2015 Page 4 Total authorization to date under Master $1,100,000 Cooperative Agreement 12C.06 Proponent City of Walnut Creek Resolution Revised Revised Amount $ 8-8

9 Resolution G May 20, 2015 Page 5 Attachment A (cont d.) Scope of Work The work for the Northwest Walnut Creek Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Program will be completed in three separate projects: San Juan Avenue Street Improvements, Buena Vista Avenue Road Rehabilitation and Hillside Avenue Sidewalk Gap Closure. The projects will install approximately 2-miles of bicycle and pedestrian improvements on Hillside Drive, San Juan Avenue and Buena Vista Avenue. These improvements will connect multiple locations including: Walnut Creek BART, Pleasant Hill BART, churches, parks, a museum, downtown shopping, schools, neighborhoods, central Walnut Creek, etc. SAN JUAN AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENTS Pedestrian improvements including sidewalk gap closures, pedestrian bulbouts, crosswalk realignment, and roadway restriping will be included with improvements on San Juan Avenue along the frontage of Buena Vista Elementary School. These improvements will upgrade pedestrian facilities on the west side of San Juan Avenue, standardize lane width for the vehicular travel way, and revise striping and signage for parking and school drop-off /pick-up areas. Certain maintenance components of the San Juan Avenue Improvements and Buena Vista Avenue Road Rehabilitation projects will be paid for by local funds. BUENA VISTA AVENUE ROAD REHABILITATION PROJECT The Buena Vista Avenue Road Rehabilitation project will perform pavement repair, repave the roadway, replace damaged sidewalk and perform ADA upgrades at curb ramp locations. Additional improvements to install bicycle facilities, close pedestrian sidewalk gaps and install pedestrian bulb outs at Sandy Lane, Alvarado Avenue intersection and 3rd Avenue intersection will be performed to improve pedestrian and bicycle access. Improvements to install bicycle facilities, closing pedestrian sidewalk gaps and installing pedestrian bulb-outs have been quantified and will be paid for by the TLC funding. HILLSIDE AVENUE SIDEWALK GAP CLOSURE PROJECT The Hillside Avenue Sidewalk Gap Closure project will be funded entirely by the TLC grant. Pedestrian and bicycle improvements will be installed on the south side of Hillside Drive to close gaps to create a bicycle/pedestrian connection to existing pedestrian route through residential neighborhoods leading towards the south side of the freeway underpass. These improvements will provide the means to connect paths for 8-9

10 Resolution G May 20, 2015 Page 6 bicyclists and pedestrians on the south side of Hillside Drive with sidewalk gap closures, bicycle facilities and a protected pedestrian signal which would complete a connection to the WC BART station and central Walnut Creek. 8-10

11 Resolution G May 20, 2015 Page 7 Attachment B Revisions to Exhibit A of Cooperative Agreement No. 12C.06 Chronological Listing of Fund Appropriation Resolutions Project Number Resolution Number Date Funds Appropriated G October 17, G G Cumulative Total $100,000 $100,000 July 16, 2014 $85,000 $185,000 May 20, 2015 $915,000 $1,100,000 Total Funds Appropriated $1,100,

12

13 Attachment B City of Walnut Creek Northwest Walnut Creek Bicycle and Pedestrian Project 65% Peer Review Comment Summary and Responses Date: 11/3/2014 Contract Peer Review Committee: Walter Allen - CCTA (Parsons) Brad Beck CCTA Angela Villar - Contra Costa County Rick - Management & Engineering, Inc. Miki - Carlson, Barbee & Gibson, Inc. HILLSIDE AVENUE SIDEWALK GAP CLOSURE Page Reviewer Comments Response Project Manual 2 Why this is "Error! Bookmark not defined" shown? Specification Links on MS Word to be updated. 4 Sheet index to match project plans sheet index Sheet index to be revised to match plans. BD-12 Provide complete Bid Schedule Complete bid schedule will be provided. GR-20 Add Caltrans to Section (Notice) Caltrans will be referenced in Section (Notice) GR-31 Add "CCTA + CCTA Peer Reviewers" in Section 7-14 (Indemnification - City) CCTA + CCTA Peer Reviewers to be included in Section 7-14 (Indemnification - City) SP - 2 Verify work limits San Juan Avenue (Alvarado Avenue to Gabriel Court) Work limits to be corrected to reference Hillside Ave. SP-7 Measurement and Payment - Update section to reflect Engineer's Estimate for this project. Measurement and Payment section to be updated for consistency with Engineer's Estimate. 8-12

14 Attachment A 65% Peer Review Comments and Responses Page 2 Page Reviewer Comments Response SP - 30 Include Caltrans in Section 14-2 (Utility Permits) Caltrans will be referenced in Section 14-2 (Utility Permits). TR-9 Section 4-2 Materials: HMA- Spec not applicable to this project. HMA is applicable. Engineer s Estimate 2 Should include striping in "IMPROVEMENT" section? EE will be revised to include striping. 1 Add loop detectors, detectable warning surface, and signal modification in estimate EE will be revised to include loop detectors, detectable warning surface, and signal modification. Improvement Plans (1) Add Photometrics Plan to Sheet Index Sheet Index to be revised to include Photometrics. Villar (1) Cross out Sheet Index 13. Sheet 13 will be deleted from the Sheet Index. T-1 Villar (2) Add Sheet 18-Photometrics Plan and Sheet 19-Photometrics Plan in sheet index. Sheet Index to be revised to include Photometrics. Villar (3) Consider adding a traffic control and construction staging plan in drawing set. Contractor is required to submit traffic control plan per Section 8 Traffic and Pedestrian Control. Additional traffic control requirements will be added for construction staging. (1) Show full text of Parkside Drive (currently cut-off). Parkside Drive text to be shown. (2) Add WF (wood fence) to abbreviations. WF (wood fence) to be added to abbreviations. (3) Show right of way lines (typical for all sheets). Right of way lines to be shown on all sheets. (1) Add WF to abbreviations. Define WF? WF (wood fence) to be added to abbreviations. C 1.0 (2) No "Pork chop" island shown on plan. This is the demolition plan. Island is shown on C2.0 Villar Villar (1) Expand viewport to show intersection (to edge of pavement) at Hillside and Parkside. (2) Grind and remove existing Stop Bar and STOP striping? Viewport to be expanded to show edge of pavement. Removal of existing Stop Bar and legend will be shown. New striping shown on C

