HomeMy WebLinkAbout3 Bee Creek Greenway TrailMeeting Notes
Hike and Bike Trail Completion
Bee Creek Greenway Trail
(Along FM 2818 between Texas and Wellborn)
May 1, 2009
City Attendees: Danielle Charbonnet, Graduate Engineer (CIP); Venessa Garza, Greenways Program
Manager (P&DS); Joe Guerra, Transportation Planner (P&DS); and Beth Boerboom, Staff
Assistant (P&DS)
TxDOT Attendee : Mr. Chad Bohne, P.E., Bryan District Advanced Planning Engineer
After a brief overv iew given by Danielle Charbonnet, Venessa Garza and Joe Guerra , the following notes
were collected based on Chad Bohne's feedback .
• Current progress of plan
o AFA review
• AFA review for Bike Loop Phase 3 is finished with no surprises
• Potential issues with trail on south side of FM 2818
o Environmental clearance
• Needed due to disturbance of public ROW
• We may able to obtain a Categorical Exclusion
o Confirmation of necessary width
• Chad would need to verify the area is not needed/planned for another facility or
needed by TxDOT
o Confirmation of no conflicts with existing utilities
o Drainage issues
• Existing improvements
o Wellborn
• Normal, off-set sidewalk planned for east side
• Plan for multi-use path on west side of Wellborn between road and railroad was
considered but railroad company did not approve
o FM 2818 -south side
• No current plans or proposals for the section between the high school and Longmire
o FM 2818 -north side
• Grade separation project is currently taking place
o FM 2818
• Originally planned to be a freeway but now this is improbable
o Christine Ln
• Right in/Right out
• General suggestions
o Send an informal layout to TxDOT for any additional plans or changes to plans before
progressing too far in planning process
• Include crossing information with the layout
From :
To:
CC :
Date:
Subject:
Joe Guerra
Charbonnet, Danielle
Garza, Venessa; Rother, Troy
2/15/2010 4:07 PM
FM 2818 Hike & Bike Trail Comments
I I
Sheet #1 List of sheets -TxDOT has SW3P Standard Sheets. Note begin project and end project on vicinity map
Sheet #5 Check station limits on sheets 9 & 10. Note begin project and end project.
I
Sheet #6 Typical Sect io ns are not drawn to scale relative to each other. 10' on one typical section looks longer than on another
typ ical section.
Sheet #7 Line symbology I am guessing is for silt fence because it is not on a legend. The plan sheets are to busy, I suggest a
separate sheet fo r SW3P items. Again we talked abo ut th is last meeting, but the absence of a vertica l profile makes it hard to
check ADA grade requirements .
Sheet #8 Line symbology fo r tree protection is not on a legend .
Sheet #9 Tree list and numbering system is hard to read on plan view, I suggest a separate sheet maybe comb ining it with the
separate SW3 P sheets . ·
General comme nts: I assume quantity sheets will be part of 100% submission. Cross slope labe ling and station limits we re not
included.
Joe R. Guerra Jr. AICP, PTP
Transportation Pl anning Coord inator
Planning and Development Services
P.O. Box 9960
1101 Texas Avenue
City· of College Station, TX 77842
979-764 -3556 Office Phone
979-764 -3496 Fax
email: jguerra@cstx.gov
City of College Station
Home of Texas A&M University @
Multi-Use Path Alqng Harvey Mit hell PaA
Hike and Bike Trail Completion (ST-0904)
Presentation by:
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
I p Bury+ Partners
ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS
Multi-Use Path Along Harvey Mitchell Pa ,,
Hike and Bike Trail Completion (ST-0904)
i> Bury Partners CJrr-..
E N G I N E E R I N G s 0 l u T I 0 N s Crrv OF Cou .F.GF. STATION
Project Overview
• Funding - 1 million dollars was allocated from the
November 2008 Bond Referendum.
• The Hike and Bike Task Force identified high priority t 1
projects in 2004. A portion of this multi-use path was
identified in that process.
• The corridor will provide connectivity to key destinat io
including A&M Consolidated High School, Bee Creek
Park and commercial property such as Walmart.
I! p Bury 1-Partners
On OF C01.1.F.GE ST,\TION ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS
..
General Improvements
• 10 ft wide trail
• Drainage improvements along trail route
• Pedestrian signage and striping
• Pedestrian signalization and push-buttons at interse
crossings on the north side only
! p Bury -Partners
CIT Y OF Cou.F.GF. STAT IO ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS
Safety Consideratio s
• Trail will be ADA compliant through the entirety of the r
• Safety handrail installed at Bee Creek Crossing on ere
side
• Pedestrian friendly improvements at intersection cros s
I p Bury + Partner s
CITY OF Cou .r.cr. ST,ITJ ON ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS
Tim ·eline
• Anticipated Completion
• Design: February 2010
• Construction: September 2010
~ p Bury -Partners
ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS CITY OF Cou.F.GE ST,moN
Section 1
! P Bury Partners
ENGINEERING SOLU T IONS CITY OF Cou .F .• r. S TAT IO
• •
Section 2
! P Bury Partners
ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS Crrv OF Cou .r.cE ST,mo '
Section 3
! p Bury _.__ Partners
ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS CIT Y OF Cou .F.GF. 5TA1·10N
Section 4
~ Bury Partners
ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS CIT Y OF Cou.F.G E STAT IO N
P1 Bury p artn er s
ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS
Section 5
CIT Y OF COl.1.F.CE STATION
Contacts
For additional information or to submit comments, pleas
the following link and click on "Projects".
www.cstx.gov/greenconnections
City of College Station Contact Information
Danielle Charbonnet
Capital Projects Department
979-764-5028
dcharbonnet@cstx.gov
Venessa Garza
Planning and Development Serv
979-764-367 4
vgarza@cstx.gov
! p Bury Partners
CITY OF COLLF.l.F. STAT IO ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS
Background
Bike Loop Phase II
Realignment
Capital Projects Department
March 8, 2010
~ Original 1993 grant proposal for the College Station Bike
Loop to provide roughly circular connection of bicycle
facilities connecting Texas A&M University, regional and
local retail centers, residential areas , as well as various
municipal buildings and several city parks.
~ 3 Phase Project :
0 Phas e I -Constructed 29 ,000 If (5 .5 mil es) of bike lanes and signed
bike route s, and upgrades to existing paths ;
0 Phase II -Constructed 7,800 If (1.5 miles) of bike paths through
Central Pa r k , Lemontree Park , and Bee Cr eek Park ;
0 Phase Il l -Upon completion of Bee Creek Drainage Improvements ,
would complete p ath along the Bee Creek shelf to Texas Avenue .
1
Original Alignment
2
Proposed Alignment
Node Connection
3
Benefits
~ Accomplishes same goals with benefit of
preserving trees
~ Allows connectivity with east side of Texas
Avenue
~ Provides more direct connection from south
of town northward towards the A&M campus
Questions
4
Design Progress MeITD
To: Danielle Charbonnet
From: Alex Reyna , P.E.
CC:
Date : February 1, 2010
BURY+ PARTNERS, INC.
Re : Hike and Bike Trail Completio n (ST-0904) -90% Submittal ·
Dear Ms. Charbonnet:
We will be submitting the 90 % design of the hike and bike trail along Harvey
Mitchell Parkway on Monday February 1, 2010 to your office for your review.
Please accept this memorandum as a summary of tasks that have been completed,
issues that have arose during the 90 % design, and tasks to be completed . Also
attached to this memorandum is a response to the comments generated during the
60 % design review .
Upon being released to proceed with 90 % plans on December 22, 2009, BPI began
addressing comments generated by City of College Station staff as well as adding
the final components to the plan set. The geotechnical engineering report for the
project was completed on January 8, 2010 and has been included with this
submittal package for the City's use. Furthermore, the environmental sub-
consultant anticipates that th e Categorical Exclusion document to be compl ete d and
ready for cli ent review by February 8, 2010.
For the 90 % Design, BPI focused on finalizing the grading, adding the drainage
improvements , and finalizing traffic improvements for the project. The drainage
improvements at Nueces A venue Crossing, Southwood Drive Crossing, and
Longmire Drive Crossing have been appropriately sized placed in ord er to aid in
the drainage with the construction of the trail.
Upon consulting with our environmental sub-consultant and TxDOT environmental
engineers, any disturbance to the trees at Bee Creek Crossing will not trigger
coordination with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) because the
trees do not meet the "mature " classification as set by TPWD. With regards to the
permit obtain by the City for the Bee Creek area, any disturbance to these trees will
not affect the permit as long as the trees are restored and maintained after the
completion of the trail construction.
Finally, the bid proposal as well as the specifications have been completed and
included with this submittal package for the City's review.
The it ems in the above memorandum are only a brief summarization of the tasks
that have been completed and what is to be completed . We will be able to go into
greater detail during the 90% Submittal Meeting. Please do not hesitate to contact
us if you should have any questions or comments.
Project Engineer
Page2
60 % Design Review Comment Response
1. Sheet 6 -The cross-section for the 6' sidewalk scales off at 3 inche s, but our COCS standard
states that we do a 4 inch sidewalk.
BPI received the Geote chnical Engineerin g Report and have revised and finalized the
various cross-s ections per the recommendations of the report .
2. Ple ase review AASHTO "Guid e for the development of bicycle facilities" fo r design criteria. I
believe it states a 6: 1 slope for the first 2 feet off of the ed ge of the path , 3 feet being preferred
for vertical clearance .
The grading has been reviewed and revised to reflect 6:1 slope for the first 2jeet off the
edge of the trail. All area s along the trail meet or exceed the minimum verti cal clearance at
th is time . Tr ee pruning will be required in the fature to mainta in th e minimum vertical
clearance .
3 . Include station numbers for where each cross-section applies.
The range of stations for each cross -section has been provided on Sheet 6 -Typical
Sections.
4. Include cro ss-section for traffic rated section at driv ewa y cro ssing s.
BPI received the Geotechnical Engineering Report and have revised and finalized the
various cross-sections per the recommendations of th e report.
5 . Sheet 7 -Note to adjust existing electrical ground bo x .
A note has been included on Sh eet 7 to address th e adj us tment to the electri cal g round box.
6. Sheet 8 -Show where the gas line runs from the gas m arker along Nueces.
A subswface utility investigation was not conducted as part of this project, therefo re the
location of dry utilities that have been identified by survey data is for reference only. It is
the responsibility of the contractor to iden tify and locat e underground dry utilities. Various
notes and annotations have been included within the plan set to show the contractor where
crossings are located and th eir assumed re sponsibility .
Page3
7 . Reconsider the design of the culverts on the west side of Nueces. You ha ve the proposed
culvert connecting in against the flow of the existing culvert pipe that is being extended.
Based upon th e survey data that was obtained and visua l insp ections ofthe existing culverts,
th e proposed culverts have been appropriately sized and designed.
8. Label Nueces.
All roadways have been labeled wi thin the plan set.
9 . Will adjustments to the light pole be required adjacent to the path on the west side of Nueces?
An annotation has been included within the plan set describ in g the relocation of the laminar.
10. Show where the electrical conduit runs to from the li ght poles.
A subsurface utility investigation was not conducted as part of thi s project, therefore the
location of dry utilities that have been identified by survey data is for referen ce only. It is
the responsibility of th e contractor to identify and locate underground dry utilities . Various
notes and annotations have been included within the plan set to show the contractor where
crossings are lo cated and their assumed responsibility.
11. Show the depth of the culv ert in plan-view and show cross-section.
Flow line data has been included within th e plans for all existing and proposed drainage
features. A cross-secti on has also been included for all proposed drainage features .
12 . Verify that proposed stop bar location is less than or equal to 30 feet from the edge line
marking. Reference TMUTCD requirement.
The proposed relocation of the stop bar meets th e minim um requirements of the TMUTCD
requirements.
13 . Stop sign located per TMUTCD.
The proposed relocation of the stop sign meets the minimum requirements of the TMUTCD
requirements.
14. Label all ambulatory r amps and reference detail .
All ambulatory ramps have been labeled and referenced to their approp riate detail.
Page4
15. Culvert on the east side of Nueces does not appear positioned with the flow-line of the ditch.
Based upon the survey data that was obtained and visual inspections of the existing culverts,
the proposed culverts have been appropriately sized and designed.
16. Show underground electric near Sta. 20 + 50 in cross-section view.
A subsuiface utility in vestigation was not conducted as part of this project, therefore th e
location of dry utilities that have been identified by survey data is for reference only. It is
the responsibility of the contractor to identify and locate underground dry utilities. Various
notes and annotations have been included within the plan set to show the contractor where
crossings are located and their assumed responsibility.
17 . Reference intersection detail sheet.
For proposed improvements with re gards to signage and striping at intersections, exzstzng
conditions have been included within the plan set and annotations have been included
stating that proposed signage and stripping has been included on the resp ective intersection
detail sheet.
18. Sheet 9 -Design path across private driveway so that there isn 't a sharp slope between th e
sidewalk and the edge of roadway.
Comment Noted
19. Label tree type and sizes on the plans.
Tree tables have been included on the plan sheets that include trees that have been
surveyed.
20. Path appears too close to cluster of trees on the north side of the path, within 5'. Construction
will impact root zone . Position path such that it minimizes impact on the trees.
' The cluster of trees was surveyed and marked at the outside edge of the branches and brush .
We are confident that this alignment will not impact the root zone of the trees.
21. Show where the conduit runs between light poles .
A subsuiface utility investigation was not conducted as part of this project, therefore the
location of dry utilities that have been identified by survey data is for reference only. It is
the responsibility of the contractor to identify and lo cate underg round dry utilities. Various
notes and annotations have been included within th e plan set to show the contractor where
crossings are located and their assumed responsibility.
Pages
22. Show the radius of the path at the light pole near Sta. 25+50.
Line and curve tables have been included with the plan set.
23. Label rock wall on plan view. Will a handrail still be included? Provide detail view .
The ro ck wall has been labeled and a cross-section of this area has been included on the
specific plan sheet. Details have also been included within th e detail sheets .
24. Rock wall alignment can remain as shown in 60 % plans and the trees can be removed to be
replaced provided you provide a detailed spec that outlines the care and maintenance of the
tree s while uprooted . Can al so consider changing rock wall angle to minimize tree impact.
May consider doing this to stay below trigger points of th e environmental review .
BPI has consulted TxDOT environmental staff as well as our environmental sub-consulta nt
with rega rds to the disturba nce to the trees. Any impact to the trees will not trigger review
with the Texas Parks and Wil dlife Department (IPWD) because the existing trees do not
meet the "mature" classification as set by TPWD.
2 5 . She et 10-Show where th e conduit runs from the light pole near Sta. 28+00 .
A subsurface utility investigation was not conducted as part of this p roj ect, therefore the
location of dry utilities that have been identified by survey data is for reference only . It is
the responsibili ty of th e contractor to identify and locate underground dry utilities . Various
notes and annotations have been included within the plan set to show the contractor where
crossings are located and th eir assumed responsibility.
2 6. Include tree protection/pruning plan for areas where path near tree s or brush, like Sta. 31 +50.
Al so, see AASHTO requirement for vertical Clearance of bike paths.
Tree protection w ill be included with the specifications of the project.
27. Sheet 11 -Label electrical crossing at Sta. 33 +00 as overhead or underground electrical.
The label has been revised to reflect th e appropriate type of electrical crossing.
28. Pipeline marker symbol not shown in legend. Show where the pipeline runs on the plans fr om
the marker.
The pipe line marker has been added to the legend. A subswface uti li ty investigation was
not conducted as part of this project, therefore the location of dry utiliti es that have been
identified by survey data is for reference only . It is the responsibility of the contra ctor to
identify and locate underground dry utilities. Various notes and anno tations have been
Page6
included within the plan set to show th e contractor where crossings are located and their
assumed responsibility.
29 . Path seems to close to the trees at Sta. 33 + 50 . How will root zone be handl ed so tree s do no t
die?
The route was first walked with BPI and City staff to obtain an approved alignment. BPI ·
feels that the current ali gnment will not affect the root zones of the trees.
30. Show the path radius around th e tee near Sta. 36+00.
Line and curve tables have been included with the plan set.
31. Sheet 12 -Flatten the curvature of the path in this area similar to Sheet 15.
Th e ali gnment has been modified in this area to reduce the curvature of th e p ath.
32 . Show wh er e el ectrical runs that connects to the existing electric ground box near Sta. 39+00 .
A subsuiface utility in vestigation was not conducted as part of this project, therefore the
location of dry utilities that have been identified by survey data is for reference only. It is
the responsibility of the contractor to identify and locate underground dry utilities. Various
notes and annotations have been included within the plan set to show the contractor where
cro ss in gs are located and their assumed responsibility.
33. Show where th e conduit run s betw een th e light poles.
A subsuiface utility investigation was not conducted as part of this project, therefore the
location of d ry utilities that have been identified by survey data is for reference only. It is
the responsibility of the contractor to identify and lo cate underground dry utilities. Various
notes and an no tations have been included within the plan set to show th e contractor where
crossin gs are loca ted and their assumed responsibility.
34. Shrubs or bollards at the end of the asphalt driveway.
City staff need to make a decision on what type of treatment shall be proposed, if any. The
cross-section of the trail will be traffic rated from the Utility Substation to just east of the
beginning of the frontage road in order to prevent vehicles from crushing the trail.
35. Sheet 13 -Label rock wall. Show in detail.
The rock wall has been labeled and a cro ss-section of this area has been included on the
specific plan sheet . Details have also been included within the detail sheets.
Page?
36. Make sure grading will not impact signal pole. Foundation and bol ts cannot be co ve red.
The gra.ding has been modified and/or a.djusted near the signal founda tions to prevent the
foundations from being covered.
37. Include pedestrian buttons for both north and south directions.
Pedestrian buttons have been included for a user to travel from north to south.
38. Label ambulatory ramps and reference appropriate detail .
All ambulatory ramps have been labeled and referenced to their appropriate detail.
39 . Reference intersection detail sheet.
For proposed improvements with re ga rds to signage and strip ing at inters ections, ex 1stmg
condition s have been included within the plan set and annotations have been included
sta ting that proposed signage and stripping has been included on th e respe ctive intersection
detail sheet.
40. Label culvert as proposed at Sta. 48 + 25.
Flow lin e data has been included within the plans for all existing and proposed drainage
features. A cross-section has also been included for all proposed drainage features.
41. Sheet 16 -Label the box at the intersection on the west side of Longmire.
The symbol fo r a traffic control box has been added to the master leg end on Sheet 2.
42 . Label and reference ambulatory ramp detail .
A ll ambulatory ramps have been lab eled and referenced to thei r appropriate detail.
43. Show depth of gas line west of intersection . Show in cross-section view.
A subsuiface utility investigation was not conducted as part of th is project, therefore the
lo cation of dry utilities that have been identified by survey data is for referen ce only . It is
th e responsibility of the contractor to identify and locate underground dry utilities. Van·ous
notes and annotations have been included within the plnn set to show the contra ctor where
crossings are lo cated and th eir assumed responsibility .
Page8
44. Label culverts that are proposed as proposed.
Flow line data has been included within the plans for all existing and proposed drainage
features. A cross-section has also been included for all proposed drainage features.
45. Reference inter section detail sheet.
For proposed improvements with regards to signage and striping at intersections, exzstzng
conditions have been included within the plan set and ann otations have been included
stating that proposed signage and stripping has been included on the respective inters ection
detail sheet.
46. Rework the east corner at the intersection for compliant ADA ramps.
The co mer of Longmire and FM 2818 has been revis ed to comply with ADA requirements.
47. Sidewalk eas t of Longmire should be 8 foot wide.
The sidewalk has been revised to reflect 8-foot width with a taper to 6 feet at the end in
order to tie in to the existing sidewalk.
48. What's the depth of the underground electrical in the grading area?
A subsuiface utility investigation was not conducted as part of this project, th erefo re the
location of dry utilities that have been identified by survey data is for reference only. It is
the responsibility of the contractor to identify and lo cate underground dry utilities. Various
notes and annotations have been included within th e plan set to show th e contractor where
crossings are located and their assumed responsibility.
49. Sheet 17 -What are these gaps in the curb? Not clear.
The gaps in the curb represent existing cuts in the curb to allow for drainage.
SO. Taper down sidewalk width from 6 feet to 8 feet where it ties in to existing sidewalk at back of
curb.
A taper has been added.
S 1. Show trees as to be protected.
Tree protection has been added.
Page9
52. Include any trees and irrigation from Texas Ave. Streetscapes project on the plans and show to
be protected.
BPI has coordinated with WP and we have added the Texas Avenue Streetscape Plans to
assure we do not affect that project.
53. Sheets 18-20 -In addition to the summary of Proposed pavement markings, show in the plans
and give summary of existing pavement markings to be removed.
Pavement markings to be removed have been added to the plan sheets.
54 . Existing pavement markings need to be removed and not just covered in black paint.
Commen t Noted
55. C onfirm distance from pavement edge per TMUTCD requirement.
The proposed relocation of the stop bar meets the minimum requirements of the TMUTCD
requirements.
56. Sheet 18 -Relocate existing lane assignment sign north 50 feet from current location.
The proposed relocation of the lane geometry sign has been moved to 50 feet north of the
existing lo cation.
57 . Sheet 19 -Show existing signage.
Existing signage has been added to the plan sh eet.
5 8. What is the box label ed 'A'?
This is a reference to the electrical schedule table on the sheet. This annotation is common
practice when identifying electrical runs for th e purposes of signals.
59 . #4 stripe, 12" white so lid scales off as 34 LF.
Quantities have been checked and revised.
60. Show existing signal pole-as ilepicted in leg end.
Existing signal poles have been revised to refle ct the depiction of the legend.
Page 10
61. Sheet 20 -Show existing signage.
Existing signage has been added to the plan sheet.
62. What is the box lab eled 'A'?
This is a reference to th e electrical schedule table on the sheet . This annotation is common
practice when identifying electri ca l runs for the purposes of signals.
63 . Sh ow existing signal pole as depicted in legend.
Existing signal poles ha ve been revised to reflect the depiction of the legend.
64. Show depth of gas line .
A subsurface utility in vestigation was not condu cted as part of this project, therefore the
location of dry utilities that have been identified by survey dala is for reference only. It is
the responsibility of the contra ctor to identify and locate underground dry utilities. Various
notes and annotations have been included within th e plan set to show th e contractor where
crossings are located and their assumed responsibility.
General Comments :
65. Include both up and downstream flow -lines for all existing and prop osed drainage features .
Flow line dala has been added for all existing and proposed drainage features.
66. Show cross -sections at all utility cross in gs and drainage structures, proposed and existing.
A cross-section has been included for proposed and existing draina ge crossings.
67 . Provide a horizontal alignment data sheet to include vertical and horizontal control on th e
ground , specify datum.
Datum, curve, and lin e data tables have been included within the plan set.
68. Provide curve data on each plan sheet.
D atum, curve, and lin e data table s have been included within th e plan set.
69. Provide station lo cations where slope changes on multi-u se d path .
Spot eleva ti ons have been included at the north , middle, and south edge of th e trail along
the entire path of the trail.
Page 11
70. We will not use an alternate trail material for the path. The path shall be concrete.
Comment Noted
71. We do not wish to include an alternate for a sidewalk along Nueces.
Comment Noted
72. No brick pavers shall be included from Longmire to Texas.
Comment Noted
73 . The approximate letting date is driven mostly by the environmental review time . You can
include July 14, 2010 as the d ate for the CE.
Comment Noted
7 4. A waiting approval from T xD OT on th e construction staging area and the rock wall approval.
Comment Noted
75. Include survey control points and benchmarks.
Survey control points and benchmarks have been added.
Page 12
CITY OF C O UEGE S TAT IO N
Platni"K t7 Dn'f!.lo/mntl Stntica
PROJECT STATUS REPORT
PROJECT: Bee Creek Greenway Trail along FM 2818
Date: May 13, 2009
Project Status: Planning
CIP Project Manager: Danielle Charbonnett
Client Department: Planning and Development Services
Venessa Garza -Greenways Program Manager
Other Departments: Parks and Recreation; Public Works
BACKGROUND ~
One million dollars ~e allocated through the November 2008 Bond for the implementation of
projects identified by the Hike and Bike Task Force and adopted by City Council on November J <>-:t'
23, 2004 . Roi lout for these funds are slotted from FY 09 -FY 11. f' l-t 1'~ -tW \cPIU .......+<..
~~~T ~~ p"-'°j~'t--\~
High priority trail projects, identified by the Hike and Bike Task Fo rce in 2004, that have not
been completed include Bee Creek Trail West South {#2), Gulf States Utilities ROW (#5) and Bee
Creek Trail West North (#6). Based on these priorities initial conclusions indicated the
completion of Bee Creek Trail West South. This trail would follow FM 2818 on the south side
from Steeplechase Park to Southwood Drive which would also connect Larry J. Ringer Library
and Georgie K. Fitch Park.
Staff, however, recommends the completion of Bee Creek Trail West North (as identified on the
attached map from Welsh to Texas) due to a number of factors described here including: 1)
Connectivity to key destinations including A&M Consolidated High School, Bee Creek Park and
commercial property such as Walmart (crossing at Longmire) 2) Intersection improvements
(existing/under construction) at Welsh & FM 2818 and Longmire & FM 2818 and 3)
Demonstrated need from students attending A&M Consolidated High School wishing to walk
and bike to school along th i s corridor.
PROJECT STATUS
• Staff met with Hannah White, a student at A&M Consolidated HS who participated in
the walking demonstration on April 24th in front of the school. Students plan to attend
the City Council meeting on May 18th to express their desire for sidewalks along FM
2818 and present a petition .
• Staff met with TxDOT to discuss the proposed alignment within FM 2818 right of way.
TxDOT has given preliminary approval and requested a map to distribute to appropriate
departments for final approval.
..
• Staff also met with Mr. Ernest Reed, the principal of A&M Consolidated HS who is in
favor of a trail in front of the school.
Based on the current situation and factors listed above, staff recommends design and
construction of a greenway trail along the north side of 2818. Staff saw an opportunity at this
stage in the project to reevaluate priorities and consider factors described above.
July 9, 2009
Consent Agenda Item #
Hike & Bike Trail Completion
Professional Services Contract
To: Glenn Brown, City Manager
From: Chuck Gilman, Director of Capital Projects
Agenda Caption: Presentation , possible action, and discussion on a resolution awarding
the professional services contract (Contract No. 09~41) with Bury + Partners, Inc. in the
amount not to exceed $112,133 for engineering design services for the Hi ke & Bike Trail
Comp l etion Project (ST-0904).
Recommendation{s): Staff recommends Council approval of the resolution and award
of the professional services contract to Bury+Partners, Inc.
Summary: The Hike & Bike Tra j l Com p letion Project was part of the 2008 bond
authori zation to i mplement projects identified by the R ike & Bike Task Force and adopted by
Council on November 23 After hearing the concerns of students at A&M Consolidated
Hig c oo a e May 18th council meeting, staff proposed an alignment change and
Council supported the decision for a greenway trail to be constructed on the north side of
FM 2818 from Welsh to Texas Avenue . The Welsh to Texas Avenue trail is identified on the
HikQ g. 6 i k8 ~iii6t e r PlaA. "f,1 \(.L.L.J~ ~ Pe.~'""-MA.Stl.Ju Pl~.
Staff recommends building this portion of the plan to address the students ' concerns and
provide greater multimodal mobility along the FM 2818 corridor. The Welsh to Texas
Avenue trail will also connect to the current improvements along Longmire, including the
intersection improvements at FM 2818 and the bridge crossing Bee Creek, which will further
increase multimodal connectivity throughout the city .
Budget & Financial Summary: This project is funded from the 2008 Bond Authorization
in the amount of $1,000,000. Funds in the amount of $333,000 have been appropriated
this fiscal year for the design of the trail. $1,302.80 have been expended or comm itted to
date, leaving a balance of $331,697.20 for this contract award and future expenses .
Attachments: 1.)
2.)
p Tt ·~~of
Resolution
Project Location Map
~~/ _ ___,"
Q~ot -fk ptUot1.-(1', p"°)t-Li.S
Engineering Services Scope of Work
Prepared by Bury+ Partners
For
Texas Avenue/Welsh A venue Hike And Bike Trail
Project Description
The City of College Station (City) has established a Hike and Bike Trail Task Force, which
has identified approximately 40 projects for new construction or rehabilitation of trails
throughout the City . One of the projects selected is a new trail to be constructed from
Texas Avenue to Welsh Avenue along Harvey Mitchell Parkway (FM 2818).
Starting in front of A&M Consolidated High School at the northeast comer of
Welsh Avenue and FM 2818, the trail traverses east along the north right-of-way (R.O.W.)
of FM 2818 to reach a major creek crossing. Upon crossing the creek, the trail continues
east to terminate at Texas A venue at the northwestern return. The alignment of the trail lies
entirely within the Texas Department of Transportation's (TxDOT) R.O.W. The total length
of this project is approximately 6, 100 linear feet.
It is assumed that this alignment has been established by the City and an evaluation of
alternate alignments is not part of this scope of work .
Bury+ Partners, Inc. (Bury) has prepared the following scope of work for Preliminary
Engineering Services, Environmental, Preliminary Design, Final Design, and
Bidding/Construction Administration.
1. Data Collection
Bury and its sub-consultant team members (the Project Team) propose to include the
following services during the Data Collection phase of the project:
1.1. Conduct a project kick-off meeting with City staff and the Project Team. A walk of
the area will be conducted with City staff and the Project Team to spot any sensitive
areas and obtain concurrence on an alignment for the trail.
June 2, 2009
Page 2of6
1.2. The City has attended meetings with the TxDOT to understand what level of review,
including environmental, will be required. The City will provide meeting minutes
from this meeting.
1.3. The Project Team will coordinate with TxDOT to gather roadway plans for
FM 2818 for the extents of the project.
1.4. The Project Team will gather existing dry utility data along the trail path .
1.5. The City will provide any information regarding all existing wet utilities.
2. Environmental
Any project that lies within TxDOT R. 0. W . is required to submit some level of an
environmental document. This document depends on the level of disturbance in which the
project will have on the land which it is planned to be constructed. City staff attended a
meeting with TxDOT in which it was documented that a Categorical Exclusion (CE) would
be the required environmental document for this project. The following services will be
included within the Environmental Investigation of this project:
2.1. Per conversations with City staff, the Project Team has assumed that a CE will be the
required environmental report to be submitted to TxDOT. The CE report will address
the following:
2.1.1. Need and Purpose
2.1.2. Proposed Action
2 .1.3. Project Setting and Land Use
2 .1.4. Socioeconomics
2.1.5. Environmental Justice
2.1.6. Limited English Proficiency
2.1.7. Section 4(f) Resources
2.1.8. Historic Properties
2.1.9. Archeological Resources
2.1.10. Vegetation
2.1.11. Water Quality
2.1.12 . Soils/Farmland
2.1.13 . Utilities
2 .1.14. Invasive Species
2.1.15. Threatened and Endangered Species
2.1.16. Air Quality
2 .1.17. Noise Impacts
2.1.18. Hazardous Materials
2.1.19. Visual
2 .1.20 . Flood Plains
2.1.21. Wild and Scenic Rivers
2 .1.22. Public Involvement
June 2, 2009
Page 3of6
2.2. Submit the finalized CE report to TxDOT for review. The Project Team will
coordinate with TxDOT staff to address any comments.
2 .3. Revise and submit updated report to TxDOT for final review and approval.
3. Preliminary Design
The Project Team will conduct the following tasks to complete the Preliminary Design of the
Hike and Bike Trail:
3.1. Conduct progress meetings, three (3), with City staff at each milestone submittal:
preliminary, 30 %, and 60 % submittals. A progress memorandum will be submitted
to the City at least one (1) week prior to each progress meeting.
3.2. Weekly progress emails will be sent out detailing project progress as well as
upcoming tasks for the· following week.
3.3. Conduct a field survey to include topographic features and tree data. The survey will
capture all areas 25-feet off the centerline of the trail route. All trees eight (8) inches
and larger in caliper will be surveyed .
