The URL can be used to link to this page

CEE01D Encinitas Blvd. Trunk Sewer- City Of Encinitas CALTRANS March 30, 2005 Attn: John Markey District Permit Engineer 2829 Juan Street San Diego, Calif. 92110 Subject: Encroachment Permit No. 11- 03- NUX0643 Dear Mr. Markey- This letter is being sent to request an extension of time on the CALTRANS encroachment permit for the Encinitas Trunk Sewer project, (Encroachment Permit No. 11-03 - NUX0643). Originally the project was to be completed on December 9, 2004. However, due to significant prolonged rainfall from October through February, and because of equipment failure in the pipe bursting operations the project completion date has been delayed for several months. Consequently, the City of Encinitas is requesting an extension of time on the encroachment permit to Friday, April 29, 2005. Should you have any questions feel free to contact me at (760)633 -2775. Your attention to this matter would be greatly appreciated. Sincer ly, Kipp ielftier, PE Associate Civil Engineer Cc: Greg Shields Ron Brady Sean Manning TEL 760- 633 -2600 / FAX 760 - 633 -2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 TDD 760 - 633 -2700 � recycled paper o I? V -1, tit TyJ, v March 22, 2005 Metropolitan Construction Attn: Jose Ortiz 8614 Troy Street Spring Valley, Calif 91977 FAX AND MAIL' RE: ENCINITAS BLVD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT(CEE01D) Jose, I am in receipt of your faxed letter dated March 21, 2005, in which you propose a sharing of the cost of the shoring not covered in the original bid. I agree to the sharing of the costs of shoring for those remaining areas that are shown on the plans to be accomplished by pipe bursting. Be advised, that any additional costs that you incur as a result of the open trench procedure shall be borne by you and not the City. The choice of pipe bursting or open trench is yours to make at this point in time. The lack of adequate traffic control and the resulting traffic congestion during the morning rush hour that has been encountered as result of the time you have needed to complete the bursting operation is unacceptable. Please provide a schedule and a traffic control plan for the open trench procedure if that is the option you wish to pursue. Notification to Caltrans shall be your responsibility since this alternative will damage the traffic loops within the state right -of -way. I will copy this letter to Raymond Guames of the City's Traffic Division and you are to coordinate your traffic control plans with him. His phone number is 760 -633 -2704. If you need any assistance in this matter, Kipp, Raymond and I will help however we can. Sincerely, reg elds, P.E. Field Operations cc: Kipp Hefner, Assoc. Civil Engineer Sean Manning, Richard Brady & Assoc. TEL 760 - 633 -2600 / FAX 760 - 633 -2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 TDD 760 - 633 -2700 qM recycled paper • - s Confirmation Report— Memory Send Job number 601 Date Mar -21 03:12pm To : $918584960505 Number of pages 002 Start time Mar -21 03:12pm End time Mar -21 03:13pm Pages sent 002 Status . OK Job number : 601 Page : 001 Date & Time: Mar -21 -05 03:13pm Line 1 Machine ID * ** SEND SUCCESSFUL * ** TgANS1�ITT.L FORS C1ty ofTaciaitss FAX 7601633 -2818 EagiaeariaB 505 3. Vslcsaa 92024 -3633 • Facfaitas. CA . • 760/633- 2.'T7o - � . 3ENOT0 F : A�C# NO. OF PAGES GATE _-� . �G _ TO: YZ OF: gppRESS: QQ� PHONE' FROM' ^ Q gtview 8t R� JG-�1 F YZ Q Call ASAP r� . Rsvapw 8t Call Q please f3�d1e 0 g,eply 3E-C ftw Coiavcrsa 0 please by Cp1vIIV�N'I'S: � . City Of Encinitas March 21, 2005 Metropolitan Construction Attn: Jose Ortiz 8614 Troy Street Spring Valley, Calif 91977 FAX AND MAIL RE: ENCIMTAS BLVD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT(CEE01D) Jose, I am in receipt of your faxed letter dated March 14, 2005. The date of the fax is March 21, 2005, and the subject of the letter is regarding work that occurred after March 14, 2005. I assume this is another clerical error. Since on or about October 17, 2004 your work has encountered numerous problems, including broken equipment and lack of progress in the pipe bursting operation. At this point, your pipe bursting operations are stalled due to broken equipment again and you have successfully placed all but the last 800 feet, approximately. You are again suggesting the problem is with unanticipated underground conditions and wish to once more complete this project by converting this job to an open trench operation. The City has concluded the problem your work has encountered is not due to differing site conditions. The City will allow the use of the open trench method only if you bear any additional costs that are incurred by way of this change in procedure. Since I did volunteer to split the cost of the additional loops that would be necessary as result of the open trench procedure, I will not withdraw this agreement. The requirement to grind for the paving is not waived. This is what was included in the contract and is expected to be done. The contract also called for contingency plans and these have not been done. Friday I spent the day responding to the citizens that ran into a blockade on Encinitas Blvd. The signage to inform the vehicular traffic of the impending detour was none existent and the City of Encinitas Engineering Department took a significant public relations beating because you could not get out of the street on time. This is the only reason you are being allowed to use the open trench procedure; i.e. after over 170 days on a 90 day contract you have failed to convince that you can follow a schedule. Sincerely, Greg Sods, P.E. Field Operations cc: Kipp Hefner, Assoc. Civil Engineer TEL 760 - 633 -2600 / FAX 760- 633 -2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 TDD 760 -633 -2700 � recycled paper ,f�Lt!G C�9GJ228Pt� C/9Z �(! 1G121�9z G /l/�Glr /N1�J March 4, 2005 Jose Ortiz Metropolitan Construction P.O. Box 477 Bonita Ca. 91908 Re: Encinitas Boulevard Trunk Sewer Replacement Time Extension Requests Dear Mr. Ortiz: We have reviewed the updated project schedule and narrative for subject project. This update shows a project completion date of March 15, 2005 resulting in negative project float of 65 work days. In response to the Progress Schedule Narrative submitted to the City dated January 17, 2005, the City has the following comments: 1) Metro: Since the beginning of the project (August2 2004) Metropolitan Construction had problems on having the Bypass plan approved, for several different reasons and after 6 unsuccessful presentations MC got the Bypass Plan approved on 10/6/04 (47 calendar day) (Lost time 33 working days). City: Bypass Plan Submittal 01 received 7/7/04 returned 7/19/04 RR Bypass Plan Submittal 01A received 8/24/04 returned 8/30/04 RR Bypass Plan Submittal 0 1 B received 9/7/04 returned 9/14/04 RR Bypass Plan Submittal 0 1 C received 9/16/04 returned 9/21/04 RR Bypass Plan Submittal 01F received 10/4/04 returned 10/6/04 NE All Bypass Plan submittal reviewed by the Engineer were found to be in non- compliance with the contract specifications. This included • the exclusion of 3 backup tanker trucks, their capacity, and pumping specs for the stand -by septic trucks (spec section 7 -34). • the contractor's proposal to use pumping equipment that did not meet TDH or flow rate requirements. • The failure to identify on the submittal the locations of all launching and receiving pits. • The failure to include in the submittal a bypass plan for the entire project limits between STA 1 +00 and 31 +75. Neither the City of Encinitas nor the Construction Manager can be held responsible for the Contractor's inability to provide submittals in compliance with the contract 4909 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 220 • San Diego, California 92123 Tel (858) 496 -0500 • Fax (858) 496 -0505 March 4, 2005 Page 2 specifications. Therefore, the City rejects the Contractors request for a time extension of 33 days. 2) Metro: From 10/6/04 to 10/12/04 MC installed the Bypass system. On October 17 we had a heavy storm that washed away our Bypass pipe. From 10/17/04 to 11105105 between rain days and replacing the Bypass system. MC lost 14 working days. City: Per the pre - construction meeting and meeting minutes "The Contractor stated they will be using CL200 pipe with interlocking joints and are confident that doing so will prevent the occurrence of accidental spills during by -pass operations" The Contractors failure to provide a sufficiently durable bypass system is not the responsibility of the City of Encinitas or the Construction Manager. Therefore, the City rejects the Contractors request for a time extension of 14 days. 3) Metro: On 10/14/04 the Subcontractor MOCON broke the pipe bursting head due to the soil conditions MC lost 2 working days, recovering the head MC lost 2 working days. City: Neither the City of Encinitas or the Construction Management is responsible for construction equipment that fractures or breaks during construction operations. The Contractor is required to have contingency plans in -place to maintain scheduled operations. Therefore, the City rejects the Contractors request for a time extension of 2 days. 4) Metro: At the same time and due to the combinations of rains, the need to change the Bypass system and the proximity of the Presidential Elections, the City decided to suspend the work from 10/19/04 to 11/5/04 (MC lost 12 working days). This time was simultaneous to the time between 10/17/04 to 11/5/04. City: The City will grant non - compensible time to the Contractor for delays resulting from work stoppage resulting from rain and the elections. Please provide a separate time extension request identifying rain days as recorded by the Contractor. 5) Metro: On 11/5/04 the Subcontractor MOCON broke the pipe bursting head due to the soil conditions MC lost 2 working days, recovering the head MC lost 2 working days. City: Neither the City of Encinitas or the Construction Management is responsible for construction equipment that fractures or breaks during construction operations. Again, the Contractor is responsible for the proper selection of equipment and having a contingency plan in place to maintain the project schedule. Therefore, the City rejects the Contractors request for a time extension of 2 days. Richard Brady & Associates . 4909 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 300 • San Diego, California 92123 Tel (858) 496 -0500 • Fax (858) 496 -0505 March 4, 2005 Page 2 6) Metro: On 12/4/04 we had a rain day (MC lost 1 working day) City: The City will grant a non - compensible time extension for delays caused by rain. Please include the this rain day in the Change Order Requested for rain days described in item 4 above. 7) Metro: On 12/5/04 MC and the City decided to grant a suspension work in the field until 1/18/05 to allow MC to propose other methods to perform this work. During this time MC proposed to change to open trench method, the City rejected this method and MC is preparing to return to the job and keep tying the pipe bursting system as indicated by the City. City: The Contractor did not work between 12/05/04 and 1/18/05. The City of Encinitas does not consider this to have been a grace period from Contractors contractual obligations and was notified as such. Therefore the lost days between these dates are being counted as working days and are being included in the count for liquidated damages if required. To date the Contractor has expended 145 working days on the project. Based on the March 15, 2006 "Finish Project" date, as shown in the January 26 schedule update, the final project duration is now calculated to be 162 working days. Thus, the Contractor is projected to exceeded the contract allowed 90 working days by 72 days. The Contractor may be subject to liquidated damages for the 72 days, minus approved rain days and other excusable delays, as described in the Contract Documents. If you have any questions please give me a call. O� ' Sean F. Manning, P.E. Construction Manager p Hefner, City of Encimlas Greg Shields, City of ncim as File Encinitas.003.303 a Richard Brady & Associates • 4909 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 300 • San Diego, California 92123 Tel (858) 496 -0500 • Fax (858) 496 -0505 i CITY OF ENCINITAS ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT WEEKLY PROGRESS MEETING Minutes March 9, 2005 City of Encinitas City Hall Attendees: Richard Brady & Associates Metropolitan Constr. City of Encinitas Sean Manning Jose Ortiz Kipp Hefner Ben Taylor Ron Brady San Dieguito Water Mark Robinson Bill O'Donnell CONTRACT SUMMARY (As of 3/2/2005) 4ll0g (,,5dJ 4 ,96 -0'e e5-e2S Page 2 Contract Price Original Contract Amount: ....................................... *****,*, $860,117.25 Approved Change Order(s): .............................................. $2300 Revised Contract Amount: ................ ............................... $862,417.25 Amount Payable to Date: .............. ............................... $187,631.55 Retention to Date: ............. ............ ............................... $1 63.16 8,7 $187,631.55 Total Invoiced to Date: .................... ............................... 21.7% Percent Invoiced to Date: ............................... **,,*,* .......... Discussion: Old business Progress of the work Submittals/RFI's/RFP's Pending Change Orders • Construction Manager requested that written notification of rain days be provided. A change order for all approved rain days will be provided on a monthly basis. • Time extension request to be provided by Contractor. Future Areas of Concern • Contractor proposed possibility of doing a 400 ft long pull between 10 +96 to 15 +00, provided soil conditions are suitable. This is planned for this Saturday. • Contractor is reminded to include Scott Carr, the contact for the recycled water utilities, in the loop prior to commencing work around those utilities. Future schedule: Next Meeting 3/16105 Other Issues Potential Changes: • Time extension request pending • Minor work items have proceeded on T &M and tickets have been signed by Bernard has verification the description of work is accurate. Metropolitan will prepare formal COR with reference to items described on the signed T &M tickets. Other concerns: �d� • 4 ,9a.9 # Wmqwt Boa • 4�°� '9Q/ 7 / -5.' /�sa/ 4W osos Page 3 New Business: Requests for Proposals (RFP) (submitted to Contractor by CM) RFP DESCRIPTION DATE SENT STATUS Change Order Requests (COR) (submitted to CM by Contractor) RFP COR #2 #3 #3 #2 DESCRIPTION Lining in Manholes #1 & 8 (as of 2/16, no cost revision has been provided) 8 -inch diameter stub outs in Manholes #14 & 15 STATUS Metro (cost to be Encinitas ADDr oved Change Orders CO (Submitted to Owner by CM) RFP COR CO DESCRIPTION TIME AMOUNT STATUS # 1 # 1 # 1 Drop Inlet Structure $2300.00 Encinitas CITY OF ENCINITAS ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT TWO WEEK LOOK AHEAD SCHEDULE (3/92005) (Provided by Contractor) �d d -We�� • 49a9.� Y.,4 goo • So. �� 9�'�� 6 "5x% 4.96 O.SOO • ��58J 4J6 OSI/S q \ / - ƒ d �z/ §k§ ) LU § k) LU r0 kW \ § LU � 2 / w / / \ o w (D j E / ƒ a E 0 O J � � Q � z C) Z W k k k § ■ 2 \ F / j » 2 \a -w ƒLL \ %w$ \ §w$ U) \�}LU Z 2a f�>oa 0EE /3 / /$ƒU )�j§LL co <F- w /i2\ LI 0 Z �w0c) i � L9{ }�F-w Tf Ozw 4n »e gIz ¥ k)§§\ ƒ \$$ \o n{ Z §S$§ / /i/ §ƒ2ƒ $E%ƒ .e»e CL C) \U)§\ < < ca E22) < / §2$ wzw0 i / §j QC) ƒ$24 w \ \ 3 \ CO LL $ ƒ \ \/0 < ok u LLJ 6@ /u ®�G�u) \$ ©ƒ »y� /ƒƒ {�M �w wof / /22iz ®*X®u= <6o- 0P f §\ /k_ =w ° noz0 )°ƒ$® \\WEEƒ\ƒ ��kin °wƒ3 {$=k A&= <l§- omƒ ®/\ ¥Z 00 10� /m§\/ �f0§U ®ILJZ / \\}/ w3i ƒi?eeok =/w C) Z11 §wz <o<w %= / < *w \ \ee /j$ IL \ƒ§2§_ ®§\§§� 3ooz I uewe w000 z }}0 < 3 : <[ -LL <ewo3<z °w=moa arnZU) T=WO®? 3j / /Iw(1)U) ƒ4 wPw w 4zOt< ww=z=u=owolww maewemE <zomzo / \ \ § / / \ \ ) f �kJ }\§ w km k 13w £ \ U) \ ■ G n 2 § \ - G w \ \ \ / < w 0 0 J � � Cl) � Z L) Z W k k k § } LO \ \ / \ \\ \ �e y w .4 mo2i \\\\ 422 LLJ §IL0W 2ozo ww�z Ww�n CL2w LLJ zw \\�§ - z / /�% �(L J = <� < F- LLj 6 C) < a LU0 -1 IL 2W< wzoa> il<m oA ? � > CL �j02LL e�ewan 2E\jƒ/ a: F- 4§$wz /) %F-§\ orZ \ /W00 § <=p4 o=2E <a EILkyg< <00LL >§ 3 wawzeo- M<&ua2> o=ao&Ee =m «E±< CO § \ \ i Ek LL U) 2 o ? 0< «wa c2 §� CO wm> $2§/ wm/ Dow 7 - --- ƒ \k =oo uI w } -w -Imo o/ j \§ /\§\ \§ oo0Zuup <0 /i§2SQ \§IL rw M: �/§ \ \ § \$ / /E$ F- 2: \ § § U) 02 zmw <5 - oILo§o /\)<<o -j< §� /ƒ� LLJ /\ LLJ »§ ;oeamo2 -± ewzzw<w 2�z44o ® ®4 <owozoww k=omo <e_r /§ }§ -1 a >wk� \ =a _ ez <oek nZ <ow;o» 00c)- w2< e /ae[<0 7:z< ƒw mF— 1 :/ z<e r e= Gea ®E §w< zwLL mm o z t6 M<Wz o = w < e J /-Ld -i § ew § \» ®)4§ � �0 <uj w�Z\ < C) \ E 2ten0m wz/ ° /9z ~i2 °< «< /� <co U)U) j2g §¥ERIE 3 2 U') / \ � E C: 2 E k § \ U kka§ CO 3 > CL eCL \o ( \_§ §. ® §9a ±C) i_- \\� 09" _� w /SR (D § «j2 CULL 02 3§@3 }£ }a \\ /j\ LO Cq / \ \ \ 3 § U a) O a N •U W O U c a� U V) 0 M bq a °o CD 0 b b i3 m La Z Z = W wo F-aF- c W o 'n O `n O Z 0' N N W m LU LO LO O w O O O N O N C W V V N _ N W W r �p O .0 a) C O p n L 0 C) 0 N C U L) °) Y ° ns Z m O U t° L C +6 O 3 L O a) O N TL N C .O t- D O + E N C V7 0 7 c : m E N C - L m w O O N 3@ E 0 C N w O a) fn N 0 p Nw Nco >. CD C �U p C E O C C 3 U a) C L C N U O X (6 a'— U° (6 O W .. a) m a)� (.Gm D O� U aZ 0 > n a U m NCO+ a) co U) N N l6 w E o rn o N -0 @ O N 'X + O L C C C - m p a7 N C= @ �EaNi> >aco ON(O MO O O-EO O N ca 0.0L C (6 0 0 E..0.� uj X U a) 0 C° O N 6)'(6 3 2 C C L_ a) _ Q @ p) U U 4) a) O C 'c N O 5 c-0 (n W .0- N Co 0 CO U � 0 a)•o a) ° cc6-°- E XD� O oL° °m °> a) 0 3 > omfl.E p- p N Y N o) c T _ Z ° ma C) >_ •7 c 0 N C N ° U m N" Q t0A L +L-� N m y d U O U 16 _ O d U N a) a) C f6 3 CF � N •� � p x 2 C C U) O 0)2.2 c �� o° E: 0� 0� � 0 0 �', c0 E � p m � a a� y ° can) m CL UC4)o �_ � ID >N 0p o d O) UO U N'O �N C �(n wL.+ NL y O f6 . UAL CL cL r N N 7 L O (A N CL a) 0 U a3� 3. 0 C r- 0 0 0 Q a) (U m .� O a) 'a p` C N 0 0 0 � L a) D C a) Q� U �0D Z N 0. ° C 0 = C L U p a) M w C =_ f6 C@ .N-. O C (n L E Co _^ 2 C O° a) N 3 p U a) -e fn V O d 0) H U ) O N E O ° p 30 C ❑. 7 N 0)2-0 N M C U (6 0-0 J U U d E X O) a) fOA a) C L U O N C U C C o w a) 0 f6 C C U (6 U a o m@ f6 ° O CO N= a' o 6' O Co a� �o f0� a�oX >° 3 p-:5 o 0 °' _� a) W Epp ° a�Q -0.. m o o ma 3r 702 a)°r� c N Q> o c.4 ° a`)= ° o��a °°��° o�� r aNia N °a��m� a 01 a)n °n °�� nC)) m a)Cp =c6�g -6 m X in N X O N U� U-0 C N E, U 0 'X 'X 0 m@� -p > N X a N Z O .X N a) O Q = a)L..... m N O. a) .°- Q N a) U) c Q a) c W n3 C (6 U � Z W m W n C:) r 0 00 C) Z V) 0 M bq a °o CD 0 b b i3 / \ \ t § M ƒ 0 & o \ \ \ E C51 3 mo E { IL \ < b ƒ 0 0 J � � Q � Z V Z W C3 4 �0 jk§ ) w§ k) LU LUq o@ / w k R § ul g 2 fk / 0 / , /§\ \ } } (D 5f\} 7t Cc \k\ƒ )�0 m =2 \\k§ -0 )� \a \ \// 7 -0 C: \ ,g§§\ / \7 /f i S 2 7/ CD (D E 27# /J\ F- 'r-ft / §\ e —co 2 §3e §2/ (D 0// /=o ®/m > oo,� b�)/ = 6g0 Z5 06.2 2]rj §E\( �3 =0 (D — E L) § \2\ / \a£a § /G \m2g /S$ \ -CE> 0 \oo a) ƒca m m %,�o7oa23E �2kJ( °ci.E fk�k% \ef$ES �m \2 ac) 22§°E�o \$)\\Da)E \cXLot 7£ /S to § —ego \cMC, ' °` \770.!= E E =ao =¥ =aaegf / o §\« %U) . CL a te 0. ()1C s — m£ E @ /=e�) k \ §ee� m =2oe$�o �L)L) % \ »/ o , . 4)o W E =EE / j 2 \ \ § C14 o /LO d \ \ § C) C) \ \ � \ fk / 0 / , /§\ \ } } (D 5f\} 7t Cc \k\ƒ )�0 m =2 \\k§ -0 )� \a \ \// 7 -0 C: \ ,g§§\ / \7 /f i S 2 7/ CD (D E 27# /J\ F- 'r-ft / §\ e —co 2 §3e §2/ (D 0// /=o ®/m > oo,� b�)/ = 6g0 Z5 06.2 2]rj §E\( �3 =0 (D — E L) § \2\ / \a£a § /G \m2g /S$ \ -CE> 0 \oo a) ƒca m m %,�o7oa23E �2kJ( °ci.E fk�k% \ef$ES �m \2 ac) 22§°E�o \$)\\Da)E \cXLot 7£ /S to § —ego \cMC, ' °` \770.!= E E =ao =¥ =aaegf / o §\« %U) . CL a te 0. ()1C s — m£ E @ /=e�) k \ §ee� m =2oe$�o �L)L) % \ »/ o , . 4)o W E =EE / j 2 \ \ § § � 3 E \ ) ( k g 4 LL % E 2 j / ) \ & o/ m C) 2i:/ }k§ k 2 ) § \ \ LU �0: k ( } Cl) LU§ \ ) LU © �\ °g 0o EE 0 §]2 \�\ \ /3 <� -§ a� \[ 7G o \ U) » m =/� a2 - Ek$» cu E_ @ m moon 0C) a2( 2 § j § @I\ j \ QD �w .6 w \2 §e ) §/0� \ \j /� ® LSE /) \ }kw) F- a\ �� 0) -p; e ± W 2 =7 �2 / U) § § \/ /0 3 §\� } L / a) fU § / £ ee ƒ \ / /ƒ §z g/ $ ) ° ?Wz §2 /7/ )_ » � w f�0� \ \\ E� 3 & ELu= /\k2 222 $ ee <z -c E /\§ /§§/ « / i w\£ W§& E J g / §77� \ S22 »cL oa 7 enc =6aG o %/\$\77 \< § -5 c - E § °°%G=- 0 Ew o% (D 0 0 U) 0- 0 C: § z ID C / a o Q § \ \�k -1 0a) J \k2 -& ;®a U) LU / / \ -'0 \ L) /a =c:] § E D'0 a FL \ ( < o0 CD -0 e° \ Ir 54) \\ \�\ ƒ >1 E 0 b Z W § 2 § � 3 E \ ) ( k g 4 LL % E 2 j / ) \ & CITY OF ENCINITAS ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT WEEKLY PROGRESS MEETING Minutes Attendees: Richard Brady & Associates Sean Manning Bernard Cook San Dieguito Water Mark Robinson Bill O'Donnell February 16, 2005 City of Encinitas City Hall Metropolitan Constr. Alberto Larios Bob Morrow Anne Morrow Rob Morrow City of Encinitas Kipp Hefner Shawn Atherton Greg Shields Ben Taylor CONTRACT SUMMARY (As of 2/16/2005) Contract Time NTPDate: ............................................................ ...... August 2, 2004 Commencement Date: ...................................................... August 2, 2004 Original Allowed Work Days: ............................................ 90 Original Contract Completion Date: ..................................... December 4, 2004 Dayscompleted: ............................................................ 137 Elapsed Contract Time: .................................................... 152% Contract Price Original Contract Amount: ............................................... $860,117.25 Approved Change Order(s): .............................................. $2300 Revised Contract Amount: ............................................... $862,417.25 /J / /,J , ; r � o <r< ova .Boni/ firs ��0 • 19a rl jVVII, %l ��J% 4J60�%O • , iia ( J',) 496?, / Page 2 Amount Payable to Date: ................................................ $71,570.25 Retention to Date: ......................................................... $7,157.03 Total Invoiced to Date: ................................................... $187,631.55 Percent Invoiced to Date: ................................................ 21.7% Discussion: Old business Progress of the work • Pipe bursting work is proceeding • All outstanding submittals have been reviewed and approved Submittals /RFI's /RFP's • Contractor requested relocation of MH 13 to avoid conflict with existing storm drain inlet. Engineer has reviewed the request and concurs with the proposal to relocate the MH as suggested. • Contractor requested that MH cone be reversed to provide separation to median curb. Engineer concurs with the proposal. • Contractor requested that concrete encasement be deleted from storm drain crossing. The existing storm drain was visually observed by pot holing to be out of zone of influence of the pipe bursting operation. Engineer concurs with the deletion of the encasement. Pending Change Orders • Construction Manager requested that written notification of rain days be provided. A change order for all approved rain days will be provided on a monthly basis. Future Areas of Concern Future schedule: Next Meeting 2/23/05 • Have soil tech out to check sub grade at MH# 13 Other Issues Potential Changes: • Time extension request pending • Minor work items have proceeded on T &M and tickets have been signed by Bernard has verification the description of work is accurate. Metropolitan will prepare formal COR with reference to items described on the signed T &M tickets. • MH 15A not shown on plans. Contractor will submit RFI to document this item. Other concerns: Page 3 New Business: • "Lane Closed Ahead" signs need to turned sideways • Pipe to be fused tonight • Citizen complaint at apartment. Greg to respond. • Contractor to clean -up site. Requests for Proposals (RFP) (submitted to Contractor by CM) RFP DESCRIPTION DATE SENT STATUS Change Order Requests (COR) (submitted to CM by Contractor) RFP COR CO STATUS TIME AMOUNT DESCRIPTION #1 #1 #1 1 Drop Inlet Structure Metro (cost #2 #3 Lining in Manholes #1 & 8 to be revised) #3 #2 8 -inch diameter stub outs in Manholes #14 & 15 Encinitas Annroved Change Orders (CO) (Submitted to Owner by CM) RFP COR CO I DESCRIPTION TIME AMOUNT STATUS #1 #1 #1 1 Drop Inlet Structure $2300.00 Encinitas CITY OF ENCINITAS ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT TWO WEEK LOOK AHEAD SCHEDULE (2/16/2005) (Provided by Contractor) 2/16 Pour manhole bases 10, 11 & 12. Install 60' ( + / -) of 12" SDR -35 pipe remaining between manholes 11 & 12. Pour concrete encasement underneath 30" storm drain at station 19 +56. Bypass will be required with above work. 2/17 Stack and backfill manholes 10, 11, 12, and concrete encased area at station 19 +56. (12 noon start) 2/22 Install insertion pits for pipe bursting between manholes 7 & 6. 2/23 Pipe burst between manholes 7 and 6 (w/ bypass). 2/24 Open trench between manholes 7, and 9 (w/ bypass). 2/28 Open Trench between manholes 7, and 9 (w/ bypass). 3/1,2 & 3 Install manholes 7, 8, and 9. <�rc� «2 <l � �i «<�� <l � �l�e <a�a • 190.9 , ��i��- <�ri,��cvi- . %i�orr </ iii �O // • . �,a ��g ��<�� <�r ,'�e/' ��J% / /.J<0i =000 • �'� <ur, �P.�6% / /. %Fi'��0.� A. co c �e 2 b O U z� �o k CD O `* O• o � � c P O N a c N r A O �-e N 0 F; UQ O O O O O O O O O O O A a n � -n W W V CO W Wp Of W S� W rn YQ, cD cfl tD � W W W W 4 V V �-1 = a) p y rn (D ca m fD W H (D as w (D CCD v N N a.�o v N N v N N ono N N ca y N N m N N N n w w VJ Cif n n CD Cl) = n 4o CD =r O N j 7 N J W OD O A Ol c o 00p 0O 00p 0 00p 0 00p 0 Cil A A A C." A A A A J i co co O W N O i W A Ol O A Ln z X z m ;u z z ;u ;D X m X m ;o ;o m m X X m OD _ W A CT V W N W M A OD z c W m m 0 co n O z 4 v m w n z v a m m m 0 _m C m 0 a m M C z m v c (a a .a c G M z D O c z v 3 m D m z n Z D C 3 D r r Q C) m 0 D 'v 0 co' z _ 3 m m n A 7 O m w N o A 0 m (D = A O m _ N 3 � n e N O rn S. O O O U z �m zl I 0 CD (9 O p O. NZi 'O A Zi o e a m 0 r It CD CD Ro m -w W -� O •J O c O �o UDI C) O W o -4 o a 0 _ z CO) p t3 N c a W N W A O ? •pP Ao 3 t0 CO S A A � 001 CA C31 _' cOh A m la O) -w v Z — co — QQDo OD CO) p t3 N a W N W A O ? •pP Ao W t0 CO S A A � 001 CA C31 _' cOh A m la O) O J 0 o -4 W n c p m p C m cD �. a 0 =r p ? N _ m O a N m O1 a d =h 7 3 O `z 9 m -n n O O • N• O -n UO j = 7 _ G N 7 A O H i p.. K N X m m m rn N 7 m cm Q o 'o m o p o 0 CD w Er co w U3 CD 3 U O Sq CL N CD = = N r K d! CL � o c� CDm w N J co N CC f.1 � � (� IV N N O i13 R) O ill iZ3 S i�3 C ° o O O A (J" A CT CT tT CA O co O co O c0 -. CO O co 00 a z C W M; n N^ Z v C7 -1 a v m m m n M m v A m M C M Z O r1i Gt C a C N C Z D O C Z D m m Z 0 Z a CA c w ic a r r- 0 0 n D 0 C z c m n _pw � m w � o 7 n a m 1 n 3 O N 03 7 � a O y C C � g — co — QQDo OD t3 N A W ' A A ? •pP Ao D S A A � 001 CA C31 cOh A m 0 o -4 C 3 d O C m m m m rn m m m m m m CL K d! O co O co O c0 -. CO O co 00 a z C W M; n N^ Z v C7 -1 a v m m m n M m v A m M C M Z O r1i Gt C a C N C Z D O C Z D m m Z 0 Z a CA c w ic a r r- 0 0 n D 0 C z c m n _pw � m w � o 7 n a m 1 n 3 O N 03 7 � a O y C C � g a m Q. °CD U b 0 w O O O A co N O-n"00Wwm 2ZXW>T2 t>om -imww TmC/)m cx ?DO -imp. <OmozmO oommzm-zom rAmm� �OnM --I r- O- ��Dmm mxrm XWM r n m�OmO0Z(a <mO<mmDO. rOT2DZv.Zm7 m0 -�� =m=oz(nv mODG)Xw0 OXOZZZW c�m0m O 0 mZ!za O-n ZOD �D- ��Om -4 � �5w"(0 K ZI - +v o v -1 2 r m m' co -D ZMrmZpc -i,(�v ��rnDDfcJ mmmmmZm� vvr0zm �DmDDOmo -Km M-0 . - ��22mo� O�DmD m��Zmm�m ��OmD� MMDZ�1�D 2m(nnir >DTD-� D DDfnzG�(n2 �rmDm 'min M C/) mom -D02r - -i --1 iZm D�00>c�m O�oNm rx- �_ -Ix0w mmc? ;Ocnz mDKX cnmz �m CD mO +O -iOmo_ rg nmTOT a :1, m��_.� m2'o 22o mD�� -2Z �m2Drn2mc 2�n D tnKcn —Z rOm�mG� mZDoo =m co nr- > 2ZDZ= ohm O -u2 2m�O�W o 2ZCrn m�ovPm <F 'mv xDmmD 0(n co a: curb Amm It -Z��cn Zn n �ZK 2=mrn -� m O •'�rn 00 Cl) 2 m M>o mc, DmO�n = cnw m O z��zZ�� 000O;U=3 --nom m°(nvo3 _ N o v, Dr- - DZcn Dm m�GV* � m0 Z�CD r-mDr-- X— mr'mmm N, ��ND;U.. �cnmDZ�� v�Z_ov = z?vm�� >O- iv(nO02 -�__ v(n' D m0 m 2 ��Zo�n -� O�4�Z m Z -OG�� M 0 rn M 2 2 0 O Dv v Z rn N D m z m O L-(n O D m Dmm vmxcw O<2 ?� -n0 r - O =Zm()F ODYmRm-A D XWX�mV =DZ��mG)+ D =DV0 m mcmi_M-Co =>Z-4 vF�Dx fn KDTZn>C ZOzODDCCmcn 22mK zmcn0 ccn X- DMpZmo -Dlvmm m = -Omz moor �o -x DOW m �cn z XKO BOO mm nm m --j co oxomz2`m z mD v (nv D�� nK mmm� z D��m< vm - =� *2 �Z�-1 -n DZ:nT< 2D�?�020 2L N2 <mcn -om 2 z_ L m my DDXZ� -nX mmwm D `0r-0 rnm m 6 A p r� X N N N O O O O O ? A A A A p A W O p A A A w w - s z c 3 W m X v m cn 0 O z m Z n Z ;a A O C) W 0 D m � 3 o, co a z c m my O z cn m j n r. 0 w m fn 3 CD Q. C) N nm M C m v m> cm X z m v m n >o �c z v 0 0 m 0 m 0 v 3 0 0 7 C 5n O 3 -0. 0 c -n a- w O I co -^(n7 NO m O c m m U) x• N C (n N O d N O CD CD ? CO O 7 CD Tl 2 d CD Q - • CL C1 O fn n "p 0 C- 7 m n N 9 �0 0 3-p N =3 E 2 0 0 s a °s- a o S n 7 < � CD CD 3 7 CL •p n N j = (n CD N O 7 N CD ;a N (D CD j O_ O. (8 0 3 n O CD CT CD m a CD 7 (n p 07 (n n m 7 c p..7 -. c 2, CD m Q d (D ( o ?°U°' _v (nm N A N 0 0 LTI N V 0 CA (D N 7 s N 3 C1 v 7 CD 7 CD N CD (D 0 C 6 7 41 tU 0 O C Cb 0 o 0ac0 ; :w– n 0 iT3 p_ ?5 O O D 7 n7 -p CD 0 CD .a 7 x•-0 c7im 3 o W '0 F CD CD U) c n 3o�'�X.co CD s y ,0. �• Q 0 7 CD N •0 CO 7 O CD CD 0 L<- CD O N 7 O y =• 0 �. O cD N CO N v 'O O = `z d CD (D CD :T CO CL J 7 p 0 7 CD v w?.o .0 K - 7 7 to SD =3 7 N N w o 3 �a0 S O 7 i 0 CD Q :E CC _ o (D °(on o rn0) (o Ci0�sn d En CD < CD O N CD =r .7•. .7.. .o O CO cr N 0) C) j d (n – o_(Dfo :7 CD 7 CAD N S < Z (n CD CD CD @ 7 p 03 �. S Zq (p •p f0 C+ p+j O OX v CD (o 3 O CD N X O C < 0 X (O CL U) Cn co CD N O (D 7 < Q V CU p CD + 7 CL 7 O N A N 0 0 Cil N V 0 ul 0 Cr :-4 (D (D CD 0- @ S irx x CD x.fli_o CD m'O a3 7 CD Cu 5 (D CD 0 (0 (D N (Q :a•O OO c (D x o ��n ?rn CD n 3, (0- x.v� 3�°_v703m CD CD 7 0 N< 7 C CD . 7 3 CD (O =3 n C1 > d O CD 'G 'p O N CD (SD N N• C N W C to 00 (O >' ~ •+. 0 B (D B CD n+ y m L 3 :n CD N CO -'B CD O n D g y� 0 3 rn 7 ° O CD 7 � o oaom CAD CD CU p (n C1 CD CD CD d '0 fn N C O N CD CD CL x CD [1 'D CD (D N CD CD O L1 3 3 m 7^_3sv 3 0 j w C 7 C1 C 3 m aQ CD N 3 (S . CD 7 O CD 0 O 0 L1 n 7 O 0 j CD O co 7 < n Cu Ort — O CD 3 O CD C V CD C O CD "' (b N 0 cn 0 0 w 0 cn Nm PQ CD 0 N N O C I j 0) 'U � n s CL (o N D CCl 3 CD c� m N a _ 7 0 v- �V) N 3 D N 0- 5-)' C 7 O D O CD Cn � 3 3 in P 6 NN. CD CD 3. -O 3 – 2) C N 0• �. :c (y 5' = N CD 0 o o CD p c 0 CL CD m (D 0) m m wEn o (n Z m z m 0 X z C -� m D cn 0 Cl) � vi z — O X O � C � v p CD Z 0 N o 7 m O CD m CD 7 n CU CD CD 3 CD 7 I- 0 G) x D m 0 CD Z c 3 CT C) (D 7 m 0 7 r. n_ 7 O m m N 7 O (7 GOJ _. O1 N O 7 O CD N 0 O (D O O p1 7 0 mD N 0 -1 m m C N n °o m o Ln v 7 zt N rn 0 cn pa w o N O w mD c m X z m v —c 3m m a jo �c v Z v CD cr w N 0 0 �v w 0 W O m z C 3 U m o_ X T N O CD fu d lfl fD C 7 0) 0 0 3 Q. 3 CD : 19 w 4 0 0 90 Ln C N N O 0 cn N O N 0 co 0 o CD o D 8 a 0 CD Cl) (D a N CD N ('(DD [li <tvs�ty o 0 3 N N N 7 d CL mm CO =m Q a p p C1 N y a % p N O q CD C 0 0 0 0 'o CD 0 p N C O '^ N CD CD ;2 O ° C g CD - (D = y CD 0 C CD n S ° (n S s 0 (D CD Q CD O — .-. CD CD N L N O 0 cn a Vt z W m v m CA n v Z m cn O 0 Z :n m X nm M C m v X m > cm X z m v —c m D �0 z �. Z v m z _n z A r 0 x n Cli (D D � O_ CD .0.. z c 3 6 0 m 0 n o N m C> O W .. SD N 0 T O 3 0 CD N .0.. 0 O CD O O N 7 0 O C a O CITY OF ENCINITAS ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT WEEKLY PROGRESS MEETING Minutes Attendees: Richard Brady & Associates Michael O'Shea Bernard Cook Sean Manning San Dieguito Water Mark Robinson Bill O'Donnell January 26, 2005 City of Encinitas City Hall Metropolitan Constr. Jose Ortiz Alberto Larios City of Encinitas Kipp Hefner Shawn Atherton Greg Shields Ben Taylor CONTRACT SUMMARY (As of 1/26/2005) Contract Time NTPDate: ............................................................ ...... August 2, 2004 Commencement Date: ...................................................... August 2, 2004 Original Allowed Work Days: ............................................ 90 Original Contract Completion Date: ..................................... December 4, 2004 Dayscompleted: ............................................................ 122 Elapsed Contract Time: .................................................... 136% Contract Price Original Contract Amount: ............................................... $860,117.25 Approved Change Order(s): .............................................. $2300 Revised Contract Amount: ............................................... $862,417.25 !9�/.Jr ��i�� `�n�t� nit- �or�/ < <ri/ „P,�O • . Cirri �i�c; �Prl oritric .9,� /I� %l' �P�S% !9G 0500 • `�i Page 2 Amount Payable to Date: ................................................. $187,631.55 Retention to Date: ......................................................... $209847.95 Total Invoiced to Date: ................................................... $208,479.50 Percent Invoiced to Date: ................................................ 24.1% Discussion: Old business • Contractor will email daily reports for delays to RBA. • Contractor to provide construction schedule revisions representing all changes and adjustments in the sequencing and timing of work remaining. Progress of the work • Trunk sewer has been replaced up until MH #13. Submittals /BFI's /RFP's • RFI 005 — Concrete Encasement • RFI 006 — Minimum Pipe Cover • Submittal 07? — 12" Expander • Submittal 01G- Discharge Hose Pending Change Orders • On 12/10 Contractor submitted proposed costs for open trenching the remainder of the trunk sewer in lieu of pipe bursting. Proposal to be reviewed by the City. Future Areas of Concern • Potential conflict with existing water main around station 11 +50 if open trenching is used. Future schedule Other Issues Potential Changes: Other concerns: • Contractor will revise the cost of COR #3 that was included in the open trenching proposal submitted on 12/10. Submit as a stand alone COR. New Business �i� <rz <l. -�z « <� � ��a�cia�v • 4.99 �;��iJ %r� ��r��ora ..moo <r <� < <iii� X00 • c «�z- �iP�� t<ein, .J<,`r /,?9 T �Y.�rP %9JG %� //O • .'�nr, %J% %960% Page 3 Requests for Proposals (RFP) (submitted to Contractor by CM) RFP DESCRIPTION DATE SENT STATUS Change Order Requests (COR) (submitted to CM by Contractor) FP COR CO STATUS TIME AMOUNT DESCRIPTION #1 r #1 Inlet Structure Metro (cost #3 Lining in Manholes # 1 & 8 to be #2 -Drop 8 -inch diameter stub outs in revised) roved Chan a Orders CO (Submitted to Owner by CM) A RFP COR CO DESCRIPTION TIME AMOUNT STATUS #1 #1 #1 Inlet Structure $2300.00 Encinitas #3 #2 #2 -Drop 8 -inch diameter stub outs in $1000.00 Encinitas Manholes #14 & 15 CITY OF ENCINITAS ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT TWO WEEK LOOK AHEAD SCHEDULE (1/26/2005) (To be provided by Contractor) 1/19/2005 Soil Testing 1/20/2005 Install insertion and receiving pits 1/24/2005 Pipe Bursting from Mh 13 to MH 12 1/25/2005 Pothole Waterlines (16" at saxony & 10" at 19 +89) 1/26/2005 Backfill insertion/ receiving pits at MH 13 and 12, plus excavate insertion/ receiving pits at MH 9 and 13 1/27/2005 Pipe Burst between MH 9 and 13 1/31/2005 Open Trench between stations 19 +26 and 20 +30 2/1/2005 Continue open trenching red <r2 <l , i «r <� /ocin J • IJO.% `,y,/r j oar . f�aa A/ 300 • i <ir- g �Oair. z�m 9 7 � 5 c O p C/) U Y `C _ � N � C O o U m m � O .0 O U N W `o U U � O C O d U N •E m U O C W � O C U 51 W d E z U a c Q (D Co U � c!) 0 J Q F- H m N Q Z U Z W a ❑ W H z O Q z F- U) M Q H N LU W LU W W z ly t— W w W Q ❑ ❑ W W V W w LU C` Q ❑ z O H a U G T z O U W U W CL W CO z 00 V to Cl) N ch LO co W 00 0. of W W W W W w w z z z z z V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D1 M N O N M N N N r f- W a) r o0 W a0 o O O O N N o O N o O N O N to O O N V O N a O O N a o O N V O O N v v O o O O N N co r T ° N N rn W - Cl) N 00 04 cli 04 � 00 co O U c6 t-: rl-: r*-: rl� Cl? cli c+i ai O C Ci T y co v O O N M Cl) Cl) M U) m rn m O - U M m M O 0 0 f� r- n ^ L1 N co M o CA 7 7 7 N U p -p '0 o c6 N N N C N N U U U U C N O O M U U) U Q o n a a a a v N CD a) o (D c/1 N (q to U) U C C C p w a m m m m m m m m m = w 0 t-: rl-: r*-: rl� Cl? cli c+i ai of of Ci T co v O N M Cl) Cl) M co m rn m M M m M o 0 0 f� r- n ^ Cl) co M Q CO U LL C7 N m N to O O O O O O O O O O O O O w CIS 0 a 0 T b ti b 3 .fl � y N 18 U U v� y Pw I C, G� b A d Y r.7 y L W p a v x .o 0 o C O U � a) o I I U z� a p W H c z � Z E a> U (6 Z (D N ~ N p C/) U V% Y > C i F. N Q ~ O N p U Fn _m W O W C O U � W p W Z U W N O CO W d U Q p p W W m U M W 'E O w O W W � Q O c p U U W E Z U N O d CD Q Z [O 0 U w H IL V CO W C7 p 0 J J to z _O ui U m � L) N a ui Q H Z ui L'0 W z m rn rn m rn r- d3 . T O O) m IN N N N 03 0 m O) O cq y v A C) N co 9 O N O N M N 01 E N h N N W W W 0 W Z Z Z U — Z c U p 7 O ca O co LL x C W D U 3 O O I— m Of ea as o 0 0 0 O Q a v v v v d3 . T O O) m IN N N N 03 0 m O) O C• I� r co Q> O O O O O 00 N R a U) w 0 `m 4 E 3 Z w O H w 0 N N a °o N ro b G b .D ti m � d (N U N > WIYi b U d a d Q y ,O a� O U k c'xa O .z z� cq N v J C) N co M O L C O N M N 01 (0 N h N N 0 0 x U p C O O ca co LL x c W D U 'C O O L N C• I� r co Q> O O O O O 00 N R a U) w 0 `m 4 E 3 Z w O H w 0 N N a °o N ro b G b .D ti m � d (N U N > WIYi b U d a d Q y ,O a� O U k c'xa O .z z� cq v C) O co M O N M N 0 16 M N h N Z f- C• I� r co Q> O O O O O 00 N R a U) w 0 `m 4 E 3 Z w O H w 0 N N a °o N ro b G b .D ti m � d (N U N > WIYi b U d a d Q y ,O a� O U k c'xa O .z z� \ \ \ £ § \ � \ G g j_ \ > \ i5l u \ \ / < E %a \E J g� S w $w ❑�� E� > §§ v■ ui z 0 CL w w / E \ & r- $ z C) w •6 < aa_ §{ \ tea§ O-@z w=e /§\ WE Z< -j mW jES°W /§§ ?E\ §§ e ?§±om \ <0 o L� �= o ®ova zrLU za \{ 0z ƒ m pa P §= U) zo §W§ i -E�\ /C) {\}j$ \ »k P U) eo w< \/j § §w // \ §� W /o§§/ ..a) f§§4 \k }6¥ - <U) w� §z woo§ \ oW >�o JE0 ko «MLL 0 O } z < o LU CL ¢ Cl) 7 C) � § 2 Z � g Z W z G r- § § \ \ Z3 : -1 �k� § <egw u0 ±± wcnw W <oqƒƒ§ ��i /z wa-z0 7kec�e�0- �jj \> § �z um < <�o CL (Lu <kau co= EL-0;00 mMZXm/ ®}- iEROM�- - �W}Z}WW§\\J\ i zLL<o - =Oz << 0 IL ea §ujk §e /wo §\ r- -< - M2zmmw \q ?\a§§ §§U-ƒ = zozpu=oe § ®� /E�§ §\E.$ 2 <z=wsee�= m@u <�xo <WE+ k$SwWEw�2z \ /§ § <\§ §k} 3usou@e«eDC) § 2. \ \ § % ry $ 2 % / / ) \ / \ 0 q 2 § \ 0 a- \ G g \ C> ui » ] G w ? z / j z �k `§ / w g k� w > �LU� LU z 0 § w - § \ / \ k LLI \w -•e_ ? #o< 0 > @2 \ < §- ywau \? \0 u-�u �/ k\)< >22 \\§§ MOW 25 _ z LLI w \�wW< EL wit §$ W0_ >�±w C— 0LuW §o§ƒ IkwCL u ex±m� uw e �w� =0 /ki/ oEwa O<wz / <oo2 r szoo_ }§F-% LL <nme W eo6 o7 §a 00 _ $¥w << z4cl 0LI) ..w(D <E> = �z ..e < )� (2) w 0 I (A: i- A�/$i <c .ca c!) O J � o a: - CL L) ƒ � § ) Z ± U b Z W z R § \ \ )/ / z§ 3� yy %/o ¥22 ¥I §/ §0 <F-T m LL CL 2 «°i$§ƒ{ I2 =u e weez§wf \ 2U) 2} �wU) w$ u > - m U) 0 < <% j±\ \ \2§ ® Ff U) : i F- r-- 2 §M44F-ZZ I elomX9 / /f \LL�j§ /F-\k <R02 )2 § /ƒwo0 PO_w -j w § <a§E \/k 3e? <00m< \ } / / w 3 mk § <aa 2= am> �/ um2 Do w22¥ ƒE 3: w -U- c — < moo <u s4zu @2 CL 0 U) EWz\ «g 22\\�j @U)C, w r ZLu 0, }§T Ia§ m <= -jae /czk=l mu»o�� \ /RR00- twW << cor § §}� // §°¥ /kk C <OWOZ Ja- o«o< / \ ) / ■ � c 0 U 2 N C O U C cu .O O N O U U l` O C O d U (m6 ' M 'U O C uj O G C U w a� d E 7 Z U a) d c Q a) U Of V O J NLL N V) Q F- Z U Z W ❑ z� D� Q� z ❑ w z w w n Q W ❑ ❑ w W ❑ w cn z O IL w z O H CL 2 U U) w In w w m z N O O N N CL N O N a) N 0. O w a N O m _N M Q E (to U N O U CL -0 m 0 Q m L N = w- U O N N m aci E F- a) fl -d fn a) O LM a`> aci Q,o m � Q � U d 'E O ; Confirmation Report— Memory Send Page : 001 Date & Time: Feb -07 -05 01:53Pm Line 1 Machine ID Job number 655 Date Feb -07 01:52pm To : 8916197415658 Number of pages 003 Start time Feb -07 01:52pm End time Feb -07 01:53pm Pages sent 003 Status OK Job number 655 * ** SEND SUCCESSFUL * ** TR.ANSM3TT�AT� FORM ' FAX 760/43 -2225 City of Encinitas SOS S_ Yvlcsa Aveave Eagiaaeriaw- Eaciaitas. CA 920243633' 760/633 -2770 TO: �� iL"C'�Z /%�t•- .C�fc2 -TO - (�,nr.2�c1S • A<701�E�5: . FROM: I�i•��PP � �FNEYL PHONE- r�can� a?3 ZZi� u Call AS�iP r0,, Review �c Gall I.�d Raview �c R.ctvra � F.Y_S_ Plane f3as►dla IJ Pt--r Our Coavaraaxiva - F-1 Pl�� Reply by • COMjVSF�1T3: - . ,F— TRANSMITTAL FORM City of Encinitas � FAX 760943 -2226 505 S. Vulcan Avenue Engineering. Encinitas, CA 92024 -3633 760/633 -2770 DATE SEND TO FAX #: NO. OF PAGES) TO: OF: kin ADDRESS: FROM: {� �� r`' �Y'- PHONE: (760)633-,2:7 5 ❑ Call ASAP ❑ Review & Call ❑ Please Handle ❑ Per Our Conversation ❑ Review & Return ❑ F.Y.I. ❑ Please Reply by CON 4ENTS: TEB. 4.2005 I2:49PM MElmoPOLITAN COIST N0.825 P.2/4 MF_TROi0UTAN CONSTRUCTION 8634 Troy St. phone (629) 741 5643 rax (619) 741 -5656 REOUEST FOR INFORMATION # 0? Question: At the proposed location of manhole no. 9 (station 17 +00), there is a conflict with an existing curb inlet not shown on the drawings. in addition, the existing 12" +/-pips draining northwest from the structure is approximately I W from top of curb. A new location is necessary for manhole; no. 9, and due to the depth of the existing drain pipe is the concrete encasement necessary? By: originator=s Signature 9. ,.t -i fad (reply /Solubon Field investigation reveals that the existing storm drain manhole shown on the drawings at approximately Station 16 +80 is actually located at approximately Date: 2/7/2005 Station 17 +03. Consequently, Sewer Manhole No. 9 should be relocated to a logical point between Station 16 +60 and 06 +80, to avoid conflict with Manhole No. 9. If the 12 -inch storm drain enters the curb inlet at about 18 inches below top of Sean Manning Y curb, then the 20 linear feet of concrete encasement shown between Station 16+ By f58 nd 16 +88 can be deleted. Design Consultant =a Signature Forwarded By; Contracts Maneger -9 Slanawre n:�cutxrnhTMgiylRNn[�PO:"+•WP5 Poesived Pali -01-2005 12:45 From- Ta- Date: rPF, 1/j Page U2 February 4, 2DOH Project Name: EncinKas Boulevard Trunk Sewer Replacement hate: To: iapp Ratner Scan AAartr+inn No.. OEE01 d VdIP No.: contractor. Mego ofynsiru�►an Go raet NO ATAnn: From' Albert Latitss Onming Ref: Spec. Ref+ Needed ASAP scsp }act MANHOLE No 8 Sc'ponse W. Question: At the proposed location of manhole no. 9 (station 17 +00), there is a conflict with an existing curb inlet not shown on the drawings. in addition, the existing 12" +/-pips draining northwest from the structure is approximately I W from top of curb. A new location is necessary for manhole; no. 9, and due to the depth of the existing drain pipe is the concrete encasement necessary? By: originator=s Signature 9. ,.t -i fad (reply /Solubon Field investigation reveals that the existing storm drain manhole shown on the drawings at approximately Station 16 +80 is actually located at approximately Date: 2/7/2005 Station 17 +03. Consequently, Sewer Manhole No. 9 should be relocated to a logical point between Station 16 +60 and 06 +80, to avoid conflict with Manhole No. 9. If the 12 -inch storm drain enters the curb inlet at about 18 inches below top of Sean Manning Y curb, then the 20 linear feet of concrete encasement shown between Station 16+ By f58 nd 16 +88 can be deleted. Design Consultant =a Signature Forwarded By; Contracts Maneger -9 Slanawre n:�cutxrnhTMgiylRNn[�PO:"+•WP5 Poesived Pali -01-2005 12:45 From- Ta- Date: rPF, 1/j Page U2 r-- • ,.wa�� 805( 90OZ- YO_gad penieao� ZOO RArd METROPOLITAN CONSTRUCTION 861$ Troy 5t. Phone (619) 741 5643 Pas (619) 741 -5658 ° o" s T flt u C T 1-0 N REQUEST FOR INFORMATION # 00 Weense No. 7M32 Date: Februsty 4, 2005 Project Name: EnclnW Boulevard Trunk sews, t R eglseemew City of IgnGnitas, f9idiard Brady & C.I.P. No.: CEE01D WIP No.: To: Associates Cotu=tor metropollten conethJetton .atlas: I*pp Hefner! Scan Manning COhtract No.: From: Jose offt Drawing Ref: C-e Spec. Fief: 7 -32 Subject. Needed ASAP Sewer Manhotos Rtmponae ay: Question: Existing Sewer manhole 10 and 11 frame and covers are currently adjacent to the median curet. If the now S -2 style manhole is installed per San Diego Reglonal Standard at these locations plus new manholes 9 & 10, the Curti will require a radius modification, and be a potential hazard to eastbound drivers on Encinitas Blvd. Suggestion', place eccentric Corte perpendicular to flow to avoid curb conflict, please advise on possible solution, . 8y: Date: EebrJa 4 2ygb 0H9Inator;s Signature Reply /Solution Date 2/07/2005 to i� . Cone rtry� be rotated as described above. Sean Manning°.��`-:- ©esign Consulterit -8 Signature P.O. Box 477, Bonitt, CA, 41908. ©477 Ph. one (619)741.5643 Fax(619)741.5658 h ;1 W ntanYtllUfNty\i "o�mfiQUZ7,vrD6 c��'d 9S8' ON 1SN00 Nd1FlOd0813W WdzZcS S00Z1v 33J CITY OF ENCINITAS ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT WEEKLY PROGRESS MEETING Minutes Attendees: Richard Brady & Associates Michael O'Shea Bernard Cook Sean Manning San Dieguito Water Mark Robinson Bill O'Donnell Contract Time February 2, 2005 City of Encinitas City Hall Metropolitan Constr. Jose Ortiz Alberto Larios Bob Morrow Anne Morrow Rob Morrow City of Encinitas Kipp Hefner Shawn Atherton Greg Shields Ben Taylor CONTRACT SUMMARY (As of 2/2/2005) NTPDate: ............................................................ ...... August 2, 2004 Commencement Date: ...................................................... August 2, 2004 Original Allowed Work Days: ............................................ 90 Original Contract Completion Date: ..................................... December 4, 2004 Dayscompleted: ............................................................ 127 Elapsed Contract Time: .................................................... 141% Contract Price Original Contract Amount: ............................................... $860,117.25 Approved Change Order(s): .............................................. $2300 Revised Contract Amount: ............................................... $862,417.25 9�//.9., ��r��` �IGirre�n�r _�n <r <l .�r.� ,1`,`�'% • , ��,0 1in�< �o��a>ta.�t ��/,�3 .'T% � >J% �Jrri'- l/. >00 • ._'¢z• �Y�J%!960�0 Page 2 Amount Payable to Date: ................................................ $71,570.25 Retention to Date: ......................................................... $7,157.03 Total Invoiced to Date: ................................................... $187,631.55 Percent Invoiced to Date: ................................................ 21.7% Discussion: Old business • Contractor sent daily reports to RBA. RBA to forward these to the City. Progress of the work • Trunk sewer has been replaced up until MH #13. Insertion pit was dug on 1/22 for the next pipe bursting run. • Contractor will commence pipe bursting 1/26/05 pending approval of remaining outstanding submittals. Contractor will submit remaining submittals by 6:00 PM 1/26/05. Submittals /BFI's /RFP's • RFI 005 — Concrete Encasement — City responded • RFI 006 — Minimum Pipe Cover — City responded • Submittal 07 — 12" Expander — RBA to respond • Submittal O1 G- Discharge Hose — RBA to respond Pending Change Orders Future Areas of Concern • Potential conflict with existing waterline around station 10 +10. Potholing required. Future schedule: Next Meeting 2/9/05 Other Issues Potential Changes: Other concerns: New Business: .�ic��zrz!%�r�� ..5`fJ�eia�v • li.J %� , :;l�i�� rr��vi, . �o¢i/ . �� X00 • �ii �i� ,- ��2��tiein / `� /,%�' T (Je"f DOE' % >00 • '< c �SP� 196 / /�% Page 3 Requests for Proposals (RFP) (submitted to Contractor by CM) RFP DESCRIPTION DATE SENT STATUS ChanLe Order Requests (COR) (submitted to CM by Contractor) RFP TOR CO STATUS TIME AMOUNT DESCRIPTION #1 #1 #1 Drop Inlet Structure Metro (cost #2 #3 Lining in Manholes #1 & 8 to be revised) #3 #2 8 -inch diameter stub outs in Manholes #14 & 15 Encinitas IV I U RFP V GU COR CO .- DESCRIPTION TIME AMOUNT STATUS #1 #1 #1 Drop Inlet Structure $2300.00 Encinitas CITY OF ENCINITAS ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT TWO WEEK LOOK AHEAD SCHEDULE (2/2/2005) (To be provided by Contractor) 1/19/2005 Soil Testing 1/20/2005 Install insertion and receiving pits 1/24/2005 Pipe Bursting from Mh 13 to MH 12 1/25/2005 Pothole Waterlines (16" at saxony & 10" at 19 +89) 1/26/2005 Backfill insertion/ receiving pits at MH 13 and 12, plus excavate insertion/ receiving pits at MH 9 and 13 1/27/2005 Pipe Burst between MH 9 and 13 1/31/2005 Open Trench between stations 19 +26 and 20 +30 2/1/2005 Continue open trenching ._�ie� <r > <G %�z¢�� <�' ��nrr�r�� • /f,9(/J ;��i�� i,e�c�a .�ani� .�r.� EGG • �i� �ip�<a, ��,�,«mac 9,�/,�.� W (IX Y) !%G %BOG' • " «a �P.� f% / /.9G (�0.� N O U U Y `c _ C O o U c m m @ o •c o W U U cis O C O a U N �6 •C M O U O c W o �c •U =' C U W N 9 E Z U N O a aci Q m U � 0 0 J J Q H F- OD U) a F Z U Z W N Q O W F- C 2 O ♦Y Q Z H M Q H N W W fY D W 2 H W Ix W Q D W W U W It W Q co 7 LLi Cl) N Cl) f.- L V Cl) CO c Z Z Ix Z Z 'n v o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lf) m C) V* O LO O N m N r- co a) 0) r m r r CO Q m U LL C� Q m U 0 _ N N N N V O O O O O O O O O O O y 0 N on LIO ++ I p � a� s. � abi U N w � I I C a 7 3 o a � s~ � Y � 0 c U � U aki G I Iz U z� 0 Cl O w b b N Co °o °O o o °O °O °O °O o h N N N N N N N N N N N 0 m C) 7 N N 7 N E' N_ v N N co O O O Q m U LL C� Q m U 0 _ N N N N V O O O O O O O O O O O y 0 N on LIO ++ I p � a� s. � abi U N w � I I C a 7 3 o a � s~ � Y � 0 c U � U aki G I Iz U z� 0 Cl O w b b N h O L 0 m C) 7 N 7 N 7 N 7 N E' v v v v m L L U L U L U L U N 2 N U) cn to cn a a a a a n v C C N H N N N C C W U) ta n a n a a a a cn N H IL p m m m m m m m m m m = � r*-� rl.: pl-: ai C? cli cli T of of of co W co m M N M m M O) M M N M M Q m U LL C� Q m U 0 _ N N N N V O O O O O O O O O O O y 0 N on LIO ++ I p � a� s. � abi U N w � I I C a 7 3 o a � s~ � Y � 0 c U � U aki G I Iz U z� 0 Cl O w b b asi o � U Y ` C 7 N ~ O a U c m m � o ,C O W rL `O U N O C O a U U r •� M O U O C Vj W �p O 'C �U C U W N E Z U (D O .. d (D in U OC a O J J Q CH GM W r� a F- Z_ U Z W w 2 H a z 7 O Q z M Q F- U) ul W W fY G W z LUFZ' H w W Q 0 w LLI w U fr LU Q z O p a_ U w 0 z O H U W U) U W CL a w m z. 00 co rn m rn O O O) O W O 0 0 0 0 0 0 c to 0 v 0 c° 0 v o )n O O O O O O O O C) O O N O N R N iz - O r v co r r r d N E (O H W W W W W W W N W W W W Z Z Z Z Z Z m Z Z Z c Z Z N 0 O U N m O N C O C J p E c ° U ° c 3 °- N c O) U c fO O .L.. N N C C c0 N U o D C o a CD 0 x N T C N N ° LL O cn v cn v u' v c° v @ > 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 o O o o Q U m N w iz C N O N W 3 N N r N r fM M L Cl) U U f6 c,) N c0 CO T — CD r 0) — r N 0 0 0 0 0 0 c to 0 v 0 c° 0 v o )n O O O O O O O O C) O O N O N O N N iz - O r co r r r N (O N m N O U N O N C O C J p ° N c ° U ° c O1 c 'n °- N c O) U c fO O .L.. N N C C c0 -O C N > U o D C o a 0 x N T C 0 O N N ° LL O 'U c ° x N a 0 C ° @ O O) _ c O LL X P2 T O U m N w w C N O N W 3 W a ii U U) U L Cl) U U f6 c,) N O � � M � 0) a) Cl) O C) O M N O O M M N Il- Cl) N ro v co C) Cl) N N 0 M Z r- l• C) 0 C) C) C) C) 0 CC 0 _a E 0 a E 3 z ii O N W O N N dD LL. .fl C vi U ti U N w � I .Q C U a h 7 3 � Q .o U 0 0 � N A I Iz U z� 0 0 N 2 .n w N 3 \ \ \ f ƒ \ / 0 _ \ \ ® \ \ > \ o w \ / ƒ \ I k/ k� wM �� z � �LU § kj z 0 w w / F \ & w e< �a < Lij ƒ2§ §&n\ §/§ gEEe U -I =wmwz \co =ajz< ®ƒ A�� /3 \& o �� $ \xC) § }§ -$ -LU ao0 owewa zrw zmƒzƒ ozm p6 0jw x7zo< ±W\ 3 -E °@ I LU®=a /\j �-JW0 / \§ kk / ®/ �®I w§zƒ/ §±g ��ƒEe =0I T °- O C) ��h$ ®§ 0 § ƒm$ §u ƒ< Kz /o§\ ) c0X >xo 3E0 <o «a- LL � O w � § § CL ƒ c § a § } Z U )' Z ■ W z G w \ § 3 \ \ eo k /6¥ = Uj �� }32U�\§ > &®m44 <onIL ƒ° kfLU(1)0 Eej ƒa� ®z /WILo< w o<w0\}k\j uu=2 -J= «Mop �� <x�w ooze �o»o ®&zR®< ml��ysl /� §� WZkERcMmre2 }§i}ƒ§wzDgw eIƒe <<zozwo 2 2cow - /w \W/ §$w #m /e[ubw )F-2 +WZ00E-§ �woencoouLL IL OF-R<Z -0<R °° eu E� \ <z /wT /)§ ƒU) mzw <z *o «o-�\ )$]wWE°} -i JCL \Iƒ�2IE\w®} AEb§ \DF -W §- w 5 § § \ w \ � \ / @ / CD / .2 / \ § \ \ § £ § \ / 0 IL o \ g j C) 0 / G 5 \ ƒ \ � < ƒ §/ kE }k W ± k� S > Mu H I� U) 0 § ■ s § \ \ \ \\ o®� >\\ 1 � § /2 \ /ƒ \ƒk /iW :ELL §0< �\LLW > >u - z W 2- - - z \§j�W wFkj �F- \LLEw �a�e< »0 ILkEƒ5 w0� LLJe exaf m ww� =0 ow5w zmzz< O <wz i ± � §{d0- z / ~% ZM:WZ 0g3W ue000 / /±ƒ /43 \\ §W y7 ..uoom § 0 <E> ..e <= »W §w> \0- %Ij a( -0w <M cwo CD O J um Z � 0 - � \ § u § § Z w V g Z s W z Cl Cl) § \ / / § j /® m? § ±77 o «2a e2 / /LI §/ §\C 00 oW0of < �f /L /� }m \w 2 iC) < /\ ƒj }// a3 :ZLu 3 Io L)zW 0\ j \§U)\§ §j® // W/ $E\\ )S 2 /�\ §$/ /ko /�j §u��=�z I- Wm == < < (Da0 +cF-2aƒ w/F -tot < z< /f /f§§w 2�\ / }t ±7g��\2§ <3Es0 §z2EEz§@ =0002W ze -zz4oM I —tWF- \ \§RaR02 M: F-::) ®p§ee 0 ;off /kk 2r- quo } §««\d$o kL244= A=oz (L e <z <owoz o < =o=< k=one< \ § / ƒ 3 3 / \ \ i\ \ / kn \ j \ \ « CR \J _ E /k § 2 k m j LO LO E q �) \ § w \ c k ] > ./ \ ® ^ \ _ C: u & § L) I 2 ES 0f/ & $ƒ{ //� / \/§ T & ® # /% oo 2 ) §m§ o2 °Q ƒ (n�� _ ®fj / /co \\ \ ƒ \E =8 20 c C LO C) G£G ^w�2i ,Jw =20 - . \ \U &Ebb ��_E (D e ƒ_ §�� ® �E2 ®oe � � � } � acr —:E; Cl) @ [ o%& CD Z5 \ \ ° -C) E\ § 2o- /- R 22� a) a) «e,0 3 )o °CL- « ®b° 0 \ E m °` t [ /fat \S« § »�\ ® ( =ate co G 3 moo Sa) a)-\ ` ° 10 o §k§ (D CD $ § &§c# 7E27 °©+ 7 �§ E 8 %0 /�£®« §$§ E 2me f o') 2§/ / §`7 0 ®��_ =o ( / ƒ *G4 eeoz 72 E g 5�\ /}� 0/> ƒ § 2 8 = ® 0) c (1) U) ®�\E ® o \ £ t I {� }#\ / ® x\72§ I \-T � '@%'o Co §k&yolyl.�o= O�32CD 04 >1 8- � CD f 0 E 7 CD 0 j C / cn rz j \ j ? § ƒ \ Z_ U § d Z W j 0 8 / kn \ j \ \ City Or Encinitas February 1, 2005 Metropolitan Construction Attn: Jose Ortiz 8614 Troy Street Spring Valley, Calif. 91977 RE: ENCINITAS BLVD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT(CEEOID) Jose: FAX AND MAIL Thursday evening when you called I told you a meeting would occur on Monday, January 31, 2005. Neither you nor Mocon attended this mornings meeting. The lack of a complete submittal package as required by the contract documents demonstrates there is a problem in performing this project. Alberto was given the requirements and missing items of the punchlist. My letter of December 15, 2004, included the following: To the extent you revise your pipe bursting means and methods to accomplish the job, please provide a new submittal containing all of the information as required in contract specification section 306 -9.1.2 on or before January 4, 2005. Renewed progress on this job must commence and continue thereafter on or before January 18, 2005. You remain subject to the liquidated damages penalties set forth in the contract. The resumption of work must be done upon completion and approval of the submittals required. If the resumption of work does not occur in the next 30 days, you will be considered in default of the contract. For this reason a copy of this letter is being sent to your surety. Please exercise all speed in the procuring the necessary requirements to resume work. Sincerely, 'Greg Vie' P.E. Field Operations cc: Peter Cota - Robles, Dir. of Engineering Services Jace Scwarm, Risk Manager Kipp Hefner, Assoc. Civil Engineer Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland CF1 -'W)O n ��3 =r,': ins � A "ul�an �nur !�nciniras "'u'i -;r, >; DU -�,n t ,_ _�O�i recycled paper Jan-IN005 05:65pm From- T -147 P.001 F -209 4909 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 220 San Diego, California 92123 Facsimile Transmittal To: Kipp Hefner From: Mike O'Shea Canwy.. City of Encinitas Project: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Replacement Fax: 76041133 -2818 Project No: Encinitas.003 Phone: 760 -633 -2775 Date: 1131/2006 Re: Submittals Pages: 11(excludes this page) CC: CC: Urgent Q For Information Cl Please Comment ❑ Please Reply • Comments: .. The only remaining submittal to be turned in by the Contractor is #11 per Sean's email, " Detailed procedures for the installation and bedding of pip in launching and receiving pits." Do you have any comments? Mike If you do not receive all the pages of this transmrttel, please call (858) 486 -0500. Date: January 31, 2005 Time: 5:51 PM Initials: Jan -31 -2005 05:55pm From- i January 31, 2005 Jose Ortiz Metropolitan Construction P.O. Box 477 Bonita Ca. 91905 Re: Encinitas Boulevard Trunk Sewer Replacement Project Submittal No. 02D Baseline Schedule Dear Mr. Ortiz: T -147 P.002 F -209 Richard Brady & Associates has reviewed the subject submittal. We have the following comments: RECOMMENDED ACTION REVISE RESUBMIT Please update to reflect future work schedule from 1/31/05 onwards. Sincerely, '�g4 �14Z Sean F. Manning, P.E. Construction Manager a: Chron File 02D Submittal Review File Confirmation Report— Memory Send Job number Date To Number of pages Start time End time Pages sent Status Job number Page : 001 Date.& Time: Jan -20 -05 03:23pm Line 1 Machine ID 274 Jan -20 03:21pm 8918584960505 005 Jan -20 03:21pm Jan -20 03:23pm 005 OK 274 * ** SEND SUCCESSFUL * ** S1��TTAI� FORM City of Ts esumstas 505 S. Vtialcsa Avoaus 3&aciuitas, CA 92024 -3633 760/633 -2770 DATE � �z��'~ SENDTO FAX #: FA-C -760/63:3-28X8 Engiaecria8 . NO. OF PAC3ES:� TO: pp OF. ADDRESS- ' FROM' Call aA$Ap ED Review 8c Call 0 Review 8c Rstt¢n ® F.Y_Z_ QPlease Handle Per Our Conve=sahoaL 0 Please Rep1Y by COIVZIVSENTS- A r-) C a ��t�'� 'C�PrG -�L �`-� �M n�y0•faY �`— F�NJA{� -`'� z�'. TRANSMITTAL FORM City of Encinitas 505 S. Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 -3633 760/633 -2770 DATE SENDTO FAX #: TO: ,� OF: FAX 760/633 -2818 Engineering ADDRESS: FROM: PHONE: (760) 633- �7 7 NO. OF PAGES:57 ❑ Call ASAP ❑ .Review &Call ❑ Review & Return ® F.Y.I. ❑ Please Handle ❑ Per Our Conversation ❑ Please Reply by COMMENTS: i�E is �S��ti P-% 24= JAN.20.2005 2 :45PM METROPOLITAN CONST CITY OF ENCINITAS ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT NO. 638 P.2 /5 CATALOG CU /SHOP DRAWING TRANSMITTAL AND APPROVAL , SUBMITTAL NO. 01G PART 1 FOR CONTRACTOR USE FROM METROPOLITAN CONSTRUCTION TO ENGINEERING SER ICES DEPARTMENT ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER CONTRACT CMDOOB FOR: REPLACEMENT THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL, PER SPECIFICATION.SECTION NO. ITEM NO (A) USE SEPARATE FORM FOR EACH SPEC. SECTION (B) A/E RECOMMEND (C) CITY ACTION (D) 7-3Z NO CHANGE-TO ORIGINAL LAYOUT XC FOR DISCHARGE HOSE. WE NOW PROPOSE USING INCH FIRE r, CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS REQUIRE FACTORY INSPECTION YES NO X NEW SUBMITTAL IRESUBMITTAL X 01120/2005 PART II - FOR DESIGNER USE FROM (DESIGNER) TO Iii G� F n� c,, w' r i s COMMENTS: ` ►��+ I WIY V V VG.7 : I= rUJ.LUW INU AU I JUN GULJF-r1' ARE GIVF-N IV I I VMS SUBMITTED (A Code letter vAlJ be Inserted for each item in wlumn D, —"° • Sectlan 1 above A.- APPROVED AS SUBMITTED C.- APPROVED. EXCEPT AS NOTED ON DRAWINGS REFER TO PROVED, EXCEPT AS NOTED ON DRAWINGS, ATTACHED SHEET, RESUBMISSION REQUIRED RESUBMISSION NOT REQUIRED D.- WILL BE RETURNED BY SEPARATE CORRESPONDENCE E.- DISAPPROVED, SEE ATTACHED SHEET NOTE: Approv ' Items does not re I! a the contmetor from complying with all requlrements of the con Tact plans and specifications. _ s it ti RN.,20.2005 2 :46PM METROPOLITAN CONST " - FIRE HOSE - jAFFREY r,-0, mq was Irra rlr�u,oe —up to taoo�F. G M le eo `•' ' 1d veagler adble • Olin's au i tco�FAWoeIm �f uar camocatioo wl� pa,teoted • War'rrsotaed for 10 mo years , •"vmvr 02191 1184 ht Wlil• �f14ai istant rul>'b�r towttr h l ,able * no fft, ad rover is forma. Id e opdio k mbba for m mUent d I:P It egls�ncs A IGO% POW *ins of etxeed meted for bunt �yttlhetll: rubberrttubing rrsulb in A etrtinntb add reefrlency, WWO Pin hoe IWr W9111hrans. Miloble sl:as of 2", 3 ", 4" =d S "u , with 8ters coplings. JAFRIB e PRBSS(IRE; RATINGS WEIGHTS AND COIL. SIZES noTL: All Jaffrey hose is tested to alwdy9 be used when operating lbrg (Xj Pa andhoeO be "Mreted between 130 G 200 psi as 4 sbfo q� Pr"Oution, llellef valves should CHA"r This chart xisually chows the relydionship between gallons par minute and friction lots per 100 lea for various size Rose dlafmtors. The amount of Mctior. toss for a divan Aow, when coin ji med front one hose diameter to another, varies tremen- 1 .for ®xampie, a 2W hose one hqs 11 dines more friction !0" n a 4" hose line, for egtra l lows. Said drlferently. a V hose line can now rtes same amolint of water 17 times at far as a lss" hose line, for the same fl'icUOR bin These impresafve hds provide the foundation for all large diameter haft tysWnm „ smeau� /ttNSU�meuu/Irr' �� ►ql.,;,'� - . r��lllllllll ONO! ''�-.. �, =li .ice -�• •M.- r�� i.iiv A •.P �.r-i• wl�' "_.r�i� r. Ally- -r�l� / 1 ►_.rtSplrad �A>fHl sue. ' ii' ►' -.riN� r�iy� ..rr�V ~�ii��rii� iii 'm JAN.20.2005 t 246 M METROPOLITAN CONST " "�'NO.638��P.4i5:'1 -w6r w d woftw Co., USTRIAL FIRE HOSE 34--33* cOTTOWPoLve rER SMpN 1eoke1• -000 Psi teat: Com.trwed for hump racks, realm, am hr?aa houses oalstnrodon It rocoltuttendled for slrl racy fire 131010911011 In wl Indusrrlas and � this aca llhi Nqh performance onina la ai*nwetastmntsynvto o rubber, r4oersoommemied wharfs theb we wig De subjected to 00nIInumd ohefhg cal rough or vNrp all litoop or ocher Continuous use, Langihs: So, 7g. AMC, 100 rV Brlit till nKGr111111 to ocwl wti haT ws)pilY kn �raor rsNgttl nle l nlsgOEp 111111111111,8111 TIN ureodruo could ; '1t s" 3101111 Jacket 94.33 1 Hof 300 PSI 'at/ Stn Is jukBt 34.33 2w � 000 PSI 26 5 15.5 E ZB n 44-250100% POLYESTER MILIA)ISCHARGE HOSE $Irtg)e 14aket --2 0 1391 test. A Ilghn11eippII��I, •aBy�to-hartdle general purpose hose lorolaa �+ash•ciown In tactorlaa end rile yore r. Tirt Ideal Industrial d n++0 end stemuon wig not mpdew or decay Wrh 4601 Llning it o=pne�rae0�'vie�nt now, ply l polyesptr dr. Lengths: 50 not up to 2+,,01 also available In 75 and 100 t. lenglhs.) mh o ruhdttr. ' q4-are-a, 100% POWESTER rA "Jacket— B00 PSI teet.Rugpedlpdeslpned and an0Ineeradprknargylorltw all and r #tarpeal MdusMes, this tough hope la avallNreble 1wdIn 4 Naoprenee Ilnirlg. if repuired. Bah wbe ON Cover are nslettvtT'a many ac" wiclelles, and whaechemicais Tne100%Pol7es ►orJaCKetwlU rot mddawor de0ay wlln age, used in hose houws and reels in navy kwuenyy whore working pra"urgs ere higher than hormal. This is the lougha+x single�aoket hose awrsllable Ior heavy Industrial spplloa- tlonS. Lengths: sq, 76, and 100 It. _ AMEICInnnu 44 -06 -D* 100% POLYESTER wraoteJaetoee -600 pet lea: The ummato In Indusa9al er�prOteeTlon, this hose is menufa0tyr11d to ozeo4n0 murtiolpel roqulromenle. Tr s jaoluels are woven from tlu Anast high ►ensile, 100�i On 611 of YMna, with Complete 11 {hr aowrerlapa or both Jackets. The oompaot Weavi insures ft4blllly encl elringt;)1 and wlp prov{de prow tlon g,galnslwear from abras)on. it does not feCir,ll 9 drying ahar use and Is completely immune to mlldovl and rot, Lengths: 60 ft, (Sizes up to r ilea aveelubl* In >5 and 100 0. lengdts,) ��tlllaeM Vtxt VnpaMrltdre "Aflftt Metal Mwtual4wblh, Tr 1pm.rdpnt mwollnI& Nollew"A6 &a t""N 0000;; aM Na prrr�dm m m W o Wpm m XhL and N&f 4dwWd ow rapluwr,010146 ft or nreionel RM Hoes Carp, N01'A � � � egaWr rAed Ell, quFOrd da Nvrorra �Nia,ru WMaufwea'�n 4,; —45" wm* nlv*14 on aft r4mm Indwetaal rfry huts, rt N, S T— E0 39dcJ 013 3NI3 d 'p , I' i I, I LARGE STOCKS WE CARRY MANY [TEp I NOT SHOWN IN THIS CAT , Complete data an Requi RM —C7Q —A T4 GIG : b T COM7 1117 4 rM JAN,20.2005 2 :47PM METROPOLITAN CONST 08 39Vd SINGLE JACK!~T FIRE HIN Single jacket oonmdme offM pt a thermoplastic or synthetic rubber liner combined with a closely woven too k single jacket. The jacket may be a comb6don of DOUBLE JACKET FIRE HOSE ,;: a. Double *W W con�trixfts Include a second closely woven Jacket for extra dun safety tilt and higher best pmmgres The A tats are nlaWhed to assure a pm*ian fit NITRILE COVERED FIRE 1108E Nitdle synthetic rubber provides a itigged ewer for this lightvueigtlt stele jacket hose designed for uaa in industtiai en*uhmerltri The dew ribbed paftri offers ermellent NO. 638 P.5 /5 cotton and polyester or 100% synthetic material. JwJmts are precisely woven, with warp yam completely covering the fillet' yams for greater strength and abreslon resistance. to meet precise hydrostatic requirements as required by Underwriters, Factory Muhl, NF% and federal specifications. abrasion resistance and the homogeneous heavy -duly one -piece cover ark liner construction resists heat and most chernicais r, COVERED FIRE HOSE �. In this conatructon, an all- polyest,single resistance to chemicals, heat, abrasion, japm hose Is spkally wmp* with a ozone, and other conditions encountered in Neoprene® or synthetic rubber cwt a cover- the petrochemical service and other severe ing, This covering gives the hose oilltnding NMmnmerds. I' PIN RACK HOSE This &gstthetic, thermoplastic lifted hose Is deemed for easy pin rack and ownt�mnce. Wthorrgh fully lined, Fop unlined finer hose W-floFfoot weighs me the sa or less This IigMwelght M- strucb is normailyfumMed with the Underwriters and /or factory Mutual labels, In addition to meeft the current WK requirements HARD SUCTION HOSE National offers a deice of a premium heavy duty hard m cbm hm in Moth oonvmftal mflj� offet�a hldh qual(tjr Ilght dO hard suclfori hose. t t BOOSTER NOSE This high pressure 8W PSI workirlo PWN1`9 twee is a vertical braid constrtcW with a premium axone malstant cover , 013 381-d 88ZL -9Z9 -61:9 99:to1: 999Z 1aZJTP1 JAN.20.4005 2:45PM METROPOLITAN CONST NO.638 P.2i5 CITY OF ENCINITAS ENGINEERING SERVICES, DEPARTMENT CA ALOG CUT/SHOP DRAWING TRANSMITTAL AND APPROVAL ; SUBMITTAL NO. 010 PART 1 FOR CONTRACTOR USE FROM METROPOLITAN CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT CMDOOB TO ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT FOR: ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL, PER SPECIFICATION-SECTION N0. ITEM NO (A) •34 USE SEPARATE FORM FOR EACH SPEC. SECTION (B) NO CHANGE TO ORIGINAL LAYOUT EXCEPT FOR A/E RECOMMEND (C) CITY ACTION (D) 01 CHARGE HOSE. WE NOW PROPOS S NG 5 INCH FIRE HOSE.— r, CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS REQUIRE FACTORY INSPECTION YES NO X NEW SUBMITTAL I RESUBMITTTAL X 01/20/2005 PART 11- FOR DESIGNER USE / � e'� F ✓Ili% - 1 i) -I ms "r-,;o az 1 t-) LA -1 ' ITEM FIAS BEEN REVIEWED, THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATION 15 MADE AS NOTED ABOVE (See Column "C") COMMENTS: ,� .�- s l vpftov � --�> %"1 e--;," L 7 i — — V 1101mo subml i ILL) (A code letter Wit be Inserted for each item In cols AS SUBMITTED Swoon 1 above C.-APPROVED. EXCEPT AS NOTED ON DRAWINGS REFER TO EXCEPT AS NOTED ON DRAWINGS, ATTACHED SHEEP, RESUBMISSION REQUIRED NOT REQUIRED D.- WILL BE RETURNED BY SEPARATE CORRESPONDENCE E.- DISAPPROVED, SEE ATTACHED SHEET i# Items does not reli a the eontreotor from complying with all requirements Of the convect plans and specifications, i� ti RN..20.2005 2:46PM r, METROPOLITAN CONST FIRE HOSE-jAFFREY • " -wWa Mor ro",*& MCM ror rO. aikolies, ails, gasoline AN sygtmgrl mupif, and nssrWem1og01ifi e up to 10002F. � , to fladbla eM In cold oreather fl �� Friction 10068 gY "*ryP4ea Wth �teoted 4,41016f o1ar couneawa Wsutentead for 7 o loll years n ++emistitreeu triil4�e lhltwith 0110h* The p�'cover kform". rgblo qN he* fib, for td Impact rwhUncm elr pnb%t R Jacw le a it bunt poly. e�>n9 ow ?"`�ted for buret m8 NFPA StRtldard � ; rubbt r tubing r Wtft in �gawd ►oaftleney. %&He plc bole leak Probieme, Available `ll" of p 314" anld S" With Stan JAFRIS ° PRESSUM RaTINTGS WEIGHTS AM - --.._� -COIL SIZES — ..1. 24 in, fi n i I o lb f9tsT1:: Jemmy hose is tested to ap�i D3i and should be o 24 �' 26 irl, ahvsys be used when operating lafac di PSI am hoed. p�ro=ed between ISO rr 200 Psl as a sbfet , Y PreCllutien hellaY velYey should This chait vlswaJJ,y shows the relt�� w W minute and McdOn Inca ��P betweetl gallons per Urnatem The amount per Io i r v erious given mine h when compared from one home diameb;r to anotlter� vatirs trernen- dottaly P'or example, a 2%1 h Joss then a 411 hose lint, for aqua dows� Id dlperently. a fiction hose pee can flow the a MR Arnopnt of watt;r 11 times as Par as 2%" pro ide the for for is 204 e loss. 7b�r home esdilve Y r0 tJd D13 3NIA i I�lalran�et /aaurtmaa /tnv'" • ... �� ■�1�111111111!l�br;�,f1 /! fir.' /' ►•.• �. JANt20.200b,*t 2:461M METROPOLITAN CONST ---""*N0.638�P. 4iSk&��'�.,,,� JUSTRIAL FIRE H OSE 34--33* COTT014 /pums-reR Sltmtelleoket +6014 m 1te ;t. a�tatnrotlan la ncomendao �bueted for hump raoka, rabls, and hpsa houses nigh performance lining Is o� one- re�asgninay fin p ,etlon In all Igducsrlas anu es' l Nilson na Thy bb s+4leabd to oangnuad chafing ca► rough o Ali rp ul4� Of 01ha opng„uour. � n4sa wnt Longlhr: so, 76. and loo tr. 8061 kin 1"alpsw1p caaYr 3►4 NIMIOEf► "1'x'1' Lr7Y 100'!- PaLY93TE � -� R MILL DISCHARGE WD9E 134IR9le laakab —m.1431 test. A Ilghwosighl, eogy.m. l� weshadown In tactarlua sn4 mi4 yarc a. An Ideal lndu4lrlal dgenaral puh'oso hose forclesn -up Itnd atruomn w1U not mildew or decay Whh 406, unma ozone how' T� all -ppoo Longiha: 5o il - aeislam extruded synthal�lo ndhber. tv(Saes up in Z1h" Alb avallable In 76 and loo ft lanplhs.j Magi Nib sPc ou'uwo 21 44,AP6.S* 100% POCYE5TER 6111pteJecbt -800 pal lest. Auagedl Ipdustrlas.thtstou h I de3bnedandsnglnearo4Pffmar ►lyfortheoilandaharpiaal nalslant b man egeir3s a le avallrble loth 4 Neoprene- Ilnitlg, If raQulrod. Bah tubw and eoverare dbosy wllh age, used to hosle houwc�AndCraelaul� Z- M uen�y� NaokotwlUpotmOdewor W hoe than norm'►, T 1. is tna toughax eingle solu3► 6 vNtere warWn Dons. I rtosa avella Ie for heavy Ind ePures are Ld ngrhs: 60. 76. and 100 h. nhMlca- —0951 am 9Rr�FIW11l1N 40UPLIO uw rJ, Zd 3�- 44'AP6 -D* 10D% PpLti!ESTER Ooubte Jeolme�@00 pot feat The unlmata In Induetrlal rota to azeatina municipal raqulfanlegis. Th a Iaokola Ore woven Irom thi this soh gn manuffa 10ro Pokyv4tar)mrn, Wllh complam filler coverlipe of hadl uee and a ertd will provide Fretectlon r,g�ny�we �m The 2OmPM Weave insures ti"Iblllty I oomP►elely immune to mlidov, and mt, radon. h doss rat require drying after Lenptha: 60 it, (Suss up to a" atao "Abll.In ?'S end 100 It, lengdptj hpseLti ✓PlCrgpN seuPUt►s Ir 'AftlabN.NllflLhIGOM /llah ' aeOrorPrepr - - '�v ral 119 136 T I�A►pru Qompj j& r Mwluol4tLrh. �ooaK alto il��a repm W "DYtr col E quF�ra de N7Ter1s'�a u046Mkft at lvvkuW qro Node Cod, Norm Gry0"4 and N"Fr i' o svaym�a • umb rol•6011 on all Ilarpn.0 lndueraal rlty 1t0+u, T-- E0 3Jb!d D13 3�12� RAT) — C7c-pr, Tq GIR:bT "%Amw CMM7 !R7 ?TM JAN-20.2005 2:47PM METROPOLITAN CONST tie 39vd SINGLE JACKET FIRE HOSE Single jacket conatructlons consist of a thermoplastic or synti oo rubber layer combined with a cimly woven tare single jacket. The jacket may be a combl'n of N0.638 P.5i5 cotton and polyester or 101PIn synthetic material. Jackets are precisely woven, with warp yam completely covering the Oiler yams for greater etrerO end abrasion resistance. DOUBLE JACKET PIKE HOSE Double *W c oraudons Include a second to meet precise hydraetatic requirements as dowry woven Jacket for extra duriOlk required by Underwriters, Factory Mutual, safety facto: and higher treat pMzWft The NFPA, and federal specifications, ja* is are matiched to assure a precision fit I NITRILE CDVERED FIRI6 HOSE° Nitrile synthetic rubber provides a 'rugged abrasion resistance and the homogeneous cover for this lightweight single jado hose Davy -duty one -piece cover arxt liner designed for use in industrial envirchments. construction Mists heat and most chemicals The deep ribbed peftm offers excellent 1. COVERED FIRS HOSE j, In this consomft, an all- poiyeati r single jardcet hose Is *MIIY wrapped with a NeoprMe or syrrtttetic rubber o* cover- ing, This covering gives the hose oikstanding I. PIN RACK HOSE. resistance to chemicals, heat, abrasion, ozone, and other conditions encountered in the petrochemical service and other severe envlronmerds. Ttrls efl- �yreitedc, c Ifned hose stuctcn is normallyfumMed with the Is designed for easy pin rack and Underwriters and /or factory Mutual labels, mainterimm, Although fully Ilned, ' feplaces In addition to meeting the currant NFPi4 unlined linen hose foal4ai weighs requirement's, the same or ion This lWhMeight con- - HARD SUCTION HOSE National afters a dOlce of a premium heavy duty herd suction hale in both con wtionai (as ;)bxff dj or caromed for greaterflex- ibII4 VW also offer a high qualify duty hand suc fan how. 1� BOOSTER HOSE This high pressure 800 PSI warkinq pressure hose is a vertical braid constructiM with a pr omium alone resistant cover 3 , 013 3INIA 88ZL- 9Z9 -6t9 09:tPT 9002 }0ZJTPj January 20, 2005 Metropolitan Construction Attn: Jose Ortiz 8614 Troy Street Spring Valley, Calif. 91977 RE: ENCINITAS BLVD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT(CEEOID) Gentlemen: FAX AND MAIL I am in receipt of your letter dated January 12, 2005. The letter speaks to further soil exploration of the work site. Section A of the Notice to Contractors states the following: The bidder is required to examine carefully the site of work, the proposal, plans, specifications, and contract forms for the work contemplated; and it will be assumed that the bidder has investigated and is satisfied as to the conditions to be encountered, as to the character, quality and quantities of work to be performed and materials to be furnished, and as to the requirements of the specifications, the special provisions, and the contract. It is mutually agreed that submission of a proposal shall be considered prima facie evidence that the bidder has made such examination. Section 4 -1.4.1 INSPECTION AND TESTING LABORATORY SERVICE includes the following: For samples and tests required for the Contractor's use, the Contractor shall make arrangements with an independent firm for payment and scheduling of testing. The cost of sampling and testing for the Contractor's use shall be paid for by him and included in the Contract Prices bid. It is our goal to be fair and reasonable in the administration of the contract. The scope of work defined by the contract documents must remain whole. Be advised that to the extent you choose to perform additional testing, such additional testing shall be at your own expense. Sincerely, /, G� Greg Melds, P.E. Field Operations cc: Kipp Hefner, Assoc. Civil Engineer TEL 760 - 633 -2600 / FAX 760- 633 -2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 TDD 760 - 633 -2700 &:11 recycled paper i - a City Of �_- Encinitas January 19, 2005 Metropolitan Construction Attn: Jose Ortiz 8614 Troy Street Spring Valley, Calif. 91977 RE: ENCINITAS BLVD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT(CEE01D) NOTICE TO PROCEED WITH PIPE BURSTING Gentlemen: FAX AND MAIL I am in receipt of your letter dated January 12, 2005. The letter speaks to Greenbook specification 306 -9 addendum stating " the tunnel shall not exceed the maximum outside diameter of the new pipe plus one inch." I am not an expert on pipe bursting procedures and can only restate the specification that was bid. It states the following: The method for pipe bursting shall utilize pneumatic impact force. The pipe bursting tool shall be designed and manufactured to be pulled through the existing pipe materials, fragmenting the pipe and compressing the broken pipe pieces into the surrounding soil as it progresses. The bursting tool shall generate sufficient force to break the existing pipeline and compact it into the surrounding soil. Manufacturer's written specifications will determine tool sizes recommended for various pipe diameters as well as parameters associated with tool sizes for allowable upsize percentages. The pipe bursting tool shall be pulled through the sewer with cable or rods by a winch located at the machine pit. The bursting tool unit shall pull the polyethylene (PE) pipe with it as it progresses from the insertion pit. The bursting tool shall incorporate a shield/expander to prevent collapse of the hole ahead of the new pipe insertion. The pipe bursting tool shall be remotely controlled. The bursting action of the tool shall increase the external dimensions sufficiently to break the existing pipe and simultaneously expand the surrounding ground sufficiently to permit pulling the new pipe through the annular space. The Contractor shall be responsible for controlling line and grade of the new pipe installation. In general, the pipe bursting tool will follow the line and grade of the existing pipeline. Should the pipe bursting equipment cause the new pipe to vary from the pre - existing alignment between TEL 760- 633 -2600 / FAX 760 - 633 -2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue. Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 TDD 760- 633 -2700 � recycled paper manholes as shown on the Contract Drawings, the Contractor shall employ the methods proposed in Section 306 - 9.1.3, 14.e above to return the pipe to proper alignment. The line and grade tolerances of pipe installed shall be +/- 1 inch (25mm) on grade and 1 -1/2 inches (38mm) in line between shafts, unless otherwise approved by the Engineer. The problem now becomes one involving the contract documents and what was bid versus what has been requested to be done. I have not received any documentation that corroborates your position that the pipe bursting is not suitable for this site and therefore must direct you to proceed per the contract documents. Sincerely, r Greg fields, P.E. Field Operations cc: Kipp Hefner, Assoc. Civil Engineer JAN.12.2005 1:07PM METPOPOLITAN CONST NO.548 P.2/3 General Building & Engineering Contractors e-0 -N8 T RU C T I O N January 12, 2005 Greg Shields, P.E. City of Encinitas 505 south Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 -3633 Re: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Replacement (CEE01D) Dear Mr. Shields: License No. 790532 Attached is a copy from a typical City of San Diego contract, and note MC is not aware of another agency that has completed more pipe bursting within the County of San Diego. Please note the greenbook addendum specification 306 -9 from San Diego states "the tunnel shall not exceed the maximum outside diameter of the new pipe plus one inch," In order to meet this specification we'd have to down size on the hammer we currently have on site. Which raises the question, has metropolitan Construction supplied the largest hammer? We are here to assist you! In using the Koloss, the City of Encinitas will be left with a 5" annular space, which can cause a sink hole in the future. This annular space can transmit water, and slowly erode the subsurface. If you have any questions, please contact me at 619 - 741 -5643, Regards, Jose 0. Ortiz President Attachments cc: Kif Hefner, PM Ron Brady, Inspector Sean Manning, CM P.O. Box 477, Bonita, CA, 919080477 Phone (619)741.5643 Fax(619)741 -5656 JAN.12.2005 1 :07PM METROPOLITAN CONST NO.54e P.3i3 ■ 40 All waste generated and ACP shall be wrapped in 6 mil polyethylene sheating or bags and properly labeled. C=Uwtor is msp mole foe ail ACp removal and associated eoaA nination,Fordisposg1ofton-Mable tlie ACp' Cot autar shall comply with City of San Diego Miramar Laad� 14'Accep�e Criteria for D4oeal of Nosy- Priable Asbestos W25Te Requirements". A OVY of the regoix == s can be obtained by calling (619) 573 -1415. Payment for the disposal of n— friable a sbestos-containing ==ids sban be included in the price per linear foot bid for caw wager main and no separate payment will b t allowed therefor. 306 -5.2.2 yISo^SAL OF ERTAM &AJI MSTOS: All friable asbestos.GMtainiug =aterials (materiel that can be m=nbI4 pubmriZ4 or reduced to powder in- hand) we regulated as a bazardovs waste and d all be trangmud by a lioeased hazardous waste bawler and disposed of in ea appropriate landMI Upon discovery of non- friable asbestos, the Contractor shall bignediately notify the Engineer. payanent for the disposal of fi iable asbestos - containing materials shall be in accordmum with Subsection 3- 2.2.3. A: 306-9 306 -9.1 The Pipe Bursting system is defined as the reconsUuction of cWrIting V2:vity sewer pipe by installing as approved pipe material, by mem of approved method. The moving device cbosen stroll be suitable for the existing soils coedit ow aid shall be sized properly so as to break out the etasftg pipe end so that the proposed pipe may be installed, The tool shall be of dimensions such that the design maximum diaram of the tutmel shall not exceed the maximum outside diameter ofthe new pipe plus one Pipe 'bursting material shall be solid wall polyetbYlene pipe MM). 'The new sewer rosin shall be installer on the same lime and grade as the wdsting sewer main, as shown on the plans. If tie Contractor installs the pipe off line or Bade it shall be removed and replaced to the ca met location at no cost to the City.. If misaligatnent is eaoourntered duff installation due to voids surrotm&Z the c fisting pipe, the Contractor shall replace the defective sirtion by making a point repair with The approval of the Resident Engineer and in woordance with Section 500 -1.2, or by otber measures aeeeptable to the Resident Engineer. The Contractor shell be ceavpenssted for such owective measures Only if it is proven to the Resident En&= that such dVAcWtirW are due to existing voids. It is the Contractor's responsibility to inform and show proof to the Res,rirnt Bn&cer or the misalignment will be considered to be caused by the Contractor's failure to follow, correct installation procedures and corrective measures shall be done at no cost to the OI . ' ` "� 109 RIGHT OF WAY ENG. 7607321367 11122/04 03:21pm P. 001 r Right -Of -Way Engineering Services, Inc. Land Surveying FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET DATE: November 22. 2004 _ TO: City of Encinitas FROM: Mike Schlumoberger ATTN: Kia Hefner JOB NO. RE: Encinitas Blvd - Calle Magdalena Sewer MESSAGE: Kip, these are the/field notes showing cuts and flowline elevations and the coordinate sheet showing rim elevations for the manholes on Calle Magdalena. If I am missing any information you requested please let me know. Thank you, Mike TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES TRANSMITTED (INCLUDING COVER SHEET): 3 /f transmission does not include the number of pages noted above, pAmse calf (760) 732 -1366. 4167 Avenida de la Plata Suite 114 • Oceanside, CA 92056 • (760) 732 -1366 • FAX(760) 732 -1367 • Email roweng @cox.net RIGHT OF WAY ENG. 7607321367 SuRVEYEO BY .. .. ................. DATE SURVEY OF INDEX 5 1 0 x_110 ppi 81%le milt 7-46 ts 9 j. =100, so (.:5 G'' - I as -I,- 9 = 113,07' 77 10- Zoo --- - -- -41-- --.. 4* S5 ,f I In = 115, 65' 31 MD 11/22/04 03:21PM P. 002 4 1144778. 9777 PAGE 4?e-, RIGHT OF WAY ENG. 7607921367 11122104 09:41am P. 001 Right -Of -Way Engineering Services, Inc. Land Surveying FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET DATE: November 22. 2004 TO: City of Encinitas FROM: Mike Schlumpberger ATTN: K,'[) Hefner JOB NO. RE: Encinitas Blvd. - Calla Magdalena Sewer MESSAGE: Kip, these are the field notes showing cuts and flowline elevations and the coordinate sheet showing rim elevations for the manholes on Calla Magdalena. If I am missing any information you requested please let me know. Thank you, Mike TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES TRANSMITTED (INCLUDING COVER SHEET): 3 if transmission does not include the number of pages noted above, please ca/ (760) 732- 7366. 4167 Avenida de Is Plata Suite 114 • Oceanside, CA 92056 • (760) 732 -1366 • FAX(760) 732 -1367 . Email roweng @cox.net RIGHT OF WAY ENG. 7607321367 SIMEYED GY 11/22/04 03:41am P. 002 5:51114 "55 F l."01-UE MA6DRGCAIA a,* VCP Lo Ll s5,-2jj 412C)o e- %36't P, i L2 e M u- rl - a, v p lt7 e4-= I o Rim EL- 113,68 ✓ep "CE ELF 103-13 jrw-w 1205 rur1 gt-z 124, /t EL- 11 -T•64 F- U-.1 23, 77 /1. o 8 )t It-' Al, 7-, S. SIC p C-IP,47-1 ucp Rim EL? 8 " vc 10 p Z:L- 1 RIGHT OF WAY ENG. 7607621967 11122104 09:41am P. 006 55, 1962725.91467, 200, 1962519.21287, 201, 1962331.45040, 205, 1962109.32531, 208, 1961893.43892, ENCTSEW.TXT 6244623.35689, 115.65, 6244627.13326, 111.66, 6244699.96425, 113.88, 6244854.24202, 126.11, 6244872.72522, 134.85, Page 1 MH N0.8 SMH SMH SMH SMH Confirmation Report— Memory Send Page Date & Time: Line 1 Machine ID 001 Jan -12 -05 04:35pm Job number 089 Date Jan -12 04:33pm To 8916197415658 Number of pages 002 Start time Jan -12 04:33pm End time Jan -12 04:35pm Pages sent 002 Status OK Job number 089 * ** SEND SUCCESSFUL * ** TRANSMITTAL FORM City of Eacaaitas FAX 760/633 -2818 SOS 8. Vnlcsa AVeauO Eagiaeeriag Eaciaitas, CA 92024 -3633 760/633 -2770 TO: �- OF: Qy o�-� � � ti- 1ST2vGT l0 7L% ADDRESS: Q Call A3�ip � Review 8c Call 0 Rcview 8a Rim•• -••• � F_Y_I. ® Please Haadle Par Our Conversation LJ Phase Reply UY COIvII�N'I'S All, X o TRANSMITTAL FORM City of Encinitas FAX 760/633 -2818 505 S. Vulcan Avenue Engineering Encinitas, CA 92024 -3633 760/633 -2770 DATE 2 SENDTO FAX #: (� �f ) 74 I —S �'S �= NO. OF PAGES: 2 -- TO: OF: 1�� ►�-�t� �;��e%��T �i �' l_v ;�'�-�- r2�C_ i t�% Il�� ADDRESS: FROM: �� +' ��' CZ" PHONE: _ (760) 633- Z-7 7 5 ❑ Call ASAP ❑ Review & Call ® Please Handle ❑ Per Our Conversation COMMENTS: ❑ Review & Return E F.Y.I. ❑ Please Reply by C J\j C %A C-1 RTT A r c-- r\/C N ri f= 5r - ` Tc;1 f� 1 C �= G� JAN.12.2005 11 :54AM METROPOLITAN CONST NO.544 P.2i2 METROPOLITAN CONSTRUCTION 8614 Troy 5t. Phone (619) 741 5643 Fax (619) 741 -5658 REQUEST FOR INFORMATION # 05 Date: January 12, 2W5 Project Name: To: ft of Encinitas C.I.P. No.: Engineering ant contractor. Attn: IGPP Hefner Contract No.: From: Alberto Larioe Drawing Ref: Spec Ref: Encinitas Boulevard Trunk Sewer Replacement CEE010 WIP No.: . Metropolitan ConbTUcffon Subject Nee�ed Concrete Encasement Response By. ASAP In lieu of concrete encasement, Metropolitan Construction request permission to use Class 200 PVC Pipe Per Department of Health code 64630 -E -2, and per California Administration Code- Title 22. If this is acceptable please advise. By: Jose 0, Ork, Admin, Date: � 2 2 05 Reply /Solution Date: IQ T-6 THE �►- QE_ S —It -t t�= By: P,5 FEE P- UNT k Design itailt�-$ g g A ; t v i\, . �v {=_ N GA3 E M EA,.; ; S This documeK l informational nly. The above reply Is intended as a clarification onl aftt� for change In contract price or time. If p n � �V �a-i S Immediately. you do not concur do not roceed and Hoff the Constructionto Manager e a basis Forwarded By; Contracts Manager --s signature Date: WW-- Nft.M"nADm?. WP6 JAN.12.2005 1 :25PM METROPOLITAN CONST NO.553 P.2i2 General Building & N S T R U C January 12, 2005 Greg Shields, P.E. City of Encinitas 505 South 'Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 -3633 Re: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Replacement (CBE01D) Dear Mr. Shields; ; Contractors Utense No. 790532 We are in process of contracting with a firm, to do further soils exploration, we encourage the City of Encinitas to participate with MC on this investigation. We need a more thorough investigation since the one test taken is not representative of what is being encountered, if you have any questions, please contact me or Alberto Larios at 619 - 741 -5643. Jose 0. Ortiz President cc: Kif Hefner, PM Ron Brady, Inspector Sean Manning, CM Ra Box 477, Bonita, CA, 91908 -0477 Phone (619)741.5643 Fax (619)741.5658 Confirmation Report— Memory Send Page : 001 Date & Time: Jan -12 -05 04:51pm Line 1 Lachine ID Job number 090 Date Jan -12 04:49pm To : 5916194438960 Number of pages 002 Start time Jan -12 04:49pm End time Jan -12 04:51pm Pages sent 002 Status OK Job number 090 * ** SEND SUCCESSFUL * ** - - TIZANSMIrrTAL FORM (REM City oiEncinitss FAX 760/633 -2818 X06 S. Valcsa AV6IIU0 Tagineorlag Encinitas, CA 92024 -3633 '760/633 -2770 LATE T?�� d`� gEN�TO FAX#: �6 L-r 7 3 _96G NO. OF PAGES:_ OF: -f- • ApORESS- \ Ps- FROM' �p� Q Call jk-1 Ap �^ Review Sc Call O Roviow 8c R ■ F_Yx. Please Handle L-., Per Our Coave+�ti� 0 PI. Reply by COIVII�'S: i 2 � icarun g anu uuwuui • Replacement of Median, Curb, Land LS 1 $34,500.00 $ 34,500.00 $ - $ - 3 Sharing and Bracing LS 1 $4,025.00 $ 4,025.00 10'% $ 402.50 $ - 4 Excavation, Backfill, and Recom act LS 1 $69,000.00 $ 69,000.00 10'% $ 6,900.00 $ - 5 Traffic Control LS 1 $41,400.00 $ 41,400.00 10' %, $ 4,140.00 $ - v 12" HDPE Sewer Pie Pi e Burst LF 2,607 $161.00 $ 419,727.00 390 $ 62,790.00 $ 7 12" PVC Sewer Pipe (O en Trench LF 469 $155.25 $ 72,81225 $ $ 8 Manholes 0- 10 Feet depth EA 8 $4,140.00 $ 33,120.00 $ $ 9 Manholes 10— 16 feet depth EA 6 $5,888.00 $ 35,328.00 $ - $ - 10 Manholes, Drop Inlet EA 2 $5,750.00 $ 11,500.00 $ $ I I 4 -inch Service Lateral Reconnection EA 1 $1,725.00 $ 1,725.00 $ $ 12 6 -inch Service Lateral Reconnection EA 5 $1,725.00 $ 8,625.00 - 13 8 -inch Service Lateral Reconnection EA 1 $1,700.00 $ 1,700.00 $ - $ - 14 Connection to Existing 12 -inch VC S EA 1 $3,680.00 $ 3,680.00 $ - $ - 15 Connection to existing 12 -inch PE S EA 1 $3,680.00 $ 3,680.00 $ - $ - 16 Relocate Existing 8 -inch Sewer Later EA 1 $3,220.00 $ 3,220.00 $ $ 17 6- inch 'thick Asphalt Concrete Dino SF 6,000 $7.19 $ 43,140.00 $ - $ - I8 Aggregate Base (Contingency item ) SF 6,000 $1.14 $ 0,840.00 $ - $ - 11) Biaxial Geo grid, Tensar BX -100 or e SF Low $1.40 $ 1,400.00 $ - $ - 20 Excavation and Removal of Unsuita CY 50 $57.50 $ 2,875.00 $ $ 21 Remove Existing 12 -inch Asphalt Co SF 4,000 $4.03 $ 16,120.00 $ $ - 22 Replace Traffic Loo s Damaged by LS 1 $14,000.00 $ 14,000.00 $ - $ - 23 Construction Bypass LS 1 $23,000.00 $ 23,000.00 20% $ 4,600.00 $ - 24 Water Service Relocation (Contin e EA 1 $1,800.00 $ 1,800.00 $ - $ - Subtotal $ 860,117.25 Subtotal $ 79,522.50 Subtotal $ - CHANGE ORDERS 3 4 s TOTAL CHANGE ORDER COST Subtotal $ - $ $ ORIGINAL CONTRACT $ 860,11725 $ 79,522.50 $ - CHANGE ORDERS TOTAL $ - $ $ TOTAL AMOUNT DUE $ 860,1 17.25 $ 79,522.50 $ LESS RETENTION 10% $ 7,952.25 $ - REDUCED RETENTION $71,570.25 LESS PREVIOUS PAY I LESS PREVIOUS PAY 2 LESS PREVIOUS PAY 3 LESS PREVIOUS PAY 4 PROGRESS PAYMENT DUE $71,570.25 $71,570.25 PERCENT PAID OF ORIGINAL CONTRACT 9% 0% PERCENT PAID OF CONTRACT CHANGES PERCENT PAID OF TOTAL CONTRACT 9%, 0% City of Encinitas Page 1 1/12/2005 Dec =13 -2004 n :59Pm From- T -095 P.001 /003 F -130 4909 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 220 San Diego, Califomia 92123 Tel: (858) 496 -0500 Fax: (858) 496-0505 Facsimile Transmittal To: CMPW- Fax: �3 Phone: G p Co 3 3 2 Re: CC: TV�—F—;Mf Wt7720. 