Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-086 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BEACH PRESERVATION PLAN WORK ORDER NO. 4 TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN COASTAL TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION, INC . AND INDIAN RIVER COUNTY , FLORIDA Pursuant to the Professional Services Agreement (MASTER AGREEMENT) dated December 13 , 2005 , and amended December 13 , 2008 by and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as the COUNTY, and COASTAL TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION, INC . , with a Florida office in VERO BEACH, FL . , hereinafter referred to as the CONSULTANT, this WORK ORDER No . 4 is an extension of and hereby becomes a part of the MASTER AGREEMENT as follows : SECTION I - PROJECT DESCRIPTION Services included in this Work Order are only approved to be Task I — Solicitation and Task lb — Evaluation of Proposals and are specified in the attached Scope of Work included as Exhibit "A" SECTION II - COUNTY OBLIGATIONS The COUNTY agrees to provide the CONSULTANT with the following material , data, or services as required in connection with the work to be performed under this Work Order : A. Currently available studies, survey drawings, plans, calculations, and other data pertinent to the Project . B . Review and comment on CONSULTANTS work in a timely fashion . SECTION III SCOPE OF SERVICES CONSULTANT will provide services as specified in the attached Scope of Work included as Exhibit " A" SECTION IV - TIME FOR COMPLETION After the COUNTY issues a written authorization to proceed , all work shall be completed on or before March 24, 2010 unless project delays extend the time of completion . C :\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\JGRAY\LOCAL SETTINGS\TEMPORARY INTERNET FILES\OLKD\COASTAL TECH WO NO 4 HG�G1VtG1V 1 J 1 / V7. Wl. SECTION V COMPENSATION The COUNTY agrees to pay, and the CONSULTANT agrees to accept fees for Task la — Solicitation and Task lb — Evaluation of Proposals services rendered according to the attached Cost Proposal included as Exhibit "B" . SECTION VI = PARTIAL PAYMENTS The COUNTY shall make monthly partial payments to the CONSULTANT for all authorized work pertaining directly to this project performed during the previous calendar month The CONSULTANT shall submit invoices monthly for services performed and expenses incurred pursuant to this Agreement during the prior month . The CONSULTANT shall submit duly certified invoices to the Director of the Public Works Department . For lump sum line items, the amount submitted shall be the prorated amount due for all work performed to date under this phase, determined by applying the percentage of the work completed as certified by the CONSULTANT , to the total due for this phase of the work . For each invoice, the CONSULTANT shall certify that the total invoice amount is correct . The amount of the partial payment due the CONSULTANT for the work performed to. date under these phases shall be an amount calculated in accordance with the previous paragraph, less ten percent ( 10%) of the invoice amount thus determined, which shall be withheld by the COUNTY as retainage, and less previous payments . The ten percent ( 10%) retainage withheld shall be paid in full to the CONSULTANT by the COUNTY, within forty-five days after the date of final acceptance of the work by the Director of Public Works . Billings shall be payable in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Prompt Payment Act, Florida Statutes section 218 . 70 et. seq. at not less than monthly intervals . No payment shall be made unless the Public Works Director has received and approved the work products required under the " Scope of Services" herein . C :\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\JGRAY\LOCAL SETTINGS\TENIrRARY INTERNET FILES\OLKD\COASTAL TECH WO NO 4 t-LWAZZIV1EIYT J I % VY. "G SECTION VII - RELATIONSHIP TO MASTER AGREEMENT AND LAWS OF FLORIDA Pursuant to paragraph 1 . 