3.4. Conduct a field survey to tie R.O.W. monumentation to locate R.O.W. limits of
FM 2818.
3 .5. The Project Team will conduct a geotechnical analysis along the trail. One (1) boring
sample at a 25-foot depth will be conducted on either side of the major creek crossing.
Four (4) other boring samples at a five (5) foot depth will conducted along the trail.
3.6. Create preliminary route exhibits and schematic drawings of the trail alignment. This
is to include schematic drawings of the pedestrian bridge to be constructed over the
major creek crossing. Submit schematics to the City to gain concurrence .
June 2, 2009
Page 4of6
3 . 7. Preliminary designs for the trail will include the design of a structural pedestrian bride
to span across the major creek crossing. The bridge is assumed to be a precast
concrete double tee type bridge.
3 .8. Bury will attend two (2) public meeting on behalf of the City.
3.9. Prepare 30 % plans/construction drawings for the pedestrian hike and bike trail to
submit to the City for review.
3.10. Meet with the City in order to review and incorporate the City's 30 % review
comments .
3.11. Prepare 60 % plans/construction drawings for the pedestrian hike and bike trail to
submit to the City for review.
3 .12. Meet with the City in order to review and incorporate the City's 60 % review
comments.
3 .13 . Prepare an opinion of probable cost per the preliminary designs for the route.
3.14. Coordinate with TxDOT to understand the requirements of the Multiple Use
Agreement (MUA) and what supporting documents will be required.
3.15 . Prepare and submit the MUA to TxDOT with supporting exhibits and drawings. 60 %
plans are typically submitted with the MUA .
3.16. Coordinate with TxDOT and the City of College Station in order to execute the
MUA.
3 .17. Prepare a Traffic Control Plan (TCP) to be included within the construction
documents.
3 .18. The TCP will be submitted to TxDOT for review and approval.
4. Fina l Design
Upon the completion of the Preliminary Design phase, the Project Team will begin the
Final Design phase . The following services will be included within this phase of the project:
4.1. Conduct progress meetings, two (2), with City staff at each milestone submittal: 90 %
and 100 % submittals. A progress memorandum will be submitted to the City at least
one (1) week prior to each progress meeting.
June 2, 2009
Page 5of6
4.2. Prepare 903 plans and specifications to the City for review. Specifications will be in
City format to include the bid document in Word format, special provisions , and
technical specification
4.3. Meet with the City in order to review and incorporate the City's 90 3 review
comments.
4.4. The Project Team will submit plans to a Registered Accessibility Specialist to review
the plans against the Texas Department of Licensure Requirement (TDLR) standards .
We will coordinate with the reviewer to address any comments .
4.5. Finalize plans/construction documents to 1003 completion.
4.6. Provide 8 bid documents (not including construction drawings) to the City . A
total of three (3) sets of final construction documents at 100 3 completion will
be submitted to the City. Of the three (3) set of plans , one (1) set will be full -s ize
(22-inch x 34-inch), and two (2) sets will be half-size sets.
4.7. One (1) digital copy of all engineering documents, plans, and design documents will
be submitted to the City.
4.8. One (1) digital copy of electronic CAD file s in AutoCAD format will be submitted to
the City.
4.9. Assist the City in the preparation of construction contract documents.
5. Bidding/Construction Administration
After all bid and construction documents have been finalize, the Project Team will begin the
Bidding/Construction Administration phase of the project, which will include the following
services:
5 .1. Assist the City in advertisement of bid .
5 .2. Assist in conducting a pre-bid meeting.
5.3. Prepare and issue any necessary addenda to bid .
5.4. Receive and evaluate bids.
5 .5. Make recommendation of award of bid.
5.6. Assist the City in preparing construction contract documents.
5 . 7. Assist the City in conducting pre-construction meeting
5 .8. Attend up to six (6) monthly progress meetings
June 2, 2009
Page 6of6
5.9. Provide periodic onsite field observation trips for an average of two (2) visits per
month for a six (6) month construction phase (maximum).
5.10. The Project Team will provide materials testing during the duration of the
construction phase.
5 .11. Review monthly pay requests from contractor .
5.12. Respond to questions during construction and any necessary Request For Information
(RFI) responses.
5 .13. Review and provide recommendations to the City regarding any proposed change
orders .
5.14. Prepare As-Built plans and submit in electronic AutoCAD format to the City.
ASSUMPTIONS
The follow items are assumptions that have been made for the purposes of this scope based on
conversations with the City:
1. The City will provide any surveys that have been done for the area in which the trail will be
built.
2. The construction of the pedestrian trail will be entirely within TxDOT R. 0 . W .; therefore, no
easements will be required .
3 . The preferred alignment has been established and, therefore, an evaluation of alternatives is
not part of this scope .
4. It is assumed TxDOT will grant a CE for this project.
5. Plans will be prepared in AutoCAD.
P :\ADMIN\8006 1-College Srati on\01-Hike & Bike Trail\PM\Scope of Work 060209.doc
0 [QOOI "J)~\M
'.Cj} j_
~s:----·--
a6t?d
pafOJd
I
date
project
~pa_g_e -------~----'···· _ .. __ ......... _ .. ...... ........ ..... .. .... .. ....... t'Yl.~. I~~~-~~~--....... .
.. bio~')\"1~~-~ ../e..~-~.: .......................................................... .
-· --· .. ---· ··-.. -... ·-........ --..... ----' ........ ' .. -· -· --· .. . .... .. --· .. -----~ .. . . .. ·-. -.... ·-·--...... -· .. -· ... ----...................... ---.. ., -----
----------·-··········-·········--·-····················-··············· "~~~~-.. ·············-~·-·································-·······································································································
f.~ (!tlt:t:, ftCe>-y, ~ fT<-... · .·.·.·~·-·_·_·_·_·_· . .-.. -.. -.-.-.. ~.--.. _._._._. ______ _. __ ._ ___ ._.__._._._ ....... -.. ··.···-~------··.· . .-.·.· ....... :.· . .-.-.·.·.· . .-···.····.·· .. ~.-;&_ci .... ·~.;;;;;;;, . .-.-.-.. ~ .. i;.~ .. f .. ·;gi~i--;·~~--!1--
---------------·····. •· ................ ------------------------------------------·----·----·-·-·-----··--.
···-··············· ································· ·······························-··········h .. (C4:~·::<, ... ::·;;;_~.5~::;··:.::.·.:::·.:····.::·::·.::::::·.:::.:.:::.::::::::::::.:::::·:::.:::.·:::::·:.::.··::·::.:
. ............. .... :.:: : ...... :··.···:.~----~:: .. ::·.· ::::::.: .. :·:·:·::.:~···::·::.::: .. · ·: .... :~·~·~'± ... :: .. :: .. :· .. :· ... :.:·::.: ... :::··:·::···::: .. ::.::::·: .. ·.:::: .. ·:.···.:::.· .. :::: ... :.··:.:.::.::::::.::: .... :: .. ·:· .... ·····:·: .. ·::::·::·.:::
-_·· ..••••...••.••••.•••••••••••.••.••..•••••••..••...•..••••••••••••• ~~············································································
•····•·•····•···· .. ···.· --~ri~u:t ~ltl~~-< .•..... ····•·· ... ·.·. > ,. " . v · ... L -Y.j
task list:
-.
... .. --·----------------· - -----··-·"'-· ·'---'.:;.--:;~··---
j
--------~ ·_ :...._.,{<.----.. --
~
... -·---.......... --------.... .
. " . C4..4(lj (Yl.{ l ,J.. (f. ~ t~---· .. .. . .. .. . ······· .....
... ····lk···;···. ~--·········
..•..•• p Mn~O'(,············· .• ... r~-rs --~~
. ............. . ..... -~·-···········
····.· ... ······ · .. ······. · .. · ........ ··· ~ ~;~~t~~~lb--
201 6.
l
..,
I I J.__)_1_~'--l--t.--l----1----!'--~j-+--+---+--ti-~---1--+--+i--j---j!c----j--t----t-11---i1 I I
:, II ! I, Ill Ii i I !,i ' i I I l,i '1 i, I i
! ! I f-!-!I -+-: -+---!--t--li-_;_--l--'--+--+---+--+---11----i
i-1-+-l -+-I -~i ~~+LI ~~:1~~:1.~~:~~:~~~~~~~~~:~~:1_ ~~:1~~-il--,lr-_-_-+'-+1 -+i,!--+l--t1--t __ I I ! i,1 ii
I ----J' ,-i r-1-I ' I ii 1 1 I I
I I : I I I I i i ' I ! I I --+--!-I -+--+---+--:---;--r!--il L--!--+----!---+-1 -+---+--+--!---+--+---ic----l1--+----l,--+-1 --r---r-1-~1--r-1 -i,-1--I !
! i
I ! I I I I I I
1 __ .1--1_L1_~1-4-_~1-+1-~1-~i1---+-+--i1 __ ~, -+1--+--'!----+-1 --r'--'r---t--t---t'--r--t1--r--r·---i--r1--r---i~· !I-I ' I I ' I ,11 t' I i I I I t,.! i.I, '1·, ! I
I ',, 1' j ! ! I I I ' 1' i, I I' I '1' ii '· ' I i l I ' l I ! : i I I ! I : i i
I I I I 1
1· I I I I I I I I ! I ! I I ! I I 1-! 1
1
1 I I 1
1
:.! 1
1
I, I I I I I I I I ! I I I I i I I I I
' i :1'~, --l---!---l--i--+--+--+--t--+-+--1--!-' -+--+1---t--rl -T'_,!_~11 I I I I ,_ I I I i i I I J I I ,'1 j .
ii-I --1-i--'----1--1---l--+1--tl--+--+--+---1! ! 1 · i I I I I I I I I I I I I I
i I i I I I i I I I I l I I . I I I I I i I
ii, '1 I I i I I I i ! I I '1 I I I 1' I I, 1' I . I I I I I I I I ! . ! I I I I
I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I i I I i
: ! I I ! I I I I, I! II ·1 I i I i I I I ! j I i
I I _j___~l--l.1~+---+--+.~~!---fl~+:1 ~1--l4l~.i~-tl~+'·--,lr--~i ~t--~l~t-~l~T'--,~-r--;1'-rl~Til--i! 1-----+----+-+---;I i i I i I I I ! i I I I I I I I I 1
I I I
Bury+ Partners
ENGINEERING SOLUT I ONS
City of College Station
Hike and Bike Trail Completion (ST-0904)
(Texas A venue/Welsh A venue Hike and Bike Trail)
Meeting Agenda
August 23 , 2010
T y pe of Meeting: Pre-Construction Meeting
Meeting Facilitator: Bury+ Partners
Attendees: Danielle Charbonnet, Project Manager (City of College Station)
Vanessa Garza , Greenway s Program Manager (City of Coll eg e Station)
Jerry Jones , Engineering Inspector (City of College Station)
Steven Kasb erg (T xDOT)
Trey Taylor (Bury+ Partners)
Bobak Tehrany (Bury+ Partner s)
Ric ky Palasota (B razos Vall ey Services)
Bill Gaston (Bravos Valley Services)
Peter Paletta (Terracon)
Mark Dornak (Terracon)
\)it)S ~
Topics of Discussion:
1. Introductions
2 . Project Overview and Limits
3 . Submittal s
4. Construction Schedule/Sequence of Construction:
• Time to Completion wobl\~~ ~ 3b-t!J.
I ·i d_>c-.r 3
• Establi sh NTP date _ c(~ce., ~-~ ~I 1J10 1\1)\ bn.l\-<t'J
P:\ADMIN\80061-Coll ege Station\0 1-Hi ke & Bike Trail\! 1.03 Pre-Bid Documents \0823 10 Pre-Constru ction Agenda.doc Page 1 of 2
5 . Special Items :
• Grading and ADA Requirements
• Bee Creek Area Construction
• Electrical and Conduit Work at Southwood
• Thickened slab and rails at Southwood and Longmire
• TxDOT concerns
~
• Public Notification (72 hour advance for lane closures)
• Construction site maintenance (erosion control, trash, restoring site conditions)
6. Material Testing
7. Summary
P AI-~~'-~
8. Adjourn
P:\ADMIN \80061-Co ll ege Station \01-Hi ke & Bike Trail \11 .03 Pre-Bid Documents\082310 Pre-Construction Agenda .doc Page 2 of 2
May 17, 2010
Regular Agenda
Hike & Bike Trail Completion Project
Final Design Presentation
To: Glenn Brown, City Manager
From: Chuck Gilman, Director of Capital Projects
Agenda Caption: Public Hearing, presentation, possible action and discussion concerning
approval to publicly bid the Hike & Bike Trail Completion Project.
Recommendation(s):
construction bid.
Staff recommends proceeding with advertisement for the
Summary: Hike & Bike Trail Completion Project (ST-0904) was part of the 2008 Bond
Authori zation to implement projects identified by the Hike & Bike Task Force and adopted by
Council on November 23, 2004. After hearing the concerns of A&M Consolidated High
School students at the May 18, 2009 council meeting, staff proposed an alignment change
and Council supported the decision for a multi-use trail to be designed and constructed
along the north side of FM 2818 from Welsh to Longmire. The design contract was awarded
July 9, 2009. Design was completed and environmental clearance obtained from TxDOT in
April 2010. Given that the City has received favorable bids on recent construction projects,
Staff has also included a bid alternative to extend the sidewalk from Texas Avenue to
Longmire.
The Welsh to Longmire trail is identified on the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Master
Plan recently adopted by Council. The trail will provide greater multimodal mobility along
the FM 2818 corridor connecting destinations including A&M Consolidated High School, Bee
Creek Park, and commercial and residential property .
Budget & Financial Summary: This project is funded from the 2008 Bond Authorization
in the amount of $1,000,000. Funds in the amount of $120,813.76 have been committed or
expended to date, leaving a balance of $879,186.24 for construct i on of the trail and other
expenses.
Attachments:
1.) Project Map
Date/Time:
Location:
Agenda:
City of College Station
Hike and Bike Trail Completion (ST-904)
PRE-BID CONFERENCE AGENDA
June 24, 2010; 2:00 p .m .
City Hall
2nd Floor Conference Room 1
1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, TX 77842
1. Sign-in Sheet
2. Introductions
3 . Project Overview
a .
b .
c.
d.
Tree Planting Times and Coordination -f'ltkt
tzepl~.( 'I<. ~&.V. ~t' 0(., t.
Southwood Traffic Work Coordination L. -~ • -· MM-«c~Oli-. -coc.~ ..-~ "-"''~'~
TxDOT Considerations
Storm Water Pollution Abatement Plan (SWPPP)
4 . Bid Date July 1, 2010, 2:00 p.m.
5. Bid Requirements
6. Time to Achieve Substantial Completion/Liquidated Damages
7. Work Hours
8 . Site Access/Use of Premises
9. Bidder's Questions
BPI Job No . 80061-01 Page 1of1
P:IADMIN\80061-College Station\0 1-Hike & Bike Trail\1 1.03 Pre-Bid Documents\062310 Pre-Bid Agend a.doc
Pre-Bid Agenda
May 17, 2010
Regular Agenda
Hike & Bike Trail Completion Project
Final Design Presentation
To: Glenn Brown, City Manager
From: Chuck Gilman, Director of Capital Projects
Agenda Caption: Public Hearing, presentation, possible action and discussion concerning
approval to publicly bid the Hike & Bike Trail Completion Project .
Recommendation(s):
construction bid .
Staff recommends proceeding with advertisement for the
Summary: Hike & Bike Trail Completion Project (ST-0904) was part of the 2008 Bond
Authorization to implement projects identified by the Hike & Bike Task Force and adopted by
Council on November 23, 2004. After hearing the concerns of A&M Consolidated High
School students at the May 18, 2009 council meeting, staff proposed an alignment change
and Council supported the decision for a multi-use trail to be designed and constructed
along the north side of FM 2818 from Welsh to Longmire. The design contract was awarded
July 9, 2009. Design was completed and environmental clearance obtained from TxDOT in
April 2010. Given that the City has received favorable bids on recent construction projects,
Staff has also included a bid alternative to extend the sidewalk from Texas Avenue to
Longmire.
The Welsh to Longmire trail is identified on the Bicycle , Pedestrian, and Greenways Master
Plan recently adopted by Council. The trail will provide greater multimodal mobility along
the FM 2818 corridor connecting destinations including A&M Consolidated High School, Bee
Creek Park, and commercial and residential property .
Budget & Financial Summary: This project is funded from the 2008 Bond Authorization
in the amount of $1,000,000. Funds in the amount of $120,813 .76 have been committed or
expended to date, leaving a balance of $879,186.24 for construction of the trail and other
expenses.
Attachments:
1.) Project Map
.. .
-I~
S ~ V t:'LN otJ
tlin-\-o.. µ.< ( Ler
~ O~V\ U Lb-SD
1>~ f /1 1:,~
~V:t:>O-~ 0-AT\ 1~
~~f-
TeoV\ ~(){1c..Lv\Mclk'
Eht\.ct \ \ A<ld.-K e 5: <;.
Su ~r.;a~ ~ fu ks / t;}\.1 ( Neet-1n7 . ~
m \"ta 68-@ <JM-°'-l J ,c_o ~
jOV\V\· ~~c @ JMA~J-c~
A }_ 'SM{eg /lrl.6t,/ 1. l /JVT'...
ell ~~@ {i::4 k .~
f\-u PA rr 5"@ V l:.. ltt z..o Al . t\l ~ T
{k W7~<2~~~1J77 .COUA._
~m \I\/\ \ti'C!Yt@ ~J t~
Bryan/College Station Connectivity Discussion
Joint P&Z Commission Meeting
9 November 2009
College Main
•
Bryan -planned project includes the reconstruction of College Main from Old College to the city
limits. The street is to be widened and the open ditch will be converted to storm sewer with curb
and gutter and sidewalks. This project is in design with planned construction start in summer of
2010 .
College Station -Existing sidewalks and designated bike lanes from University Drive to the city
limits
South College
• Bryan -planned reconstruction of South College from Sulphur Springs to Villa Maria . The project
in cludes bike lanes and 6 foot wide sidewalks along both sides of the street. This project is
currently approved for the 2012 fiscal year in [he CIP plan .
• College Station -multi-use path planned along South College is shown as the # 1 priority in the
draft bike /pedestrian master p!an
Texas Ave .
Bryan -plans to install 6 foot wide sidewalks along both sides of Texas Ave . from the city lim its to
Elm Avenue (Tejas Center). The project is under des ign with construction planned in early 2010 .
College Station -existing sidewalk along Texas (primarily on the east side)
29th Street/Tarrow
•
Bryan -plans to install includes 6 and 8 foot wide sidewalks on both sides of 29th street from
Barak to Briarcrest and from Carter Creek to the city limits . This project is currently approved for
the 2011 fiscal year in the CIP plan .
College Station -Existing sidewalk on Spring Loop from Univers ity to Tarrow. Tarrow and Spring
Loop designated as a high priority bike lane in the draft bike/pedestrian master plan -Sidewalks
are also proposed along Tarrow from University to the city limits . -
University Drive
• College Station -multi-use path shown along Cater Creek and the Gulf States easement. A
connection is also shown to the existing path in Vete ran's Park . CS staff has been involved in
discussions with TXDOT and the City of Bryan regarding best type and location for connection(s).
TXDOT staff has indicated that the best location for a below grade connection would be under the
University Drive bridge closest to Earl Rudder Freeway (AKA the bypass).
• Bryan -recent opening of a multi-use path in Bryan . Ongoing discussions between the Parks
Department staff regarding a possible connection to Veteran 's Park.
! p Bury +Partners Bury+Parmers -Public Works , Inc .
221 We st Sixth Street , Suite 600
Austin , Texas 78701 ENGINEERI N G SOLUTI ON S
Meetmg Notes
Project
Hike and Bike Trail Completion (ST-0904)
Cl ient
City of College Station
(512 ) 328-0011 -Phone
(512) 328--0325 - Fax
Conference Date
August 14, 2009
Issue Da te
Revised August 24, 2009
August 18 , 2009
Conference Location
Bryan, Texas
Project No .
80061-01
Attendees
Alex Reyna -Bury + Partners
Bobak Tehrany -Bury + Partners
Danielle Charbonnet -City of College Station
Maury Jacob -TxDOT Bryan District
John D . Moravec -TxDOT Bryan District
Andrew Greer -TxDOT Bryan District
m " .,.
Routing
Di scuss ion : The fo llowing is our understanding of the subject matt er covered in thi s co nference . If thi s differs wi th your und e rstanding, pl eas e
notify us:
I. The meeting was started with introductions and the proj ect overview. Mr. Tehrany went over the general
trail alignme nt which was presented on the provided exhibits . The trail is planned to be 10-feet wide,
concrete , and ADA Accessible from Welsh Avenue to Longmire Drive as the base bid and to Texas
A venue a s an add alternate.
II . A list questions was prov ided to all in which the meeting generally followed the list of questions in order.
Please refe rence the attached document which is the list of questions along with the answers to the
questions.
III. The point of contact for TxDOT over the ne xt two (2) weeks will be Andy Greer (agreer@dot.state.tx.us).
Andy will also be the person completing the Categorical Exclusion document on behalf of TxDOT.
IV. Items which require further action:
•
•
•
•
Attachments : 1
Ms . Charbonnet is to coordinate with J . Paige for any improvements at the intersection of FM 2818
and Rio Grande Boulevard. Also, in order to unde rstand if the Frontage Road is planned to be
extended from Southwood Drive to Rio Grande Boule vard.
Ms . Charbonnet is to coordinate with the Property Owner as w e ll as J . Paige in order to discuss the
private drive just west of Bee Creek.
Ms. Charbonnet is to coordinate with Bob Richardson in order to understand the process which will
take place if TxDOT will be completing the Categorical Exclusion document.
Ms. Charbonnet is to set the PAC meeting for a date to be determined .
Prepared by: Bobak Tehrany
P:ll En gi neering\8006 1\0 1\Mee tings\Meering Mintues 08 1409 (revised). doc Page 1of1
Trail Alignment
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
Hike and Bike Trail (ST-0904)
TxDOT Meeting Questions
August 2009
• Is the alignment that we have flagged and shown on the provided exhibit acceptable
by TxDOT?
The alignment as shown on the provided exhibits is acceptable .
• How far do we need to stay away from Harvey Mitchell Parkway (FM 2818)?
There is a clear zone requirement of 30jeet, however it does not need to be met for
this project. As a guideline, the trail should be installed as far away as allowable
from FM 2818. Mr. Jacob mentioned that the utilities tend to hug the TOW line,
therefore it will be a good idea to stay some distance from the ROW line.
• In the median near Welsh A venue, can we stay on top of the hill, out of the swail,
for the alignment?
Yes, the trail may stay outside of the swail and traverse along the ridge within the
median near Welsh Avenue.
• Will the public meetings that the City of College Station has planned pass the
TxDOT public meeting requirements?
As long as a Notice goes out to the property owners in which the trail will
immediately affect, the TxDOT requirement will be covered.
Creek Crossing
• Can we utilize the box culvert to cross the creek?
Yes, the trail may pass on top of the box culvert in order to cross Bee Creek.
• If we can utilize the box culvert, what safety device will be required to create a
buffer between pedestrians and vehicles (e.g . traffic barrier)?
TxDOT will require a guardrail to be installed on the creek side of the proposed
trail. When passing over the box culvert, the trail maybe raised in order to create a
swail on the roadway side of the trail.
• What environmental issues will come about in the creek area with the construction
of the trail?
A Categorical Exclusion will be the only environmental document required for this
project.
FM 2818 Improvements
• Will the Frontage Road at just west of Southwood Drive be extended to Rio Grande
Boulevard?
TED -Contact J . Paige
• What intersection improvements are planned at Rio Grande Boulevard and FM
2818?
TED -Contact J. Paige
• Will the private drive just west of the creek be removed or improved in the near
future?
The property owner and J. Paige need to be contacted to understand if the private
drive will remain.
Categorical Exclusion Document
• Will TxDOT want to complete the CE document for this project?
TxDOT has expressed that they would like to complete the CE document.
• How much will it cost?
Bob Richardson will need to be contacted in order to better understand how TxDOT
will charge for these services.
• How long will it take to complete?
TxDOT has stated that if they complete the CE document internally, the process will
take six (6) to nine (9) months from preparation to approval.
• Does it fit within the City of College Station's schedule?
The City agrees that the timeline of six (6) to nine (9) months falls in line with their
schedule for the project.
Page 1of1
Workshop Agenda Item No. 4 -Presentation, discussion, and possible action regardin~ the
activities of the Bike and Hike Task Force as it relates to their prioritization of future CIP trail
projects.
Kristan Clann, Greenway Program Manager provided a brief overview of the greenway activities that
the staff is focused on. The Bike and Hike Task Force has categorized trail projects into high, medium,
and low priorities. Ms. Clann presented the following projects list with priority rating :
Project Priority Ranking
G Brison Park Connection High 01
td Bee Creek Trail West South High 02
f\lrA Lick Creek Trail West High 03
~· Bee Creek Bridge High 04
Gulf States Utilities ROW Trail High 05
Bee Creek Trail West North High 06
~Pen Creek Upper Trail Phase III Medium 07
Creek Trail East Medium 07
Wolf Pen Creek Upper Trail Phase II Medium 08
Wolf Pen Creek Trail West Medium 09
~td Lick Creek Trail East Medium 10
Bike Loop Continuation Medium 11
~WQlf Pen Creek Trail Lower Phase II Medium 12
Spring Creek Trail East Low 13
Spring Creek Trail West Low 14
Hensel Park Trail Low 15
I&GN Trail Low 16 ~CTrail Low 17
um Creek Trail Low 18
Council member Berry moved to approve the proposed project list as recommended by the Bike and
Hike Task Force . Council member Massey seconded the motion.
After a series of specific questions, Council member Massey moved to approve the bike plan, modifying
the priority of the Bee Creek Bridge from high to medium priority. Council member Berry seconded the
motion. Motion failed by a vote of 5-1
FOR: Massey
AGAINST : Silvia, Happ, Wareing, Lancaster, Berry
ABSENT: Maloney
Council member Happ moved to approve the proposed project list and expand the scope of the Bee
Creek Project to include impro ving Bicycle and Pedestrian access along Longmire Drive across FM
2818. Council member Wareing seconded the motion, which carried unanimously ,
6-0.
FOR: Silvia, Happ, Wareing, Lancaster, Berry, Massey
AGAINST: None
ABSENT : Maloney
http:// agenda. cstx. gov/Council %20Minutes/2004/Minutes %2 Ofor%20N ovember%2 023, %2... 1 /3/2009
Anticipated Project Duration*
Project 2014
Rin ger Library Expansion
Community Center
Fire Station #6
Creckview e ighborhood Pa rk
Neighborhood Park Improve ments
Lin coln Cen ter Addition
Central Park Improveme nts
Lick Creek P a rk Trail Completion
Skate Park
East Dist. Maint. Shop Re pl acement
Neighborhood P a rk s R evolvin g Fund
Li ck Creek Pa rk Nature Center
Jon es-Butler Pha se 1
Traffic S ignals
Victoria Ave nue
Barron Road Wid e nin g -Ph ase 2
Hik e/Bike Trail Completion
Barron Road East/Lakeway Dri ve
Sidewa lk s
R ockp rairie West ROW
Lick Creek Hike and Bike Trail
Uni versity Dr Pedest. Improvements
C it y H all
* Project order and/or duratio 11 may be subject to change at the dis cre tion of th e curren t City Council or extenuating
c ircumstances. Dates a re based 011 th e Fis ca l Yea r (October I -September 30).
2015
12 www.cstx .gov/2008bond
... task list: -: z ~
. zc;
.. <(3
, 3~
-·-r ···-·-· .. ·-·--· ·-· ·----·----·· --·--------------·---·----------·--------------·----·----·-----------------------------·---------
I
f~ ,___,... ;----r r-r--r : ~,! ! r-1--:---1---i
l l i i i . , i i l i ! ! I i i i ! I i i !__J
I r--!--1'l ,---,·--1--i ----.,.--ll-~,--.1--:-:-r i,, 1' 1·
: ' : ! 1
1
11 1'__Li ! i j: I I : : i : ! !, ! ' ' l • i ! __ _,_ __ ,__f ·, ·--! ' I .. ,:~,: t .-----. ----i
• : ' I i I I I i ! I '· I. i ! ' I : : I : : ' ' f-~--' ,---l : !---t i 1, 1· II '1 i. :, f .. ,-~-->-1--11 1, L! I i l __ Ll--l 1,· I
:
i ,i ,i 'j j I : ,---'---+---+---+---+--+---+---1--t---•--+---ll--1-+-l--j--. '.
! ,: i . ! ,1 I i I 1, I '1 '1 !I i, ;,· i ii i-: : :--:---1--i--. I I i -l ~-1--· I 1---l-----1
':,,":,'·,, : : : ! I : • ! ! ! I. 1' •• ·,' ,i ,! ,! ' I I ' : : ,i .i ! ·,' ,I ,i ,i --l---<:-i ! i--l--h i ! ;--l--l---j--t--1----1 i---1--i--! ;_j_j
I
i ,i ,I .i
1,. ,i ! ! ! i i i i .!. !, ,i, !, I 1,' :.· '.·.' i ! i i i ~,,·--·1' ,~.:--~-..,._-~ 1 1 -1--1--r --+---'---+--+
i i I i ! : I i__J i !
r. 1 , 1 ·.,1--·,i--.,t -+---+---!1--... ,--i---'---l: !--+--.....
, i ' I i : I i ! i j-t---~--1" _ __, _ __,__~ :--i -j-· j
i i ! ! L__.l ! I : : : : . ! ! I i
i. :·--r-i 1 1 , 1-i--1:-H , H1--r-. 1
]]
r., i.,-1,, i,.-1--r-i,,.· ', : : ,_J----r-' __ 1 __ ·~' __ L I i -1~, --r---1--+---;-, --1---ti rJ
iilliii ii 1 11 ___ 1_[ i LJ ___ l i ! j___;---l . .--i--:---1--r-r ~ . .
! : ! ! 1_J ! j_j _ _j _ _j __ ~i i I j _ _J __ L-! .
I i f i ' i I ' i I ! i--1 i ! ! 1--l--i--l
: : ! : ! ! I-! ' ! i i . ' ! : ! : ! I ! : i i I ! 1--~--.·--T-----1-1 f--:--:--i--.--t--r !-! , ~
. i ! I i i I ! ! i ! .,!--1,:_j,'.-J,· i i :r--1f~.:.:---;-.,:--,1 .;.:___j;--·.,1~,1---1r--,r , i,, ;·'
1
,i ·,'·
1
,1 ·,,
i
! __ [ __ L.i 1 : i :--+---<-' --J---t --J-----t----~-1---t---+--;----i---t--I I ,---<--+·-i---1
i : : : i : I 1' ,i ,! ,:! ,:! :i I ' ' ' : ' : i ! ! . ! ! I LL: . I: •. I iii i ! Ii 1--f • I --1--· [----, ! j-j--f-f : 1
.. i i l ! . : : ! ! _ _j ! i i i ! ! ;_: ! i i,-',:::=1
,
1
--i---t (1 1l=l i :·--~-... t---.... ,~==ir :--1--1 ~, --r-1
i i i I ! i 1 L,! 1,:--
1
,i _
1
,!::
l : : ! : , ! I ! ! ~,--+---+---'--+-I .. c1---r--r1 : :-r·--+i--i--+---'---'----'----11--+---,i--, --i I ,
i---+ . ---'----t-t---'---'---i---<---'---'---i--t-1, 1,
! : I I i, i, '1 !, , : I , ' ~----<:----i---: --f--f--f . ~--[--... I-----+'--+'---t i . i i : . . . I • . I ! i i i . .
i. --n !. HH i __ :--H i ::--+---i--l~~~~1----... r:::~1c--~~--~-~ ... ;c_:::~l-~~:~~-+·~---_-_-.. ::~~:~_~l:::_!::-: ... r_::_~ __ :":_:~ ... i_---!I
· : : : : j !-! I 1 : j ! ! j
: : I : : : : I • : : i LJ _ ___j __ ! I f : 1 i
f-·-1-1--r--r . r~l!--,;--;.·.1 :,1=',l ! i ! t-!--<f--... !--[ 1~--H--r-L; ! I ; ! ! ! i-f->--+--~-~--1
l
I : : j ' __ _,_ __ [--1-· --f--:--~----~---~L--1
i ! i ! ! .! .l .l j
t
, ___ 1 ___ , ___ L_J __ _,_ _ _, _ __, . I l
c--+ r.--r. -:.
j •. ___ ., ___ !, i ! l,i : .. _ : ' ~---1--+---i--i--f--+ ! : ~
i i 1 ;---l---1--i--rt I ·_ i-! ·--t--r -----j
Bury+Partners Team Member
Representative Hike & Bike
Trail Experience
Walk for a Day (WFAD) for Hill Country Conservancy -Austin, Texas
• Summary of the project scope: designing 35 mile trail to connect Zilker Pork to existing trails as well as
construct ion of new tra i ls down to FM 150
• Construction cost : Anticipated $20 million
• Challenges: This project hos numerous environmental challenges , heavy public involvement, and
coordination between multiple agencies (COA, TxDOT, USFW, Texas Porks and Wildlife, TCEQ, etc .)
