Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNB 7 CALTRANS CONST. 04-03-89~' ~'~ ~.~ F: ,"'~ !'~ · NEW BUSINESS NO. 7 Inter Corn TO: FROM: SUBJECT: WILLIAM HUSTON, CITY MANAGER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT/ENGINEERING DIVISION AGREEMENT FOR CERTAIN CITY STREET IMPROVEMENTS AS MITIGATION MEASURES FOR CALTRANS CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATION: That the Tustin City Council at their meeting of April 3, 1989 approve the Cooperative Agreement No. 12-028 between Caltrans and City of Tustin with deletion of Improvement No. 6 in Stage I as shown on Exhibit "A" and authorize Mayor to,execute said Agreement subject to final approval by the City Attorney's office, and authorize a supplemental 1988-89 budget appropriation in the amount of $19,000.00. BACKGROUND: As a phase of the Stage II construction of the Santa Ana (I-5)/Costa Mesa (Rte. 55) Interchange construction, Caltrans has determined that it will be necessary to demolish and construct each of the following local street bridge structures across the indicated freeways: Local Agency Street Freeway Santa Ana Tustin/Santa Ana Santa Ana Tustin Fourth Street Irvine/Fourth Street First Street First Street Santa Ana (I-5) Costa Mesa (Rte.55) Santa Ana (I-5) Costa Mesa (Rte.55) This demolition and reconstruction of each structure will require the total..,closure of each street across the respective freeway for a period of one (1) year. These closures will require re-routing of traffic during the periods of closure. The City staffs of Santa Ana and Tustin had expressed concerns to Caltrans on the traffic impacts that would be experienced by each City as a result of these street closures for a combined period of two (2) years. In 1988, the City Council of each City authorized a First Street/Fourth Street-Irvine Boulevard detour study which has been completed by the firm of Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade and Douglas, Inc. This study evaluated the traffic impacts to each City as they relate to the various combinations of street closures and suggests certain local street and traffic signal improvements to help reduce the effects of these impacts. Some of these suggested improvements are those outlined in Exhibit "A" of the subject agreement. A list of similar type improvements was included within the City of Santa Ana agreement which was approved by the Santa Ana City Council in early March 1989. AGREEMENT FOR CITY STREET IMPROVEMENTS MARCH 27, 1989 PAGE 2. Caltrans has selected the desired alternative outlined in the City's consultant study where the work is described as follows: o Phase I includes the demolition and reconstruction of two bridges simultaneously. One bridge on Irvine Boulevard/Fourth Street over the Costa Mesa (Rte.55) Freeway and one bridge on Fourth Street over the Santa Ana (I-5) Freeway. This work will require street closures at each location for a period of one (1) year. o Phase II includes the demolition and reconstruction of two bridges simultaneously. One bridge on First Street over the Costa Mesa (Rte.55) Freeway and one bridge over the Santa Ana (I-5) Free~ay. This work will also require street closures at each location for a period of one (1) year. The previously mentioned local street improvements will help reduce the anticipated traffic congestion as a result of the street closures. These proposed improvements within Tustin and their estimated costs are shown below: Phase I - Closure of Irvine Boulevard/Fourth Street at I-5 and Rte. 55 1... Widen west side of Yorba Street between First Street and Irvine Boulevard ....................... $ 82,000 2. Remove on-street parking and re-stripe Yorba Street between First Street and Irvine Boulevard ................ 2,000 3. Remove on-street parking .and re-stripe First Street between Tustin Avenue and 300 to 400 feet easterly of Y~rba/Pacific streets ................................ ~irst -- ~treet 1,000 4. Modify traffic signal at Street/Yorba · Pacific Street ........................................... 30,000 5. ~odify traffic signal at Irvine Boulevard/Yorba Street ... 30,000 6. Widen south side of First Street at Tustin Avenue and modify traffic signal .................................... 218,000 Phase II - Closure of First Street at I-5 and Rte. 55 1. Re-stripe northbound Yorba Street at Irvine Boulevard ...$ 2. Modify traffic signal at Irvine Boulevard/Yorba Street .. 3. Re-stripe eastbound Irvine Boulevard at Yorba Street .... 4. Remove on-street parking and re-stripe Irvine Boulevard between Yorba Street and Prospect Avenue ................ 5. Modify traffic signal at First Street/Yorba Street ...... 6. Re-stripe Yorba Street between First Street and Irvine Boulevard ........................................ 2,000 30,000 2,000 5,000 30,000 2,000 Total Phase I and Phase II $434,000 AGREEMENT FOR CITY STREET IMPROVEMENTS MARCH 27, 1989 PAGE 3. Please note that Item No. 6 on the Caltrans Exhibit "A" has been deleted. Staff does not concur with re-striping Main Street between Pacific Street and Elk Lane (in Santa Ana) to four travel lanes due to the narrow roadway, the Main Street underpass, the driveway access to Main Street, and upcoming freeway construction of the underpass. DISCUSSION: Caltrans has prepared the attached agreement that provides the vehicle for the City to construct the suggested improvements and for Caltrans to reimburse the City 100% of the construction cost, provided they do not exceed the costs outlined on Exhibit "A" of the agreement. This agreement provides~ for the City to furnish all engineering design and construction contract administration at the City's sole cost. Estimated design cost for this work is $24,000 wherein approximately $5,000 may be reimbursable through the City's AHFP project at First Street and Tustin Avenue. These proposed improvements include some key issues which could be a concern to the adjacent residents/businesses. These issues are identified as follows: 1. Removal of on-street parking on both sides of Yorba Street between First and Irvine Boulevard. 