Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0850-72_Highland Haven Development Sewer Project - RDA_13.2Run Date: 09/29/92 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES CURRENT MONTH TO DATE BILLING FOR PROJECT: 066-20104 - BATCH -- - ITEM --- REPORT WORK CODE LINE CODE CLASS NUMB. DATE 91707 89 91707 90 91707 91 91707 92 16590 26795 26795 26795 0 0 co ? 01 02 03 04 09/21/92 09/21/92 09/22/92 09/23/92 Pago UNIT EXTENDED QUANTITY PRICE AMOUNT 41:1L1.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 GRAND TOTALS: NUMBER OF BILLING LINES: 4 / C05 % 5 9-24 9,119. 79..5 9/y 6 001,0 .1irto/oe * 9 a 5 f- 3 4(32 r �a� 90.00 34.00 34.00 34.00 AMOUNT BILLED: 90.00 68.00 136.00 136.00 430.00 90 °° 654, 9a� • REDEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING DEPARTMENT WORK REQUEST TO: Engineering DATE: July 1, 1992 You are authorized to record labor charges as follows: seg .... PROJECTiTfitt.'"""::::::=1:ii::::........ .. ....Performance: Penod :::::.:.:.:::::::.............,..x.:.:::.x.:;:.x...:.:•:•.•:•:•:•:•:•:•:.:.:•:•:•:•:•:.:.:.:,,,...:•::...... ....... ....Labor :•:::::::•:•:•:•..........:•:•:.:.......,:•:.,,x.x.:,..,:. .. .....:•:::::•:•::::.::: ... _ 'iiidaii:iii:.iii.:iiiiiiiiiiiiiinEa fitoliriiiiiiii:.iii . ::::: •••• :::: :::: • '',':':::iii:ii*,i:ii*::.i:ii?...iiii:ii...]:.i:::iii:,:if..i:.. .. ••• .i.......:::.:::.,,,,,,,,,, iiiiiiiiii:.iiiiiiiiMinn:::i ...,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,......: f- ii:::?:i*:ii:i:::.giii:.Miiiiiiiiiiiiii,:in ...... ......,..,:,...,,,,,,,,,..:::,:::::::. CDBG - Downtown Streetlight Project 7/1/92 10/1/92 031 6973 MOCK Sttnent.�t Work:: Construction bid assistance, construction contract administration and construction administration. (POST TIME TO PROGRAM NUMBER 031-6973 Commercial Revitalization) : i• • " • "" Yousuf Patanwala (C.Con.A) Jim Rankin (Con. Insp.) Don Gilbertson (Eng. Tech II) Yousuf Patanwala 40 $1,540 Jim Rankin 80 $2,323 Don Gilbertson 30 792 OrpmzaUon • • • • Authorized By: • - • • n _ • • • - • . - . c=m1c-ii-3?1,11'scirisel-- ..- - -J. -• .- - . loject Manager ,/91 , iDeputment Budget Administrator 111,c,.... Redevelopment & Housing anager Accepted By: Supervisor P.NG City of Fontana HIGHLAND.XLS/2/23/93/jdj 1992-93 Community Facilities Districts Labor Charges Highland/Haven City Construction Services Employee Employee Total Name Number Posistion Hours Hrly Rate w/ benefits Total Labor Charge R. Weddle 9085 City Engineer 6.50 $57.50 $373.75 J. Jamerson 90401 Admin. Analyst II $32.62 . $0.00 W. Pinsak 6331 Admin. Analyst I $31.03 $0.00 L. Rombaugh 7126 Acct. Tech. $26.10 $0.00 M. Hamilton 2505 Secertary 2.00 $20.38 $40.76 C. Eastland 1785 Secertary $20.38 $0.00 Y. Valenzulea 90825 Admin. Clerk II $15.95 $0.00 F. Molinos 4981 Principal Engr. 19.00 $44.94 $853.86 M. Alturk 150 Asso. Engr. 32.00 $34.27 $1,096.64 J. Tesley 8405 Engr. Tech. 11 2.00 $28.81 $57.62 R. Cota 1493 Principal Engr. $41.71 $0.00 E. Casasola 1272 Asso. Engr. $37.78 $0.00 R. Sandoval 7300 Asst. Engr. $34.23 $0.00 G. Martinez 4358 Engr. Tech. II $28.81 $0.00 C. Narvarro 5370 Asso. Engr. 5.00 $37.78 $188.90 B. Savant 7310 Sr. Inspector $29.55 $0.00 J. Rankin 6690 Sr. Inspector 1037.50 $28.14 $29,195.25 C. Edwards 1825 P.W. Inspec. 52.50 $24.85 $1,304.63 W. Brown 1107 P.W. Inspec. 8.00 $24.85 $198.80 B. Buster 1180 Landscape Tech. $25.47 $0.00 G. Bucknell 1150 Principal Engr. $47.19 $0.00 Y. Patanwala 5798 Asso. Engr. 84.00 - $37.78 $3,173.52 J. Riley " 6968 Asso. Engr. $35.98 $0.00 D. Gilbertson 2305 Engr. Tech. II 105.00 $28.81 $3,025.05 H. Foley 2091 Engr. Tech. 11 $24.83 $0.00 C. Sweet 8384. Principal Engr, 8.00 $51.94 $415.52 H. Childress 1364 Asso. Engr. 4.00 $37.78 $151.12 K. Irvin 2875 Asso. Engr. $35.98 $0.00 K. Chitwood 1365 Asst Engr. $32.60 $0.00 A. Branstetter 1049 Engr. Tech II 16.00 $28.81 $460.96 R. Gardner 2230 Engr. Tech I $23.65 $0.00 P. Bartley 541 Engr. Tech I $22.52 $0.00 M. Greenwood 2340 Asst. Engr. $31.05 $0.00 K. Kramer 3750 Engr. Tech I $28.81 $0.00 TOTALS 1381.50 - $40,536.38 Engineering Division Page 1 CITY OF FONTANA California MEMORANDUM TO: MAGGIE PACHECO, REDEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR FROM: BOB MEDDLE, CITY ENGINEER RE: HIGHWD/HAYEN PROJECT DATE: NOVEMBER 6. 