15 Attachment A 65% Peer Review Comments and Responses Page 3 Page Reviewer Comments Response CCTA (1) Add FDC and CBTV in the list of abbreviations FDC and CBTV to be added to abbreviations. C 1.1 C 1.2 (1) No demo on this sheet? What is to be demoed? (2) No right-of way indicated. All city property? Demo work will be shown at select buckeled sidewalk locations. Right of way lines to be shown on all sheets. All improvements are on City property. CCTA (1) Add WF and MB to the abbreviations WF and MB to be added to abbreviations. CCTA (1) Adjust existing utility box at finished grade? Boxes to be adjusted to finished grade as necessary. CCTA (2) Leaving existing street light in middle of new sidewalk? No. To be relocated. Plans will be revised to call for street light relocation. (1) Verify Caltrans Right of Way and I-680 Overpass Limit. (2) Protect existing sewer manhole and adjust rim elevation to finished grade. Caltrans Right of Way and I-680 Overpass Limit to be verified. Plans will be updated accordingly. Plans to be revised to call for protection of sewer manhole and raising of rim to grade. C 1.3 (1) Caltrans indicated. Required Caltrans review? Yes. Caltrans encroachment permit application submitted. Villar (1) Add DH in abbreviations DH to be added to abbreviations. Villar (2) Rename keynote #3 at curb ramp to #7? Keynote will be corrected to #7. Villar (3) Identify the begin and the end of curb and gutter removal? Plans to be revised to identify begin and end of curb and gutter removal. C 1.4 (1) Where is the sign to be removed? Sign has been verified in field. Plans to be revised to show symbol. CCTA (1) Add SL in the list of abbreviations SL to be added to abbreviations. (1) Keynote 1 is covering existing manhole Text conflicts will be corrected. (2) Identify existing sign location. Sign has been verified in field. Plans to be revised to show symbol. C 2.0 (1) Island with domes indicated. Is this AC with domes indicated? Asphalt island will be revised to concrete island. 8-14

16 Attachment A 65% Peer Review Comments and Responses Page 4 Page Reviewer Comments Response (2) Crosswalk to East across Hillside does not connect to ADA ramp (1) Add R1-1 stop signs. Existing ramp will be removed and replaced at new location to line-up with crosswalk. Signs and legend will be revised to align with new crosswalk. (2) Crosswalk from "Pork chop" island is not aligned with a curb ramp Existing ramp will be removed and replaced at new location to line-up with crosswalk. (3) Dimension truncated dome Truncated domes will be dimensioned. (4) Verify proposed curb ramp slope with current Caltrans standards. Ramps will be per City Standard. (5) Concrete or AC curb ramp? Ramp is concrete. (6) Verify Sharrow or Bike Lane marking. Bike lane markings to be revised to sharrows. (7) Why not concrete sidewalk? (8) Why not install curb and widen pavement to connect existing sidewalk? (9) Keynotes 12 - Identify type of traffic marker and provide details. Asphalt path is temporary to serve as walkway purposes until area is developed. Curb layout maybe revised with future development Plans will be updated to identify marking types and to include details for each type. CCTA (1) Add a new curb ramp at Hillside and Parkside and align with the proposed "pork chop" island Existing ramp will be removed and replaced at new location to line-up with crosswalk. (1) Show complete R/W line. Right of way lines to be shown on all sheets. (2) Erosion control on 3:1 slope. (3) Remove existing curb ramp and replace with standard sidewalk. (4) Add new curb ramp and align with proposed crosswalk. (5) Remove existing striping that conflict with the proposed crosswalk. Plans will be revised to include erosion control in this location. Existing ramp will be removed and replaced with standard sidewalk. Existing ramp will be removed and replaced at new location to line-up with crosswalk. Existing striping will be removed and replaced in the proper location. 8-15

17 Attachment A 65% Peer Review Comments and Responses Page 5 Page Reviewer Comments Response (6) Add AC dike around median for safety. Median to be concrete island (7) Add root barrier at proposed side walk next to the existing 24" tree. From past experience with root barriers, City does not install them. (8) Check curb ramp slope per Caltrans latest standard. Ramps will be per City Standard. (9) Avoid text/line conflict at keynote 13. Text conflicts to be resolved. C 2.1 C 2.2 (1) Bike indicator only on this sheet? Yes, bike lane markings are the only proposed improvements on this sheet. (1) Fix buckled sidewalk at station Plans will be revised to replace this sidewalk. (2) Why not install city standard driveway and curb at station 5+00? (1) Existing streetlight appears to be in the middle of the proposed sidewalk. Verify if there is enough clearance between the existing streetlight and the face of curb per ADA requirements. Not within project scope. Driveway is the responsibility of the property owner. Streetlight to be relocated. (1) Revise keynotes #10-5ft sidewalk to 7ft sidewalk. Keynote to be revised to show 7 foot sidewalk. (1) Adjust existing sewer manhole to grade? Yes. Sewer manhole will be adjusted to grade. (2) Verify proposed sidewalk width on plans and pavement sections on sheet C3.0. Proposed sidewalk width and pavement sections will be verified and revised as necessary. (3) Dimension travel lane and bike lane width Travel lane and bike lane widths to be dimensioned. (4) Check sidewalk slope and make sure to meet ADA requirements. Sidewalk to connect to existing curb grades. Grades to be verified and revised as necessary. C 2.3 (5) Stripe bike lane. Striping to be revised to accommodate bike lane prior to intersection. (6) Show saw cut line for new curb construction. Saw cut line for new curb construction to be shown. (7) What does the interface look like between the existing traffic signal and the proposed curb ramp? (8) Provide conform elevation at existing TC. Sections through this area to be provided. Curb is to be replaced. Conform elevation to be provided. 8-16