2.. Removal of on-street parking on both sides of First Street between Tustin Avenue and 300-400 feet easterly of Yorba/Pacific Streets. 3. Removal of on-street parking on both sides of Irvine Boulevard between Yorba Street and Prospect Avenue. It is anticipated that the adjacent residents/businesses would oppose any on-street parking removal despite the fact that these developments all have on-site parking as required by City development standards. · Eac~' of the directly affected intersections within Tustin's jurisdiction were reviewed for existing conditions and project conditions with each phase of the street closures and are summarized in volume/capacity ratios and levels of service on Table 1. Level of Service (LOS) definitions as defined by the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual are provided in Table 2. Typically, LOS D is considered the maximum LOS appropriate for an urban setting. Trip assignments for the suggested detouring for Phase I and Phase II of the proposed street closures allocate all trips to the shortest available route during the reconstruction project, and do not take into account possible trip diversions created by congestion. These potential congested conditions required evaluation of alternative routes throughout the study area to accommodate any likely spillover traffic demand. ~ AGREEMENT FOR CITY STREET IMPROVEMENTS MARCH 27, 1989 PAGE 4. In order to minimize the effects of additional traffic congestion on streets and intersections within the impacted areas of Tustin, it is recommended that the City Council approve the street/intersection improvement listed in Exhibit "A" of the Caltrans agreement, with the exception of Improvement No. 6 in Stage I, and direct staff to commence with the plan preparation for said improvements at an estimated net cost to the City of $19,000.00. Additionally, it is recommended that the subject agreement be approved by the City Council and the Mayor be authorized to execute same, subject to final approval by the City Attorney who is currently reviewing this document. Bob Ledendecker Director of Public Works/City Engineer BL:mv O~ 0 0 u~ 0 -H 0 0 -~l 0 0 -,-I TABLE 2 LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS Level of Service Traffic Flow/Delay Characteristics A Very low delay, i.e., less than 5.0 sec per vehicle. This occurs when progression is extremely favorable, and most vehicles arrive during the green phase. Most vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may also contribute to low delay. Delay in the range of 5.1 to 15.0 sec per vehicle. This generally occurs with good progression and/or short cycl~ lengths. More vehicles stop than for LOS A, causing higher levels of average delay. Delay in the range of 15.1 to 25.0 sec per vehicle. These higher delays may result from fair progression and/ or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear in this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, although many still pass through the intersection without stopping. Delay in the range of 25.1 to 40.0 sec per vehicle. At level D, the influence of congestion becomes more notice- able. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high v/c ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable. Delay in the range of 40.1 to 60.0 sec per vehicle. This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. These high delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high v/c ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. Delay in excess of 60.0 sec per vehicle. This is considered to be unacceptable to most drivers. This condition often occurs with oversaturation, i.e., when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersec- tion. It may also occur at high v/c ratios below 1.00 with many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also be major contributing causes to such delay levels. 12-0RA-5/55 Stage 2 12209 - 101641 District Agreement No. 12-028 THIS AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO ON 19 is between the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, acting by and through its Department of Transportation, referred to herein as STATE, and CITY OF TUSTIN a body politic and a municipal corporation of the State of California, referred to herein as CITY. RECITALS 1. STATE and CITY, pursuant to Streets and Highways Code Section 130, are authorized to enter into a Cooperative Agreement for improvements to CITY streets within the CITY, said CITY streets which would be impacted by the construction of the. STATE's project to reconstruct the 5/55 Interchange. 2. .STATE recognizes that with reconstruction of the Routes 5/55 In~terchange, inter-city traffic flow will be diverted to certain CITY streets and is willing to cooperate to alleviate the expected traffic congestion by participating in street improvements listed on Exhibit A, hereinafter called PROJECT. Exhibit A is attached and made a part of this Agreement. 3. CITY recognizes the potential impacts to CITY streets and is willing to cooperate in completing PROJECT. 4. This Agreement supersedes any prior Memorandum of ,. ~nderstanding (MOU) relating to this project. 5. The parties hereto desire to define herein the terms and conditions under which said PROJECT will be developed and designed and under which the CITY is to be reimbursed. - 2 - SECTION I STATE AGREES: 1. To fund one hundred (100) percent of construction cost of PROJECT provided these costs do not exceed the amount shown in Exhibit A and are completed prior to their need to mitigate the impacts of construction caused by STATE's Stage 2 project to reconstruct the 5/55 Interchange. 2. To provide, at no cost to CITY, prompt reviews and approvals as appropriate of submittals by CITY, and to cooperate in timely processing of the PROJECT. 3. To issue at no cost, upon proper application, an encroachment permit to CiTY authorizing entry onto STATE's right-of-way to perform survey and construction activities required for completion of PROJECT. 