0 Urgent Q For Review K ( PP - From Project: Project No: Date: Pages: Iti-t 1 Kam' O s�/- IMI S /ad/ _(excludes this page) Q Please Comment 0 Please Reply J Ju f f, u%v 'ea� 'V► If you did not receive the entire umisrnittal, Please call (858) 496 -0500. Dam: Tbw: Initials: Dec -13 -2004 03:59pm From- Met ro p olitan construction GENERAL BUILDING & ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS Lie. No. 790532 nars: 19-113 (Zoo T -095 P- 003/003 F -130 FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL FORM TO. ATTN:5CQYI r• Hn�� FROM: SUBJUcr:.�•�� I rwl �xG�ii. NUMBER OF PAGES (Tuludiu this to mmittal form): Alm"rmtrnust, inAMMENTIVINBTRUCTIONS: PROJECT NUMBER: FAX NUMM ( .To yqb a 44!dGd., ' f/ ?'TP : /�t-7--rcch vio G o°j r S • Go H'� /r+�a., ualS /-F /y�o -� YF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THE PAGES LISTED ABOVE, PLEASE CALL AS SOON AS POSSMLB FOR RETRANSMISSION" PHONE: (619) 741 -5643 FAX: (619) 741 -5658 THANK YOU. SENT,. Date: Tune: InitialS:_.,,^. Received Doc - 13-2004 15:25 From- To- Page 001 Dec - 13-2004 01:59pm From- Decembet 13, 2004 Seas F. M=11ing Richard Brady & Associates 4909 Murphy Canyon Road. Suite 220 San Diego CA 92123 Reference: EncWtss Boulevard TTtm* Sewer Replacement Subject: User'a Guide and Safety Manual from TT Technologies, Inc Duar Mr. Maud -as, T -095 P.002/003 F -130 & E0011maing COI1%aC= Unmse Na 790632 In reference to tits meeting an December 8, 2004, you asked why Metropolitan Construction (MG) subeoaaaetor did not uttli� a larger hammer on the bursting head. That are oTher available options that could have been utilized, but let's !leap in mind that the b0Bt pipe is an 8 inch diameter pipe. Please reference the attached "User's Guide and safety Manual" from TT Technologies, Ium This guide is backed by 30 plus years of experience, Job Parameters. Section 2 subsection B states 'bast pipe sire Wiff a¢fut 60th h vftr/ WwF4r mognatlow andwowh ss&c9od. ,5rn4aUmur host pipe in d&uh F99canditians can p rsent pmfi(W s 6""A kWsr, neon poWafiddmn:vrer gill ndt fit *S4 the fiWt pipe. Spatial saes tools can de adapted to soiae t/tese pra6(sms." In the case of this reference project, it is our position that the experience of TT Technologies was used to size the equipment deemed accessary to complete the required OF installation. On page 7, figure 5 letter A indicates to size the "Gamdocrack Tool" to tho diameter of the host pipe, MC Subcontractor Maven npplW a 10 >z dimpowor which c=cds the host pipe ID by 2 % incbss. If you roformco the Osu akmiaeh roquireaments an page 21, it spegWcs to use it 10 ton winch, and Mocon used it 20 ton winch, Our sub has attemptod to use the 14 inch baauuar tool on small diameter pipe, and the result has nos been positive. plrat, tho tool has greater tendency to have sags, increased annular spaco, On= the bammor is not acting as a guide within the host pipe alignment. Second, the most common problem has been cable friction on the aching, of the pipe, which has frayed, or tom the cable apart. Inc 14 inch tool is designed for pulling 16" OD, and IS OD materials to lieu of 14 OD material spmMed for this project. The specified 12 snob M pipe is 14" OD, and the industry standards are using an expander 3 inches greater than the outside diameter of the proposed pipe per the TT Technologies Representative. The smallest expander available for this 14 inch hammer is 19 inches OD, five inches greater than the 14 inch OD pipe required for the project. There are many option out there, but with the available resources, sire of existing host pipe, soils conditions, and risk involved per the TT manual in upsiziug (75 percent- it's an experimental task), but achievable in some soils. If you bava any cluostious, ploaso feel f= to call. Sin ly, Jose O, Ortiz Psesi nt P.O. Box 477, 9onIW CA, 91908.0477 Mane (619)741.5643 Fax (619)741.5656 Recsived Dec -13 -2004 16:26 From- To- Page 002 Greg'Shields= FW: Encinitas Blvd Trunk SewerReplacement Project Page 1 From: "Neal Meyers" <NMeyers @daley- heft.com> To: <gshields @ci.encinitas.ca.us >, <jschwarm @ci.encinitas.ca.us> Date: 12/9/2004 1:16:45 PM Subject: FW: Encinitas Blvd. Trunk SewerReplacement Project Greg and Jace: Please obtain and forward this information to him ASAP. Maybe Arme or the TT representative would know the equipment information. Neal From: Samuel Ariaratnam [ mailto :Samuel.Ariaratnam @asu.edu] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 1:05 PM To: Neal Meyers Cc: Jace Schwarm Subject: RE: Encinitas Blvd. Trunk SewerReplacement Project Neal, I'll examine these documents. Also, could you please send me information on the equipment that Marcon was using, their proposed construction plan (i.e. pit locations, etc.), and site photographs? What is your deadline for me to provide you feedback? Sam --------------------------- --------------------------- Samuel T. Ariaratnam, Ph.D., P.E. Associate Professor Ira A. Fulton School of Engineering 13 Cc, P.O. Box 870204 5�6, \ j' 0A Arizona State University Tempe, Arizona 85287 -0204 � A- fl) r \ � � � � r � ,L� tc tel (480) 965 -7399; fax (480) 965 -1769; �� LL C Greg Shields - Re: Encinitas Blvd. Pipe Rursting Project Page 9 From: <PipeDr96 @aol.com> To: <GSHIELDS @ci.encinitas.ca.us> Date: 12/13/2004 6:15:08 AM Subject: Re: Encinitas Blvd. Pipe Bursting Project Yes, I have been to the site. The soil conditions in the immediate pipe zone appear to be adequate for pipe bursting, the soil outside the pipe zone is very tough. The width of the original pipezone appears to be close to 24" = or On Friday, I received phone calls from both Jose Ortiz and Bob Morrow. Collins K. Orton California Regional Manager TT Technologies, Inc. Office 800 - 533 -2078 Fax 650 - 368 -0832 E -mail PipeDr96 @aol.com This message (including any attachments) is confidential and may be privileged. If you have received it by mistake please notify the sender by return e -mail and delete this message from your system. Any unauthorized use or dissemination of this message in whole or in part is strictly prohibited. TT Technologies Inc. shall not be liable for the improper or incomplete transmission of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in its receipt or damage to your system. TT TECHNOLOGIES INC. does not guarantee that the integrity of this communication has been maintained or that this communication is free of viruses, interceptions or interference. Greg Shields - FW: Encinitas Blvd Trunk SewerReplacement Project Pale 2 g From: Neal Meyers [mailto:NMeyers @daley- heft.comj Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 11:25 AM To: Samuel Ariaratnam Cc: Jace Schwarm Subject: Encinitas Blvd. Trunk SewerReplacement Project Dr. Ariaratnam: Thank you for passing along to me your Curriculum Vitae. I have talked with the City of Encinitas and I have been authorized to retain your services in this matter at your rate of $250.00 /hour. If you have a formal retainer agreement, please pass it along. As we briefly discussed yesterday, the project involves the replacement of an existing 8 -inch Vitrified Clay Sewer Pipe (VCP) along Encinitas Blvd., which is currently flowing at capacity, with a new 12 -inch Polyethylene Sewer Pipe in order to handle additional flows. The pipe busting method is specified. I understand that the total length is about 2,600 feet. The low bidder was Metropolitan Construction at $860,117.25. It is my understanding that Metropolitan is using a subcontractor named Marcon to assist with the pipe bursting technology. The project is currently in progress and we have run into a standstill. The contractor has completed only about 600 feet into the job and ran into trouble. I am told that the problems include the bursting head becoming stuck, breaking and ultimately making so little progress that the contractor will not continue. He has suggested changing the job to a traditional open trench project, which the City is very reluctant to do for a number of reasons, including traffic (this is a very heavily traveled main thoroughfare of the City), potential underground interferences and other reasons. We request your assistance in helping to identifying the source of the contractor's problems so we can make the appropriate decision on how to proceed. We are concerned the problem is with the contractor's means and methods, as we have been told by others in the industry that with the right equipment, this job should work. However, we want to be sure to have an objective, independent view from an expert in the pipe bursting field such as you. I am attaching project documents and specifications. The section on Pipe Bursting Operations is found at section 306 -9, beginning at page B -53 of the specifications. I am arranging to have the soils reports sent to you by express mail at the Geronimo Road address. I am sure you will have a number of questions. The City's engineer is Greg Shields. He can either answer your questions or lead you in the right direction. His number is: 760- 633 -2600. Also, Michael Arme of BRH GarverWest has some general knowledge about the project. You can contact him at 619- 265- 0537x3 or his cell is 619 - 247 -1165. Finally, we are told that Colin Orton(sp ?) who is the TT Technology representative may know something about this project. I understand you may know Mr. Orten and you are free to contact him. Greg Shields - FW: Encinitas Blvd. Trunk SewerReplacement Project Page 3 The bottom line is that we want to make an informed decision as to how to proceed with this contractor and the project and we need to make it quickly. I very much appreciate your willingness to help on such short notice. If you believe it would be important for you to travel here to take a look at the job yourself, that is something the City is prepared to entertain. Thank you, Neal S. Meyers, Esq. Daley & Heft 462 Stevens Avenue, Suite 201 Solana Beach, Ca. 92075 858 - 755 -5666 nmeyers @Daley- Heft.com Greg Shields - RE: Encinitas Sewer ReDlacement Pa e 1 From: "Sean Manning" <smanning @rbrady.net> To: "Greg Shields" < GSHIELDS @ci.encinitas.ca.us> Date: 12/9/2004 3:39:30 PM Subject: RE: Encinitas Sewer Replacement Greg, I will pull together the photos we have. Also, I will pull the submittal when I get back to the office. In the meantime, I believe we transmitted all final copies of submittals to the City so it may be quicker for you to pull the submittal out of Kipp's files. Sean - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Greg Shields [mailto :GSHIELDS @ci.encinitas.ca.usj Sent: Thu 12/9/2004 3:01 PM To: Sean Manning Cc: Subject: Fwd: Encinitas Sewer Replacement Sean If you would respond to this to both Neal and myself. greg Greg: If you have the photos you took in digital format, could you please e-mail them to me? Also, looking at the specifications, Section 306 -9.1.3 requires the pipe bursting contractor to submit a very detailed submittal, including contingency plans if there is a stoppage of the bursting head. Was such a submittal received? I would like to see whatever was submitted and eventually approved by the City and /or Brady. Thanks, Neal S. Meyers, Esq. Daley & Heft 462 Stevens Avenue, Suite 201 Solana Beach, Ca. 92075 858 - 755 -5666 nmeyers @Daley- Heft.com Greg Shields, P.E. Field Operations 760- 633 -2778 Greg Shields - FW: Encinitas Blvd. Trunk SewerReplacement Project Page 1 From: "Neal Meyers" <NMeyers @daley - heft.com> To: <gshields @ci.encinitas.ca.us >, <jschwarm @ci.encinitas.ca.us> Date: 12/9/2004 1:16:45 PM Subject: FW: Encinitas Blvd. Trunk SewerReplacement Project Greg and Jace: Please obtain and forward this information to him ASAP. Maybe Arme or the TT representative would know the equipment information. Neal From: Samuel Ariaratnam [ mailto :Samuel.Ariaratnam @asu.edu] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 1:05 PM To: Neal Meyers Cc: Jace Schwarm Subject: RE: Encinitas Blvd. Trunk SewerReplacement Project Neal, I'll examine these documents. Also, could you please send me information on the equipment that Marcon was using, their proposed construction plan (i.e. pit locations, etc.), and site photographs? What is your deadline for me to provide you feedback? Sam Samuel T. Ariaratnam, Ph.D., P.E. Associate Professor Ira A. Fulton School of Engineering P.O. Box 870204 Arizona State University Tempe, Arizona 85287 -0204 tel (480) 965 -7399; fax (480) 965 -1769 Greg Shields - FW: Encinitas Blvd Trunk From: Neal Meyers [mailto:NMeyers @daley- heft.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 11:25 AM To: Samuel Ariaratnam Cc: Jace Schwarm Subject: Encinitas Blvd. Trunk SewerReplacement Project Dr. Ariaratnam: Thank you for passing along to me your Curriculum Vitae. I have talked with the City of Encinitas and I have been authorized to retain your services in this matter at your rate of $250.00 /hour. If you have a formal retainer agreement, please pass it along. As we briefly discussed yesterday, the project involves the replacement of an existing 8 -inch Vitrified Clay Sewer Pipe (VCP) along Encinitas Blvd., which is currently flowing at capacity, with a new 12 -inch Polyethylene Sewer Pipe in order to handle additional flows. The pipe busting method is specified. I understand that the total length is about 2,600 feet. The low bidder was Metropolitan Construction at $860,117.25. It is my understanding that Metropolitan is using a subcontractor named Marcon to assist with the pipe bursting technology. The project is currently in progress and we have run into a standstill. The contractor has completed only about 600 feet into the job and ran into trouble. I am told that the problems include the bursting head becoming stuck, breaking and ultimately making so little progress that the contractor will not continue. He has suggested changing the job to a traditional open trench project, which the City is very reluctant to do for a number of reasons, including traffic (this is a very heavily traveled main thoroughfare of the City), potential underground interferences and other reasons. We request your assistance in helping to identifying the source of the contractor's problems so we can make the appropriate decision on how to proceed. We are concerned the problem is with the contractor's means and methods, as we have been told by others in the industry that with the right equipment, this job should work. However, we want to be sure to have an objective, independent view from an expert in the pipe bursting field such as you. I am attaching project documents and specifications. The section on Pipe Bursting Operations is found at section 306 -9, beginning at page B -53 of the specifications. I am arranging to have the soils reports sent to you by express mail at the Geronimo Road address. I am sure you will have a number of questions. The City's engineer is Greg Shields. He can either answer your questions or lead you in the right direction. His number is: 760- 633 -2600. Also, Michael Arme of BRH GarverWest has some general knowledge about the project. You can contact him at 619- 265- 0537x3 or his cell is 619 - 247 -1165. Finally, we are told that Colin Orton(sp ?) who is the TT Technology representative may know something about this project. I understand you may know Mr. Orten and you are free to contact him. Shields - FW: Encinitas Blvd. Trunk Sewer Replacement Project The bottom line is that we want to make an informed decision as to how to proceed with this contractor and the project and we need to make it quickly. I very much appreciate your willingness to help on such short notice. If you believe it would be important for you to travel here to take a look at the job yourself, that is something the City is prepared to entertain. Thank you, Neal S. Meyers, Esq. Daley & Heft 462 Stevens Avenue, Suite 201 Solana Beach, Ca. 92075 858 - 755 -5666 nmeyers @Daley- Heft.com CITY OF ENCINITAS ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT WEEKLY PROGRESS MEETING AGENDA September 21, 2004 City of Encinitas City Hall CONTRACT SUMMARY Contract Time NTP Date: ............................ .... ............................... August 2, 2004 Commencement Date: ...................................................... August 2, 2004 Original Allowed Work Days: ............................................ 90 Original Contract Completion Date: ..................................... December 4, 2004 Days completed :............................. ............................... 36 Elapsed Contract Time: .................................................... 40% Contract Price Original Contract Amount: ............................................... $800,000.00 Approved Change Order(s): .............................................. $0.00 Revised Contract Amount: ............................................... $800,000.00 Amount Payable to Date: ................................................ $0.00 Retention to Date: ......................................................... $0.00 Total Invoiced to Date :.................... ............................... $0.00 Percent Invoiced to Date :................. ............................... 0% Discussion: Progress of the work • Mobilizing. • Welded Pipe Section (length varies per reach). • 8 -10 Days to install bypass piping once the bypass submittal is accepted. Submittals/RFI's • Revised baseline is needed. 0500 • X5� 4J6 0505 Page 2 • Two (2) week look ahead is required. • Bypass Plan is top priority. Pending Change Orders • No pending change orders. Future Areas of Concern 1. Request that contractor identify areas for welding that is closer to reaches 2. Transport of fused off -site pipe needs protection? May use area closer to reaches so that pipe does not need to be dragged (By End of Week) 3. 16 -inch waterline on Saxony Rd. too close to sewer. Contractor suggests open trench for 20 ft. segment. 4. STA. 3 +50 10" ACP is close (385 Top) contractor will dig up before bursting. 5. Work in Cal -Trans Right of Way are long reaches. Additional MH's may be required to avoid going past hours of operation. Going outside hours of operation is out of the question. Solution to Issues 5a. For the work in Cal -Trans ROW, an extra MH could be added to reduce the length of each reach. Another solution is to move the existing MH's to reduce each length. Previous Issues Future schedule • Contact San Dieguito before coming near the water pipes • Start potholing Sunday night, finish potholing 7:30pm Monday night Other Issues Potential Changes: • 8" Stub out in MH #14 & 15 • Drop in MH #8 • Potential MH #1 New Business • The next meeting will be held on Tuesday, September 28, 2004 Change Order Requests (COR) (submitted to CM by Contractor) RFP COR Status Description A roved Chan a Orders CO (Submitted to Owner by CM) RFP I COR CO DESCRIPTION TIME AMOUNT STATUS 9 Woa • 9.''p'p -, & owf Va'Yaro M"Vd Yi/ 300 • 7" _64'p Watfro" 9-0 /P ofx) ("53% 4�w 0505 3 0 0 0 � U s c L, N H C 0 m m w— m o o U � W � i i L 0 U � N : p C a. O CL 0 R c o L) O wcu o U W E O z U N O c LL N m U x 0 O J J m co co Q N z U z W W a P G z O m z m H 1— N W_ ❑ W z � I w W Q ❑ ❑ W tll U w W a ❑ z O a U U) W z O U W W CL U) w W m g ❑ z 00 v LO OD co c0 O O O O O) co CK w w Z Z z Z z z O z M r N N N •- n m m co 00 co m m m v v v v v v v et v v a O O O O O GO O O O O O r m m m Q m v �n <o � co w o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o r ta. m E i- v c 0 C H ea a T E 7 0 `m s E z 9 w O d OU . a v� a� a3 � � U O I � d a 0 � N o � o U c � 0 o U N 6J E Wiz Z � O N N s a v� a F 0 Z ai Cl? J O O �p V) M _ N N C m M r n m Cl) �0)i O Cl) Oi O c+) O O r O N 0 M O z m r- U t C:,L m c O N w w v m g o �X N —O O m m m m o •1 o a a a ° „ a m x W o LL c m m cc a� v o CL CL OL S c m m m W a ii U U U Q m v �n <o � co w o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o r ta. m E i- v c 0 C H ea a T E 7 0 `m s E z 9 w O d OU . a v� a� a3 � � U O I � d a 0 � N o � o U c � 0 o U N 6J E Wiz Z � O N N s a v� a F 0 v ai Cl? O O �p V) M _ N O Ci 0 M r n m Cl) �0)i O Cl) Oi O c+) M N N t.- r O N 0 M O z Q m v �n <o � co w o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o r ta. m E i- v c 0 C H ea a T E 7 0 `m s E z 9 w O d OU . a v� a� a3 � � U O I � d a 0 � N o � o U c � 0 o U N 6J E Wiz Z � O N N s a v� a F c 0 U 7 in C C C O O i N 0 U U � a� • C d U cn co •c o L) O w m O U U w Z U m O zm �- Q � M zW H � O w z W� o ui r 0 01 O W m W %J 0 IL m w 0 U) H Z W 2 u~i = LU + CO F- ° U LLJ Lu owww-wm 2E:a¢r 0.? ¢°LIJULLZJJ S MZ =7j w¢ ~10oul I - =F- `-mfnW Uz2JYzW°5= O O � > a wL) -U ¢ mO =!dt< m7 Z W F- N =JZ aCo ao W�=��j� WMU �z0 = 0J0 w- mzz¢JYz =) 0 -ZLLR:Ow 6PZ02O°za 02 N¢Z¢OIJ --w° O N J t cc cc cr. z o P 2 0 ° (n V 0) Q F- to w w Z C) w Z m w z o = W cZg ¢ n af mJ WZO °Z WOO OOZmW w3Q Z ~- 0 omt F-02¢ =UZ °UQJWrL =00 ¢ W Z W a LL J = m O W° P W°� W W -,ZW3:m°wm aooZW J¢�= W— Z_J- WN_ �awQ"- �JL�LO `nO�=waoz ruJw = ~0 E tL a M w ~ I.- —z J Lu =zJW WJWO a a?oEi0a >�Lo �Ci °�2WOZ_w wWaaO200 =�UZWaWQ0^ LL �� 3: 0Cw-w. caowozo owam _TV] _o R O M W J ° J fn_• ZvUJ UR'O''0 O dcoaw a LLJJ aOOj c O U 2 a) N 0 O U C ca O 0 i 0 i 0 m aUi O O CL U m m L SU w v o c U W E Z aD �o a U � V O J LL _Z U Z W 0 _ z N a° z p W z W. W M Q w p� W FU a W w W N z a U) w w z 0 a U W 0 w m z O M rn W aD i COLS ik F p� w a =W�YOC3W Cl) Ld (j) w 0 CL LLJ p Z =Wlnp ZWw ~W a '`�n7 X Z W °m2- J =QQmOa aLqaxn.w p0=~ aO�oo Cnyiz�Cn< Wz— dRgmc/))UU2 0¢wW��0 -' -- 4lwwzmwwwzDgw a ZOzo NHQU� jw1 -�F-U oom = -Ja�nZogla- wpC/) F'OCnWwCwn �m ~2 WZooF= -a 6=?zozz -ipoa 0E- WaZ -UagO o tY z XQIw -W W —zwm =a o Ww-wgZOogaWo °Wa =WaWwcJnzz W�d�F -a =wz= CYwio0 a h z W W U 3 a J g w N 0 v O M O N h Qw Z W J -- 7 F- Q -UZ Lo 0Mw Uw2p LL I U)iWo - Wa =z¢ J a J n J O B U0W Ujw =rn� � LL F Z 3. W o o ��OW� zu)w zaUz> OzU) �o�F. -9a LLJ CO Wm m - Opco o ~J a?on- 1—aW aJWrnFZ- �U) 0 >=F-WC0 Wz WWZM W50 w QQ COUPOOWmQz CD 0U " =v)V)w W WS cow >crO amo aUa0.o.Fi. J a w w a a CL O M O N N DA 0.. 0 N N v E H U m O i CL N l6 U C W O U c a� U 0 z Q O ZW H� W Z c 0 O w N O O U W C � .@ W W O a' O i N g 0 ,- U L C O U M 0 O N .0 U C W E O Z W U (n N Z O CL a U) m W V 0 J I.L z ot o H IL � v Q U) �.,. W O Z U W Z m W 2 M N a m E a C O E 7 H ea m 4 V H W O m a E z_ O H M W O M N CL 0 O N 8 CIO b E-� • EX. MH • 8" PVC CAP • • • • 8" PVC TEE J • SDR -35 • • • • SDR35 • PVC PIPE SOLVENT • WELDED • IN MH 1 DETAIL NOT TO SCALE FINISH SURFACE SEAL SPACE W/ EPDXY GROUT 3 FEET ± `-- EXISTING 8" SEWER LATERAL CORE DRILL 8 112" DIA. HOLE & INSTALL LINK SEAL PROVIDE 3 316 SS BRACKETS W/ 1/2" DIA. 316 SS EPDXY ANCHORS DROP CONNECTION PIPE INVERT SHALL MATCH THE SPRINGLINE OF THE EXIT PIPE. CHIP OUT INVERT AND REPAIR W/ EPDXY GROUT TO SUIT. 4 ' 'v ' •a f 1 DETAIL NOT TO SCALE FINISH SURFACE SEAL SPACE W/ EPDXY GROUT 3 FEET ± `-- EXISTING 8" SEWER LATERAL CORE DRILL 8 112" DIA. HOLE & INSTALL LINK SEAL PROVIDE 3 316 SS BRACKETS W/ 1/2" DIA. 316 SS EPDXY ANCHORS DROP CONNECTION PIPE INVERT SHALL MATCH THE SPRINGLINE OF THE EXIT PIPE. CHIP OUT INVERT AND REPAIR W/ EPDXY GROUT TO SUIT. _i California R.,gional Water Quality )ntrol Board San Diego Region Terry Tamminen 9174 Sky Park Court, Suite 100, San Diego, Califomia 92123 -4340 Arnold Schwarzenegger Secretary for (858) 467 -2952 • Fax (858) 571 -6972 Governor Environmental http: / /www.swrcb.ca.gov /rwgcb9 Protection Certified Mail No. 7004 2510 0004 5830 7592 Return Receipt Requested December 14, 2004 Mr. Shawn Atherton In Reply Refer To: Wastewater Collection System Supervisor POTW:01- 0748.01:OTBRY City of Encinitas 505 S. Vulcan Ave. Encinitas, CA 92024 Dear Mr. Atherton: SUBJECT: NOTICE OF VIOLATION NO. 119- 2004 -0451 AGENCY: CITY OF ENCINITAS, WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM, ORDER NO. 96-04 YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT: Enclosed is a Notice of Violation (NOV) for the City of Encinitas. The violation specified in the NOV was reported via facsimile on October 18, 2004 to the Regional Board. Please refer to the enclosed NOV for details of the violation. You are required to take immediate steps to achieve compliance with Order No. 96 -04. The heading portion of this letter includes a Regional Board code number noted after "In reply refer to:" In order to assist us in the processing of your correspondence, please include this code number in the heading or subject line of all correspondence and reports to the Regional Board pertaining to this matter. Questions pertaining to the issuance of this Notice of Violation should be directed to Mr. Bryan Ott by phone at (858) 637 -5589 or by email at BOtt @waterboards.ca.gov. Written correspondence pertaining to this Notice of Violation should be directed to the following address: California Environmental Protection Agency 01 Recycled Paper Notice of Violation No. R9- 2004 -0451 -2- City of Encinitas, Wastewater Collection System Michael P. McCann Supervising Water Resource Control Engineer ATTN: Bryan Ott California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region 9174 Sky Park Court, Suite 100 San Diego, CA 92123 -4340 MICHAEL P. McCANN, P.E. Supervising Water Resource Control Engineer MPM:bdk:bao Violation Code: 188051 Enforcement Code: (NOV) R9 -2004 -0451 ; 96308 Enclosed: Notice of Violation R9- 2004 -0451 CC w/ enclosure: Order No. 96 -04 WDID No. 9 000000748 DATE Mr. Tom Huetteman, Chief, Compliance Office, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, M.S. WTR -7, San Francisco, CA 94105 Mr. Jack Miller, Chief, Land and Water Division, Department of Environmental Health, P.O. Box 129261, San Diego, CA 92112 -9261 Mr. Brian Bernados, State Department of Health Services, 1350 Front Street, Rm 2050 San Diego, CA 92101 California Environmental Protection Agency 0 Recycled Paper IN THE MATTER OF ) NOTICE OF VIOLATION No. R9- 2004 -0451 Mr. Shawn Atherton Wastewater Collection System Supervisor ) ) WDID No. 9 000000748 City of Encinitas ) Order No. 96 -04 505 S. Vulcan Ave. Encinitas, CA 92024 ) ) Discharge Violation YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT: The City of Encinitas notified this office on October 18, 2004 of a sanitary sewer overflow (SSO) of approximately 1,945 gallons that occurred on October 17, 2004 at Cottonwood Creek Park on Encinitas Boulevard. The cause of spill was attributed to a construction crew rupturing an out of service sewer bypass line that apparently was not empty. The SSO reached Cottonwood Creek, which drains to the Pacific Ocean at Moonlight Beach. The exact amount is unknown, but City Crews estimate that the maximum volume of the SSO reaching Cottonwood Creek would have been 1,945 gallons if the both the sewer line and subsequent basin were full. Signs warning of sewage - contaminated water were posted 100 yards north and south of the beach access point. The report noted that there was measurable precipitation within 72 hours prior to the reported incident. This sewer overflow constitutes a violation of Prohibition A.1 of Order No. 96 -04, General Waste Discharge Requirements Prohibiting Sanitary Sewer Overflows by Sewage Collection Agencies, which prohibits the discharge of sewage from a sanitary sewer system at any point upstream of a sewage treatment plant. This violation of Order No. 96 -04 is serious and may subject you to enforcement action by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region, including administrative enforcement orders requiring you to cease and desist from violations, or to clean up waste and abate existing or threatened conditions of pollution or nuisance; administrative civil liability in amounts of up to $10,000 per day per violation; referral to the State Attorney General for injunctive relief; and, referral to the District Attorney for criminal prosecution. At this time I am not recommending consideration of further enforcement action. If, however, new information about this discharge comes to light, or if future discharges of sewage or other violations of the Basin Plan or the Water Code occur, this specific discharge could become the basis for enforcement action by the Regional Board. Regional Board enforcement action could include the imposition of administrative civil liability, adoption of a cease and desist order or time schedule order, issuance of a cleanup and abatement order, or referral of the matter to the district attorney or state attorney general. Also, we will provide a written summary of the circumstances regarding the overflow to the Regional Board. Questions pertaining to the issuance of this Notice of Violation should be directed to Mr. Bryan Ott at (858) 637 -5589 (email: BOtt @waterboards.ca.gov). Page 1 of 2 Notice of Violation No. R9- 2004 -0451 Order No. 96 -04 City of Encinitas, Wastewater Collection System WDID No. 9 000000748 Written correspondence pertaining to this Notice of Violation should be directed to the following address: Michael P. McCann Supervising Water Resource Control Engineer ATTN: Bryan Ott California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region 9174 Sky Park Court, Suite 100 San Diego, CA 92123 -4340 MI AEL P. McCANN, P.E. Supervising Water Resource Control Engineer MPM:bdk:bao Violation Code: 188051 Enforcement Code: (NOV) R9- 2004 -0451 ; 96308 DATE Page 2 of 2 City Of Encinitas January 3, 2005 Metropolitan Construction Attm Jose Ortiz 8614 Troy Street Spring Valley, Calif. 91977 FAX AND MAIL RE: ENCINITAS BLVD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT(CEE01D) Gentlemen: The City has received your correspondence with attachments dated December 16, 2004, which was not delivered to the City for review until December 29, 2004. First, the City rejects any suggestion or implication on your part that the construction means or methods of this job have been or will be directed by the City or its representatives. The second paragraph of page two of your letter makes reference to "...the hammer your (referring to the City) experts are designating as the proper tool...." That paragraph further requests that City "experts" demonstrate that the work can be accomplished in some specific way. The City does not and will not in any manner assume or accept that "means and methods" role. The City only requires you to accomplish the terms and conditions of the contract. The means and methods of how you will successfully accomplish the pipe bursting component, including the choice of equipment, how you choose to accomplish the by- pass and traffic control are up to you. Any belief on your part that the City is telling you how to do the work, including what specific equipment to use is incorrect. With respect to your comments and attachments, it continues to be the City's opinion that differing site conditions have not been encountered and that the job could have and still can be accomplished under the terms of the contract specifications. We reiterate our letter to you dated December 15, 2004 that "...you are hereby directed to proceed with all the work to be performed under the contract specifications, using means and methods necessary to accomplish the work." Reference is made to Public Contract Code section 7104(c) and Section 3 -4 of the Greenbook, which requires you to proceed with all work to be performed under the contract. Please note that the deadline of January 18, 2005 for Metropolitan to renew its progress on the job is fast approaching. Please be advised the City will place your surety on notice if that deadline is not met. Currently the City is experiencing winter rains and you are directed to insure that all erosion control measures are in place and that any modifications necessary to the site are accomplished. We look forward to the receipt of your data submission this week. Sincerely, a Greg 7plerations lds, P.E. Field cc: Kipp Hefner, Assoc. Civil Engineer Jace Schwarm, Risk Manager 46�7 recycled paper s �Jlty 01' Encinitas January 3, 2005 Metropolitan Construction Attn: Jose Ortiz 8614 Troy Street Spring Valley, Calif. 91977 RE: ENCINITAS BLVD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT(CEE01D) Gentlemen: FAX AND MAIL The City has received your correspondence with attachments dated December 16, 2004, which was not delivered to the City for review until December 29, 2004. First, the City rejects any suggestion or implication on your part that the construction means or methods of this job have been or will be directed by the City or its representatives. The second paragraph of page two of your letter makes reference to "...the hammer your (referring to the City) experts are designating as the proper tool...." That paragraph further requests that City "experts" demonstrate that the work can be accomplished in some specific way. The City does not and will not in any manner assume or accept that "means and methods" role. The City only requires you to accomplish the terms and conditions of the contract. The means and methods of how you will successfully accomplish the pipe bursting component, including the choice of equipment, how you choose to accomplish the by- pass and traffic control are up to you. Any belief on your part that the City is telling you how to do the work, including what specific equipment to use is incorrect. With respect to your comments and attachments, upon our initial review, it continues to be the City's opinion that differing site conditions have not been encountered and that the job could have and still can be accomplished under the terms of the contract specifications. We reiterate our letter to you dated December 15, 2004 that "...you are hereby directed to proceed with all the work to be performed under the contract specifications, using means and methods necessary to accomplish the work." Reference is made to Public Contract Code section 7104(c) and Section 3-4 of the Greenbook, which requires you to proceed with all work to be performed under the contract. Please note that the deadline of January 18, 2005 for Metropolitan to renew its progress on the job is fast approaching. Please be advised the City will place your surety on notice if that deadline is not met. Currently the City is experiencing winter rains and you are directed to insure that all erosion control measures are in place and that any modifications necessary to the site are accomplished. We look forward to the receipt of your data submission this week. Sincerely,._ Greg Shields, P.E. Field Operations cc: Kipp Hefner, Assoc. Civil Engineer Jace Schwarm, Risk Manager Ar- I-LL 760 -633 -2600 % 1AV ,G0- 63; -26Z 71 Vulcan A, <nuc. I ncinim, ( alih'rni, �.u�:E j(,i; �[� - C,0- b33 -' -r)D recycled paper Greg Shields - Encinitas Blvd Pipe Bursting Project From: Samuel Ariaratnam <Samuel.Ariaratnam @asu.edu> To: <NMeyers @daley - heft.com> Date: 12/16/2004 11:46:40 PM Subject: Encinitas Blvd Pipe Bursting Project Neal, Please find attached a copy of my opinion regarding the Encinitas Boulevard Trunk Sewer Replacement Project. It is evident that Mocon utilized undersized equipment in the project. I had a long conversation with Collins Orton from TT Technologies who confirmed my opinion. I apologize for the delay in sending you this information. Please let me know if you have any further questions. Regards, Sam P.S. Please note that the PowerPoint slide contains Figure 2 CC: <GSHIELDS @ci.encinitas.ca.us >, <JSCHWARM @ci.encinitas.ca.us> Page 1 Greg Shields - Encinitas Pipe Bursting problem - Figure 2.ppt Looks like 100% compacted ground - not much room for displacement OR required increased displacement force to create the necessary void space behind the burst head Solutions: • Increase O.D. of burst head • Possibly increase cable tension to overcome pipe drag • LUBRICATION -a must for jobs like this 100% compacted ground - displaced material collapsed immediately behind the bursting head and created frictional resistance to the advancing pipe column. The further the burst head advances, the greater the frictional drag (non linear- more likely exponentially) Burst head obviously advancing - clay pipe ahead of burst head already cracked due to hammer impact FIGURE 2. Problematic Areas Page 1 Greg Shields - City Encinitas PB - Ariaratnam opinion.doc Page 1 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA Greg Shields -City Encinitas PB - Ariaratnam opinion.doc Page 2 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT Project Background The City of Encinitas, CA solicited bids for the Encinitas Boulevard Trunk Sewer Replacement Project. On June 3, 2004 five general contractors responded with Metropolitan Construction being awarded the contract based on the lowest responsible and responsive bid of $860,117.25. The first day of contract was August 2, 2004 with a stated completion within 90 working days. A rate of $600.00 per day for liquidated damages was stipulated in the contract documents. Replacement and upsizing of 2,607 L.F. of existing 8" Vitrified Clay Pipe (VCP) with 12" DR 17 High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) Pipe was to be performed using the Pipe Bursting method. Pipe Bursting is defined as "a method of replacing a host (or existing) pipe by fragmenting it while simultaneously installing a new pipe of equal or larger diameter in its place." Mocon Corporation was subcontracted by Metropolitan Construction to perform the pipe bursting operations along Encinitas Boulevard. Kleinfelder, Inc. performed a geotechnical investigation of the site in August 2003 to determine the soil composition of the backfill and pipe zone material along the existing sewer alignment. One pothole was placed at Sta. 30 +85 west of the intersection of Westlake Street to a depth of 13.5 ft. below the surface. The trench backfill material to the top of the existing 8" VCP at a distance below the surface of 13 ft. was determined to consist of a medium dense to dense, yellow brown, silty sand (SM). A sample of material from the pipe zone, between 13 ft. and 13.5 ft. from the surface, was collected and tested in a laboratory. The results found the pipe zone material to consist of brown, coarse grained, silty to clayey sand (SM -SC). These are not conditions that would prohibit pipe bursting operations from occurring successfully. Problem Mocon, the pipe bursting contractor, completed approximately 60 ft. of a run when the bursting head configuration became stuck. This resulted in difficulty in proceeding with the burst. Subsequently, Mocon requested that the remainder of the job be changed to traditional open trenching since the pipe bursting method did not make sufficient progress. Independent Opinion In examining documents, photographs, and telephone conversations with industry professionals, it is evident that Mocon used a 10" pneumatic tool. In my opinion, this was one of the main problems that caused the pipe bursting operation to encounter difficulty. According to the information provided by J -M PE Corporation in the HDPE Pipe Materials Submittal, a 12" DR 17 HDPE pipe has an average outside diameter (O.D.) of 12.750" and a minimum wall thickness of 0.750 ". Subsequently, the 10" pneumatic tool utilized by Mocon was undersized. When selecting an appropriate pneumatic tool, at least 1.5" should Greg Shields - City Encinitas PB - Ariaratnam opinion.doc Page 3 be added to the pipe O.D. to account for a slight oversize. This would require a pneumatic tool of approximately 14.25" diameter. My recommendation would be to utilize a 14" pneumatic bursting tool with a 16" rear expander to ensure a successful installation of the new HDPE pipe (Figure 1). It is also recommended that an optional guided head schnoze be used to aid in aligning the pneumatic tool within the existing 8" VCP. Additionally, from the jobsite photos provided, it appears that Mocon did not utilize any lubrication. My recommendation would be to use a bentonite -based lubrication setup to minimize frictional drag during the bursting operation. Not using lubrication can limit the length of bursting runs. A 20 ton constant tension cable winch is also recommended to ensure sufficient pulling capacity. Problematic areas are identified in Figure 2. Greg Shields - City Encinitas PB - Ariaratnam opinion.doc Page 4 Documents Examined [1] Pipe Bursting Submittals from Metropolitan Construction, dated August 12, 2004 [2] Geotechnical Report of Existing Backfill Condition from Kleinfelder, Inc., dated September 3, 2003 [3] Contract Documents and Specifications for Encinitas Boulevard Trunk Sewer Replacement, City of Encinitas, CA, dated May 2004 [4] Encinitas Trunk Sewer Replacement Drawings, dated April 30, 2004 [5] Notice to Proceed, from Kipp Hefner, dated July 12, 2004 [6] Letter from Greg Shields to Jose Ortiz regarding missing Sewer Bypass plan, dated August 17, 2004 [7] Change Order #1, dated November 17, 2004 [8] Change Order #2, dated November 18, 2004 [9] Total Contract Work Days Calendar, City of Encinitas [10] Bid Summaries, Encinitas Boulevard Trunk Sewer Replacement, City of Encinitas 4 CITY OF ENCINITAS ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT WEEKLY PROGRESS MEETING MINUTES Attendees: Richard Brady & Associates Michael O'Shea Bernard Cook Sean Manning San Dieguito Water Mark Robinson Bill O'Donnell December 15, 2004 City of Encinitas City Hall Metropolitan Constr. Jose Ortiz City of Encinitas Kipp Hefner Shawn Atherton Greg Shields Ben Taylor CONTRACT SUMMARY (As of 12/15/2004) Contract Time NTPDate: ............................................................ ...... August 2, 2004 Commencement Date: ................... .... ............................... August 2, 2004 Original Allowed Work Days: ............................................ 90 Original Contract Completion Date: ..................................... December 4, 2004 Dayscompleted: ............................................................ 96 Elapsed Contract Time: .................................................... 100% Contract Price Original Contract Amount: ............................................... $860,117.25 Approved Change Order(s): .............................................. $2300 Revised Contract Amount: ............................................... $862,417.25 �J0.9 �- �li�� n, fnir ./toiii/ . iiC/ ,2 ?O •�ii� 1 �q- Page 2 Amount Payable to Date: ................................................ $187,631.55 Retention to Date: ......................................................... $205847.95 Total Invoiced to Date: ................................................... $208,479.50 Percent Invoiced to Date: ................................................ 24.1% Discussion: Old business • Contractor will email daily reports for delays to RBA. Progress of the work • Trunk sewer has been replaced up until MH #13. Asphalt work to be completed by Friday 12/10. Submittals /BFI's /RFP's • None Pending Change Orders • On 12/10 Contractor submitted proposed costs for open trenching the remainder of the trunk sewer in lieu of pipe bursting. Proposal to be reviewed by the City. Future Areas of Concern • Potential conflict with existing water main around station 11 +50 if open trenching is used. Future schedule Other Issues Potential Changes: Other concerns: • Contractor will revise the cost of COR #3 which was included within the open trenching proposal on 12/10. New Business f�i��itztl.�zot� �r . �`�lcctir /f • !%//1 �, �lr�� `ire /o>r- . %I�¢il . fi/ f%O • <rtr �r� �i��t�tiir J,?7,2� ,fin% �: J/ !J5 000 • for �J' Y� !J /° O.�O� Page 3 Requests for Proposals (RFP) (submitted to Contractor by CM) RFP DESCRIPTION DATE SENT STATUS Change Order Requests (COR) (submitted to CM by Contractor) RFP COR ^ CO v STATUS TIME AMOUNT DESCRIPTION #1 #1 #1 Drop Inlet Structure Metro (cost #2 #3 Lining in Manholes #1 & 8 to be #2 8-inch diameter stub outs in revised) ,""i -nupt] Chnnae Orders WO) (Submitted to Owner by CM) RFP V COR ^ CO v DESCRIPTION TIME AMOUNT STATUS #1 #1 #1 Drop Inlet Structure $2300.00 Encinitas #3 #2 #2 8-inch diameter stub outs in $1000.00 Encinitas Manholes #14 & 15 CITY OF ENCINITAS ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT TWO WEEK LOOK AHEAD SCHEDULE (12/15/2004) (To be provided by Contractor) City Of Encinitas December 15, 2004 Metropolitan Construction Attn: Jose Ortiz 8614 Troy Street Spring Valley, Calif. 