18 Attachment A 65% Peer Review Comments and Responses Page 6 Page Reviewer Comments Response (1) Ramps shown poorly. Additional ramp detail to be provided. (2) Verify sidewalk width with sections on sheet C3.0. and key note # 10. (3) Is dimension of the sidewalk pointed to lip of gutter? No. Dimension to TC. Sidewalk width to be verified and revised as necessary. (1) Where is the measure J sign location? To be provided at beginning and end of project. (2) Add FS in abbreviations. FS to be added to abbreviations. (3) Revise keynotes #10-5ft sidewalk to 7ft sidewalk. Keynote to be revised to show 7 foot sidewalk. (4) Add keynote #6 on plan. Keynote 6 to be added. CCTA (5) Verify proposed sidewalk slope to meet ADA. (1) Verify Sharrow or Bike Lane markings? (see NACTO Guidelines for through bike intersections). Proposed sidewalk slope to be verified and revised as necessary. Striping to be revised to accommodate bike lane prior to intersection. C 2.4 CCTA (2) Reduced curb radius from existing. Reduced radius is proposed. (1) Show existing signal box and call out adjust existing utility to grade. Existing signal box to be shown and adjusted to grade. (2) Provide conform elevation at existing TC. Conform to existing TC to be provided. (3) Dimension the width of the existing sidewalk at the beginning of the sidewalk widening. Sidewalk width to be dimensioned. (4) Show Ygnacio Valley Road right of way lines. Right of way lines to be shown on all sheets. (1) Revise keynotes #10-5ft sidewalk to 7ft sidewalk. Keynote to be revised to show 7 foot sidewalk. (2) Add saw cut line and AC plug at sidewalk widening. (3) Add keynote #6 on plan. Keynote 6 to be added. Saw cut line and AC plug at sidewalk widening to be added. (4) Label sidewalk width at station Sidewalk width to be dimensioned. CCTA (1) Provide 5' bike lane? Sharrow will be striped east of intersection CCTA (2) Widen transition to the existing sidewalk. 5' minimum sidewalk to be provided. C 3.0 (1) Show cross slope in Detail 1. Cross slope to be shown on Detail

19 Attachment A 65% Peer Review Comments and Responses Page 7 Page Reviewer Comments Response (2) Show cross slopes, root barrier, AC sidewalk edging in Detail 2. Cross slopes and AC sidewalk edging to be shown in Detail 2. City does not use root barriers. (3) Delete 12" in Detail 3. 12' AC plug required per City Standards. (4) Add new detail for new sidewalk at existing curb & gutter. Detail for new sidewalk at existing curb & gutter to be provided. CCTA (1) Show CCTA logo on Project Construction Sign. CCTA logo to be added. Identify measure J sign location on plan? To be provided at beginning and end of project. (1) Label the distance between the yield to pedestrian sign and the new face of curb and verify ADA requirements. Distance between the yield to pedestrian sign and the new face of curb to be shown. ADA requirements to be verified. (1) How is the loop detector to be removed? Spec? Payment? To be cut and abandoned in place. Note to be revised. C 4.0 CCTA (1) Verify Sharrow or Bike Lane marking. Sharrows except just prior to 680 onramp intersection. Bike detection to be installed in bike lane before intersection. C 5.0 CCTA (2) Where are you directing bicyclists? A bike lane will be provided for refuge between the turn lane and through lane. CCTA (3) Verify Bike Lane/Sharrow Location. Sharrow location to be verified and shown on plan. CCTA (4) Add bike lane signage? Bike lane signage to be provided. Remove Bike Lane call out in existing underpass lighting condition Renumber Sheet 15 to Sheet 16 Sheet to be renumbered. C 5.1 Renumber Sheet 16 to Sheet 17 Sheet to be renumbered. C 6.0 Renumber Sheet 17 to Sheet 18 Sheet to be renumbered. C 6.1 Renumber Sheet 18 to Sheet 19 Sheet to be renumbered. Bike Lane call out in existing underpass lighting condition to be removed. 8-18

20 Attachment A 65% Peer Review Comments and Responses Page 8 SAN JUAN AVE STREET IMPROVEMENTS Page Reviewer Comment Response Project Manual BD - 12 Does bid schedule go here some place? Bid schedule is incomplete. Bid schedule to be completed and included. GR - 17 Section Abnormal weather conditions: Does using this apply to unsafe conditions? What is city policy? It is not clear whether a rain delay is granted or not. Unsafe conditions may occur with less than a 10 year event. Section applies to suspension of work and determination of working days. Unsafe Conditions defined in Section 7 Legal Relationships and Responsibility. GR - 25 Section Invoices; Check mark up rates with State Standards. GR - 25 GR-31 SP-8 SP-9 SP-9 Section Partial payments: City shall retain 50% of work completed is incorrect. Should be 5%. To be revised to 5%. Add CCTA + CCTA Peer Reviews to "City" under Section 7-14 Indemnification Section Method of Measurement: not clear on drawing. Engineers Estimate indicates a full depth AC repair, not 4". (1) Section Method of Measurement- 2" HMA Overlay: Estimate is 308 but different depth may be different price; Engineer's estimate does not delineate 2" vs. 2.25" HMA overlay. (2) Section 5-12 Remove Pavement Markers, Legends, and Striping: Why pay this when you grind or mill the pavement. City does not follow Caltrans Standards for Subcontractor Markups. To be revised per comment. SP-13 Section Payment: Should reflect "(LF)" not (SF) To be revised to LF SP-14 SP-15 SP-16 SP-17 Section Method of Measurement: Does "Install Sidewalk Ramp" include truncated domes or measure separately? Section Method of Measurement: Is all valley gutter the same width? If not then pay by SF. Section 5-41 Adjust Storm Drain Structure To Grade: It is not clear that this is for lowering and raising iron. Section " RCP Storm Drain Line: No 12" RCP indicated in Engineers Estimate. To be clarified to 4" base failure repair. To be revised/clarified. Overlay will be 2" in depth and measured per tonnage placed. Striping removal is broken out as a separate item as it is not included with the scope of work for the milling operations. Truncated Domes will be measured separately. All is same width. To be clarified. Engineer's Estimate to be revised to include 12" RCP. 8-19