1991 As we discussed, here are some budgetary cost comparison figures to do some programming for your project. These figures do not include your right of way costs, nor your division's time on the project. It also includes some preliminary items for both divisions cross reimbursements. However, it should be a good reference point for your current and future negotiations with consultants for their services. As such, the J. F. Davidson proposal for construction survey services seems too high from a percent of construction cost comparison and from a production crew perspective. Before you contract for those services, I would be willing to help you review their work sheets from which they derived their fees to see if I overlooked something. Additionally, their design costs while not totally out of line for the special street design (i.e. have to design ultimate street before they design interim) seems to be on the upper end. When the final product is delivered, I can do a production, street count analysis if you want to see how design costs are estimated for PS & E. These items are for our next meeting. Call me if you have any questions. RWW:sh Enclosure CC: D. Gee F. Molinos HIGHLAND HAVEN PROJECT Review of updated J. F. Davidson Cost Estimates June 1991 Fee District Report by R.W. Weddle, City Engineer A. Hard Costs (including 10% contingency) Phase I (see attached) Sewer (including interim pavement replacement) Storm Drain Subtotal Phase II Street Improvements RDA Reimbursement Analysis Subject to sewer fund reimbursement for H/H constructing upsized 21 inch sewer Tentative 10% Contingency Total Cost $257,500 25,750 $283,250 $1,156,797 554.398 $1,711,195 922,829 $2,634,024 JFD Est. Eligible Reimbursement to RDA $112,600 11.200 $123,860 Final percentage reimburseable to RDA as per normal City policy. Presently being updated in conjunction with City updating Master Plan of Sewers by NBS/Lowry. Note: Consider MPD reimbursement for lines over 48" from any new fees for H/H B. Phase I Summary: 1. Hard Costs 2. Soft Costs Design Engineering Sewer Storm Drain 10% contingency $79,620 $69,250 $14,887 Design Cost Comparison (see attached) ASCE "B" Curve $1,711,195 (5.8%) _ $99,249 ASCE "A" 1,711,145 (7.2%) _ $123,206 Design Survey (including potholing) per JFD Sewer $23,900 Storm Drain $10,000 10% Contingency $ 3,390 $1,711,195 $ 163,757 37,290 Design Soils Engineer Costs ? Plan Check cost per City fee table for $1,711,195 project = $39,814 Final T & M Webb Bill 32,000 (NTE) Estimated Project costs up to bid award $1,912,242 • C. Construction Engineering Costs 1. Construction Surveys JFD T &.M NTE $ 136,780 NOTE: Normal Typical Projects run 1.5% Design Survey, 2.5% Construction Survey) 1.5% (2,634,024) = $39,510 vs. $37,290 budget 2.5% (1,711,195) = $42,780 vs. $136,780 budget 3.0% (1,711,195) = $51,336 vs. $136,780 budget This item needs to be restudied as three sets of stakes plus re-establishing survey monuments is not typical, but due to the cost variance these numbers need to be revisited. Normally a two to three person production survey crew should be able to place on a very rough budgetary basis 800' 1200' of stakes per day for sewers, 1000' to 1200' per day for storm drains and 1200' to 1800' per day for streets (reference D.L. Weddle, L.S. No. 5570) plus $2880 for 10-12 survey monuments replaced. (see attached) Using JFD rates for a three person crew of $180/hr. plus $95/hr office coordination management: Sewer 11,590 ft. = 9.65 say 10 days 1,200 ft./day Storm drain 