• Innovative solut ions/approaches : Utilizing new pedestrian signalization technology, crushed crashed
granite and natural trails (no impervious cover), st i mulus application experience
• Public involvement : The City of Austin has estab l ished a WFAD Committee that meets monthly to discuss
the project and how to move forward dealing with Water Quality Land, Land Preserves , User Education as
wel l as to discuss maintenance issues , ownership, and funding.
City of San Marcos River Road/Riverside Drive Project:
• Summary of the project scope: The trail will be designed to connect trails east of IH-35 to City parks west
of IH -35. This project was funded through Stimulus money.
• Construction cost : Anticipated $200,000
• Challenges: Environmental challenges , endangered birds , multi-route, USFW, TxDOT, Texas Historic
Comm it tee, Archeo log ical, Corp of Engineers
• Innovative solutions/approaches: The project is required to be ADA accessible throughout the entire trail .
• Public involvement: Moderate
Crestview Station Phase I -Austin, Texas
• Summa r y of the project scope: design of 1,700 LF of Sidewalk and Bikewoy along the urban co r ridor
Lamar Road
• Construction cost: ~$55,000
• Challenges: Exist i ng Trees and Utility conflicts
• Innovative solutions/approaches : Sidewalk and Bikeway ore sometimes combined , sometimes separate in
order to save existing trees , ovoid utility conflicts and provide on interesting layout.
• Public involvement : n/a
Crestview Station Phase II -Austin, Texas
• Summary of the project scope: design of 2,400 LF of Sidewalk and Bikeway to link Crestview Phase I, the _
Capitol Metro Train Station and the adjacent Crestview Neighborhood.
• Construction cost: ~$40,000
• Challenges: integrating the bikewoy with urban neighborhood design
• Public involvement: Feedback from the Crestview Neighborhood Associat ion
~B +Part s
ENGINEER! G SOLUTIONS
Brushy Creek Regional Trail -Williamson County, Texas
• Summary of the project scope : Over three miles of trails from east of Great Oaks Drive to Brushy Creek
Lake Park adjacent to the Avery Ranch Development . Mr. Ran d azzo and the des ign team walked
the ent i re route predevelopment and placed stakes for the surveyors to perform the route su r vey. Mr.
Randazzo prepared the grading, drainage , and erosion and sedimentation control plans.
• Construction cos t: $750,000
• Challenges: The most challenging aspect technically was managing the project budget wh i le util izing
erosion res istant materials for a proposed trail ro ute which was almost entirely withi n the l 00 year
floodplain adjacent to Brushy Creek .
• Innovative solut ions /approaches : n/a
• Pub l ic involvement: The trail was a regional project for Will iamson County but wi thin the City limits of
Round Rock . Therefore, th is required review by both autho rit ies as well as public meetings with both .
Gables Park Plaza and Gables Sand Beach -Aus ti n, Texas
• Summary of the p roject scope : Coordinating with the City of Austin to i ntegrate the Gab les projects with
the C ity 's Lance Armstrong Bikeway and Pfl uger Bridge Bike Extension . The project included the design of
360 LF of City Bi keway to connect to the Pfluger Bridge Extension .
• Construction cost : -$40,000 (i ncluding Soft Costs)
• Cha ll enges : Coordinating the site des ign of intensive utilities , stormwater management, parkland and two
large commercial buildings with other agencies ' and consul tants' design of the Lance Armstrong Bikeway
and Pfl uger Bridge Ex tens ion .
• Innovative solut ions/approaches: Despite the very urban nature of the p roject, ex tensive effort was made
to keep manholes and othe r hazards out of the Pfluger Bridge Bi keway, which involved variances and
waivers from TCEQ and AWU.
• Public i nvolvement: Public hearings too k place to gain public approval of the bikeway layouts .
EYA Hyattsville Eas t -Hyattsville, Maryland
• Summary of the project scope: Designing approximately 3 ,000 feet of the city 's first hike/bike facility. This
will even tually connect the City of Hyattsville in Maryland to Washington , DC's hike/bike trails .
• Construction cost: -$100,000
• Challenges: Extreme grade variations and sensitive existing envi ronmental features in the proposed hike/
bike trail path
• Innovate solutions / approaches : The layout snaked around to save and avoid trees and excessive cut /fill.
Retaining Wal ls were utilized where necessary.
• Public involvement: Public heari ngs took place to gain public approval of the hike/bikeway plan.
Colleyville and North Richland Hills Trail -North Dallas Area, Texas
• Summary of the project scope: Des igned two miles of hike and bike tra il in Colleyvil le, Texas and 4 miles
in North Richland Hills along the Cotton Belt Railroad which also included drainage issues , bridges, culvert
extensions, street crossing , and two railroad crossings .
• Construction cost : NRH costs was $2.3M and Colleyville was$ l .2M
• Challenges: The design had many cha ll enges including drainage issues , pedestrian bridges , culvert
extensions, street and railroad crossing and grad i ng for HC accessible. In add ition, some of the trail was
designed over an existing Explorer Petroleum Pipeline and their concern was easy access to the pipeline
t.-Bm
ENGINEERI G SOLUTIONS
in case of on emergency and needed the ability to remove the trail without cutting it. Our solution was to
design the trail in sections as a removable panel with lifti ng hooks .
• Innovat ive solutions/approaches : Some of the trail was not accessible for concrete trucks so we eliminated
the reinforcing steel which allowed the trucks to drive down the trail and place the concrete. The steel was
replaced with fibe r mesh which allowed the concrete to be place very rapidly without the delay of laying
and tying the steel.
• Public inv olvement: Two publ ic meetings were requ i red in each city. The first meeting was to present a
preliminary design and get community input and the second was to present the final design and cost
estimates.
White Rock Lake Trail Improvements -Dallas, Texas
• Summary of the project scope : Mr. Lindner was responsible for the evaluation and improvements to 24
miles of hike and bike trail around White Rock Lake in Dallas .
• Construction cos t: $6.0 million
• Challenges: This project was in a heavily utilized pork around White Rock Lake, through the Dallas
Arboretum and high affluent neighborhoods . Public involvement, traffic control and environmenta l
sensitivities were all major challenges.
• Innovative solutions /approaches : Built new pedestri an bridge over Wh ite Rock Lake sp ill way.
• Publ ic involvement: This project involved coordination with multiple city deportments , bike clubs and
citizens' groups around the lake .
Brushy Creek Municipal Utility District Phase I, II, and Ill Park Improvements -Round Rock, Texas
• Summary of the project scope: Mr. Ku was responsible for planning , layout, and design of over 20,000
LF of 8 ' wide crushed gran ite and concrete Hike and Bike Trails , trail heads, trail markers , ADA sidewalks ,
ramps , parking and playground facilities at various porks throughout the Distr ict.
• Construction cost : Total project cost $1 ,205 ,000 .
• Challenges: Major challenges included routing trails across existing drainage features and providing ADA
compl iant sections of the trail .
Watters Creek -Allen, Texas
• Summary of the project scope -designed 3 ,400 LF of 12 ' w ide concrete Hike & Bi ke trails as port of
the City of Allen's master planned trail system located adjacent to the Bury designed Watters Creek at
Montgomery Form mixed-use development project. The tra il will allow residents of Watters Creek to hove
access to other parts of the City & users of the tra il to interact with the events within the pro ject .
• Construction cost -$520,000
• Challenges: located i n the floodplain of Watters Branch, blending grades & location of trails into the
exist i ng topography & trees; connecting trails to ex isting str eet bridge & sidewalks while meeting City
& ADA maximum slope requirements ; providing trailheads with amenities connect i ng to the pedestrian
facilit ies leading into the Watters Creek project. Des ign i nvolved widening an existing concrete bridge
over Watters Branch to make a trail connection to other projects.
• Innovative solutions/approaches -used steel & concrete in bridge widening design wh ich saved
sign ificant dollars.
• Publ ic involvement -City of Allen Porks Department criter ia was used for design & construction . Integrating
the City's trail system connection & pedestrian traffic flow into the Watte rs Creek project was a critical part
~B
ENGINEE P.1 G SO L UTlONS
of the zoning & site planning in the initial stages of the project because the City will be using the pa rk &
open spaces w ithin Watters Creek for special events .
TxDOT SH 161 Park Mitigation -Grand Prairie, Texas*
• Summary of the project scope: As the Project Director, Mr. N icholson led the conceptual design, design
development, and construction documentation for the parks mitigation project. The improvements include
approximately three miles of fourteen-foot-wide concrete hi ke and bike trai l that also i ncluded several
bridges , an eleva ted boardwalk throug h wetland zones , tr in ity river overlook , pavil ions , equestrian
center upgrades, equestrian center judges stand , parks maintenance facility build i ng , restroom build i ng,
parking , interna l park roads , playground , exerc ise stations, site furnishings , pedestrian lighting, landscape
plantings, irrigat ion , and site and en try signage .
• Construction cos t : $10,400,000
• Challenges: dealt with developing with i n the Trinity River floo dplain as well as crossing through several
thousand feet of wetland habitat areas . The project involved sensitive detai ling and construction to keep
within mitigation requirements.
• Innova tive solutions /approaches : The Tri nity overlook serves as a dual-purpose flood gauge and
pedestr ian destination. The detailing of the family of furnishings brings in the wild grassland type theme.
• Publ ic involvement: The pub li c involvement actually occurred ten years before project began .
Plum Creek Preserve and Nature Trail -Kyle, Texas*
• Summary of the project scope : LDP is partner i ng with the City in planni ng a natural trail system with
ameni ti es connect i ng an approximate two-mile corridor between Steeplec hase Pa r k and Waterleaf Park
and the surround i ng neighborhoods. In add ition, land i s being identified along the co r ridor for acqu i si tion
and preservation to enhan ce the trail co r r idor and protect the ecosystem of Plum Creek. LDP is preparing
the Master Plan and Prel i mi nary Trail Des ign for the project.
• Const r uction Cost: $3,000,000 (estimated)
• Challe nges: l .) Assisting the City to p iece together a contiguous piece of property for the preserve across
many d ifferent single land owners and developments; 2 .) Providing a master plan to help the City in
obta i ni ng a TPWD grant. The City rece ived a $500 ,000 TPWD grant fo r the project in 2009 .
• Innovative Soluti ons / Approaches: Using GIS databases to assist in planning and create the overall
Preserve plans
• Publ ic Involvement : LDP worked with individual land owners to assist the City in acquiring an easement
agreement and a lso to help in the sale of a 120 acre parce l of land t~at is the anchor of the Preserve .
Winter's Mill Parkway Trail -Wimberley, Texas*
• Summary of the project scope: LDP is designing and prepari ng construction documen ts for the 3 .4 mile
Winter's Mill Parkway Trai l. The trail itself is a 1 O' wide mix of decomposed gran ite and concrete surface
with several low water and creek crossings . The trail is funded through a CAMPO Bicycle and Pedes trian
Project Grant, Hays County and the Village of Wimberley.
• Construction Cost : $1,000,000
• Challenges : 1.) Des igning the trail to AASHTO and TXDOT standards to meet requ i rements of the CAMPO
funding ; 2 .) Balancing the tra i l design to minimize disturbance of sensitive natural features on Blue Hole
Park such as large trees , rock outcroppings and creeks while maximizing the experience of being in
nature for the tra i l user.; 3 .) Working with and satisfying multiple publ ic enti t ies to complete the project
I p Bm +P
ENGINEE R ! G S.OlUTlONS
-Hays County, City of Wimberley, TXDOT; 4.) Assisting Hays County to evaluate whether to obtain trail
easements across private property or acquire the property itself
• Innovative Solutions/ Approaches: N/ A
• Public Involvement: No public meetings on the LDP end
The Hollow Pedestrian Trails and Bridges -Jonestown, Texas*
• Summary of the project scope: With such an expansive site and relatively scattered but numerous
amenities, the need to create a extensive network of trails and bridges at the Hollows became a large
component of the landscape architectural efforts. Particular care was given in laying out the tra ils so as
to minimize disturbance to the site while at the same time still providing a safe and enjoyable pedestrian
experience. Custom built, long pedestrian bridges, where they were adjudged to be necessary, were
completed by the contractor who had to put the bridges together in place, as hauling in an entire bridge
was not possible . In some areas of the Hollows where access to amenities needed to traverse slopes,
wood walkways were installed. These constructions were laid out to weave through the existing trees and
maintain the dense canopy. As the walkway was -completed, materials were hauled down the walkway
and refuse back up the walkway in order to reduce disturbance to the site. In additio·n, throughout the trail
system, down lighting was put into large existing trees creating a striking moonlighting effect.
• Construction Cost : $650,000
• Challenges: Much of this project was in a riparian zone. In an effort to reduce the disturbance to the site,
no large equipment was brought in so muc h of the labor was done by hand and only materials found on
site were used for the mountain bike trails .
• Innovative Solutions/ Approaches : Fibercrete (wh ich is sturd ier than asphalt) was used over existing so
excavation wasn't necessary, causing little disturbance to the land.
• Public Involvement : None (private project)
Additional projects include:
• Shops at Arbor Tra il s -Austin, Texas : 1.5 miles of granite hike and bike trails that used a public ADA
route .
• StoneCreek Crossing -San Marcos , Texas : 8 1 wide path 1 mile long of granite hike and bike trail,
adjacent to a public right-of-way
• Water Oak -Aust i n, Texas : designed approximately one mile of trail
• Peter Pan Park Improvement Project -Dallas, Texas : The scope of services included slope stabilization
(featuring the use of limestone-faced gravity walls), the installation of upland pedestrian amenities
including the restoration of an existing 80-foot long pedestrian bridge and adjoining trail system; and
public involvement meetings to build consensus for the park improvements with the public. Est i mated
construction cost : $300,000 .
* The following projects were performed by members of Land Design Partners (LDP), a member of the Bury
Family of Companies . We would subcontract with LDP if necessary.
~B I
ENGlNEERI G SOlUTlONS
Hike and Bike Trail Completion (ST-0904) RFQ #
a) Detailed Project Description
The Hike and Bike Trail Completion project includes the design of the Bee Creek Trail
West South project, the #2 ranked project by the Bike & Hike Task Force. The project
involves a bicycle and pedestrian trail that generally runs parallel to Harvey Mitchell
Parkway on the south side from Southwood Drive to FM 2154. Some drainage crossings
and trail amenities will be included in the design. The consultant will de ve lop design
drawings and technical specifications for construction bids , and provide construction
administration services.
b) Budget Amount
Total project budget is $1,000,000
c) Scope of work
It is the City's intent that the successful firm will pro vide professional engineering
services to perform the necessary evaluation, design , and all related functions required for
the development of plans , specifications, and estimates for the construction of the Hike
and Bike Trail Completion Project (City of College Station Project No. ST-0904 ).
d) General ledger account number and project number.
General Ledger: 139-9111-971.30-10
Project Number: ST-0904
e) Contact person information
Project Manager: Danielle Charbonnet
Brison Park Connection
• High Priority -#1
• Connection : south College Station & TAMU
• Scope :
signage
beautification
pavement improvements
• Ownership : City of College Station
• Cost Estimate : $25 ,000
••• ..... ... ..
·~· ...
~-
2/23/2009
./
1
Bee Creek Trail -South/West
• High Priority -#2
• Connection : Wellborn Road to Southwood
Steeplechase Park
Larry J , Ringer Library
Georgie K, Fitch Park
A&M Consolidated High School
• Scope :
beautification
new concrete trail
bridge crossing Bee Creek
• Ownership : City of College Station , Private , TxDOT
• Cost Estimate : $600 ,000
••• •••• ...... . ,,,,.
2
Bee Creek Trail -North/West
• High Priority -#6
• Connection: Holleman Drive to Bee Creek
It Lincoln Center
* future Southwest Park
.t A&M Consolidated High School
•Scope:
., new concrete trail
••• •••• •••• ••• -~-. ..
• Ownership: City of College Station, Private,
TxDOT , negotiating for greenway
• Cost Estimate: $660 ,000
Bee Creek Trail -West
••• ... ~· ...... . •· '"
• Ownership: We have CoCS property (south section
I) and we are hoping to negotiate access to the
current BTU electrical line easement (for both south
sections I & II). For the North alignment , we are
negotiating for greenway along most of the
proposed trail route. We also plan to traverse CoCS
parkland and travel along Christine Lane.
2/23/2009
3
Lick Creek Trail -West
• High Priority -#3
• Connection : Victoria Avenue to Highway 6
·· Edelweiss Gartens Park
Westfield Park
Cypress Grove Intermediate School
residential ne ighborhoods
• Scope :
· new conc rete trail
. bridge crossing Lick Creek
• Ownership : City of College Station , Private , negotiating for
greenway
• Cost Estimate : $550 ,000
••• •••• •••• .... .. .,
'\.
2/23/2009
4
Lick Creek Trail -West
• Ownership: Working on gaining access or
ownership of -0.5 mi. Owner indicates
willingness for public greenway and trail.
Sidewalk is already along public greenway
property. Footpath is in private greenway,
but HOA has expressed interest in that
becoming a public greenway.
••• •••• •••• ••• •• 4
2/23/2009
5
Bee Creek Bridge
• High Priority -#4
• Connection: Longmire Court to Bike Loop
D.A . "Andy " Anderson Arboretum
, Bee Creek Park
Adamson Lagoon
•Scope :
beautification
bridge crossing Bee Creek
• Ownership: City of College Station , Private
• Cost Estimate: $150,000
••• •••• •• <I' .. ... . . ..
2/23/2009
6
2/23/2009
7
. .
2/23/2009
8
1
Parks and Leisure Services
Vision Statement
••• •••• •••• ••• ... . •
"We will continue to promote a wide range of
leisure, recreational and cultural arts
opportunities."
Strategy #1.c. Implement greenway/bikeway
plans that foster connectivity .
Representatives
• Recreation
• Planning & Zoning Commission
• Parks Advisory Board
• Brazos Greenways Council
• Environmental/Ecological Science
• Neighborhood/HOA
• Landscape Architecture
• Development Community
• •• •••• •••• .. .. ,., .
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
C Project Funding and Planning Information
The proj ect is a part of the 2007 Safe Routes to School program and is included in the
November FY 2009 Revis ions to the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program for FY
2008-2011 . It is proposed to be funded by the City of College Station as the local sponsor
with federal Transportation Enhancements (Category 9) assistance using 100% federal
funding . It is included in the 2008-2011 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
(STIP) under the grouped CSJ #5000-00-916 for bicycle and pedestrian projects . Current
total project cost is estimated to be xx . The estimated project letting date is August 2010
and the estimated completion of construction date is December 2010 . Reference
Appendix D.
D Need and Purpose
The subject reach of exist ing Harvey Mitchell Parkway was constructed without a pedestrian
sidewalk along the north side of the roadway . Residents attending the A&M Consolidated ·
High School at Welsh Avenue , living in the ex isting single -family residential develc_:>pment in
neighborhoods north of the Parkway and living in the high-density residential areas along
Welsh Avenue w i thin~ m ile of the Parkway do riot currently have safe pedestrian access to
the significant commercial development that is available in the vic inity of Texas Avenue at
the project's eastern terminus . Safe , multi-modal transportation facilities for walking and
cycling are also generally desired as healthy alternatives for a more active lifestyle and to
help reduce emissions due to motor vehicle traffic .
The proposed project would connect to existing sidewalks at Welsh Avenue and Texas
Avenue , providing safe , pedestrian and bicycle access between the existing school and
residential development west of Texas Avenue and existing commercial development in the
vicinity of Tex~s Avenue .
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Hike and Bike Trail
College Station, Texas
January 8, 2010
Terracon Project No. A 1095063
Prepared for:
Bury + Partners, Inc .
Austin , Texas
P repa red by:
Terracon Consultants, Inc.
College Station , Texas
,_
January 8, 201 O
Bury + Partners , Inc .
221 West Sixth Street
Austin, Texas 78701
Attention : Mr. Bobak Te h rany
PHN : 512 .328 .001 1
Regarding: Geotechnica l Engineering Report
Hike a n d Bike Trail
College Station , Texas
Terracon Project No. A 1095063
Dear Mr. Tehrany:
Terracon Consultants, Inc. is pleased to submit our Geot echnical E ngineering Report for the
above-referenced project. We trust that this report is responsive to your project. needs . Please
contact us if you have any questions or if we can be of further assista n ce.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you during the desig n phase of your project ,
and we look forward to assisting yo u during the constructi o n pl1ase . P lease contact us if you
have any questions about our report, or if we may be of furt her service to you .
Sincere ly ,
Terracon Consultants, Inc.
(Texas Fir m Registratio n No. F-3272)
Geotechnical Engineer
~· ,.,,,_,.,~..., ~14...,<:<:7-o</
/<-' Daniel E. Pickett P .E.
Senior Geotechn ical ~ngineer
En cl osu res
Cop ie s Submitted : Addressee : (1) Bound & (1) Elect ronic
f ~~ ~a.lletta , PE
Senior Associate/Office Manager
................. ,,"\\ ~-·OFT \\ .: ~'\Y,. ........ !f..f4 \~ .-~:::... ... · * ··· . .JI'· ,--~. . ...,,., . •1 ;*..... \*'J "*: ~*I , ..... ':. ... !•••······~··~········ .. ··"I. ~-ABIGJ\ll. \!J. ALFOR D :; f. ........................... :····-'
' ·. g72·-:'3: # , .......... 1 :/:I:'; f ~. • '-V'"" •1ro~··.~!CENS~.:.~.··~<:J;
' ~~ ·~ ....... 1C:i -\\\. 'S°/O NA\..e _.:-
\. ,, ......... -
Te rrac on Consultants, toe . 6198 Imperial Loop College Station. TX 77845
P 197$) 846 3767 F [979] 846 7604 tetracon .co m
.,,~-·~-.~t .,,. -':/'' \'t"J''"~'.-" ·;., ..... ,, 1'...,. ~ .. -•• ... ~. l':· ';;:""' "· ·•: .. • "" •' r ,. · .... ~ · ,,., · .... . .... -;. ... , · .,-.,-...... ,,¢ :'-· •-.. .,,, ..
Geotechninl ·. • ·Environ·mentnl • C'onstruction Mo 'teria,ls • · .fa.c j lJties '·'~
-• f •• ~.... ~ • • , "' ..,. ... ... • • •
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... i
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1
2.0 PROJECT IN FORMATION ............................................................................................... 1
2.1 Project Desc ri pt ion ................................................................................................. 1
2 .2 Site Location and Descripti on ................................................................................ 2
3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .......................................................................................... 2
3.1 Typical So il Profile ................................................................................................. 2
3.2 Groundwater .......................................................................................................... 2
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTI ON ......................................... 3
4 .1 Geotechnical Considerations ................................................................................. 3
4 .2 Earthwork .............................................................................................................. 4
4.2.1 We t Weather/Soft Subgrade Considerations .............................................. .4
4 .3 Grading an d Drainage ........................................................................................... 4
4.4 Bridge Foundation Systems .................................................................................. 5
4.4.1 Straight Shaft Drilled Pier Foundation System ............................................. 5
4.4 .2 Drilled an d Underream ed Pier Foundation System ...................................... 6
4 .5 Foundation Construction ....................................................................................... 7
4.5.1 Straight Shaft Drilled Piers and Drilled and Un derreamed Piers .................. 8
4.6 Pavements ............................................................................................................ 8
4.6 .1 Design Traffic ............................................................................................ 9
4 .6.2 Pavem ent Des ign Th ickness ................................................................... 10
4 .6.3 Pavement Cons t ruction Speci fi cat ions .................................................... 11
4.6 .3.1 Pavement Subgrade Preparation and Fill ........................................ 12
4.6.3.2 Pavement Design and Construction Cons id erations ........................ 12
5.0 GENERAL COMME NTS ................................................................................................. 13
APPENDIX A-FIELD EX PLORATION
Exhibit A-1
Exhibit A-2
Exhibits A-3 through A -8
Exhibit A-9
Vicinity Plan
Plan of Borings
Boring Logs
Field Exploration Description
APPENDIX B -LABO RATORY TESTING
Exhibit B-1 Laboratory Testing
APPENDIX C -SUPPORTIN G DO C UMENTS
Exhib it C-1
Exhibit C-2
Ge ne ral Notes
Unified Soil Classification
Geotechnic al Engineering Re port
Hike and Bike Trail • College Station , Texas
January 8, 2010 • Terracon Project No. A 1095063
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
lrerracon
A geotechnical invest iga tion has bee n performed for the proposed Hike and Bike Trail in College
Station Texas. The proposed concrete hike and bike trail will connect Texas Avenue and Welsh
Avenue along the northern side of Harvey Mitchell Parkwa y (FM 2818) within the Texas
Department of Transportation 's (Tx DOT) ri ght-of-way (R.O.W.). The hike and Bike trail will have a
· major creek crossing and also intersects several driveways, requiring pavement recommendations.
A total of six borings , designa ted B-1 through B-6 , were drilled to depths of 5 or 25 feet for this
project. Soil stratigraphy below t he surface is predominantl y clayey sand and lean and fat clays
with varying amounts of sand that have a low to hig h potential for shrink/swell movem ent.
Seepage was not observed while drilling, except in Boring B-3, where seepage was encountered at
1 O feet while d rilling. Groundwater was observe d in the 25-foot borings at depths of 5.5 feet
after 24 hours.
Bas ed on the information obtained from our subsu rf ace exp lo ration , the site can be developed for
the proposed project. The followi ng geotechnical considerations were identified :
• Stripp ing should include existing pavements, vegetation, or other unsuitable materia ls .
• Proo f rolling should be performed after overexcavation to detect weak areas. Weak
areas should be removed and re placed with select fill .
• The surface soils and soils underlying the concrete surface w ill exhibit trafficability
problems , if they become wet and weak.
• Concret e trail design , with the exception of where it crosses driveways , will be in
acco rd ance with Bryan/College Station (B/CS) Unified Design Guidelines .
• Pavement recommendations are provided for locatio ns where the trail crosses existing
driveways .
• Straight shaft drilled piers or drilled and underreamed piers will be used to support the
bike bridge. Recommendations for des ign and const ructi on of pier foundations are
provided in the report .
• This summa ry should be used in conjunct ion with the e nti re report for design purposes.
It should be rec og ni ze d that details were not included or fully developed in this sect ion, and
he report must be read in its entirety for a comprehensive understanding of the items
contained herein . The section titled GENERAL COMMENTS should be read for an
understanding of the report limitations.
iReliable • Responsive • Convenient • Innovative
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
·HIKE AND BIKE TRAIL
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
Project No. A 1095063
January 8, 201 O
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Terracon Consultants Inc . (T erracon) is pleased to submit our Geo tec hnical Engine~ring Re port
for the prop osed Hike and Bike Trail in College Station , Texas . Th is proje ct was authorized by
Mr . John H. Lindner, P.E., through signature of "Agreement Between Engineer and Consultant"
on Novembe r 11 , 2009 . The project scope was performed in gene ral accordance with Terracon
Proposal No. PA 1090047 date d June 2, 2009 .
The purpose of this report is to describe the subsurface conditions ob served at the six bor ings
drilled fo r this study , an alyz e a nd evaluate the test data, and provi de recommendati ons with
respect to:
• Site and subg rad e preparat ion , including removal of existing pav eme nts,
• Foundation design and construction; an d
• Concrete pavement recommendat ions.
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
2.1 Project Desc ription
ITEM DESCRIPTION
Site layout See Appendix A , Exhi bit A -2, Plan of Borings
Hike and Bike Trail Con crete hike and bike trail , 10 feet w id e, approximately
6, 100 feet long , w ith a major creek crossing .
Trail surface Concre te
Finishe d elevation Unknown
Maximum loads Bri dge loads: unknow n
Maximum allowable settl ement 1 inch (assumed)
Reliable • Responsive • Convenient • Innovative
Geotechni c a Engin erin g epo ._
Hike and Bike Tra il •College Station, Texas
Ja n uary 8, 2010 • Terra con Projec t No. A 1095063
lrerracan
2.2 Site Location and Description
ITEM
Location
Existing improvements
Current ground cover
Existing topography
DESCRIPTION
North side of Harvey Mitchell Parkway (FM 2818) between
Texas Avenue and Welsh Avenue in the TxDOT R.O.W. in
College Station , Texas. See Appendix A, Exhibit A-1 , Vicinity
Plan.
Existing concrete driveways .
Grass .
Existing grade is similar to FM 2818, with a major creek
crossing.
3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
3.1 Typical Soil Profile
Subsurface soil conditions encountered during the geotechnical study are described in detail on
the Logs of Bor ings. Strata lines shown on those logs represent the estimated depths at which
the changes of soil types occur in the borings . However, the soil strata often transition gradually
from one type of soil to the unde rlying type .
Soil stratigraphy was predominantly sandy lean clay that extended to depths ranging from about
2 to 6.5 feet below the surface, underlain by clayey sand that extended to the termination
depths of 25 feet in Borings B-2 and B-3 drilled for the bridge. Fat clay with variable amounts of
sand was observed from the ground surface to the termination depth of 5 feet in Boring B-6 .
The lean and fat clays and clayey sands have plasticity indices ranging from 11 to 39, indicat ing
a low to high pote nti al for sh rink/swell movemen t.
The soils at this site are genera ll y of moderate to high strength . Details for each of the borings
can be found on the Logs of Borings in Append ix A of this report .
3.2 Groundwate r
The bo ri ngs drille d fo r this project were advanced by th e dry auger drilling method to the boring
termination dept hs of 5 or 25 feet below the existing ground surface . Groundwater observations
were made during drilling the borings, upon completion of eac h boring, and at 24 hours after
comple ti on of Borings B-2 and B-3 . Seepage was observed at about 10 feet below the surface
Reliable • Responsive • Convenient• Innovative 2
Ge ote c n ·ca l Engin ering, .epo
Hike and Bike Trai l• Co ll ege Statio n, Texas
Janua ry 8 , 2010 • T er racon Proje ct No . A 1095063
lrerracon
while drilling Boring B-3 . Groundwater wa s observed in both of the 25 -fo ot bo rings at 5.5 feet
below the surface 24 ho urs aft e r completion of drilling .
The above measureme nt s re corded during and after drilling were made o n a ve ry sho rt-t erm
basis at the t ime the bor in gs were drilled. On a long-term bas is , t he gro undw ater might be
observed at different dept hs . Rainfall might become temporari ly t rap ped in t he nea r-surface s oi l
layers causing perched water at very shallow depths from time to time . In addit ion , perched
water could develop in deeper sandy soils overlying lower-permeability clayey so il s following
periods of heavy or prolonged precipitation . Seasonal groundwater conditions may vary
throughout the year , depending upon prevail i ng climatic conditions , and other factors such as
significant changes in s ite topography. T he possib ility of water level fluctuations should be
considered when developing the design an d construction plans for the project.