21 Attachment A 65% Peer Review Comments and Responses Page 9 Page Reviewer Comment Response SP-18 - SP- 22 (1) Lowering and raising of Iron for various utilities could be pulled together. Separate payments for this work may be more costly. To be revised to combine these items. (2) Slurry seal not indicated in measurement & payment. Project Area will be overlaid. No slurry seal. (3) Erosion control not indicated in measurement and payment. Erosion control to be indicated in measurement and payment. (4) Surveying & Dimensional control not indicated in engineers estimate. Surveying & Dimensional control to be indicated in engineers estimate. SP-23 (1) Section 7-1 Substantial Completion: 30 Calendar days allowed after substantial completion. How is this related to work days allowed in Section 7-2 Completion? Working days will be suspended when work is substantially completed. SP-33 Section Driving Area #2.: Dust control sprinkling should not be used during drought conditions, polymers should not be used as this goes into storm water. To be revised per comment removing polymers. Recycled water to be used during drought conditions. TR-5 TR-7 Section 3-3 Materials: What materials are used for excavation and removal? Section 3-10 Excavation: Over excavation not shown in measurement and payment nor engineer's estimate. Payment section required if this to be done. None. To be removed. Overexcavation not required, to be eliminated. TR-12 Section Compaction: Who does this testing? Not clear. Independent testing agency. To be clarified. TR-16 TR-31 Section 5-1 General "Concrete work must be completed and opened to traffic prior to a weekend": This may not be feasible for driveway or valley gutters (7 day cure for vehicular traffic seems to preclude this). Section Central Contra Costa Sanitary Sewer: False bottoms in sewer manholes. To be revised/clarified. Does not apply. N/A (1) Side note: No Slurry Seal Specs No slurry work in project We are only adjusting the grade rings for manhole cover N/A (2) Side note: Need Special Traffic Considerations for School? Contractor required to submit traffic control plan per Section 8 Traffic and Pedestrian Control. Additional traffic control requirements will be added for work when school is in session. 8-20

22 Attachment A 65% Peer Review Comments and Responses Page 10 Page Reviewer Comment Response Engineer's Estimate (1) Item 103: Erosion Control - needs measurement and payment. Measurement and payment to be added for erosion control. 1 2 (2) Demolition/Removal items- There is a measurement and payment but not on bid form. (3) Item 307: Full Depth Pavement Repair - Detail 2 on sheet C5.1 shows 4" not full pavement depth. Bid form to be revised. (4) Item 310: Slurry Seal - Needs Measurement and Payment No Slurry work in project Add 12" SD Line in "Utility Improvement" section 12" RCP to be added. EE and bid schedule to be revised to show 4" base failure repair. Add 6" Storm Drain in the estimate 6" Storm Drain lines will be changed to 12" SD Lines Improvement Plans T-1 Add Traffic Control / Construction Staging Plan? Contractor required to submit traffic control plan per Section 8 Traffic and Pedestrian Control. Additional traffic control requirements will be added for work when school is in session. (1) Verify School District property line. School District property line to be verified. C 1.0 (2) Show saw cut line and pavement repair for new storm drain Saw cut line and pavement repair for new storm drain to be shown. (1) Show limits of AC removal. Limits of AC removal to be shown. (2) What is to be removed (AC or AC & AB)? What is the depth of removal? Plans to be revised to clarify AC/AB removal and depth. CCTA (1) Add EX and PR in abbreviation? Existing = EX? Proposed = PR? To be clarified. Existing = EX. Proposed = PR. (1) Identify grinding or full depth pavement removal in Demo Legend. Legend will be revised to clarify. (2) Add abbreviations - EX, PR. EX and PR to be added to abbreviations. (3) Why is a section of AC pavement in the middle of the road being removed? Hatching error to be corrected. 8-21

23 Attachment A 65% Peer Review Comments and Responses Page 11 Page Reviewer Comment Response (4) Where is the SDCB? Symbol to be shown. (5) Revise key note #12 "PROTECT JOINT POLE IN PLACE". Key note #12 to be revised to "PROTECT JOINT POLE IN PLACE". C 1.1 (1) Revise demolition keynote #11 to read "PROTECT SEWER" instead of "PROTECT ELECTRICAL". Keynote #11 to read "PROTECT SEWER". (1) Show dimensions of AC removal. Dimensions of AC removal to be shown. (2) Clarify fire water line removal. For FH relocation. (3) Provide adequate fire protection during fire hydrant relocation. EBMUD will perform relocation work. (4) Key note 14 - Where is this FH moving to? EBMUD or CCWD may not allow the fire hydrant relocation. Will coordinate with Fire Department and EBMUD for approved location of FH. (1) Where is the new fire hydrant location? C 1.2 Add key note to protect sewer structure at existing sewer manhole Keynote to be added. C 2.0 Will coordinate with Fire Department and EBMUD for approved location of FH. (1) Revise keynote 9 crosswalk "White Stripe" to "Yellow Stripe". Keynote to be revised to yellow striping. (2) Identify ADA parking spaces. (3) Add curb ramp and striping for ADA parking, if any. Two ADA stalls and ramp will be added in angled parking. ADA stalls will be nearest school entrance. Two ADA stalls and ramp will be added in angled parking. ADA stalls will be nearest school entrance. (1) Crosswalk striping near school should be yellow. Crosswalk will be revised to yellow. (2) Differentiate AC overlay and AC plug in legend. Different hatch pattern will be provided for each. (3) Key note 9 - replace white stripe with yellow stripe. Yellow striping will be provided. (4) Clarify AC overlay limits. AC overlay limits will be clarified. (1) What is the opening width of the segmented AC berm? To be shown at 12 inches. (2) Identify the locations of the AC plug. AC plug locations to be identified. (3) Any proposed accessible parking spaces? Two ADA stalls and ramp will be added in angled parking. ADA stalls will be nearest school entrance. CCTA (1) What is proposed at the new curb ramp at Alvarado & San Juan? Case G ramp. To be clarified. 8-22