2,980 ft. = 2.5 say 3 days 1,200 ft./day Street Est. 440.000 SF = 17,600 ft. long 25' wide 17.600 ft. = 9.77 say 10 days 1,800/day Construction survey (3 person) 23 days @ $180/hr (8 hr/day) $33,120 Office - 40 hours at $95/hr. 3,800 Monument replacement 2.880 2 days @ $180/hr (8 hr/day) �— Subtotal $39,800 10% Contingency 3.980 TOTAL $43,780 Soils testing - assume 1%, say $17,000 vs. $32,000 (JFD estimate) plus 10% contingency 1. Construction Management and Administration $ 18,700 Estimate 214 hours Salary costs incl. payroll overhead (Principal Eng) 214 (33.65 x 1.40) = 214 (47.11) = $10,080 Comparison to JFD estimate = $26,780 15.000 Subtotal 41,780 = 400 hours 10% Contingency 4,178 $45,958 1' • 3. Construction Inspection a. Private firm Private engineer 3% (1,711,195) = $51,335 JFD Estimate $60,000 35.000 Subtotal $95,000 10% Contingency 9.500 $104,500 @ 63/hr = 1659 hours = 9.6 manmonths Bid Spec Const. Time = working days b. City staff Alternate No. 1 - Direct Payroll Costs If 4 hours per day City Inspector for 4 months x 352 hours Senior P.W. Inspector say $40,000/yr. 1800 hours avail. $22.22/hr. (140) = $31.11/hr. @ 352 = $10,951 if 8 hrs/day = $31.11/hr. @ 704 = $21,902 Alternate No. 2 - Pyaroll plus DMG OH Facor (102%) using 1800 hours available to work Senior P.W. Inspector say $40,000/yr. $22.22/hr (2.02) = $44.89/hr. @ 352 = $15,800 $44.89/hr. @ 704 = $31,600 Alternate No. 3 - Per City Fee Table $4,290 $48,336 (3% 1,611,195) $52,626 for $1,711,195 if 55/hr. = 956 hours if 63/hr = 835 hours PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Highland Haven project consists of the design and construction of infrastructure facilities for this previously developed residential property. The infrastructure improvements. include the following: Sanitary Sewer, Trench Repair and Street Overlay Storm Drain Installation Street Improvements including Pavement, Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk The location of the above facilities is generally bound by Highland Avenue on the north, Walnut Street on the south, Citrus Avenue on the east and the westerly tract boundary of Tr. 3348 on the west. Exhibits "A", "B" and "C" indicate the location and describes the facilities to be constructed. The facilities to be constructed are: Sanitary Sewer 8" sewer main - 8,815 LF. 21" sewer main - 2,775 LF. Manholes and Services 3 1 J J 1 Storm Drain 18" reinforced concrete pipe 24" reinforced concrete pipe 30" reinforced concrete pipe 36" reinforced concrete pipe 42" reinforced concrete pipe 48" reinforced concrete pipe 54" reinforced concrete pipe 60" reinforced concrete pipe 90 L.F. 295 L.F. 510 L.F. 395 L.F. 400 L.F_ 890 L.F. 395 L.F. ' 5 L.F. Manholes, Junction Structures and Catch Basins Street Curb and Gutter - 25,000 L.F. A.C. Pavement and Base 440,000 S.F. P.C.C. Sidewalk - 96,850 S.F. Residential Driveways - 393 EA Relocations, Handicap Ramps, and Miscellaneous Removals 4 e Table No 1 Estimate of Probable Costs for Highland Haven - City of Fontana Sanitary Sewer and Pavement Replacement - Alternate "A" Construction Costs 8" Sanitary Sewer $ 542,494.00 21" Sanitary Sewer 257,500.00 Pavement Replacement 251 640.00 Subtotal $1,051,634.00 Contingency (10%) 105,163.00 Total Construction Cost $1,156,797.00 Engineering, Surveys & Management Costs Engineering $ 79,620.00 Design Survey (includes Potholing) 23,900.00 Construction Surveys 65,000.00 Construction Soils Testing 20,000.00 Construction Management & Administration 26,780.00 Construction Inspection 60,000.00 Subtotal $ 255,300.00 Contingency (10%) 25,530.00 Total Engineering, Surveys, Etc. $ 280,830.00 Total Project Costs $1,437,627.00 Less Sewer oversizing Costs (21 " to 8") Construction $112,600.00 Engineering (10%) 11,260.00 Net Project Costs 123,860.00 $1,313,767.00 Table No 3 Estimate of Probable Costs for Highland Haven - City of Fontana Storm Drains Storm Drain