4 .0 RE CO MMEN DA TIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRU CT IO N
The fo ll owing recomme ndati ons are based up on the data ob tain ed in ou r field an d lab oratory
progra ms, project info rmat ion provide d t o us , a nd on our expe rienc e wit h s im ilar subs urfac e and
site co nditions .
4.1 Geotechnical C ons idera t io ns
The proposed project is a hik e and bike t ra il an d a bike and pede st rian br idge spa nn ing a creek
along FM 2818 . Terracon understands the proposed bridge may be constructed on either
straight shaft drilled piers or drilled and underreamed piers. Structural live and dead loads were
not known when the report was prepared .
A geotechnical item of concern is any poten tia l for shrink/swell movement of so il bel ow and
around the piers . Highly-p lastic , fat clay soils are present on this site . Such soils are commonly
referred to as "expansive " or "swelling " soils because they expand or swell as their moisture
contents increase. However, these soils also "contract" or "shrink" as their moisture contents
decrease . Piers supported within the active zone of expansive soils, but not anchored below
the active zone, will experience cycles of upward and downward movement that might result in
d istortio n, possib ly causin g cracking or struc tu ral damage to the structure.
This s ite has the potenti al for creek bank an d bottom erosion caused by rapidly -moving water,
drainage from s urround ing areas flow ing d own the bank of the creek, and ot her means . Such
erosion could c ut away soi ls near t he foun dat io n and potentially reduce t he effect ive ness of the
soils surrounding the foundation. This could potentially reduce the skin fr iction resistance of the
straight-sided shaft as stated in this report. To help reduce the r isk of loss of skin friction
support , the potential for creek bank erosion should be considered wh e n developing the design
and construction plans for the project.
Reliable • Responsive • Convenient • Innovative 3
Geotec h nical Engin eering Report
Hike and Bike Trail •College Station , Texas
January 8, 2010 • Terracon Project No . A 1095063
rerracan
Another geo techni ca l item of concern is the presence of clayey sand and le an and fat clay soils
at or near the surface. These soils ma y become saturated during heavy ra infall and/or wet
seasons, and that condit ion could cause t rafficabili ty problems at this site .
The following sections present detailed geotechnical recommendations for design and
construction of straight shaft drilled piers and drilled and underreamed piers.
4.2 Earthwo rk
Existing pavements within the hike and bike trail should be demolished, and cons tr uction areas
should be stripped of all vegetation , organics, and debris . Underground utili ties and fill may
exist at the s ite. Al th ough not observed in our borings , buried debris an d fill could be uncovered
at the site. If encountered during excavation , debris or unsu it able fill would need to be
completely removed and replaced with co mpacte d pavement fill soil, specified in "4.6.3.1
Pavement Su bg rade P reparati o n and Fill" section of this report. The cons tructi on cont rac t
doc ument s shou ld make provision for the possibility of encoun terin g buried utilities, unsuitable
fill, or debris .
4.2 .1 Wet Weather/S oft Subgrade Co nsiderations
Near-surface soils include lean and fat clays with varying amo unts of sand , and clayey sand that
will become wet and weak following rainfall events after the c oncrete and vegetation are
removed . Construct ion operations may encounter difficulties due to the wet or soft subgrade
soils becoming a general hindrance to equipment due to rutting and pumping of the soi l surface ,
especially during and soon after periods of wet weather. If the subgrade cannot be proof rolled
or adequate ly compacted to m inimum densities as described above, one of t he following
measures will be req uired : 1) remova l and replacement with select fill , 2) chemical treatment of
the soi l to dry and inc rease the stability of the subgrade, or 3) drying by natural means if the
schedule allows . In our experience with simi lar soils in this area , chemical treatment is the most
effi cient and effective method t o increase the supporting value of wet and weak subgrade.
Terraco n should be contacted for additional recommenda tio ns if chemi cal treatment of the soils
is needed.
4 .3 Grading a nd Drainage
All grades must provide effect iv e drainage away from th e co nstructi on areas during and after
con struct io n. Water permitted t o pond next to the trail and bridge can result in unacceptable
differential movemen ts and distress to the trail and bridge .
Trai l and bridge foundation performances desc ri bed in this report are based on effective
dra inage for th e life of the trai l and bridge and cannot be relied upon if effecti ve dra inage is not
maintained . Trail and su rro unding ground shou ld be designed to promote proper surface
Reliable • Responsive • Convenient • Innovative 4
Geo t ec hnical En gi nee r i n g Re port
Hike and Bike Trail • College Stati on , Te xa s
January 8, 2010 • Terracon Pro j ect No . A 1095063
lrer racon
drainage , prefe rab ly at a minimum grade of 2 percent. After cons t ruct ion and lan dscap ing, we
recommend verifying fina l grades to document that effective d rain age has been ac hiev ed .
Grades around the trail and bridge foundations should also be periodically ins pected and
adjusted as necessary , as part of the maintenance program .
4.4 Bridge Found ati o n Systems
Terracon understands tha t the bridge may be supported on stra ig ht shaft d r illed piers or drilled
and underreamed piers . Recommendations for bo th fo u ndat ion syste ms are discussed in the
following sections .
4.4.1 Straight Shaft Drille d Pier Fo un d ation Syst em
It is our unde rstanding that t he proposed br idge m ay be suppo rted o n str aight sh aft drilled pier
foundations. Geotechn ical parameters for straight shaft drilled p ie rs are provided below. The
straight shaft design parameters should be neglected in the uppe r 5 feet below finished grade to
account for strength loss due to surface effect s an d moisture var ia ions with in the near-surface
soils . The potential for erosion and scour should be considered in des ign of straight shaft piers .
DESCRIPTION BR ID GE LOADS
Minimum embedment below existing grade1
•
2 5 fee t bel ow exis ti ng grad e
(grade at the time of our field invest ig ati on )
Neg lect 0 to 5 feet
Net allowable end bearing p ressures 3 3,00 0 psf@ 5 to 10 feet
5 ,000 psf @ 10 to 25 fee t
Neglect 0 to 5 feet
Allowable skin friction for vertical 150 psf@ 5 to 10 feet compression loads
300 ps f @10 to 25 feet
Estimat ed u plift pressu re from foundat ion 500 ps f so il 4
Minimum Percentage of stee l5 0. 75 percent fo r 40 ksi ste el
0.5 percent for 60 ksi st eel
Approximate total settlement 1 inch or less
Estimated differential settlement6 Approx imately % of total settlement
Allowable passive pressure7 750 psf
1. To bear within the nati ve sandy lean clay and clayey sand soils.
2. In addition to havin g an adequate bearing area to support the com pre ss ive load s, the depth of th e
strai ght shaft should be adequate to overcome uplift forces on the foo ting w itho ut causing detrimental
move ment of the st ra ight shaft pier . The de pt h required to meet tha t crit er ia mig ht be grea te r than the
Reliable • Responsive • Convenient • Innovative 5
Ge otechnic al Engineering Report lrerracan Hike an d Bi ke Trail • Co llege St ati on, Texas
January 8, 2 0 10 • Terracon Project No. A 1095063
3 .
4.
5.
6.
7.
DESCRIPTION BRIDGE LOADS
minimum depth listed in the .table. Uplift resistance is provided by dead weight of the footing and
supported structure, and by skin friction over the perimeter of the shaft below the active soil zone . The
sk in friction component of uplift resistance below the active soil zone can be est imated by using 500 psf
over the enti re perimeter of the shaft below a depth of 8 feet.
Whichever condition yields a larger bearing area.
The magnitude of uplift caused by foundation soil surrounding the shaft is difficult to predict, and will
vary with moisture content changes and soil stratigraphy . That component of uplift loads can be
approximated by using the indicated uplift pressure over the entire perimeter of the shaft between the
top of the shaft and a depth of 8 feet below final grade.
The foo tings should contain suffic ient vertical reinforcing steel throughout the entire shaft length to
resist uplift (tensi le) forces due to post-construction heave of the clay soils, as well as structural uplift
loads. The amoun t of reinforcing steel required can be computed by assuming that the dead load of the
structure surcharges the footing , that the estimated tensi le force acts vertically on the shaft, and that the
underream acts as a rigid anchor.
Differential settlements will result from variances in subsurface conditions, loading conditions and
construction procedures, s uch a cleanliness of the bearing area or flowing water in the shaft.
Fo r fo oti ngs p laced aga inst an undisturbed ve rti c a l f ace of t he in-s it u soils. Latera l resis tance of the
st raight shaft drilled foo t ings is primarily developed by passive resistance of the soils aga inst the
side of the foo ting . Due to surface effects, the lateral resistance of the upper 3 feet of the soils at the
surface sho u ld b e neglected , u nless pav i ng is p rov ide around the pier.
4 .4.2 Dr illed an d Und e rreamed Pie r Fo und ation System
Structural loads for the proposed bridge could also be supported on a drilled and underreamed
pier foundation system . In our opinion, drilled and underreamed piers would bette r resist uplift
and la tera l loads than would straight shaft piers . We therefore recommend that a foundation
system of drilled and underreamed piers be used for support of the proposed bridge. The
potential for erosion and scour should be considered in design of straight shaft piers.
DESCRIPTION
Minimum embedment below exist i n g grade 1
Net allowable e nd bearing pressure2
•
3
Maximum un d err eam-to-shaft diamet er ratio
Estimated up l ift p res s u re from foundat ion
so i l4
Minimum 'p erce ntage of steel 5
Reliable • Responsive • Convenient • Innovative
BRIDGE LOADS
15 feet below existing grade
(g ra de at the time of our field investigation)
5,0 00 ps f
2:1
800 psf
0. 7 5 percent fo r 40 ksi steel
0.5 percent for 60 ksi steel
6
Geotech ni cal Engineerin g Report lrerracan Hike and Bike Trai l •College Station , Texas
January 8 , 2010 • Terracon Project No. A 1095063
DESCRIPTION BRIDGE LOAD S
Estimated total settlement6 1 inch or less
Estimated differential settlement7 Approximately ~ of total sett lement
Allowable passive pressure 8 750 psf
1· To bear within the native clayey sand soils.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
4.5
Whichever condition yields a larger bearing area .
In addit ion to having an ade quate bearing area to support the compressive loads , the diameter of the
underream should be large enough to overcome uplift forces on the footing withou t ca using local soil
failure of the overlying so il s. Uplift resistance is provided by dead weight of the footing and supported
structure, and upward bearing on the soil. For allowable upward bearing over the projec ted area of
the underream, we recommend 70 perc e nt of the previously-noted net allowable bearing pressure
for ve rtical compression loads .
The magnitud e of uplift caus ed by fo und ation soi l surrounding the sha ft is difficu lt to predict, and will
vary w ith mo isture con tent changes and soil stratigraphy. This component of uplift loads can be
appro x imated by using the indicated upli ft press ure over the entire perimeter of the shaft between the
top of the shaft and a depth of 8 feet below fina l grade.
The footings should conta in sufficient vertical re inforcing steel throughout the entire shaft leng th to
res ist uplift (tensile) force s due to post-const ruct ion heave of the clay so ils, as well as structural uplift
loads. The amount of rein forcing steel req uired can be compute d by ass umi ng that the dead load of the
structure surcharg es th e fo oting , that the estimated tensile force acts vertically on the shaft, and that the
underream acts as a rigid anchor.
Provided proper const ructi on practices are followed. A clear distance be tween the footings of one
underream diameter of the larger footing should be provided between the underreams to facilitate
cons truction , to develop the recommended bearing pressures, and to control settlements. If a
clearance of one diameter cannot be maintained in every case, the above bearing pressures should be
reduced by 20 percent for a clearance between one ha lf and one underream diameters. Unde rr eams
closer than a clearance of one half of an underream diameter are not recommended.
Differential settlements will result from variances in subsurface conditions , loading conditions and
co ns t ruction procedu res, such a cleanliness of the bearing area or flow ing water in the shaft.
Fo r footings placed aga ins t an undisturbe d vertical face of the in-situ soi ls. Lateral resistance of the
drilled and underreamed footi ngs is primaril y deve loped by passive res istance of the soils against
the side of the foo ting. Due t o surface effe ct s , the latera l re sistance of the upper 3 feet of the soils
should be neglected , unles s area paving is provid ed around the pier.
Foundati on Construction
We recommend that const ruction of piers be monitored by Terracon . This would help assure
that the piers are constructed in accordance with the project plans and spec ifications.
Reliable • Responsive • Convenient • Innovative 7
I
Geo te c hn ical Eng i ee r i ng Report
H ike a nd Bike Trail •Co ll eg e Stat ion, T exa s
J an uary 8, 2 0 10 • Terraco n Proj ect No. A 10 95063
lrerraca
4.5.1 Straight Shaf t Drilled Pi ers a n d Drilled an d Un d erreamed Piers
Clayey sands with high sand content and 'groundwater were observed in the borings for this
project. Th e refore , provision should be made in the construction contract documents for th e use
of temporary casing or slurry displacement methods if required by field conditions at the time of
construction . Concrete and reinforcing steel should be placed in each pier immediately after
underream ing or dril ling straight shafts. In no case s hould an underreamed pier or shaft be left
open for more than 4 hours. The allo wable end bearing pressure listed previously is for
undisturbed foundation soil. The pier contractor should not leave water or a layer of loose soil
at the base of the piers prior to placement of concrete .
Groundwater was observed on a short-term basis in t he borings dri ll ed at this si t e. Al th ough t he
risk of groundwat er typically increases with depth , sand layers , lenses, or pockets cou ld be
present and te m porarily t ra p water du ring rainfal l events , or during the seasons of winter and
spring . Groundwater in the soil might also be affected by water level in the creek . Construct ion
documents shoul d make provision for handling groundwater in pier excavations.
4.6 Pave m e nts
This project includes construct ion of an approximately 10-foot wide concrete hike and bike trail.
The trai l will cross several paved driveways . We understand that portland cement concrete
surfacing is pla nned fo r all of t he pavements on this project , and that trail design , with the
except ion of where it crosses driveways, will be in accordance with Bryan/College Station
(B/CS) Uni fi ed Des ign Guide line s .
Pavement des ign grades are ex pected to require minimal cut and fill. Recommendations for
pavement fi ll a re pr esented subsequently . Following cut to design grade , and pri or to
placement of any fill, the pavement subgrade should be proof rolled t o detect any soft areas .
Surface a nd near-s urfac e so ils at this site are fat clays and lean clays. That soil becomes
saturated and weak during we t weathe r. Depending on the t ime of construction , additional
removal and replacement or chemical treatment of existing weak soils might be necessary , as
discussed previously in the "4.2.1 Wet W eather/Soft Subg rade Considerations " section.
After design s ubg rade eleva ti on is ac h ieved by c ut t ing and fill ing , we recommend t hat th e top 8
inches of the fi nished subgra de so ils directl y be ne at h t he pave men t be chemica lly treated.
Chem ical t rea tm en t will increase the s upp ort ing v alue of t he s ubgrade and dec rease the effec t
of moi sture o n su bgrade s oi ls . We reco mm end t ha t Terrac on ob serve the su bgra de soils
fo llow in g cu t and fi ll t o the design pavement sub g ra de elevation in order t o determine t he type
c hemical(s) that w oul d be the mos t appropr ia te for t reatment of th e subgrade soil. Lime would
be the most app ropri ate c hemical for treatmen t of the moderate-to high-p lasticity lean clay and
fat clay soil s at t his site . Recommendations for treatment of the subgrade soil with lime are
pr esen te d subseq uentl y in this re port.
Reliable • Responsive • Convenient• Innovative 8
Geotechnical Engin eering Report
Hike and Bike Trail • Coll ege Station, Texas
Janua ry 8 , 20 10 • Terracon Project No. A 1095063
4.6.1 Design Traffic
l rerracan
Detailed traffic loads, frequencies, and service life were not available . The client indicated that
pavement would need to support HS20 traffic loading at the driveway crossings . We anticipate
that the remaining sections of the trail w ill need to support occasional maintenance and
construct ion vehic les in addit ion to bicycl es and pedestrains . Based on these assumptions , the
follow i ng three pavement alternatives have been evaluated: (1) Ve ry Light Duty -seasonal
recreat ional roads , bike paths , and golf cart paths, (2) Light-Duty -Passenger veh icles only,
and (3) Medium-Duty -Passenger vehicles with a limited number of multi-ax le maintenance,
construction , and/or delivery vehicles. We have designated traffic for those three pavements as
Class I, Class II , and Class Ill , as described subsequently . Pleas e contact us if the traffic
expected for this project is different than used for our analyses . Traffic loa dings for various
c lasses of traffic are prov ided in the fo llowing tab le wh ich is based on a table published by the
Asphalt Ins titute. The approximate traffic for the design period is expressed in 18-kip equiv alent
single axle load (ESAL) appli cat ions . Information in that table may be used t o verify , or mod ify if
necessa ry , the design traffic we selected for the proposed paveme nt .
TRAFFIC CA TE GO RIES
~verage No. Heavy Approximate Trucks
Functional Use Group Daily Expected Over 18-kip ESAL for
Class Traffic Design Period
(ADT) Design Pe r iod (1 OOOs) (1 OOOs)
Very Light -small parking lots ,
driveways , light farm roads , non -
traffic S,chool areas and 50-100 <7 5-10 I playgrounds, seasonal
recreation al roads , bike paths ,
golf cart pa t hs , tenni s courts
Light -residential roa ds, ru ral
farm roads, parking lo ts less < 200 7-15 10-50 ' II than 300 stalls, and light general
aviation (GA) airports
Reliable• Responsive• Convenient• Innovative 9
Geotechn ic al Engine er ing Report
Hike and Bike Trail • College Station , Texas
January 8 , 2010 • Terracon Project No . A 1095063
lrerracan
TRAFFIC CATEGORIES
!Average No. Heavy Approximate Trucks
Functional Use Group Daily Expected Over 18-kip ESAL for
Class Traffic Design Period
(ADT) Design Period (1000s)
I (1 OOOs)
Medium -Urban and rural
II minor co llecto rs, parking lots < 700 70-150 100-250 greater than 300 stalls , 15-kip
max gross weigh t GA airports
Medium-Heavy -Urban minor
arterial and ligh t industrial, rural
maj or collector and minor
IV arterial, ind ustrial parking lots < 45 00 700-1,500 1,000-2,00 0
and rue~ stalls , bus driveways
a nd loading zones, and 30-kip
max gross weight air ports
NOTES: Ta ble is based on t he Traffic Class ifica tio n table pub lis hed in the A spha lt Insti tute IS-18 1
(MS-1 ). Heavy trucks include two-axle, s ix-ti re trucks or la rger. P ickup , panel, and light four-t ire
trucks are not included as heavy t rucks .
4 .6.2 Pavement Design Thickn ess
The pavem ent componen t thicknesses listed below may be used as a guide for pavement
systems at the site for the traffic classifications and traffic loadings stated herein. These
systems were deri ved based on general characterization of the subgrade . No specific testing
(such as CBR , resilient modulus , etc .) was performed for this project to evaluate the support
characteris t ics of the subgrade.
RIGID PAVEMENT SYSTEM
I Material Thickness, Inches
I
Class I Class II Class Ill
Pavement Component Very Light-Light-Duty Medium-Duty
Duty (50,000 ESAL) (250,000
(10,000 ESAL) ESAL)
Reinforced Concrete Surface 5.0 5.0 6.0
Chemically Treat ed Subgra de 6.0 8.0 8.0
Re li able • Responsive • Convenient • Innovative 10
Geotechn ical Eng in eeri ng Report
Hike and Bike Trail •College Station , Texas
January 8, 2010 • Terracon Project No . A 1095063
lre rracon
Please contact Terracon if rec ommendations are need ed for other traffic loadings . We would
be pleased to perform add it ional pavement analyses.
Accepta ble performance of the new pavement will be strongly influenced by maintenance ,
drainage , and other unknown factors . The service life of this pavement is based on periodic
maintenance, adequate drainage, and t raffic that is consistent with the des ign traffic discussed
previously in this report .
4.6 .3 Pavement Construction Specifications
The following information may be used to prep a re technical specificat ions for construction of the
pavement. Specifications refer red to he rein are the Texas De p art men t of Transportation
(TxDOT) 2004 "Standard Specificat ions for Cons tru ct ion and Mainte nance of Highways , Streets ,
and Bridges ."
Re inforced Concrete Surface: Portland cement concrete pav ement s u rfacing should be
constructe d directly on the chemically treated subgrade soil. Concrete for the pavem ent should
be designed for a 28-day compressive strength of 3,500 po u nds per square inch. An air
entrain ing admixture is recommended to increase durability of the concrete . Item 36 0 of the
previous ly-n oted TxDOT Specifications may be used as a technical specification for reinforced
concre te pavement.
Steel reinforcement will not prevent the concrete pavement from cracking. Nevertheless, we
recommend that steel reinforcement be used to help ho ld cracks together. Guide lines
developed by the American Concrete Institute may be used to prepare technical s pecificati ons
for steel reinforcement.
Control and expansion joints sho uld be provided in accordan ce with requirements of the
American Concrete Institute . All joints in the concrete should be sealed to make them
impervious to surface water intrusion. A sa nd leveling cou rse beneath concrete pave ments
should not be permitted.
Lime Treated Subgra de : T he lea n and fat cl ay so ils at t hi s si te, or impo rt ed pavement fill, may
be treated with lime . Based on the c lassification test resul ts , we recommend that about 5
percent lime by dry weight of soil (equal to about 35 pounds per square yard per 8-inch depth ,
or 26 pounds per square yard per 6-inch depth) be used for estimating and planning of
subg rade treatment. That amount of lime s hould be ver ified by the use of pH tests at the time of
construction . Lime treatment of the subgrade soil should be in accordance with provisions of
TxDOT Item 260 . After t he specified'ini t ia l mixing, moist cur ing, and fina l mixi ng , lime treated
subgrade soil should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the mate rial's maximum dry unit
weight determined by ASTM 0 698 Standard Effort at a moisture content at, or within 4 percent
above , the optimum moisture content . ·
Re liable• Responsive• Convenient• Innovative 11
G eotechnical Eng ine er ing Repo rt
Hike and Bike Tra il • College Statio n, Tex as
Ja nuary 8 , 2010 • Terrac on Proj ect No . A 10 95063
lrerracon
T ype C quicklime meeting the req uirements of TxDOT Item 260 could be used in lieu of
hyd rated lime. In no case should waste lime or by-product lime material (so metimes called
carbide lime or blue lime) be approved for use . The surfa ce of the lime treated subgrade should
be prote cted until the concrete or crushed stone base is pla ced.
4 .6.3 .1 Pavemen Subgrade Preparation and Fill
Th e pavem ent areas shou ld be prepared as described in t he "4 .2 Earthwork" sect ion . If t he
surface so ils are wet and weak at the t ime construction begins , a stable subgrade must be
pro vided by one of the options discussed in the "4.2.1 Wet Weather/Soft Subgrade
Considerations" section . T hose op tion s include removal and re placement of weak soil ,
chemical trea tment, or drying by natural means. The const ruction contract documen ts should
make provisi on for en cou ntering wet, weak subgrade soils.
On -site soils , exclus iv e of org anic topsoil , may be used for pavement fill, but the lean cla y and
fat clay soils will be difficul t to process and compact. Imported fill for pavement areas should be
clean clayey sand or sandy clay with an Atterberg plasticity index between 4 and 25 . All fill soil
for paveme nt sh ould be compacted to at least 95 percent of the mate rial 's maximum dry unit
weight determined by ASTM D 698 Stan dard Effort at a moisture content withi n 3 percent of the
material's op timum moisture.
After the pavement subgrade has been prepared to a fir m, unyielding condition, as evidenced
by proof rolling , and afte r any fill has been placed and compacted, we recommend that the
previously-recommended thickness of the finish ed s ubg rade soils directly beneath the
pavement be chemically treated . The recommended thic kness of chemical treatment is a
required part of the paveme nt design, and is not a part of site and subgrade preparatio n for
wet/so ft subgrade conditions.
Positive drainage of the construction areas should be maintained at all times. Rainfall and
stormwater on the open subgrade soil should be rem oved im mediately. The exposed subgrade
soil sho uld no t be allowed to dry out or become saturated . Trafficability of raw subgrade soil on
this site will be poor if that soi l becomes saturated .
. It is possible t hat new undergro und utility lines may cross the proposed pavement areas.
Set lement of utility line backfill could result in pavement distress and failures. We recommend
that any utility t renches in pavement areas be backfilled wi th cement trea ted sand in order to
reduc e t he po ten t ial fo r se t lement of he bac kfill.
4.6 .3.2 Pavement Design and Construction Considerations
The pavement sections presented previously are based on the indi cated traffic categories, and
th ose sect ions are not suitable for heavy construction traffic. A partially -constructed pavement
section may be subjected to heavy constru ctio n traffic that can result in pavement deterioration
Reliable • Responsive • Convenient • Innovative 12
Geotech ni cal Engineeri ng Report
Hike and Bike Trai l • College Station, Te x as
January 8 , 2010 • Terracon Pro j ect No . A 1095063
lrerracon
and premature fa ilure. Our experience indicates that heavy cons truction traffic on the pavement
(partially or fully constructed) can result in pavements that will not perform satisfactorily . Thicker
pavement sections could be used to accommodate heavy construct ion traffic , or such traffic
could be routed around the pavement.
The following recomm endation s should be imple mented to help promote long -te rm pavement
performance :
• The subgrade and th e pavem ent surface should be designed to promote prope r
surface drainage , prefera bly at a mi n imum grade of 2 percent;
• Sit e grading sho uld be designed to dra in aw ay from the pavements , p refera bly at a
minimum grade of 2 perc ent;
• Joints and cracks should be sealed immed iate ly ;
Preventive maintenance should be pla nne d and provided for the pavements at this site.
Preventive maintenance activitie s are intended t o slow the rate of pavement deterioration, and
consist of both localized mainte nance (e .g . crack and joint sea ling and patching) and global
maintenance (e .g . surface sealing). Prior to implementing any maintenance, additional
engineering observations are recommended to determine the type and ext en t of preventive
maintenance.
The subgrade so il in th e pro posed pavement area incl udes expan sive clayey soil. Desp ite the
lime trea t ment of upp er subg rade soils, there is a possibility that s hri n kage and swelling of that
deep sub grade so il migh t cause cracks to appear in t he pavement an d/or vertical movement of
the pavement. That con dition sometimes develops in concrete pavements on expansive clayey
subgrade soil. Although thickening of the pavement layers of concrete and chemically treated
subgrade would provide some resistance to those type cracks and movement , it is doubtful that
increasing thickness of those layers within reasonable limits, above the values needed for
structural design to suppo rt the traffic , would eliminate the risk of all cracks and movement
caused by shrinkage of the deep subgrade soil. Overexcavation of expansive su bgra de soil and
replacement w ith non-expansi ve sele ct fill could be used to reduce the ris k of cracks and
movem ent caused by shrinkage of the subgrade soil. Thickening of the pavement layers and
ove rexcavation of ex isti ng soil would increase cost of the project , an d might not be justifi ed.
5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS
Terracon should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications so comments
can be made regarding interpretati on and implementation of our geo technical recommendations
in the design and specifications. Terracon also should be retained to provide observation and
testing services during grading, excavation, foundation construct ion an d other earth-related
construction phases of the proje ct.
Reliable • Responsive • Convenient • Innovative 13
Geotechnical Engi nee ring Report
Hike and Bike Trail •College Station , Texas
Ja nuary 8 , 2010 • Terracon Project No. A 1095063
lrerracon
Th e ana lysis and rec omme ndations presented in t his rep ort are based upon he data ob tained
from the bo rings perfo rmed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed in
this rep ort . T his report does not reflect variations that may occur between bo rin gs , across the
site, or due to the modifying effects of weather . The nature and extent of such variations may
not become evident until during or after construction . If variations appear, we should be
immediately notified so that further evaluation and supplemental recommendations can be
provided.
The scope of services for this project does not incl ude either specifically or by implication any
environmental or biological (e .g., mold, fungi , bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or
prevention of pol lutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the
potential for such contamination or pollution , oth er studies should be undertaken.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to the
project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical
engineering practices . No warranties, eithe r ex press or impl ied , are intende d or made. Site
safety, excavation support, and dewatering requi re ments are the resp onsibility of others . In the
event that changes in the nature , design , or location of the project as outlined in this report are
planned, the conclusions and recommen dations contained in this report shall not be considered
valid unless Terracon reviews t he changes and either verifie s o r modifies the conclusions of th is
repo rt in wri ing.
Reliable • Responsive • Convenient • Innovative 14
APPENDIX A
FIELD EXP LORATION
LW l[~!rn;,~ an ers and Scien ti sts
Note : Vicinity Pl Develop an was prepa r d ment Per mit Plans for eH .~si n g a vicinity mao f . I e and Bik e T , rom City of C II
"''""''' ra il Compl •tio•. o '''''"°"Sil•
;:---..::;.AW~'"':_A I Projecl No .
Drawn By :
Checked By:
VICINTY PLAN
HIKE AND BIKE TRAIL
H~RVE Y MITCHELL PARKWAY
EXAS AVENUE TO WELSHAVENU
College Station, Texas E -·-·~·....!
A-1
~---
N
Note : Plan of Boring s was prepared usi ng a project overview from City of
College Station Site Development Permit Plans for Hike and Bike T ra il
Completion .
FIGURE NO. A-2
PROJECT MNG : AWA
DRAWN BY: LW
CHECKED BY : AWA
APPROVED BY: DEP
JOB NO: A1095063
SCALE : 1·; 500'
FILE NO: A 1095063. POB
DATE: DECEMBER, 2009
·-;
1
...,
LOG OF BORING NO. B-1
CLIENT: Bury + Partners, Inc . PROJECT: Hike and Bike Trail
Austin, Texas Harvey Mitchell Parkway
BORIN G See Plan of Borings SITE: T exas Avenue to Welsh Avenue
LOCATION : College Station, Texas
SAMPLES TESTS
0 u.. >!!. x 0
Zu.. u >!!. w z. I-<i.(f) Q 0 0 u.. Ui >!!. WC!J ~ _J u.. It-~ 0 I--?:: I-0 (i5 0 ' >!!. ~ ~ >I-Q
Cl DESCRIPTION w CD 0 >-Ui -I-0 s: w:::? ~ 0 ('.)W _J w :2 1-0 w -(fJ :::i I-0 CfJI (fJ Zn'. u.. >-0 Q'. I-z :::i 0 ~* w I-u C2 Q'. ::iZ u Q'.('.) w -::i :E I -Cf) _J w Q'. ?;Cf) CD CD I-1-W 0 0 i= i= Cf) -o._Z a. I-Cf) w _w (fJ I-(fJ (fJ ::iw ::2:w ::i U..C!J ro Q u Q I--_J z -Z >-::i 5 5 ?::[;j 0 g: _J zw (9 Approx. Surface Elevati on: Existing Grade w Cf) >-[L <l'.W oo Q'. a <( on::
0 ::i I-(fJ U O.. :20 0 :::i Q Q ::2: Ui UC!J u.. Un.
~ SANDY LEAN C LAY; me dium stiff to C L
hard, brown -SS 5 17 26 15 11 52
-
~ -beco mes tan -SS 13 10 34 15 19 59
-
5 .0 ST 4.5
Boring terminated at 5 feet. 5
STRATI FICATION LINES REPRESEN T APPROX IMATE RE MARKS : Dry auger to 5 feet.
BOUNDARIES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN SITU. THE Seepage was not observed while drilling .
TRANSI T ION BETWEE N STRATA MAY BE MORE Bo ring was dry and open to near termination depth upon completion.
GRAD UAL.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATION S DATE DRILLED Page 1of1
'SJ_ .!. lli!rracm 1 12/31/2009 FIGURE '1-l'. PROJECT NUMB ER
3 FREE WATER WAS NOT OBSERVED DUR ING A1095063 DRILLING OP ERATIONS
..