24 Attachment A 65% Peer Review Comments and Responses Page 12 Page Reviewer Comment Response C 2.1 (1) Need ADA ramp for loading zone? (see CA Dept. State Policy requirements for schools). (2) Check clearance between new face of curb and existing utility pole. (1) Retaining wall controls. Provide barrier or fence on top of new retaining wall. Adequate space does not exist to provide a complaint loading zone. This is a City project, not a school project. If the school wishes to upgrade the loading area in the future, the City will collaborate with the District. Accessible parking and access will be available at the angled parking area, and currently in the existing school parking lot. Curb location to be adjusted out of conflict with pole. Fence to be provided. (2) Proposed property line should be new rather than proposed. Language to be revised per comment. (3) What rights does City have in this (between existing school district property line and proposed school district property line) Can we take off existing school property line? (4) Verify concrete hatching within school district property line. New concrete paving in school property? (5) Show layout of parallel parking. School District and Right of Way lines to be clearly shown and labeled. Hatching for concrete work to be clarified Parallel parking on residential streets are not striped in the City of Walnut Creek (1) Is the proposed loading zone ADA accessible? Adequate space does not exist to provide a complaint loading zone. This is a City project, not a school project. If the school wishes to upgrade the loading area in the future, the City will collaborate with the District. Accessible parking and access will be available at the angled parking area, and currently in the existing school parking lot. (2) Why are you proposing curb openings at the corner of staff parking? Yes. To facilitate overland release. (3) Correct key note 13 to point to the curb. Keynote leader to be corrected. (4) Show new fire hydrant location. New FH location to be shown. (5) Verify concrete hatching within school district property line. New Hatching for concrete work to be clarified 8-23

25 Attachment A 65% Peer Review Comments and Responses Page 13 Page Reviewer Comment Response concrete paving in school property? (1) Show Storm drain pipe profile and identify any utility conflicts. SD profile to be shown. (2) Verify proposed storm drain grate elevation at valley gutter. SD grate elevation to be verified and revised as necessary. C 3.0 (1) Provide more detail for retaining wall construction. Wall elevations are not clean. Retaining wall doesn't match with engineers estimate. To be clarified. Additional detail to be provided. CCTA (1) Typo - TC should read TC ? TC to be revised to (1) Typo - TC should read TC ? TC to be revised to (1) Typo - TC should read TC ? TC to be revised to C 3.1 C 3.2 C 4.0 C 5.0 C 5.1 (1) Show overlay limits. Overlay limits to be shown. (2) Why is superelevation (and transition)being used? To accommodate drainage while allowing curb bulb out. (1) Adjust WM to grade. WM to be adjusted to grade. (2) Show storm drain pipe profile. SD profile to be shown. (3) Show 2% max proposed sidewalk cross slope. 2% max. SW slope to be shown. (1) Why superelevation transition is being used? To accommodate drainage while allowing curb bulb out. (2) Add a storm drain manhole to connect proposed storm drain to existing storm drain. (1) In Section A-A replace 90 degree parking with 60 degree parking. (1) In section A-A: Identify type of slurry seal, depth and type of AC overlay, depth of AC removal. Also revise "17.7' 90 PARKING" to "17.8' 60 PARKING". (1) Note: Caltrans has revised curb ramp details. SDMH to be added. 60 degree parking to be shown. (1) Concrete valley gutter detail: Identify rebar size. Rebar size to be identified. Retaining wall detail: Show storm drain connection/discharge point on plans. No slurry seal is proposed, reference to be removed. Depth and type of overlay to be shown. Depth of AC removal to be shown. 60 degree parking to be shown. City standard details to be used. Individual ramp design to meet new Caltrans standards Storm drain discharge to be shown. Safety issue. Provide barrier or fence on top of new retaining wall. Fence to be provided. 8-24

26 Attachment A 65% Peer Review Comments and Responses Page 14 Page Reviewer Comment Response Retaining wall detail: Show storm drain connection/discharge point on plans. Storm drain discharge to be shown. 8-25

27 Attachment C City of Walnut Creek Northwest Walnut Creek Bicycle and Pedestrian Project 90% Peer Review Comment Summary and Responses Date: March 2015 Contract Peer Review Committee: Walter Allen - CCTA (Parsons) Brad Beck CCTA Angela Villar - Contra Costa County Rick - Management & Engineering, Inc. Miki - Carlson, Barbee & Gibson, Inc. HILLSIDE AVENUE SIDEWALK GAP CLOSURE Sheet Reviewer Comments Response Engineer's Estimate 1 (1) There are no items for SWPPP or Erosion Control Plan. Erosion Control Plan and implementation are included in bid item entitled "Clearing, Grubbing and Off-Haul" (2) There are no items for project signs, fiber rolls, erosion control blanket, and street light relocation. Bid Items will be added for project signs and street light relocation. Erosion control measures will be included as part of Glearing, Grubbing and Off-Haul Improvement Plans T-1 (1) Page numbering is still off. There is only one sheet of construction details and a total of 18 pages. Revised as noted 8-26

28 Attachment B 90% Peer Review Comments and Responses Page 2 Sheet Reviewer Comments Response (2) There are no cross sections provided in the plans. Provide typical cross sections in the plan set. (3) Abbreviations do not abbreviations on other plan sheets and have not been updated. Key cross-sections will be added showing sidewalk improvements Abbreviations will be updated C 1.0 (1) Expand viewport to show intersection at Hillside and Parkside. Revised as noted (2) Show removal of existing Stop Bar and STOP marking on Parkside Drive and Hillside Ave north of Parkside. (3) Key note #2 near the clear and grub area is conflicting with the line for the limit of demolition. Revised as noted Revised as noted C 1.2 (1) Move key notes in conflict with line for limit of demolition. Revised as noted C 1.4 (1) Protect existing signal equipment at east end of clear and grub area. Added additional note for protection of existing signal equipment C 2.0 (1) Abbreviations list needs to be updated on all sheets of the Grading Plan. Revised as noted (2) Provide curve and line tables for new curb. Revised as noted (3) Dimension the walkway and opening in the new median island. Revised as noted (4) There is not note for the STOP stencil and stop bar pavement markings. (5) Hatch the concrete sidewalk at the SE corner of the intersection. Note to be added for pavement markings Revised as noted (6) Add key note call outs to the new curb ramps. Revised as noted (7) Hatch the AC plugs on this sheet. Revised as noted (8) Add key note #6 call out at SW corner. Revised as noted (9) Key note #9 does not specify the paint color for the crosswalk stripe. "White" will be added as the crosswalk color (10) Key note #13 should reference the sign construction detail. Reference to be added (11) Extend the fiber roll to the end of the proposed walkway. Revised as noted 8-27