Construction Costs 18" Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP) $ 4,600.00 24" Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP) 21,900.00 30" Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP) 25,610.00 36" Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP) 30,590.00 39" Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP) 31,760.00 42" Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP) 1,131.00 48' Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP) 3,016.00 51" Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP) 143,400.00 60" Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP) 1,120.00 Drainage Structures 240,871.00 Subtotal $ 503,998.00 Contingency (10°/0) 50,400.00 Total Construction Costs $554,398.00 Engineering, Surveys, & Management Engineering $ 69,250.00 Design Surveys 10,000.00 Construction Surveys 33,260.00 Construction Soils Testing 12,000.00 Construction Management 15,000.00 Construction Inspection 35,000.00 Subtotal $174,510.00 Contingency (10%) 17,451.00 Total Engineering, Survey, Mgmt. $191,961.00 Total Project Costs $746,359.00 7 i(► ( ()N't'I.IIN(, 1 \t.1\1 1 ILI\t. ( ()NSI I IIti(, I NtI\I 1 RIN(. 14 13 12 11 10 0 A 9 c C N E 0 m 8 7 6 5 c$ 'Isks,:- :`,,,-, Cur vlel0A6- 13 97'.I Ili 111111 UlIIIflhIUIIllI in I 1111111 III ell IRO I R�1 1111111 IIIIII � 111 II IlIlIlIOlIl 001 005 0.1 05 1 . 5 10 Net construction cost, in mil' o's of dollars 0 FIG. 1. -- CURVE A. MEDIAN COMPENSATION FOR BASIC SERVICES EXPRESSED AS A PERCENTAGE OF CONSTRUCTION COST FOR PROJECTS OF ABOVE -AVERAGE COMPLEXITY (1974) 14 13 12 11 10 c c 0 o 9 W Q E 0 c O 8 7 5 4 _r. _. _ _— T— 1111 1 1 1 1 11111 1 1 I 1 Net construction ;, from cost Curve H-19/4 $ 100.000 9 01 200,000 8 1 1 500.000 100 1,000,000 6 22 5.000.000 5 32 10.000.000 4 97 50,000.000 4 68 ,. 1. .. i1 1 - 4 100,000.000 4 61 i . \ 001 0.05 0.1 0 5 1 5 10 Net construction cost, in millions of dollars 50 100 I(i. 2. CURVE B. MEDIAN COMPENSATION FOR BASIC SERVICES I XPRI SSE') AS A PERCENTAGE OF CONSTRUCTION COST FOR PROJECTS 01 AVE RAGI COMPLEXITY (1974) 28 CONSULTING ENGINEERING services to be perfomred by the Consulting Engineer he fully set forth in the agreement. Such agreements also provide for appropriate adjustments in the fixed payment, in the event that the physical scope of the project, time for completion, or the services required are materially increased over that contemplated during the negotiations. The principal contingency for the Engineer, with cost -based methods, lies in failure to spell out, in sufficient detail all the reirnbursible items. Where this list is not complete the client's auditor may unreasonably reject certain items of cost which are not included in the Agreement. 5. Fixed Lump -Sum Payment This method of compensating Consulting Engineers is used frequently for investigations and studies and for basic services on design -type projects when the scope of the assignment to he undertaken can be clearly and fully defined. Two methods are generally used to arrive at a lump -sum compensation for the basic services on design -type projects. The first of these is the computation of a lump sum as an appropriate percentage of the estimated construction cost of the project. The second is direct development of a fixed amount of compensation, by estimating the individual elements of the engineering cost outlined in the forego- ing section, plus a reasonable margin of profit, all expressed as a single lump sum. These two methods are frequently used concurrently, each as a check on the other. For arriving at a lump sum compensation for investigations and studies, the second of the two preceding methods is generally used. Where consultation is undertaken on a lump -sum basis, the agreement should contain a clearly stated time limit during which the services will be performed, and a provision for additional compensation for time in excess of that stated. In design assignments, there should be a provision for changes required after the approval of preliminary designs, with a clear understanding as to where the final approval authority lies. Payments on this basis should be made to the Consulting Engineer at stated times (usually once a month) during the execution of the work. .