91977 FAX AND MAIL, RE: ENCINITAS BLVD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT(CEE01D) NOTICE TO PROCEED WITH PIPE BURSTING A review of yesterdays letter resulted in discovery of a clerical error. The error is corrected in this amended letter. The City of Encinitas' Council authorized award of a construction contract titled, Encinitas Blvd. Trunk Sewer Replacement to Metropolitan Construction in the amount of $860,117.25 at their regular meeting on June 16, 2004. Your NOTICE TO PROCEED for the subject contract was issued on July 12, 2004, and August 2, 2004 was the first working day of the contract. The work was to be completed within 90 working days per the contract documents and a rate of $600.00 a day is established in the contract as liquidated damages. Since on or about October 17, 2004 your work has encountered numerous problems, including broken equipment and lack of progress in the pipe bursting operation. At this point, your pipe bursting operations are stalled after only about 600 feet of progress. You have suggested the problem is with unanticipated underground conditions and explored converting this job to an open trench operation. In response, the City has undertaken a thorough investigation of the conditions, including consultation with experts in pipe bursting operations. The City has concluded the problem your work has encountered is not due to differing site conditions. Further, the City declines to convert this job to an open trench operation for many reasons, including traffic impacts and added costs. Accordingly, you are hereby directed to proceed with all the work to be performed under the contract specifications, using means and methods necessary to accomplish the work. To the extent you revise your pipe bursting means and methods to accomplish the job, please provide a new submittal containing all of the information as required in contract specification section 306 -9.1.2 on or before January 4, 2005. Renewed progress on this job must commence and continue thereafter on or before January 18, 2005. You remain subject to the liquidated damages penalties set forth in the contract. Sincerely, r' Greg S fields, P.E. Field operations cc: Kipp Hefner, Assoc. Civil Engineer TEL 760- 633 -2600 / FAX 760- 633 -2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 TDD 760 - 633 -2700 � recycled paper �� OF; ENCI�J December 14, 2004 Metropolitan Construction Attn: Jose Ortiz 8614 Troy Street Spring Valley, Calif., 91977 RE: ENCINITAS BLVD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT(CEE01D) NOTICE TO PROCEED WITH PIPE BURSTING Gentlemen: FAX AND MAIL The City of Encinitas' Council authorized award of a construction contract titled, Encinitas Blvd. Trunk Sewer Replacement to Metropolitan Construction in the amount of $860,117.25 at their regular meeting on June 16, 2004. Your NOTICE TO PROCEED for the subject contract was issued on July 12, 2004, and August 2, 2004 was to be considered the first day of the contract. The work was to be completed within 90 working days per the contract documents and a rate of $600.00 a day is established in the contract as liquidated damages. Since October 17, 2004, your work has encountered numerous problems, including broken equipment and lack of progress in the pipe bursting operation. At this point, your pipe bursting operations are stalled after only approximately 600 feet of progress. You have suggested the problem is with unanticipated underground conditions and explored converting this job to an open trench operation. In response, the City has undertaken a thorough investigation of the conditions, including consultation with experts in pipe bursting operations. Further, the City declines to convert this job to an open trench operation for many reasons, including traffic impacts and added costs. Accordingly, you are hereby directed to proceed with all the work to be performed under the contract specifications, using means and methods necessary to accomplish the work. To the extent you revise your pipe bursting means and methods to accomplish the job, please provide a new submittal containing all of the information as required in the contract specification section 306 -9.1.2 on or before January 4, 2005. Renewed progress on this job must commence and continue thereafter on or before January 18, 2005. You remain subject to the liquidated damages penalties set forth in the contract. Sincerely, Greg Shields, P.E. Field Operations cc: Kipp Hefner, Assoc. Civil Engineer TEL 760 - 633 -2600 / FAX 760 - 633 -2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 TDD 760 -633 -2700 recycled paper CITY OF ENCINITAS ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT WEEKLY PROGRESS MEETING MINUTES Attendees: Richard Brady & Associates Michael O'Shea Bernard Cook Sean Manning San Dieguito Water Mark Robinson Bill O'Donnell November 24, 2004 City of Encinitas City Hall Metropolitan Constr. Alberto Larios Jose Ortiz City of Encinitas Kipp Hefner Shawn Atherton Greg Shields Ben Taylor CONTRACT SUMMARY (As of 11/24/2004) Contract Time NTPDate: ............................................................ ...... August 2, 2004 Commencement Date: ....................... ............................... August 2, 2004 Original Allowed Work Days: ............................................ 90 Original Contract Completion Date: ..................................... December 4, 2004 Dayscompleted: ............................................................ 83 Elapsed Contract Time: .................................................... 920Zo Contract Price Original Contract Amount: ............................................... $800,000.00 Approved Change Order(s): .............................................. $0.00 Revised Contract Amount: ............................................... $800,000.00 /r. % / /,% , . ��i��f �� <ii(�oir .�nrrr./ � n </ ,2�0 • . �ri �r� � lii /i` c�iirii J,� /,2�' Page 2 Amount Payable to Date: ................................................ $71,570.25 Retention to Date: ......................................................... $7,952.25 Total Invoiced to Date: ................................................... $79,522.50 Percent Invoiced to Date: ................................................ 10% Discussion: Old business • New Baseline schedule (Submittal 02B) to be emailed to RBA. Progress of the work • Sta. 19 +90 is to be potholed. City reminded contractor that 48 -hour notice is required for all inspection work including potholing. • The contractor proposed that open trenching be performed between Sta 26 +00 and 22 +75. Contractor would be allowed to work during the day between the hours of 7:30 am to 4pm. Contractor estimated that approximately 175 to 200ft could be achieved per day with open trenching. It was agreed that SDR35 would be used in the open cut section. • Contractor must provide a two -week look -ahead schedule at every construction progress meeting. Contractors staging area to be relocated. Submittals /RFI's /RFP's • Contractor to provide cost proposal for RFP# 2 using Sand -Con product. Pending Change Orders • Metropolitan is have an itemized COR for a time extension completed by Monday, 11/22. • Metropolitan is in the process of submitting a COR per line item #16 for the relocation of existing 8 -inch sewer laterals Future Areas of Concern • Contractor proposed adding a parallel line and open trenching the entire stretch. The Contractor will prepare details for this option by Weds 11/24. • Should pipe bursting be performed at Sta 14 +65, extra caution must be used to avoid uplifting here due to the water main nearby. Future schedule • Open trench approx. 300 ft to pass area of dense soil. • Area between MH #1 and STA. 7 +00 is shallow non - compressible soil, which could cause upheaval. Contractor will monitor and make repairs as necessary. • See attached 2 week look ahead schedule. Other Issues Potential Changes: • See RFP's. � /c�ir1� /.� >or� �f ,_k�1 <ctir /� • ! /G %J, l�i�� ri�r >t. 1 %iri /.� </ �%% • ._�ir �� i�'crirrir / ° /?i .'mil �I;iJI ! %G'0�0% • ,�ir �;�J %! % /' /;�O> Page 3 Other concerns: • When using the bypass the Contractor is responsible for ensuring that none of the couplings are leaking. • When pulling from MH #13 on the night of 11/16, the Contractor believes that parts of the existing 8" vc pipe was cracked during the 55 ft bursting segment. This segment is to be replaced this coming week. • RBA asked that the Contractor document in writing all potential change of conditions anticipated so that negotiations for these items can begin immediately. • Contractor is reminded that all storm drain inlets need to be protected with gravel bags. • Daily extra work tickets are to be provided to the inspector for signature upon completion of shift or by the next shift at the latest. • Traffic control — Contractor is to watch for cones that have been dragged into roadway by passing motorists. Contractor shall maintain traffic control facilities throughout the duration of operations. New Business • The next meeting will be held on Wednesday, December 1, 2004 @ 2:00pm. Requests for Proposals (RFP) (submitted to Contractor by CM) RFP DESCRIPTION DATE SENT STATUS Change Order Requests (COR) (submitted to CM by Contractor) RFP COR DESCRIPTION STATUS #2 AMOUNT Lining in Manholes #1 & 8 Metro. A"nrnv,,d C'hnnae Orders (CO) (Submitted to Owner by CM) RFP COR CO DESCRIPTION TIME AMOUNT STATUS #1 #1 #1 Drop Inlet Structure $2300.00 Encinitas #3 #2 8 -inch diameter stub outs in $1000.00 Encinitas Manholes # 14 & 15 fli /rim /. �' >ai� C% ,_ - ��nciir /f • !J /i% , -. �li� r� � on� <ri ..�ciri/ , �/ 1 /%% • . �iir % %Ff �F�J�! %6 "O� /'% • ..iii �;��f�!9�' /� /a Page 4 CITY OF ENCINITAS ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT TWO WEEK LOOK AHEAD SCHEDULE (11/24/2004) (To be provided by Contractor) (_,Y /""llla/ Work Description Sun. 21 Mon 22 Tues 23 Wed 24 Thur 25 Fri 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 Work Description Sun. 28 Mon 29 Tues 30 Wed 1 Thur 2 Fri. 3 7 8 9 10 11 12 (_,Y /""llla/ N C O m O 2+, Mu w E O .O 3 3 y O C m o a CL o. N T 3 m fn E a N m 'C m m a a m O E o L � a � N y O C Z « O E z o O 0 A C O m y N V ❑ x CM m d V C O U c A a N N C Q m a � m � m v L C LL U a; L CL y 10 h M � O N+ O N M m O N N K E 0 C LL > N m � y a � m N n + N M N +0-. w LO O h + t h N N R r co N E L O v w c wOl c CD c O m m M a U O 3 is °� eta c d a L H J f0 N O � M t N p N �0' r O � M �p N N N O W + O N N a O) a N i d L m a J ' olmlo10lCD LO A m 0 L c N z o1Oly O y LL z L ca m F- C C O n a R N C W) O N + O r N w O t0 + a tO + O Or ) V �0i 1p C � � R E w J O a N dt C f0 in U CD d R h O a0+ 3 N + O N y CV O m L �O O CL LL m p d C_ d G m a a 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0' 0 n 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o g o 0 v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v UO �O CD o° o 0 0 0 0 0 0 C:, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > >> M > > > > > >> U U U U U U U U O Z Z O O O w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w w w w w w w w w Z Z Z LL Z Z Z Z Z Z Z 0 0 0 0❑0 0 4 -Qi O O_ N 47 O N N M O c0 h M v LO h M h O It O N N N N N M O O N N M O O Q Q v v v v v v v v v v v v v vv v v v v It 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > > > > > >55550000000008,002Z v 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O w w w w w w w w w 0 U U Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q N m W M M N O N ... O O O O N N N N N O O O N N N 010 O O L Lo O O O+ O m r 3 N + N N T O + + O + + M + + + + O M N N O N � } .- q C O O Y O 0 O O 0 _ O _ O O c0 _ .3 ..-. � .0.. O r- LO OM O N N O O 0 m 0 W h p W U a E N t0 Cl) + h + O 4k O + + O LL # O O + ik } O m E O L h + h + O + N O + O q v O O O N h N OM U O + O CO w c0 N U) 4. �0 U) N E N N n N N q M + @ O _N C O O -� O t0 } t0 0 L N N (O + to M m O O c0 m T N U) L (E N O co (0 E C (n ~ .m. (n M (n + (n N M V% + — f N `o a Eo 4 �a '� 'E m a m En E m o m N o E ° u o E c o :° o m v 3 to (n f0 d v E❑ E N 7 m o cn w c A w o� v ` u o n (n o m LL cn 0 0 o w o x U LL m E o m ii m C m O1 C Z 7 7 t0 C U a. N C «. a (n C p d. F (i C N O N C p C N N IL '� C N O C N n 0 O N ... .` 7 CO _ ` N C O) C N d L O (n 0 (n rn c a N to m o .N r E o Z o x m m m >. U c an d fl. In U I m c m co n 7 m 7 a c N o 7 t❑ 0 U n L 7 rn r 7 n Q n= 7 a s r � - c U 0 o m LL >> m O c U v m T ? O v CO a >1 ? m CO >• L) a 0 o m .- U L a� r d m c c m m c m ° 3 m y 3 m c _ n m m L) a c 0 c 3 n U 7 m a� a 7 ro 3 m o m m m 7 O 7 > = n' C O � @ O O (A �y n n_ !d N _a m m _n Z (n c7 W LL w LL > H U U Q �� Q �LL d' (n J d d U F J l d fn Z LL LL J LL (n C z (n LL' d Z LL (n J O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O� O O O O 0 0 0 0 O O H O O �O O O O O O' O Lo O O O O O O O v O l O O O O O O O O N M v O h O O O F O O O M �O - LO m N h o0 N CD v 1O �O N W M M M M M M M M M N M N N N N N N N N N rirlr 0 O N h t � O r C ++ r p + +� + r N t + r w O 10 N + 07 + EO O O LL fn .0+ r 07 0 fn C >>+ r m o. c a o p' J O p d O + O fp O m h O r L o1Oly O y LL z L ca m F- C C O n a R N C W) O N + O r N w O t0 + a tO + O Or ) V �0i 1p C � � R E w J O a N dt C f0 in U CD d R h O a0+ 3 N + O N y CV O m L �O O CL LL m p d C_ d G m a a 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0' 0 n 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o g o 0 v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v UO �O CD o° o 0 0 0 0 0 0 C:, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > >> M > > > > > >> U U U U U U U U O Z Z O O O w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w w w w w w w w w Z Z Z LL Z Z Z Z Z Z Z 0 0 0 0❑0 0 4 -Qi O O_ N 47 O N N M O c0 h M v LO h M h O It O N N N N N M O O N N M O O Q Q v v v v v v v v v v v v v vv v v v v It 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > > > > > >55550000000008,002Z v 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O w w w w w w w w w 0 U U Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q N m W M M N O N ... O O O O N N N N N O O O N N N 010 O O L Lo O O O+ O m r 3 N + N N T O + + O + + M + + + + O M N N O N � } .- q C O O Y O 0 O O 0 _ O _ O O c0 _ .3 ..-. � .0.. O r- LO OM O N N O O 0 m 0 W h p W U a E N t0 Cl) + h + O 4k O + + O LL # O O + ik } O m E O L h + h + O + N O + O q v O O O N h N OM U O + O CO w c0 N U) 4. �0 U) N E N N n N N q M + @ O _N C O O -� O t0 } t0 0 L N N (O + to M m O O c0 m T N U) L (E N O co (0 E C (n ~ .m. (n M (n + (n N M V% + — f N `o a Eo 4 �a '� 'E m a m En E m o m N o E ° u o E c o :° o m v 3 to (n f0 d v E❑ E N 7 m o cn w c A w o� v ` u o n (n o m LL cn 0 0 o w o x U LL m E o m ii m C m O1 C Z 7 7 t0 C U a. N C «. a (n C p d. F (i C N O N C p C N N IL '� C N O C N n 0 O N ... .` 7 CO _ ` N C O) C N d L O (n 0 (n rn c a N to m o .N r E o Z o x m m m >. U c an d fl. In U I m c m co n 7 m 7 a c N o 7 t❑ 0 U n L 7 rn r 7 n Q n= 7 a s r � - c U 0 o m LL >> m O c U v m T ? O v CO a >1 ? m CO >• L) a 0 o m .- U L a� r d m c c m m c m ° 3 m y 3 m c _ n m m L) a c 0 c 3 n U 7 m a� a 7 ro 3 m o m m m 7 O 7 > = n' C O � @ O O (A �y n n_ !d N _a m m _n Z (n c7 W LL w LL > H U U Q �� Q �LL d' (n J d d U F J l d fn Z LL LL J LL (n C z (n LL' d Z LL (n J O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O� O O O O 0 0 0 0 O O H O O �O O O O O O' O Lo O O O O O O O v O l O O O O O O O O N M v O h O O O F O O O M �O - LO m N h o0 N CD v 1O �O N W M M M M M M M M M N M N N N N N N N N N rirlr asi o V U Y C � C O � U m � o :c o U W O U U � O C O U H w C � U O C W co O C L C U W a� a E z U O IL m U � 0 O J J Q H F- m U) U) Q r_ z U z W Q W H O z a z a D N U) a co 3 W W. OC ', W z Q' f1" I- C G W W v W Fz uj Y— Q z O a_ U CO) W G z O U W N v W 0. y a W m z IOD v (n M N r` LO Go CO CD O) O w z Q' w z z z z z O o O o O O LL`Y OD 00 O n O 01 T r pp� p p � O O O d O •Y N N N N N N N N N N N O N co a) O r- r` r` n cli cli 0 ri of of of of CD co v m vi N N w � CL O O o U r m O M M M M 7 7 N N (Cp (0 a 'a ql N O. d m m (0 a h G m (O a ca d m /V a N a m d ( ) o� C H m N m C N ca ct N a d p 2 O ? LL O U d W y Q m w cc 0 U x_ LL .� 0 a .. o M U r- r` r` n cli cli M ri of of of of CD co v CD pp vi m M M Cl) O m O M M M M (O (O N M M n ti � ^ M N d m U LL m (n (O 1,- co 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O bl) a U N r �Iy I C4 �i •O C Y m 0 w 3 � Q � Q � 0 0 � U N O � I Iz U z� 0 0 N N 0 z rr �3 N O V U Y `C _ � N C 0 U m cc m O ;c O W � v U co C O n. U f�0 .0 M U O c w o c �U C U W v E 7 Z v d 'o _(D Q U � 0 O J J C13 ^ J Q 1- z V Z W a 0 W H O Z O r� Q Z F- N 7 H 3 W W D W Z LU tY F=- w W LU Q O D �I W U W 4' W Q D Z 0 F- a U U) W C rn rn rn r- IZ O Z o � o v v � T r T O O N fV N 0 rn rn U) J d 0 c � c .y m 0 X_ C � O m �m � � U v U U) U N A m E v C O 1`6 C 3 H m N d Q w 0 N N bD W a 7 � � O � U O I I CG c d d .a m 0 � abi O � c CYi `c� o � ,o U C O o N N k o I 0 I Z U z v 0 0 N N z b 3 v O U W r- N T - E 0 41 04 IL O M CL N Z w 0 a E Z m Z o T � w 0 N N bD W a 7 � � O � U O I I CG c d d .a m 0 � abi O � c CYi `c� o � ,o U C O o N N k o I 0 I Z U z v 0 0 N N z b 3 - Change Order #2 November 16, 2004 City of Encinitas Encinitas Blvd Trunk Sewer Replacement %o�, tW4 d ,5Z 4909 Murphy Canyon Rd Ph 858 -496 -0500 San Diego, CA 92123 Fax 858- 496 -0505 Change Order #2 Record of Negotiation Date: November 16, 2004 Subject: 8" x 3 ft Stub -outs Project No: Encinitas.003 Contractor: Metropolitan Construction P.O. Box 477 Bonita, Ca. 91908 City W.O. #: CEE01 D Drawing Reference: Specification Reference: RFP Reference: Prepared by: Michael O'Shea COR Reference: Summary of Work C -3 RFP #3 COR #2 This change order is for the installation of 8 -inch diameter. PVC type stud -outs extending from the base of the manholes 3 -feet. The interior manhole base will be sloped and channeled to accept future flows from the stub -out. The stub -out will be capped to prevent sediments from entering the manholes. Stub - outs as described will be installed at manholes 14 & 15. Justification for Entitlement City of Encinitas staff notified the CM team that Manholes 14 and 15 are expected to accommodate extra laterals in the future. Manholes 14 & 15 were not designed with stub -outs to accept future laterals. Therefore, The City of Encinitas has requested the Contractor provide 8 -inch x 3 -foot stub -outs at each manhole, which will be used in the future. Additional Cost Requested by Contractor $1000.00 Negotiation The Contractor provided a materials cost sheet showing a total cost of $500.00 for each of the two manholes expected to accommodate extra laterals in the futures. CO #2 Page 1 of 2 -Mange Order #2 November 16, 2004 Recommendation The Construction Manager has reviewed COR #2 and believes that the cost of the 8 -inch x 3 foot stub - outs at each of the two manholes to be reasonable. 'The Construction Manager recommends that an additive Change Order be issued to Metropolitan Construction in the amount of $1000.00 for the addition of the subject work. Attachments Attachment A: RFP #3 COR #2 Materials Cost sheet CO #2 Page 2 of 2 i�tc =r� �trr�/tire�rS rrirtr/ �is2v/rrrr /hart .!��rururfrs<1 Project Title Encinitas Blvd Trunk Sewer Replacement Project Project No. CEEOID Contractor Metropolitan Construction Proposed By: City of Encinitas Contract No. Encinitas.003 Request For Proposal No. 003 Contract Date 10/06/04 Date 10/6/04 Submitted By: Sean Manning, Construction Manager Date 11 /2/04 Owner r Engr. Const. Mgr. Actual Job conditions in area of proposed change: Manholes 14 and 15 are expected to accommodate extra laterals in the future. Currently said manholes have no extra outlets to accept extra laterals. Change order justification: The City of Encinitas has requested the Contractor provide 8 -inch x 3 -foot stub outs at each manhole, which will be used in the future. The Contractor shall provide a cost estimate for the change order request. Contractor authorized to proceed with this change i— YES % NO Other contracts involved are as follows (List Contracts by No.) Submitted by CM 1102 (revised 9/28/04) on Is Dwg. Req.? [7 NO C` YES (Date) NOV. 9.2004 4:42PM METROPOLITAN CONST General Building & NO. 050 P.3 /3 Contractors License No. 790532 C a N S T R U C T I o w November 9, 2004 Richard Brady & Associates 4909 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 220 San Diego CA 92123 Attention: Sean F Manning Reference; Encinitas Boulevard Trunk Sewer Replacement Subject: RFP # 3 8" X 3' Stub out Dear Mr. Manning As requested in RFP # 003, we are here by submitting our cost proposal in accordance with your RFP . TOTAL COSY' S 500.00 ea. If you have any questions, please feel free to call. Sincerely, 0. t"at �10(21 Alberto arios Project Manager P.O. Box 477, Ban In, CA, 91906 -0477 Phone (619) 741-5643 Fax(61V)741-S658 Received Nov -09 -2004 16:37 From- To- Page 003 � to d H Q. Q a 3 W F E � m O. Q 19 xx , HW Y O h a m LJ � a aJ � C 0. r v s 3 q 196 -d 900 sped -01 -raid 1 1 11 9001- 11 -40N pen16381 Ij 900/900'd 118 -1 -wuiy 82:21 g00Z- 11 -^ON $�i: sico u, co m m m amp fl7f I M � Y I tu O 0 (wW�7QgWgL.1 ¢ W 7 Q _ Z S w� 0 QZ 9 •� C � W W� O @ � a ° d w w f N r l4 r r s O Q W o tl a Z a W IV O J V r W W tl ! a ro d G 900/900'd 118 -1 -wuiy 82:21 g00Z- 11 -^ON Nov -18 -2004 01:00pm From- T-069 P.001 /002 F -083 ✓�6/al�/'em 4909 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 220 San Diego, Callfomia 92123 T91:(858)496-0500 Fax: (858) 496 -0505 e-mail-,rbrady@rbrady.net Facsimile Transmittal To: Kipp Hefner may. City of Encinitas Fax: 760633 2818 Phone: 760 633 2775 Re: RBA Fee Status CC: X Urgent X For Review 0 Comments: From: Sean Manning Project; Encinitas Blvd. Trunk Sewer Project No: Encinitas.003 Date: November 18, 2004 Pages: 1 (excludes this page) Cl Please Comment ❑ Please Reply Tf you did not receive the entire transmittal, please call (858) 496 -0500. Date: Novernbcr 18, 2004 Time: 9:42 AM Initials: Nov -18 -2004 01:00pm From- T -058 P.002/002 F -083 November 18, 2004 Mr. Kipp Hefner City of Encinitas 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 Re: Encinitas Boulevard Trunk Sewer Replacement Fee Status Dear Mr. Hefner: This letter is to inform you that only l2% of our Construction o l Management for CM and Inspection Services fee for the subject pro11ctestire�dnW h the expectation that the project would be Services of $46,395 was originally completed by December 2, 2004. As you are aware, the Contractor has informed the project revised schedule for project he project we complete until February 2005. Based on the Contractors ction inspection and project closeout anticipate that we will be required to provide services through March 2005. ire an 000 TO At our current rate of expenditure we estimate that if youuhav an additional estions o9,require complete the project through March 2005. Please cal any additional information to process this request. Very truly yours, Sean F. Manning, P.E. Construction Manager cc: Rick Brady, Richard Brady & Associates Greg Shieids, City of Encinitas rile Fsncinitas.003 4909 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 220 . San Diego, California 92123 Tel (858) 496 -0500 • Fax (858) 496 -0505 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL To: Shawn Atherton City of Encinitas 505 S. Vulcan Ave. Encinitas, CA 92024 From: Michael O'Shea i Date: November 16, 2004 Project: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Replacement We are sending you ❑ Enclosed ❑ Under separate cover via 0 Mail ❑ Messenger, the following items: ❑ drawings ❑ prints ❑ data sheets ❑ report F1 qnw- ifications ❑ sketches ❑ brochures 0 other: No. of Copies prepared By Reference No. Description 1 Bernard Cook Encinitas.003 Sewer Bypass Line Disconnection Report — October 18, 2004 These are transmitted as checked below: 0 As requested ❑ Approved ❑ Resubmit _ copies for approval 0 For your use ❑ Approved as corrected ❑ Submit _ copies for distribution ❑ For review & comment ❑ Revise & Resubmit ❑ Return corrected prints ❑ Other Remarks: By: ��58� 4,960500 � �58� 4.960505 October 18, 2004 To: Ron Brady, Engineering Inspector City of Encinitas From: Bernard Cook, Project Inspector Richard Brady & Associates RE: Sewerage Bypass Line Disconnection Mr. Brady: On Sunday October 17, 2004 at or about 10:30am I visited the project site to verify conditions following the over -night rain fall. I was specifically checking on the condition of the bypass piping passing through the 96" storm drain to Cottonwood Creek. I observed sections of the 6" sewerage bypass piping were disconnected and several sections of pipe were lodged in the Cottonwood Creek spillway on the North side of Encinitas Blvd. adjacent to the shopping center, (near Wendy's). I did observe storm water run -off flowing from the storm drain outlet. I believe the flow was storm run off from the morning rain. I contacted the City of Encinitas engineering and wastewater department personnel and the contractor. I visited the UV pumping station on P. and "B" to begin bypass procedures. A representative from the joint agency water authority (Bob) was present to work on the filtering system equipment. He indicated the pumping system was inoperative. No further spill prevention measures could be implemented at that time. I do not know the exact time when the bypass piping sections became disconnected. I cannot confirm nor deny whether there was any residual sewerage left in the 6" bypass piping remaining from sewerage bypass pumping operations on Thursday October 14, 2004 and Friday October 15, 2004. I cannot confirm nor deny the amount of sewerage in gallons that may have been released into the Cottonwood Creek spillway. When asked to estimate the amount of sewerage possibly released into Cottonwood Creek, I based my presumption on the rough calculation that approximately 2000 lineal feet of 6" pipe that was presumed to contain some raw sewerage was released. I initially estimated 500 gallons may have been released from the bypass piping into the 96" storm drain. The exact amount of raw sewerage released, if any, must be based on the invert elevations of the 96" storm drain located at station 31 +75 + / -, and the invert (not shown on the contract drawings), of the Cottonwood Creek spillway at approximate station 1 +00 +/-. Reference is made to the contract drawings C -1 and C -3. The invert elevation of the existing 12" sewer connection point to the new 12" sewer is 58.69. The rim of the new manhole structure at station 1 +00 +/- is 65.0. First; the invert elevation of the 96" storm drain located at station 31 +75 +/- is shown on the contract drawing C -3 as being 129.1. The rim of the manhole at station 1 +00 +/- (MH No. 1), is 65.0. I believe there was sufficient head pressure remaining from bypass pumping operations to have effectively flushed the bypass pipe of all residual sewerage after the bypass pumps were stopped. Bypass pumping operations stopped sometime on Friday morning AM* October 15, 2004. R Second; if there was any residual sewerage left in the bypass piping and at any point in the pipe, I believe the weight of the sewerage and pipe would have prevented the piping sections from being disconnected. 1 believe the bypass piping sections were not filled with residual sewerage and the storm run -off and debris flowing through the 96" storm drain caused the piping sections to disconnect at the joints and flow into Cottonwood Creek. Third; to the best of my knowledge there was no bacteria monitoring devices positioned at the Cottonwood Creek spillway, and no way to determine the type nor source of any contamination flowing from the storm drain system between station 31 +75 to the storm drain spillway. When evaluating this report, please refer to the contract drawings C -1, C -2 and C -3. Also refer to the City of Encinitas engineering as -built drawings showing the invert elevation of the Cottonwood Creek spillway elevation, (not included with the contract drawings for the sewer replacement project). Confirm the elevation of the manhole rim located at the existing manhole structure located in the landscaped area west of MH No. 1 at station 1 +00 +/- shown on the contract drawing C- 1. I visited the contractor's staging area located near Encinitas Blvd. and Quail Gardens Dr. and observed no significant erosion from storm water run off. No work was in progress. No photographs were taken of either location. I left the area approximately 11:15am. Please contact me at 619- 778 -3248 if you have any further questions regarding this report Bernard Cook, Project Inspector Cc: RBA Project File CITY OF ENCINITAS ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT WEEKLY PROGRESS MEETING AGENDA / MINUTES Attendees: Richard Brady & Associates Michael O'Shea Bernard Cook Sean Manning San Dieguito Water Mark Robinson Bill O'Donnell November 17, 2004 City of Encinitas City Hall Metropolitan Constr. Alberto Larios City of Encinitas Kipp Hefner Shawn Atherton Greg Shields Ben Taylor CONTRACT SUMMARY (As of 11/17/2004) Contract Time NTPDate: ............................................................ ...... August 2, 2004 Commencement Date: ...................................................... Augu st 2 2004 Original Allowed Work Days: ............................................ 90 Original Contract Completion Date: ..................................... December 4, 2004 Days completed: ............................................................ 78 Elapsed Contract Time: .................................................... 87% Contract Price Original Contract Amount: ............................................... $800,000.00 Approved Change Order(s): .............................................. $0.00 Revised Contract Amount: ............................................... $800,000.00 490.9 "'A14 Wm7m , . Kes�/ 49605ao • Page 2 Amount Payable to Date: ................................................ $71,570.25 Retention to Date: ......................................................... $7,952.25 Total Invoiced to Date :.................... ............................... $79,522.50 Percent Invoiced to Date: ................................................ 10% Discussion: Old business • New Baseline schedule to be provided. To be reviewed by RBA. Progress of the work • Additional potholing at Sta. 19+90 for the 10 -inch pipeline was to be executed on 11/11/04. Work did not take place because of Veteran's day holiday. Contractor did not plan to work on Sunday night because of 2 day forecasted rain. The CM suggested that in the future work should be scheduled and then called off if it rains. Rain days will not be granted for non -rain days. • Set -up launching pit at MH #14 on Monday night 11/15. Tuesday night, 11/16 began pipe bursting 350 ft section between MH #14 and #13. At 6:30 am this morning, the pipe bursting operation was in progress. • Contractor must provide a two -week look -ahead schedule at every construction progress meeting. Submittals/RFI's/RFP's • RFP #2 provided by City of Encinitas regarding the manhole linings for manholes #8 and #1. Contractor provided cost proposal for a brand other than Sand -Con. The City of Encintas requested that this specific brand be used. A new cost estimate will be submitted for this RFP using Sand -Con. • RFP #3 for the 8 -inch diameter stub outs in MH #14 and 15. Contractor provided cost proposal and a COR has been issued to the City. Pending Change Orders • Metropolitan is in the process of putting together a detailed and itemized CO for a time extension. • Metropolitan is in the process of submitting a CO per line item #16 for the relocation of existing 8 -inch sewer laterals Future Areas of Concern • Additional MH's may be required in the Caltrans Right of Way, depending on the density of the soil. (Action: RBA, Doug Morales) Future schedule • Open trench approx. 300 ft to pass area of dense soil. • Area between MH #1 and STA. 7 +00 is shallow non - compressible soil, which could cause upheaval. Contractor will monitor and make repairs as necessary. • See attached 2 week look ahead schedule. e�atd air _Q/4"" w • Y&w 900 • tee/ K&'q) -iPe 0.500 • Kds"d) 4.96 O,SO,S Page 3 Other Issues Potential Changes: • See RFP's. Other concerns: • The City emphasized to the need to exercise caution when soil testing, and to avoid using a jack hammer in areas where the depths of the utilities are unknown. • The City reminded the Contractor that he needs to be out of the street by 5 am each day. • Pipe bursting Contractor requested permission to leave the pipe bursting cable in the sewer line to save time setting up equipment each night. The City does not think this will be a problem provided precautions are taken to protect any exposed equipment from traffic. • Sandbags are required on site for containment purposes. The two areas where sand bags are needed are Cotton Wood Creek Park and 3` and B. Contractor to find a place to store the bags at 3rd and B. Contractor is to confirm that these sandbags are on site. New Business • The next meeting will be held on Wednesday, November 24, 2004 @ 2:00pm. Requests for Proposals (RFP) (submitted to Contractor by CM) RFP DESCRIPTION DATE SENT STATUS Change Order Requests (COR) (submitted to CM by Contractor) RFP OR DESCRIPTION STATUS #2 AMOUNT Lining in Manholes # 1& 8 Metro. A roved Chan a Orders CO (submitted to Owner by CM) RFP COR CO DESCRIPTION TIME AMOUNT STATUS #1 71 #1 Inlet Structure $2300.00 Encinitas #3 42 -Drop 8 -inch diameter stub outs in $1000.00 Encinitas Manholes #14 & 15 _�iirvta��21!!� � �' avoceao�a • 4.9/J9.�2�itr�� n�orz pia! �� X00 • ��iue �i� �iu� ,9,�'1,P� '7e/ Ky5'% 4.96 4.96 050.E Page 4 CITY OF ENCINITAS ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT TWO WEEK LOOK AHEAD SCHEDULE (11/17/2004) Work Description Sun. 14 Mon 15 Tues 16 Wed. 17 Thurs. 18 Fri. 19 Installing pits between MH 13 & 14, no backfill, bypass, or bursting. X Pipe Bursting between MH 13 & 14, no backfill. X Prep for pouring MH 14 base, pits for segment between MH 12 & 13, minimum backfill at pit near MH 14. X Pipe Busting between sections 12 & 13. X Work Description Sun. 21 Mon 22 Tues 23 Wed. 24 Thurs. 25 Fri. 26 t e e • 4 09 -AM'y ' &7— Y--,e goo • -'/— 5� �e� 656/ 49ge O.SOO • 4Jge O.SO.S m o n - Y � C i3 � H r c O �Li U m � m 0 c o U � w 0 N C a` U N M C 0 CO w 16 - �U C U w d .Q E z U m 'o CL` c Q d ca U w 0 O J J a H m n N a I— Z V Z W w P n z O Q z N Q i- N 3 w W n w z 11� w a n n w ED U W it Lu Q n z O a_ U co w n F z O w U w U) U a co a W m z GD at to (n N f- Lo 0 OD a0 O) O 8 8 o o Q 41 00 00 0 O) 61 0 O O 00 0 O 0 O o0 O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N p �- dp p) OD CO CO LL N MN 'f to r- M 0 O O O O O 0 O O 0 O O N W O N b0 a � U N ~ I I 'O G a y w = o c " a� a 0 •U A � 0 0 .p, U C I Iz U z 0 0 r" .n 6 O z c 3 ti ti Cl) M M O of of ai of C6 co (D Iq co M L6 M M M T Qi Oi M �{ M t0 MM CA 0 O � ti M M Cl) N fl- c U _N CL `-° m a� a) o °? U o L t c O N m m C Lco m �j �j OL 3 (L a a a a. a) m a L� m x N N N H N C c O yF LL CL � a� o CL CL CL CL m m m m ii m m m = w C7 U LL N MN 'f to r- M 0 O O O O O 0 O O 0 O O N W O N b0 a � U N ~ I I 'O G a y w = o c " a� a 0 •U A � 0 0 .p, U C I Iz U z 0 0 r" .n 6 O z c 3 ti ti Cl) M M M of of ai of C6 co (D Iq co M N M M M T Qi Oi M �{ M t0 MM p O O N ti M M Cl) N fl- LL N MN 'f to r- M 0 O O O O O 0 O O 0 O O N W O N b0 a � U N ~ I I 'O G a y w = o c " a� a 0 •U A � 0 0 .p, U C I Iz U z 0 0 r" .n 6 O z c 3 N O � U Y ` C P w c O a U cNO o c o w O U V � m C O a U N •� M .0 O W N O c c U W N E 7 Z U N O A c Q N U a a O J }J-.. F- G m U) U) Q Z V Z W } Q W O z O Q x OC r U) Q r N w 0 W ui Z fL' r w ul r D O W LU U w r Q O O IL_ w lu go W 0 IM rn rn r- z - z O O 01 � Q7 o N N r r r y a ..1 m 0 C "C W x o a� ' G U r- U H r a c 0 E r R `m Q r H CR sr O V (D M ry� U) UJ CL E p M 3 N z n N O � m a e z Z 10 ° `� I.- 0 N W O N N 00 a v O O N 0 z b 3 o � IE O N7U. Ull `I" I C4 7 a ai .a y b+ 3 � O Q � o U 0 0 U N N � I Iz U z� 0 W 0 :B 3 �D a1 CL z < i y e� O z 0 w 0 m z Z -a D N III O C r m D v c z X CA m m 7G V X O m 3 m z -q W mvT9MOT ®wm N W CL W < i N C O = Y = i i 2 i W W Non Working Day x Non Working Day x x x x Holyday mayday Non Working Day x x 1XI xx 0 W 0 :B 3 �D a1 CL z < i y e� O z 0 w 0 m z Z -a D N III O C r m D v c z X CA m m 7G V X O m 3 m z -q W - Nbv -11 -20$x" 06:57PM From- T -051 P.001 /008 F -071 ?aw e ,�e�r� 4wel- 4909 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 220 San Diego, California 92123 Tel: (858) 496 -0500 Fax: (858) 496 -0505 e-mail: rbrady @rbrady.net Facsimile Transmittal To: Kipp Hefner Company: City of Encinitas Fax: 760 633 2818 Phone: 760 633 2775 Re: Record of Negotiation Change Order #1 CC: ❑ Urgent • Comments: Kipp, X For Review From: Sean Manning Project: Encinitas Blvd. Trunk Sewer Project No: Encinitas.003 Date: November 11, 2004 Pages: 7 (excludes this page) X Please Comment ❑ Please Reply Here is the draft record of negotiation for the drop inlet. Let me know if you have any comments. Do you have City of Fncinitas CO form that you would like me to fill out and submit for processing? Sean If you did not receive the entire transmittal, please call (858) 496 -0500. Datc: November 11, 2004 Tune: 3 :42 PM Initials: Nov -11 -2004' 06:57PM From- City of Encinitas i 1 � LL Encinitas Blvd Trunk Sewer Replacement V � 1 4909 Murphy Canyon Rd Ph 858-496 -0500 ?#W San Diego, CA 92123 Fax 858- 496 -0505 Change Order #1 Record of Negotiation Date: 11 /10/04 Project No: Encinitas.003 Contractor: Metropolitan Construction P.O. Box 477 Bonita, Ca. 91908 Prepared by: Michael Herrmann, P.E. Summary of Work T-051 P- 002/008 F -071 Subject: installation of Drop Inlet Structure Citv W.O. #: CEE01D Drawing Reference: Specification Reference: RFP Reference: COR Reference: C -3 RFP #1 COR #1 On drawing C -3, Manhole No. 15 located at Station 29.75.94 was found to contain an 8 -inch drop lateral entering from the south that was not shown on the contract drawings. Therefore, it will be necessary to construct a drop inlet structure in accordance with City requirements. Justification for Entitlement The City had previously issued RFP #1 in response to RFI # 2. RFP #1 contained a drawing that showed construction of the drop inlet structure. The Contractor was directed to submit a proposal to provide a drop inlet structure at Manhole No. 15 in accordance with REP #1. Additional Cost Reauested by Contractor $2,300.00 Nbv -11- 2904' 06:57pm From- Change Order #1 November 10, 2004 T-051 P- 003/008 F-071 Negotiation The Construction Manager and the Contractor discussed actual costs to construct the drop inlet structure. The Contractor provided a materials cost sheet showing a total materials cost of $678.77. The Construction Manager and the Contractor agreed on a total price of $2,300 to construct the drop inlet structure. This cost includes all materials, markups, labor and equipment. Recommendation The Construction Manager and Contractor mutually agree that that the cost of $2,300.00 for construction of the drop inlet structure is fair and reasonable. The Construction Manager recommends that an additive Change Order be issued to Metropolitan Construction in the amount of $2,300.00 for the addition of the subject work. Attachments Attachment A: RFP #1 COR #1 Materials Cost sheet CO #1 Page 2 of 2 Nbv -11 -2004' 06:57pm From- : -sue' - ' city Of 4 J September 28, 2004 Metropolitan Construction Attn: Jose Ortiz 8614 Troy Street Spring Valley, CA 91977 RE: ENCINITAS BLVD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT(CEE01 D) RFP #1 Gentlemen: T -051 P.004/008 F -071 Pursuant to paragraph 3 — CHANGES IN WORK, of the Special Provisions, it is requested that you submit to this office your detailed cost proposal for all labor, material and equipment necessary to accomplish the following change. All further correspondence regarding this work shall be identified as Proposed Change RFP #1 until incorporated into this contract by written modification. Pursuant to paragraph 7 -32, SEWER MANHOLES„ of section IV.- General Specifications of the Special Provisions, drop manholes shall be constructed as shown on the drawings. This fact is to be taken into account when providing this proposal. Your proposal should be submitted for the following work: FURNISH AND INSTALL DROP INLET PER THE ATTACHED PLAN. In addition to your cost proposal, you are requested to indicate any changes to the construction schedule as a result of this proposed change.. This letter is a request for a price proposal only and is not to be construed as an authority to proceed, such authority being withheld pending receipt and review of your detailed cost proposal. It is requested that your cost proposal be submitted no later than October 4, 2004. If you have any questions, please call me at 633 -2778. Sincerely, , reg " Ids, P. E. Field Aerations cc: Ron Brady, Inspector Richard Brady and Assoc., Consultant Utilities, Sewer TEL 7G0- 633.36011 / FAX 76u -G33 -36;17 Obi 8, 1'l1lCan Ayunur, I:nriniras, Cali(urnii -0 2 -i -1633 I'DO 760.63- 27011 kr� racycled papor Nov -11 -2004 06:57pm From- EX. MH 8° PVC CAP • • 18" PVC TEE SDR -35 • a SDR35 PVC PIPE SOLVENT WELDED IN MH 1 DETAIL -• NOT TO SCALE • T -051 P.005 /008 F -071 FINISH SURFACE 3 FEET SEAL SPACE W/ EPDXY GROUT EXISTING 8" SEWER LATERAL CORE DRILL 8 1/2" DIA, HOLE & INSTALL LINK SEAL PROVIDE 3 316 SS BRACKETS W/ 1/2" DIA. 316 SS EPDXY ANCHORS —DROP CONNECTION PIPE INVERT SHALL MATCH THE SPRINGLINE OF THE EXIT PIPE, CHIP OUT INVERT AND REPAIR W/ EPDXY GROUT TO SUIT. - Nov -11 -2004, 06:56Pm From- T -051 P.006 /008 F -071 4 METROPOLITAN CONSTRUCTION GENERAL, BUILDING & ENGINEERING CONTRACTOR PHONE: (619) 741 -5643 FAX: (618) 741 -5658 Lic. No. 780632 FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL FORM DATE: November 9, 2004 PROJECT No: 822 TO: Richard Brady & Associates FAX MBIR (866) 486.0505 ATTN: Sean F Manlnins pHohm (858) 496 -.0500 FROM: Alberto Larloo SUBJECT: ENCINITAS BLVD. TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT NUMBER OF PAGES (Including this transmittal form): 2 ADDITIONAL GOMMENT5 1INSTRUCTIONS; RFP # 1 Price IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL S LISTED ABOVE, PLEASE CALL AS soON AS PossisLE FOR RETRANSMISSION: THANK YOU. SENT: Dste; Time: Initials: Received Nov -09 -9004 16:12 Fron- To- Paao 001 Nov -11 -2004 06:56PM From- General T -051 P- 007/008 F -071 & $tlgiAeerjng C'ont aotor 1.Icmd"s No• 990532 November 9, 2004 Richard Brady & ,A,ssoci&Zas 4909 MmPhy Canyon Raab, Sure 220 San Diego CA 92123 Attention: Sean F Manning Refer iwe: Encinitas Boulevard Trunk Sewer Replacement Sub] RFP # 1 Drop Wet Gentleman, As requested in RFP # 001, we are here by pubrnitting our cost proposal in accordance with your sketch. for a drop ialeL TOTAL COST 3 2.300.00 If you have any questions, please feal frae 10 call- Sincerely, Alberto Larios Project Manager PO, box 477, 6onlw. CA. 91906.047! Phone (619)741 -5643 hx(619)741.5656 Received Nov -09 -2004 15:12 From- To- Page 002 Mov- 11-2004 06:58pm From- T -051 P.008/006 F -071 i /rr1 %, - f r _ Biscprldi,�J ' rMTWvQLlTAX C0Ns%%=X0 ' 665 Oppex Street CA 92029 ESCOI�DZaC STOCX ESOOli� 760,781 -5335 PO EOX 477 g�tigos Te9.epb,ot.e: a0=Th 619 ^7+40.5643 TelePhorae• 619- 747. -566a Fax.. Cte.nt3.on.: AT�]3�T'o ,1 . 92343p E>�C DTI TM �,vU TR[TATK S SEWFR R IC Page II /Oa/04 Sia IDt Net. Exteiaded Se11 prase price Tine Quantity Per pesa =a.Pirioa 36.67 3S_67 10 1 SA . SOLVENT WMI; (� um% 11.07 -1.0'i 2 D 1 E�1 a BvC' 5DR3 5 GSM CAP H= 6OLVE= wELa (GLU9) 84.21 24.21 a PVC S R35-l5 R - 90iSAD 30 1 SDR35- EVC SWR PiBS (�) 2,95 96 b0 59.00 95.00 20 FT 40 1 S0 TaT SEAL SET TO FIT 8"6aR -35 SDR -35 _ 135.00 9,05.00 50 3 TEA Go 316SS PzpE S FOR 629.95 Subtotal-" ' �l• ` 4&.82 Tax: Total- 678 .77 did 1 .1 , �4 Received Nov -08 -2004 1 1 1804 From- To- Page OOZ TRANSMITTAL November 15, 2004 Alberto Larios Metropolitan Construction Company PO Box 477 Bonita, CA 91908 -0477 Re: Encinitas Boulevard Trunk Sewer Replacement Submittal No. 02B Baseline Schedule Dear Mr. Larios, We have reviewed the subject submittal. We have the following comments: RECOMMENDED ACTION: REVISE RESUBMIT Comments: 1. The disk provided does not appear to be formatted. We were unable to open the baseline schedule. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, RICHARD BRADY & ASSOCIATES 4� a'4 (;� se--aw ) Sean Manning Project Manager cc: Chron File 02B Submittal Review File 4-90.9 6". Kipp Hefner - RE: Encinitas Trunk Sewer From: "Sean Manning" <smanning @rbrady.net> To: "Jose Ortiz" <joortiz @cox.net> Date: 11/15/2004 11:41:08 AM Subject: RE: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Jose, I understand your predicament. However, I am not confident that the City will accept taking on the scheduling responsibility for the project that would result with such an arrangement. We would have to analyze and compare multiple weather reports and ultimately never get a consensus on what is a rain day or not based on the predictions of weathermen (who both know are wrong most of the time). Typically, work is justifiabley suspended on a site because it is unsafe to continue, not because it is un- economical for the Contractor. Concerning the use of Atlas, it was my understanding that this sub - Contractor was provided to you to use as an option because you failed to provide a suitable sub - contractor in your submittal that could meet the contract requirements. The City does not have a preference for Atlas, if you can find a sub that can meet the contract requirements and is economically reasonable please revise your submittal and send it in. Continue to schedule the project as you see fit to meet the contract requirements. We can add this issue to the list of discussion items for this week. Sean - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Jose Ortiz [mailto:joortiz @cox.net] Sent: Mon 11/15/2004 10:50 AM To: Sean Manning Cc: Subject: Re: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Sean, Understood, but Atlas Pumping Service requires a minimum 48 hour scheduling (set up or cancellation) notification. If the owner is prepared to pay 3k + in cancellation fee's due to acts of God, then we've got no problem in setting them up when there's potential for inclement weather. Please advise? Thanks Jose - - - -- Original Message - - - -- From: Sean Manning <mailto:smanning @rbrady.net> To: Jose Ortiz <mailto:joortiz @cox.net> Cc: Kipp Hefner (E -mail) < mailto :khefner @ci.encinitas.ca.us> ; Greg Shields (E -mail) < mai Ito: gshields @ci.encinitas.ca. us> Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 6:52 AM Subject: RE: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Jose, As you know it did not rain Sunday night. We can not continue to lose working days on this project. Please plan on attending the our progress meeting this week so that we can discuss this issue. Also, you need to inform me promptly in writing of any days that you are calssifying as non -work days due to weather. Thanks T....— Kipp Hefner - RE Encinitas Trunk Sewer Sean - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Jose Ortiz [mailto:joortiz @cox.net] Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2004 2:23 PM To: Sean Manning Subject: Re: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Sean, We will not, the company Kip Hefner had us use for the tanker trucks require a 48 hours cancellation. So if it were to rain, we'd get stuck picking up the tab, so any rain in the forecast will result in a non - working day. The tab is substantial! Contact me for any further questions Regards, Jose - - - -- Original Message - - - -- From: Sean Manning <mailto:smanning @ rbrady.net> To: Jose Ortiz <mailto:joortiz @cox.net> ; Doug Morales <mailto:dmorales @rbrady. net> Cc: Alberto Larios < mai Ito: metroconstructs@cox. net> ; Greg Shields < mailto :gshields @ci.encinitas.ca.us> ; Bill O'Donnell < mailto :bodonnel @ci.encinitas.ca.us> ; Kip Hefner <mailto:KHEFNER @ci.encinitas.ca.us> ; Rob Morrow <mailto:Worrombor @aol.com> ; Ron Brady < mailto :rbrady @ci.encinitas.ca.us> ; Michael O'Shea <mailto: moshea@rbrady. net> Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 1:25 PM Subject: RE: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Jose, Thanks for the update, keep the postings coming they are a big help. At our last meeting I introduced Mike O'Shea from our office who will be taking over as RE for the project. Mike's email is moshea @rbrady.net. Please send future correspondence to my attention with copy to Mike O'Shea. Concerning rain days, will you be working Sunday evening if it does not rain? Usually work is scheduled and then called off if it rains. If we rely on the weather forecasting to schedule work we may not get very much done. The City can not grant rain delays for forecasted rain that does not materialize. Besides, it never rains in Encinitas. Let me know if you have any comments. Sean - - - -- Original Message - -- From: Jose Ortiz [mailto:joortiz @cox.net] Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 12:55 PM To: Doug Morales Cc: Alberto Larios; Greg Shields; Bill O'Donnell; Kip Hefner; Rob Morrow; Ron Brady; Sean Manning Subject: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Doug, ... _ .. Kipp Hefner - RE: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Page 3 We will not be working on Sunday evening (November 14, 2004) due to the projected rain. On Monday (November 15, 2004), and our focus will be installing the receiving/ insertion pits between manholes 13 & 14. No backfill, bypass or bursting operation will be done on this work night. On Tuesday Night (November 16, 2004) pipe bursting will commence for the section between manholes 13 & 14. Connections will be made at the completion of the work, and no backfill operation will take place. As for Wednesday night (November 17, 2004) minimal backfill will be done at insertion pit area near manhole no. 14, and preparations for pouring manhole 14 base will be done. In addition, receiving/ insertion pits for segment between manholes 12 & 13 will also be completed. On Thursday (November 18, 2004) pipe bursting will commence once again for the week between sections 12 & 13. Please note, I will begin sending similar emails to increase communication for the subject project. This email is to elaborate on the two week look ahead, and inteded to assist all interested parties for scheduling purposes. With rains continually in the forecast it is subject to change, and I will try to stay 48 hrs ahead of schedule. Please email me for any questions or call me at 619- 921 -2003. Regards, Jose O. Ortiz Metropolitan Construction CC: <khefner @ci.encinitas.ca.us >, "Greg Shields" <gshields @ci.encinitas.ca.us> Kipp Hefner - RE. Encinitas Trunk Sewer Pa e 1 From: "Sean Manning" <smanning @rbrady.net> To: "Jose Ortiz" <joortiz @cox.net> Date: 11 /15/2004 6:51:47 AM Subject: RE: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Jose, As you know it did not rain Sunday night. We can not continue to lose working days on this project. Please plan on attending the our progress meeting this week so that we can discuss this issue. Also, you need to inform me promptly in writing of any days that you are calssifying as non -work days due to weather. Thanks Sean - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Jose Ortiz [mailto:joortiz @cox.net] Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2004 2:23 PM To: Sean Manning Subject: Re: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Sean, We will not, the company Kip Hefner had us use for the tanker trucks require a 48 hours cancellation. So if it were to rain, we'd get stuck picking up the tab, so any rain in the forecast will result in a non - working day. The tab is substantial! Contact me for any further questions Regards, Jose - - - -- Original Message - - - -- From: Sean <mailto:smanning @ rbrady.net> Manning To: Jose Ortiz <mailto:joortiz @cox.net> ; Doug Morales <mailto:dmorales @rbrady.net> Cc: Alberto Larios <mai Ito: metroconstructs@cox. net> ; Greg Shields <mailto:gshields @ci.encinitas.ca.us> ; Bill O'Donnell < mai Ito: bodonnel @ci.encinitas. ca. us> ; Kip Hefner <mailto:KHEFNER @ci.encinitas.ca.us> ; Rob Morrow <mailto:Worrombor @aol.com> ; Ron <mailto:rbrady @ci.encinitas.ca.us> Brady; Michael O'Shea <mailto:moshea @rbrady.net> Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 1:25 PM Subject: RE: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Jose, Thanks for the update, keep the postings coming they are a big help. At our last meeting I introduced Mike O'Shea from our office who will be taking over as RE for the project. Mike's email is moshea @rbrady.net. Please send future correspondence to my attention with copy to Mike O'Shea. Concerning rain days, will you be working Sunday evening if it does not rain? Usually work is scheduled and then called off if it rains. If we rely on the weather forecasting to schedule work we may not get very much done. The City can not grant rain delays for forecasted rain that does not materialize. Besides, it never rains in Encinitas. Let me know if you have any comments. Sean �—. — Kipp Hefner - RE: Encinitas Trunk Sewer age - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Jose Ortiz [mailto:joortiz @cox.net] Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 12:55 PM To: Doug Morales Cc: Alberto Larios; Greg Shields; Bill O'Donnell; Kip Hefner; Rob Morrow; Ron Brady; Sean Manning Subject: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Doug, We will not be working on Sunday evening (November 14, 2004) due to the projected rain. On Monday (November 15, 2004), and our focus will be installing the receiving/ insertion pits between manholes 13 & 14. No backfill, bypass or bursting operation will be done on this work night. On Tuesday Night (November 16, 2004) pipe bursting will commence for the section between manholes 13 & 14. Connections will be made at the completion of the work, and no backfill operation will take place. As for Wednesday night (November 17, 2004) minimal backfill will be done at insertion pit area near manhole no. 14, and preparations for pouring manhole 14 base will be done. In addition, receiving/ insertion pits for segment between manholes 12 & 13 will also be completed. On Thursday (November 18, 2004) pipe bursting will commence once again for the week between sections 12 & 13. Please note, I will begin sending similar emails to increase communication for the subject project. This email is to elaborate on the two week look ahead, and inteded to assist all interested parties for scheduling purposes. With rains continually in the forecast it is subject to change, and I will try to stay 48 hrs ahead of schedule. Please email me for any questions or call me at 619- 921 -2003. Regards, Jose O. Ortiz Metropolitan Construction CC: "Kipp Hefner (E- mail)" <khefner @ci.encinitas.ca.us >, "Greg Shields (E- mail)" <gshields @ci.encinitas.ca.us> /0 ogwo' CITY OF ENCINITAS ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT WEEKLY PROGRESS MEETING AGENDA Attendees: Richard Brady & Associates Doug Morales Bernard Cook Sean Manning San Dieguito Water Mark Robinson Bill O'Donnell November 10, 2004 City of Encinitas City Hall Metropolitan Constr. Alberto Larios City of Encinitas Kipp Hefner Shawn Atherton Greg Shields Ben Taylor CONTRACT SUMMARY (As of 11/10/2004) Contract Time NTP Date: ................................... ............................... 2, 2 August Commencement Date: ....................... ............................... 004 Augu st 2 Original Allowed Work Days: ............................................ Original Contract Completion Date: .................................... December 4, 2004 Dayscompleted: ............................................................ 73 Elapsed Contract Time: .................................................... 81.1% Contract Price Original Contract Amount: ............................................... $800,000.00 Approved Change Order(s): .............................................. $0.00 � /�s�/ ¢�sosoa • .� �8�a/ 49�oso5 Page 2 Revised Contract Amount: ............................................... $800,000.00 Amount Payable to Date: ................................................ $71,570.25 Retention to Date :.......................... ............................... $7,952.25 Total Invoiced to Date: ................................................... $79,522.50 Percent Invoiced to Date :................. ............................... 1011/0 Discussion: Old business • New Baseline schedule to be provided. To be reviewed by RBA. • RBA to prepare a design clarification identifying potholing for congested utilities near pipe bursting work. (Action: RBA, Doug Morales) Progress of the work • Additional potholing required at Sta. 19 +90 for the 10 -inch pipeline. • Expansion head fractured during pipe bursting operation due to dense soil. Contractor requested open trenching in areas where soil is dense. Contractor to provide RFD. (Action: Jose Ortiz). • Bypass piping to be revised by contractor. Operation will be from manhole to manhole. • Set base for MH #15 @ Sta. 29 +75 • Pour MH # 15 • Open trench Monday (11/8/04) • Contractor must provide a two -week look ahead schedule at every construction progress meeting. See 2 week look ahead developed by attendees attached. Submittals/RFi's/RFP's • RFP #1 provided by City of Encinitas regarding the drop inlet structure for Manhole #8. Discussion about this drop inlet took place on 9/14/04. Contractor found another drop inlet at MH #15. City advised to use the same procedure as requested for M11#8 • Lining in MH# 1 & 8 requested by City. RBA to provide RFP #2. The City wants to use Sand -Con for lining application work. • RFP #3 for the 8 -inch diameter stub outs in MH #14 and 15. To be a per unit cost. Pending Change Orders • Metropolitan reported that the COR in response to RFP #1 is in progress. • Metropolitan to put in COR for a time extension. Future Areas of Concern • Additional MH's may be required in the Caltrans Right of Way. Depends on the density of the soil. Future schedule • Open trench approx. 300 ft to pass area of dense soil. • Area between MH #1 and STA. 7 +00 is shallow non - compressible soil, which could cause upheaval. Contractor will monitor and make repairs as necessary. • 4.wv "" wj'L �� • '�� _� Page 3 Other Issues Potential Changes: • See RFP's. Other concerns: • Contractor needs to contact San Dieguito Water 48 hours before performing work near water pipelines. RBA will send a field memo to remind the contractor to contact San Dieguito accordingly. (Action: RBA, Doug Morales) • Emergency Response Time. City of Encinitas requests that the Contractor respond faster in an emergency situation. Contractor must follow the Emergency Action Plan provided by the City and have it on site at all times. • Sandbags are required on site for containment purposes. The two areas where sand bags are needed are Cotton Wood Creek Park and 3` and B. Contractor to find a place to store the bags at 3`d and B. • RBA to send Shawn Atherton the report concerning the sewage spill on October 18, 2004. New Business • The next meeting will be held on Wednesday, November 10, 2004 @ 2:00pm. Reauests for Proposals (RFP) (submitted to Contractor by CM) RFP DESCRIPTION DATE SENT STATUS 1 Drop inlet structure at Manholes #1 & 8 10/6/04 Metro. Lining in Manholes #1 & 8 11/3/04 Metro. F 32 8 -inch diameter stub outs in Manholes #14 & 15 11/3/04 Metro. Change Order Requests (COR) (submitted to CM by Contractor) RFP COR STATUS DESCRIPTION RFP COR CO DESCRIPTION TIME AMOUNT STATUS 1T 456% X1960500 • of'r) 4A60.S//S Page 4 CITY OF ENCINITAS ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT TWO WEEK LOOK AHEAD SCHEDULE (11/3/2004) Work Description Wed. 03 Thurs. 04 Fri. 05 Sun. 07 Mon. 08 Tues. 09 Wed 10 Thurs 11 Set Base MH #15 x install MH #15 x No Work Open Trench starting at Sta. 27 +75 x x x o �erL iadr� Qaci¢.e� • 9.90 ✓�' "� �are�r orG Yrul X00 • .am /�5�/ ��6a�oo • . /asa/ 4woso.� 5 0 N O . 16 x ` c � N F G -d U > c tt] m •c o tit � O 0 d T O C a v •C M .v c � W _ 0 c U c U w N Q E 3 Z U N O a` c Q N v � (9 O J J Q H H m Q F- z W N Q W H a H W Z F a Li LL tY F CD V• LO Cl) N r- CD CO CO CA a' w w w Z w Z Z Z Z IT O 0 a) —O Go 00 0 T Q m U V- N LO CD fl- C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N W O N a 0 N O z b 3 a3 � � U N ' I d h '.3 w 3 � 0 W � c ,0 U o 0 o •n, a� a� E 0 .z U z:;E C0 0 0 C0 0 0 O 0 0 0 N N_ N N N N N N N N C 4 C cD - m a ui CL m a N N n N °� m O1 c O U c O a a) W ° N �- z r` ao rn 0) cc 00 ao Q m U V- N LO CD fl- C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N W O N a 0 N O z b 3 a3 � � U N ' I d h '.3 w 3 � 0 W � c ,0 U o 0 o •n, a� a� E 0 .z U z:;E O U m CL H a m m a ui CL m R a H CL m a i a CL m m a m CL m d m L can m CO) (a n W a = m O1 c O U c O a a) W c 0 U L o H o 15 m L 3 at Ci u r- r` r` r- 6 m Cl) Cl) Di ai 0i ai 0 M 0 M 0 Cl) 0 Cl) N 6f M r M M cl- O �0p1 O O M r- Cl) M M N Q m U V- N LO CD fl- C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N W O N a 0 N O z b 3 a3 � � U N ' I d h '.3 w 3 � 0 W � c ,0 U o 0 o •n, a� a� E 0 .z U z:;E N O X U C � � H O m R � O c o W 0 U U @ O C O r1 U CO) l6 C lh U O C W N 1 ._ O C U L C U W m E z U N CL c Q U � 0 O J J Q H G m N Q Z U Z W W f z O Q z H U) Q W 3 W W O W z lz H D O W W U LU Q z 0 a U N W C z O U W rn U W IL rn m W m z W T CY) 0) A z z O z o g v v v v r r r r O 0 O O ds 0) 0) 0) Ico rn 0 0 0 IA l0 m E C 7 O E 3 H d R d a T E a 7 U) w 0 m a E 3 z 0 H N O N d M C1. I a> f- w .� U U a�i ti ^III]• I W i1�i 'O C d d .7 y RS 3 � o 0 U 0 0 U � 7J axi � p I I U W 0 O N 0 0 z CIR v d 0 C C C � l0 N to 2 N N O x o x C w a c 0 U U U U Ico rn 0 0 0 IA l0 m E C 7 O E 3 H d R d a T E a 7 U) w 0 m a E 3 z 0 H N O N d M C1. I a> f- w .� U U a�i ti ^III]• I W i1�i 'O C d d .7 y RS 3 � o 0 U 0 0 U � 7J axi � p I I U W 0 O N 0 0 z CIR v to 0 Cl) r � N N N p O lh N N z f-- Ico rn 0 0 0 IA l0 m E C 7 O E 3 H d R d a T E a 7 U) w 0 m a E 3 z 0 H N O N d M C1. I a> f- w .� U U a�i ti ^III]• I W i1�i 'O C d d .7 y RS 3 � o 0 U 0 0 U � 7J axi � p I I U W 0 O N 0 0 z k k \ 2 I § � 2 ƒ k m n 0 G j � b / z CL / m w §� ka n /K cl z o� / § §� 0 z 0 LU ■ \ i § q §E ■/ o �=0 k2$ƒ§2 / Mg «��3< ou) it a. I - w I T w - �:a@ z0W■Iw> I2$w2 X < / /�-§o$f v2k20> B§�W� «U) \ § ƒ > /IU) m m zC4to & °m < *�� /§ip3§a I�� 32z I e=o®w9 ®37��kRw <w)fR§§ �RRowe o 2m <pWwo0 e0-e -Jw 2(DZ 00— 2 8- -Qnog< $ 0 « J I § o IL ° ■ e (j) � � k � u Z Z W z LU U) z § < ¥ £m± I <za z �\ §e-<8 LLJ Q_ IEeeR� <w 0 CD, w m �IQo <u7b� 1«zw§2oxm �®LL -�EG�$ 0-oo «m cw 00� §E § <$§ oo@_ \Iw2�kj §j C)2L� I�LLf °��ƒkCD§ �< u -e- - /<dzzm 2di m� §@ 2< <« <D - _$ §� WOOD O°-IX _ w�.-< 0 =F- ozW <wz 2LLMJReo =m= ..eewgoeOwo §L2 ?$§U)I -I <owRzo�_� 'A zOw2w LO � \ \ d xz" Z!L r >22 < �w W03b 7O§I a. I, � o 2 k \U-§ \> < ODW>w z M z \\ <-- <w�22 ma.Ze Uwƒ §$ $�bm W7§ww °L� m -wa-i ww R cxwmm wwm =0RR@ om /ƒ22a D<wz §7RRk §§ -q LL <mmR 0 zzwzm 0U)w ƒE §Rq zzml 4 «w« ow¥« aI_cn kiw§j W ;w w> (L eI< 3�S$� < :E m k LU � _ § j .\ z / C 0 i3 ; C U C W 0 E N a A U � � C O d U •C M •� o w $ ;c ol w c ? U a E z U G1 'o CL m 0 _ Z N Zw 0 W Z FW- c a �, a W 1W- U O tK W U) O IL U) w N M a0 = LL Q w w g W �- > w(n u=i�:wac7c°na =a Z wcwnZOO 0 ► w _: W z °° I -IX aa0¢ tW = Z g a F- a�¢xaw o0 =~' ap�0 DU izWcna Uz�d��HU�2 Waxa ¢ �DU) - �2mz=wwzn�w ►- =aa►-OzOZwo F- 2 W �w W ikm��cowfnW [- la= =;MWzmiw �^M-2 wzp0�W `n =z°zc�ZP oa DHRaz_ U¢O 0 W ~WW��Zwt=w< a� °"- �wcozxpogaw� o U) w w w W U 0O z Z WaI.- w3: Ww� LL =wxz awio0 Cwf)1 -JD H z w 2 W U O a J J Ix Z w �. o g P Ix U � Q W w � o CO Z_ cr C1 m W Z o 0 ch 9 N N iz n w N a CL a 0LO w LL W J Q' CL � Ix Ow � r J z c°v U0 0 0ZWj W(L m U) WJ O H J a Z �w0 Wg= U 0-02 U) o Op °U9= w a c�aU J a W Q w a a CL 0 z orU) z O w 0. U 1-- Z w J Za i -'ow Z:-i:x0U) W W ZdOZ> �o §t;� cn_ZZC� oa M pU O to wUJXLo aUU�,.�tn d J W 0 F w Q U wu=izaQ wwaaU TOowm? �QU¢oWwm 3ZwU0W c0W >Of O aU¢O 11 LL M O N d d0 �d 0.� 0 N 0 8 Z F V N O a` N f0 'v c Lil O U C a� U N of } 04 _ 2W u N 4J T w O Q W m E b 'o c D c U ? O �o m F c o �- G o o m � � m Q 0 U C O U M O 0 N f0 S 'U c W `m a E z W U (n N z o p n. N Q m W .r of V O J z H LL 0 CL CO) U CO) a p E 3 Z Z w r U m F°- Z g W z M W O M b0 a O O N 0 0 z Vi I C 3 t Nov -11 -2004 02:10pm From- To: T -050 P.001 /003 F -066 4909 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 220 San Diego, Califomia 92123 Tel (858)496 -0500 Fax (858)496 -0505 Facsimile Transmittal Wafner From: Sean Man CoYlpaW. City of Encinitas cnv• 76n- 6332818 Project: Encinitas Trunk Sewer No: Encinitas.003 Phone: 760 -633 2775 Date: 11/11/2004 015- Misc ®Ilaneous Pages: 2 (excludes this page) CC: CC: 0 Urgent 121 For Information ❑ Please Comment ❑ Please Reply • Comments: Kipp, Included are Metro's request for time extension and our response. Please contact me if you have any questions. If you do not receive all the pages of this transmittal, please call (858) 496 -0500. Date: November 11, 2004 Time: 10:51 AM Initials: Nov - 11-2004 02:10pm From- November 11, 2004 Jose Ortiz Metropolitan Construction P.O. Box 477 Bonita Ca. 91908 Re: Encinitas Boulevard Trunk Sewer Replacement Contract Time Dear Mr. Ortiz: T -050 P- 002/003 F -068 A letter that Metropolitan Construction submitted requesting additional contract days was not adequate for the purposes of providing a change order. As stated in the letter I sent to you on November 9, 2004, documentation is required to demonstrate the delays incurred to -date are pursuant to Section 6 -6 of the Standard Specifications. This documentation shall, as a minimum, include the following: - Stoppage of Work Request from the City of Encinitas - Revised baseline schedule - Proof of material days (if applicable) - Daily Reports for Rain Delays - Timeline description showing at fault delay for by -pass approval please send a change order request with the proper documentation demonstrating the need for a specific amount extra contract days to complete the project. An immediate response is required due to the limited time available in the existing contract days. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, Sean F. Manning, P.E. Consmtction Manager cc: Kipp Hefner, City of Encinitas Greg Shields, City of Encinitas File Encinitas.003.363 9DG /, •r � �rY✓J/ 40ti= G:i /rG • ..'� /rY: 1� ?d�e�G.>Gs Nov -11 -2004 02:11pm From - I1VT, /D - . _ . . General November 9, 2004 Richard Brady & Associates ci suite 220 4909 Murphy Ca> San Diego CA 92123 Attention: Sean F Manning Reference: Encinitas Boulevard TrJak Sewer RePlacoment Subject-i Time Exteusion T -050 P- 003/003 F -068 1.kania No 790332 Dear W MAnrilA$v Fallowing Section 6 -6 "Delays and Extension of Ilme" Paragraph 6-6.1 Metropoliten Construction, respectfully requests a not coat time axtensio>� unti s Feb tubes 11, 20� 05; due to x that unforeseen events such %W the tune a�tpended on Setting the by P PP destroy am by Pass Pipe 3YAM the muPcnsion of work duo to the Probident3al Mectious, rain days etc. If you have any questious. Please feel free to call. Sincerely, �� Alberto Project Manager M Box 477, Bonita, G, 91909 -0477 Poona (619)741.6643 FL%(619)741 -5659 002 To- Page Received Nov-08 -2004 16:01 Frov Nov -09 -2004 05:24pm From- November 9, 2004 T -047 P.002/003 F -062 Jose Ortiz Metropolitan Construction P.O. Box 477 Bonita Ca. 91905 Re: Encinitas Boulevard Trunk Sewer Replacement Request for Two -Week Look Ahead Schedules Dear Mr. Ortiz: This letter is to serve as a request that two -week look ahead schedules be provided for review and discussion by the project team at our weekly progress review meetings. i have made- repeated requests at our meetings that these updates be prepared. These updates are an important tool to be used by the City's project management staff and Metropolitan Construction. The two -week look ahead schedule is used to schedule quality control inspection, assist in notifications to land owners or affected agencies, update City Project Management staff on upcoming work, and when reviewing the project baseline schedule. Your assistance with this request is greatly appreciated_ Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, Sean F. Manning, P.E. Construction Manager cc: Kipp Hefner, City of Encinitas Greg Shields, City of Encinitas Filo Encinitas.003.303 4909 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 220 • San Diego, California 92123 Tel (858) 496 -0500 • Fax (858) 496 -0505 Nov -09 -2004 05:25pm From- r �C�hr� CriD��! %!P�1J 11�6ff �(/X.��lds�lU✓I �.., fGIG/ll�irdar November 9, 2004 Jose Ortiz Metropolitan Construction P.O. Box 477 Bonita Ca. 91908 Re: Encinitas Boulevard Trunk Sewer Replacement Contract Time Dear Mr. Ortiz: T -047 P.003/003 F -062 As you are aware the subject project has ninety (90) working day contract duration. This letter is being provided as a notice that Metropolitan Construction is approaching the contract time completion date of December 3, 2004. To date we have not received a time extension request or executed change orders to the contract to execute any changes in allowable contract time. The City of Encinitas project management team is concerned that Metropolitan Construction is not going to meet the time requirements as described in the Contract. In addition, the project baseline schedule submitted by Metropolitan Construction on October 7, 2004 shows a completion date of February 1, 2005. To assist the project team in monitoring elapsed contract time, Contract Time status information was provided at each progress meeting. Contract Time information is provided in the Construction Progress Meeting Agenda for review by Metropolitan Construction and the City of Encinitas project team at each progress meeting. At our last Construction Progress meeting on November 3, 2004 I expressed the City's concern that the project may extend beyond the allowable working time and requested that Metropolitan Construction evaluate the project schedule and prepare a Change Order Request for additional contract time as needed. This request shall be accompanied by an updated Project Baseline schedule and documentation to demonstrate that delays incurred to -date are pursuant to Section 6 -6 of the Standard Specifications. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, Sean F. Manning, P.E. Construction Manager cc: Kipp Hefner, City of Encinitas Greg Shields, City of Encinitas Files Eneinitag.003.303 4909 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 220 . San Diego, California 92123 Tel (858) 496 -0500 . Fax (858) 496 -0505 NOV. 8.2004 3 :51PM METP °pOLITAN CONST N0.011 P.1i3 METROPOLITAN CONSTRUCTION GENERAL BUILDING & ENGINEERING CONTRACTOR PHONE: (619) 741-5643 F: (619) 741 -5658 Lic FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL FORM DATE: November 8, 2004 PROJECT No: 522 TO: Engineering Department FAX NUMBER (760) 633 - 2818 ATTN: Kipp Hefner Pte- (760) 633 - 2797 FROM: Alberto Larios SUBJECT: ENCINITAS BLVD. TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT NUMBER OF PAGES (Including this transmittal form): 3 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS/INSTRUCTIONS: REVISED BASELINE SCHEDULE IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THE PAGES LISTED ABOVE, PLEASE CALL AS SOON AS POSSIBLE FOR RETRANSMISSION: THANK YOU. SENT:Date: Time: Initials:. NOV. 8.2004 3 :51PM S Ii m � 04 d L METPnPOLITAN CONST _ NO.011— P.2/3 --�- r im � s N 0 Id ° w r I R g n _ lc5 w NJ d i o I g , _. ,TA ca u t i ea 0 0 a Q p v o o O N o W$_! r c w N lz� CpQ IS O T_ N LV N O O i7 O O z Zo lV 2N ZcN V Op�� N G 1L�7 Ir P' N O O O O r N N D 4i m + C m N La a * m Lo Q �I N 1` '� T pr g a 1� N T . o pG� A + N yC to rZ LL IM h FL IL z z to ii h. W pp pp pp pp CO app 1p'� a �C � O CGf N h� m taD Q � ry F I I ea 0 0 a Q p v o o O N o W$_! r c w N lz� CpQ IS O T_ N LV N O O i7 O O z Zo lV 2N ZcN V Op�� N G 1L�7 Ir P' N O O O O r N N D 4i m + C m N La a * m Lo Q �I N 1` '� T pr g a 1� N T . o pG� A + N yC to rZ LL IM h FL IL z z to ii h. W pp pp pp pp CO app 1p'� a �C � O CGf N h� m taD Q � ry F NOV. 8.2004 3:52PM METPnPOLITAN CONST NO.011-P. ee5. H CA $ l in gm IL a d I o 0 0 o v v o 0 0 I N m N �C Cri N �t1 � o o O O o 0 0 0 0 0 it .V � N � Irf 'n � � N � p 9 r g 4 pI�I�I�I�I�Ii IRIS h N S m March 22, 2005 Metropolitan Construction Attn: Jose Ortiz 8614 Troy Street Spring Valley, Calif 91977 FAX AND MAIL RE: ENCINITAS BLVD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT(CEEOID) Jose, I am in receipt of your faxed letter dated March 21, 2005, in which you propose a sharing of the cost of the shoring not covered in the original bid. I agree to the sharing of the costs of shoring for those remaining areas that are shown on the plans to be accomplished by pipe bursting. Be advised, that any additional costs that you incur as a result of the open trench procedure shall be borne by you and not the City. The choice of pipe bursting or open trench is yours to make at this point in time. The lack of adequate traffic control and the resulting traffic congestion during the morning rush hour that has been encountered as result of the time you have needed to complete the bursting operation is unacceptable. Please provide a schedule and a traffic control plan for the open trench procedure if that is the option you wish to pursue. Notification to Caltrans shall be your responsibility since this alternative will damage the traffic loops within the state right -of -way. I will copy this letter to Raymond Guames of the City's Traffic Division and you are to coordinate your traffic control plans with him. His phone number is 760 - 633 -2704. If you need any assistance in this matter, Kipp, Raymond and I will help however we can. Sincerely, Greg Shields, P.E. Field Operations cc: Kipp Hefner, Assoc. Civil Engineer Sean Manning, Richard Brady & Assoc. March 21, 2005 Metropolitan Construction Attn: Jose Ortiz 8614 Troy Street Spring Valley, Calif. 91977 FAX AND MAIL RE: ENCINITAS BLVD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT(CEEOID) Jose, I am in receipt of your faxed letter dated March 14, 2005. The date of the fax is March 21, 2005, and the subject of the letter is regarding work that occurred after March 14, 2005. I assume this is another clerical error. Since on or about October 17, 2004 your work has encountered numerous problems, including broken equipment and lack of progress in the pipe bursting operation. At this point, your pipe bursting operations are stalled due to broken equipment again and you have successfully placed all but the last 800 feet, approximately. You are again suggesting the problem is with unanticipated underground conditions and wish to once more complete this project by converting this job to an open trench operation. The City has concluded the problem your work has encountered is not due to differing site conditions. The City will allow the use of the open trench method only if you bear any additional costs that are incurred by way of this change in procedure. Since I did volunteer to split the cost of the additional loops that would be necessary as result of the open trench procedure, I will not withdraw this agreement. The requirement to grind for the paving is not waived. This is what was included in the contract and is expected to be done. The contract also called for contingency plans and these have not been done. Friday I spent the day responding to the citizens that ran into a blockade on Encinitas Blvd. The signage to inform the vehicular traffic of the impending detour was none existent and the City of Encinitas Engineering Department took a significant public relations beating because you could not get out of the street on time. This is the only reason you are being allowed to use the open trench procedure; i.e. after over 170 days on a 90 day contract you have failed to convince that you can follow a schedule. Sincerely, Greg Shields, P.E. Field Operations cc: Kipp Hefner, Assoc. Civil Engineer 02/08/2005 13:54 DALEY AND HEFT DL MR 4 917609432240 DENNIS W. DALEY t DALEY & HEFT LLP F.OBERT R. HEFT NEAL S. MEYERS ATTORNEYS AT LAW RICHARD 1. SCHNEIDER ROBERT W. BROCHMAN , JR. 462 STEVENS AVE, SUITE 201 92075 -2099 MITCHELL D, DEAN SOLANA BEACH, CALIFORNIA DAVID P. BERMAN TELEPHONE (858) 755 -5666 SCOTT NOYA M ROBERT H. QUAYLE IV PAX (858) 755 -7870 WWW -DALEY -HEFT -COM JAMES D. MATHISON tt SYLvIE P. SNYDER SCOTT E.PATTERSON GOLNAR J. FOZI LEE H. ROISTACHER 92&nivewayc y ANpRF,W K. RAUCH MATTHEW E. BENNETT e980 - 2006 SAMUEL C- GAZZO t ANNE M. PERnIGO CHRISTINE J. GRACCO 2 0 0 5 February 8, i CARRIE L. MITCHELL SHIVA ELIHU @^ WENTZELEE BOTHA �...__ PAMELA J. WALLACH CHAD M. HARRIS LEAH A. FI.ASKIN t_ CHRISTINA M. RHUDY Deliver to: Gre Shields NO.323 P001 RON J. BEVERIDGE WILLIAM D. BROWN OF COUNSEL MELINDA M. SCHALL ADMINISTRATOR t also admirred In Washington * also admilled in ifawait atso admW'd to Texas also admitted in Iowa also admitted to Nevada WRITER 'S E -M AIL: mm ODALEY -HUT Fax Number: 760 9 -2240 Phone: 760 633 -2778 Froze: Ne 1 S . Me ers Es w Re: City of Encinitas -Trunk S ewer Total number of pages (including this cover sheet): 13 Please call back as soon as possible if you do not receive all pages: Telephone Number (858) 755 -5666 /FAX Number (858) 755 -7870 Special instructions or notation: Thank you! ** *NOTE * ** mpanying this facsimile transmission contain information from the The documents acco ended firm of baley & Heft. The information ;Ls int f y h you have received this individual or entity named on this transmittal form- facsimile in error, please notify us by telephone 02/08/2005 13:54 DALEY AND HEFT DL MR 4 917609432240 E! - _- M u 22 Cal.F4mr 3d 340 r.0� 4 Cal. Daily OP- Sery (t s 40 C : 34 Ca4 b 960, 22 Cal Rpt3d 3 H Briefs and Other Related Documents Supreme Court of California LEWIS JORGE CONSTRUCTIO MANAGEMENT, INC., plaintiff and Resp ondent, V. pOMONA LINVIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al., Defendants and Appellants. No. S112624. Dec. 23,2004- Contractor brought breach, of BackgrourAd: contract action against school district and its employee after construction contracts was The when projcCo not timely No. Superior Los Angeles County, Chex KCO23186, Harold I- judgment J., entered judgment awarding contractor damages including lost profits for prospective contracts it never won because of impaired bonding capacity suffered as a result of the termination of the contract with district District and employee appealed. The Court of ,Appeal affirmed in part and reversed in part, and the Supreme Court granted district's petition for review. Holdings.' The Supreme Court , Kennard, J., held that: may have earned on (1) lost profits contractor future projects were not recoverable as general images, and special (2) lost profits were not recoverable as damages. Judgment of the Court of appeal affirmed as modified. West Headnotes ]11 Damages E�117 11511117 Most Cited Cases for breach o£ Damages awarded to an injured pan' contract seek to approxu)aate the agreed -upon N0.323 P002 rdy'c 1, vl +-✓ page 1 11,267, 2004 Daily Joumal D.A.R. 15,217 performance, i.e., the plaintiff is entitled to damages that are equivalent to the benefit of the plaintiff's contractual bargain- [23 Damages b"f117 11 5k 17 Most Cited Cases Limitation on damages for breach of a contract to what injured parry would have received if the contract had been fully performed on both sides serves to encourage contractual relations and commercial activity by enabling. parties to estimate in advance the financial risks of their enterprise - Wesfs Arno- Cal.Civ.Code § [31 Damages EIS I I5k5 Most Cited Cases types—general Contractual damages are of two typ es-- g damages (sometimes called direct damages) . and special damages (sometimes called consequential damages)- 141 Damages '6_--Z3 115k23 Most Cited Cases Because general damages are a natural and necessary, consequence of a contract breach., the" occurrence is sufficiently predictable that ed to have at the time of contracting are contemplated them. [51 Damages Cis 115k5 Most Cited Cases Unlike general damages for breach of contract, .,special damages" are those losses that do not arise directly and inevitably from any s imilar breach of any sianilar agTeement; instead, they are secondary or derivative losses arising from circumstances that are particular to the contract or to the parties- 161 pamages X23 115k23 Most Cited Cases Special damages are recoverable for breach of contract if the special or particular circumstances from which they arise were actually cornmunic9ted to or known by the breaching party test) or were matters of which the breaching parry should have been aware at ' the time of contracting ® 2005 Thomon/We -a- No Claim to Orig. U.S- Govt. Works- 02/08/2005 13:54 DALEY AND HEFT DL MR 4 917609432240 YageNO z2 3 Page 2 22 CaLRpptr.3d 340 22 Cal.Rptr.3d 340,4 Cal. Daily Op. Sete. 11,267, 2004 Daily Journal DAR. 15,217 34 CaL4th 960,102 P.3d 257, (Cite as: 34 C91.4th 960,22 Cal.Rptr.3d 340) n because of (an objective test). 171 Damages a22 115k22 Most Cited Cases [7) Damages X163(1) 115kl63(1) Most Cited Cases ed the Special damages will not be presumed mere breach of a contract but following represent loss the occurred by reason of injune breach. 181 Damages 0=23 115k23 Most Cited Cases Contract damages, untie damages in tort, do not permit recovery for unanticipated injury. (91 Damages C-23 115k23 Most Cited Cases Parties may voluntarily assume the risk of liability for unusual losses caused by breach of contract, but to do so they must be told, at the time the Contract is a made, of any special barn likely to result breach, or alternatively, the nature of the contract or the circumstances in which it is made may compel the inference that the defendant should have contemplated the fact that such a loss would be the probable result of the defendants breach. [101 Damages C=23 115k23 Most Cited Cases Not recoverable as special damages for breach of co1*act are those beyond the expectations of the parties. [11) Damages 0=122 115k22 Most Cited Cases 1111 Damages k�-23 115k23 Most Cited Cases Special damages for breach of contract are limited to losses that were either actually foreseen or were reasonably foreseeable when the contract was formed. [121 Damages X40(4) 115k40(4) Most Cited Cases Construction contractor, whose contract with school district was terminated for failure to - complete timely, could not recover, as general lost Profits for district's breach of contract, prospective contracts it never wo impaired bonding capacity suffered as result of district's termination; parties' contxact anticipated full payment of contract price, not contractor's future projects. See I Witkin, Summary of Cal. Law (9th ed. 1987) Contracts, j'§ 815 -817, 823 -826; Cal. Jur. 3d, Damages, §§ 28 -30. 1131 Damages 0-117 115k117 Most Cited Cases General damages for breach of a contract are based on the value of the performance itself, not on the value of some consequence that performance may produce. 1141 Damages X124(3) 115kl24(3) Most Cited Cases Unearned profits can sometimes be used as the measure of general damages for breach sf uc contract, such as when the breaching ply prevented the other side from undertaking performance. 1151 Damages C7-'124(3) 115kl24(3) Most Cited Cases Lost profits from collateral for breach transactions of contract measure of general damag e typically arise when the contract involves crops, goods intended for resale, or an agreement creating an exclusive sales agency; likelihood of lost profits from related or derivative transactions is so obvious in these situations that the breaching party be deemed to have contemplated them at the inception of the contract 1161 Damages C-40(4) 115k40(4) Most Cited Cases Contractor's lost profits from future constriction projects it did not win, due to impaired bonding capacity suffered as a result of school district's termination of construction project, were not recoverable as special damages for district's breach in absence of district's Imowledge of surety's criteria used to evaluate contractofs bonding limits. [171 Damages X40(2) 115k40(2) Most Cited Cases [17] Pleading X18 302k18 Most Cited Cases ©.2005 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. 02/08/2005 13:54 DALEY AND HEFT DL MR 4 917609432240 N0.323 rage 4 oI 1.3 Page 3 22 Cal.Rpptr.3d 340 4 Cal. Daily Op. Ste'. 11,267, 2004 Daily Journal D.A.R. 15,217 34 Cal-4th 960,102 P.. 3d 257,22 Cal- Rptr.3d 340, (Cite as: 34 Cal.4th 960,22 Cal.Rptr3d 340) Lost profits, if recoverable for contract breach, are more commonly rather than general damages and subject to various�nust damages must be pled with particularity, d m also be proven to be certain both to with occurrence and their extent, mathematical precision. * *342 Superior Court, LOS Angeles County; Harold I. Cherness [FNI, Judge. FN* Retired judge of the former Municipal Court for the Culver Judicial District, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to aitiale VI, section - 6 of the California Constitution. *965 Horvitz & Levy, Mitchell C. Timer, John A. Taylor, Jr., Encino; Best, Best & Krieger, Howard B. Golds and Piero C. Dallarda, Riverside, for Defendants and Appellants. Ammon, Amdelson, Loya, Ruud & Romo, Terry T. Tao, Cerritos, and Joseph J. Huprich for Education Legal Alliance of the California School Boards Association as Amiens Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Appellants. Orbach & Huff, David M. Duff, Los Angeles, and Siena R SaA cus Coalition ae on behalf of Defendants Housing as Ami and Appellants. Case, Ibrahim & Clauss, F. Albert Ibrahim, Costa Mesa; Snell & Wilmer, Richard A. Derevan and Maze L. Turman, Irvine, for Plaintiff and Respondent Gordon & Rees and Thorsten J. Pray, San Francisco, for Associated General Contractors of Califot�oia as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiff and Respondent. KENNARD, J. ,A, school district terminates a construction contract when the contractor, four and a half months after the promised due date, still has not ishedth the Project. The contractor's bonding mp y huts another firm to complete the project, but it suspends then later reduces the amount of s e n th for the contractor. The latter successfully school district for breach of contract, recovering in damages some $3 million dollars for potentially lost profits, which the contractor clammed it would have earned on prospective construction contracts it never won because of its imp aired bonding capacity. The Court of Appeal concluded that those potential profits were a proper item of general damages in this action for breach of contract. We disagree. Y. In 1994, the Pomona Unified School District (District) solicited bids for building improvements at Vejar Elementary School. The District awarded the contract to Lewis Jorge Construction. low bidder at Management, Inc. (Lewis Jozg e ), $6,029,000. Although the contract origbAny provided for completion in December of 1995, heavy rains delayed worts, and the parties agreed to a revised completion date of January 22, 1996- That date canoe and went, but the project rep sined unfinished. *966 The District withheld payments May, Lewis Jorge for work completed in April and Ors June 5, the District terminated the contract with Lewis Jorge and made a demand on the contractor's surety to finish the project under the performance bond the surety bad provided for Lewis Jorge. The surety them hired another contractor 'to complete the school * *343 project for $164,000. That contractor completed the project between early July alld raid- September, 1996. Lewis Jorge sued the District, alleging it breached the contract by declaring Lewis Jorge in default and teiminating it from the construction project. The complaint sought damages and alleged six causes of action. The first, alleging breach of contract, and the second, alleging breach of an implied warranty Of sufficiency of the plans and Specifications. for the project, are both contractual claims namng the District as a defendant. Causes of action three through five -- alleging nondisclosure of material facts, inducing breach of contract, and negligence —named a district employee as a defendant- The sgainst both the District and the equitable iwdemnity g employee for claims against Lewis Jorge by its surety and its unpaid subcontractors. Lewis Jorge did not plead as special damages the profits it 0 2005 Thomson/West. No Claire to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. 