29 Attachment B 90% Peer Review Comments and Responses Page 3 Sheet Reviewer Comments Response (12) What is the proposed pavement section for the asphalt concrete walkway? Consider using concrete sidewalk since it connects to concrete on both ends. Asphalt section called out in Asphalt path detail. Without a defined curb and gutter, and future development, an asphalt pathway in this area is a more suitable application (13) Right-of-way lines are cut off. Extend right-of-way lines to intersection. Revised as noted C 2.2 (1) Key note #4 should indicate street light to be relocated. Revised as noted (2) Sidewalk transition to existing sidewalk on north end should be detailed and dimensioned. C 2.3 (1) At SW corner of 680 on-ramp, new C&G and AC plug should be shown south of ramp. Revised as noted Revised as noted (2) Match EX TC elevation on north side of ramp not given. Revised as noted (3) "EX" and "( E)" abbreviations both used and both are not identified on the abbreviation list. (4) Sidewalk east of 680 on-ramp appears to have 9% slope and not ADA compliant. Revised as noted The sidewalk is directly adjacent to the roadway and matches roadway grade. It is therefore compliant. MT MT On sheet 2.0, the 5 -wide pathway at the southerly portion through the median island has AC grades of and 201.7, which provides a pathway cross-slope of approx. 12% instead of the 2% shown on the plans. Please revise as necessary. On sheet 2.0, the new HC ramp at the westerly corner has proposed finish surface flowline grades of , , , etc. Water will tend to pond at the location with the grade of Please check and revise elevations as necessary to ensure positive drainage around the HC ramp. MT Starting on sheet 2.0, General Notes #3, change wall to way. Revised as noted MT Similar to the San Juan project, I recommend adding language about working in the vicinity of high voltage lines. Grades will be revised to maintain 2% inside ramp area Grades will be revised to allow positive drainage into drainage structure High voltage line proximity language will be added MT Starting on sheet 2.2, use text masks in the ACAD file for all proposed information. Text appearance will be clarified 8-28

30 Attachment B 90% Peer Review Comments and Responses Page 4 Sheet Reviewer Comments Response MT Starting on sheet 2.2, the circled Key Notes are blacked out. Some of the triangle notes are also blacked out (i.e., sheet 4.0). Please revise. Key Note blocks revised SAN JUAN AVE STREET IMPROVEMENTS Page Reviewer Comments Response Engineer's Estimate 1 (1) There are no items for SWPPP or Erosion Control Plan. Erosion Control Plan and implementation are included in bid item entitled "Clearing, Grubbing and Off-Haul" (2) Only 1 project sign is indicated. There should be at least 2 project signs, one at the beginning and one at the end of the project. Bid Package updated to show 2 project signs with one at the beginning and one at end of project. (3) What is landscape resotration item for? Nothing shown on plans. Plans revised to show landscape restoration areas. Work includes restoration of landscape as well as irrigation. (4)There are no items for mulch or wheel stops in the estimate. Mulch areas revised to be shown and paid for as Landscape Restoration areas. Wheel Stops are paid for under ADA Stall bid item. Improvement Plans T-1 Sheet Index: Sheet C1.0 is titled "Street Sections" and not "Typical Cross Sections". Sheet Revised to "Typical Cross Sections" C1.0 (1) Street Sections should be C1.0 and not C2.0. Sections Revised as noted (2) Provide a legend for hatching on this sheet or specify each material and depth. Legend and Description are now included (3) On Section C & D, AC plug is not labeled. Sections Revised as noted. No AC plug needed at full depth asphalt areas (4) On Section C, curb and sidewalk is not labeled with note #1. Sections Revised as noted 8-29

31 Attachment B 90% Peer Review Comments and Responses Page 5 Page Reviewer Comments Response (5) AB depth under overlay is not specified. We are only overlaying the existing AC and performing the deep lift AC at certain locations. New AB section is not planned for the roadway pavement areas. (6) Label existing and proposed ROW on sections. Plans revised to show only final ROW. Labeled as "ROW" on all sheets (Typical). C 2.0 (1) Add ROW line type to legend (typical). ROW line type added to legend (2) Does existing centerline striping need to be removed with proposed 2" mill? (3) Asphalt hatching is shown over a portion of existing CB at NE corner of intersection. C 3.0 (1) Key note numbering was not readable (appeared as large black circles) in the set of plans received. (2) Curb return at NE corner of intersection is not listed in the curve table. The milling operation will remove all striping inside the milling and overlay areas Revised as noted Key Note Blocks Revised We are maintaining the existing curb radius. Callouts added to table (See Labels C9 - C12) on Sheet C3.0 (3) Street Section details are on sheet C1.0, not C2.0. Revised as noted (4) Asphalt plug hatching for curb on west side and valley gutter is not shown Asphalt Plug hatching added. Remaining Valley Gutter area to receive 8" asphalt paving adjacent. Clarified on plans. (5) In Legend, asphalt plug shown 8" deep, however in detail sheets, it is shown 12" deep? Revised as noted (6) Key note #10 should be shown on all parking space striping. A call out for note #10 will be added and referencing typical for all parking space striping C 3.1 (1) No detail or key note is provided for the new wheel stops. Note and detail for wheel stop added to project plans (2) Case C curb ramp at ADA parking is not called out with Key note #1. Callout added at new Case C Ramp Location (3) SDMH symbol is not shown in the legend. A SDMH Symbol is shown in the Title Sheet Legend C3.2 (1) No detail is referenced for the driveway approach in key note #2. Is there a City detail? C 4.0 (1) What is heavy black line at NW corner of intersection for? Solid line removed. Callout for City Standard driveway type included 8-30