OG OF BORIN G NO. B-2
C LI E NT: Bury + Partners, Inc. PROJ ECT: Hike and Bike Trail
Austi n, Texas Harvey Mitchell Par kwa y
BORING See P la n of Borings SITE: Texas Avenue to Wels h Av enue
LOCAT IO N: College Station , T ex as
SAMPLES TESTS
0 LL ,,g x 0
Z LL u ~ w z I-<f.(f) Cl. ~ 0 LL en _J LL I I-~ 1-· ~ W (f) ~ Ol I-0 U5 0 ~ 1-" ~ >I-Cl.
0 DESCRIPTION w CD w~ ~ 0 en -I-
_J w 2 ~ w -en ~ _J 0 (f)I (/) t9 w
u LL >-0 1-Q Cl'. I-z :::i ~~ w I-z o::: ;? Cl'. ::i Z u u Cl'. t9 w -::i :c I (/) _J w Cl'. ~(/) c. CD ~tu 1-W 0 g f== f== (/) -o_Z
~ I-(/) w (/)I-:::> (/) (/) ::iw 2W :::> LL(/)
Cl. u Cl. 1-· _J z -Z >-::i ::i ~iii _J zw
t9 Approx . Surface E levation: Exi sting Grade w (/) >-Cl. <(W o o Cl'. 0 o g: < oo:::
0 :::> I-(/) U ll. 20 0 :::i Cl. Cl. 2 en 0 ([) LL 0 Cl.
I SANDY LEAN CLAY ; st iff to hard , brown C L
-
SS 10
-
-beco mes brown a nd red
-ST 4.5 15 36 18 18 50 ~ -
-becom es dark gray ~ ~ 5-ST 1.5 17 10 1 36 16 20 1.9 10 0
~ 6.5 -
~: CLAY EY SAND; medium dense , gray -SC SS 12
I
I
-
-ST 3 .0 29 92 42 22 20 35 6.1 4 0
10 -
I -
-~ -
~ -ST 4.5 22 34 19 15 39
15 -~ -m -
-~ -SS 27 24 34 21 13 39
20 -
-~ -
-
~ -becomes very dense -SS 50/4'
·.-·:/ 25.0 25 Boring te rm inated at 25 feet.
STRAT IFIC ATION LIN ES REPRESE NT APPROXIMATE REMARKS: Dry auger to 25 feet.
BOUN DARIES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN SITU, THE Seepage was not observed w hile d r i lling by dry auger.
TRANS IT ION BETWEEN STRATA MAY BE MORE Water at 5.5 feet afte r 24 hrs.
GRADUAL.
WATER LE VEL OBSERVATIONS DATE DRILLED Page 1 of 1
'Sl 5.5 ft at 24 hrs .!. II li!rnrcm 1
12/31/2009 FIGURE y l'.. PROJECT NUMBER
4 A1095063
\:cc--==----=-..., ..:,;;::r.u ·--~. ---'-..... .· : ,.. oa"¥.&.--w:.u;. -.:. .. .J..a=~....,_.----7_)
LOG OF BORING NO. B-3
CLIENT: Bury + Partners, Inc .
Austin, Texas
BORING
LOCATION : See Plan of Borings
Ol
0
...J
u :c a.
<1l
DE SCRIPTION
(3 Approx. Surface Elevatio n: Existing Grade
PROJECT: Hike and Bike Trail
Harvey Mitchell Parkway
SITE:
1-w w
LL
I
I--
Cl. w
0
...J
0
CD
::2: >-
Cf!
Cf! u
Cf! :::>
Texas Avenue to Welsh Avenue
College Station, Texas
SAMPLES
w
Cl.
~
TESTS
~ 0
SAND Y LEAN CLAY ; stiff, brown CL 1----+-~+---+~-+---1~-1-~1----+-~+---+~-t---1
2.0 SS 7
CLAYE Y SAND; medium de nse , brown SC
-ST 0 .5
-beco mes gray, very loose 5-SS 2 26 31 18 13 48
-SS 24 27 39 22 17 32
-becomes medium de nse to very dense
-ST 4.0 27 91 45 23 22 30 3.0 5
10-
-
-
-SS 150/2'
15 -
-
-
SS 150/6' 20 38 20 18 32
20 -
-
-SS 5014' 2 1 40 22 18 40
STRATIFICAT IO N LINE S REPRESENT APPROX IMATE
BOUNDARIES BE TWEEN SOIL TYPES . IN S ITU . THE
TRANSITION BE TWEEN STRATA MAY BE MORE
GRADUAL.
REMA RKS: Dry auger to 25 feet.
WATER LEVE L OBSERVAT IONS
.¥'. 10 ft A B .:?: 5.5 ft at 24 hrs
Seepage was observed at 10 feet while drill ing by dry auger.
Water at 5.5 feet afte r 24 hrs .
11erracan
DA TE DR ILLED
12/31 /2009
PR OJECT NUMBER
A 109506 3
Pa ge 1 of 1
FIGURE
5
0
LOG OF BORI NG NO. 8 -4
CLIENT: PROJECT: Hike and Bike Trait Bury + Pa rtners, Inc .
Austin , Texas Harvey Mitchell Parkway
BORING
LOCAT ION : Se e Plan of Borings S IT E : Texas Avenue to Welsh Avenue
College Station, Texas
SAM PLES TESTS
0 LL ~ >< 0
Z LL u ~ w z I-<(en Cl. ~
0 0 LL
LL I I-~ 0 1-· ~ wen ~ ii5 0 ~ r..: ~ >I-
~ w~ ~ >-0 en . I-W · en ::::; I-0 en I en 1-Q 0::: I-0 ;} 0::: :::iZ z ::::; u 0 ~~ w I-w ....J w 0::: t9 0::: Cl) ~tu 1-W 0 g i= i= en • o_Z w en I-en en :J w 2w :J
Cl. 1-· ....J Z -Z >-:J ::5 ::5 ~[;j og: ....J
>-Cl. <(W Oo 0::: 0 < I-en UCl.. 2U 0 ::::; Cl. Cl. 2 en u en LL
....J
Ol DESCR IPTI O N I-0
0 w Cl)
....J w 2
() LL >-:.c :i en
0. I-en ro
(5 Approx . Surface Elevation: Ex isting Grade Cl. u w en
0 :J
SS 6 19 47 16 31 64
ST 4.5 18 49 15 34 56
ST 4 .5 +
~ SANDY LEAN CLAY ; me diu m stiff to C L ~ hard, brown -
-
~ -becom es ta n -
-
5.0 5 Bo ring termi nat ed at 5 fee t.
REMARKS : Dry auger to 5 feet.
Seepag e was not observed while drilling.
ST RAT IFIC ATION LIN ES RE PRESENT APPROX IMATE
BOUNDA RIES BE TWEE N SOIL TYP ES. IN SITU , THE
TRA NS IT IO N BETWEEN STRA TA MAY BE MORE
GRADUAL.
Boring was dry and open to near termination depth upon completion.
WATER L EVEL OBSERVATI O NS DA TE DRILLED
12/31/2 009
PR OJECT NUMBER
FR EE WATER WAS NOT OBSERVED DURI NG A 1095063
~.~OP E RATION S ,..,r~~w::•co.s::i'lt.Jr"Ca·.t~-..~-i----~--~~ •• ;.sr.-~:....._-··-·
Page 1of1
FIGURE
6
en
Cl.
t9 w zo::: -:::i ~en LL en Zw oo:::
UCl..
LOG OF BORING NO . B-5
CLIENT: Bury + Partners, In c. PROJECT: Hike and Bike Trail
Austin, Texas Harvey Mitchell Parkway
BORING See Plan of Borings SITE: Texas Avenue to Welsh Avenue
LOCATION : College Station, Texas
SAMPLES TESTS
0 lL ~ x 0 z lL u ~ w z I-<( (/) Cl. ~
0 0 lL Ui __, lL I I-~ 0 i-"' ~ WUl ~ I-0 Ui 0 ' ~ i-"' ~ >I-Cl.
Ol DESCRIPT ION w en w~ 0 r:: 0 Ui • I-l'.JW 0 s: Ui ~ UlI __, w ~ 1-Q W· ::J 0 (/) za:: lL >-0 a:: I-z ::J u ~~ w I-u ~a:: ::iZ u a::<.9 w -::i :.c I . (/) _, w a:: ~(/) en ~tD 1-W 0 0 i= i= (/) . o._Z a. I-(/) w (/)I-(/) (/) ::iw ~w ::i lL (/) ~ Q_ u Cl. i-"' _,z -Z >-::i 5 5 ~GJ og:
_, Zw
(.'.J Approx. Surface Elevation : Existing Grade w (/) r:: Cl. <(W oo a:: 0 ~ 00::
0 ::i (/) UD.. ~u 0 ::J Cl. Cl. ~Ui OUl lL U Cl.
~ SANDY LEAN CLAY ; me dium stiff, ta n CL
-
SS 5 26 46 19 27 64
2 .0
~ LEAN CLAY ; hard, tan CL
-ST 4.5 25 46 24 22 86
-
5.0 ST 4 .0
Boring termi nated at 5 feet. 5
STRATIFICATION LIN ES RE PR ESENT APPROXIMATE REMARKS: Dry auger t o 5 feet.
BOUNDARIES BETW EEN SOIL TYPES . IN SITU, THE Se epage was not observed while drilling .
TRANS ITI ON BETWEEN STRATA MAY BE MO RE Bo ring was dry and open to near termi nation dep th upon co mpletion .
GRADUAL.
WATER LEVEL OB SERVATIONS DATE DRILLED Page 1 of 1
'¥ .!. 11Brracm1 12/31/2009 FIGURE :J. l'.. PROJECT NUMBER
FREE WATER WAS NOT OBSERVED DURING A1095063 7 DRILLING OPERATIONS
-
LOG OF BORIN G NO . B-6
CLIENT: Bu ry + Partners, In c . PRO JECT : Hike and Bike Trail
Austi n , Texas Harvey Mitchell Parkw ay
BORING See Plan of Borings SI TE : Texas Avenue to Welsh Avenue
LOCATION : Colle g e Station, Texas
SAM PL ES TESTS
0 LL >< <ft.
ZLL u ~ UJ z-<{ U) ll.. LL
-' f-If-~ t::: 0 UJ U) ~ iii LL ~-~ f-0 (/j 0 ' <ft. f-->f-ll..
Ol DES CRIPTION 2 0 UJ Ill UJ 2 >-0 iii -f-
....J UJ 2 s: UJ • iii ~ :::; f-0 U)I U) t9 UJ
f-Q er:: f-zcr:: u LL >-0 ~er:: ::iZ z :::; u u ~~ UJ f-UJ -::i E I U) ....J UJ er:: t9 er:: ~ U) a. Ill ~t;j f-UJ 0 0 f= f= U) -ll..z
~ f-U) UJ U) f-::i U) U) ::i UJ 2 UJ ::i LL U)
ll.. u ll.. i-:-....JZ -Z >-5 5 ~(ij ....J z UJ
t9 Approx. Surface Elevation: Existing Grade UJ U) >-ll.. <{ UJ Oo er:: 0 0 g: <( ocr::
0 ::i f-U) Oil. 20 0 :::; ll.. ll.. 2iii 0 U) LL O il.
~ SANDY FAT CLAY; medium st iff, brown CH
-59 2.0 SS 4 30 21 38 65
~ FAT CLAY WITH SAND; hard, tan C H
-ST 4 .5+ 17 58 19 39 84
-
5.0 ST 4.0 17 56 20 36 83
Boring term inat ed at 5 fe et. 5
STRAT IFI CATION LINE S REPRES EN T AP PROXIMAT E REMARKS: Dry auger to 5 feet.
BOUNDARIES BETW EEN SOI L TY PES. IN SI TU, THE Seepage was not observed while drilling.
TRANSITIO N BETW EEN ST RATA MAY BE MOR E Boring was dry and open to near termination depth upon completion.
GRADUAL.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS DATE DRILLED Page 1 of 1
'Si.. l'. Ii lerracm1 12/3 1/2009 FIGURE
7 ~ PROJECT NU MBER
8 FREE WATE R WAS NOT OBSERVED DURING A 1095063
DRILLING OPERATIONS ---~-..:u.;:: ..-UT~,; --""" -
City of College Station
Hike and Bike Trail Completion (ST-0904)
(Texas Avenue/Welsh A venue Hike and Bike Trail)
Meeting Agenda
July 27 ' 2009
Type of Meeting: Project Kickoff Meeting
Meeting Facilitator: Bury + Partners
Attendees: Danielle Charbonnet (City of College Station)
John Lindner (Bury + Partners)
Bobak Tehrany (Bury + Partners)
Cathy Wahren (Terracon)
Topics of Discussion:
1. Project Overview and Limits
2. Review scope of services and confirm responsibilities
3 . Project schedule and deliverables (milestones)
4 . Trail Route
• Overview
• Creek Crossing/Environmental Concerns
• Pedestrian bridge crossing option
• TxDOT right-of-way design standards
5. Go out to site and walk proposed alignment
6. Summary
7. Adjourn
City of College Station
Architects & Engineering Professional Services Contract
This Contract is between the City of College Station , a Texas home-rule municipal
corporation, (the "City") and Bury+Partners, Inc., a project engineering and management
corporation (the "Contractor"), whereby the Contractor agrees to provide the City with certain
professional services as described herein and the City agrees to pay the Contractor for those
services.
ARTICLE I
Scope of Services
1.01 In consideration of the compensation stated in paragraph 2.01 herein below, the
Contractor agrees to provide the City with the professional services as described in
Exhibit "A", the Scope of Services , which is incorporated herein by reference for all
purposes, and which services may be more generally described as follows: Professional
engineering, environmental, and surveying services for the design, preparation of
plans and construction documents, and construction assistance for the Hike and
Bike Trail Completion Project from Welsh Avenue to Texas Avenue (the "Project").
ARTICLE II
Payment
2.01 In consideration of the Contractor's provision of the professional services in compliance
with all terms and conditions of this Contract, the City shall pay the Contractor according
to the terms set forth in Exhibit "B". Except in the event of a duly authorized change
order, approved by the City as provided in this Contract, the total cost of all professional
services provided under this Contract may not exceed One hundred and twelve
thousand one hundred and thirty-three and 00/100 Dollars ($112,133.00).
ARTICLE III
Time of Performance and Construction Cost
3.01 The Contractor shall complete the professional services within the times set forth below.
The Contractor shall exercise a degree of care and diligence in the performance of all
services under this Contractor in accordance with the professional standards prevailing
among Contractors in the location in which Contractor practices or College Station,
Texas , whichever is the higher standard, skilled in design for projects of similar scope ,
and all of the Contractor services shall be performed as expeditiously as is consistent
with said standards and the orderly progress of the Work.
[Conceptual Design: 70 calendar days after the authorization to commence planning]
[Preliminary Project Design: 28 calendar days after authorization to commence PPDJ
[Final Design: 35 calendar days after authorization to commence final design]
Page 1
Contract No . 09-241
Council Approved -Rev. 2112103
3.02 All design work and other professional services provided under this Contract must be
completed by the following date: as set forth in the Notice to Proceed.
3.03 Time is of the essence of this Contract. The Contractor shall be prepared to provide the
professional services in the most expedient and efficient manner possible in order to
complete the work by the times specified. Promptly after the execution of this Contract,
the Contractor shall prepare and submit for the City to approve in writing , a detailed
schedule for the performance of the Contractor 's services to meet the City's project
milestone dates which are included in this Contract. The Contractor's schedule shall
include allowances for periods of time required for the City 's review and for approval of
submissions by authorities having jurisdiction over the Project. The time limits
established by this schedule over w hich Contractor has control shall not be ex ceeded
without w ritten approval from the City .
3.04 The Contractor 's services consist of all of the services required to be performed by
Contractor, Contractor's employees and Contractor 's consultants under the terms of this
Contract. Such services include normal civil , structural, mechan ical and electrical
engineering services , plumbing, food service , acoustical and landscape services , and any
other design services that are normally or customarily furnished and reasonably
necessary for the Project. The Contractor shall contract and employ at his expense
consultants necessary for the design of the Project, and such consultants shall be licensed
as required by the State of Texas and approved in writing by the City .
3.05 The Contractor shall designate a principal of the firm reasonably satisfactory to the City
who shall, so long as employed by Contractor and acceptable to the City , remain in
charge of professional services through completion and be available for general
consultation throughout the Project. Any replacement of that principal shall be approved
in writing (which shall not be unreasonably withheld) by the City, prior to replacement.
3.06 Contractor shall be responsible for the coordination of all drawings and design
documents relating to Contractor's design and used on the Project, regardless of whether
such drawings and documents are prepared by Contractor. Contractor shall be
responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all drawings and specifications
submitted by or through Contractor and for their compliance with all applicable codes ,
ordinances, regulations, laws and statutes.
3.07 Contractor's evaluations of the City 's project budget and the preliminary estimates of
construction cost and detailed estimates of construction cost, represent the Contractor 's
best judgment as a design professional familiar with the construction industry.
3.08 The construction budget for this Project, which is established as a condition of this
Contract is $750,000.00. This construction budget shall not be exceeded unless the
amount is changed in writing by the City.
Page 2
Contract No. 09-241
Coun cil Approved -Rev. 2112103
ARTICLE IV
Conceptual Design
4.01 Upon the Contractor 's receipt from the City of a letter of authorization to commence
planning, the Contractor shall meet w ith the City for the purpose of determining the
nature of the Project. The Contractor shall inquire in writing as to the information he
believes the City may have in its possession that is necessary for the Contractor's
performance. The City shall provide the information within its possession that it can
make available to the Contractor. The City shall designate a representative to act as the
contact person on behalf of the City.
4 .02 The Contractor shall determine the City's needs with regard to the Project, including , but
not limited to, tests, analyses , reports , site evaluations, needs surveys , comparisons with
other municipal Projects , review of budgetary constraints and other preliminary
investigations necessary for the Project. Contractor shall verify the observable existing
conditions of the Project and verify any existing as-built drawings. Contractor shall
confirm that the Project can be designed and constructed within the time limits outlined
in this Contract. Contractor shall prepare a detailed design phase schedule which
includes all review and approval periods during the schematic design , design
development and construction document phases . Contractor shall confirm that the
Project can be designed and constructed for the dollar amount of the project budget, if
applicable .
4 .03 The Contractor shall prepare a conceptual design that shall include schematic layouts ,
surveys, sketches and exhibits demonstrating the considerations involved in the Project.
The conceptual design shall contemplate compliance with all applicable laws , statutes ,
ordinances , codes and regulations. Upon the City's request, the Contractor shall meet
with City staff and the City Council to make a presentation of his report.
ARTICLE V
Preliminary Design
5.01 The City shall direct the Contractor to commence work on the Project design by sending
to the Contractor a "letter of authorization" to begin work on the preliminary Project
design pursuant to this Contract. Upon receipt of the Letter of Authorization to
commence preliminary Project design , the Contractor shall meet with the City for the
purpose of determining the extent of any revisions to the Conceptual Design.
5.02 The Contractor shall prepare the preliminary design of the Project, including , but not
limited to, the preliminary drawings and specifications and other documents to fix and
describe the size and character of the Project as to architectural, structural, mechanical
and electrical systems, materials and such other elements as may be appropriate. The
Contractor shall submit to the City a detailed estimate of the construction costs of the
Project, based on current area, volume, or other unit costs. This estimate shall also
indicate both the cost of each category of work involved in constructing the Project and
the time required for construction of the Project from commencement to final completion.
Page 3
Contract No. 09-241
Council Approved -Rev. 2112103
5.03 Upon completion of the preliminary design of the Project, the Contractor shall so notify
the City. Upon request the Contractor shall meet with the City staff and City Council to
make a presentation of his preliminary design of the Project. The Contractor shall
provide an explanation of the preliminary design and cost estimate and shall verify that,
to the best of Contractor's belief, the Project requirements and construction can be
completed within the project budget and schedule.
ARTICLE VI
Final Design
6.01 The City shall direct the Contractor to commence work on the final design of the Project
by sending to the Contractor a "letter of authorization" to begin work on the final design
phase of the Project. Upon receipt of the Letter of Authorization to proceed with final
design of the Project, the Contractor shall immediately prepare the final design ,
including, but not limited to, the bid documents , contract, drawings, and specifications, to
fix and describe the size and character of the Project as to structural, mechanical , and
electrical systems, materials , and such other elements as may be appropriate. The final
design of the Project shall comply with all applicable laws , statutes , ordinances , codes
and regulations.
6.02 Notwithstanding the City's approval of the final design, the Contractor warrants that the
final design will be sufficient and adequate to fulfill the purposes of the Project.
6.03 The Contractor shall prepare and separately seal the special provisions, the
technical specifications, and bid proposal form(s) in conformance with the City's
current pre-approved, "Standard Form of Construction Agreement" for the
construction contract between the City and the contractor. The Contractor hereby
agrees that no changes, modifications, supplementations, alterations, or deletions
will be made to the City's standard form without the prior written approval of the
City.
6.04 The Contractor shall provide the City with complete contract documents sufficient to be
advertised for bids by the City. The contract documents shall include the design and
specifications and other changes that are required to fulfill the purpose of the Project.
Upon completion of the final design of the Project, with the submission of the complete
contract documents, and upon request of the City, the Contractor shall meet with City
Staff and the City Council to present the final design of the Project. The Contractor shall
provide an explanation of the final design and cost estimate.
Page4
Contract No . 09-241
Co1D1ci1 Approved -Rev. 2112103
ARTICLE VII
Bid Preparations & Evaluation
7.01 The Contractor shall assist the City in advertising for and obtaining bids or negotiating
proposals for the construction of the Project. Upon request, the Contractor shall meet
with City Staff and the City Council to present, and make recommendations on, the bids
submitted for the construction of the Project.
7.02 The Contractor shall review the construction contractors' bids, including subcontractors ,
suppliers , and other persons required for completion of the Project. The Contractor shall
evaluate each bid and provide these evaluations to the City along with a recommendation
on each bid. If the lowest bid for the construction of the Project ex ceeds the final cost
estimate set forth in the final design of the Project, then the Contractor, at his sole cost
and expense , shall revise the construction documents so that the total construction costs
of the Project will not exceed the final cost estimate contained in the final design of the
Project.
7.03 Where substitutions are requested by a construction contractor, the Contractor shall
review the substitution requested and approve or disapprove such substitutions.
ARTICLE VIII
Construction
8.01 The Contractor shall be a representative of, and shall advise and consult with , the City (1)
during construction, and (2) at the City's direction from time to time during the
correction, or warranty , period described in the construction contract. The Contractor
shall have authority to act on behalf of the City only to the extent provided in this
Agreement unless modified by written instrument.
8.02 The Contractor shall make visits to the site , with a frequency appropriate to the scope of
the Project, to inspect the progress and quality of the executed work of the construction
contractor and his subcontractors and to determine if such work is proceeding in
accordance with the contract documents. Contractor shall periodically review the as-built
drawings for accuracy and completeness , and shall report his findings to the Ci ty .
8.03 The Contractor shall keep the City informed of the progress and quality of the work. The
Contractor shall exercise the utmost care and diligence in discovering and promptly
reporting to the City any defects or deficiencies in such work and shall disapprove or
reject any work failing to conform with the contract documents.
8.04 The Contractor shall review and approve shop drawings and samples , the results of tests
and inspections, and other data that each construction contractor or subcontractor is
required to provide. The Contractor's review and approval shall include a determination
of whether the work complies with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances and codes and
a determination of whether the work, when completed, will be in compliance with the
requirements of the contract documents.
Page 5
Contract No . 09-241
Coun cil Approved -Rev. 2112103
8.05 The Contractor shall determine the acceptability of substitute materials and equipment
that may be proposed by construction contractors or subcontractors. The Contractor shall
also receive and review maintenance and operating instruction manuals , schedules,
guarantees , and certificates of inspection, which are to be assembled by the construction
contractor in accordance with the contract documents.
8.06 The Contractor shall issue all instructions of the City to the construction contractor as
well as interpretations and clarifications of the contract documents pertaining to the
performance of the work. Contractor shall interpret the contract documents and judge the
performance thereunder by the contractor constructing the Project, and Contractor shall ,
within a reasonable time, render such interpretations and clarifications as it may deem
necessary for the proper execution and progress of the Work. Contractor shall receive no
additional compensation for providing clarification of the Drawings and Specifications .
8.07 The Contractor shall review the amounts owing to the construction contractor and
recommend to the City, in writing, payments to the construction contractor of such
amounts. The Contractor's recommendation of payment, being based upon the
Contractor's on-site inspections and his experience and qualifications as a design
professional, shall constitute a recommendation by the Contractor to the City that the
quality of such work is in accordance with the contract documents and that the work has
progressed to the point reflected in Contractor's recommendation for payment.
8.08 Upon notification from the construction contractor that the Project is substantially
complete, the Contractor shall conduct an inspection of the site to determine if the Project
is substantially complete. The Contractor shall prepare a checklist of items that shall be
completed prior to final acceptance. Upon notification by the construction contractor that
the checklist items designated by the Contractor for completion have been completed, the
Contractor shall inspect the Project to verify final completion.
8.09 The Contractor shall not be responsible for the work of the construction contractor or any
of his subcontractors, except that the Contractor shall be responsible for the construction
contractor's schedules or failure to carry out the work in accordance with the contract
documents if such failures result from the Contractor's negligent acts or omissions. This
provision shall not alter the Contractor's duties to the City arising from the performance
of the Contractor's obligations under this Contract.
8.10 The Contractor shall conduct at least one on-site inspection during the warranty period
and shall report to the City as to the continued acceptability of the work.
8.11 The Contractor shall not execute change orders on behalf of the City or otherwise alter
the financial scope of the Project without an advance, written authorization from the City.
8.12 The Contractor shall perform all of its duties under this Article VIII so as to not cause
any delay in the progress of construction of the Project.
Page 6
Contract No. 09-241
Coun cil Approved -Re v. 2112103
8.13 The Contractor shall assist the construction contractor and City in obtaining an
Occupancy Permit by accompanying governing officials during inspections of the Project
ifrequested to do so by the City.
ARTICLE IX
Change Orders & Documents & Materials
9.01 No changes shall be made, nor will invoices for changes , alterations, modifications ,
deviations , or extra work or services be recognized or paid except upon the prior written
order from authorized personnel of the City. The Contractor shall not execute change
orders on behalf of the City or otherwise alter the financial scope of the Project.
9.02 Written change orders may be approved by the City Manager or his delegate provided
that the change order does not increase the amount set forth in paragraph 2 of this
Contract by more than five percent (5%). Changes in excess of this amount must be
approved by the City Council prior to commencement of the services or work. Any
request by the Contractor for an increase in the Scope of Services and an increase in
the amount listed in paragraph two of this Contract shall be made and approved by
the City prior to the Contractor providing such services or the right to payment for
such additional services shall be waived. If there is a dispute between the Contractor
and the City respecting any service provided or to be provided hereunder by the
Contractor, including a dispute as to whether such service is additional to the Scope of
Services included in this Contract, the Contractor agrees to continue providing on a
timely basis all services to be provided by the Contractor hereunder, including any
service as to which there is a dispute.
9.03 The Contractor shall furnish the City seven (7) sets of plans and specifications. It is
hereby agreed that additional copies shall be provided to the City at the City's expense.
The Contractor shall provide the City one (1) sets ofreproducible, mylar-record drawings
that clearly show all the changes made during the construction process , based upon the
marked-up prints, drawings, and other data furnished by the construction contractor to the
Contractor. The Contractor shall provide copies of documents, computer files if
available, surveys, notes, and tracings used or prepared by the Contractor. The foregoing
documentation, the Contractor's work product, and other information in the Contractor 's
possession concerning the Project shall be the property of the City from the time of
preparation. The Contractor shall also furnish one set of digital files representing the
final as-built mylars.
Page 7
Contract No . 09-241
Council Approved -Rev. 2112103
ARTICLEX
Warranty, Indemnification & Release
10.01 As an experienced and qualified design professional, the Contractor warrants that the
information provided by the Contractor reflects high professional and industry standards ,
procedures , and performances . The Contractor warrants the design preparation of
drawings, the designation or selection of materials and equipment, the selection and
supervision of personnel , and the performance of other services under this Contract,
pursuant to a high standard of performance in the profession. The Contractor warrants
that the Contractor will exercise diligence and due care and perform in a good and
workmanlike manner all of the services pursuant to this Contract. Approval of the City
shall not constitute , or be deemed , a release of the responsibility and liability of the
Contractor, its employees , agents, or associates for the exercise of skill and diligence to
promote the accuracy and competency of their designs , information, plans, specifications
or any other document, nor shall the City's approval be deemed to be the assumption of
respons.ibility by the City for any defect or error in the aforesaid documents prepared by
the Contractor, its employees, associates, agents, or subcontractors.
10 .02 The Contractor shall promptly correct any defective designs or specifications furnished
by the Contractor at no cost to the City. The City's approval, acceptance , use of, or
payment for , all or any part of the Contractor's services hereunder or of the Project itself
shall in no way alter the Contractor's obligations or the City's rights hereunder.
10.03 In all activities or services performed hereunder, the Contractor is an independent
contractor and not an agent or employee of the City. The Contractor and its employees
are not the agents , servants, or employees of the City. As an independent contractor, the
Contractor shall be responsible for the professional services and the final work product
contemplated under this Contract. Except for materials furnished by the City , the
Contractor shall supply all materials , equipment, and labor required for the professional
services to be provided under this Contract. The Contractor shall have ultimate control
over the execution of the professional services. The Contractor shall have the sole
obligation to employ, direct , control, supervise, manage , discharge , and compensate all of
its employees or subcontractors, and the City shall have no control of or supervision over
the employees of the Contractor or any of the Contractor 's subcontractors.
10.04 The Contractor must at all times exercise reasonable precautions on behalf of, and be
solely responsible for , the safety of its officers, employees, agents, subcontractors ,
licensees , and other persons, as well as their personal property, while in the vicinity of
the Project or any of the work being done on or for the Project. It is expressly understood
and agreed that the City shall not be liable or responsible for the negligence of the
Contractor, its officers, employees, agents, subcontractors, invitees, licensees , and other
persons .
10.05 Indemnity. The Contractor agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the
City, its officers, employees, and agents (separately and collectively referred to in
this paragraph as "lndemnitee"), from and against any and all claims, losses,
Page 8
Contract No . 09-241
Council Approved -Rev. 2112103
damages, causes of action, suits, judgments, settlements made by Indemnitee, and
liability of every kind, including all ex penses of litigation, court costs , attorney 's
fees, and other reasonable costs for damage to or loss of use of any property, for
injuries to, or sickness or death of any person, including but not limited to
Contractor, any of its subcontractors of any tier, or of any employee or invitee of
Contractor or of any such subcontractors, that is caused by, arises out of, related to ,
or in connection with, the negligence of and/or negligent performance of this
Contract by Contractor or by any such subcontractors of any tier, under this
Contract.
10.06 It is agreed with respect to any legal limitations now or hereafter in effect and
affecting the validity or enforceability of the indemnification obligation under
Paragraph 10.05, such legal limitations are made a part of the indemnification
obligation and shall operate to amend th e indemnification obligation to the
minimum ex tent necessary to bring the provision into conformity with the
requirements of such limitations, and as so modified, the indemnification obligation
shall continue in full force and effect.
10 .07 Release. The Contractor releases, relinquishes, and discharges the City, its officers,
agents, and employ ees from all claims, demands, and causes of action of ev ery kind
and character, including the cost of defense thereof, for any injury to, sickness or
death of the Contractor or its employees and any loss of or damage to any property
of the Contractor or its employees that is caused by or alleged to be caused by,
arises out of, or is in connection with the Contractor's work to be performed
hereunder. Both the City and the Contractor ex pressly intend that this release shall
apply r egardless of whether said claims, demands, and causes of action are cov ered,
in whole or in part, by insurance and in the ev ent of injury, sickness, death, loss , or
damage suffered by the Contractor or its employees, but not otherwise, this release
shall apply regardless of whether such loss, damage, injury, or death was caused in
whole or in part by the City, any other party released hereunder, the Contractor, or
any third party.