02/08/2005 13:54 DALEY AND HEFT DL MR 4 917609432240 22 Cal.Rpptr3d 340 3Cite as: 4 Cal.4th 960, 22 Ca RVt�3d 3d0) 340,4 Cal. Daily Op. Sery clairnd to have lost on future contracts. Lewis Jorge, in twin, was sued by a number of its subcontractors for nonpayment of their past due bills. At trial, Lewis Jorge presented evidence from its bonding agent that in June 1996 it had a bo tiding limit of $10 million per project, with, an aggregate limit of $30 million for all work in progress. By mid -1997, the only sureties wWing to provide Lewis large with bonding imposed a limit of $5 million per project, with an aggregate limit of $15 million, a reduction of its bonding capacity to the level its surety had imposed in the early 1990's- Someti= in 1998, Lewis Jorge ceased bidding altogether and eventually closed down. Lewis large sought to prove the extent of its lost future profits on unidentified construction projects, using as the relevant period the date of the District's breach to the date of trial, and relying on its profitability during the four years preceding the breach. Robert Knudsen, a financial analyst who specialized in calculating lost profits claims, projected that Lewis Jorge had lost $95 million in gross. revenue for future contracts that, based on its past history, it would likely have been awarded. Historically, Lewis Jorge had realized a profit of about 6 percent of revenue. Knudsen calculated lwhicprofits iscounted t tifi present value $4,500,000, came $3,148,107. *967 The jury returned special verdicts in favor of Lewis Jorge, ==ding the District liable for $362,671 owed on the school construction contract, of which $143,755 was attributable to the District's "breach of warranty as to the fitness of its plans or specification" (the complaint's second cause of action). It awarded $3,148,197 RNI] in profits Lewis Jorge did not realize "due to the 1 Having found reduction of its bonding capacity The District's employee negligent, the jury found him, and the District jointly and severally liable for $ 3,510,868. FNI. The jury returned an award some ninety dollars greater than the lost profit sure calculated by expert witness Knudsen. N0.323 P005 Page D 01 1.) Page 4 11,267, 2004 Daily Joumal D.A.R. 15,217 is The District and its employ a are a not Jorge. also appealed, raising issues that material here and were rejected by the Court of Appeal. Although the Court of Appeal reversed the judgment against the District's employee, and reversed awards against the District for prejudgment interest and contractual attorney fees ( Civ.Code, § 1717), it rejected the District's claim for that the award to Lewis Jorge of $3, 148, potential profits on * *344 future projects was an improper component of general damages for breach of contracL The Court of Appeal granted the District's petition for xeheming on that question; after receiving additional briefing, it concluded that "the lost profit damages sought by Lewis Jorge were in the nature of general damages, [ J not special damages as claimed by the District." We granted the District's petition for review to resolve whether general damages for breach of a construction contract include potential profits lost on future contracts that a contractor does not win when, as a consequence Of the property owner breach, the contractor's surety reduces the contractor's bonding capacity, PN2] We later solicited and received briefing from the parties an the related potential profits issue would ave been proper here lost special damages. FN2. The District does not challenge either the jury's finding that the District breached the contract or its award of $362,671 in general damages for the breach- U. (1j Damages awarded to an injured parry for breach of contract seek to approximate the agreed-upon performance." (Applied Equipment Corp. v. Litton Saudi Arabia Ltd. (1994) 7 CalAth 503, 515, 28 Cal.4tr.2d 475, 869 p.2d 454 ( Applied ).) The goal is to put the plaiod f "in as good a position as he or she would have occupied" if the defendant had not breached the contract. (24 Williston on Contracts (4th ed.2002) § 64:1, p. 7.) . In other *968 words, the plaintiff is entitled to damages that are equivalent to the benefit of the plaintiffs ontractuaof CalmLaw (9th tied. 11098-) 71 987) Widan, urmr)' Contracts, § 813, pp. 732 -733; ,Peterson v. Larquier (1927) 84 Cal-APP. 174, 179, 257 P. 873 ® 2005 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. 02/08/2005 13:54 DALEY AND HEFT DL MR 3 917609432240 22 Cal.Rpptr.3d 340 Citeas3 4 Ca1.4th 960, 22 C 1 Rpt�d 340) 0' 4 Cal. Daily Op- 5ery ( . inevitably from any similar breach o£ any similar agreement. Instead, they are secondary or derivative losses arising from circumstances that are particular to the contract or to the parties. Special damages are recoverable if the sp 969 arise were circumstances tuall ,scat d chto thoorr known by the actually breaching party (a subjective test) or were matters of which the breaching party should have been aware at the time of contracting an objective test). Mitchell v Clarke, supra, 71 Cal. at pp. 164 -167, 11 P. 882; 1 Witlan, Surcomaxy of Cal• Law, supra, § 815 p. 733.) Special damages will not be presumed from the mere breach" but represent loss that "occurred by reason of injuries following from /' the breach. (Mitchell v. Clarke, supra, 71 Cal. at p- 168, 11 P. 882.) Special damages are among the losses that are foreseeable and proximately caused by the breach of a contract. (eiV.code, § 3300.) N0.323 9006 ]?age 0 01 1.3 Page 5 11,267, 2004 Daily Journal D.A.R. 15,217 [breach of lease permits injured Parry to recover difference between rental value at date of breach and rent specified in lease for its teen].) [2) The iqjured party's damages cannot, however, exceed what it would have received if the contract had been fully performed on bot for breach of a § 3358.) This limitation of damages contract "serves to encourage contractual zee tuns and commercial .activity by enabling parties to estimate in advance the financial risks of their enterprise." (Applied, supra, 7 Ca1.4th at p. 515, 28 Cal.Rptr.2d 475, 869 P.2d 454.) [3] Contractual damages are of two types -- general damages (sometimes called direct damages) and special damages (sometimes called consequential damages). (24 Williston on Contracts, supra, § 614,1, pp. 11 -12; 3 Dobbs, Law of Remedies (2d ed.1993) § 12.2(3), pp. 39-42; see, e.g., Erlich v. Menezes (1999) 21 CalAth 543, 558, 87 Ca1.Rptr.2d 886,981 P.2d 978.) A. General Damages [4] General damages are often characterized as those that flow dire cttlhy and at are a natural lresult f a breach of contract, 3300 [damages "w " "Chf in the breach. (Civ.Code, § ordinary course of things, would be likely to result" from breach]; Mitchell V. Clarke (1886) 71 Cal. 163, 167 -168, 11 P. 882 [general damages are those that naturally and necessarily result from breach].) Because general damages are a /natural and necessary consequence of a contract breach, they are often said to be within the contemplation of the partites, meaning that because their occurrence is sufficiently predictable the parties at the time of contracting are "deemed" to have contemplated therm. (Calamari & Peri110, The Law of Contracts (2d ed.1977) § 14 -5, p. 525; **345Hunt Bros. Co. v. San Lorenzo Water Co. (1906) 150 Cal. 51, 56, 87 'P. 1093 [parties need not "actually have contemplated the very consequence that oecwed," but they would have supposed such a consequence was likely to follow a breach].) B. Special Damages 15][6][7) Unlike general damages, special damages are those losses that do not arise directly and California follows the common law zueara that an Bmglish court articulated some 150 y g o Hadley V. Baxendale (1854) 156 Fng.Rep. 145. After Hadley's Mill shut down because of a broken crankshaft, he entered into a contract to have a new one built. When the builder asked Hadley to send him the broken shaft to use as a model, Hadley took it to Baxendale, a common carrier, for delivery to the builder. -Baxendale did not deliver until seven days later. Hadley then sued Baxemdale for lost profits for that period. Hadley s lost profits, the court held, were not recoverable, because he had failed to inform the carrier that the mill would be shut down until delivery of the new shaft. (Id. at p. 151.) Because the special circumstance --the mill's inoperability without a mull shaft- -was not communicated to Baxendale, he did not assume the risk of compensating Hadley for mill profits lost as a resulting of Baxendale's late delivery of the mill shaft. Hadley did not expressly distinguish between general and special damages. But such a distinction flows naturally from that case; hence the rule that a party assumes the risk of special damages liability for unusual losses arising from special circumstances only if it was "advised of the facts concerning special harm which might result" from breach —it is not deemed to have assumed such additional risk, however, simply by entering into the contract. (i Witkin, Summary of Cal. Law, supra, § 0 2005 Thomson/West. No Claim to Or'& U.S. Govt Works. 02/08/2005 13:54 DALEY AND HEFT DL MR 4 917609432240 22 Cal.Rptr.3d 340 34 CalAth 960,102 P.3d 257, 22 Cal.Rptr.3d 340,4 Cal. Daily OP. Seen+ (Cite as: 34 CaL4th 960,22 Cal.Rptr.3d 340) ' [12] Mere, the Court of Appeal affirmed the jurys award to Lewis Jorge of $3,148,197 in general damages, based on profits Lewis Jorge did not earn on future unidentified contracts because its surety had reduced its bonding capacity after the District's termination of the construction contract. The Court of Appeal concluded that such Potential tial because they recoverable as general wag followed "from the breach in the ordinary course of events" and were a "natural and probable consequence." The Court of Appeal found it significant, as did the trial court, that the contract at issue, like much of Lewis Jorge's business, was a public contract that required bonding. N0.323 9007 Page 6 11,267, 2004 Daily Journal D.A.R. 15,217 815, p. 733; .Mitchell v. Clarke, supra,. 71 Cal. at pp. 165- 169,11 P. 882.) [8][9][10][11] The Hadley rule has long been applied by California courts, which view it as having been incorporated into California Civil available sction 3300,s definition of the damag es for breach of a contract. (Hunt Bros- Co. v. San 'Lorenzo •Water Co., supra, 150 Cal. at p. 56, 87 P. 1093; Christensen v. Slawter (1959) 173 Ca1.App.2d 325, 334, 343 P.2d 341; Sabraw v. ,Kaplan (1962) 211 Cal,App.2d 224, 227, 27 Cal.Rptr. 81.) Contract damages, unlike damages in tort,(Civ.Code, § 3333), do not permit recovery for unanticipated jnjury. (.hunt Bros. Co. v. San jrorenzo Water Co., supra, 150 Cal. at p. 56, 87 P. 1093.) *970 Parties may voluntarily . assume e risk of liability for unusual losses, but to do so they must be told, at the time the contract is made, of any special harm, likely to result from a breach ( ,Mendoyoma, Inc. v. County of Mendocino (1970) 8 Ca1App -3d 873, 879 -880, 87 Cal.Rptr. 740)' see * *346Erlich v. ,tMenezw, supra, 21 Ca1.4th 543, 558 -560, 87 Cal.Rptr-2d 886, 981 P.2d 978; Brandon & Tibbs v. George Kevorkian Accountancy Corp. (1990) 226 Cal.App.3d 442, 455 -456, 277 Cal.Rptr. 40). Alternatively, the nature of the contract or the circumstances in which it is made may compel the inference that the defendant should have contemplated the fact that such a loss would be "the probable result" of the defendant's breach. (Burnett & Doty Development Co. v. ,Phillips (1978) 84 CalApp.3d 384, 148 Cal .Rptr. 569 [defendant's delay in preparing site for subdivision breached contract with developer and subjected defendant to liability for profits that developer could not earn on unbuilt houses] -) Not recoverable as special damages are those "beyond parties." (Applied, supra, 7 the expectations of the CaL4th at p. 515, 28 for 5 each of contract are 454.) Special damag limited to losses that were either actually foreseen (see, e.g., Dallman Co. v. Southern Heater Co. (1968) 262 Cal.App.2d 582, 586, 68 Cal.Rptr. 873 [in contract negotiations, supplier was put on notice that its failure to perform would result in lost profits] ) or were "reasonably foreseeable" when the contract was formed. (applied, at p. 515, 28 Cal.Rptr-2d 475, 869 P.Zd 454 ) Ell. The Court of Appeal reasoned: When the contract was formed, the District Imew of its own bond requirements, and it knew that public works contractors must provide bon to secure their Performance. Because impa d b capacity "has long been recognized as a direct consequence of an owner's breach of a construction contract," the Court of Appeal concluded that the District should have known that breaching the contract and resorting to the surety to complete the project could impair Lewis Jorge's ability to obtain bonds without which it could not bid on other Public lc that the Accordingly, 971 the Court of Appeal potential profits Lewis Jorge lost on contracts it did not win after the District's termination of the school construction contract were general damages attributable to the District's breach. [FN3] FN3. The District advances various public policy arguments in urging us to preclude lost future profits as a component of general damages when the hiring Party is a public entity and especially when, as here, it is a school district. Lewis Jorge responds that because public contracts require bonding, profits lost on potential projects because of impaired bonding capacity after an owner's breach of a public contract will always be general damages. Whatever the merits of these argumentsp we need not base our holding On the circumstance that the contract was a public contract or that a public school district was the breaching party. For bonding, although it is statutorily required for most public contracts, is also commonly 0 2005 Thomsoa(West. No Claim to Orig- U.S. Govt. Works. 02/08/2005 13:54 DALEY AND HEFT DL MR 4 917609432240 N0.323 D008 rage o Ux A Page 7 22 Cal.Rptr.3d 340 Serv. 11,267, 2004 Daily loumal D.A.R. 15,217 Cite u: 4 Ca1.4t 960, 22 CaLltptrR.3d 340)40' 4 Cal. gaily Op- imposed under contracts between private parties for larger construction projects. (See, e.g., Cates Construction, Inc, v. Talbot Partners (1999) 21 CalAth 28, 35, 40, 86 Cal.Rptr.2d 855, 980 P.2d 407 [condominium developer required contractor to furnish a labor and materials payment bond and a performance bond for the full $3.9 million contract price]; 1 Cal. Construction Contracts and Disputes (Cont.Ed.Bar 3d ed. 2003) Drafting Construction Contracts, § 2.9, P• 82 [vowner should also reserve, the right to require bidders to furnish performance and payment bonds "].) * *347 [13] The Court of Appeal however, Wed of to consider a threshold inquiry. purpose contractual damages is to give the umbreacbi:ng party the benefit of its contractual bargain, then the first question is: What performance did the parties bargain bargain • for? General damages contract are based on the value of the performance itself, not on the value of some conse quence that performance may produce." (3 Dobbs, Law of Remedies, supra, § 12.4(1), p. 62.) Profits " 'which are the direct and itnrnediate fruits of the contract' are 'part and parcel of the contract itself, entering into and constituting a portion of its very elements; something stipulated for, the right to the eljoyment of which is just as clear and plain as to the fulfillment of any other stipulation.' " (Shoemaker V. Acker (1897) 116 CaL 239, 245, 48 P. 62.) [14] Unearned profits can sometimes be used as the measure of general damages for breach of contract. Damages measured by lost profits have been upheld for breach of a construction contract when the breaching party's conduct prevented the other side from undertaking performance. (Stark v. Shaw (1957) 155 Cal.App.2d 171, 181, 317 P.2d 182 [contractor's delay in building subdivision prevented roofing subcontractor from performing]; De Flavio v. Zstell (1959) 173 Cal..App.2d 226, 232 -2337 343 P.2d 150 [lost profit damages below contractor's estimated profit upheld when repudiated contract].) The profits involved in Stark profits and De Flavio, however, were purely pr unearned on the very contract that was breached. [15] Lost profits from collateral transactions as a 0 2005 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig- U.S. Govt. Works. measure of general damages for breach of contract typically arise when the contract involves crops, goods intended for resale, or an agreement creating an exclusive sales *972 agency. (Nelson v. Reisner (1958) 51 Cal.2d 161, 170 -171, 331 P.2d 17 [lessor's breach of lease precluded sharecoppaug farmer from raising crops and realizing Profit their sale]; Morello v. Growers Grape Prod. Assn. (1947) 82 Cal-App-2d 365, who [disappointed purchaser of brandy o intended to bottle and resell it); Brunvold v. Johnson (1939) 36 Ca1.App.2d 226, 97 P.2d 489 [termination of exclusive agent for sale of rope and twine products]; Tahoe Ice Co. v. Union Ice Co. (1895) l09 Cal. 242, 41 P. 1020 [t Gjto k 194526 contract by ice retailer]; Grupe ( ) Cal.2d 680, 160 P.2d 832 [defective oil refining machines purchased for resale by exclusive agent); see also Brandon & Tibbs 226 Cal George ev rkian Accountancy Corp., supra, pp• 457, 277 CabRptr. 40 [where parties conceded that lost profits were the measure of damages for breach, the breach of a joint venture to expand accounting practice by acquiring an existing practice in another city supported an award of unearned profits as component of general damages for breach of contract].) The likelihood of lost profits from related or derivative transactions is so obvious in these situations that the breaching party must be deemed to have contemplated them at the inception of the contract. We are not aware of any California authority involving a construction contract that has upheld an award of general damages against a breaching owner for profits unearned on unidentified contracts the contractor did not get when its bonding was impaired as a result of the contract breach. Lewis Jorge, nevertheless, urges **348 us topermi M. uch recovery, citing a Montana decision, o H". Comm% et al (1971) 157 Mont, 121, 483 P.2d 699. In that case the plaintiff highway contractor, who had been in business for 22 years and had made a profit on every construction project, claimed three years of profits lost or $250,000 for projects he was unable to win when his bonding capacity was reduced after the state breached the construction contract_ The Montana Supreme Court affumed a jury award of $78,000 in lost profits. (Id. at p. 130, 483 P-2d 699.) It did so without reference w the construction context, by simply 02/08/2005 13:54 DALEY AND HEFT DL MR 4 917609432240 N0.323 re.6o7vi.ta Page 8 22 Cal.Rptr.3d 340 34 CalAth 960, 102 P.3d 25 , 22 Ca tr 3d 34 )40, 4 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11,267, 2004 Daily Journal D.A.R. 15,217 (Cite as, 34 CaL4th 960, 2 applying rule 's for profits lost to an established business. But five years later, in • Zook Brothers Constr. Co. v. State (1976) 171 Mont 64, 556 P.2d 911, another case involving breach of a highway construction contract, the same court disallowed recovery of profits lost on other projects after the state's breach. The Montana court found "vague and speculative" future profits the contractor did not earn when the state's breach caused bum financial woes, forcing him to sell .equipment without which he was unable to take on additional work. (Id. at p. 76, 556 P.2d 911.) The Montana court's earlier decision in Laas appears to represent a singular instance of upholding lost profits on future construction projects as an item of general damages for breach of a construction contract, a holding that has not been followed in a published opinion outside Montana in the 33 years it has been on the books. *973 The only California decision upholding damages for a contractor's lost profits on future contracts it did not win because its bonding capacity was impaired arises not, as here, from a construction contract but from a contract to provide future bonding. (Arniz Contracting Co. v. St .Paul Fire cti Marine Ins. Co. (1996) 47 Cal,.AppAth 464; 489, 54 Cal.Rptr.2d 888.) The patties to the breached contract in Arntz were the contractor and its surety, which agreed to provide the contractor with ongoing bonding. (Id. at p. 473, 54 Cal.4tr.2d 888.) Because the contract was one for future bonding, it was entirely within the contemplation of the surety that its breach of the contract— resulting in the contractor's loss of actual bonding —would preclude the contractor from bidding on and being awarded major projects. Thus, the loss of profits on those projects were properly general damages, for they were the "direct and immediate fruits" (Shoemaker v. Acker, supra, 116 CaL at p_ 245, 48 P. 62) of the surety's breach of the contract to provide bonding. Applying these rules to the school construction contract here, we cannot say that the parties' bargain included Lewis Jorge's potential profits on future construction projects it had not bid on and been awarded. Pull performance by the District would have provided Lewis Jorge with full payment of the contract plitce. certainly, Lewis Jorge anticipated earning a profit on the school contract with the District, but that projected profit was limited by the contract price and Lewis Jorge's costs of performance. if Lewis Jorge's bid accurately predicted its costs, the benefit of its contractual bargain for profits was capped by whatever net profit it had assumed in setting its bid price. The District's termination of the school contract did not directly or necessarily cause Lewis Jorge's loss of potential profits on future contracts. Such loss resulted from the decision of CNA, Lewis Jorge's surety at the time of the breach, to cease bonding Lewis Jorge. Contrary to Lewis Jorge's contention, our decision in Warner Constr. Corp. v. City of Los Angeles (1970) 2 Cal.3d 285, 85 CaIRptr. 444, 466 P.2d 996 does not compel a different result. There, a contractor * *349 sued the city for breach of a contract to construct a retaining wall. The complaint alleged four causes of action. As relevant here, the third cause of action alleged that the city had breached the contract by refusing to issue a "change order" to compensate the contractor for additional costs when soil at the site proved to be more unstable than city test holes had revealed, requiring the contractor to use special, more expensive casting methods, which did not comply with the contract's specifications. (Id. at p. 290, 85 Cal.Rptr. 444, 466 P.2d 996.) The fourth cause of action alleged *974 that the city provided misleadivag results of two test holes it had drilled and did not disclose earlier landslides on the site. ( Id. at pp. 290 -291, 85 Cal.Rptr. 444, 466 P.2d 996.) The jury, returned a general verdict for $150,000 against the city. (Id at pp. 289, 300, fn. 18, 85 CaLRptr. 444, 466 P.2d 996.) Of the $150,000 awarded by the jury in Warner, we upheld only $81,743.55 in damages. [l N4] ( Warner Constr. Corp. v. City of Los Angeles, supra, 2 Cal.3d at pp. 301, 303, 85 Cal.Rptr. 444, 466 P.2d 996.) The city had challenged the $150,000 award on the ground that it included "compensation for speculative and unproven items of damages," ( Id at p. 300, 85 Ca1.Rptr. 444, 466 P.2d 996.) The plaintiff, relying on evidence that it had suffered impairment of capital when it Rinded added construction costs out of pocket, argued that it was entitled to the entire $150,000 award because of its uncompensated losses, including profits it did not ® 2005 ,Momson/West No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt Works. 02/08/2005 13:54 DALEY AND HEFT DL MR 4 917609432240 N0.323 D010 .rage 1U oz i.) 22 Cal_RRpptr.3d 340 4 Cal. Daily Op. Sery 34 CalAth 960, 102 P.3d 257,22 Cal.Rptr.3d 340, (Cite as: 34 Cal.4th 960,22 Cal.Rptr.3d 340) water heaters breached a contract for providing a ready supply of heaters and spare parts. (Id. at PP- 591-592, 68 Cal.Rptr. 873.) The Court of Appeal upheld an award of lost profits because the plaintiff had specifically informed the defendant would would suffer losses if new heaters and parts not be readily available. (Id. at p. 586, 68 Cal.Rptr. 873.) In other words, the lost profits claim there -met the rule of Hadley v. oaxendale, supra, 156 Eng. Rep. 145, allowing damages flowing from unusual circumstances l when the e contract was formed. breaching party Page 9 11,267, 2004 Daily Journal D.A.R. 15,217 earn after the city's breach. This court rejected the contention that lost profits would necessarily be speculative qt joy an established firm such as Warner." (Id. at p. 301, 85 Ca1.4 444, f business, 996.) We went on to state that "[1] os restriction of research, reduction of bonding capacity, and destruction of a former advantageous competitive position comprise imponderable factors which may affect different companies to differing extents and amounts." (Ibid) The measure of such damages, we said, "requires proof of the effect of these factors" on the Plaintiff .5 profits. (Ibid.) Warner did not reach the merits of the contractor's lost profits claim/, however, because it concluded that the contractor had failed to prove lost profits, and therefore any award for lost profits could not "be sustained." (Ibid.) FN4. Although the complaint in Warner framed thi fourth cause of action as one for fraudulent conceahnent, which is a tort, this court treated the claim as an action in contract for breach of warranty. (Warner Constr. Corp. v. City of LOS Angeles, supra, 2 Cal.3d at p. 294 & fn. 4, 85 Ca1.Rptt. 444, 466 P.2d 996.) Warner did not hold that potential profits lost from fugue contracts are general damages that naturally flow from a breach of a construction contract At most, it ackmowledged that to recover profits lost on future contracts the plaintiff contractor must prove their occurrence and extent (Warner Constr. Corp. v. City of Los Angeles, supra, 2 Cal3d at pp. 301 -302, 85 Ca1.Rptr. 444, 466 P.2d 996.) Indeed, are ma the two lost profits cases cited by instructive, and we briefly discuss there below. The' fiurst, Lucky Auto Supply v. Turner (1966) 244 Cal,App2d 872, 53 Cal.Rptr. 628, concerned a claim of trespass, a tort, for which the measure of damages is broader than for breach of a contract (See Civ.Code, § 3333 [ "all the detriment proximately caused" whether or not it could have been "anticipated "); Lucky Auto Supply, at pp. 881 -882, 53 Cal.Rptr. 628.) The second case, Dallman Co. v. Southern Heater Co. (1968) 262 Cal.App.2d 582, 68 CaLRptir- ,873, involved profits lost by a 350 plumbing *975 distributor when the supplier of its private -label [16][17] Having here concluded that profits Lewis Jorge might have earned on future construction projects were improperly awarded as general damages, we now decide whether those lost potential profits were recoverable as special damages. Lost profits, if recoverable, are more l commonly special rather than g damages Dobbs, Law of Remedies, supra, § 12.4(3), pp. 76 -77), and subject to various limitation Not Only must such damages be pled with particularity ( Mitchell v Clarke, supra, 71 Cal. at p. 164, 11 P. 882), but they must also be proven to be certain both as to their occurrence and their extent, albeit not with "mathematical precision." (Berge V. International Harvester Co. (1983) 142 Cal.App.3d 152, 161, 190 Cal -Rptr. 815; accord, Grupe v. Glick supra, 26 Cal.2d at pp. 692 -693, 160 P.2d 832; ,Resort Video, Ltd. v. Laser Video, Inc. (1995) 35 Cal.App.4th 1679, 1698- 1700, 42 Cal_Rptr,2d 136.) "When the contractor's, claim is extended to profits allegedly lost on other jobs because of the defendant's breach" that "claim is clearly a claim for special damages." (3 Dobbs, Law of Remedies, supra, § 12,4(3), fn. 12, p. 71.) Although Lewis Jorge did not plead its lost future profits as special damages, the issue of their availability as special damages was presented to the jury, and at oral argument the District expressly stated that it was not relying on that pleading omission. Although a few cases state that a contractor suing for breach of contract may recover as special damages any profits it might have earned on other unawarded construction contracts, such damages are frequently denied as too speculative. (See, e.g., Hirsch Elec. Co., Inc. v. Cvmmunity Services, Inc. (1988) 145 A.D.2d 603, 605, 536 N.Y.S,2d 141, 143 [contractor's claims that breach rendered it 0 2005 TbomsonlWest. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt Works. 02/08/2005 13:54 DALEY AND HEFT DL MR -> 917609432240 N0.323 D011 .rijgtz; J.L UL ii Page 10 22 Ca1.Rpptr -3d 340 22 Cal 1Z�.3d 340,4 Cal. Daily OP. Serv, 11,267, 2004 Daily Journal A.A.R. 15,217 34 Cal.4th 960, 102 P.3d 257, (Cite as: 34 CaLAlk 960,22 Cal ltptr.3d 340) won unable to obtain bonding, without which it could not bid or wing another contract on which it would have made a profit of $800,000, rejected as consisting of "inferences piled upon inferences" that "as a matter of law, are too speculative to give rise to the recovery of damages for lost profits "]; Manshul Constr. Corp. v. Dormitory Auth. of N.Y. (1981) 111 Misc.2d 209, 444 N.Y.S.2d 792, 803 -804.) And there are federal decisions that likewise have rejected as too remote and speculative special damages for breach consisting of profits lost on other contracts. As one circuit court explained, "even in a common -law suit there would be no recovery for general loss of business, the claimed loss of [the contractors entire] net worth, and losses on the non - federal work - -such damages are RU deemed too *976 remote." (William Green Construction Co., Inc. v. United States (1973) 201 CtCt. 616, 477 P.2d 930, 936; accord, Olin Sand Company V. United Stares (1980) 225 Ct.CI. 741 [failure of government to make timely proms payments to contractor caused it loss of standing in the business community and occasioned denial of bonding on other contracts-, lost profits on such contracts too remote and indirect]; ,Rocky Mountain Constr. Co. v. United States (1978) 218 Ct.Cl. 665, 666, 1978 WL 8468 * *351 [ "wholly conjectural whether the plaintiff connector would have received other contracts; such speculative and remote damages not compensable as a matter of law].) These cases bar recovery of profits lost on future contracts not because the amount of the lost profits is speculative or remote, but because their occurrence is uncertain. (Continental Car Na -Var Corporation V. Moseley (1944) 24 Cal.2d 104, 113, 148 p.2d 9; see 1 Dunn, Recovery of Damages for Lost Profits (5th ed.1998.y § 1.6, P. 17; 2 Bruner and O'Connor, Construction Lae' (202) § 7:173, p. 945 [an impaired bonding claim is a lost business claim with the added requirement that plaintiff must prove that the breach of contract caused the impairment of bonding capacity].) California, likewise, has not upheld as special damages a contractor's unearned profits after breach of the construction contract In S.C. Anderson u Bank of America (1994) 24 Cal-App-4th 529, 30 Cal.Rptr.2d 286, a contractor hired to build � tenant improvements did not receive timely paym from a fumcially strapped developer, and because of the contractor's rising receivables, its surety reduced its bonding capacity. Before the surety s a e contractor had submitted the low bid on a public . school construction project. Instead of awarding the contract to that contractor, the school district rebid the project. The contractor prepared a rebid, bttt could not subunit its rebid because it lacked the requisite bonding capacity. Its rebid was lower than the winning bid for the school project. The contractor sued the developer's lender for fraud, seeking damages of $140,588 for profits it did not earn on the school project, amounting to 5 per cent of its rebid. The Court of Appeal aff=ed nonsuit for the lender on the lost profits. damages, noting there was "no evidence which would have enabled the jury to conclude it was reasonably probable" the contractor "would in fact have earned a profit" in the claimed amount. (id. at p- 536, 30 oabl. .Rpp r to 286.) Although the contractor "was only demonstrate its loss with reasonable certainty" (id. at pp. 537 -538, 30 Cal.Rptr.2d 286), the court said that the contractor had failed to show that it would be li mpossible or impracticable to produce evidence relating to the accuracy of its bid, its ability to competently and efficiently perform the [school] project, yr its likely net profit." (Id. at P. 538, 30 Cal.Rptr.2d 286.) *977 In contrast to S.C. Anderson, where the lost profits, claim was for a sum terrain and flowing from. a particular project that the contractor would likely have won as the low bidder, the lost profits Lewis Jorge claimed were uncertain and speculative. construction prof At trial, Lewis Jorge presented evidence that its bonding capacity was reduced by its surety after the District's termination of the contract. But Lewis Jorge did not establish that when the contract was formed the District could have reasonably contemplated .bat its breach of the contract would probably lead to a reduction of Lewis Jorge's bonding capacity by its surety, which in tuna would adversely affect Lewis Jorge's ability to obtain future contracts. As the evidence at trial disclosed, Lewis Jorge's bonding agent, who had obtained the construction bonds from CNA, anticipated that CNA's suspension of Lewis Jorgge's bonding capacity would only be temporary, be awarded for breach of contract for those losses which naturally arise from the breach, or which might reasonably have been foreseen by the parties C 2005 Thomson/wesL No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt Works. 02/08/2005 13:54 DALEY AND HEFT DL MR 4 917609432240 N0.323 Page 12 of 13 22 Cal.ltr3d 340 Page 11 34 Cal.4ih 960, 102 P.3d 257, 22 Cal.Rptr.3d 340, 4 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11,267, 2004 Daily Journal D.A.R. 15,217 (Cite as: 34 Cai.4th 960,22 Cal.Rptr.3d 340) at the tinge they contracted, as the probable result of the breach-" (Burnett & Doty Development Co. V. Phillips, supra, 84 Ca1.App.3d at p. 389, 148 Cal.Rptr. 569.) But the breaching party "is not required to compensate **352 the injured party for injuries that it had no reason to foresee as the probable result of its breach when it made the contract." (Iba; Coughlin v. Blair (1953) 41 Cal-2d 587, 603, 262 P.2d 305.) Evidence at trial established that the owners terminating a contract might or might not cause the contractor's surety to reduce its bonding capacity. As the District pointed out at oral argument, when it signed the contract it did not know what Lewis Jorge's balance sheet showed or what criteria Lewis Jorge's surety ordinarily used to evaluate a contractor's bonding limits. Absent such knowledge, the profits Lewis Jorge claimed it would have made on future, unawarded contracts were not actually foreseen nor reasonably foreseeable. Hence they are unavailable as special damages for the breach of this contract. To surmnanze. It is indisputable that the District's termination of the school construction contract was the first event in a series of misforttmes that culminated in Lewis Jorge's closing down its construction business. Such . disastrous consequences, however, are not the natural and necessary result of the breach of every construction contract involving bonding. Therefore, as we concluded earlier, lost profits are not general damages here. Nor were they actually foreseen or foreseeable as reasonably probable to result from the District's breach. Thus, they are not special damages in this case. DISPOSITION The judgment of the Court of Appeal must be modified to read: „ The judgment against Christopher Butler is reversed; the award of prejudgment interest is reversed; the award of attorney fees is reversed; and the award of $3,148,197 for lost profits is reversed. In all other respects, the judgment is armed. The matter is remanded to the trial court for an award of prejudgment interest consistent with the opinion of the Court of Appeal.” As modified that judgment is afrumed. WE CONCUR: GEORGE, C.J., BAXTER, WERDEGAR, cE N, BROWN, and MORENO, JJ. 34 CaL4th 960, 102 P.3d 257, 22 CaLRptr.3d 340, 4 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11,267, 2004 Daily Journal D.A.R. 15,217 Briefs and Other Related Documents (Back to top) . 2004 WL 2823256 (Appellate Brief) Reply Brief (Sep. 21, 2004)Original Image of this Document (PDF) . 2003 WL 23194528 (Appellate Brief) Answer to Amiens Curiae Brief of Associated General Contractors of California (Dec. 03, 2003) . 2003 WL 23194527 (Appellate Brief) Answering Brief of Lewis Jorge Construction Management, Inc. to Briefs of ,Amici, Education Legal Alliance of The California School Boards Association and Coalition for Adequate School Housing -(Dec. 02, 2003) . 2003 WL 23145518 (Appellate Brief) Arnicus Curie Brief in Support of Pomona Unified School District (Nov. 19, 2003) . 2003 WL 23270261 (Appellate Brief) Amicus Curiae Brief (Oct 21, 2003)Original Image of this Document with Appendix (PDF) . 2003 WL 22850030 (Appellate Brief) Amuicus Brief of Associated General Contractors of California on Behalf of Plaintiff Lewis Jorge Construction Management, Inc. (Oct. 20, 2003) . 2003 WL 23270260 (Appellate Brief) Arnicus Brief of Associated General Contractors of California on Behalf of Plaintiff Lewis Jorge Construction Management, Inc. (Oct. 20, 2003)Original Image of this Document (PDF) . 2003 WL 23270259 (Appellate Brief) Arnicus Curiae Brief (Oct. 13, 2003)Original Image of this Document with Appendix (PDF) . 2003 WL 23270258 (Appellate Brief) Reply Brief on the Merits (Sep. 12, 2003)Original Image of this Document (PDF) ® 2005 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. P012 02/08/2005 13:54 DALEY AND HEFT DL MR -> 917609432240 N0.323 P013 Xage i.3 oZ o 22 Cal.Rptr.3d 340 Page 12 34 CalAth 960,102 P.3d 257,22 Cal.Rptir3d 340,4 Cal. Daily Op, Smv, 11,267, 2004 Daily Journal D.A.R. 15,217 (Cite as: 34 Cal.4th 960,22 Cal.RDtr.3d 340) . 2003 WL 22469816 (Appellate Brief) Reply Brief on the Merits (Sep. 11, 2003) . 2003 WL 22297127 (Appellate Brie fl Answering Brief on the Merits (Jul. 08, 2003) . 2003 WL 22330751 (Appellate Brief) Opezaiaag Brief on the Merits (Apr. 21, 2003) . 2003 WL 22023384 (Appellate Petition, Motion and Filing) Lewis Jorge Construction Managciment, Inc.'s Answ er to Petition for Review (Jana. 27, 2003) . 2003 WL 22023309 (Appellate Petition, Motion and Filing) Petition for Review (Jan. 07, 2003) 2003 WL 23017598 (Appellate Petitions, Motion and Filing) Petition for Review (Jan. 07, 2003)Or7igin4 Image of this Document with Appendix (PDF) END OF DOCUMENT U 2005 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. July 13, 2005 Mr. Greg Shields City of Encinitas 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 Re: Encinitas Boulevard Trunk Sewer Replacement Fee Status Dear Mr. Shields: This letter is being provided to inform you that we have exceeded our Construction Management Services budget for the subject project. As you are aware we originally requested a budget extension in November in the amount of $40,000 to cover services through the middle of April 2005. This extension has been exhausted, as it was not anticipated at the time of the request that the project would be extended through July. To date we have exceeded the subject budget extension in the amount of $7,838.00. Attached is a summary of hours and the related dates that services were provided. We anticipate that the City will also request that we provide additional project closeout services for this project. Additional work identified includes: - Preparation, attendance, and participation at change order negotiation meetings - Preparation of project documentation and meeting reports - Record drawings Attached is a proposal of the hours and associated fees for providing closeout services anticipated for this project. The additional services are in the amount of $10, 692.00. In summary, we request that an additional budget amount of $18,530 be authorized to Richard Brady & Associates' contract for construction management services provided May to June and additional project closeout services as described above. Please call me if you have any questions or require any additional information to process this request. Very truly yours, Sean F. Manning, P.E. Construction Manager cc: Rick Brady, Richard Brady & Associates Kipp Hefner, City of Encinitas File Encinitas.003 4909 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 220 • San Diego, California 92123 Tel (858) 496 -0500 • Fax (858) 496 -0505 .Q Q N m IL m c C E N Of N m 9 J m J O O O O 0 0 C. 0 0 Q O co O 7 N U) co N M th � D1 N R Fp E9 bq fR b969 �V�M EH� b9 (A di 00000000000 0 0 0 n 0 On V m ei F»ua E»F»e»fn t»as ssw y O O O O N T C 0O C O O N E c c 0 o EmxY U Oo:Y -i m a $zx zUmo2o > in a N C C l0 c N E m rn m c c O U J O U 0 N O L O L O N U N O w m n y c 0 0 m N m c c c U o a U m m rn o, 0> Q N c m O w w w am V y o a a y N y0m ° J o o w °xd00�¢¢¢w 0 ¢ $ O o 0 O 0 0 0 E m y°o v a0c°�w Q N O N h O ry M V 1� �p b9 b9 4�i � V� � Vi b9 fA Ni EA fA IA 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O IO O C+D N R R c0 O N <c�coonnnnonv ( f 60 f toe e f E e a JO N W N N 2 O c y O V co ._ C 01 N E -O E d C Y N N N co by) .�_. o Em`xY U Oo:Y m` $' Zwmzu)tmo20-C7> CL N C N c C C6 c N E a m m c � C O U N o m N � O J L O) ° O U r N 0 0 N 0 N 0 E O r O O w O L � J Ul J_ O m m O N L O LLI m O N .20 rn Mn o c\ m m m a c F 'c w H m No @ a� '� c c c U '@ } m 0 www CL m0 m J _ N cm °@ °E a° 0 2° = o y 0 E o a o Q U o m° .S ° N UNl N d< x F- a a` a U Q Q Q Do Q C H r U W O Q K U a O r a z O w a f a w J U a > w w 0) LU z 3 ° y U Y � z 7 r Z O p U > m p (n z W r X ? w 00% tJ ky,MI , r�politan January 9, 2006 Select Electric, Inc. P.O. Box 1457 Spring Valley, CA 91979 General Building &Engineering Contractors Re: Inv# 1942 -1, 1942 -2, 1942 -3Ret /City of Encinitas Traffic Loops To Whom It May Concern: As you are aware the work that your company performed, was requested by Metropolitan Constriction at the direction of The City of Encinitas. Metropolitan has been informed by The City of Encinitas that they will not be compensating Metropolitan for the traffic loops placed. Metropolitan Construction has had several meetings with the City of Encinitas in attempts to settle on an amount, without success. At this time Metropolitan Constriction will not be able to fully compensate you for the work performed by your Company on the Encinitas Trunk Sewer Replacement Project. Attached is a copy of the invoices with the highlighted items that we will not be compensating you for. We understand you may need to proceed with action to recover monies owed by any means necessary. Should you have any questions or need further information, please contact our office (619) 741 -5643. Since ely i Jose Ortiz President cc: Jace C. Schwarm, RM Department Manager City of Encinitas ?C a V" CA cT �p n O �o ~LA t , ,01 t ow``° J °°a0 W O > p Z W a ui .� V Ndn'iQ� i n w wa�o o� Q¢ZLL o¢ a W l!1 ,S w z a n O Q F- z O u w m Z w CQ M 2 Z Z LY U O LA ce- Lei LU p Z � O � 0 a 0 a 4 0 0 N 0 u y C E 0 m � rn D O 0 C U n N M Ill J L & n� i U a _ cl W l!1 ,S w z a n O Q F- z O u w m Z w CQ M 2 Z Z LY U O LA ce- Lei LU p Z � O � 0 a 0 a 4 0 0 N 0 u y C E 0 m D O 0 Q Q c U n N M Ill J L & n� i 0 0 c o b C7 � C p �v U v► b �'� +R Ta a� c c 'o+ C R 14 0 V F X 4 ■ LL. V 0% INA Ch a� n a W � � 0 H Ln U VA V O � J00 a C) O. Z LLIH � rw �y N v ui.A W U 11 i c a� 2 Q O a F- z U o�oi -„IT'I JN Ll� 7 i I � 2 d 9 L Z W m 113 Q Q L �Ec�z pI.OI..... p� U U �n C� Lu w a�oN G r C OIq O O C 17 u1 u a E 0 W I:1 O 0 d N M_ IA e M F a z LX a: c E a c � o V � Cd o '^ +r+ '^ v p w c c � O V �' X d z H C H Ln d C V o� .j 7 n�'.C9a �a �O Jth Ch Ch LLJ 1-4 V) w n y b O ~ � U ip Q zx�n s W Z Q Off¢ G I- z O U I � r!r n:I L. a w E Z W Co cn n Q � c �zL OogLLL," 0 W 0 8 0 0 u N a v I in 0 w a Q IQ o � p p b b N � �D M In i rl = s z z o � Q C V4& O��ut p rJ F- V City Of Encinitas March 21, 2005 Metropolitan Construction Attn: Jose Ortiz 8614 Troy Street Spring Valley, Calif FAX AND MAIL 91977 RE: ENCINITAS BLVD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT(CEEOID) Jose, I am in receipt of your faxed letter dated March 14, 2005. The date of the fax is March 21, 2005, and the subject of the letter is regarding work that occurred after March 14, 2005. I assume this is another clerical error. Since on or about October 17, 2004 your work has encountered numerous problems, including broken equipment and lack of progress in the pipe bursting operation. At this point, your pipe bursting operations are stalled due to broken equipment again and you have successfully placed all but the last 800 feet, approximately. You are again suggesting the problem is with unanticipated underground conditions and wish to once more complete this project by converting this job to an open trench operation. The City has concluded the problem your work has encountered is not due to differing site conditions. 