4 of the Agreement, nothing contained in any WORK ORDER shall conflict with the terms of the Agreement and the terms of the Agreement shall be deemed to be incorporated in each individual WORK ORDER as if fully set forth herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed these presents this 24th day of March , 2009. COASTAL TECHNOLOGY INDIAN RIVER COUNTY , FLORIDA CORPORATION , INC . BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 3625 20TH STREET VERO BEACH , FL 32960 - / / f . / Michael Walther, P . E Wesley S . Davis, President Chairman JEFFREY K . BARTON, CLERK Attest : APPROVED BY : � Ji!6 I eph A. it , County Administlatdr Approved as to form and legal suffiienc Marian E. Fell Senior Assistant County Attorney CADOCUMENTS AND SE'l 1INGSUTI IOMPSON\LOCAL SETTING3)TEMPORARY INTERNET FILEMOLK7MCOASTAL TECH WO NO 4 AGREEMLN' C 3 17 09 (2 ). DOC Indian River County E X H 1 B I T Upland Sand Source Evaluation cope o or Upland Sand Source Evaluation & Permitting For Sector 3 Beach Nourishment Introduction : On March 3 , 2009 the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners directed County staff to amend the Joint Coastal Permit (JCP ) application for the proposed Sector 3 Beach and Dune Restoration Project to allow use of upland sand sources as an alternate source of fill material . The objective of this Scope of Services is to ( a) identify upland sand sources for the supply of suitable sand for the Sector 3 Project , and (b ) formulate and submit an amendment to the JCP application for the proposed Sector 3 Project to allow use of upland sand sources . The following describes the work under this Scope of Work : TASK 1 — UPLAND SAND SOURCES In general , COASTAL TECH will assist the COUNTY with formulation and execution of a solicitation to identify acceptable upland sand sources . Task la — Solicitation : COASTAL TECH will identify minimum " Geotechnical Standards" for beach fill based upon : ■ existing governing statutes ( 161 F . S . ) and rules (628 - 33 & 621341 F . A . C . ) . ■ compatibility with native beach material characteristics based upon : mean grain size, percent fines , sorting , percent carbonate , and Munsell color ( wet/dry) . COASTAL TECH will formulate " Geotechnical Requirements " for documentation of upland sand sources — to be provided by potential upland sand suppliers ; such requirements shall include : ■ a topographic survey of the upland sand source site , ■ a sufficient number of core borings to define the sub - surface stratigrapghy , ■ sediment characteristics for each sediment layer including : (a) grain size distribution including specific sieve sizes , mean grain size, percent fines , and sorting (b ) percent carbonate ( c) Munsell color (wet/dry) . ■ sediment characteristics ( see above) for processed sand material with a description of the processing methods , ■ upland sand assays - summarizing the above - signed and sealed by a Professional Geologist , ■ representative samples ( 1 , 500 — 2 , 000 grams) of the sand fill proposed to be provided . The COUNTY will prepare a Draft Solicitation for prospective contractors to provide and deliver sand for nourishment of COUNTY beaches ; the Draft Solicitation shall include : ■ Geotechnical Standards , ■ Geotechnical Requirements , and ■ Sand Placement Requirements . The COUNTY will provide the Draft Solicitation to COASTAL TECH for review and meet with COASTAL TECH to finalize the Solicitation . The County will incorporate revisions as may be warranted . The COUNTY shall publish the Solicitation , address questions of prospective bidders and receive responses from bidders . The COUNTY shall provide copies of all responses to COASTAL TECH . Pagel of 3 March 17 , 2009 Indian River County Upland Sand Source Evaluation Scope or work. Task lb — Evaluation of Proposals : COASTAL TECH will review the data submitted to the COUNTY by prospective suppliers for compliance with the minimum Geotechnical Standards ; based upon this review , COASTAL TECH will rank the top potential suppliers for further analysis (up to six ( 6) respondents ) . COASTAL TECH will meet with the COUNTY to review the results and confirm the prospective suppliers to be further assessed . For the top 6 potential suppliers , COASTAL TECH will review the "upland sand assays" and rank the overall ability of the prospective bidder to meet the requirements of the Solicitation — as represented by the prospective supplier . COASTAL TECH will meet with the COUNTY to review the results . TASK 2 — SECTOR 3 PROJECT In general , for the Sector 3 Beach and Dune Restoration Project , subsequent to a written Notice- to - Proceed from the COUNTY , COASTAL TECH will formulate an alternate design employing the upland sources , prepare and submit a proposed modification to the existing JCP application , and process the JCP modification request via the Florida Department of Environmental Protection ( FDEP ) and U . S . Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) . Task 2a — Alternate Preliminary Design : In general , COASTAL TECH will prepare an alternate preliminary design for the Sector 3 Project employing the top two ( 2) upland sand sources as determined under Task 1 . Each alternate design shall include : ■ revisions to design templates and initial fill volume to maintain a "No Impact" (to existing hardbottom ) design , ■ an Opinion of Probable Costs for initial construction — based upon the unit prices obtained under Task 1 , ■ assessment of the re-nourishment interval and determination of probable annual maintenance costs based upon unit costs associated with other truck-haul projects completed within Indian River County over the past year, ■ identification of potential staging and placement areas , ■ Preparation of 81 /2 " by 11 " preliminary design Drawings (plan and cross - section) and the existing permit sketches to be submitted Upon completion of the assessment of the two ( 2) upland sand sources , COASTAL TECH will prepare a Design Document Addendum and provide five ( 5 ) copies of the Design Document Addendum to the COUNTY . COASTAL TECH will meet with the COUNTY to review the above and subsequently incorporate revisions as may be required by the COUNTY . Task 2b — EA Modification : COASTAL TECH will review the existing Environmental Assessment (EA) to identify appropriate revisions to the EA . COASTAL TECH will confer with the COUNTY and the COUNTY ' s EA consultant ( Dial - Cordy & Associates , Inc . ) to identify , prepare and incorporate appropriate revisions to the EA to reflect the alternate use of the upland sand sources . Task 2c — JCP Modification Request : COASTAL TECH will prepare and submit a JCP modification request incorporating the Design Document Addendum and the revised EA prepared under Tasks 2a and 2b respectively . The COUNTY will provide any JCP modification fee as may be required by FDEP . COASTAL TECH will review the draft permit modification request with the COUNTY and incorporate revisions as appropriate — prior to submitting the application to FDEP and USACE . Task 2d — JCP Modification Processing : Subsequent to submittal of the JCP modification request , COASTAL TECH will serve as the COUNTY ' s agent for processing of the application through FDEP and the USACE . COASTAL TECH will make informal contact with FDEP and USACE staff Page 2 of 3 March 17. 2009 Indian River County Upland Sand Source Evaluation Scope of Work to address staff questions regarding the JCP modification request and Project . COASTAL TECH will compile , clarify , and provide existing information as may be requested by FDEP , USACE , and state/federal commenting agencies . COASTAL TECH will represent the project before FDEP and USACE staff toward obtainment of a modified JCP and to negotiate acceptable permits ( s ) for the Project . It is expected that the FDEP will make two ( 2) requests for additional information ( RAI ) and that two ( 2 ) meetings will be required with FDEP staff in Tallahassee to favorably conclude the JCP modification request . It is assumed that existing information ( including design details/analysis) will be sufficient to meet permit application requirements ; however , FDEP may require additional surveys and studies which are beyond this scope , but may be provided by COASTAL TECH under separate authorization . Task 2e — Alternate Final Design : Upon FDEP acceptance of the upland sand sources under Task 2d , COASTAL TECH will revise the Final Design Drawings and Contract Documents to incorporate the modified JCP and approved upland sand sources . Page 3 of 3 March 17 , 2009 Indian River County - Upland Sand Source Evaluation Detailed Summary of Estimated Fees March 17, 2009 Micheal James Cir1 DIiP Walker Charge Leiphane Michael Kin Leis A'o or Robert Brooke Walther Marino Traltt BdNa_ Dawson Fonialne B_u7_de_ Osoom Coined _ E_dw_ards Na_ach Hal Edwards �e Tad: PMapd Wean a fie rar En $r C laic slefl staff Coa "a -Ley - _ - _ - Sa;w Pa 4 / CA Sr. Mmin - - - - 