-6. Percentage of Construction Cost This method has been widely used fordetermining the compensation of Consult- ing Engineers on assignments where the principal responsibility is the design of various works, and the preparation of drawings, specifications, and other contract documents necessary for the description of facilities to be constructed. '"Construction cost" is defined as ibe total cost to the Client for the execution of the work authorized at one lime and handled in each separate phase of engineering services, excluding fees or other cost for engineering and legal services, the cost of land. rights -of -way, legal and administrative expenses, but including the direct cost to the client of all construction contracts; items of construc- tion, including labor, materials, and equipment; required for the completed work (including extras) and the total value at site of project of all labor, materials, and equipment purchased or furnished directly by the Client for the project. CONSULTING ENGINEERING 29 - Over the years, engineering experience has established some approximate correlations between engineering costs and construction costs, for certain types of engineering design, where design procedures and materials of construction are more or less standardized. These correlations have resulted in various curves and schedules which have been widely used — so much so that they are sometimes mistakenly regarded as fixed bases of compensation for design projects of any kind. The validity of the percentage -of -construction -cost method rests upon the assumption that engineering costs vary in proportion to the cost of construction, irrespective of the location or type of construction undertaken. This is a ques- tionable assumption; however, it is not intended to imply that these assumed relationships between engineering costs and construction costs are no longer of value. When judiciously applied, and with the due consideration of the ranges within which engineering scope may vary, they remain valuable as tools for general comparison with lump -sum or salary -plus -multiplier charges for design services. Their acceptance over many years also affords a valuable guide for judging the reasonableness of proposals for engineering services. Many design assignments are negotiated by means of two or more of the foregoing methods of compensation. Quite frequently the preliminary phase of the assignment may be undertaken for a fixed lump sum, especially where the resultant report may be required to establish the project's feasibility, or where the preliminary phase will involve planning for deferred stages of construction. In such cases, the compensation for the preliminary and design phases is combined as a proportionate part of the percentage charge from the curves, and a pro-rata credit allowed for lump -sum payment for the preliminary phase. In other cases, the preliminary phase may be undertaken separately, on the basis of salary cost times a multiplier, and the design and construction phases computed from curves, with appropriate reduction of the percentage compensation. The curves presented in Figs. 1 and 2 represent median compensation, com- puted as a percentage of "construction cost," necessary to permit Consulting Engineers in the United States to serve their Clients with the degree of technical competence demanded by modern engineering standards. The curves reflect the composite experience and judgment of Consulting Engineers throughout the United States developed from responses to a detailed questionnaire sent out by the Society in 1974 to 2,089 consultants. Obviously, the appropriate compensa- tion for a given assignment may vary above or below the curves shown in Figs. I and 2, depending on the various factors which have been discussed in the forego- ing sections. While these curves may be an appropriate basis for initiating discussions with u client. the final compensation should be determined by negotiation following detailed discussion of the scope of services and the elements of the cost of engineering. 