40 The City will allow the use of the open trench method only if you bear any additional costs that are incurred by way of this change in procedure. Since I did volunteer to split the cost of the additional loops that would be necessary as result of the open trench procedure, I will not withdraw this agreement. The requirement to grind for the paving is not waived. This is what was included in the contract and is expected to be done. The contract also called for contingency plans and these have not been done. Friday I spent the day responding to the citizens that ran into a blockade on Encinitas Blvd. The signage to inform the vehicular traffic of the impending detour was none existent and the City of Encinitas Engineering Department took a significant public relations beating because you could not get out of the street on time. This is the only reason you are being allowed to use the open trench procedure; i.e. after over 170 days on a 90 day contract you have failed to convince that you can follow a schedule. Sincerely, CSods, P.E. Field Operations cc: Kipp Hefner, Assoc. Civil Engineer ALL TEL 760- 633 -2600 / FAX 760- 633 -2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 TDD 760 -633 -2700 recycled paper 7J Metropolitan Construction GENERAL BUILDING & ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS Lic. No. 790532 DATE: -3 /at 1 1 D 5— FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL FORM PROJECT NUMBER: FAX NUMBER To: Clty of GN,01N17'01r5 (701033- ATTN: G. ✓`LO FROM: —S 0 G 0rTt L ( ) SUBJECT: E N C l^ t -f 'K► 5 R LU r-> 'VIA K k S l2 w e 2 NUMBER OF PAGES (Including this transmittal form): 3 AnnITIONAL COMMENTS/INSTRUCTIONS: IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THE PAGES LISTED ABOVE, PLEASE CALL AS SOON AS POSSIBLE FOR RETRANSMISSION: PHONE: (619) 741 -5643 FAX: (619) 741 -5658 THANK YOU. SENT: Date: Time: Initials: ff c /T.-1 TMPIrIIJ 1SN00 NUII-10cAONi3W WdbS : T Z S002 ' T2 ' NUW March 14, 2005 Sean Manning Richard Brady and Associates 4909 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 220 San Diego, CA 92123 Re: Encinitas Boulevard Trunk Sewer General Building & Engineering Contractors Ucamse No. 790532 pear Mr. Manning; I met with Mr. Greg Shields of City of Encinitas on March 18, 2005 to discuss the recent ,failure from the hard soil encountered on the last burst between manholes 5 and 4. In light of there being no guarantee as to when we can be off of the street to avoid rush hour impacts, we discussed open trenching may be our only option to assure work stoppage by 5am. MC will be impairing traffic loops on both turn lanes onto the Interstate 5, and plans to asphalt pave within 7 days in order to reinstate them. Unfortunately, MC will be unable to grind asphalt prior to final course within the caltrans right of way to avoid further damage to the traffic system. Metropolitan Construction proposes the final asphalt cap to be per San Diego Regional Standards Drawing SDG -107, and note it will have a minimum with of 6 foot, and extend V beyond any edge. If this proposal is acceptable, please respond a.s.a.p., so we may proceed with the completion of the subject contract. Regards, Jose 0, Ortiz President Enclosures cc: Kip Hefner, Encinitas Greg Shields, Encinitas P.C. Box 477, Bonita, CA, 91906 -0477 Phone (619)741-5643 Fax (619)741.5658 �i7 ' A Z eE ' ON 1sN00 W1I10d0Ni3W WdbS : T T S002 * T 2 * UW 0 • 56o-C,.32�,,p 3) 1',9- -1 A' wOOft 010" of / Chm F asphak ccl 0 to CO — addit tow a aid carcreta 12"Tart 6' mir, oakh sido abarodo ssx roWa CwMacdw "roca4) CITY OF SAN DIEGO - STANDARD DRAWING TRENCH RESURFACING FOR ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACED STREETS cltY •0F SAN DIECO STANDARDS COMMITTEE I&A.�� 2-795 a 2 o: DUM"E NUMBER SDG -107 1SN00 Ndl I10dOZ113W WdbS : Z ti S002 ' tiZ ' 8uw N_ 1. t:*ft AC. pavement shall be sawm4 to a minimum depth of'1 -12 Inches or 25% of b ��ofa me mrQ'ek by the Engneer. n 9wwY�endsn9artn9 b � safety or property, swm:iA ing Is not required a g. Prior to plating concrete, Paving and base edges shah be ftnrned to neat horitonfal end vertical roes. 3. Unims ottwOse specified, concrete trench cover shall be a minimum of 5-12 irrchea thick far alleys, 7 itches 11101' IOCW through four lane collector streets and 9 Inches thick for of major Or snider street classificabV s. q. pny asphalt type curing compound shag be used on the concrete trench cover. pigmeralian Is not required. 5. A tack coat shall be applied to the eIdstin9 AC. pavement and concrete torch cover prior to placing the rww aC. B, Subgra& pmpwuWn shall bs done in accordance with Section 301 -1 of the Standard Spoaificatiorrs for pubk Waft Conshaon� latest edlOOn. Any sheet trench 7 feet in width or grater and longer then 100 feet in overall 7. length shall be teconsbucted with the pavement eed011 for the street Per SdtedLde V (SDG -113). Sheet trench secti" 7 ciasafticabon fart In width or greeter twt less than 100 feet In overall length shall to Wellness Of one Inch ri greater than required by be rewft:ed a note 3 above. • In fau -lane major or greater streets, an OPPrOved set accelerating admkWm such as calcium chloride, shell be used In the concrete. CITY OF SAN DIEGO - STANDARD DRAWING TRENCH RESURFACING FOR ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACED STREETS cltY •0F SAN DIECO STANDARDS COMMITTEE I&A.�� 2-795 a 2 o: DUM"E NUMBER SDG -107 1SN00 Ndl I10dOZ113W WdbS : Z ti S002 ' tiZ ' 8uw O O 0 a CD O Z v N m z n z D O O v .Z1 O --I c m 0 D r O' z O Vl m m m z D m O O I O O O O O O O o a e ;a m m C 0 D D z o v c z z m m �- o O D CO O CO Z X 3 A > D O -4 N m + 0 m o m M 0 71 O z D (7 MIX m m z O d v 0 O m n O d r x x Z x n 0 m D r cn D Z � � A O c O J, cc O O c. OOO O C A O C O C T m m 0 M n C v m fn = O E m cn O R ym 0 n D r v R n i R n @ @ _ r O C O z i7 v O O O W ca'), A v N � (n C W A OD (Ti Cn -1 (D A W (O D (T O O C O T m m O A m O co I { m- -I O v O D Z O Z Zn C � C n o T I N O O (.T1 m m a O N O A W N Op A N N z O N W N p N A O N A N N N 01 O O O In U1 N En C) cn 3 _ 10 C7 = � (1 O 0 0) 0 d D 9 Do 01 V1 X N O O 10 7 7 d N W d^ d O N 7 N (p X .. d N � N O a O O d � N m 0 m n y Gl L% C V 0 v m Q N t 7 o � 3 O0 O N r w r [2- 0 N N N O d x O w S N 7 N- O N O T. d ° c c m In m s a a (7 d ? N d - 1 G S O d S CL G m m x Re 0 ° n 0 00) _ O m o d a 3 B m m 3 Z -1 3 m 22 D r c 0 0 A N O O O O O p 0 p 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O O O O O O O O Z O O W W im O fA 1D d/ O7 07 0 N p A O N A M J_3 D m NN ti p Q7 (T O O O N N O 6 O ui m 6 ut 0 0 O 0 O u, w A O �O O O v p O a N O N O O O W v O O O O O 0 N 10 0 0 0 0 0 W N O m o m 2 C " m o 0 N 9 D i 3 A In W A _ A O A O _ O1 J O O OC z ZC O O O O O O N O Vt O O A O O O m C Z N � z Z O N� c a 0 M c c c 1D `° o 3 3 3 3 3 3 d N - 3 N N W d N N 0 O < m CL O m m m 3 3 d d Vi m N o O < � 3 r 3 W O M i O N � C D (J1+ O J (n N N m O a O m A W N N A J N Of A ` A y O N A J N V7 J O y O A tJ� C O N N W Ql m Of O O O A O 'a �^ x m z 0 3 N O W N j N A C O T m m O A m O co I { m- -I O v O D Z O Z Zn C � C n o T I N O O (.T1 m m a O N O Contractor's Daily Report Project: ENCINITAS BLVD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT ENCINITAS BLVD ENCINITAS, CA Date Company Crew 27- Jan -05 METROPOLITAN CONSTRUCTION P.O. BOX 477 BONITA CA 91908 Daily Work Description GPM Tasks Provide a brief description of daily work performed: Shut down per City of Encinitas due to add'I submittals notice unapproved bursting method and unapproved bypass method Manpower and Equipment Provide a detailed list of manpower and equipment resources. The Trade field refers to type of manpower, i.e. Carpenter, Electrician, etc. The �,......e.....or. Annranfira Pfr t,idssna:duVn Qty 11WU — yuanuwo -1— ,.-. . CLASSIFICATION ..._..I ---- -1 . . Emplo ee Signature 1.75 FOREMAN JOSE ORTIZ 2 Pipelayer JOSE RODRIGUEZ 1.75 PLUMBER: TRADESMAN HERMES ALVARADO PLUMBER: TRADESMAN JOSE PILAR PLUMBER: PIPELAYER JULIAN MONTES PLUMBER: TRADESMAN MIGUEL S PILAR TEAMSTER GP 3 MIGUEL S PILAR 1.75 PLUMBER: TRADESMAN MIGUEL PILAR JR OPERATOR GP 8 JOSE RODRIGUEZ Qty EQUIPMENT 1 721C CASE WHEEL LOADER 1 580 SM CASE BACKHOE 590 SM CASE BACKHOE/W BKR DUMP TRUCK 2 FORD F450 FLATBED AIR COMPRESSER 3 TRENCH PLATES 20/100 SIGNS /BARRICADES /CONES 1 LIGHT TOWERS 2 ARROW BOARDS Manpower Units: Manhours E Mandays ❑ Other ❑ Equipment Units: Hours U Other LJ Subcontracto: NCR tankers on site, & MOCON (Bob, Rob, and Ann Morrow on site Events or Issues Provide a description of any significant events or issues to report. Include quantities and units if applicable: NONE Prolog Manager PUSD Bond Page 1 of 1 Page 1 of 1 Main Identity From: "Jose Ortiz" <joortiz @cox.net> To: "Greg Shields" <gshields @ci.encinitas.ca.us> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 2:58 PM Subject: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Greg, If it rains wednesday evening, we'd like to start bursting first thing thursday morning. Is that acceptable? It appears we may have a window to get one pipe burst in before friday's forecasted rains, and starting early thursday will give us extra time. Please advise! Jose Metropolitan Construction 5/23/2005 NRC Environmental Services 1839 Water Street /a San Diego. CA 92113 ENVIRONMENTAL Phone. 619-235-3320 SERVICES _ Fax: 619- 232 -4093 I Date ail Project No. D- Customer: mcf�eDc�l; fns Cr n��s f'y�cfir,.a Customer Phone: __(,-,- / 9) 42 Customer's P.O. /Project No — vz DAILY WORK REPO[ CHANGE ORDER Emergency Response Marine Services Project Services Work lVee,'val c - Tvb crz ll.d Description: Ttiiz f� 4old kt- _iiah Inh I nratinn , 4 /31,,.� l�r_�t1Je�i. Cut lNa�d2l.L� GLvGI 4ldii� yiGCc/ .�rri <T LABOR L & I m POSITION NAME START END START END z; !! U ,;,0 3 STRAIGHT TIME HO RS RATE D OVERTIME HOURS RATE PREMIUM OURS RATE AMOUNT 3 0 Y G 316E cLu� -�Y fy 3!6 3 NRC EQUIPMENT SUB -TOTAL I 01193- MTA I 7 !i =n 11DRAFAIT UNIT # NRC EQUIPMENT QTY. UOM RATE AMOUNT Y G 316E cLu� -�Y fy 3!6 3 NRC EQUIPMENT SUB -TOTAL MATERIALS NRc MATERIALS QTY. UOM RATE AMOUNT i NRC MATERIAL SUB -TOTAL OUTSIDE SERVICE OUTSIDE SERVICE I QTY. UOM RATE AMOUNT OUTSIDE SERVICES SUB -TOTAL MARKUP OUTSIDE SERVICES TOTAL J L j NRC LABOR NRC EQUIPMENT NRC MATERIALS OUTSIDE SERVICES TOTAL ia-O ACKNOWLEDGEMENT - - - -- NRC REPRESENTATIVE I CUT STONI R 1: PRESEi`1TATWE SIGNATURE I SI(_-NATUR� PRINTED -- - -- RRINTED i 1 NAM E TITLE O in 0 0 D n omm r O r n o z o A C < O v) O z ... O O D O � n m 0 4 0 O w m 6( O (p A m N O O O df N y o °° 0 m v p N O 0 z 0 n m Q o m N A 1 T 0 �D3 O �• r m 0 cn C 1 m D m a _ z p :E '0 fn m N O m' m m Z x D O 9 m (P O 0 W W C) I t0 o c n p m D 0 0 O O i W cD J 3 m :D O m m O M 0 O N N C, D m 0 0 0 O cn W 0 0 p O O W A O O N O r O (/, p O O A N O D O p r Z X A 0 O in 0 0 D n omm r O r _ 0 0 O O A tD 0 ti N C 2 z o A C < O m p O ... O O � � n m 0 4 0 O w m 6( O (p A m N O O O df N O. °° 0 0 A Of N O A OI fR fR 10 A o. rn n m Q o m N A 1 T 0 �D3 O �• r m 0 cn a 0 p :E '0 fn CD N N 0 0 0 O Fn fA N O 9 m (P O 0 W W C) O t0 o c n p o 0 0 0 O O W W cD J 3 m :D O O tO t0 O m O M 0 O N N C, O m 0 0 0 O cn W 0 0 p O O W A O O N O r O (/, p O O A N O N O p r N X A W N D 0 O O Q (T t0 o ca Z o > X o z O X 1 D T c N T ^ ` m m m O W CD �J m m (n In P? .� C7 T m 'n cq 9 z C n C O' C 0 O. N N C7 N X N N W J 7C OD C x W O .TT) Ol < 0 � X (� O n ~' o H O 1 0 O �' 5 O m m r O? S o O v+ c N CD 0 v m 3 l�,�D S S m [� N 0 .Z7 - < m O n< Z °i 0 C;, 0 o -� c v 7 D ,a m° N ,o m o m f m m o^ v T C7 ID o ° -0 -a m= v �0 m 3 v m m m o` T m X X m A z 0 m o° m c 3 a m° o X m r m o m o rn f° o m v c N S m � o < N U1 o c m m m ty v v v m O 0 N 7 p �, m 0< C7 0 i1 .ZI O m d a 4 3 3 !n n m Q n N C N r d Q O ? m 3 3 3 x c m n m m m m co 3 3 3 c X < N m m m° m m o O o° °m a m m 1 O -0 y, m O m X X C. m a m m m 0 m O M O C j' (C Z r1, N N N N N Q0 iL Or m C ° V m ; CL r CL 0 11 o m Z 3 10 Z _ 0 0 O O A tD 0 ti N C 2 z o A C < O m p O ... O O � � n m 0 4 0 O w m 6( O (p A m N O O O df N O. °° 0 0 A Of N O A OI fR fR 10 A o. rn n m Q o m N A 1 T 0 �D3 O �• r m 0 cn a 0 fn CD N N 0 0 0 O Fn fA N O 9 m (P O 0 W W C) O t0 o c n p o 0 0 0 O O W W cD J 3 m :D O O tO t0 O m O O N N C, O m 0 0 0 O cn W 0 0 p O O W A O O N O r O (/, p O O A N O N O p r �I X 0 0 O O Q (T t0 o ca Z o > _ 0 0 O O A tD 0 ti N C 2 z o A C < O m p O ... O O 0 o O O !A to N N t�J, 0 O w m 6( O (p A m N O O O df N O. °° 0 0 A Of N O A OI fR fR 10 A Oc n N A D m n m Q o m N A 1 T 0 �D3 O �• r m 0 cn a 0 fn CD N N 0 0 0 O Fn fA N O 9 m (P O 0 W W C) O t0 do m p o 0 0 0 O O W W cD J 3 m :D O O tO t0 O y O O N N C, O m 0 0 0 O cn W 0 0 p O O W A O tD O r O (/, p O O A N O N O p r �I X 0 0 O O Q (T t0 CD X o z O X 1 D T c N ^ ` m m O W CD �J z °m m� n 6� 'd N N 0 d J p on N N M W O W A N J O z a O ` j C z r O A O O O O N j N N a 0 C;, 0 o N v O (p C z A z m Q 3 -1 � o m m c m v v v v v v O 0 T T C m 3 3 3 m m 3 3 3 c c m m m m co 3 3 3 X N m m m° m m O O m 7 @ 1 -0 y, m O m X m C. m a m m m 0 m O M O r1, N N N N N iL ° m ; r .� •' n ^i r W o l) 0 z n \� O m O J O N O O O O O O O 0 O J \\ O A W N W N N A fT L! -4 �l OC D O T N O� N O1 N Ot O O O m m V Pi W cn (D W W j N n ci W W O (T CJ� O W Ol O tD rN U, O A O [O (T W O — U1 J T O OD CT O O Cn rn W N O O Ln X m v 0 m 4t 12 X m 0 O A O 0 m Z, m m N O N W J O rn W N O O Ln X m v 0 m 4t 12 D r m m z z z m m O Z D n 0 0 4! m m m m z y D 1 m m D = i Project. ENCINITAS BLVD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT ENCINITAS BLVD ENCINITAS, CA Date Company 16- Mar -05 METROPOLITAN CONSTRUCTION P.O. BOX 477 BONITA CA 91908 Contractor's Daily Report Crew Weather start/finish 7pm to 3:00pm Daily Work Description L t lv1 I asKs Provide a brief description of daily work performed: Pipe Bursting between manholes 5 towards 4 pipe bursting began at 12 30am to &30 am in the morning. 4 5" approximate average speed of burst spent approximately 4 hours cleaning up the connection at Saxony due to the pipe going upward. Excavated the soil underneath pipe this is dirt that collapsed during burst in trench area exposed while removing encasement around sewer underneath 16" AC waterline. Manpower and Equipment Provide a detailed list of manpower and equipment resources. The Trade field refers to type of manpower, i.e. Carpenter, Electrician, etc. The r...e —n ins trnov— Annranticp etc. Qty CLASSIFICATION Employee Signature 15 FOREMAN JOSE ORTIZ 4 OP/ 11 PL Operator/ Pipelayer JOSE RODRIGUEZ 15 PLUMBER: TRADESMAN HERMES ALVARADO 15 PLUMBER: TRADESMAN JOSE PILAR 15 PLUMBER: PIPELAYER JULIAN MONTES 5.5 PLUMBER: TRADESMAN MIGUEL S PILAR 9am to 3pm ARROW BOARDS TEAMSTER GP 3 MIGUEL S PILAR 11 PLUMBER: TRADESMAN MIGUEL PILAR JR 4 OPERATOR IMIGUEL PILAR JR 15 PLUMBER: TRADESMAN ANTHONY FULWILDER Qty EQUIPMENT 2da s 721C CASE WHEEL LOADER 2da s 580 SM CASE BACKHOE 2da s 590 SM CASE BACKHOE/W BKR 2da s DUMP TRUCK 2da s FORD F450 FLATBED 2da s AIR COMPRESSER 2da s TRENCH PLATES 2da S SIGNS /BARRICADES /CONES 2da S LIGHT TOWERS 2da s ARROW BOARDS Manpower Units: Manhours 0 Mandays Other ❑ Equipment Units: Hours U Other LJ Subcontractos: NRC, and Mocon (2 employees, Bob and Rob) Events or Issues Provide a description of any significant events or issues to report. Include quantities and units if applicable: Prolog Manager PUSD Bond Page 1 of 1 N O I 0 m m n z z 0 Vl T m z 1 y m a) r1 1r 0 0 W W N A V QW) (D rn cN0 CD O -4 A 4 V O 000 A 000 AO 0) Q1 p A A A y O O O O N O O O O O m Am On A Ln d v.0 D in 0 0 O) m X m 0 m 3 N O N O W z Am a Ao a o :�>: M O 0, 17 � m 0 -n z CI 0 O A m o m Er { O N 0 O m r n D z n d O Z m d m Oz 6i U) 0 i m CL m a 0 G C m m r 7C O :n m mCD A CD a N o F CD cn CD rn y n m 3 N m D 7 m m r► m O C o C ° X A X S m M Q m N O O Ln X m m O N v W z n O N A O O -i c to LA. (n o N K g 3 y X D o m 0? 0 O 7� o 7 O N N m d N O. @ > N v N N z N N N a X N � d p 3 N 3 V Ci .� j m O N 7 O_ O N d C H N C °i 0 0 N 7 O 7 O N A n N Ol fD m-u � A D N � N Or W A °C ° n A p 3 9 N N Q < Er o o °0 0 C 7 o !/1 d O d o N O O o O O 10 d m �' O O z d CD F C cr 01 p (/� f/1 d (/1 H C 3 01 cn CD O `° O, ?i W 0 ID N m 2 m N N °O CD M A OO O ; G A o d D o Q O p ( N c C p `° m N G N 0 b p 0 W A O d m G d O m m v a O O O W J o. S ° N 0 r n O Q O N {O 0 m m m m m m m v Z X m z O % o m o D N 3 o o o D m d d r d O Z N O Z [ O O O 0 O N O O N O a) r1 1r 0 0 W W N A V QW) (D rn cN0 CD O -4 A 4 V O 000 A 000 AO 0) Q1 p A A A y O O O O N O O O O O m Am On A Ln d v.0 D in 0 0 O) m X m 0 m 3 N O N O W z Am a Ao a o :�>: M O 0, 17 � m 0 -n z CI 0 O A m o m Er { O N 0 O m r n D z n d O Z m d m Oz 6i U) 0 i m CL m a 0 G C m m r 7C O :n m mCD A CD a N o F CD cn CD rn y n m 3 N m D 7 m m r► m O C o C ° X A X S m M Q m N O O Ln X m m O N v z n = Z 0 N a a z o a C 0 0 0 0 N A A N A A N N N 0 A °C ° N Q o o °0 0 0 o o o z O O, W W 0 ID N m m N N °O CD M A O O N tD L O O D O p O p p p 0 N 0 o 0 p 0 W A O t0 O m m v O O O O W J tJ0 0 0 0 O Q O N {O 0 0 m X m X m z O o z m o m o D N o D m r N O Z N O Z [ O O Ol O N O O N O ti N O O q O O O O o= m m 110 O 0 0 0 0 6 �� W N�� 0 0 o e o v D< 0 O m c r m o c c 3 c 3 c 3 c 3 c 3 v m v m o m 0 m m 0 p O m m = m< y m to o 3 3 3 m° m° m m o m° = 3 3 ZO T C S S M r 1 N D D < n m m <O 0 m X Z p W n of z 0 0 r m 0 0 H CL m a N m m m m m C z z O < y D >> >> 03i in m Co m r O m O Z m rn m O O O m o O c Z ,TOI -� m 2 a fA a 3 i D> n r m m m t" D ON 0° 04 n 'O 0 !A @ @ 2 2 m 'i D r o m O 00 0O p w N z a) r1 1r 0 0 W W N A V QW) (D rn cN0 CD O -4 A 4 V O 000 A 000 AO 0) Q1 p A A A y O O O O N O O O O O m Am On A Ln d v.0 D in 0 0 O) m X m 0 m 3 N O N O W z Am a Ao a o :�>: M O 0, 17 � m 0 -n z CI 0 O A m o m Er { O N 0 O m r n D z n d O Z m d m Oz 6i U) 0 i m CL m a 0 G C m m r 7C O :n m mCD A CD a N o F CD cn CD rn y n m 3 N m D 7 m m r► m O C o C ° X A X S m M Q m N O O Ln X m m O N v Contractor's Daily Report Project: ENCINITAS BLVD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT ENCINITAS BLVD ENCINITAS, CA Date Company Crew Weather start/finish 12- Apr -OS METROPOLITAN CONSTRUCTION 8:30pm /5:30am P.O. BOX 477 BONITA CA 91908 CPM Tasks Daily Work Description Provide a brief description of daily work performed: Attempted to pour manhole no. 1, and unable to due to wet soil encountered and bypassing of two additional laterals. Cancelled concrete pour at 12:30am. Excavated a total of 50' and trench plated Held off of excavation til 10 pm per Ralph- Caltrans Inspector Manpower and Equipment Provide a detailed list of manpower and equipment resources. The Trade field refers to type of manpower, i.e. Carpenter, Electrician, etc. The uiaSSiTIcauon Qty new reiels to yuwl— auuna, 1— , ..•�,•• CLASSIFICATION -•• -- - - -- Em tP o ee Si nature 8.5 FOREMAN JOSE ORTIZ 8.5 Pipelayer JOSE RODRIGUEZ 8.5 PLUMBER: TRADESMAN SALVADOR NAVARETTI 8.5 PLUMBER: TRADESMAN JAMES STRATWOOD 8.5 PLUMBER: PIPELAYER JULIAN MONTES 8.5 PLUMBER: TRADESMAN MIGUEL S PILAR 7.5 TEAMSTER GP 3 MIGUEL S PILAR PLUMBER: TRADESMAN MIGUEL PILAR JR PLUMBER: TRADESMAN ANTHONY FULWILDER 7.5 PLUMBER- TRADESMAN HERMIS ALVARADO n Manpower Units: Manhours M Mandays LJ Other u Qt EQUIPMENT 8.5 8.5 721C CASE WHEEL LOADER 580 SM CASE BACKHOE 8.5 590 SM CASE BACKHOEM/ BKR 8.5 DUMP TRUCK 8.5 FORD F450 FLATBED 8.5 AIR COMPRESSER 8.5 TRENCH PLATES 8.5 Sewer Pump 2 8.5 Discharge Hose 1000 8.5 SIGNS /BARRICADES /CONES 8.5 LIGHT TOWERS 8.5 ARROW BOARDS Equipment Units: Hours U Other LJ Subcontractos: NRC pumper trucks and B 8 W precast Events or issues ? Provide a description of any significant events or issues to report. Include quantities and units if applicable: EXTRA WORK potholing traffic signal conduit 5' west of manhole no 1 (2hrs of crew), and bypassing 2 6" laterals 2hrs of crew 1.5 hour delay in starting excavation per Caltrans Page 1 of 1 Prolog Manager z E5 Z m z m Q 0 0 N m m m m H m _ o m N A O 1 W N tT O tV N A N N N O� 00 00 C) # O O) [EL P n rn y ii=onnnD o m Q m v Z C C O 10 J J m N d w N G fC j »1 N X N X N 3 Q p O < m 3 n d m° p° y N j m o 0 m ° fD f G) y m Z O Q o 5 5' m r o cn m "' 3 m ^' J v m -'1 m v m .D D .c .Q Q f � o .o in v c -� J O D m 2 J v m v o a m o Q 7c n° v ° 3 v m T m r m m c A Q Q o o iy H 0 c (� m o N m m m 3 m x a u3 7 r o m o N r S O CO Q c ° cn Q °o ° f m RO m? f 3 2 cn °m m < (n O m D m CL m N c m m c m F r. n m .. ° ' a v O n ° Q N o x m n O m 0 < m J O a of x m m m m m m m n m X T d z �° o d° O 3 CD m m r o' 3 Z o D -{ Z T �� Z ° Z rn m ; m n � m d z d D � D N r D d (n r O v co D D o 'z = 3 __4 < ZO ° C N A A 2 N N N A D O (m}� C O O O O O N � G O O O [-C-O,O O v= = C i = D � -� G w w v, w w w w N �' r �n A w D C u m O O M fN w N O Vt N" m O t0 O 01 N °I O A O Ol t0 A m 0 N O N O N O O N O O W W m 0 O O N O 0 W A O N °' v v T iD o O X A m ° O z �' m m m O Z m Q Ln O m _ 9 � N pl A l O W l0 N N W O C ci Om O > N OD OD p 01 O tD Ol O W O Z O C r O do O A O O O O 0 0 y Of O N N O O O O m c 0 o= m m Z z D 8 0 1.8181.8 0 o CD O O O O O < K 0 0 O y -{ i m 3 N m 3 3 3 W v N c c V c 9 d -p d O m O m 2 0 m m m c m m O A m m m< y N '^ m m m m m m o o m m 7C 0 z" p m r-4 v v m m T X cn o `m m m m m v v 0 m 'mL ° D D 0 0 Z 0 m 0 w m m m m � m m m c . m m O z z O Z m D 33 D Dm m a m m m m D m m � -� p p m cm a Z v 0 O-1 m Z o in `J ni� a p�� a a 3 r ° r U) m O m 1 m N ( c` O m O U) M co z \ a cn G �n �c \`y c A 1I \ ! O O O O O N O \� 3 N O me vc WD m A m w -1 -i Q QI A W N W N N A �I N OI A L Oo U+ A Ut A 7I N N v O D O O O A N O V+ O O N Ot QI O A to D D O O1 N Ql N Ol N Qt O1 O O Iml r r m 1 z °m O D A W N 3 1-4 N -� N w cp w w 2 C co N Ln CO co N O Ln OD �o co d AO A m OD NJ co w N. N 0 Ul x m 0 O x 4t N 00 Contractor's Daily Report Project: ENCINITAS BLVD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT ENCINITAS BLVD ENCINITAS, CA Company Crew Weather start/finish Date 8:30pm /5:30am 13- Apr -OS METROPOLITAN CONSTRUCTION P.O. BOX 477 BONITA CA 91908 CPM Tasks Daily Work Description Provide a brief description of daily work performed: Excavated from station 1 +50 to 2 +70. Soil extremely saturated and unsuitable for backfill. Attempted to mix with other soil, attempt failed- Exported all and imported from stock pile alon side Encinitas Blvd. Temp. connected two 6" laterals coming into manhole no. 1 Held off of excavation til 10 m Der Ralph - Caltrans inspector Manpower and Equipment Provide a detailed list of manpower and equipment resources. The Trade field refers to type of manpower, i.e. Carpenter, Electrician, etc. The Classiticanon tiew Ot rerers to quamluduu—, ......, CLASSIFICATION - Employee Si nature 9 FOREMAN JOSE ORTIZ 9 Pipelayer JOSE RODRIGUEZ PLUMBER: TRADESMAN SALVADOR NAVARETTI 9 PLUMBER: TRADESMAN JAMES STRATWOOD 9 PLUMBER: PIPELAYER JULIAN MONTES 4 PLUMBER: TRADESMAN MIGUEL PILAR JR 8 TEAMSTER GP 3 MIGUEL S PILAR 4 PLUMBER: TRADESMAN MIGUEL PILAR JR 9 PLUMBER: TRADESMAN ANTHONY FULWILDER 7.5 PLUMBER: TRADESMAN HERMIS ALVARADO Y Manpower Units: Manhours Manda s El Other ❑ Equipment Units: Hours ❑ Other U Subcontractos: NRC Environmental Events or )ssues Provide a description of any significant events or issues to report. Include quantities and units if applicable: EXTRA WORK Bypassing 2 6" laterals(2hrs of crew) wet soil impact was 5 hours, and two hour delay from start of work from hours stated in contract Page 1 of 1 Prolog Manager O * u M O O A ;D at MM z O O OO � 3 o M, O O O N r } Z H A O O z N (n =� O A A a O Z d v � D m m W m O m a O ` m f ° m - v �r m X d N OD CL C f mT N CD n N O) p N 0 N N N O� O p N N O 00 A N N O c V .Zl O Z D1 C -I w C V! �. W^ A (n 7 -i 3 ,p A d S O W A O A d A N' D o? M m .. to G ut x A (n A X -i N A Q d O O d tC O N N m d» m N m (n m �^ N m co 3 n ID a A< 7 N O O m C 7 O m d C m m N 0 N N =r n =r OI C y N r m -i D =Z 1'O i co n ZZ 3 c CO m vi m m m ^ m n p m m m 0 �„ p f O m F 'D c 3 0 Q a m Q o ° (n cn x d 3 A° I Cl) m 0 3 m 3 v 'D c m m m `L O G 0 H N m o x v y x 0 m 0£ o o m= (n v w 2 o? m o S O O m '� p m x cn y C d f Q N m x ? z d O. O. < G n N r n m n (C DL m A M 0 Q �'1 0 O N m 2 O m d 0(D m m i� N p m d m z p, r n r C o m CJ 3 w d c o°, -0 I z C o m o m 3 m m 0 3 m m m -1 Z D z 1 D 3 -q a ;D m D X r a cn r D n z z O p O O N p A C J W W 0 J °0 W 0 N 1 IC> z 0 0 <x fn Fn w w w w to A w N 49 N A Vl A IA dl y O N N O O n N N tp O� r O N W M O N 01 T ut N O Q N W (A W N 01 (A O 10 0) m 0 O O O O m O O O 0 N O O O N � O [C, Cn W 0 (O 0 0 0 0 O 0 (Ji 0 W W A O t0 O O N p m y N O N O O �0 00 m m m y z z °m p m v7 m n o D O OC r O O O t0 O A A z N ~ N O O O O 00 O O H O^ _ N L Z O O O O z z CD O O O O O N f W O e e e a o 0 0 T T >< O (n r m m c 3 c 3 c 3 c 3 c 3 c 3 a m a m o m 0 m G0 co O -n m = m D m m N z 3 m 3 m m° m m m m o 0 o m m z -� C 2 S ° � r � � � -� � v v � '^ > > m m z vo T m m c o m m m m� v' O 0 a C: z z m m D A O� O p O m m N m to D m \ m m O m N O m a H m 0 C: ? D 3 A r 0 0 m W A D 74 o m� ° N @ @ m A D -n zz D O ^ �i z 0 r N o W O W O W O O c z y rn c v c a W a a m 2 O m °a° 0 m 0 o > m W 0 -A I O O) m y� x I 0 o � A W CD A A A N N p N Arn 3 CD NN-!(D (D Lnn nJi CA LJ PQ W O O O N O) (D N �I WIN) O N N O * u M O O A ;D at MM z O O OO � 3 o M, O O O N r } Z H A O O z N (n =� O A A a O Z d v � D m m W m O m a O ` m f ° m - v �r m X d N OD CL C f mT N CD n K ntractor's Daily Report J"I" Project: ENCINITAS BLVD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT ENCINITAS BLVD ENCINITAS, CA Company Crew Weather start/finish Date 8:30pm /5:30am 18- Apr -05 METROPOLITAN CONSTRUCTION P.O. BOX 477 BONITA CA 91908 CPM Tasks Daily Work Description Provide a brief description of daily work performed: Poured Manhole No. 2, and backfilled manhole no. 1 Started mining at 12:30am, st )pped all work except for concrete work at manhole no. 2 Held off of excavation til lop m per Ralph - Caltrans inspect or Manpower and Equipment. Provide a detailed list of manpower and equipment resources. The Trade field refers to type of manpower, i.e. Carpenter, Electrician, etc. The prentice, etc. Classification field refers to qualifications, i.e. Foreman, Journeyman, Ap ntv ICLASSIFICATION Emplo yee I Si nature 4.5 FOREMAN Pipelayer PLUMBER: TRADESMAN PLUMBER: TRADESMAN PLUMBER: PIPELAYER PLUMBER: TRADESMAN TEAMSTER GP 3 PLUMBER: TRADESMAN PLUMBER: TRADESMAN PLUMBER: TRADESMAN PLUMBER: TRADESMAN 4.5 4.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Manpower Units: Manhours Subcontractos: NRC Environmental JOSE ORTIZ JOSE RODRIGUEZ SALVADOR NAVARETTI JAMES STRATWOOD JULIAN MONTES MIGUEL PILAR JR MIGUEL S PILAR MIGUEL PILAR JR ANTHONY FULWILDER HERMIS ALVARADO JOSE PILAR Mandays ❑ Other ❑ Equipment Units: Hours ❑ Other L-J Events, or Issues Provide a description of any significant events or issues to report. Include quantities and units if applicable: Extra Work: 2 hour delay in waiting from 10 to excavate Page 1 of 1 Prolog Manager C d d v c. Nd 1.1. d d Y C 7 M� W N (v a+ C C W M LY O n W W Y OC O i LO Q N 0 N_ Q r X W 0 Q o! 00 Z O r= U r (n Z O U Z 0 CL O r W Y m 0 W 2 of O LL Q' W CL Y 0_ Y O O Z O r a U W 0 co Q m (D (D (p � N O O OW00v O O N N m o Z co `o O LO co C7 e- M LO J �n Q N I` Q O M O N N CD 07 co Ct C? 1+1 a M M O w z Z w x X w W w o o m w-;:7-9 N N (O N t0 O J J H Q O m 10 N O O N O c0 Q O o m u'I r Q N N P) N t7 O c0 O O Q co m D W = N n O O O O O c7 ch cn en M O S Ll Z 0 0 U O V J z �— 0 O U x ( w "' O w O 3 LL) N W O F-w o d J u) Q� a m E d z W 0 J U JQ r "> ° Z Z w H m a Z m > O O w N i O F m 7 0 O U O 1 U w Q 11 ?mmm a No ZZ� d) TH E M > W d v > U p n o n a 2 r y r N r d f O D m W W J LL W W O. x x� r 0 m `o ` w m 0 m a a n a n E E p to > w F w w O m > > a aEi `o `o n a > >? ? v oi0i J M (n M< r O O O 2 a LL LL O O a LL il a a a r r o o o o o N O N O OI OIO O O Z t- T y� C O O O O az h y Z aoi c w 2 0 N p V r 9 M O O O O O O O00 00 p Q O O J V m Q Q N W y m 2 Q W O Z W X 2 o a Ix X W W 00 O O Q O N n m O O c!1 n p p p O Q M O 0 c0 0 O p 0 O 0 O OI O c0 N O p 0 O N O N O O r p 0 0 p Q Q) N p Q O cp N N m m N O1 Q O w m M w f'> N O cf1 N c0 m N O w m P1 N w Y. V p N cp w w Qw w w w w w w w w w w w o F m O O 0 O 0 O o O o O 0 O 0° °o N c, fh y O O O O O O '. cij fh t7 M C G Z 0 0 h 0 0 Q 0 N Q O S i O Z 6 J Q Z Q J Q > `a Z W W W 0 W W Z W a K W v ; o W a m o A o >> m m E d 0 w ry an J d N V W y as Z c0 m N LJ.1 o 0 U W v W x o Y /0 O L .d+ 3 O r O C N LL. O K Yl V N U O J N N Y W N V � > Vr d V .0.� C 3 �- Z L p (Lil Y v. L a n m n m Y o N U Q E p U) J o r a o $ m N m o J d E y t J X Ti E m m w m Y W m o w m O o v y a E o a y (n m m m I v o' a m o o u D u '> w w J H L r o m L a u; O o. E m U Y .Y 7 m N d D y m m (n m J Q L c 0_ L r LL c W LL '> y -y Q N L N N O U �0 N N N N O L J aD d O I: O p u1 V >` n E .�.. > F' O N EO U N H X 'v N "v A u� 'O io io O in Q N U l0 0 O 0 0 T x N U_ lU E H N L N 7 U c+-j Ol O U O- r aC m 0' Z J 0 d 0_ C7 F- J O N N Q O O N N O N m N N N Q N N m N O Z w q m « } � L w � I w w E U) W / ca 2 E z c o w � U 2 § \ 0 a. o e L k z k 0 U) § § / u § z o 2 w D z U) 2 a. a LU / d � e § § -j L 4 F- � m 2 a. � ■ U w © ¥ ■ 0 m « o © 4 o ` q § Lu ® -j 0 Cl. § w 0 z w E \ k « co 2 « w « a § 0 D a. © § ® w ■ © k � Cl © k © m m § § § Cl) m § co m m k W �e 2 7 0 b § C) N d N it n v \ 2 \ w i Go k 0) g o 2 u 0 a w w F w 0 a w w IX 0 a w ■ F- ■ 0 a w w w ■ 0 a w w w 0 a w ■ R w 0 a. w w 2 e IX 0 a. w ■ L) \ 0 k U k k U LU z W z z g z g 2 2 2 z 2 W ■ ■ U m m 2 2 2 2 2 2 o I 0 w ■ S ■ ■ § 1-- L) % § = b b \ \ \ x x ■ Q Q o LL 0 L) o L) _ a q m « } L w � I w w E U) W / ca 2 E z c o w � U 2 § \ 0 a. o e L k z k 0 U) § 0 v z / u § z o 2 w D z U) 2 a. a / d � e § § -j L 4 F- � m 2 a. � ■ U w © ¥ ■ 0 m « o © 4 o ` q § Lu ® -j 0 Cl. § w 0 z w E \ k « co 2 « w « a § 0 © § ® w ■ © k � Cl © k © m m § § § Cl) m § co m m k � 2 7 C) N d N it n v It v LO g CD k w i Go k 0) g o 2 w ■ 0 a w w 0 a w w F w 0 a w w IX 0 a w ■ F- ■ 0 a w w w ■ 0 a w w w 0 a w ■ R w 0 a. w w R w 0 a w ■ e IX 0 a. w ■ w w 0 a. w w q m « } DENNIS W. DALEY t DALEY & HEFT LLP JAMES tt ROBERT R. HEFT D. BR OWW WILLIAM M D D. BRN NEAL S. MEYERS ATTORNEYS AT LAW RON J. BEVERIDGE RICHARD J. SCHNEIDER OF COUNSEL ROBERT W. BROCKMAN , JR. 462 STEVENS AVE. SUITE 201 MITCHELL D. DEAN SOLANA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92075 -2099 DAVID P. BERMAN MELINDA M. SCHALL SCOTT NOVA * TELEPHONE (858) 755 -5666 ADMINISTRATOR ROBERT H. QUAYLE IV FAX (858) 755 -7870 WWW . DALEY -HEFT .COM SYLVIE P. SNYDER t also admitted in Washington SCOTT E. PATTERSON also admitted in Hawaii GOLNAR J. FOZI LEE H. ROISTACHER tt also admitted in Texas ANDREW K. RAUCH nn��ex�ax2fi O MATTHEW E. BENNETT X980 - $005 ANNE M. PERRIGO WRITER 's E-MAIL: CHRISTINE J. GRACCO CARRIE L. MITCHELL NMEYERS @ DALEY -HEFT .COM SHIVA ELIHU WENTZELEE BOTHA November 1, 2005 LEAH A. PLASKIN JEFFREY T. ORRELL Andrew J. Blackburn, Esq. GRAY & PROUTY Civil Litigation Division 3170 Fourth Avenue, 3r1 Floor San Diego, CA 92103 VIA FACSIMILE AND MAIL RE: Encinitas Boulevard - Trunk Sewer Project Your File No.: M20,398 Dear Mr. Blackburn: I am in receipt of your correspondence dated October 28, 2005. I have consulted with my client regarding the accuracy of your correspondence and I have learned that you are misinformed as to the substance of the discussion which took place on October 28. First, the City Engineer, Greg Shields, indicated to Mr. Ortiz that the City's check for change order no. 10 will be ready this week. The City expects that the Finance Department will cut the check on Thursday, November 3 and mail it out the same day. No specific mention of November 1, 2005 was made during that meeting. With respect to the $100,000.00 final offer, it is also misstated. The City's final offer of $100,000-00 is to cover ALL issues to include Mocon. The City specifically discussed with Mr. Ortiz that the settlement amount between Metropolitan and Mocon was between them. The City's offer was $100,000.00 as a final payment and a full release of all parties to include Mocon. Mr. Ortiz advised that he was going to try and cut a check for $45,000.00 and see if Mocon would settle. The $100,000.00 is the last and final offer from the City. Andrew J. Blackburn Encinitas Boulevard - Trunk Sewer Proiect November 1, 2005 Page 2 The City's offer of $100,000.00 remains open through November 11, 2005 at which time it is withdrawn. The City would consider extending this offer further if it appears that concrete and positive progress is being made in the full resolution of this matter. I hope this helps in clarifying the status of negotiations. If you wish to discuss this further, please call. Very truly yours, Neal eyers NSM /j gw cc: Jace C. Schwarm, Risk Manager, CITY OF ENCINITAS Greg Shields, Senior Civil Engineer, CITY OF ENCINITAS Biii K. Gray Malcolm D. Schick LAW OFFICES OF John P. Welch, Inc. C. Kempton Letts James B. James Kelly J. Hamilton GRAY & PROUTY Melinda Schaffner, Inc. Roger A. Cartozian Marilee B. Hazen Christopher L. Herritt A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION Stephen M. Berger Diane L. Cray Sherry M. Dixon Daniel R. Brown CIVIL LITIGATION DIVISION Gehring C. Prouty (1947 - 1998) 3170 FOURTH AVENUE, THIRD FLOOR John R. Banks, Inc. Rosa M. Hernandez Joseph A. Hernandez Elizabeth H. Adamson SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92103 Christopher Cooley Ronald J. Zappelli (619) 718 -9790 FAX (619) 718 -9797 Terry Wheaton Lisa A. Berman Jennifer A. Haber Leo Andrada Frank M. Jodzio Tracy Sturtevant www.grayandprouty.com David J. Mitchell Jill M. Klein "" gpsandiegocivil @grayandprouty.com Khanh Le Kwan Andrew J. Blackburn David J. Demshki Jason P. Williams Lynne Pearson Houry Stephen L.Z. Kwan October 7, 2005 Jill S. Grathwohl Julie Ree G Bruce Sutherland Meighan McHugh Rowe Thomas E. Mullen Newsha Alsafar David J. Gittelman Tiffany A. Boyland Dawn C. Nelms Michael McConville Joanne Marecek Kurt A. Gronau" KathleenL.Wilson Maureen A. Terheyden Karen I. Rose Jeff M. Shalmi Janice N. Hunter Justin D. Hollander T. Kelly Cox Jeanne Bawa of James C. Hazen "Licensed in Hawaii /Colorado * "Licensed in Nevada Mr. Greg Shields CITY OF ENCINITAS 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 Other Offices SANTA ANA - ORANGE (714) 558 -3751 FAX (714) 973 -4736 SAN FRANCISCO (650) 246 -1440 FAX (650) 246 -1441 SACRAMENTO (916) 419 -6662 FAX (916) 419 -6663 RIVERSIDE (951) 276 -8750 FAX (951) 276 -0392 SAN DIEGO (619) 521 -2660 FAX (619) 521 -2655 GROVERBEACH (805) 786 -4050 FAX (805) 786 -0131 LOS ANGELES (323) 525 -3170 FAX (323) 525 -3180 FRESNO (559) 243 -4390 FAX (559) 243 -4399 SANTA BARBARA (805) 565 -2050 FAX (805) 565 -2069 REDDING (530) 246 -9061 FAX (530) 246 -0781 POMONA (909) 623 -9966 FAX (909) 623 -9936 SALINAS f831)444-7735 FAX (831; 444 -7746 HAWAII (808) 523 -5520 FAX (808) 523 -7924 Re: Metropolitan Construction v. City of Encinitas Our File No.: M20,398 Dear_ Mr. Shields: Please be advised that this office presents Jose Ortiz and Filmex, Inc., dba Metropolitan Construction, with respect to claims arising out of Contract for Construction of an Engineering Services Project (the Contract) between the City of Encinitas and my client. It is my understanding that you and Mr. Ortiz have been actively involved in ongoing negotiations with respect to his claims. However, due to issues involving one of my client's subcontractor MOCON, the negotiations between Mr. Ortiz and the City of Encinitas have been put on hold temporarily pending further action by MOCON with respect to MOCON's claims. Mr. Ortiz has kept me apprized of your negotiations, as well as MOCON's ineptitude. Please be advised that it is my client's position that the temporary suspension of negotiations between Metropolitan Construction and the City of Encinitas does not in any waive Metropolitan's right to pursue claims and /or disputes arising out of the Contract as specifically defined by Section 11.1 of the Contract. Specifically, Section 11.1.1 of the contract provides that any disputed facts or issues with relation to the performance of the contract be reduced to writing by the party making the claim and delivered to the City of Encinitas within fifteen (15) days of the event or change in circumstances and /or dispute. It is my client's position that the ongoing negotiations between my client and the City of Encinitas, as well as the previously submitted Mr. Greg Shields Re: Metropolitan Construction v. City of Encinitas October 7, 2005 Page 2 of 2 writings documenting the claim, satisfies the provisions of the contract. If the City of Encinitas disagrees with this position and asserts that my client has waived any right to pursue a claim arising out of a performance of the contract, I request that you notify me immediately. Nevertheless, it is my understanding that the City of Encinitas and my client are close to resolving most if not all the issues with respect to claims and /or extra work pending participation by and resolution with MOCON. Please do not construe this correspondence as anything but a measure to ensure that my client's rights have not been waived, or construed waived, due to the ongoing discussions between the parties. In fact, I encourage both my client and the City of Encinitas to continue their negotiations. I have been in contact with MOCON's attorney and am in the process of attempting to resolve the issues with MOCON's claims so as to finalize my clients' claims, as well as MOCON's claims with the City of Encinitas. Should you have any questions or comments, I invite you to give me a call. I encourage you to continue the lines of communication with Mr. Ortiz. However, if counsel on behalf of the City of Encinitas becomes involved in this matter, I request that he or she contact me first. Sincerely, GRAY & PROUTY -C� Andrew J. Blackburn AJB : sfm cc: Jose Ortiz Shields- 01- 1tr.wpd DENNIS W. DALEY t DALEY & HEFT ROBERT R. HEFT LLP NEAL S. MEYERS - J RICHARD J. SCHNEIDER ATTORNEYS AT LAW ROBERT W. BROCKMAN, JR. 462 STEVENS AVE. SUITE 201 MITCHELL D. DEAN SOLANA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92075 -2099 DAVID P. BERMAN TELEPHONE (858) 755 -5666 SCOTT NOYA * FAX (858) 755 -7870 ROBERT H. QUAYLEIV WWW.DALEY- HEFT.COM SYLVIE P. SNYDER SCOTT E. PATTERSON 25th Anniversary GOLNAR J. FOZI - J LEE H. ROISTACHER 1980- 2005 ANDREW K. RAUCH MATTHEW E. BENNETT ANNE M. PERRIGO CHRISTINE J. GRACCO CARRIE L. MITCHELL SHIVA ELIHU October 25, 2005 WENTZELEE BOTHA LEAH A. PLASKIN JEFFREY T. ORRELL Andrew J. Blackburn, Esq. GRAY & PROUTY Civil Litigation Division 3170 Fourth Avenue, 3rd Floor San Diego, CA 92103 JAMES D. MATHISON tt WILLIAM D. BROWN RON J. BEVERIDGE OF COUNSEL MELINDA M. SCHALL ADMINISTRATOR t also admitted in Washington it also admitted in Hawaii also admitted in Texas J %a� \4y \b RE: Encinitas Boulevard - Trunk Sewer Project Your File No.: M20,398 Dear Mr. Blackburn: I am retained counsel for the City of Encinitas in the above - referenced matter. The City has passed along to me your letter dated October 7, 2005 for response. The City appreciates your client's efforts to resolve this matter through negotiation. However, by engaging in these negotiations, the City does not waive any contractual or statutory rights or defenses it may have against Metropolitan, including any notice provisions. Whether or not your client has waived any rights to pursue a claim arising out of the performance of the contract is something to be resolved down the road if this matter does not resolve through negotiations. The City is not .waiving that possibility at this time. In the meantime, if there is something I can do to assist in the resolution of this matter, please feel free to communicate with me. I have no idea how long you believe this "temporary suspension" of negotiations with the City may last, but it is Andrew J. Blackburn Encinitas Boulevard - Trunk Sewer Project October 25, 2005 Page 2 ultimately up to you and your client when it must reinitiate negotiations with the City and /or assert its legal rights. Very truly yours, NSM /jgw cc: Jace C. Schwarm, Risk Manager, CITY OF ENCINITAS Greg Shields, Senior Civil Engineer, CITY OF ENCINITAS Jace Schwarm - RE: Revised order.J 0 attached r :;3;V 9 S From: "Neal Meyers" <NMeyers @daley- heft.com> To: "Greg Shields" <GSHIELDS @ci.encinitas.ca.us >, "Jace Schwarm" <JSCHWARM @ci.encinitas.ca.us >, "Peter Cota - Robles" <PCR @ci.encinitas.ca.us> Date: 10/25/2005 8:34:48 AM Subject: RE: Revised Change order 10 attached Greg: As we discussed, I will work on language clarifying that this change order is intended to resolve all outstanding project claims, with the exception of the Mocon dispute. Neal Meyers - - -- Original Message-- - From: Greg Shields [mailto :GSHIELDS @ci.encinitas.ca.usJ Sent: Tue 10/25/2005 8:18 AM To: Jace Schwarm; Peter Cota - Robles; Ron Brady; joortiz @cox.net; Neal Meyers Cc: Subject: Revised Change order 10 attached Greg Shields, P.E. Field Operations 760 -633 -2778 Jace Schwarm - RE: Encinitas Trunk Sewer. From: "Neal Meyers" <NMeyers @daley- heft.com> To: "Jace Schwarm" <JSCHWARM @ci.encinitas.ca.us> Date: 10/24/2005 5:07:06 PM Subject: RE: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Thanks. Neal - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Jace Schwarm [ mailto :JSCHWARM@ci.encinitas.ca.us] Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 2:47 PM To: Greg Shields; Neal Meyers Subject: RE: Encinitas Trunk Sewer No. The settlement is on the Metropolitan issues only and NOT including the Mocan issues of $350K. Mocan $350K is still at issue and unresolved. Jace R.M. >>> "Neal Meyers" <NMeyers @daley - heft.com> 10/24/2005 1:50:52 PM >>> Greg: It is important I am in the loop before you complete any close -out paperwork or release retention. 1 remain unclear about the status of negotiations. Have you now reached a final number with Metropolitan and now waiting to see if Mocan will accept? Let me know when convenient. Neal - - -- Original Message---- - From: Greg Shields [ mai Ito: GSHIELDS @ci.encinitas.ca. us] Sent: Mon 10/2412005 9:53 AM To: joortiz @cox.net Cc: Jace Schwarm Subject: Re: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Sounds good - How's 3pm work for you? Greg Shields, P.E. Field Operations 760 -633 -2778 >>> "Jose Ortiz" <joortiz @cox.net> 10/20/2005 6:53:38 PM >>> Let's get together on Tuesday to discuss a possible way to resolve the issues pending with my subcontractor. I think they'll go with it, so let's see if it will work for you ?? Jose - - - -- Original Message - - - -- From: Greg Shields < mai Ito: GSHIELDS @ci.encinitas.ca.us> To: joortiz @cox.net Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 3:56 PM Subject: Re: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Jace Schwarm - RE: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Page 2 ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? Greg Shields, P.E. Field Operations 760 -633 -2778 >>> "Jose Ortiz" <joortiz @cox.net> 10/20/2005 2:40:39 PM Greg, I've added 30days for the impact of change order no. 10 Jose Jace Schwarm - co#10.doc Page 1 October 25, 2005 Metropolitan Construction C/o Jose Ortiz 8614 Troy Street Spring Valley, Ca 91977 Re: CHANGE ORDER #10 Encinitas Blvd. Trunk Sewer Replacement Project CEE01 D Gentlemen: Pursuant to Section 3 — CHANGES IN WORK, you are directed to proceed with all labor, material and equipment necessary to accomplish the following change: The work described in Metropolitan extra work reports 8 thru 19- ($12,825 +$42,000) and 27 thru 30- ($9,000). The work consists of removing the pcc encasement around MH #10; removing and replacing the encasement of an existing sewer crossing Saxony; excavating sewer and connecting to MH #5. Also included is MH #15 and the T &M Tickets, ($9,500). The change for the above work will be $73,325.00 (Seventy-three Thousand Three Hundred twenty-five Dollars and Zero Cents) in accordance with the attached. This change will add 35 days to the contract time. Please signify your acceptance of this change order by signing below. Please return the change order to the City after you sign it. Upon receipt, the City will sign and a copy, with original signatures, shall be forwarded to you for your files. Greg Shields, P.E. Field Operations cc: Director of Engineering Services ACCEPTED BY: Jose Ortiz, President Metropolitan Construction Contractors License No. 790532A City Of Encinitas March 21, 2005 Metropolitan Construction Attn: Jose Ortiz 8614 Troy Street Spring Valley, Calif 91977 FAX AND MAIL RE: ENCINITAS BLVD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT(CEE01D) Jose, I am in receipt of your faxed letter dated March 14, 2005. The date of the fax is March 21, 2005, and the subject of the letter is regarding work that occurred after March 14, 2005. I assume this is another clerical error. Since on or about October 17, 2004 your work has encountered numerous problems, including broken equipment and lack of progress in the pipe bursting operation. At this point, your pipe bursting operations are stalled due to broken equipment again and you have successfully placed all but the last 800 feet, approximately. You are again suggesting the problem is with unanticipated underground conditions and wish to once more complete this project by converting this job to an open trench operation. The City has concluded the problem your work has encountered is not due to differing site conditions. The City will allow the use of the open trench method only if you bear any additional costs that are incurred by way of this change in procedure. Since I did volunteer to split the cost of the additional loops that would be necessary as result of the open trench procedure, I will not withdraw this agreement. The requirement to grind for the paving is not waived. This is what was included in the contract and is expected to be done. The contract also called for contingency plans and these have not been done. Friday I spent the day responding to the citizens that ran into a blockade on Encinitas Blvd. The signage to inform the vehicular traffic of the impending detour was none existent and the City of Encinitas Engineering Department took a significant public relations beating because you could not get out of the street on time. This is the only reason you are being allowed to use the open trench procedure; i.e. after over 170 days on a 90 day contract you have failed to convince that you can follow a schedule. Sincerely, reg Sic ds, P.E. Field Operations cc: Kipp Hefner, Assoc. Civil Engineer TEL 760- 633 -2600 / FAX 760- 633 -2627 505 S. Vulcan .Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 TDD 760 -633 -2700 40 recycled paper Metropolitan Construction GENERAL BUILDING & ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS Lie. No. 790532 DATE: -3 la, l o S` FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL FORM PROJECT NUMBER: To: CLtY of zNcIn.) 1 %6s FAX NUMBER ATT14: C e105 Sh r e ce S FROM: 7:50 Se D P T1 I- ( ) SUBJECT: E N C I M t -f ^ 5 R LU (!',) NUMBER OF PAGES (Including this transmittal form): 3 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS/INSTRUCTIONS: IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THE PAGES LISTED ABOVE, PLEASE CALL AS SOON AS POSSIBLE FOR RETRANSMISSION: THANK YOU. SENT: Date: PHONE: (619) 741 -5643 FAX (619) 741 -5658 Time: Initials' E/T ' d TOE ' ON 1SN00 Nd1I30d0N13W WHYS :tit S002 ' TZ ' NbW General Building & Engineering Contractors C O N S T R U C T 1 0 N Uanse No. 790532 March 14, 2005 Sean Manning Richard Brady and Associates 4909 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 220 San Diego, CA 92123 Re: Encinitas Boulevard Trunk Sewer Dear Mr. Manning: I met with Mr. Greg Shields of City of Encinitas on March 18, 2005 to discuss the recent failure from the hard soil encountered on the last burst between manholes 5 and 4. In light of there being no guarantee as to when we can be off of the street to avoid rush hour impacts, we discussed open trenching may be our only option to assure work stoppage by 5am. MC will be impairing traffic loops on both turn lanes onto the Interstate 5, and plans to asphalt pave within 7 days in order to reinstate them. Unfortunately, MC will be unable to grind asphalt prior to final course within the caltrans right of way to avoid Rather damage to the traffic system. Metropolitan Construction proposes the final asphalt cap to be per San Diego Regional Standards Drawing SDG -107, and note it will have a minimum with of 5 foot, and extend V beyond any edge. If this proposal is acceptable, please respond a.s.a.p., so we may proceed with the completion of the subject contract. Regards, Jose 0, Ortiz President Enclosures cc: Kip Hefner, Encinitas Greg Shields, Encinitas P.O. Box 477, Bon1m, CA, 91908 -0477 Phone (619)741 -5643 Fax (61 r) iq 1'a"U E/2 . d TOE ' ON 1SN00 W1d1F10d0N13W WdbS : Z T S902 ' TZ ' 8UW rt A' -1 A' vvaarirg surface Dt / MM F aaphat aonr d �!■ �,�,�_,_ jam_ - - aubgreda S6% reW06" oompacslon tso�s noeo � cF SAN DIEGO Ravlalan uYlAwroved Date CM OF SAN =Go - STAMARD DRAWW6 STIANDARDS COMI iTTTTEF (tTit t d1+.Ca Z _ 2-7.95_ 11.0 34 D� TRENCH RESURFACING FOR ASPHALT A CONCRETE SURFACED STREETS °,� S D G -10 7 Ei8 ' d TOE '014 1SW00 WUlI30d0N13W WUVG : T T S002 ' TZ ' NUW NOTES: 1. E>dsdrrg AC. pavement shall be sawcut b am rnum depth of I-12 Incf�es or 2596 of Its ls� mvj be appcov b the eginser. n case of an el, al encY�enden9arin9 pubic gal* or property, aawwtting Is not required. 2. Prior to plating ccrxrete, paving and base edges shah be trki 01 d to neat hw tanlaf and vertical lines, 3. Unkw otherwise specified, conaels trench Dover shall be a rrlk*nUrn of 5-12 inches thick for alleys, 7 inches for local 0 fW91 tour lame cone= strraets and 9 Inches fit for er major or greater street dassilicallorrs. 4. Only wpbgft type mm" compound shat be Used on the oonaete trench carer, pigmentaIion is not required. S. A tack eoet shall be applied to the 9 AG. pavement and comets wench corer prior to placid the new AC, B, Subgfads pmpwaton "be done in accordance vrith Section 30-1 of the Standard SpWfficakm for Pubic Waft Conah4on: latest edition. 7. Any sleet bw Id r 7 feet In vAdth or greaten and lOrW than 100 feet in overall Ienglh shall be fsoonshucted YAM the pavement aectlon for the street • dacsiicatiorl per SchaUe 'J' (SDG -113). Street tfench sections 7 feat in Wfdtft or greeder but leas than 100 feet In oveW length shall be Mot,, I to a thicimas of one Inch 07 greater then required by note 3 above. * In kxu -lane Mahn or greater atteeb- an approved set acceierattng admixture such as caldum chloride, shall be Used In the concrete. cF SAN DIEGO Ravlalan uYlAwroved Date CM OF SAN =Go - STAMARD DRAWW6 STIANDARDS COMI iTTTTEF (tTit t d1+.Ca Z _ 2-7.95_ 11.0 34 D� TRENCH RESURFACING FOR ASPHALT A CONCRETE SURFACED STREETS °,� S D G -10 7 Ei8 ' d TOE '014 1SW00 WUlI30d0N13W WUVG : T T S002 ' TZ ' NUW Confirmation Report— Memory Send Page : 001 Date & Time: Mar -21 -05 03:03pm Line 1 Machine ID Job number 600 Date Mar -21 03:02pm To : 5916197415658 Number of pages 002 Start time Mar -21 03:02pm End time Mar -21 03:03pm Pages sent 002 Status OK Job number 600 * ** SEND SUCCESSFUL * ** S�TTAL FORM Cfty of Encinitas RAX 760/633 -2818 JW SOS S. Vulcan Aveano EaBiaS Encinitaas, CA 92024 -3633 • 760/633 =2770 - TO: 'Z– OF: - gpORESS: _ • ��r�- S �—( ♦ � -- jS PHONE' [7601 633- Z�l� FROM' Q Call ASAP 0 P�r'our eo N'=eati— Please > ly �r Pleases Ha�c71s - . Page 1 of 1 Greg Shields - Encinitas Trunk Sewer From: "Jose Ortiz" <joortiz @cox.net> To: <j schwarm@ci. encinitas. ca.us> Date: 11/7/2005 11:21 AM Subject: Encinitas Trunk Sewer CC: "Greg Shields" <gshields @ci.encinitas.ca.us> Jace, I received the check for the subject project, but i was surprised that it was less than anticipated. When the project was changed from pipe bursting to open trench additional cost were to be incurred in replacement of traffic loops and additional shoring. It was agreed that full compensation would be given on the shoring, and the loops would be split in half. I've given Greg the invoices for each of the items since May, and I'd like to get paid. It would be much easier if parties kept up their end of the agreements to close this out, so please follow up with me, and provide me a status on these to items. I'm still waiting on Mocon to respond to the proposal pitched at our last meeting, so please bare with us as we attempt to close this item out with Mocon. Thanks for your assistance to this matter. Regards, J. Ortiz Metropolitan Construction file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \gshields \Local Settings \Temp \GW }00001.HTM 11/8/2005 lb ( f\ \\ f2 e LU � d � k � i $ � � k � § ! � �fƒfff ff ��f2 ■■■2■ � �a$asK ■ ■.gym ■9mR■ aagi §S \ $k&@ v &a- E R m w L LU s 2 � w ■ 0 � 0 $ LU &k 2 • , � to 'd j� %± @ a kk� A;o ;g §�Q k8 « fill .. §�� ;_� § � � August 16, 2005 Metropolitan Construction C/o Jose Ortiz 8614 Troy Street Spring Valley, Ca 91977 Re: CHANGE ORDER #9 Encinitas Blvd. Trunk Sewer Replacement Project CEE01D Gentlemen: Pursuant to Section 7 -10.5 — Protection of the Public:: The costs for all labor, equipment, materials, and incidentals, together with the cost and expense of such repairs as are deemed necessary by the City Engineer, shall be paid by the Contractor. All expenses incurred by the City for emergency repairs or remedial actions will be deducted from the amounts due the Contractor. The invoice from the County of San Diego, Department of Environmental Health for the work they performed April 24, 2005 is attached. The deductive change for the above work is for $198.00 (One Hundred Ninety -eight Dollars and NO Cents). The contract time will not change. Please signify your acceptance of this change order by signing below. Please return the change order to the City after you sign it. Upon receipt, the City will sign and a copy, with original signatures, shall be forwarded to you for your files. Greg Shields, P.E. Field Operations cc: Director of Engineering Services ACCEPTED BY: Jose Ortiz, President Metropolitan Construction Contractors License No. 790532A Page 1 of 3 Greg Shields - Re: Encinitas Trunk Sewer From: "Jose Ortiz" <joortiz @cox.net> To: "Greg Shields" <GSHIELDS @ci.encinitas.ca.us> Date: 10/14/2005 4:04 PM Subject: Re: Encinitas Trunk Sewer CC: "Ron Brady" <rbrady @ci.encinitas.ca.us >, "Michael O'Shea" <moshea @rbrady.net> Greg, I've written in some comments regarding each item on the invoice. Please read the following notes for the bid items being invoiced; 7 LF being invoiced was as stated per Sewer Pipe TV inspection. 9 MC installed 14 MH's on the project, and to date only 13 had been invoiced. 14 Per our last "negotiation" meeting, it was agreed that an additional connection was to be paid for MH 15A. 17 Measured with Ron Brady 18 Measured with Ron Brady 19 Measured with Ron Brady 21 Encountered 14" to 16" pavement from MH 1 thru 4, which is equavalent to the quantity on the invoice. In addition, encountered the old street section from manhole 6 to 13, and quantity was not invoiced yet! We are not planning to invoice that quantity, since we didn't struggle with it much, so please process the above quantity. Change Orders Item 8, discussed per correspondence with Greg Shields Item 9, Additional Shoring per meeting, and backup submitted Item 10, per RFI, and measured with Ron Brady If there is additional clarification required, please contact me. You always have the option to pay undisputed items, and remove items which you may require additional clarification. I'm available Monday (anytime) or Tuesday (anytime). Jose Ortiz - - - -- Original Message - - - -- From: Greg Shields To: joortiz @cox.net ; moshea@rbrady.net Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 4:05 PM Subject: Re: Encinitas Trunk Sewer file: / /C:\ Documents %20and %2OSettings \gshields \Local %2OSettings \Temp \GW } OOOO 1.H... 10/17/2005 Page 2 of 3 Jose the quantities on your invoice are not agreed to by the inspector. This has to be resolved )efore I can request the issuance of a check. If Alberto does the quantities, bring him. We -an meet next week at your choice of day and time. 3reg Shields, P.E. Field Operations 760- 633 -2778 >>> "Jose Ortiz" <joortiz @cox.net> 10/13/2005 9:06:30 AM >>> Mike, I've made the change to match the quantity I measured with Ron for the digouts. Attached is the revised file, and i'II have a copy with a wet signature dropped off by lunch. I appreciate your quick response to this matter. Regards, Jose Ortiz - - - -- Original Message - - - -- From: Michael _O'Shea To: Jose-Ortiz Cc: Greg _Shields Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 8:10 AM Subject: RE: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Jose, Please check with Alberto. He said he was going to send me a new Progress Payment #7 that reflected a different square footage for asphalt grinding as well as a new grand total (he said that either he or yourself would contact Ron or Greg to settle this SF issue). Since Alberto and I talked about this (early last week), I have made a couple of attempts to contact him to follow up with this. He has not returned any of my messages. Mike From: Jose Ortiz [mailto:joortiz @cox.net] Sent: Wed 10/12/2005 5:19 PM To: Michael O'Shea Cc: Greg Shields Subject: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Mike, On September 22, 2005, Alberto Larios dropped off invoice number 7 for the file: / /C:\ Documents %20and %20Settings \gshields \Local %20Settings \Temp \GW 10000 LH... 10/17/2005 Page 3 of 3 subject project at your office. I had some dialogue with you pertaining to the Manhole number being invoiced on payment application number 7 on September 22, 2005. Per a conversation with Greg Shields of City of Encinitas; he has received no documentation or follow up from you pertaining to payment application no. 7. Please forward any information regarding pay - ap no. 7, to prevent any delays to our payment. If you have any further questions, please call me. Thank You Jose Ortiz Metropolitan Construction file: //C :\ Documents %20and %2OSettings \gshields \Local %2OSettings \Temp \GW } OOOO 1.H... 10/17/2005 Shields - T &M Ticket #20 CM Response oc June 20, 2005 Jose Ortiz Metropolitan Construction P.O. Box 477 Bonita Ca. 91908 Re: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Replacement Change Order Request — T &M Ticket #20 Work Stopped By Encinitas Due to Lack of Notification Dear Mr. Ortiz: On January 27, 2005 the City requested that the Contractor stop work. Until that date, the contractor had failed to provide all submittals required per section 306 -9.1.3 of the specifications. These were not "additional' submittals and should have been provided to the City and approved prior to ordering materials and/or commencing the pipe replacement process. The City rejects the costs incurred by the Contractor for T &M #20. If you have any questions concerning this matter please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, Sean Manning Construction Manager c: Kipp Hefner, Project Manager Encinitas.003.201 File 4909 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 220 • San Diego, California 92123 Tel (858) 496 -0500 . Fax (858) 496 -0505 June 20, 2005 Jose Ortiz Metropolitan Construction P.O. Box 477 Bonita Ca. 91908 Re: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Replacement Change Order Request — T &M Ticket #21, 22 Differing Site Conditions Dear Mr. Ortiz: Per Section 306 -9.3.1 of the specifications: "The bursting tool used should generate sufficient force to break the existing pipeline and compact it into the surrounding soil. The Manufacturer's written specifications will determine tool sizes recommended for various pipe diameters as well as parameters associated with tool sizes for allowable upsize percentages. " "The bursting action of the tool shall increase the external dimensions sufficiently to break the existing pipe and simultaneously expand the surrounding ground sufficiently to permit pulling the new pipe through the annular space. " And Section 306 -9.3.4 of the specifications: "The Contractor shall verify all subsurface conditions, which may affect the Work on this contract. All investigations necessary to verify subsurface conditions or potential interferences and to complete the Work shall be included in the prices bid for Contract Bid Items in the Bid Proposal at no additional cost to the City. Copies of all reports and information on subsurface conditions obtained by the Contractor shall be provided to the Engineer" The City rejects the costs incurred by the Contractor for T &M #21 and #22. If you have any questions concerning this matter please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, Sean Manning Construction Manager c: Kipp Hefner, Project Manager 4909 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 220 • San Diego, California 92123 Tel (858) 496 -0500 . Fax (858) 496 -0505 ket #21, 22, CM Response.doc can- 'Metropolitan General Building & Engineering Contractors C O N S T R U C T I O N License No. 790532 December 16, 2004 Greg Shields, P.E. City of Encinitas 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 -3633 Re: Encinitas Trunk Sewer Replacement (CEE01D) Dear Mr. Shields: ,zl�ti1� J I'm in receipt of your letter dated December 15, 2004. Your letter states the projected start dates and the estimated completion date. I do understand the project has had minor problems getting off the ground, but this excess time has been due to additional investigations which should have been included in this contract. The original bursting lengths are too long to be accomplished within an 8 hour period as a result of the soil conditions. On a typical burst requires 3 hrs to install and take down traffic control/ bypass), and the actual burst cannot take longer than 5 -6 hrs to allow for tool removal and temporary connection. At most, they should have been from manhole to manhole in lieu of every other. Lack of geological information would have concluded this project un- burstible within the allotted time frame. Other indirect contributors have been: bypass design, bypass installation, damaged bypass from rains and storm drain debris, and now are the differing site conditions hindering production. As you know by now, my intent is to make this project successful, and perhaps this project will be a learning experience. In your letter I don't believe the proper information has been channeled to the expert witnesses you have hired to analyze our proposal. Attached is a letter from Mark Maxwell, product specialist from TT Technologies, Inc. Mark has hands on experience in the field for the construction method selected for this project, and in several conversations with Mr. Maxwell he's concluded; the time, dense soil and bypass constraints on the subject project do not make this project a good candidate for pipe bursting. I realize our position does not concur with that of your experts, but keep in mind Metropolitan Construction has an obligation to the tax payers, and the owner's of the facility. To date our impacts are over 100k, continuing the designated method of pipe installation will only increase the cost to date on work outside the scope of the contract. P.O. Box 477, Bonita, CA, 91908 -0477 Phone (619)741 -5643 Fax (619)741 -5658 Ai Attached is a letter from from Collins K. Orton (California Sales) of TT Technologies, Inc., and it's pertaining to a problem we may encounter using the 14" Koloss Hammer. The cable in this case cut the ceiling of the pipe; debris littered the invert of the pipe, and resulted in sags. This letter also addressed poor backfill over the pipe, but the cable will ride on the top, and increase exposure to sags on Encinitas Blvd. In the first week of January 2005, Metropolitan Construction will submit data as to the performance that's expected from the hammer your experts are designating as the proper tool. Please have the experts demonstrate with the data that the hammer can successfully penetrate, have an expert in soil verify if the soil can be displaced the required volume in the required time frame mentioned above. We are contractors not engineers, and once the method is approved to meet the contract time constraints, Metropolitan will commence the bursting with the 14" hammer which we contend is outside the scope of the contract. If you have any questions, please contact me or Alberto Larios at 619 - 741 -5643. Regards, Jose O. Ortiz President Attachments cc: Kif Hefner, PM Ron Brady, Inspector Sean Manning, CM City of Encinitas January 3, 2005 Metropolitan Construction Attn: Jose Ortiz 8614 Troy Street Spring Valley, Calif. 91977 FAX AND MAIL RE: ENCINITAS BLVD TRUNK SEWER REPLACEMENT(CEE01D) Gentlemen: The City has received your correspondence with attachments dated December 16, 2004, which was not delivered to the City for review until December 29, 2004. First, the City rejects any suggestion or implication on your part that the construction means or methods of this job have been or will be directed by the City or its representatives. The second paragraph of page two of your letter makes reference to "...the hammer your (referring to the City) experts are designating as the proper tool...." That paragraph further requests that City "experts" demonstrate that the work can be accomplished in some specific way. The City does not and will not in any manner assume or accept that "means and methods" role. The City only requires you to accomplish the terms and conditions of the contract. The means and methods of how you will successfully accomplish the pipe bursting component, including the choice of equipment, how you choose to accomplish the by- pass and traffic control are up to you. Any belief on your part that the City is telling you how to do the work, including what specific equipment to use is incorrect. With respect to your comments and attachments, upon our initial review, it continues to be the City's opinion that differing site conditions have not been encountered and that the job could have and still can be accomplished under the terms of the contract specifications. We reiterate our letter to you dated December 15, 2004 that "...you are hereby directed to proceed with all the work to be performed under the contract specifications, using means and methods necessary to accomplish the work." Reference is made to Public Contract Code section 7104(c) and Section 3 -4 of the Greenbook, which requires you to proceed with all work to be performed under the contract. Please note that the deadline of January 18, 2005 for Metropolitan to renew its progress on the job is fast approaching. Please be advised the City will place your surety on notice if that deadline is not met. Currently the City is experiencing winter rains and you are directed to insure that all erosion control measures are in place and that any modifications necessary to the site are accomplished. We look forward to the receipt of your data submission this week. Sincerely Greg Melds, P.E. Field Operations cc: Kipp Hefner, Assoc. Civil Engineer Jace Schwarm, Risk Manager tFA ,6(16 >,;_?r,(li) / 1 >AS .i,- 6ii -'G �0, ti. VuI,In \% (.1111, inii d Ito III i.i recycled paper n /7 v 1 1 1117 Vr -1,(, rj *M TT TEC NOL ®GIES, Inc. Friday. March 16, 2001 Bob Morrow MOCON 82 -204 Highway 111 Suite C -201 Indio, CA 92201 650 3b8 -0832 RE: City of Venture's Telephone Road Sewer Repfacement Project Dear Bob' "Leaders in Trenchless Technology" Per our teleptone conversation of 3- 12 -01. The alleged "sags or humps,,, in the 277 linear feel of 8" HDPE replacement pipe, are probably due 'o saturated, poor and uneven compa(lion of the soil around the clay pipe that was burst on your job in Ventura, Per telephone conversation with Howard Janotta, of J&H Engineering, the new pipe is _5" higher than the original tlow line at the manhole at Sts. 3 +70. Howerd described the sag as actually being a hump of 8 -9" from Sta. 3 +50 to Sta. 3 +70. The Pipe Bursting method does not change the line and grade of the existing pipe other than what the soil conditions allow and the amount of upsize requires. This prompts a few questions. Did the City perform any soil testing to deterTnine the suitability of the site for pipe bursting? If a soil report was not provided, how would the pipe bursting method be "known ", by the engineers, to be correct for the existing pipe and soils condition? The manhole at Sta. 3 +70 teas probably been leaking, from above, for a long time and eroding the pipe zone. Was pre - construction CCTV made available and If It was available, was n closely analyzed by the City and contractor prior to pipe bursting? It is clear, from the description the site, that open cut construction was very difficult due eo extremely poor soil conditions. Pipe Burstin improve poor soil conditions. g does not Furthor, after consulting with Scott Kneip, our Grundocrack pipe bursting specialist oil site, winch tension was never lost during the burst. A constant cession of approx. 9 tens was maintained throughout this particular run- It is all but Impossible for the pipe bursting tool to change the alignment without coming out of the existing pipe. If the pipe bursting tool did come out of the pipe, the winch cable would have been cut by the combination of forward motion of the bursting tool and the constant pull of the Those forces would have been working against each other instead of together. winch. Please see illustration (Fig. 1) Please refer to the attached document Desi6n and Application Issues for Pipe Bursting. This paper was published in NO -DIG ENGINEERING vol. 3, No. 2. Dec. 1999. Consult the section on -Position of Replacement Pipe" paragraph e. "Sags In the existing pipe will tend to be reduced by the replacement Process (pipe bursting) if the soil conditions ;around the pipe are uniform. If an existing sag in a pipe has been caused by a soft zone beneath the pipe, however, the pipe may be forced by the bursting operation toward fire soft zone, thus accentuating the sag (Figure t3F) " This also applies to soft zones over the pipe as well as beneath the pipe. The fads presented in this technical document refer to all pipe bursting methods. This document was authored by three highly qualified Ph.D's from Louisiana Tech University and from Delta Construction, The authors are known to be knowledgeable and are respected in the field of pipe bursting. �241 2020 East NAw York Street - Aurora, IL 60504 GRU(1DOf IIHI R \1 630 -851 -8200 800- 533 -2076 PAX 630 -851 -8299 http:,'Iwww.ttlechnologies.con, r T°F i'ECHNOLO GIES, Inc. Page 2 .... v • VC)9V sets- Vt3SG N_11 ,'Leaders in TrencMess Technology" Based on the information above, there may be a line and grade problem with the new pipe but it is not the fault of the pipe bursting process but possibly of the selection of pipe bursting as a way to solve a very bad excavation situation in poor soil conditions- Pipe Bursting is an alternative to open cut construction however "due diligence'. prudent engineering practice and Informed decisions need to be made before employing this technique. Millions of feet of wastewater pipe have been successfully replaced with the pipe bursting method when utilized in the proper conditions. if we can be of any further assistance, please contact us at any time. Sincerely, CC: H. Janotia (J&H Engineering). C. Brah;er, S. Kneip. M. Schwager Attachments: a) Sketch Figure 1 b) Design and Application issues for Pipe Bursting 2020 East Now York Street • Aurora, 1L 60504 IDQt l 1RIP q 630- 851.820() • 800 -533 -2078 • FAX 630 -851 -8299 L_.... -. htti!: /iwww,titechnoingies -corn Collins K. Orton Califomis Sales Manager CC: H. Janotia (J&H Engineering). C. Brah;er, S. Kneip. M. Schwager Attachments: a) Sketch Figure 1 b) Design and Application issues for Pipe Bursting 2020 East Now York Street • Aurora, 1L 60504 IDQt l 1RIP q 630- 851.820() • 800 -533 -2078 • FAX 630 -851 -8299 L_.... -. htti!: /iwww,titechnoingies -corn 11V-V r J d � ll� c q L 1- 'P.A. luv Ju`I Ju`IU lilui !v 650 368 -0832 P.04 J t I1� L� � L ✓ J o. e V ' C-f J - 'P.A. luv Ju`I Ju`IU lilui !v 650 368 -0832 P.04 J t I1� City of Encinitas 'A San Dieguito Water District Risk Management Department Jace C. Schwarm, Risk & Safety Department Manager (760) 633 -2636 Erin Carrera, Risk Management Analyst (760) 633 -2672 Kathy Hollywood, R.M. Program Assistant H (760) 943 -2219 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, CA 92024 -3633 FAX (760) 943 =2240 FAX TRANSM T'TAL FORM DATE: �Z l� SEND TO F TO: v Y� FROM: 0 # OF P. Crx.,v� csvl ❑ Review & Call ❑ F.Y.I. ❑ Please Handle ❑ Please Reply by <- y�rnwud I�1. �� C J -,- CoMMENTS: 0 Q. t c-jj cI-4 W\ �/VL VV"VVJ e-Q-" -1 u (j, - -l[ -I c: - O, (p to 33 -a(0 3 � ,::a ". 0 / — I r: city of Encinitas October 19, 2005 Metropolitan Construction C/o Jose Ortiz 8614 Troy Street Spring Valley, Ca 91977 Re: CHANGE ORDER #10 Encinitas Blvd. Trunk Sewer Replacement Project CEE01D Gentlemen: Pursuant to Section 3 — CHANGES IN WORK, you are directed to proceed with all labor, material and equipment necessary to accomplish the following change: The work described in Metropolitan extra work reports 8 thru 19- ($12,825 +$42,000) and 27 thru 30- ($9,000). The work consists of removing the pcc encasement around MH #10; removing and replacing the encasement of an existing sewer crossing Saxony; excavating sewer and connecting to MH #5. The change for the above work will be $63,825.00 (Sixty -three Thousand Eight Hundred twenty -five Dollars and Zero Cents) in accordance with the attached. The contract time will not change. Please signify your acceptance of this change order by signing below. Please return the change order to the City after you sign it. Upon receipt, the City will sign and a copy, with original signatures, shall be forwarded to you for your files. Greg Shields, P.E. Field Operations cc: Director of Engineering Services ACCEPTED BY: Jose Ortiz, President Metropolitan Construction Contractors License No. 790532A E ?_ 760 -633 2600 /FAX 760 -633 2627 50> S. Vulcan Avenue, Fncinicas, California 92024 -3633 TDD 760- 633 -2700 recycled paper Change Order #6 May 16, 2005 City of Encinitas Encinitas Blvd Trunk Sewer Replacement MecAW ,544 d — a44AV & 4909 Murphy Canyon Rd Ph 858 -496 -0500 San Diego, CA 92123 Fax 858 -496 -0505 Change Order #6 Record of Negotiation Date: May 16, 2005 Project No: Encinitas.003 Contractor: Metropolitan Construction P.O. Box 477 Bonita, Ca. 91908 Prepared by: Michael O'Shea Subject: City W.O. #: CEE01 D Drawing Reference: Specification Reference: Report Reference: COR Reference: Summary of Work 1) Removal of concrete encasement around MH #10 8,9 11.12 Justification for Entitlement 1) Section 300 -1 Clearing and Grubbing: Contractor is required to demolish and remove existing surface and subsurface improvements. 2) General Note #3 on Plans: No other existing utilities known to exist except as shown on plans. Additional Cost Requested by Contractor 1)$6,529.26 (Report 8), $9,502.07 (Report 9), Total Cost - $16,031.33 Negotiation Recommendation 1) RBA estimated cost for removal of concrete encasement around MH# 10 i cluding all costs for traffic control and sewer bypass as included on the Contractor's T &M tickets is $4.5 ! TOTAL COST AWARDED FOR CHANGE ORDER #8 - $3,216.58 Attachments Attachment A: Report Reference 8, 9 COR #11, #12 Materials Cost sheet CO #6 Page 1 of 1 t 00 O a w LO O O N N R O IL Wa' Y W Q V ❑ %i � N VS � N d W Y J w iOLL F- w ,a a > m o N O C � U U C W U Z O U Z H O IL O F- W m m ❑ 2 O LL ui W 2 # Y O O IL 3: V V N M � (0 °m m 00) COO (NO N z Cl) MCO Cl) co ai (1) co n V v CD 0 m C Un C) _o C-4 N O N N C' of � '7 < r sr LO CO ° w V! 0 z w w t p w W ED N U1 O V O O J J KQ co v w r �n Un r L° v r cn v N v cn ao < m Q ~ O O Y cr o x m Q m Q C U U 0 U) W N O O O O K d y < Q O x w z U O 0 Fn Q 2 > J ~ Z a L' O Y U p[ Ui "' O W 0 w U @ N s ❑ W Q W O E V to � U m m j w O J < C _ y Z Z= o a r w O 2 � O p O (9 W w F— Q O U y d h N N N d Q (n O J w E E `w `w E E = w 2 wa 7 z z cn O O C m u m m a�i 2 a d y o - U U X 0 Z ❑ ❑ O O O n n O w W LL w w a E w a a a m Q= O LL m m d d E E E E E E m >> Q n>>?° v J(n 0 0 0 2 a e LL LL O O a a o a F e o o e a O O O) OI C! O 2 F- O O O O � z Q Q a H H Z w W m 0 O O O O O O O 0 O 0 0 O Z th V N 01 N r t0 r O M t7 O < m O O r O fD m C1 V Q O 0 Cl) N (n O m N N O W � N N q a O p w O � m W ° Z X ` W O W X W W t7 Y O O O m r O O 0 O 0 O 0 N 0 D O O O O ? r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 lf? 0 O 0 O 0 O N �q f* 0 O O 0 N O 0 N O V~i O O W aIn m N fD M N O� V a0 N V V9 6 W O r V1 N fA V 7 N O Yl �n t0 O O f9 O Of tl9 O V O N vD Vi O w O 0 CD � OU N N O K 19 V! N Vi di W f9 (A V! Vf fA M W M 4'1 M z in Y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 O 0 o 0 0 o 0 O s v v v v v v v o v v o v z w o o O lc> O z V 0 i c Z J Z _Q J Q LLI 2 < > H F.. W w W Z z C7 ui E a D_ w z O `y v O ° d K w a co m o h cr ¢ w v J ro ro Z W o m W w ° m " v v O L < ¢ N d dN U J y inp at1 > Y ` Y ` N L U) L U) N CL a' w >. m Q z ° L m p F- F- -° n ° n v v °' °' U) E a J U) m co a t~ y n n x o n° E m 3 E c c m ° >> a a v`°, m m a 0 w ❑ `m Y x m m `n U p m U m m a �° u S d> E E > a° n O a d H H m `m `m n m ° L cc m N m° m> U ` F m❑ W a s Lu, rn Q L i° io u v a�'i E ° 3: —° o L m ~ co F¢-- N N N T N r y IE N O O ~ X X ` U7 U1 �t U Z N L O O ❑ J N U �v j .- N U 2 U) L U) �n 2 co U Un m v m Ft ro v � Q _ w Z cn F- O N O O Z � v o r � V I q+ r m O a w 0 m LO O O N I y O m W Y O W F a. G V � N N d 3 x d W N � W L 0 O LL F— w o m m o � N c (� z P +_+ O ° U c _ ~ E W to z U O U z u Q � F- u J C O S a a O > O E W Y Y m 0 Q O W LL cr o U- O M P: a a � Y � 0 U O O w a � o w m o to to m F n N rn o n O N w N V N Q W z 2 W r x w W O O O tD tD N t0 N tD O of 0 0 to t0 N O O N It 0 OD O co tf n 7 to N t7 a [O s x cd I 0 O O C) O O C)l K 6 t0 t0 O t0 g z O' O C C W E a5 `m E E E T T H N W > 0 to N m > O O°° a w 0 m m a a M to O O r E E 2 d 2 W E E E E E E o ° o. n > ? > > to to LL LL 010 a a o_ a F N N N N z a H O) O m to 0 N N O 2 O? m M 0) N m tOn O th m N N N °w z W W O O O O 01 n 0 0 0 0 N 00 M O O OI O tT IN 0 0 0 0 )n ~ tC0 6 N N< w q m 0 N N u9 eA s9 rA sA w vi ds CD f0 1 10 tD ID N 1D W (O O1 0 :irl I^ dal m U) z a: 0 O p U O Fn y w > 5 O Q J F- z it LL O Y U CL w rA O w O F- W L) w to N o m w `o V m v U W O W J < tWnv z z C �- 0 tnW O $50 w m m m > 0 m W w o 0 0 m W z X W Q Q O cn W N W J LL W W a U R D W m m z:) F O m ¢ Z O > > Q m � m F O C 0 0 2 a e i ¢IQI V I I I °I ° of z W 0 0 0 O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O O O A z O O t7 O w O O O m O J O < N O Iq (D N 7 t0 Q O to N D) L) N w a � w m o W w z l � 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O n O N N to 0 0 to 0 0 w O N m O O O Y N p M W l0 N H O t0 N 19 N !A H O L) N z 10101 0 101 T", 0 0 C, 0 0 0 0 tti m tc F o0 o -- z Y cc F zz w W K W m QO K z 0 U W 2 O w z O y a. to o m `o 0 0 C N w m u 01 U .O .O z LL y Y O J Q a3 > ,� L D a 0 O m o 2 2 0 `ta n rn d U n m ° 3 y r `m _ w? Y O w O m d L L H m J) O a ° J N U a L~ t1 C X O E E C C N 7 u0i . d N w 7 0 N U O to °° U a o a to m E E n° °° 3 a m m a a n H '3 o 0 p v 7 rn N m J .- N n m (U O �` > v 2 75 `° 7 F- rn C 0 a ID O- L N W ¢ .� w O t0 L d 3 d 3 E O 0 L C L N ar U y C J Q N y 3 .� '- O X to ; C to C N '� C l0 x. X N N to C U t O V U 4) ° O O to J N U lh � N U N 2- T m N to f) L U N rn E 2 iD O U O_ N m o So F= _ m _ y O) fT > _ 1— O F zz w W K W m QO K z 0 U W 2 O w z Project Description Job No. RU5 7 �x"O AA�Y,) -poszl BLE T- 4!N4 � f - 7 77-4- M F i E _ 4L, -_ -7Z - 2 -?A63 7Z�-�S -- -S y DUE -7z). CA -To 1> 4-10/ 4D60 7AOl-7#, Sheet By Date Checked Date project Description i � /i �OP.0K�u2s�Z Job No. 7i T By Date Checked Date Sheet ` f Change Order #7 May 16, 2005 City of Encinitas Encinitas Blvd Trunk Sewer Replacement Raved mm* d Jq4 4909 Murphy Canyon Rd Ph 858496 -0500 San Diego, CA 92123 Fax 858- 496 -0505 Change Order #7 Record of Negotiation Date: May 16, 2005 Project No: Encinitas.003 Contractor: Metropolitan Construction P.O. Box 477 Bonita, Ca. 91908 Prepared by: Michael O'Shea Summary of Work Subject: Work done in vicinity of Saxony Rd. City W.O. #: CEE01 D Drawing Reference: Specification Reference: Report Reference: COR Reference: 10,11,12,13,14,15, 16,17,18,19 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 a) Excavate, remove and backfill concrete encased sewer main crossing Saxony Rd. to enable pipe bursting to continue per RFI #11 (See Contractor's reports 10, 12, 15 and 18). b) Excavate and backfill below 10 "RW for hammer clearance per RFI # 12 (See Contractor's reports 11 and 13). c) Excavate 8" sewer on Saxony and connect to MH 5 per RFI #13 (See Contractor's reports 14, 16,17, and 19). Justification for Entitlement a) Concrete encased existing sewer main under Saxony Rd. not shown on plans. b) Field location of 10" RW indicated only 6" clearance above existing sewer main. Excavation provided relief from hammer impact force on 10" RW during pipe bursting operations. c) After pipe bursting operations existing 8" sewer lateral invert no longer aligned with new sewer main for connection. CO #7 Page 1 of 1 Change Order #7 May 16, 2005 Additional Cost Requested by Contractor a) Remove Encased Sewer - $15,884.62 (Report 10), Excavate soil around pipe $3,962.02 (Report 12), Backfill- $3,959.03 (Report 15), Backfill- $2,990.22 (Report 18), Total Cost - $26,795.89 b) Excavation - $5,130.30 (Report 11), Backfill- $3,541.11 (Report 13), Total Cost - $8,671.41 c) Excvation - $9,281.34 (Report 14), Excavation - $2,219.61 (Report 16), Excavation - $608.59 (Report 17), Excavation - $4,925.98 (Report 19), Total Cost - $17,035.52 TOTAL COST REQUESTED BY CONTRACTOR FOR CHANGE ORDER #8 - $52,502.82 Negotiation Recommendation a) RFI #11 authorized the Contractor to proceed with work based on Time and Materials. The unit price provided by the Contractor in Bid Tab for open trench installation of a 12" sewer main is $155.25/LF. The encased sewer main crossing under Saxony Rd. is approximately 40LF. Recommend maximum compensation be open trench unit cost minus pipe materials cost for additional work. ($155.25 - $9=$146.25/LF where $9/LF cost for 12" HDPE provided by CostWorks.) plus the cost for demolition of encasement. Also included is cost for 4 hours of traffic control and sewer bypass on the days /nights where the demolition of the encasement took place (not the 11 hrs requested from the Contractor). RBA's on -site inspector verified approximate length of encased sewer removal and that work required did not exceed normal open cut trenching operations. Recommend total compensation for work completed- $10,338.55 b) RBA estimated cost for excavating and Backfill below 10 "RW for hammer clearance per RFI #12 including costs for 2 hours of traffic control as included on the Contractor's T &M tickets. Recommend total compensation for work completed- $1,253.55 c) RFI #13 instructs the Contractor to relocate an existing 8" sewer lateral. A unit price of $3220.00 for this work was provided by the Contractor as line item #16. Also included is compensation for half of the costs of traffic control and sewer bypass operations for this extra work. Recommend total compensation for work completed- $3,473.25 TOTAL COST AWARDED FOR CHANGE ORDER #8 - $15,065.35 Attachments Attachment A: Report Reference 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 COR #13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 Materials Cost sheet CO #7 Page 2 of 2 v O 0 0 a w O n W Y .Q W Q C ❑ E d Lo V O m N Q c'o d W W Y _J m L O Of W V w > r m o N lC C C W a r � Co LO t- N Ih O m Ol O m 0 � m OD N � M N O Q v a r M M Q M m N r N r C' n N 0) 6N n L 2 ONi OC Q OO N V r'.:. �- co IT OD It to O w L r zz K w m O p O CO m m m N N O m O N N m Q O O J J aQ K C6 m Y7 Q 10 N C7 Q m Q O m m O N amamc� (n U) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � vi w w ri w of m v w ri x U (� Q F- F- Z 0 O of LL. O U EL w w O w O w U @ @ U) U ❑ O w V N F 0 v E w Mv 0 < c m Z W aZ X Cl z 0 O WU w m a OU U) J W W N m W W W �' N 7 W m E >. m d W 10 W 'O U w W 0 O O W d m U a J O❑ Z p m a m m o Z E E m m m m a a o U) > W w w Z w LL m o n n ? -W0 CO >> LL LL O O a - ag i 3 co N O O a 0 e o e o 0 N N N O Z O O O O O O O O O O S TF Z Q O O O 0 f y) j w 1 z H W Z N N O O m N O O O O 0 0 0 O C7 O O 0 0 O 0 O O z Q w Q O O N O 0 N O N J .9 m N O 0 a m Q O N m O m Q h N N m N N N N f` ' Q m Q N w O 0 a O W w W w X W Z X w W Y O O 0 O 0 N O N Q - O O p n 0 O Of O Q M O 0 U1 0 O D O O O O O) O O O O O Q N O O N O O N O O y p FQ [� OI O Q Q O m 0 l0 t00 m m N O) Q O Vi m 10 m M O N O m ui m m N 6 I- N N fA O m Vi m O O w Q 69 N t9 )O V' K W t9 Vf W f9 4! O F m z O 0 O 0 O 0 O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O 0 O 0 O 0 O N w m Q N m K 'o N c O M = i Z a J Q Q J Q F- w a Z LLI N w Z W E u, w z a d `W o W .N d w w n m > m m m z J x J a8 y d O 9 W W O N a w W O d U U Z O LL U W K J N Y '" „ > F- O m U w U) a N N v o c� u ¢ N m o n m 0 Cc, w c O U m m a a E d m N N o o o ❑ i°W n D m O n n N W m L Q d ` X a J > cc iD N O N y O J O O cr N N H X (/ 16 W W L L Milli O r2 M Q Q w m m Q U W W U O U T I W U W E _ � N n Of O U) Z) U O C) O O N Pz- .- N Q O N t7 Q N O- N N N O N T N I I METROPOLITAN CONSTRUCTION 8614 Troy St. Phone (619) 741 5643 Fax (619) 741 -5658 REQUEST FOR INFORMATION # 11 February 28, 2005 Date: City of Encinitas/ Richard Brandy To: and Assoc. Attn: Kipp Hefner, Sean Manning From: Jose Ortiz Subject: 1' t con , is - Project Name: Encinitas Boulevard Trunk Sewer Replacement C.I.P. No.: CEEOD WIP No.: Contractor: Metr000litan Construction Contract No.: Drawing Ref: c -2 Soec. Ref: Needed ASAP Response By: Question: we discovered the sewer main While potholing the 16 inch water line at Saxony, appears to be concrete enandedto assure theehamm ertwillenotxdamage the swater to cas.' It is verify the encased area, line by deflecting a segment of concrete. The hammer will follow the path o least resistance, and in somebeacompensatedva.t. her open_trenchimprice_,ThIn MC proposed excavation work ma_y. addition,, ice —it is necessary to reme�ethethe contract. Pleased adviseeifrthisnis will perform on time and material p acceptable so we may proceed. By: Date: February 28, 2005 Originator =s Signature Reply /Solution Proceed with removal ofcthe concrete alconeaeTimen and oMaterialstbasis. T &M bursting. Proceed with tickets shall be signed by the resident inspector at the conclusion of the shift. Date: 2/28/05 By: 0 Sean Manning _' Design Consultant =s signature intended as a clarification only This document is informational only. The above reply is and does onot otcproceedtand notifyfthecConstructiont Manager 1immediately. If you do not or time. concur d Forwarded By: Date: Contracts Manager =s Signature h:�cenlral% ibrary,foms,UU27.wp6 X* N it re 0 a w m LO 0 0 N M' IR O a w Y 1 W C ¢ � O d In V O (O N n. Nm M d W Cl) >_ w Y J 0 o: O F- w ,d a > F m O N C C W u O a z U O F, U w O o � o H d m °- z n O v U c z o —° J O O y a O m t0 W w m Q: O O w LL O c O w a a Y � � U O � O aD V a0 F W O � V N O O M M" N 0 m o a m m Q m Q F M o m m w o rr o LO CD CO CO N 6) N In COO r- Cato N co to o Q m , n N Q r O p r N to co O> 0) 0 a N M M C V► O W O Z FW X W m O O J m O O co m m m N N O m O N to QO C GO 1� 10 to Q 1� Q �O m a O O 4 0 m m o N amam�� ❑Nw° x o °o °o• o 0 0 °o, m o S x x z U N m � O J z LL o: w a O w O w w p w v O m 0~ O ¢ ¢ E Q Q w w U a� E t o O z z= p a z w O m O ° w > ~ w m O c c U 0/ E E d E E y ¢ O Z Z m m v K U a o z m a�i z w ¢¢ O 0 O N > O n a n s m d `m o W w F W LL w w a N m w x x O z a a a K(r Y LL m m¢_ m¢ 0 m E E 'm m a a >> d d d 7 3 7 N N O O- 2 a e J m O O LL O LL Q a N a N a N a N F F e I a t o I a e O O O O O O O O O O O F O O O O z F F F u p u°'Y O N N y z N z O Q fD O p m < O O N W a a a 1. w W m z z xoc z X W W Y y o 0 0 °o O ° N O °o. O °" �1 O o m O y Ih r� O .n O o ° ° 0 0 0 0 O) 0 O o m O o Q N O o N o O O o F Q t7 �O O m Q ° O N O m m N Q °M N 19 N O N N m m N O f- N N W O m� "' O O O O U m t0 01 �» vi Vn w O t Y z w r Q ui o D o z o z x ¢ z ¢ Q J Q F- W Q I- > F_ a W W W w z Z z E a z °' a W W o ° 5 w z 0 m ° U1 W J u J .6 V Z w O W N t l0 w O L¢ y U O LL K O w N W N Y U O J N N Y U N Y •° C:) r a z O `w o w n m y o d 3 tEt: y u 2 2 H a °o `m ° Y � O w O l0 a N J V O1 F n n U 7 N J E L J U~ n 3 N Y W U y d o c m a n E m El E c w a y m m m m a o m .0 E a o o m u a o J x D m O O L E U Y o �, 30 a 001 ¢ L U T > ?~ L! 3 y `W v_ ; N N iC (n x V ... X y N N m m 3 H� t '� rn o " �' = � o U 0 N ' 'v N n n o m a ci 0 v o c _ � U 0 w� H 0 O C-1 V M O N O Z N Q O N (7 Q N O In N N N r (7 N N Q it r O a w w 0 CL w w a C ° d � LO V O R N_ N� LO li M O d d W w C Q 0 Li LL r w .a a uj r m o .N`_. 0 U W N z O U z F J O S- 0 w } m ° w O LL m w a it Y O O ^ n�LOCC! �MOMONCh N r o r ° N m v O> N p N lit O N N N CO M OI < r N M M M O GH O Z W r x w f0 O O fD t0 N (O N (D O J J Q K �Q f0 r< N Ln M Co V c0 O 0 0 Q m V w W Q m N 0 10 0 1n 0 N 0 N'1 O S at z 0 U fn Q> ~ J Z O w u, Y U a as i9 0 w O Q H u Ix w 0 w O U V 0< 0 Qm E U J w co Z O° z = Q f. a F" O Z m ~ O d ul -' N Q U1 O J W m E z z z c > m d m i