ARTICLE XI
Insurance
11.01 T h e Contractor shall procure and maintain at its sole co st and expense for the duration of
this Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to p er sons or d amages to prop erty that
may arise fro m or in connec tio n with the p erformance of the work hereunder b y the
Contractor, its agents, rep resentatives, volunteers, employees or subcontractors . The
policies, limits and end or sem en ts r equire d ar e as set for th on Exhibi t C.
ARTICLE XII
Use of Drawings, Specifications and Other Documents
12 .01 The Draw ings , Specifications and other documents prepared by the Contracto r and
Contractor's consultants for this Proj ect shall become the property of the Ci ty whether th e
Page 9
Con tract No . 09 -241
Co Wl cil Approve d -Rev. 2112103
Project is completed or not. The City shall be furnished and permitted to retain
reproducible copies and electronic versions of Contractor's Drawings, Specifications and
other documents.
12.02 The documents prepared by Contractor may be used as a prototype for other facilities by
the City. The City may elect to use the Contractor to perform the site adaptation and
other architectural services involved in reuse of the prototype. If so, the Contractor is
obligated to perform the work for an additional compensation that will fairly compensate
the Contractor and its consultants only for the additional work involved. It is reasonable
to expect that the fair additional compensation will be significantly less than the fee
provided for under this Contract. If the City elects to employ a different architect to
perform the site adaptation and other architectural services involved in reuse of the
prototype, that architect will be entitled to use Contractor's consultants on the same basis
that Contractor would have been entitled to use them for the work on the reuse of the
prototype , and such architect will be entitled, to the extent allowed by law, to duplicate
the design and review and refer to the construction documents, approved shop drawings
and calculations, and change order drawings in performing its work. The Contractor will
not be responsible for errors and omissions of a subsequent architect. The Contractor
shall commit its consultants to the terms of this subparagraph.
12.03 In the event of termination of this Agreement for any reason, the City shall receive all
original documents prepared to the date of termination and shall have the right to use
those documents and any reproductions in any way necessary to complete the Project.
12.04 Only the details of the drawings relating to this Project may be used by the Contractor on
other projects, but they shall not be used as a whole without written authorization by the
City. The City furnished forms, conditions, and other written documents shall not be
used on other projects by the Contractor.
ARTICLE XIII
Termination
13.01 The City may terminate this Contract at any time upon thirty (30) calendar days written
notice. Upon the Contractor's receipt of such notice, the Contractor shall cease work
immediately. The Contractor shall be compensated for the services satisfactorily
performed prior to the termination date.
13 .02 If, through any cause, the Contractor fails to fulfill its obligations under this Contract, or
if the Contractor violates any of the agreements of this Contract, the City has the right to
terminate this Contract by giving the Contractor five (5) calendar days written notice to
the Contractor. The Contractor will be compensated for the services satisfactorily
performed before the termination date.
13.03 No term or provision of this Contract shall be construed to relieve the Contractor of
liability to the City for damages sustained by the City because of any breach of contract
and/or negligence by the Contractor. The City may withhold payments to the Contractor
Page 10
Contract No . 09-241
Council Approved -Rev. 2112103
for the purpose of setoff until the exact amount of damages due the City from the
Contractor is determined and paid.
ARTICLE XIV
Miscellaneous Terms
14 .01 This Contract has been made under and shall be governed by the laws of the State of
Texas. The parties agree that performance and all matters related thereto shall be in
Brazos County, Texas .
14.02 Notices shall be mailed to the addresses designated herein or as may be designated in
writing by the parties from time to time and shall be deemed received when sent postage
prepaid U.S. Mail to the following addresses:
City of College Station
Attn: Danielle Charbonnet
P.O. Box 9960
College Station, Texas 77842
Contractor:
Attn: Alex Reyna
221 West 6th Street
Suite 600
Austin, Texas 78701
14.03 No waiver by either party hereto of any term or condition of this Contract shall be
deemed or construed to be a waiver of any other term or condition or subsequent waiver
of the same term or condition.
14 .04 This Contract represents the entire and integrated agreement between the City and the
Contractor and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements, either
written or oral. This Contract may only be amended by written instrument approved and
executed by the parties.
14.05 This Contract and all rights and obligations contained herein may not be assigned by the
Contractor without the prior written approval of the City.
14.06 If any provision of this Contract shall be held to be invalid or unenforceable for any
reason, the remaining provisions shall continue to be valid and enforceable. If a court of
competent jurisdiction finds that any provision of this Contract is invalid or
unenforceable, but that by limiting such provision it may become valid and enforceable,
then such provision shall be deemed to be written, construed, and enforced as so limited.
14.07 The Contractor, its agents, employees, and subcontractors must comply with all
applicable federal and state laws, the charter and ordinances of the City of College
Station, and with all applicable rules and regulations promulgated by local, state, and
Page 11
Contract No. 09-241
Council Approved-Rev. 2112103
national boards , bureaus , and agencies. The Contractor must obtain all neces sary permits
and licenses required in completing the work and providing the services required by this
Contract.
14.08 The parties acknowledge that they have read , understood , and intend to be bound by the
terms and conditions of this Contract.
14.09 This Contract will be effective when signed by the last party whose signing makes the
Contract fully executed.
14 .10 Notice of Indemnification. City and Contractor hereby acknowledge and agree that
this Contract contains certain indemnification obligations and covenants.
BURY+PARTNERS, INC.
By: ___________ _
Printed Name: __________ _
Title :
--------------~
Date: ------
Page 12
Contract No . 09-241
Council Approved -Rev. 2112103
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
By: ___________ _
Mayor
Date : ------
ATTEST:
City Secretary
Date: --------
APPROVED:
City Manager
Date : --------
City Attorney
Date: --------
Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit A
Scope of Services
Prepared by Bury+ Partners, Inc.
For
Hike and Bike Trail Completion (ST-0904)
(Texas Avenue/Welsh Avenue Hike and Bike Trail)
Project Description
The City of College Station (City) elected to move forward and selected a new trail. The
project selected is a new trail to be constructed from Texas Avenue to Welsh Avenue
along Harvey Mitchell Parkway (FM 2818), which is the subject of this scope of work.
Starting in front of A&M Consolidated High School at the northeast comer of
Welsh Avenue and FM 2818, the proposed trail route traverses east along the north
right-of-w ay (R.O.W.) of FM 2818 to reach a major creek crossing. U pon crossing the
creek, the proposed trail route continues east to terminate at Texas Avenue at the
northwestern return. The alignment of the proposed trail route lies entirely within the
Texas Department of Transportation's (TxDOT) R.O.W. The total length of this project
is approximately 6 , 100 linear feet.
It is assumed that this alignment has been established by the City and an evaluation of
alternate alignments is not part of this scope of work.
Bury+ Partners, Inc. (Bury) has prepared the following scope of work for Data Collection,
Environmental, Preliminary Design, Final Design, and Bidding/Construction
Administration Services, and Materials Testing.
1. Data Collection
Bury and its sub-consultant team members (the Project Team) propose to include the
following services during the Data Collection phase of the project:
1.1. Conduct a project kick-off meeting with City staff and the Project Team. A walk
of the area will be conducted with City staff and the Project Team to spot any
sensitive areas and obtain concurrence on an alignment for the trail.
1.2. The City has attended meetings with TxDOT to understand what level of review,
including environmental, will be required. The City will provide meeting minutes
from this meeting.
1.3. The Project Team will coordinate with TxDOT to gather roadway drawings for
FM 2818 for the extents of the project.
Page 13
Contract No. 09-241
Council Approved -Rev. 2112103
1.4. The City will provide all available information regarding City owned existing wet
utilities including water, sanitary sewer, stormwater, and electrical.
1.5. The Project Team will gather all other existing dry utility data along the proposed
trail route. This includes gas , telephone, BTU Electrical, and data.
2. Environmental
The trail route is proposed to be constructed within ex isting TxDOT R.O.W and
provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) apply. It is anticipated
that, based on the level of potential impacts and City staff discussions with TxDOT
personnel , that documentation supporting Categorical Exclusion (CE) will suffice. The
following services will be included within the Environmental Investigation of this
project:
2.1 . The Project Team will prepare appropriate CE in general accordance with
TxDOT's Environmental Manual and Standards of Uniformity. The CE report
will address the following:
2 .1.1.
2.1.2 .
2.1.3.
2 .1.4 .
2.1.5.
2.1.6.
2.1.7.
2 .1.8.
2.1.9.
2.1.10 .
2.1.11.
2.1.12 .
2.1.13.
2.1.14.
2.1.15.
2.1.16.
2 .1.17.
2.1.18.
Contrac t No . 09-241
Council Approved -Rev. 2112103
Need and Purpose
Proposed Action
Project Setting and Land Use
Socioeconomics
Environmental Justice
Limited English Proficiency
Section 4(f) Resources
Historic Properties
Archeological Resources
Vegetation
Water Quality
Soils/Farmland
Utilities
Invasive Species
Threatened and Endangered Species
Air Quality
Noise Impacts
Hazardous Materials
Page 14
2.1.19 .
2 .1.20.
2.1.21.
2.1.22.
Visual
Flood Plains
Wild and Scenic Rivers
Public Involvement
2.2. Submit the CE report to the City for review and comments. The Project Team
will coordinate with the City to address staff comments.
2 .3. Revise and submit finalized report to the City for final review and approval.
2.4 . The City's Project Manager will submit to and coordinate with TxDOT for
approval.
3. Preliminary Design
The Project Team will conduct the following tasks to complete the Preliminary Design of
the Hike and Bike Trail:
3.1. Conduct progress meetings, three (3), with City staff at each milestone submittal:
preliminary, 30%, and 60% design submittals. A progress memorandum will be
submitted to the City at least one (1) week prior to each progress meeting. The
memorandum will include, but not limited to, project progress, design issue, and
recommendations to issues.
3.2. Weekly progress emails will be sent out detailing project progress as well as
upcoming tasks for the following week.
3.3. Conduct the field survey to include topographic features and tree data. The
survey will capture the area within 25-feet of the centerline of the trail route. All
trees
eight (8) inches and larger in diameter will be surveyed.
3.4. Conduct a field survey to tie R.0.W. monumentation and to locate R.O.W. limits
of
FM 2818.
3.5. The Project Team will conduct a geotechnical analysis along the trail. One (1)
boring sample at a 25-foot depth will be conducted on either side of the major
creek crossing. Four (4) other boring samples at a five (5) foot depth will
conducted along the trail.
Page 15
Contract No. 09-241
Coun cil Approved -Rev. 2112103
3.6. Preliminary designs for the trail will include the design of a structural pedestrian
bridge to span across the major creek crossing . The bridge is assumed to be a
precast concrete double tee type bridge.
3.7. Create preliminary route exhibits and schematic drawings of the trail alignment.
This is to include schematic drawings of the pedestrian bridge to be constructed
over the major creek crossing. The Project Team will also evaluate utilizing the
culverts at the creek to cross . Submit schematics to the City for review and
approval.
3.8. Bury will attend two (2) public meetings on behalf of the City and provide
supporting exhibits for the meetings .
3.9. Bury will attend the Pre-application Conference (PAC) at the City of College
Station.
3.10. Prepare 30% plans/construction drawings for the pedestrian hike and bike trail to
submit to the City for review.
3.11. Meet with the City in order to review and incorporate the City's 30% review
comments.
3.12. Prepare 60% plans/construction drawings for the pedestrian hike and bike trail to
submit to the City for review.
3.13. Meet with the City in order to review and incorporate the City 's 60% review
comments .
3.14 . Prepare an opinion of probable cost per the preliminary designs for the route.
3 .15. The Project Team will provide supporting drawings and exhibits to the City for
the Multiple Use Agreement process with TxDOT.
3 .16. Prepare a Traffic Control Plan (TCP) to be included within the construction
documents.
3.17. Submit the TCP to the City for review and approval. The City will coordinate
with TxDOT for TCP approval.
4. Final Design
Upon the completion of the Preliminary Design phase, the Project Team will begin the
Final Design phase. The following services will be included within this phase of the
project:
Page 16
Contract No. 09 -241
Coun cil Approved -Rev. 2112103
4.1. Conduct one (1) progress meetings with City staff at 90% submittal. A progress
memorandum will be submitted to the City at least one (1) week prior to each
progress meeting. The memorandum will include, but not limited to , project
progress, design issue, and recommendations to issues.
4.2. Prepare 90% plans and specifications to the City for review. Specifications will
be in City format to include the bid document in PDF format, special provisions,
and technical specification.
4 .3. Meet with the City in order to review and incorporate the City's 90% review
comments.
4.4. The Project Team will submit plans to a Registered Accessibility Specialist to
review the plans against the Texas Department of Li censure Requirement (TDLR)
standards. We will coordinate with the reviewer to address any comments.
4.5. Finalize construction documents to 100% completion.
4.6 . Provide three (3) project manuals (not including construction drawings) to the
City. A total of three (3) half-size sets of final construction drawings at 100%
completion will be submitted to the City.
4.7. One (1) digital copy of all engineering documents , plans , and design documents
will be submitted to the City.
4.8. One (1) digital copy of electronic CAD files in AutoCAD format will be
submitted to the City.
4.9. Provide the City with bid proposals in excel format.
5. Bidding/Construction Administration
After all bid and construction documents have been finalized, the Project Team will
begin the Bidding/Construction Administration phase of the project, which will include
the following services:
5.1. Assist in conducting a pre-bid meeting.
5.2. Prepare and issue any necessary addenda to bid.
5.3. Receive and evaluate bids.
5.4. Make recommendation of award of bid.
Page 17
Contract No. 09-241
Coun cil Approved -R ev. 2112103
5.5. Assist the City in preparing construction contract documents. We will also
provide four ( 4) copies of construction drawing incorporating any associated
Addendum during construction bidding. Of the four ( 4) set of plans , one (1) set
will be full-size (22-inch x 34-inch), and three (3) sets will be half-size sets.
5.6. Attend up to six (6) monthly progress meetings
5. 7. Provide periodic onsite field observation trips for an average of two (2) visits per
month for a six (6) month construction phase (maximum).
5.8. The Project Team will provide materials testing during the duration of the
construction phase. Please refer to the attached scope of work provided by
Terracon Consulting Engineers and Scientists for a detailed scope.
5.9. Review monthly pay requests from contractor.
5.10. Respond to questions during construction and any necessary Request For
Information (RFI) responses.
5.11. Review and provide recommendations to the City regarding any proposed change
orders.
5.12. Prepare As-Built plans and submit in electronic AutoCAD format to the City.
Also, one (1) mylar set of as-built plans shall be submitted to the City.
6. Reimbursables
6.1. Out of pocket expenses on the project will be charged to the City in the form of a
reimbursable expense. The expenses will be based on out of pocket expenses
incurred during the performance of tasks related to the project. These
reimbursable expenses have been estimated as follows:
• Printing and Reproduction ($2500)
• Mileage ($2500)
ASSUMPTIONS
The following items are assumptions that have been made for the purposes of this scope based
on conversations with the City:
1. The City will provide any surveys that have been done for the area in which the trail will
be built.
Page 18
Contract No. 09-241
Coun cil Approved -Rev. 2112103
2. The construction of the pedestrian trail will be entirely within TxDOT R.O.W.; therefore ,
no easements will be required.
3. The preferred alignment has been established and , therefore , an evaluation of alternatives
is not part of this scope.
4. It is assumed TxDOT will grant a CE for this project.
5. Plans will be prepared in AutoCAD .
Contract No. 09-241
Page 19
Coun cil Approved -Rev. 2112103
Exhibit B
Payment Terms
SELECT ONE:
Payment is a fixed fee in the amount listed in paragraph 2.01 of this Contract. This
amount shall be payable by the City pursuant to the schedule listed below and upon completion
of the services and written acceptance by the City.
Schedule of Payment for each phase:
Page 20
Contract No. 09-2 41
Coun cil Approved -Rev. 2112103
CJTYOFCOI,UIC.:&STATlON
TEX AS AVENUl!IWHLSllAVENIJE l'ROJEL"T
Pa )'fl)t'flt. 't'r.ntit . F.xblbll a
JUD.t 1009
I JHl.11T I AR (IT I
i SJ9l..50 i SU7 • .50 I S109 . .50 I S160.0Q S-11 7.50 I SIOL<o I S t(.s>
Su b-con~uJLa nt
To cat Budlttl Na mt
-
fflimO -----------------j---~----:-4 _ -t---~o ------i--1-----+-+~------
•Plan~ ' 6 ! 6 : f 12 ! '-l 81:!
I t 8 I u • J1 • s ).696
~.=withCil.vto dlscu..q:«j:O%Pl.ans i _6 t ' i 12 i S l ,S l2 lnccrponnc:®'''-xtTm1.Ull•mt oPl~tl.f i -i 12 ;.S. L.378
i! .. :.L.;.~:;...~.=-.~~~I~~~-j~~1~~~i~q;j~i ~~~.~.~.~ ~~~;;~~c0Rr:;w AOACccn-Tin~---------·-j ----f------L -t----·-'L:i-----1---·· ---~--H ---~~-1-Ai~S:.~~ $117$ ~g;;;~~~~~~::~~==:=~=f~±=f-:,=;:T=:~::?::~.'=::=F::;=-:::.&:::tt=1f :::=:=~::=
i ~ t j Sni.. Tollll ! $ .9 466 Sub .. .Total S 1.17,5
~~~':,;~~ ·~~~c:;1~~i~~~v•·¥-·-·--~ .. ··--···-·-·· .. v•v··· .. ·----·~--·-····~1 ··· ,-··--···-···i ---~--·--···-······v· .. -·l· ., ... , _____ ... ·-··-· ...... •v•v ·v--~·v-----~----··-···-·· ·------··-Nts ········ .... :, ···SJ;~~b&"~~--·s---···900 ·
Mi.~ in rond11e.iin.~--a rttt-bid n'Mtiu&-! 6 t f i 6 ~ ! J. l.55
~*~:-~.;;;~~~~'!1~J~_lf.1. ___________________________ ·+·-~·-+--·--1 ---!....+------· -·--·-·----·--··-----1-·-;i_ ____ .. --i --·-H ---d~· --·----·--·-·-·-·····-·
MAk~-;;;;d~;;i'"orawarddbid:--1 t ! i 1 ! 1 i s 210
Pnpato ... IJ<lill pl<vlsl<obmil in <leClronk AUl.C.'\D -to O" Cit)• .. wdl •• rn• (I )Ji i i i S 940 M}11rR<. _ j i I
™;;;:;~~~~~dR~iXod'~tt;~;· .,..-......... H·--···--·---~-"·--,._,., .. , ....... ~-----··•·u··--··· --i ----~,_, __ -~f ........ ~--····+ , .. ~-··"··-.... ~---· ..... -----M---~~*1 ,. ... __ ... .__._,_,, ·---~!_tt~!~i··t-H :~~ .. ,.._ . ..,J,!~_:T!'~-J_,._ ... ~~~.7,
~~~d--~-~~~-~-----·=~-=~=~:=:~---~:--~-=~~~;1=~~=~t~~--=1~-~~;~~:-J;i= ~;~= =----~;~~~=t=:--=. -~;:;;~---~~~ ----~~~~!~ l ~::~
Page 21
Contract No . 09-241
Council Approved -Rev. 211210 3
Exhibit C
Insurance Requirements
During the term of this Agreement all Contractor's insurance policies shall meet the following
requirements:
I. Standard Insurance Policies Required:
A. Commercial General Liability
B. Business Automobile Liability
C. Workers' Compensation
D. Professional Liability
II . For each of these policies, the Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary
insurance with respect to the City, its officials, employees and volunteers. Any self-
insurance or insurance policies maintained by the City, its officials, employees or
volunteers, shall be considered in excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not
contribute to it. No term or provision of the indemnification provided by the Contractor
to the City pursuant to this Contract shall be construed or interpreted as limiting or
otherwise affecting the terms of the insurance coverage. All Certificates of Insurance and
endorsements shall be furnished to the City's Representative at the time of execution of
this Agreement, attached hereto as Exhibit D, and approved by the City before any letter
of authorization to commence planning will issue or any work on the Project commences.
III. The Contractor shall include all subcontractors as additional insureds under its policies or
shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All
coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein.
IV. General Requirements Applicable to All Policies
A. Only insurance carriers licensed and admitted to do business in the State of Texas
will be accepted.
B. Deductibles shall be listed on the Certificate of Insurance and are acceptable only
on a "per occurrence" basis for property damage only.
C. "Claims made" policies will not be accepted, except for Professional Liability
msurance.
D. Each insurance policy shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be
suspended, voided, canceled, or reduced in coverage or in limits except after
thirty (30) calendar days prior written notice has been given to the City of College
Station by certified mail, return receipt requested.
E. Upon request, certified copies of all insurance policies shall be furnished to the
City.
F. The Certificates of Insurance shall be prepared and executed by the insurance
company or its authorized agent. Each certificate shall contain the following
Page 22
Contract No. 09-241
Council Approved-Rev. 2112103
provisions and warranties :
1. that the insurance company is licensed and admitted to do business in the
State of Texas
2. that the insurance policy is underwritten on forms provided by the Tex as
State Board of Insurance or ISO
3. all endorsements and coverages according to the requirements of this
Contract
4 . the form of notice of cancellation, termination , or change in coverage
provisions
5. original endorsements affecting coverage required by this Contract.
6. The City of College Station, its officials , employees , and volunt eers are
named as Additional Insureds on the Commercial General Liability and
Business Automobile Liability Policies . The coverage shall contain no
special limitations on the scope of protection afforded the City , its
officials , employees , and volunteers .
V. Commercial (General) Liability requirements:
A. Coverage shall be written by a carrier with an "A: VIII" or better rating in
accordance with the current Best Key Rating Guide.
B. Minimum Limit of $1 ,000 ,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property
damage with a $2,000 ,000 annual aggregate.
C . Coverage shall be at least as broad as Insurance Service 's Office Number CG 00
01.
D. No coverage shall be excluded from the standard policy without notification of
individual ex clusions being attached for review and acceptance.
E. The coverage shall include but not be limited to: premises/operations;
independent contracts, products/completed operations , contractual liability
(insuring the indemnity provided herein), and where exposures exist, Explosion
Collapse and Underground coverage.
F. The City shall be named as an additional insured and the policy shall be endorsed
to waive subrogation and to be primary and non-contributory.
VI. Business Automobile Liability requirements:
A. Coverage shall be written by a carrier with an "A: VIII" or better rating in
accordance with the current Best Key Rating Guide.
B. Minimum Combined Single Limit of $1 ,000 ,000 per occurrence for bodily injury
and property damage.
C. The Business Auto Policy must show Symbol 1 in the Covered Autos portion of
the liability section in Item 2 of the declarations page .
D. The coverage shall include owned autos , leased or rented autos, non-owned autos ,
any autos and hired autos.
VIL Workers Compensation Insurance requirements:
Page 23
Contract No . 09-241
Counc il Approved -Rev. 2112103
A. Pursuant to the requirements set forth in Title 28, Section 110.110 of the Texas
Administrative Code, all employees of the Contractor, the Contractor, all
employees of any and all subcontractors , and all other persons providing services
on the Project must be covered by a workers' compensation insurance policy:
either directly through their employer's policy (the Contractor's, or
subcontractor's policy) or through an executed coverage agreement on an
approved Tex as Department of Insurance Division of Workers Compensation
(DWC) form . Accordingly, if a subcontractor does not have his or her own policy
and a coverage agreement is used, Contractors and subcontractors must use that
portion of the form whereby the hiring contractor agrees to provide coverage to
the employees of the subcontractor. The portion of the form that would otherwise
allow them not to provide coverage for the employees of an independent
contractor may not be used.
B. The worker 's compensation insurance shall include the following tenns:
1. Employer's Liability limits of $1 ,000 ,000 for each accident is required.
2. "Texas Waiver of Our Right to Recover From Others Endorsement, WC
42 03 04" shall be included in this policy.
3. Texas must appear in Item 3A of the Worker's Compen sation co verage or
Item 3C must contain the following: All States except those listed in Item
3A and the States of NV, ND, OH, WA, WV, and WY.
C. Pursuant to the explicit terms of Title 28 , Section 1.10.l 10(c)(7) of the Texas
Administrative Code, this Agreement, the bid specifications , this Agreement, and
all subcontracts on this Project must include the terms and conditions set forth
below, without any additional words or changes, except those required to
accommodate the specific document in which they are contained or to impose
stricter standards of documentation:
"A. Definitions:
Contract No. 09-241
Co1D1 cil Approved -Rev. 2112103
Certificate of coverage ("certificate'') -A copy of a certificate of
insurance, a certificate of authority to self-ins ure issued by the Division of
Workers Compensation, or a coverage agreement (DWC-81, DWC-83, or
DWC-84), showing statutory workers' compensation insurance coverage
for the person's or entity's employees providing services on a project, for
the duration of the project.
Duration of the project -includes the time from the beginning of the work
on the project until the Contractor's/person's work on the project has been
completed and accepted by the governmental entity.
Persons providing services on the project ("subcontractors" in§ 406.096
[of the Texas Labor Code}) -includes all persons or entities performing
all or part of the services the Contractor has undertaken to perform on the
Page 24
project, regardless of whether that person contracted directly with the
Contractor and regardless of whether that person has employees. This
includes, without limitation, independent Contractors, subcontractors,
leasing companies, motor carriers, owner-operators, employees of any
such entity, or employees of any entity which furnishes persons to provide
services on the project. "Services" include, without limitation, providing,
hauling, or delivering equipment or materials, or providing labor,
transportation, or other service related to a project. "Services" does not
include activities unrelated to the project, such as food/beverage vendors,
office supply deliveries, and delivery of portable toilets.
· B. The Contractor shall provide coverage, based on proper reporting of
classification codes and payroll amounts and filing of any coverage
agreements; that meets the statutory requirements of Texas Labor Code,
Section 401.011(44)for all employees of the Contractor providing
services on the project, for the duration of the project.
C. The Contractor must provide a certificate of coverage to the governmental
entity prior to being awarded the contract.
D. If the coverage period shown on the Contractor's current certificate of
coverage ends during the duration of the project, the Contractor must,
prior to the end of the coverage period, file a new certificate of coverage
with the governmental entity showing that coverage has been extended.
E. The Contractor shall obtain from each person providing services on a
project, and provide to the governmental entity:
(1) a certificate of coverage, prior to that person beginning work on
the project, so the governmental entity will have on file certificates
of coverage showing coverage for all persons providing services
on the project; and
(2) no later than seven calendar days after receipt by the Contractor,
a new certificate of coverage showing extension of coverage, if the
coverage period shown on the current certificate of coverage ends
during the duration of the project.
F. The Contractor shall retain all required certificates of coverage for the
duration of the project and for one year thereafter.
G. The Contractor shall notify the governmental entity in writing by certified
mail or personal delivery, within 10 ca lendar days after the Contractor
knew or should have known, or any change that materially affects the
provision of coverage of any person providing services on the project.
Page 25
Contract No. 09-241
Coun cil Approved -Rev. 2112103
H The Contractor shall post on each project site a notice, in the text, form
and manner prescribed by the Division of Workers Compensation,
informing all persons providing services on the project that they are
required to be covered, and stating how a person may verifY coverage and
report lack of coverage.
I The Contractor shall contractually require each person with whom it
contracts to provide services on a project, to:
Contract No . 09-241
Council Approved -Rev. 2112103
(1) provide coverage, based on proper reporting of classification
codes and payroll amounts and filing of any coverage agreements,
that meets the statutory requirements of Texas Labor Code,
Section 40I.011 ( 44) for all of its employees providing sefvices on
the project, for the duration of the project;
(2) provide to the Contractor, prior to that person beginning work on
the project, a certificate of coverage showing that coverage is
being provided for all employees of the person providing services
on the project, for the duration of the project;
(3) provide the Contractor, prior to the end of the coverage period, a
new certificate of coverage showing extension of coverage, if the
coverage period shown on the current certificate of coverage ends
during the duration of the project,·
(4) obtain.from each other person with whom it contracts, and provide
to the Contractor:
(a) a certificate of coverage, prior to the other person
beginning work on the project; and
(b) a new certificate of coverage showing extension of
coverage, prior to the end of the coverage period, if the
coverage period shown on the current certificate of
coverage ends during the duration of the project;
(5) retain all required certificates of coverage on file for the duration
of the project and for one year thereafter,·
(6) notifY the governmental entity in writing by certified mail or
personal delivery, within I 0 calendar days after the person knew
or should have known, of any change that materially affects the
provision of coverage of any person providing services on the
project; and
(7) contractually require each person with whom it contracts, to
Page 26
perform as require d by paragraphs (a) -(g), with the certificates
of coverage to be provided to the person for whom they are
providing services.
J By signing this contract, or providing, or causing to be provided a
certificate of coverage, the Contractor is representing to the governmental
entity that all employees of the Contractor who will provide services on
the project will be covered by workers' compensation coverage for the
duration of the project, that the coverage will be based on proper
reporting of classification codes and payroll amounts, and that all
coverage agreements will be filed with the appropriate insurance carrier
or, in the case of a self-insured, with the Commission's Division of Self-
Insurance Regulation. Providing false or misleading information may
subject the Contractor to administrative penalties, criminal penalties, civil
penalties, or other civil actions.
K. The Contractor's failure to comply with any of these provisions is a
breach of contract by the Contractor that entitles the governmental entity
to declare the contract void if the Contractor does not remedy the breach
within ten calendar days after receipt of notice of breach.from the
governmental entity. "
VIII. Professional Liability requirements:
A. Coverage shall be written by a carrier with a "A: VIII" or better rating in
accordance with the current Best Key Rating Guide .
B . Minimum of $1 ,000 ,000 per occurrence and $2 ,00 0,000 aggregate, with a
maximum deductible of $100,000.00 . Financial statements shall be furnished to
the City of College Station when requested.
C. For "claims made" policies, a two-year extended reporting period shall be
required.
Page 27
Contract No. 09-241
Coun cil Approved -Rev. 2112103
Contract No. 09-241
Council Approved -Rev. 2112103
Exhibit "D"
Certificate( s) of Insurance
Page 28
Geotechnica! Enginee 7i ng Report
·Hike and Bike Trail • Colle ge Station, Texas
Jan u ary 8 , 2010 • T e rra con Proj ect No . A 109506 3
Field Exploration Desc ript io n
lrerracan
Subsurface conditions were evaluated by drilling six test borings , d es ig nated B-1 through B-6 to
depths of 5 and 25 feet The borings were drilled on December 31 , 2009 , us ing track-mounted
drilling equipment at the approximate locations shown on the Plan of Borings, Exhibit A-2 of
Appendix A Boring locations were selected and staked on the gro u nd by Terraco n measuring
from ex isting site feat u res without the use of surveying equipme nt T he Plan of Borings was
prepared from a Site Plan provided by Bury + Partners , Inc. The bori ng depths w ere measu re d
from the existing ground surface at the time of our field activities . A t th e comple tion of our field
activities , the borings were backfilled with soil cuttings .
Cohesive soil samples were generally recovered using thin-wall ed tu be samplers. Hand
penetrometer tests were performed on samples of cohesive soils to serve as a general measure of
consistency.
G ran ula r so il s and so ils for w hich good qual it y open-tube samples co ul d not be recovered were
samp led by me an s of the Stan da rd Penetra tion Test (SPT). This test con sists of measuring the
number of b lows (N) req uired for a 14 0-po und ham mer free falling 30 inche s to drive a standard
split-spoon sa mpler 12 inche s into the subsurface material after bei ng seated six inches . This blow
count , or SPT N-value , is used to evaluate the stratum .