32 Attachment B 90% Peer Review Comments and Responses Page 6 Page Reviewer Comments Response (2) There appears to be a large sign at the NW corner of the intersection that is not labeled. What is it? Measure J Sign noted on sheet C3.0 (3) Where are the project funding signs located? Signs at beginning ~STA 0+50 and at end ~Sta 7+50 (4) There are two key notes labeled #5. Key Notes revised as noted (5) Existing and New ROW lines on the west side are not shown. ROW lines are shown (6) You could turn off the striping in this plan to avoid confusion. Striping layers shaded back to clarify (7) Full depth pavement reconstruction limits should be located with stations and grades in the Grading Plan. Stations and Grades of full depth pavement area added on grading plan C 4.1 (1) Reference constrution details for retaining walls. Retaining Wall detail referenced (2) Add abbreviations for CL, PR, EP on all appropraite shees. Abbreviations and definitions added (3) Abbreviations "EX" and "(E)" are both used for existing. Only EX is shown in plans. Revised as noted (4) Deimnsion width of erosion control blanket Landscape Restoration and other BMP's will be used instead of erosion control blankets (5) There is no note for the fire hydrant relocation. Fire Hydrant note added (6) There are no station labels for when the superelevation transition begins. (7) A street profile should be provided to show change in finished grades and superelevation. Station labels added at locations of superelevation transition Finished contours added to show superelevation and transitions. The finished grades and stations of key points are added to the grading plan. Refer to cross sections on Sheet C5.0 (8) From the street sections, the superelevation begins around Station There should also be a transition beginning around that station. (9) It appears as if you are removing an existing crosswalk. Proper noticing of crosswalk removals per the California Vehicle Code should apply. (10) Federal ADA guidelines require that passenger loading zones provide a minimum 5ft wide marked access aisle. Locations of transitions and superelevation are added to the grading plan Crosswalk to being replaced with new ladder type striping after final paving. The draft federal guidelines have not been adopted and there are currently no federal requirements for accessible loading zones in the public right of way. 8-31

33 Attachment B 90% Peer Review Comments and Responses Page 7 Page Reviewer Comments Response C4.2 (1) SDCB on Storm Drain Line 2 rim elevation= Per plan view, grate elevation=152.20? Profile view revised to show C5.0 (1) Label existing cross slope on east side of roadway. Revised as noted (2) AC plug not shown in Street Sections. Asphalt plug is referenced in grading plan (3) Some cross slopes labeled 2% appear to be greater than 2%. Slope verified and adjusted as needed C6.1 (1) Detail 6 is not called out in the plans anywhere and the text appears to be too small. Detailed replaced with updated conform grind. Callouts added to end of limit of work (Sheets C3.0, C3.2, C4.0, C4.2) MT MT MT MT MT MT MT Does the City and/or School want anti-graffiti coating on the face of the retaining wall as part of this project? If so, add to plans and/or specs The hatch grayscale between Mill 2 Asphalt Pavement, Full Depth Pavement, 2 Asphalt Overlay, and Asphalt Plug starting on sheet 2.0 all look the same. Consider using different hatch patterns to better delineate these. The circled Key Notes starting on sheet 3.0 are all blacked out. Please revise. Starting on sheet 2.0, please check the Matchline sheet numbers on plan views, and update. For example, sheet 2.0 should be revised from Matchline see sheet C1.1 to Matchline see sheet C2.1. Starting on sheet 4.0, please use text masks in the ACAD files for all proposed information. These sheets are very difficult to read and understand. To help clear the sheets, the Grading and Drainage Plan sheets should only show the proposed finish street grade contours on San Juan Avenue instead of the existing contours. Also, the sheets also seem to show 2 sets of contours lines (dashed and solid lines) in the landscaping areas beyond the limit of work. Please revise as necessary. I recommend adding language somewhere on the plans or specs notifying the contractor that he/she will be working in the vicinity of high voltage lines (i.e. along the westerly portion of San Juan Avenue) and will need to take adequate safety precautions. Anti Graffiti Coating bid item has been added to contract documents. Refer to Section 17 of the Technical Requirements The hatching for the Asphalt Removal,2" Mill and Overlay and 8" Asphalt Plug has been revised for visual clarification. Key Note Blocks Revised Matchline Notes Revised Notes revised for visual clarification. Existing and Proposed contours revised in street and landscape areas. Notes added on the Grading and Drainage Plan Sheets in reference of high voltage lines. 8-32

34 Attachment B 90% Peer Review Comments and Responses Page 8 Page Reviewer Comments Response MT On sheets 3.2 and 4.2, there is a proposed S1-1 sign in the exiting sidewalk on the easterly side of San Juan. Verify or add notes or dimensions to make sure the placement of this sign will comply with ADA requirements, and that it also needs to be clear of the existing 2 gas pipe. The ped crossing sign locations were adjusted for improved visibility and away from ADA access areas. 8-33