24-Mar- o9 $153,488 E,oinm E ginswirg GA officer H'd Era Enginvv Eny�® o®irgly 1c wan eiapgla sp�dId 7s nrom, Estmdo aeMd Total Direct Costs Submsk Task Task Descri lion $218 166 $186 $188 128 $ 128 95 95 $107 115 $85 $144 56 Fees Amount Do�rlodon Total Total Start. :- . Finish Das ask=ta -=::SOIICftstr6n - _ 24-Mar-09 1 23-Apr-OB 30 Identify minimum 'Oeotechrticel Standards' 1 302 1 4 1 2 12 4 $3, 192 $3, 192 dart formuiate 'OeotechMcal Requirements' 2 8 4 24 8 $8,052 $6.052 99ePere-0ra11ee8e - - $0 -- -- $0 review Draft SoOdtation 1 4 2 6 _ $1 ,890 meet with COUNTY 4 4 $1 ,888 $ 10168 c s:: aW1 -' Evaluation ofProposals . «:: 0 07Jun 09 I 0]Jui09 ]0 .. - - 184130 1 ears review data provided by suppliers 2 6 2 12 12 $0 $0 t $4 ,336 4 338 --- ' $ , Dapxds meet vvhh COUNTY 4 4 $ 1 , 168 -- $ 1 , 168 m $9,732 eetas review 8 rank the sand essays' 4 10 6 24 24 12 _ $9,732 _ a meet with COUNTY 4 _ _ ca..tr 4 $1 , 168 $ 7 , 168 Sakipppn $0 $0 Task 2a,- kemate Preliminary es n = . . - . 041308 ` 07-Jul-DO u6-Arg09 30 rovisiOns m design templates 8 initial fin volume 2 8 1 12 40 $6,842 $6,842 iters Opinion of Probable Costs 1 2 8 ------- i�- - re-nourishment interval 8 probable arnuel malmenarece 1 8 12 24 12 8 2 $3,862 -_ - _ $3,042 preliminary design Drawings - permit sketches 2 6 _ $8,582 - - - - $8,582 24 40 $7,856 $7,856 1 Design Doaunent Addendum 2 8 2 8 40 20 1 meet with COUNTY 4 4 20 $12,884 _ _ $ 12,884 Inco orate revisions 1 3 $1 , 188 _ $ 1 , 186 " � . .. 6 10 2 $2.434 $2.434 Taskc2 -.EA; odHlcaton, q$12sB601OB-Aag-09 120-Auq-09 +4 review e:kortg F1i to b revisions 6 12 12 4 $4,252 $4,252dare confer with COUNTY8 DCA 4 4 / 2 $2,912 $2,912 e 8 hcor Orme r late re Islons to FA 1 4 -- - - ,mm16 24 2Taak2c -:JCPc ItlCat daR uart . < a - - $ 898 20-Aig-09 03SepB9 14 prepare JCP modifIcadon request 1 4 10 4 2 12 4 8 85,028 $5,028 dare meet with COUNTY 4 4 $ 7 ,044 _-- $1 ,044 Incorporate revisions 2 6 4 2 submit JCP modification re est 1 4 -- - -- - - . ;. ask=2d '= JCP otllt "at on roceesln t; , $1 ,426 _ $1 ,426 f 6 Oat 042 - :•i. _ _.. .. - ` : . 848 0611 03-Setr09 1 02-Dec-09 90 Informal contactwlo+ FDEP, USACE, 8 agendas 2 10 2 16 8 4 48 16 12 $ 13,680 $13.480 ear. FDEP RAItU 4 12 2 20 24 16 24 $12, 184 --- $12, 764 4 10 2 16 FDEP RAIN2 - - 20 10 20 $9,870 with FDEP 4 8 24 .-_ - I meso 24 24 $10455 2 $2,000 . travel . _ ... ,: Tae -2a =i remote- _ Ina : Deal n _ '„_:-: - - : . , . .. . . _ tr $ 12 552 02-Doe-09 1 Dt Jan-10 30 revise final design Drawings 8 2 16 .. . .s0 $9,848 . . . . $13928 $9,648 1 dare revise Contract Documents 2 B 2 12 12 $a 280 4 280 Tota Hours : 41 164 14 20 270 132 58 12 186 80 230 6 46 1261 _ Total Costs : sae3s EZI,221 .2321 g3,32o g3aA2o 818.632 SS510 g1, 14o 4+9,9aZ ga.2o0 g1a,550 5+, 162 02.E/e 75148 $2000 $153,488 S153498 $1511488 $ 153,4BB TELEPHONE CONFERENCE REPORT 25225 . 01 March 11 , 2009 9 : 00am to 10 : 00am DST Participants : FDEP : Merrie Beth Neely Bob Brantly Jennifer Koch Elizabeth Kromhout Indian River County : Jonathan Gorham James Gray Coastal Tech: Kim Colstad Walker Dawson James Marino Lois Edwards Re : Indian River County Sector 3 — Upland Sand Source Purpose : The purpose of the meeting was to conduct an "informal consultation" with Department staffregarding additional permitting and design that may be necessary to allow for the use of an upland sand source for construction of the Sector 3 project. Report : Background James Gray explained that on March 3rd, 2009 the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners directed County staff to explore, via input from Department staff, what efforts (i. e, additional design and permitting) would be necessary to allow for upland sand source contractors to bid on the Sector 3 beach restoration project. James also indicated that County staff had drafted a Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) to be used to "pre- qualify" upland sand sources . Geotechnical Requirements Jennifer Koch stated that the FDEP will not "pre-qualify" fill material . Jennifer indicated that the borrow source material is evaluated on a case-by-case basis for each specific project. Elizabeth Kromhout added that the geotechnical data requirements for the upland sources will be the same as for the offshore borrow area. The only difference is that the data for the ROSS database will