A CME au to ma t ic SPT ha mmer was used t o advance the split-ba r re l samp ler in th e borings
performed on this site . A greater efficiency is typically achieved wi t h the autom ati c hammer
compared to the conven t ional safety hamme r operated wit h a cathe ad a nd rope . Published
cor relat ions between the SPT values and soil properties are based on the lower efficiency
cathead and rope method . This higher efficiency of the automatic hammer affect s t he standard
penetration resistance blow count (N) value by increasing the pe netrati on per ham mer blow,
with a resu ltant decrease in the blow count value, over what woul d be o btaine d using the
cathead and rope method . The effect of the automatic ham me r's efficien cy has been
considered in .Terracon 's interpretat ion and analysis of the subsurface information for t his report .
If necessary , the consistency descripti on we assigned to the so i l strat a on the borin g logs has
been ad j usted to accou nt fo r t ha t higher efficie ncy.
Samples were removed fr om samp lers i n the fiel d , v isually cla ssified , and appro pria tel y seal ed in
sample containers to preserve their in -si t u mo isture con t ents. Sampl es were returned to our
laboratory in College Station , Tex as. Sa mples not tested in the labo rat ory will be stored for a
period of 30 days subsequen t to subm itt al of this report a nd will be di scard e d afte r th is pe riod ,
unless w e are no ti f ied otherw ise .
A field log of each boring was prepared as dri lli ng and sampling progres sed. These field logs
inc lude d visual classification of the soils encountered during dril li ng. Laboratory testing was
used to confirm or revise fie ld class ifications , a nd to de t ermine general so i l con diti ons. Hand
Ex hibit A-9
Geotechnical Enginee r"ng Report
Hike and Bike Trail • Col lege Station, Texas
January 8 , 2010 • Terracon Project No. A 1095063
lrerracan
pe netr ome ter tes t re sults , which give an indication of strength of t he soil, are shown o n the logs.
Soil descriptions and symbols used on the logs are in general accordance with the Unified Soil
Classification System (USCS). The Logs of Borings, presenting the subsurface soil
descriptions , type of sampling used , and additional field data , are presented on Exhibits A-3
through A-8 of Appendix A The General Notes, which define the terms used on the logs, are
prese nt ed on Ex hibi t C-1 of Appendix C. The Unified Soil Classifi catio n Sys tem is pre sented on
Exhibi t C-2 of Append ix C.
Measuremen ts to determine the presence and depth of seepage and groundwater were made in
t he boreholes wh ile drill ing and upon completion of each boring. Thi s information is shown on
the Logs of Boring s . A m ore detailed study would be needed to determine a more accurate
location of groundwater and seepage rates. Such a study might require addi t ional deep
bo rin gs, wa ter level observations on a long-term basis , and setti ng and monitoring piezom ete rs
(observation wells) over an extended period of ti me.
2 Exhibit A-9
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTING
-------------
Ge ote c hn ical Engineering Report
Hike a nd Bike T ra il • Coll ege St ation, Texas
Janu a ry 8, 20 10 • Terracon Project No _ A 10 95063
L bo rat o ry Te sting
lrerracan
Soil sam p les w ere test ed in t he laboratory to measure their dry unit weight and natural water
con te nt. Unconfi ned compre ssion tests we re performed on se lected samp les and a calibrated
han d penet ro mete r was use d t o es tima te t he approximate u nconfined comp ress ive strength of
so me co hes ive samples . Th e calibra ted hand penetrometer has been correlated w ith
unconfined co mpression tes ts , and provides a better estimate of soil consistency than visual
examination alo ne. Selected samples were also tested to determine Atterberg limits testing and
percent pass in g the No . 200 s iev e. The test resul t s are provided on the boring logs inc luded in
Appendix A
Descrip t ive clas sifi catio ns of the soi ls indicated on th e boring log s are in acco rd a nce w it h the
attached Gene ral Notes and the Unified Soil Classification Syste m. A lso shown are est imated
Un ified Soi l Class ifi c at io n Sy mbo ls . A brief de scri ptio n of t his classi fi ca tion system is att ac hed
to th is report . All classi f icati on w as by visua l manual proc edures .
Exhibit B-1
APPENDIX C
SUPPORTING DOCUMENT S
~------------------
GE ERAL NOT ES
D~LLI N G&SAMP LING S YMB O LS :
SS: Split Spo on -1-3te" l.D., 2" O.D., un less othe rwis e no te d HS: Ho llow St em A uge r
ST : T hin-Walled T ube -2" O.D., unl ess ot herwise not ed PA: Power A ug er
RS : Ring Sampl er -2.42" l.D., 3" 0.0 ., un less oth erw ise noted HA: Ha nd Auge r
DB : Diamond Bi t Cor ing -4", N, B RB : Ro ck Bit
BS: Bul k Sampl e or A uger Sa mple WB: Wash Boring or Mud Ro ta ry
The number of blows required to advan ce a sta nda rd 2-in ch O.D . spli t-sp oo n sample r (S S) th e last 12 inches of th e tota l 18-i nch
penetration wi th a 140-pou nd hammer falling 30 inches is consi dered the "Standar d Penetra tion " or "N -va lue".
WATER LEVEL MEASU REMEN T SYMBOLS:
WL : Water Level WS :
WCI : Wet Cave in WO:
Whil e Samplin g
Wh il e Drilli ng
N/E : Not Encou ntere d
DCI: Dry Cave in
A B: Afte r Borin g
BCR :
ACR :
Before Cas ing Rem oval
Afte r Casi ng Remo val
Wate r levels in dicat ed on the bor ing logs are the levels measu red in the bori ngs at the tim es in dicate d. G ro undwate r levels at oth er
ti mes and other locatio ns ac ross the si te could vary . In perv ious soils , the indicated level s may reflect t he loc at ion of groun dwat er.
In low permeabi lity so ils , the acc ura te determ inat ion of gro undwate r leve ls ma y not be pos sible wi th only short-term observ atio ns .
DESCRIPTIVE SOI L C LASS IFICATION : Soi l class ificat ion is based on the Unifi ed Class ifi ca tion Sys tem. Coarse Grai ned Soils
ha ve more t han 50% of their d ry we ight reta ined on a #200 si eve ; the ir principa l de sc ript ors a re : bo ulders , co bb les , gravel or sand .
Fine Grained So il s ha ve less than 50 % of thei r dry we ight retained on a #200 sie ve; the y are pri ncip all y des cr ibe d as clays if they are
p lastic , and si lts if they are sligh tly plast ic or non-plastic. Major co nstit uents may be add ed as modifiers and min or co nstituents may
be added acco rdin g to the rel ati ve pro port ions based on gra in siz e . In add ition to gra dati on , coarse-gra in ed soi ls are defined on the
basis of th eir in-place rela ti ve den sity and fine -gra ined soi ls on t he basi s of their cons ist ency.
CONSISTENCY OF FINE -GRAINED SOI LS
Unconfined St a n d ard Penetration
Com12ressive o r N-value {SS} Con s is ten c y:
Strength, Qu, QS f Blows/Ft.
< 500 <2 Ve ry Soft
500 -1 ,000 2-3 Soft
1,00 1 -2,000 4-6 Me dium St iff
2 ,00 1 -4 ,000 7-12 Sti ff
4,00 1 -8 ,000 13-26 Ve ry Stiff
8 ,000+ 26+ Hard
RELATIVE PROPORTIONS O F SAND AND GRAVEL
Descriptive Te r m{s) of ot her
Constituents
Trace
W ith
Mod ifier
RELATIVE PROPORTIO NS OF FI NES
Descriptive Term{s} of other
Constituents
T ra ce
With
Mod ifie rs
Percent of
Dry Weight
< 15
15-29
> 30
Percent of
Ory Weight
<5
5 -12
> 12
RELATIV E DENSITY OF COARSE -GRAINED SOILS
St andard Penetration Ring SamQle r {RS} or N-value {SS} Relative Densi!Y
Blows/Ft. Blows/Ft.
0 -3 0-6 Ve ry Loose
4 -9 7-18 Loose
10-29 19-58 Med ium De nse
30 -49 59-98 Den se
50+ 99+ Very Dens e
GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY
Major Com12onent
of Sample Particle Size
Bo ul ders Over 12 in . (300mm)
Cob bl es 12 in . to 3 in . (300m m to 75 mm)
Gra vel 3 in . to #4 sie ve (75m m to 4.7 5 mm)
Sand #4 to #200 sieve (4 .75 mm to 0.0 75mm)
Silt or Cla y Passing #200 Siev e (0.075mm)
PLASTICITY DESCRI PTION
Term Plasticity:
Index
Non -plastic 0
Lo w 1-10
Mediu m 11-30
Hig h 30+
Exh ibit C-1
I
I
I
UNI FIED SOIL CLASSIFICAT ION SYSTEM
Soil Classification
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests A Group
Symbol Group Name 8
Gravels: Clean Gravels: C u ~ 4 and 1 ~ Cc ~ 3 E GW Well-g raded gravel F
More than 50 % of Less than 5% fines c Cu < 4 and/or 1 > Cc > 3 E GP Poorly graded gravel F
coarse Gravels with Fines: Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel F.G. H
Coarse Grained Soils : fraction retain ed on More than 12 % fines c C layey gravel F.G.H Nn . 4 •:iF'V" Fines class ify as CL or CH GC More than 50 % retai ned
on No. 200 sieve Sands : Clean Sands : Cu ~ 6 and 1 ~ Cc ~ 3 E SW Well-g raded sand 1
50% or more of coarse Less than 5% fines 0 Cu < 6 and/or 1 > Cc > 3 E SP Poorly graded sand 1
fraction p asses Sands with Fines: Fin es classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand G.H.1
No. 4 sieve More than 12% fines 0 Fines Class ify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand G.H.i
Pl > 7 and plots on or above "A" line J CL Lean clay K.L.M
Si lts and Clay s:
Inorganic :
P l < 4 or plots below "A " line J ML SiltK,L ,M
Liquid lim it less than 50
Organic: Liqu id lim it -ov en d ried I
OL
Organic clay K.L.M,N
Fine-Grained Soils: <0.75 Orga nic silt K.L.M.o Liquid limit -not dried I
50 % or more passes the
Pl plots on or above "A" line CH Fat clayK.L.M N0 . 200 sieve Inorgani c:
Silts and Clays: Pl plots below "A" line MH Elastic Silt K.L.M
Liquid limit 50 or more
Organic:
Liquid li mit -ove n dried I
OH
Organic clay K.L.M,P
I < 0 .75 Organic si lt K.L.M.a Liquid limi t -not dried
Highly organic soils : Primarily organic matter , dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat
A Based on the material passing the 3-in . (75-mm) sieve H If fines are organ ic , ad d "with orga nic fines" to group name.
8 If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both , add "wi th cobbles
or boulders , or both " to group name .
1 If soil contains ~ 15 % gravel, add "with gravel" to group name .
c Gravels with 5 to 12 % fi nes req uire dual symbols : GW-GM well-graded
g ravel with silt , GW-GC well-graded grave l with clay, GP-GM poorly
graded gravel with s ilt , GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay.
J If Atterberg lim its plot in shaded area , soil is a CL-ML , silty c lay .
K If so il contai ns 15 to 29 % plus No . 200 , add "with sand" or "w ith
gravel ," whichever is predominant.
0 San ds with 5 to 12 % fines require dual symbols : SW-SM well -graded
sand with silt , SW-SC we ll -g rade d sand w it h clay , SP -SM poorly graded
sand with silt, SP-SC poo rly graded sand with clay
L If so il contains ~ 30 % plus No. 200 p redominantly sand, add "sandy"
to group name.
M If so il con tains ~ 30% p lu s No. 200 , pre do minantly gravel , add
"gravelly" to group name .
2
(D30 )
E Cu = Deo/0 10 Cc = -~--
N Pl ~ 4 and plots on or above "A" line.
0 Pl < 4 or plots below "A " line .
o,o x 0 60 P Pl plots on or abo ve "A" line.
F If soil co nta in s ~ 15% sand, add "with sand " to group ame .
0 Pl plots bel ow "A" line.
a If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM .
Q_
x w
0 z
6° Fo~ classif.!cat l on_of
1
fine-gr?
1
lned 1·~1-,
1
1
,/·-[ ]/'
sails and fine-grained fraction / _I /
50 -Of coarse-grained sous 17 --·,<e-0 ,.!---·~,<e-0 ....---.----; ~v /' ~v
Equation of 'A" -line •V, •\>-
Horizontal at P1 =4 to LL=25 .5 . ,/ /
40 1-then Pl =0.73 (LL -20) --I --,--' -~ o-0 -. --------
Equation of ·u· -li ne ,/ '(-o
Vertical at LL=16 to Pl =7, / G j 1
3-0 r '"'"i".09 IL'~~,~ :o"-v I -------
: H /,//~ MH '.,00 ----~-
7 r---, I j ~r -~~~ / M~o_:_____ __ _ ______ _
0 10 16 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 11 0
LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
Exhibit C-2
I
!
• Southwood Drive Crossing: There is a large existing culvert on the west side of
Southwood in which the alignment was modified to travel on the south side of
the culvert instead of the north side so as not to redesign that existing culvert.
However, in order to achieve the proper grading in this area, a rock wall has
been proposed to accommodate a 3: 1 slope when traveling south of the culvert.
On the east side of Southwood Drive, a culvert has been proposed in order to
allow water to flow under the sidewalk.
• Longmire Drive : On the east side of Longmire Drive, a culvert has been -proposed to allow water to flow under the sidewalk.
In order to calculate and design the appropriate sizes of the improvements, we have
requested a copy of the FM 2818 Roadway Plans so as to analyze the drainage
patterns and design set forth by the Texas Department of Transportation (fxDOT).
These plans have been requested from the City as well as TxDOT. Furthermore,
four (4) varying sections have been sought for the trail. BPI has requested Terracon
to provide recommendations for these four section s. Once the report has been
obtained from Terracon, BPI will then be able to incorporate the sections into the
plan se t.
The following is a summary of future tasks and meetings to be held :
• 60% Design Submittal Meeting -December 14th
• Geotechnical Report -December 21, 2009
• Categorical Exclusion Document from Terracon -January 20, 2010
• 90 % Design -Upon the receipt of the 60 % design comments from the City
The items in the above memorandum are only a brief summarization of the tasks that
have been completed and what is to be completed. We will be ab le to go into
greater detail during the 60% Submittal Meeting . Please do not hesitate to contact
us if you should have any questions or comments .
Thank you ,
Alex Reyna, P .E.
Project Engineer
Page 2
~i <Jr~ ..
~-1-i~~~ 2.~
@~,~fs·Jdt~I~.
-"h~~; .A '' w~.,.
Design Progress Menn
To : Danielle Charbonnet
From: Alex Reyna, P.E .
CC:
Date: December 9, 2009
BURY+ PARTNERS, NC.
Re : Hike and Bike Trail Completion (ST-0904) -60 % Submittal
Dear Ms. Charbonnet:
We will be submitting the 60 % design of the hike and bike trail along Harvey
Mitchell Parkway on Wednesday December 9, 2009 to your office for your
rev iew. Please accept this memorandum as a summary of tasks that have been
completed , issues that have arose during the 60 % design, and tasks to be
completed.
During the review for the 30 % plans, Bury+ Partners , Inc . (BPI) attended and
ass isted the City of College Station (City) with a Public Meeting on October 26,
2009 which was held at the Peace Lutheran Church in College Station. After the
Public Meeting and upon completion of the 30 % Design Review, BPI was released
to move forward with 60 % Design on November 11, 2009
For the 60 % Design, BPI released Terracon for Geotechnical Services and
Environmental Services associated with the project. For the plan set, BPI focu sed
on the grading , drainage, and traffic improvements for the project. During the
grading design, some areas where found that will need drainage improv~ments in
order to allow the proper flow of water with the installation of the trail. Four areas
have been identified for drainage improvements:
• Nueces Avenue Crossing: Due to the new alignment of the sidewalk, on the -west side a new culvert is proposed to allow water to travel under the sidewalk
and the existing culvert will need to extend out passed the sidewalk . On the east
side a new culvert is proposed to allow water to travel under the sidewalk. The -grading in this particular area is the constraint requiring culverts .
• Bee Creek Crossing: The grading here showed to be a little challenging in order
to obtain a 3: 1 slope passed the sidewalk north to the creek. In order to achieve -a 3: 1 slope a rock wall has been proposed to be extended from the headwall of
the Bee Creek culvert. L .
' \4, ooD 0-aol~lo\· -~ o. '\"" p~i:t
HIKE AND BIKE TRAIL COMPLETION (ST-0904)
Preliminary Engineer's Opinion of Probable Cost
December 14, 2009
Item
No. Description
1.00 MOBILIZATION
1.01 Ins urance and Mobilization for all material ,
equipment and labor to complete the project (not
to exceed 5% of construction) per lump sum.
2.00 REMOVALS & RELOCATIONS
2.01 Prepare ROW for the hike and bike path including
excavation and haul off spoil material as shown on
the drawings and directed by the engineer, complete per Station
2.02 Remove and Properly Dispose of Trees as shown on
the drawings and directed by the engineer, complete
per each
2.03 Remove and Reset Electrical Ground Box to match
proposed grade as shown on the drawings and
directed by the engineer, complete per each.
2.04 Relocate Small Traffic Sign Assembly as shown on the
drawings and directed by the engineer, complete per
each.
2 .05 Furnish and Install Number 2 Base Electrical Conductor
as shown on the drawings and directed by the engineer,
complete per linear foot.
2.06
2.07
2.08
2.09
Estimated
Quantity Unit
Unit Price
(Figures) Total Cost
LS $ 30,000 .00 $ 30,000.00 ----------'-----
Subtotal Item 1.00: $ --------=3...:0-'-',0:...:0...:0.:...:.0...:0_
62 STA $ 1,248.00 $ 77,376.00
10 EA $ 77 .00 $ 770 .00
1 EA $ 250.00 $ 250.00
1 EA $ 100.00 $ 100 .00
217 LF $ 4 .75 $ 1,030.75
$ $
$ $
$ $
$ $
Subtotal Item 2.00 : $ _____ __:7.:..9.<:,5:.:.:2...:6.:...:.7..:;5_
Item
No. Description
3.00 ROADWAY & EARTHWORK
3.01 F urnish and Install Pedestrian Rail as shown on the
drawings and directed by the engineer, complete in place
per linear foot.
3.02 Furnish and Install 5" Sidewalk including all embedment,
finishing, surface texture and joints as shown on the drawings
and directed by the engineer, complete in place per square yard .
3.03 Furnish and Install 6" Lime Treated Subgrade including
placement and grading as shown on the drawings and
directed by the engineer, complete in place per square yard .
3 .04 Furnish and Install{fpe 1 Curb Ramj)s shown on the
drawings and directed by the engmeer, complete in place
per each.
3 .05 Furnish and Install -GLCurb ~ as shown on the
drawings and directed by the engineer, complete in place
per each.
3.06 Furnish and Install Segmental Retaining Wall including
reinforcement for trail, as shown on the drawings and directed
by the engineer, complete in place per surface square foot.
3.07
3 .08
4.00 EROSION CONTROL
4 .01
~ 4.02 ..
~4.03
4.04
Furnish and Install 4" Topsoil including placement and
grading as directed by the engineer, complete in place ,.;::
per square yard. _J
Furnish and Install Block Sodding including ground
preparation, planting and raking as directed by the
engineer, complete in place per square yard.
Furnish and Install Cell Fiber Mulch Seeding (permanent
seeding for urban clay areas) as directed by the engineer,
complete in place per square yard.
Furnish and Install Vegetative Fertilizer as directed by
the engineer, complete in place per acre.
Estimated
Quantity
78
6 ,200
7 ,500
3
500
TBD
Unit Price
Unit (Figures) Total Cost
LF $ 175.00 $ 13 ,650.00
SY $ 45.00 $ 279,000.00
SY $ 25.00 $ 187,500.00
EA $ 1,000.00 $ 3,000 .00
EA $ 1,000 .00 $ 1,000 .00
SSF $ 18 .00 $ 9,000.00
$ $
$ $
Subtotal Item 3.00: $ ______ 4_9_3_,__,1_5_0_.0_0_
SY $ 12.00 $ ----------
SY $ 3.15 $ ________ _
SY $ 0.21 $ ----------
AC $ 150.00 $ ________ _
Item Estimated Unit Price
No . Description Quantity Unit (Figures) Total Cost
4.05 Furnish and In stall Vegetative Watering as directed
by the engineer, complete in place per
th ou sand gallo ns . 28 KG $ 35.00 $ 980.00
4.06 Furni sh and Install Temporary Sediment Control
Fence as directed by the engineer, complete in
place per linear foot. 12 ,000 LF $ 2.20 $ 2 6,400 .00
4.07 Furnish and Install Tree Protection as directed by th e engineer,
complete in place per each .
10 EA $ 100.00 $ 1,000 .00
4.08
$ $
4 .09
$ $
Subtotal Item 4.00: $ 28,380.00
5.00 PAVEMENT MARKINGS
5.01 Furni sh and Install Small Sign Assembly as
directed by the engineer, complete in place per
ea oh. ~ 4 EA $ 100.00 $ 400.00
5.02 Furnish and Install Type I, 4" Solid Yellow Reflective
Pavement Marking (100 MIL) as di rected by the
engineer, com plete in place per linear foot. , • 276 LF $ 0.45 $ 124 .20
5.03 Furnish and Insta~o lid White Reflective "t1
Pavem ent Markin 90 MIL directed by the ~
engineer, com plete in place p er linear foot. • 75 LF $ 0.75 $ 56.25
5.04 F urnish and Ins tall Type I, 12" Solid White Reflective f
Pavement Marking (100 MIL) as directed by the 1
engineer, complete in place per linear foot. 419 LF $ 3.35 $ 1,403.65
5.05 Furnish and Install T~ I, 24 " Solid White Reflective
Pavement Marki ng <JLMIL)J> directed by the
engineer, complete in place per lin ear foot. 80 LF $ 6.1 4 $ 491.20
5.06
$ $
Subtotal Item 5.00: $ ______ ...:.c2_,_,4_7....:5....:.3....:0_
Item Estimated Unit Price
No. Description Quantity Un it (Figures) Total Cost
6.00 TRAFFIC CONTROL
6.01 Provide Traffic Control including labor and materials
as directed by the engineer, complete in place
per month 2 MO $ 2,135.00 $ 4 ,270.00
Subtotal Item 6.00: $ _______ 4,_,2_7-'-0--'.0-'-0-
7.00 STORM SEWER
7.01
$ $
----~ ----------
Subtotal Item 7.00: $ _________ _
BASE BID:
(Sum of Items 1.00, 2.00, 3.00, 4 .00, 5 .00, & 6.00)
637,802.05
ALTERNATE BID ITEMS TABLE:
Item Estimated Unit Price
No . Description Quan ti~ Unit (Figures} Total Cost
Alternate No. 1 -Sidewalk from Longmire Drive to Texas A venue • ~ A-1 Remove and Properly Dispose of Concrete Sidewalk and
Ramps as shown on the drawings and directed by the
engineer, complete per square yard. 7 SY $ 15.00 105.00
A-2 Remove and Properly Dispose of Concrete Curb and
Gutter as shown on the drawings and directed by the
engineer, complete pe~ear foot. 45 LF $ 5.00 $ 225.00
A-3 Furnis h and Insta~ e Treated Subgrade including
placement and gra g as shown on the drawings and
directed by the engineer, complete in place per square yard . 778 SY $ 25.00 $ 19,450.00
A-4 Furnish and Install Type II Concrete Curb and Gutter as
shown on the drawings and directed by the engineer,
complete in place per linear foot. 875 LF $ 13.00 $ 11,375.00
A-5 Furnish and Install 4" Sidewalk including all embedment,
finishing, surface texture and joints as shown on the drawings
and directed by the engineer, complete in place per square yard . 583 SY $ 45 .00 $ 26,235 .00
A -6 Furnish and Install 4" Topsoil including placement and
grading as directed by the engineer, complete in place
per square yard . SY $ 12.00 $
•
Item Estimated Unit Price
'o. Description Quantity Unit (Figures) Total Cost
A-7 Furnish and Install Block Sodding including gro und
preparation, planting and raking as directed by the
engineer, complete in place per square yard.
A-8 Furnish and Install Cell Fiber Mulch Seeding (permanent
seeding for urban clay areas) as directed by the engineer,
complete in place per square yard.
A-9 Furnish and Install Vegetative Fertilizer as directed by
the engineer, complete in place per acre .
A-10 Furnish and Install Vegetative Watering as directed
by the engineer, complete in place per
thousand gallons.
A-11 Furnish and Install Temporary Sediment Control
Fence as directed by the engineer, complete in
place per linear foot.
Alternate No. 2 -Nueces Sidewalk Extension
A-1
A-2
Furnish and Install 6" Lime Treated Subgrade including
placement and grading as shown on the drawings and
Furnish and Inst 14" idewalk including all embedment,
directed by the e~· eer, complete in place per square yard.
finishing, surface re and joints as shown on the drawings <\ •
and directed by the engineer, complete in place per square yard'
<.J' (;
SY $ 3.15 $
SY $ 0.21 $
AC $ 150 .00 $
28 KG $ 35.00 $ 980.00
2,000 LF $ 2.20 $ 4,400 .00
Subtotal Alternate No. 1: $ 62,770.00
400 SY $ 25.oo $ ______ 1_,o,_00_0_.o_.:.o_
300 SY $ 45.00 $ 13,500 .00 ~~~~~~.=..lC:..C...:..:..:.~
Subtotal Alternate No. 2: $ 23,500.00
TIDS DOCUMENT IS RELEASED FO R THE PURPOSE OF INTERIM REVIEW UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF ALEJANDRO REYNA, JR.
#101243 ON THE DATE SHOWN ON THE DATE STAMP . IT IS NOT TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION, BIDDING,
OR PERMIT PURPOSES.
LIBERTY MUTUAL SURETY 005338
8350 N CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY
SUITE 820
Contract Bond
Status Query ~ Liber!_y MutuaL ~ C::llDt:TV DALLAS , TX 75 206
Date of Requ est: 6/2/2014
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
110 l TEXAS A VE .
COLLEGE STATION , TX 77842
Offic. __
Phone: 972-233 -9588
Fax: 855-318 -1836
Email : StatusQuery@ Libe rtyMutual.com
In orde r to allow us to monitor th e progress of our contractor, pleas e compl e te and return this form . Your respons e will not prejudice
your rights or affect our liability under our bond(s) referred to below. We enclose a prepaid return enve lope for your us e.
Bond Number: 022042787 Contract Price: $480 ,366 .00
Cross Reference Bond Number:
Contract Description: Project No . 13-351 Hike and Bike Trail Phase II
Our Bond On Behalf Of: G .W. Williams , Inc.
Bond Executed In The
Following Company: West American Insurance Company
l . HAS CONTRACT BEEN COMPLETED?
2 . IF COMPLETED PLEASE STATE:
a. Date of acceptance
b. Total amount of complete d contract
3 . IF NOT COMPLETED PLEASE STATE:
a. Probabl e completion date
b . Amount paid contractor to date
c . Amount withhe ld as retained pe rc e nta ge
4. HAS WORK PROGRESS ED SATISFACTORILY ?
5 . ARE THERE ANY UNSATISFIED CLAIMS OR LIENS ON FILE?
Date d : ________ _
Inception Date: 9 /24/2013
~ !h.0.o .. 0
Signed ··~
Tim Mikolajewski
Pre sident -Liberty Mutual Surety
Signed _____________ _
Name
Title
Phon e : ______ Fax: _____ _
MONTHLY PROGRESS MEETING
HIKE & BIKE PHASE 2
G.W. WILLIAMS, INC.
4090 Raymond Stotzer Parkway
College Station , Texas 77845
Project Name : City of College Station -Hike & Bike Phase 2
Project Number: PK0806 , ST1103
Date: April 9 , 2014
9 :00 AM
Present: Mark Ward , Casey Rhodes , Danielle Charbonnet, Jerry Jones, Gary Williams, & Mike
Wesp
A. SCHEDULE
1. Pouring Sidewalks at SW Pkwy. Complete at the end of the week or early next week.
2 . Start grading at SW Pkwy upon sidewalk completion .
3 . Will leave SW Pkwy construction entrance in place until final grading and clean up.
After that we will pour the last section of sidewalk along the street.
4 . Fabricating handrails along SW Pkwy to match existing .
5 . Reinstall road sign along SW Pkwy
6. Next week drill and pour light pole base at 2818 .
7 . Early to middle of next week s et up traffic control to saw cut asphalt at new curb &
gutter.
8 . Next week start setting up and pouring sidewalk at 2818 .
9 . TxDot handrails at 2818 should be del ivered the week of April 21st.
B . SUBMITT ALS
1
2 .
3 .
B . RFI STATUS
1. N/A
2 .
3 .
B . CHANGE ORDERS I REVISIONS
1. Working on change order #2 to dowel into the reta in ing wall .
B. OUTSTANDING ISSUES
1. N/A
2 .
B . NEW ISSUES
1.
2.
B . MONTHLY PAY REQUEST
Our Next Meeting will be Held : May 7th
To:
From:
September 9, 2010
Regular Agenda
FM 2818 Hike & Bike Trail Phase II
Glenn Brown, City Manager
Chuck Gilman, P.E., Director of Capital Projects
Agenda Caption: Public Hearing, presentation, possible action and discussion concerning
Phase II of the Hike and Bike Trail project along FM 2818 continuing from Welsh Avenue to
the Campus Village trail and through Southwest Park.
Relationship to Strategic Goals: Goal IV, Improving Multi Modal Transportation.
Recommendation(s): Staff recommends approval of the plan to move forward with
Phase II of the Hike & Bike Trail Completion Project.
Summary: Staff has identified an opportunity to complete the multiuse trail system
identified on the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Master Plan from Texas Avenue along
FM 2818 to Southwest Parkway . The first phase of the Hike & Bike Trail Completion Project,
which is currently under construction along FM 2818, will complete the trail segment from
Texas Avenue to Welsh Avenue. Phase I is currently under construction and is being
delivered under budget.
The Campus Village development under construction at the corner of FM 2818 and FM 2154
is constructing a multiuse path through their property which will begin immediately west of
the A&M Consolidated High School property line and end at Southwest Park. Staff feels this
short segment of path between Phase I of the Hike and Bike Trail project, which terminates
at Welsh, and the Campus Village path is an important connection in the hike and bike
network. Staff proposes to use the remaining budget in Phase I of the project to design and
construct this segment that will connect Phase I with Campus Village. Additionally, staff is
proposing to extend the trail from Campus Village through Southwest Park to Southwest
Parkway. Staff proposes to use Parkland dedication funds from Zone 6 for the proposed
improvements in Southwest Park. In an effort to maximize the money available for
construction of these improvements, Staff is proposing to design these improvements and
develop the bidding documents.
· The proposed trail aligns with Council's Strategic Goal for improving multi-modal
transportation by providing greater multi-modal mobility along the FM 2818 corridor and by
providing a parallel route for bicyclist to Wellborn Road, one of the major transporta_.tion
corridors in the City. The trail will also connect destinations including A&M Consolidated
High School, several City parks, business centers, and residential properties that have
traditionally been rented by students. · ~
Budget & Financial Summary: Phase I is funded from the 2008 Bond Authorization and
budgeted in the General Government CIP Fund in the amount of $1,000,000. Fu.nds in the
amount of $661,818.29 have been committed or expended to date, leaving a balance of
$338,181.71. Additional funds in the amount of $77,810 are anticipated for other
expenditures associated with the construction of Phase I, leaving a balance of $260,371.71.
Parkland dedication funds in the amount of $258,000 have been budgeted i n t he Parks
Escrow Fund -Zone 6 for the development of Southwest Park. Funds in the amount of
$219.54 have been expended to date, leaving a balance of $257,780.46 .
Attachments:
1.) Project Map
------i---1
----\ __ !,
------~-:
l :
: j
--------: ---!