32 ('ONSULIIN(i I N(,INI.I,KIN(, CONSULTING ENG1NI•1-.KIN(, These curves afford compensation only forthe basic services outlined in Section II. The special services, also described in Section 11, may add substan- tially to the total engineering cost of the project. These special services arc furnished either directly by the Client, or by the Consulting Engineer, usually on the basis of salary cost times a multiplier. For special services, the multiplier averages 2.4, except for field staff employed for the purposes of the assignment. when the multiplier averages 2.3. Direct non -salary costs for special services are reimbursed at invoice cost plus a surcharge for overhead and handling of from 10% to 15%. Curve A in Fig. 1 is intended to apply to assignments of which the following are typical examples: a. Airports with extensive terminal facilities; h. Water, wastewater, and industrial waste treatment plants; c. Bridges which are asymmetric or are otherwise complicated; d. Public and office buildings; e. Power plants; f. Large dams or complicated small dams; g. Highways* and urban and suburban arterial streets; h. Grade crossing eliminations; i. Highway and railway tunnels; j. Pumping stations; k. Incinerators; I. Intercepting and relief sewers; m. Sanitary sewer lines under 24 in. in diameter; n. Water distribution lines under 16 in. in diameter; o. Complicated waterfront and marine terminal facilities; p. Foundations; q. Large sports stadia; and r. Additions to or reconstruction of projects classified in Curve B. Curve B in Fig. 2 is intended to apply to less complex assignments of which the following are examples: a. Industrial buildings, warehouses, garages, hangars, and comparable struc- tures; b. Bridges and other structures of conventional design; c. Simple waterfront facilities; d. Railways; e. Roads and streets; f. Conventional levees, flood walls, and retaining walls; g. Small dams; •Extensive pertinent information regarding these classifications may he found in the current edition of the American Road Builders' Association Technical Bulletin No. 253. AREA, 525 School Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20024. h. Sewer and water tunnels (free -air); i. Storm sewers and drains; j. Sanitary sewers 24 in_ and larger; k. Water distribution lines 16 in. and larger; I. Irrigation works, except pumping plants; and m. Airports except as classified for Curve A. The curves in Figs. 1 and 2 represent median compensation for the three phases of the basic services described in Section II. For the purpose of establish- ing charges for the separate phases the following ranges of allocations apply in a very general way: Preliminary Phase - up to 40% of basic compensation Design Phase — up to 90% of basic compensation Construction Phase — up to 15% of basic compensation For each separate phase, the percentage charge from the curves (Figure. r 2) is applicable to the construction cost of the work authorized by the Cliein that phase. Once the percentage for each of the three phases (Preliminary Phase, Design Phase, and Construction Phase) has been agreed upon with the Client, both the percentage and the scope of the phase should be clearly spelled out in the agreement. It should be understood that each of these three separate percentages for the Preliminary Phase, Design Phase and