not need to be submitted, as ROSS only includes offshore data. The Department will require geotechnical data for the proposed upland sand. Therefore, if the local sand contractor has to wash or screen the sand proposed for use on this project, this process should be done prior to the sand contractor providing the required geotechnical data. Upland sand assays must be signed and sealed by a Professional Geologist. A complete description of the processing methods for each mine will also be required. Project Performance & Compatibility — "Minimum Specs" Bob Brantly suggested that "minimum specs" be developed relative to project performance and compatibility with native beach material rather than conducting an assessment of the performance and compatibility of each borrow source material individually. The purpose of the "minimum specs" would allow for one project performance and compatibility standard by which to evaluate each of the upland sand sources . Bob also indicated that the Department should be consulted for defming the "minimum specs". Bob referred to a USACE project in Dade County, The USACE had a minim requirement and then another specification for upland material that was of a higher quality in terms of project performance. Since that higher quality material required smaller volumes, the USACE was willing to pay a higher cost per cubic yard. This USACE project was permitted by the Department but never constructed because of the logistics of getting 600,000 cubic yards to the site. Bob suggested that the County include a financial incentive to get a higher qualify of sand. Conference Report March 11 , 2009 Page 2 of 2 Based upon the characterization of the "minimum specs " described by Bob , it was determined that there is a potential for none of the upland sand sources to qualify for the Sector 3 project since upland sand source material tends to be finer grain than offshore source material . Permitting Lois Edwards asked for a time frame relative to the Department review clock once a request was submitted. Bob indicated that Department review is typically 21 days from the initial request and then 14 days for review of subsequent revisions . It was concluded that there would be an approximately 60 to 75 day delay strictly relative to permit processing when accounting for 1 RAI and response. The Department confirmed that an additional UMAM assessment will also be required if the characteristics of the upland sand do not result in a "no impact" project design. Lois asked if the request would be considered a permit modification. Merrie Beth indicated that until the pernut is issued it would only be a revision to the project description. The Department stated that if an upland source was selected there would be modifications to the Sediment QA/QC Plan to include inspection of each truck and stockpile of "washed" material (if needed) . Other Department Comments/Concerns Bob indicated that the Department would be concerned with the use of upland material in the region from R20 to R30 because of the seaward horizontal berm feature and use of potentially finer grain material . Bob also indicated that regions in the southern portion of the Sector 3 project area may be deemed suitable for the use of upland material based on minimal fill densities but it could pose contractual problems during the bidding phase . Bob also noted that if the County was going to vary from use of the offshore borrow area characteristics, the County will need to advise the Department if the redesign of the beach fill area has potential for an adverse effect on nearshore resources . Bob noted that the design objective was to meet a certain performance criteria with no impact to nearshore resources . Bob also indicated that the EA will basically have to be rewritten in an upland sand source is used. Meme Beth indicated that additional information would need to be provided relative to upland access points , staging areas used for stockpiling, and dune plant protection measures . James Gray concluded the telephone conference by identifying that it was not the County ' s intent to delay the processing of the project as currently proposed and that this conversation was an informal discussion. James said that the County will continue to process the JCP application as originally submitted at this time.