1 l
-----:--------:
~-·
-~-
. . -
___ J
date
project
--t -
t ---·--
task list:
-· ----··--------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----~---------------------------------
-----,---
-----------l
·-
Phase II
Hike & Bike Complete, Ph. II ST1103 PK0806
FY 12
Budget 192,000.00 260,000.00
land 1,500 .00
environmental 5,000 4,000.00
survey 4,200 16,800.00
geotech 2,500 1,000.00
structural 2,000 5000
engineering design 10,920 21,840 ST1103 PK0806
engineering/OH 13,563 27,127 24,620.00 48,640.00 des ign budget
ADA inspection 500 500 150,000.00 162,500.00 construct io n budge t
miscellaneous 1,000 1000 13 ,563 27,127 OH
construction 115,200 126800 1,500 1,500 misc
conting 28,800 31,700 188,183.33 238,266.67 TOTAL
materials testing 6,000 4,000
Total: $ 189,683.33 $ 241,266.67
Balance: 2,3 16 .67 18,733 .33
~EM I QTY I UN IT I DESCRJPTION
00 GENERAL CONSTRUCT ION ITEMS
LOI
Insurance and MobiliZJJtion for all matenal,
equipment rmd labor to complete the project (00(
LS to exceed 5'A of construction) !um sum
Subcotul hem LOO
.00 REMOVALS & R ELOCATIONS
2.01 51
2.02 17
2 03
2 .04
2 .05 025
2.06
l>repor~ ROW for the tuke and bike path mclud1ng
exca\'lltion nnd haul otrspoi l material as shown on
the drawings and directed by the eng ineer, com plete
ST A ix:r Station
Remove and Replace Trees as sho"n on the drawi ngs
'"" EA directed by the engineer, com plete per each.
Rc..'tru>\'C nnd Reset Electrical Ground Bo'.'< to match
proposed grade as shown on the drawings and
EA directed bv the cmz.inoer. com lete ocrcach.
Re locate Small Troflic Sign Aucmbly as sho\\1l on
the drawings and directed by the engineer, complete
EA percrich.
Trimming of Trees nnd Remove\ of Brush as shown on
the dmwi ngs as directed by the engu'IC!Cr, complete per
Ml mile
IA•ff10hsh existing 24" RCP Safety End Tre.1tm .. -ntns
shown on the drawings as directed by the engineer,
EA complete in pince per ench
Sub101al l1em 2.00
3.00 ROAOWA Y & EARTHWORK
3 01 725
] 02 2.534
3.03 133
3.04 4,667
].05 1,050
3.06 S,095
3.07 1,155
3.08 310
3.09 65
3.10
],\\
312 39
CY
Excavate Arens as l>ho"11 on the plans and directed by
the engineer. Remove materials encountered to the
lines, and typie11J sections shown on the plans and
c..-rou-sect ions, complete in place-per cubic ynrd
Furrus h and lnsr.all Topsoil mctudmg placcm..-nt and
grading as din:ctcd by the engincc:r, complete in pi nce
CY per squnrn yurd.
Furnish nnd Install Pedcstnnn Hund Rail as shown on
thc plans nnd directed by the engineer, complete in
U pince per linear foot
Fw11ish and Install 5" Sidewalk including 1111
t.'ITlbcdmcnt, finishing, surface texlure and joinllll u
SY shown on the dmwinas
Furnish and lnsta ll 6" Sid .. ··walk mcluding all
embcdmcnt, fi ni shing, surface texture and joints as
shown on the drawings and directed by the engineer,
s y complete in pince per square yard.
Provide 6• dept.h of Lime Treatment for subgmde
Sy including pln~mcnt as shown on the dmwing! nnd
Provide 8" depth o,f Llme Treat ment for subg.radc
inc luding placement as shown on the drawings and
directed by the engineer. complete in place per squa re
SY yard.
Provide Flex ible 13ase inc\ud mg plaa..-"tncnt as shown
on the drawings and directed by the engineer,
SY com plete in place per square yard
Furn ish and lnstall lluckened Concrete Slab as shown
on the drawings and directed by the: engineer,
LF complete inplacc per
Furnish and install Type S Curb Ramp as shown on
the drawi ngs and directed by the engineer, complete in
EA place per ench.
Furnish and lnstnll Type 7 Cw-b Ramp as shown on
the dmwingJ nnd directed by the engifk!t."r, complete in
EA p\ncept.'fcach.
SF
FWTi ish and Ins ta ll Scgmcn\11] Retain mg Wa ll
incl uding reinforceme nt for trail, ns shown on the
dmwings nnd directed by the engineer, complete in
place per swfnce square foot .
Brazos Vallcv Services
UN IT PRICE I TOTAL PRICE
$18,000.00 $18,000.00
$18,000.00
$500.00 125.500.00
$400.00 $6,800.00
1660.00 $2,640.00
$360.00 $720.00
St.000.00 1250.00
$200.00 $40000
$36,.3 10.00
SI0.00 $7,250.00
SI0.00 $25.340.00
$125.00 $16,625.00
128.00 $130,676.00
130.00 $31,500.00
$4.00 120.380.00
15.00 $5,775 00
115.00 $4.650.00
$25.00 Sl.62S.OO
$750.00 $750 00
1500.00 12,500.00
$50.00 $1,9SO.OO
City of Colle ge Station -Purchasing Division
Bid Tabulati on for #10-71
"Hi ke a nd Bike Trnil "
Open Date : T hursday. J uly I, 201 a@ 2:00 p.m.
G. W. Williams, Inc. Dudlev Constnrction Ltd. Larrv Youn2 Pavin2
UN IT PRICE I TOTAL PRJCt: UN IT PRI CE I TOTAL PRICE UN IT PRI CE I TOTAL PRICE
19.000.00 19,000.00 $12,42000 $12,420_00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00
$9,000.00 $12,42000 $20,000.00
$798.00 $40,698 00 $19800 SI0,098.00 1380.00 119.38000
$136.80 $2.325.60 $101.00 Sl,717.00 $22500 $3,825.00
$684.00 $2,736.00 $688 83 $2,755.32 $66000 $2.640.00
$372.1 2 $744.24 $373 12 $746.24 $375.00 $750 00
$4,560 00 $1,140.00 $16,072.80 $4,0 18 .20 $1 5,000.00 $3.750.00
$228.00 $456 ()() $28700 $574 00 1300.00 1600 00
S-'8,099.84 $19 ,908.76
$962 $6,974 50 $6 89 $4 ,995.25 18 50 $6,162.SO
113.68 $34,665.12 $1 3 .78 $34 .918.52 $13.50 $34,209.00
$117.42 S \5,616.86 $88.40 $11,757.20 $120.00 $15,960.00
S26.97 $125,868.99 $34 .09 1159.098.03 12800 $130,676 00
$28.46 129,883 .00 $39 .84 $4 1,832.00 130.00 13 1,500 .00
$6.98 SJS,563.10 $5.19 $26,443 OS $6.40 $32,608.00
$7.27 $8,3968S $5.57 $6,433.35 $7.25 $8,373.75
SI0.42 $3,230.20 $86 10 $26,691 00 $1700 $5,270.00
$44.04 $2,862.60 $26.49 Sl,721.85 $21 .00 Sl,365.00
$777 46 $777.46 $5 1663 $51663 $825 00 $82S .OO
$403.56 $2,017.80 $401 82 $2 ,009.10 $935 00 $4,675 ()()
$2936 $1 ,145.04 $82.42 $3,2 14 38 $12000 $4,680.00
Kieschnic:k General
Contractors Acklam Construction Co., Ltd. D.L Meacham LP
UNIT PRIC E I TOTA L PRICE UNIT PRICE I TOTAL PRICE UN ITPRJC[ I T<JTAL PRIC£
$15,000.00 $15,000.00 $33,250.00 $33,250.00 $35 ,000.00 $3 5,000.00
$15,000.00 $33,250.00 $35,000.00
1500.00 125,50000 $763.00 $38,9 13.00 $2 1000 $10.710.00
$200.00 $3,400.00 1200 .00 Sl,400.00 $3 50.00 $5,950.00
$700.00 $2,800.00 $654 .00 $2,616 00 $750.00 SJ,00000
$364 00 $728 00 $354 25 1708.50 $350 00 1700.00
16,000.00 Sl,500.00 SJ0,000.00 $2,500.00 $4,900.00 S i,22 5.00
$50000 S l ,000.00 $55000 $1,10000 $250.00 1500 00
$3 -',928.00 S49,2J7.30 $22,083.00
$6.00 $4,350.00 $9 16 $6,64 1.00 $15000 $108 ,7 50.00
SJ0.00 $25,340.00 $1308 $33,14472 SJ0.50 $77,287.00
$120.00 $15.960.00 $18,620.00 $210.00 $27.93000
$32.00 $149,344.00 $40.00 $1 86,680.00 130.00 $1 40,0 10 .00
$35.00 $36.750.00 $4 1.00 $43,050.00 $33.00 $34 ,650 00
$7.00 $35,665.00 $6.65 $33,88 1.75 $1 4 .50 $73,877 50
$9.00 SI0,395.00 $6.93 SS.004 15 $\6.50 $1 9.057.50
$20.00 $6,200.00 $1000 13.10000 $28 00 18,680 00
$50.00 SJ.250.00 $40.00 $2,600.00 152.50 $3,412 so
$1,50000 $1,500.00 150000 1500.00 $1 ,15000 $1 ,15000
$2.400.00 $12,000.00 $550.00 $2,75000 $95000 $4,75000
$100.00 $3,900.00 $75.00 $2,92S.OO $45.00 $1,75500
IT<M QTY
3.13
4.00 EROS ION CONTROL
4.0 1
4.02 7,374
4.03 14
4.04
4.05 7 154
4.06 7.154
5.00 PAVEM.ENT MARKINGS
5.0 1 284
5.02 75
5.0J 280
5.04 60
5.05
5.06
5.07
5.08 75
5.09 409
5.10 81
5.11
5.12
5.13 292
514 75
UN IT DESCRIPTION
Remove and Rclocnte Street Light u shown on the
drawings and directed by the engineer, compl ete in
EA pince per ench
SY
S ublola l lle m 3.00
Furnish and lrut.111 Tcmpornry Corutruc.•t 1on Exit as
sbown on the drawings and directed by the engineer.
complete in pl ace per each
Furnish and Inst.all Temporary Sediment Control
Fence as din:..ted by the e ngincc!I', complete in place
LF locr linear foot.
Furnish and Install Tree Protection as directed by the
El\ engineer, oomplcle in place per cnch.
Furnish a Stom1...,-atcr Pollution Protection Plan for U1c
work to be performed as shmm in the drawings and
LS directed by thc engineer. complete per each
SY
SY
LF
LF
Furnish and lrutall Cell Fiber Mulc h Secdmg
(pcnnancnt seeding for urban c la y areas) H directed
by the engineer. complete in place per square yard.
Furnish and lru:tall Soil Retention Blanket as directed
by the engineer, complete in place per square yard.
S u1Jtot 11.I He m 4.00
Elim.in11tc 4~ Solid Yellow Pa~ncnt Marking as
directed by the e ngint .. 'Cr, complete in place per linear
Eliminate 8~ Solid White Powmcnt Mnrking u
directed by the engineer, complete in place per linear
Elimin.nte 12" Solid White Pavement M.nrking as
directed by the engineer, complete in pin ce per linear
LF foot.
Eliminnte 24" Solid White Pavement Marking as
directed by the enginccr. complete in plnoc per lmcnr
LF fool
EA
El iminnle Arrow Soli d White Pavement Mnrking ns
directed by the engineer, complete in place per each.
Eliminate Double Arrow Solid White Pavement
Marking asdirected by the engineer. complete in pince
El\ ocr each.
Furnish nnd lnslllll Type I, 4" Solid Yellow Reflecti"e
Pn\'\..'l!lcnt Marking (JOO M IL) ns directed by U1e
LF cnRincer, oomnlete in Ince ocr linear foot.
Furnish and Inst.nil Type I, r Solid White Reflective
Pavement Ma rking (100 M[L) as di rected by Uie
LF L'llRinca-, comok1e in olace oer li near foot.
Furnis h and luslllll Type I, 12" Solid White Reflective
Pavement Marking (100 MIL) a s directed by U1c
LF cop,inccr, complete in pince ncr linear foot.
LF
EA
F./\
FlU11ish nnd Install Type I, 24" Solid White Reflecti\"c
Pavement Mnrking (100 MIL) ns di~ted by U1c
en inecr, com !etc in la ce oer Ji ncnr foot.
Furnish nnd lnstn ll Type I, /\rrow Solid White
Rcflccti\."e Pa"cmcnt Mnrking (100 MlL) n~ directed
bv the cn12.incer, comoletc in olace ncr e<1ch.
Furnish and lnstn ll Type I, Double Arrow Solid White
Reflective Pn\'emcnt Mnrking(IOO MIL) ns directod
by the engineer, complete in place per each.
Furnish and Install T)'pe II , 4" Solid Yellow Reflective
Pavoncnt Marking as directed by the engint.'Cr,
LF comolcte in lace ocr h near fool
Fwnish and Install Type II , 8" Sol id White Rc flcctm~
Paveme nt Marking as Jirected by the engineer,
LF comolete in lace ocr hnear foot.
Brazos Valley Services
Cit y of Co ll ege Stn ti on -Purclrnsin g Divi sion
Bid Tabulation fo r #10-7 1
"Hike and Bike Trail"
Open Da le : Thursday, July 1, 20 1-@ 2:00 p.111 .
G. W. Williams, Inc. Dudley Cons truclion Ltd. l..arni Yo11n2 Pavin2
Kieschnick General
Contractors Acklam Cons lmclion Co., Lid. D.L. Meacham LP
UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE UNIT PRICE TOTA L PRICE UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE UNIT PRICE _TOTAL PRICE .UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE llNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE
$6,600.00 $1 9,800.00 $6,840.00 $20,520.00 $6,888.34 $20 665.02 S6 600.00 $19,800.00 S7000.00 $2 \,000.00 $6,540.00 $19 620.00 S7,000 00 $21 ,000.00
$268.82 1.00 $287,52 1.52 $340 295.38 $296,!04.H SJ25 6S4.00 $36 1.5 16.62 $522.309.50
SJ5.00 S!,96000 $47 88 S2,68\ 28 $14 35 $803 60 SJ0.00 SJ,680.00 $14 .00 $784.00 $25.00 Sl ,400.00 $24 .50 Sl ,372 00
$3 .00 $22,122.00 SI 66 $12,240.84 Sl.49 S\0.987.26 $1.40 $10.323.60 Sl.46 Sl0.766.04 $2.46 $18,140.04 $1.40 $1 0,323 .60
$200.00 $2,800.00 $171.00 $2 ,394.00 $66.0 1 S924 .14 $500.00 S7 .000.00 S4 50 .00 S6 300.00 $150 00 S2 100.00 $20000 $2,800.00
150000 1500.00 S969 00 S969.00 $861 .04 S861 04 SJ 800.00 SJ,800.00 S750.00 $75000 Sl,50000 Sl,500.00 S2,50000 12 500.00
S0.50 SJ 577.00 S0 .33 $2,360.82 S0 .33 $2 360.82 S0 .30 $2,146.20 S0 .39 $2,790.06 $0.40 $2,861.60 SO .JO $2,146.20
$2 .00 S\4,308.00 Sl.24 18,870.96 SI 24 $8 870.96 Sl.10 $7,869.40 Sl 34 $9 586.36 Sl.18 $8.441.72 S0.95 $6,796 30
545 267.00 519.516.90 $24.807.81 $32,819.20 SJO 976.46 $34 443.36 $15 938.10
$2 .10 $596.40 $2 .18 $619.12 $2 18 $619.12 S2 .20 $624.80 $2 .13 $604.92 $2.08 S590.72 $2 .10 $596.40
S3 .20 $240.00 SJ .32 S249.00 SJ.JJ $249.75 $3.30 $247.50 SJ .25 $243 75 SJ.17 S237 .75 $3.05 $228.75
S4.40 Sl,232.00 $4.56 Sl.276.80 $4 .59 Sl.285.20 $4 .45 SJ .246.00 $4 .48 Sl ,2S4 40 $4 36 Sl,220.80 $4 .20 SJ ,17600
15.50 S330.00 $5.73 S343 .80 S5.74 $344.40 S7 .00 $42000 S5 60 S336.00 $5.45 $327.00 S5 .25 $315.00
SI 1000 $220.00 SI 14.00 $228.00 SI 14 .81 $229.62 SI 15 .00 mo.oo SI 12 .00 $224 00 $109.00 S2 18.00 $105.00 $210.00
Sl65.00 SJJ0.00 $171.00 S342.00 $172 21 $344.42 $165 .00 $3JO.OO Sl6800 SJJ6.00 $1 63 .50 sm.oo Sl60.00 SJ20.00
Sl.32 $385 .44 Sl.37 $400.04 Sl.38 $402.96 Sl .34 $391 .28 Sl .34 $391.28 Sl.31 $382.52 SI.JO S379.60
S2.40 $180.00 S2.47 $185 .25 $2 .48 $186.00 $2.42 $181.50 $2.42 $181.50 $2.36 $177.00 $2 .30 $172.50
$4 .00 S l ,636.00 $4 .12 Sl ,685.08 $4.13 SJ ,689.17 $4 .00 Sl,636.00 S403 Si,648 27 $3 .93 Sl,607.J7 $3 .50 Sl,431.50
S9.25 $749.25 $9.62 $779.22 $9.64 $780.84 S9.41 $762 21 $941 S762 2 1 S9 16 $741.96 S8.90 $720.90
S\65.00 S330.00 $171.00 $342.00 $168.83 $337.66 $170.00 $340.00 S 168.00 $33600 S1 6J.50 $327.00 $160.00 $320 00
$231 .00 S4 62.00 S23 9.40 S478 80 S241 09 S482.18 $24 5.00 $490.00 $235 20 $47040 $228.90 S457 80 $220 00 $440.00
S0.6 1 Sl78.12 $063 S\83 96 S0 .63 $183 .96 S0 .62 $181.04 S0 .62 $181 04 S0.60 $175 20 $060 $175 20
SJ.45 $108.75 Sl.5 1 $113.25 Sl.52 Sl \4.00 1 1.50 $112.50 $1.48 Sii l.00 Sl.44 $10800 Sl.40 SI05 00
Brazos Valley Services
City of Co ll ege S tntion -P u rchasin g Div is ion
Bid Tabulnli on fo r HI0-7 l
"Hike and Bike T r·nil"
01>en Date: Thursday, July I, 201-@ 2:00 p.m.
G. \V . \Villiams, Inc. Dudlev Cons1ruclion Ltd. Larrv Voun2 Pavim!
Kieschnitk General
Contratton Acklam Cons1ruc1ion Co., Ltd. D.L. Meacham LP
't:M "'-""-f---'0,._1,_'Y:..__+-"U"-'N"'J1'-' -+F::-·um_,,.;,"'h -,nd..,..,.-lm-w""n"'~"'~~o::C:;,~;:..'~::,2r:.:.'Soi"O;'~d"Wh""";t:-o ,;:Ro~fl;--«-,,tive--j•""U"Nll .... TP...,.RI C~I~~ Tffr&' puir1.· UNIT PHIC_t; TOTALPRI C£ UNJT PRIC.E TOTAL PRICE UJ'lllT PRICE TOTAL PRICE UN IT PRICE Tn-r PRICE UNJT PRICE TOTAL PRICE UNIT PRIC!: TOTAL PRICE.
).15 409
5.16 81
5.17
5.18
00 TRAFFIC
601 235
6.02
6.0J 13
6,04
6.05 44
7 00 STORM SEWER
701 122
702 177
7.03
7.04
LF
LF
Pnvement Marking as directed by the engin«r,
·-" Fwnish and lnst111l Type U, 24" Solid White Reffocti\!e
Pnvemcnt Marking its directed by the engineer,
comnlcte in nlnce oer linear foot .
FWTiish 1md lnstnll Type II, Arrow Solid White
Rellccti\..: Pavement Mnd:ing as directed by the
EA em1.ineer, com letc in lace rx:r ench.
Fwnish nnd lnsll11l Type I, Double Arrow Solid White
Renecti\IC Pnvenwnt Marking 111 directed by the
EA emi.i neer, complete in vl11ce per e:ich.
LF
Su btola l Item 5.00
Fw11iid111nd lnsl.Zltl Nwnbcr 2 Base Elcctricnl
Conductor 11s shown oo the drawings nnd directed by
the engineer, complete in pince per linear foot.
Furnish 11nd Install Pedcstrinn Push Buttom 11 1hown
on the dniwingii 11nd directed by the cngmeer,
EA complete in pince per e.1ch
Furnish and Install Traffic Signs ns shown on the
drawings 11nd directed by the engineer, complete in
EA 1_,n ___ 1t"h
Provide Traffic Control mcluding l11bor 11nd m.iterinls
as directed by the engineer, complete in place per
MO month
Fwnish and Insta ll I" Conduit llS shown on the
drowingt and directocl by the engineer, complete in
LF · , ......,. Jin .. ftr roo
S ublUl ~l llem 6.00
Furnish nnd Install 18• Clnss Ill RCP as shown on the
t .F drawings nnd directed by the engineer, complete in
Fwn1sh and lnsta ll 24• Class Ill RC!' H shom1 on the
LF drawings and directed by the engineer, complete m
Furnish 11nd lnstull IS-Type II Sofiey End Trcounent
as shown in lhe drawings and directed by the engineo.-r.
EA complete in place
FWTiish and lnsUlll 24• Type II Snfiey End Treatment
us shown in the drawings 11nd directed by the engint.'t."I",
EA complete in pince
Sub lolal Item 7.00
Su m of lle11u J.00, 2.00, 3.00, 4.00, 5.00, 6.00, & 7.()0
ALTERNATE urn ITEMS TABLE
Alte rna te No. I -Sldcw.11lk from Lon!!mlrc Drive lo TcIH Avenue
A·I 10
A·2
A·J 858
A-4 860
A·5 901
A-6 908
A-7
A-8 1,%7
A-9 1,967
l'ln.-pare ROW for I.he hike nnd bike path mcluding
exca\'ution nnd hnul off spoil mnterin l ns shown on
the drawings and directed by the engineer, complete
STA loer Station
CY
Excnvnte Areas us showTI oo the plans and directed by
the engineer. Remove mn terin ls encountered to lhe
lines, nnd typical sections sho\'Tl oo the pl11ns and
cross-sections, complete in place per cubic ynrd
Furnish and Install Topsoil mcludm8 plncemt."llt and
grading 11s directed by the engmccr, complete in pince
CY 1 ....... ,..,h,,.,.,.M
Fwnish and lnst11ll 5• Sidt.-w11lk including all
embcdment, finishing, swface texture nnd joinlll ns
shown on the dr11wings and direc1ed by the engineer,
SY ..... ....i
Provide 6. depth of f'lexible Bnse including plnct.'ffient
nJI shown on the drawings 11nd directed by the
SY engineer, complete in pince per square y11rd.
Furnish and Install T1..mpomry Sediment Control
Fence as directed by the cngmcer, complete in place
l.F lr'l<'rlinf'nrfoot .
Furnish and Install Tree Protection as directed by lhc
EA enninccr com lele in Ince ......,. each .
SY
SY
Furnish and Install Cell Fiber Mulch Seeding
(pc..-nnanent seedi ng for urba n clay arens) as directed
by the engineer, comp!l.1.c in place per squnre yard.
Furnish and Insta ll Soil Rentcnt1ot1 Dlnnkct as direct«!
by the engineer, coo1plcte in pince per square )'Drd
Provide Tmflic Control including labor and materials
as din:cted by lhe engineer, complete in pince
per month
$1.85 $156 .65 $1 .89 S7730 1 $1 .89
$600 $486.00 $6.30 $510.30 $6 .JI
$10000 S20000 S94 .46 S188.92 $94 71
Sl60.00 S320.00 $157.44 $314 .88 $157.86
S9,0U.H
S2 .75 S64625 $2 .86 $672 .10 $2 .87
$825.00 $3,300.00 $855 .00 $3,420.00 S861.04
$385.00 S5.005.00 $399.00 $5,187.00 S40\.82
SJ,000.00 S9.000.00 S2,280.00 $6,840,00 $2.694 .49
$31 00 Sl,364.00 $31.92 Sl,404.48 S32.15
$19,315.25 $17,523.58
SS-000 $6.100 00 S56.JJ $6,872 .26 SS0.9 1
$75.00 $13,27500 $63 20 $11 ,186 40 $6 1.82
Sl.000.00 $4,00000 Sl.299 60 $5,19840 $9 10.26
St.000.00 $4,000.00 $1.573.20 $6.292.80 Sl.191.27
$27,375.00 $29,.549.86
S423,tU8.86 5"30,225.13
S500.00 S5 .000.00 Sl ,91500 S19,!5000 $146.95
S25 .00 S\5000 $16.49 $98.94 $6.89
$10.00 S8,58000 SIJ.68 SI 1,737.44 S13 .78
S28.00 $24 .080.00 $27.31 $23,486.60 $33.58
$15.00 $13.515.00 $1042 $9,388.42 $861
SJ 00 $2,724 .00 Sl .66 Sl ,507.28 $1.49
$250.00 S750.00 $171.00 $513 00 $86.10
$0.50 $983 .50 S0.33 $649.11 SO.JJ
$2.00 $3,934 .00 $1.24 $2,439.08 $1.19
.U.000.00 SJ.00000 S2,280.00 S2.280.00 SJ.435.07
$773.01 $1 .85 S756.65 Sl.85 $75665 SI 80 $736.20 $1.75 $715.75
$511.11 S6.05 $49005 S6.16 S498.96 $6.00 $486.00 $5.78 $468.18
$18942 $90.75 $181.SO $92 .40 Sl84 80 S89.9J St79.86 $87.00 $174.00
S315.72 $150.00 SJOOOO $154 .00 $308.00 $149.88 S299.76 $144.00 $288.00
$9,038.5 .. SS,92 1.03 $8,82 9.18 $8.599.9 .. $8,236.78
$674.45 $2 .75 $646.25 SJ.00 $105 .00 $2 .73 $641.55 SJ.00 $105 00
S3,444.16 $825.00 SJ .JOOOO S900.00 SJ .600.00 $8 17 50 SJ.27000 S800.00 $3,200.00
$5,223.66 S400.00 S5.200.00 $392.00 $5,096.00 $380.00 $4 ,940.00 S500.00 $6,500.00
$8,083.47 S8,000.00 SH.000.00 S2.00000 $6,000.00 S5 ,00000 $15,000.00 $3,500.00 $10,500.00
$1,4 14 60 SJ0.80 SJ,355 .20 $33.00 $1,452.00 $30.52 S l ,342 88 $32.00 $1.408.00
S J4 ,~0 l.45 $16,853.00 $25,194.43 $22,313.00
$6,211 .02 $55.00 $6,710.00 $50.00 $6,100.00 $83 .93 $1 0,239.4 6 $63.00 $7,686.00
$10,942 14 $67.00 SI 1,85900 S60.00 $10,620.00 $87 .20 $15,434 40 $77.00 $1 3,62900
$364104 $1,70000 $6 80000 $\,500.00 $6,00000 $790 25 $3.161.00 Sl ,050.00 S4 ,20000
$4,765.08 S2,250.00 $9,000.00 $1,700.00 $6,800.00 $1,362 .50 $5,450.00 Sl,250.00 S5,000.00
$25.559.28 $34,369.00 $29,520.00 534,284.86 S30,5 15.00
s .. 50,s10.12 $457,659.93 $46 1,760.64 S5,.6 .. ~26.7 1 $666,397.38
SJ,46950 SJ80.00 $3 ,800.00 S50000 S5 .00000 $1,831 20 $18,31200 $2 1000 $2,100 00
$41 .34 SJ0.00 $6000 $20.00 $120.00 $15 70 $94.20 $\20.00 $720.00
SI 1,823 24 S14 ()() $12,012 .00 $10.00 S8,580.00 $13 08 $11.222 64 S30.50 $26,169.00
$28,878 so $2800 S24.080.00 SJ200 $27.520.00 $4000 $34,40000 $3000 $25,800.00
$7,757.6 1 $17.00 S\5.31700 S20.00 Si8,020.00 $10.00 $9.0 10.00 $33 .00 $29.733 .00
$1,352 92 Sl.40 Sl.271 20 Sl.46 Sl,325 68 $2 46 $2,233 68 Si.40 $1 ,271.20
$258.30 $500.00 Sl.500.00 S64 .40 $193 .20 $15000 $45000 S200.00 S600.00
$649.11 SO.JO $590.10 SO.J9 $767.13 S0.40 $786.80 $0.30 S590.IO
$2.34073 SI.JO S2,163 .70 Sl.34 $2,635.78 $1.1 8 $2,32 1.06 S0.95 S l ,86865
S l ,435.07 16.000.00 $6.000.00 S2.000.00 $2,000.00 $20,000.00 S20.000.00 SJ.500.00 SJ.500.00
ITEM QTY
/H I
A-12
A·\J
A·\4
A-15
Ceor1irk11;tlon o r Bid
Ac knowlctl cd Atldcntlum'I l 2\
Old Bo nd
UNIT DESCRIPTION
Furnish and lruiLDll 10' Type 2 Curb Inlet 11s shown 011
the drawings and as dm:ctcd by lhc engineer, complete
flA in -1-------!..
Fumis h nnd lnsLDll 15" Class Ill RCPas shown on lhe
dmwings nnd directed by the t.-nginccr, complete in
LF ~1 ~-ner 1;--~-foot
Furnish and lruitall 15" Type II Saf\ey End Trcntmcnt
as shown in the drawings and directed by the cngmcer,
complete in ploce
EA •v..-cach
Fmnish and Install Type Curb 1md Gutter u ~h own in
the drawings and directed by the engineer, eomp\c\e in
place per
LF r~•
EA
Raise Existing Street Light to match propsed grndes as
shown in drawings and directed by engineer, complete
S ullto111JAltcn111;leNo. I
To!MI UM.M: Bid and Altcr11alu
Brazos Valley Services
Cily of Coll ege Sta lion -Purchasi ng Di visio n
Bid Tabulalion for HJ0-7 1
"Hike and Bike Trail "
01>cn Oal'e: Thursday, July I, 201 -@ 2:00 p.m.
G. W. Williams, Inc. Dudlev Construction Ltd. Larry Y 011112 Pavin2
Kieschnick General
Contractors Acklarn Construction Co., Ltd. D.l... Meacham LP
UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE UN IT PRICE TOTA~ PR ICE UNI'. PRICE TOTAL PRIC& Ui'llT PRICE JOTAL PRICE Ur<JT oo•r•· TOTAL PRICE 'N'"' PRICE TOTAL PRICE
$4,00000 $12000.00 $2,528.52 $7,585.56 $5,740.29 $17 220.87 $2.750.00 $8.250.00 $4,000.00 $12,000.00 $5.232.00 $15.696.00 $4 ,500.00 $13 500.00
$40.00 $3,680.00 $47.69 $4 387.48 $34.9 1 S3 211 72 $5500 $5,060.00 $5000 14,600.00 $78.48 $7,220.16 $58.00 $5,336.00
$75000 $2 ,250.00 $1 ,187.88 $3 563.64 $678.19 $2,034 .57 SI 700.00 $5,10000 $1 ,50000 $4,500.00 $654.00 $1,962.00 $950.00 $2,850.00
$1800 $15,480.00 $12.46 $10,715 .60 $17.79 $15,299.40 $20.00 $17.200.00 $15 .00 $12,900.00 $17.00 $14.620.00 $30.00 $25 ,80000
S7.000 00 $14,000.00 $7.182.00 $14.364.00 $7.232.76 $14 ,465.52 $7,000.00 $14 00000 $7 300.00 $14 600.00 $6,867.00 $13 .73400 $7,200.00 $1440000
S ll0,126.~0 Sl lJ ,866.15 S IOS ,238.70 S I 16 404.00 S I 14 76 1.79 $152,062.54 S t .s.4,237 .95
---·3~J.9~~-J{, SS-'2,091.28 S559 108.82 S574,063.93 S576-'U2.4J S698-'i89.25 5820,635.JJ
\ ,/' I ,/' ,/' ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,/' ,/' ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,/' ,, ,/' ,/' ,/'