4. To deposit with CITY within 25 days of receipt of billing therefor (which billing may be forwarded immediately following CITY's bid advertising date of a construction contract for PROJECT) the amount of $439,000, which figure represents STATE's share of the expense of construction costs required to complete PROJECT, as shown on Exhibit A. STATE's total obligation for said anticipated PROJECT costs under this Agreement shall not exceed the amount of $439,000. - 3 - SECTION II CITY AGREES: 1. To prepare PS&E and to administer the construction contract, at no cost to STATE, for said PROJECT with CITY and/or consultant forces. The PS&E are to be prepared in accordance with STATE's laws, rules, regulations, policies, procedures, manuals, standard plans and specifications, and other standards including compliance with Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements. Said PS&E are to be subject to ongoing review and formal draft and final review and approval by STATE and FHWA. The CITY and/or its consultants shall not incorporate in the design any materials or equipment of single or sole source origin without the written approval of' the~STATE. 2. To furnish STATE, prior to commencing work on the PROJECT, a proposed time schedule to complete the PS&E and the construction contract for PROJECT. 3. To have the final design documents and drawings of structural, mechanical, electrical, civil, architectural, or other engineering features of the PROJECT prepared by or under the direction of engineers or architects registered and licensed in the applicable professional field in the State of California. Any reports, the specifications, and each sheet of plans shall - 4 - bear the professional seal, 6ertificate number, registration classification, expiration date of certificate, and signature of the professional engineer responsible for their preparation. 4. To retain all books, documents, papers, accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to costs incurred, including support data for cost proposals, and make such materials available at the respective offices of the CITY and its subcon- tractors at all reasonable times during the contract period and for three years from the date of final payment under the contract. The STATE, FHW~, or any duly authorized representative of the Federal Government shall have access to any books, records, and documents of the CITY and its subcontractors that are pertinent to the contract for audits, examinations, excerpts, and transactions, and copies thereof shall be furnished if requested. SECTION III IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED: 0. 1o Ail obligations of STATE under the terms of this Agreement are contingent upon the appropriation of resources by the Legislature. 2. The total cost reimbursement payable by STATE to CITY under this Agreement will not exceed $439,000, and will be subject to audit verification as to all elements of costs and - 5 - fees charged. Any STATE funds remaining on deposit with CITY for work by CITY shall be returned to STATE within 30 days after completion and acceptance of PROJECT. 3. Nothing in the provisions of this Agreement is intended to create duties or obligations to or rights in third parties not parties to this Agreement or affect the legal liability of either party to the Agreement by imposing any standard of care respecting the maintenance of State highways different from the standard of car~ imposed by law. It is understood and agreed that neither STATE nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reasons of anything done or omitted to be done by CITY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to CITY under this Agreement. It is under- stood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, CITY shall fully defend, indemnify and save harmless the State of California, all officers and employees from all claims, suits or ,actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on account of injuries to or death of any person or damage to property resulting from anything done or omitted to be done by the CITY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to the CITY under this Agreement. - 6 - 4. It is understood and agreed that neither CITY nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reasons of anything done or omitted to be done by STATE under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to STATE under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, STATE shall defend, indemnify and save harmless the CITY from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on account of injuries to or death of any person or damage to property resulting from anything done or omitted to. be done by STATE under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to the STATE under this Agreement. 5. No alteration or variation of the terms of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by the parties hereto and no oral understanding or agreement not incorporated herein shall be binding on any of the parties hereto. 6. STATE reserves the right to terminate this Agreement °~pon written notice to CITY. At the time of termination, CITY will be paid for work accomplished and delivered in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. 7. The STATE will only participate in PROJECT work that will be completed prior to the commencement of the Stage 2 - Route 5/55 Interchange Reconstruction PROJECT. - 7 - 8. Except as otherwise provided in Article 6 above, this Agreement shall terminate upon completion a~d acceptance of the construction contract for PROJECT or on November 1, 1990, whichever is earlier in time. Any CITY refunds due STATE shall be determined after final accounting of costs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA Department of Transportation ROBERT K. BEST Director of Transportation CITY OF TUSTIN By. Mayor By. KEITH E. McKEAN District Director Attest City Clerk Approved as to Form and Procedure Attorney Department of Transportation Certified as to Funds and Procedure District Accounting Officer - 8 -