Construction Phase are to be used as a multiplier to be applied to the value read from the curves in Figures 1 or 2. For each separate phase the agreed percentage multiplied by the value read from the curves is applicable to the construction cost for that particular phase. For example, the work authorized for preliminary design may be greater than that authorized for final design and construction. The percentage charges from the curves are normally applicable to each con- struction contract for which separate designs and contract documents are to be prepared, or where different fields of construction are involved. Partial payments for the preliminary and design phases usually are made at monthly intervals, based on monthly statements submitted by the Engijigr. Partial payments in the construction phase are made monthly, usually cte basis of contractor's monthly estimates. Charges for special services are usually billed on a monthly basis. On small projects, the Engineer may prefer to bill upon completion of each phase, or on some similar basis. Time Overruns Beyond Control of the Engineer Frequently the Engineer is required to extend the anticipated design period and to continue technical observation services on construction contracts overrunning the program schedule contemplated at the time of negotiation of the Engineer's compensation. In most instances, the time element is beyond the control of the Engineer. To provide for the contingency of overrun of time, the agreement between the Client and the Engineer should state the period for which the j • RECORD OF TELEPHONSCONVERSATION CITY OF FONTANA Date /0/2e/9 / Individual , 2 2 ve /A,/ec%//e Organization ,U. L. k./e mod/ Items Discussed PG 5 = SS 7 U v9 CaHJ -7 Job No. By �3G b 14 /e//c/le Project Sir �/e y Cu S,L: ✓1G .6i e.>...-a>4. ,471.'9f�/a.,�.�ave� /'raj. %4SSvG/ s Phone No No Z "er/GN,7 c r ew p,er•/ti-, Ga....r.,„/ '/ G.,- • e v ery epp.-ux. pA Qr,e c e//.-;,/ sewer/4 /d "4-e S ..0; fe'o- /2'o/day f /0Qufr,y, / L‘"‘ldek, / 2 / / 2 4.u/d//,, /&0 �/cdly - 37Z- Z/6Z "o Je/2P,G I/ s E wvr .574�rr.+ Wed. v, - J 7 �„ee.J Z s' 5 743.16.:.,. J / vto/ /a!erd../ siaker s ec••e,-/C si��- c2.-a. N �n� 1�.�+ C . eoretlr..r s 7/air-e t r .74i/r, / sf'.Pa - S e p 14 A4.ItiS 4 ✓erf��.� // .4, LL AL, sir e S�Jb 9 rcpe 6" Z S / _tA. -A L., J v er/" G..r v w .62./4. GU.T/rdc�Tn� e G r / i /- e/7 /.. c e .S' c 4-04- /-yl ur! ✓..+ e. t-ii J '/ redo Gw2- e .�Q�ui� o� tlo�o v�JcSr✓e/. .4) /2: �Z oP ci Je GBr-i er -ec c. r cl ciS J ce•cortf.ri+J ,f-ee i r/.a C - S- vPam/.r p /z.. Gb e.rk f=ec . / S Go s A - 2000 J, p r-eAdre , L 7Gam- Ply f�c .� cc.-��,� s�rvey /Se,:-,- -. 2. s Z L���f. L0:f. .-iy Curie/,► •r+•. , h.'.f O/o/ TKO- DJe,-/' v f'.ce Irloii�.•ygi c.1/e�G/ Comments or Action Required 2- f 3. 0 Z o o �a�' �t Hof / 7/lee Pry/20J..,6 24 G 4 eG� S'c✓OQr✓. 1..� S✓rVPyu#- 62 es { J .D /3i/ z - /40/h.,- - 3 (Vi O7"�Ime- J/»' Y/0 op6i/Cp/fC:K pert perSGy Cor.,er /2QC-A..-o/ P€.a y / how- e-ac..4. ^"- / .. /0 - /ds.i 2. cej.,f,1 y4Lp / 6 Q it oG h'r • - Z AFJ BSI-P006 2/80 "X nc • Notes from a • C9WCH POTATO c-).a-r ,' /✓, rG✓� /J 1) C•10 Cc� • R r �7— J P 11. iv 3) S.7f A, .o..., �,..�..�..._ s o • is ir►-�.. GG /0 4 4'_1/464>IZI J/,.d = -35-2_ 41 es.-a--so..- armet Redevelopment & Housing Work Request To: BOB WEDDLE, CITY ENGINEER FELIPE MOLINOS, PRINCIPLE CIVIL ENGINEER DATE 9/13/91 You are authorized to record labor charges as follows: Project Title Performance Period Labor Charge Number From To Fund Program Object NORTH FONTANA — LOW/MOD•• 1. HIGHLAND HAVEN PROJECT 9/13/91 9/13/9, 010 1742 **** Statement of Work 1 �. Provide Engineering support on the Highland Haven Project 2 3 4 Estimated Costs 5. 800 hours 6. 7. .4009.099900 Authorized By: /V Project Manager Division Budget Administration Riew (?.4,Y;rttdo2 Redevelopment & Housing Manager Accepted By: Supervisor RDAWAA.XLS, 8/22/91