35 Attachment D 8-34

36 This Page Intentionally Blank

37 Attachment E Page 1 MEMORANDUM DATE: March 24, 2015 PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING TO: FROM: Brad Beck, CCTA Alex Wong SUBJECT: Project Information Memo Northwest Walnut Creek Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Measure J CC-TLC and PBTF Programs Purpose The purpose of this memo is to address the allocation of TLC funding for the City s Northwest Walnut Creek Pedestrian and Bicycle Access project. Discussion The work for the Northwest Walnut Creek Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Program will be completed in three separate projects: San Juan Avenue Street Improvements, Buena Vista Avenue Road Rehabilitation and Hillside Avenue Sidewalk Gap Closure. Certain maintenance components of the San Juan Avenue Improvements and Buena Vista Avenue Road Rehabilitation projects will be paid for by Local funds. These components are further detailed below and shown per the attached exhibits. The San Juan Avenue Street Improvement project will close pedestrian sidewalk gaps on San Juan Avenue to improve access to Buena Vista Elementary School. The project will also perform pavement repair and repave San Juan Avenue along the frontage of Buena Vista Elementary School as shown on Sheet 1 of the attachment. The pavement repair and repaving work has been quantified and will be paid for by local funds. The bid item quantities and engineer s estimate are quantified below. Expenditures will be based on the estimated quantities with the Contract bid unit costs. Local funded work for the San Juan Avenue Street Improvement project: SAN JUAN AVENUE PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE ESTIMATED TOTAL PRICE Pavement Milling (2 ) SF $1.00 $20, HMA Overlay with Leveling Course TON 253 $ $50, Full Depth Pavement Repair SF 2818 $14.00 $39, Subtotal for Locally funded work for the San Juan Street Improvement Project $110, The Buena Vista Avenue Road Rehabilitation project will perform pavement repair, repave the roadway, replace damaged sidewalk and perform ADA upgrades at curb ramp locations. Additional improvements to install bicycle facilities, close pedestrian sidewalk gaps and install pedestrian bulb-outs at Sandy Lane, Alvarado Avenue intersection and 3 rd Avenue intersection will be performed to improve pedestrian and bicycle access. Improvements to install bicycle facilities, closing pedestrian sidewalk gaps and installing pedestrian bulb-outs have been quantified and will be paid for by the TLC funding. The bid item quantities and engineer s estimate are summarized below and shown and detailed on Sheets 2 and 3 of the attachments. Expenditures will be based on the estimated quantities with the Contract bid unit costs. The Hillside Avenue Sidewalk Gap Closure project will be funded entirely by the TLC grant. 8-35

38 Page 2 TLC funded work for the Buena Vista Avenue Road Rehabilitation project: BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE ESTIMATED TOTAL PRICE Thermoplastic Traffic Stripe - Caltrans Detail 39 LF 4163 $0.55 $2, Thermoplastic Traffic Stripe - Caltrans Detail 39A LF 700 $1.00 $ Thermoplastic Legends and Markings SF 392 $3.00 $1, Share The Road Sign - W11-1 and W16-1P EA 6 $ $4, Begin Bike Lane Sign - R81(CA) and R81A(CA) EA 1 $ $ End Bike Lane Sign - R81(CA) and R81A(CA) EA 1 $ $ SUBTOTAL $9, BULB-OUT AND SIDEWALK GAP CLOSURE AT SANDY LANE DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE ESTIMATED TOTAL PRICE Full Depth Pavement Reconstruct SF 1073 $5.00 $5, Remove Asphalt SF 1952 $7.00 $13, Install Asphalt Plug SF 248 $20.00 $4, Install Curb & Gutter LF 248 $38.00 $9, Install Sidewalk SF 450 $10.00 $4, Install Concrete Driveway SF 1130 $25.00 $28, Install Sidewalk Cross Drain EA 3 $ $2, SUBTOTAL $68, BULBOUT AT ALVARADO AVE INTERSECTION DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE ESTIMATED TOTAL PRICE Full Depth Pavement Reconstruct SF 2507 $5.00 $12, Remove Asphalt SF 370 $7.00 $2, Install Asphalt Plug SF 57 $20.00 $1, Install Curb & Gutter LF 57 $38.00 $2, Install Sidewalk SF 20 $10.00 $ Install Curb Ramp SF 265 $16.00 $4, SUBTOTAL $22, BULB-OUT AND SIDEWALK GAP CLOSURE AT 3rd AVE INTERSECTION DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY ESTIMATED UNIT TOTAL PRICE PRICE Full Depth Pavement Reconstruct SF 2711 $5.00 $13, Remove Asphalt SF 5600 $7.00 $39, Install Asphalt Plug SF 557 $20.00 $11, Install Curb & Gutter LF 557 $38.00 $21, Install Sidewalk SF 2058 $10.00 $20, Install Curb Ramp SF 1082 $16.00 $17, Install Concrete Driveway SF 1093 $25.00 $27, SUBTOTAL $150, Subtotal for TLC funded work for the Buena Vista Avenue Road Rehabilitation Project $251,

39 8-37

40 8-38

41 8-39

42

43 Attachment F 8-40

44 8-41

45 8-42

46 8-43

47 Attachment G Quarterly Project Status Report ATTACHMENT E Jan Mar, 2015 Project Northwest Walnut Creek Pedestrian and Bicycle Access (TLC ) Sponsor Walnut Creek Subregion Central County Project Scope The Hillside Avenue project will improve crosswalks, filling gaps in sidewalks, and install a protected pedestrian signal at the I-680 underpass to connect to the Walnut Creek BART station. The San Juan Avenue project (near the Buena Vista Elementary School) will close a gap in the pedestrian network, modify on-street perpendicular parking stalls to 45 degree stalls, and provide curb ramps and sidewalks. The Buena Vista Avenue project replace damaged sidewalks, add ADA upgrades, and install bicycle facilities, close pedestrian sidewalk gaps and install pedestrian bulb-outs between Geary and Parkside. Project Status and Continuing Activities Construction contract for the San Juan Avenue Street Improvement project is scheduled to be awarded April 2015 with construction scheduled to between June and December The Hillside Avenue improvement project is at the 90% design level. Caltrans Encroachment Permit comments under I-680 for sidewalk installation and traffic signal upgrades are being addressed with the completed PS&E package scheduled for late Construction is scheduled for Project Issues/Areas of Concern The Caltrans Encroachment Permit work under the I-680 overpass on Hillside Drive requires the TLC project to be performed with separate construction contracts, since the work on San Juan Avenue is adjacent to an elementary school and needs to be completed prior to the start of school in Changes Since Last Quarterly Update Construction for the San Juan Avenue Street Improvement is scheduled to occur between June and October PS&E is expected to be completed in late 2015 with construction scheduled for Project Location Schedule Summary Milestone Dates Project Approval/ Complete Environmental Document Final Design Right of Way & Utilities N/A Construction Funding by Source ($ 000s) Funding Source Amount Measure TLC $1,000,000 Local agency funds $425,000 Total $1,425,000 Construction of the Buena Vista Avenue Rehabilitation will occur in the summer of The bicycle and pedestrian enhancement components of the project are within the project scope of the City s TLC grant and will be subsidized through TLC funding. Updated April 6,