301-CPH-Amendment 19 AMENDMENT NO. 19
TO AGREElV!F~NT FOR CONTINUING SERVICES
FOR
DOWNTOWN / PUMP BRANCH STORMWATER DILAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS
PHASE I- ENGINEERING ANALYSIS
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF SANFORD, FLORIDA
AND
CONKLIN, PORTER AND HOLME~S-ENGINEERS, INC.
This Agreement made on the ,2 ~ ff f J'g/o/'?. , 1995 between the CITY OF SANFORD,
day o
FLORIDA (hereinafter called the CITY) and CONKLIN, PORTER AND HOLMES-ENGINEERS,
INC. (hereinafter called the ENGINEER), is mutually agreed upon and declared an authorized
Amendment to an Agreement dated December 17, 1981, between the parties, herein setting forth the
scope, terms and conditions of the work herein authorized.
In case of any conflict between this Amendment and the aforementioned Agreement of December 17,
1983, this Amendment shall govern for the work described herein.
SECTION 1
PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT
1.1 General
1.1.1 This Amendment work is to generally provide for engineering services for the Downtown / Pump
Branch Stormwater Drainage Improvements, Phase I - Engineering Analysis. Three alternative
stormwater piping improvement scenarios shall be considered with the general objective to reduce
both the frequency and intensity of stormwater flooding throughout the City downtown area.
SECTION 2
PLANNING AND SCtW, DULING, DATA REVIEW AND
EVALUATION, ANALYSIS OF STORMWATER
IMPROVEMENTS ALTERNATIVES, EVALUATION
AND RECOMMENDATION OF IMPROVEMENTS
2.1 Engineering services shall be provided in connection with the Planning and Scheduling, Data
Review and Evaluation, Analysis of Stormwater Improvements Alternatives, Evaluation and
Recommendation of Improvements.
Specific services to be provided shall include the following:
PLANNING AND SCHEDULING
DATA COLLECTION AND REVIEW
2.1.1 Gather existing stormwater sewer maps of the City downtown area, generally east of French Ave.
and west of Pine Ave.
2.1.2 Gather previous drainage studies and existing available drainage information relating to the
downtown area. Review existing drainage basin boundaries and stormwater pipe network.
Utilize existing information from previous studies to the maximum extent possible.
2.1.3 Gather Redi Arias Map aerial photographs of the City downtown area and contributing drainage
2.1.4 Collect existing available historic water elevation data for Lake Monroe from City and/or other
sources. Review information and establish acceptable lake elevations for use as tailwator
conditions for analysis of the stormwater collection pipes.
-2-
2.1.5 Meet with City personnel to gather any additional information not speciftcally shown on the sewer
maps, ie: specific purpose survey data, new or replaced stormwater pipes, etc. Also, identify
specific known areas within the downtown which have a history of drainage problems.
2.1.6 Meet with the Water Management District to identify the drainage problems, review alternatives
as identified hereinafter, and ascertain from the District the requirements for physical system
improvements and permitting requirements.
2.2 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING STORMWATER DRAINAGE COLLECTION SYSTEM
2.2.1 Prepare a Drainage Basin base map from the existing City sewer maps, including removal of non-
essential information on the existing City sewer maps that is unrelated to the stormwater system.
Mark on the base map the existing overall drainage basin boundaries of the downtown area which
generally encompasses the area east of French Ave., west of Pine Ave. and north of 23rd St.
Also mark on the base map the overall drainage basin boundary of Pump Branch which is
generally east of Cypress Ave., west of Willow Ave., and north of 25th St.
2.2.2 From previous studies, mark on the base map the sub-basin boundaries for each of the existing
main stormwater pipe lines that ultimately drain through the downtown area between Laurel Ave.
and Pine Ave.
2.2.3 Coordinate with City personnel to review both the overall basin and sub-basin boundaries,
tailwater conditions for analysis, and the design storm(s) to evaluate under the Tasks which
follow.
2.2.4 Prepare model flow diagrams which represent each of the existing stormwater pipe systems now
serving the downtown area.
2.2.5 For each of the drainage sub-basins as well as the overall basins, verify the drainage area
quantities available from previous studies. Utilize existing information from previous preliminary
studies to the maximum extent possible.
2.2.6 Based upon aerial photographs and the Engineer's knowledge of the study area, evaluate runoff
coefficients to be applied for both pervions and impervious surfaces. Calculate the composite
runoff coefficient within each of the sub-basins.
2.2.7 Mark drainage patterns and estimate the time of concentration within each of the established
drainage sub-basins.
2.2.8 Prepare a computer database summary to include such hydrologic parameters as drainage area,
composite runoff coefficient, and time of concentration.
2.2.9 Assimilate computer model input data for computer aided analysis, to include data on the existing
pipe systems (ie: pipe lengths, inverts, sizes, material, condition).
-3-
2.2.10 Generate a computer model of each of the stormwater pipe systems utilizing the Hydraflow
computer program. Perform model simulations applying the design storm(s) established in Task
2.2.3. Summarize results.
2.3 ANALYSIS OF STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES
Evaluate the three previously proposed improvement alternatives, which are as follows:
2.3.1 Reroute drainage between Myrtle Ave. and Pine Ave. westward along 2nd. St. to Pump Branch
2.3.2 Reroute drainage between Park Ave. and Pine Ave. westward along 2rid St. to Pump Branch
2.3.3 Reroute drainage between Magnolia Ave. and Pine Ave. westward along 6th St. to Pump Branch.
Also consider if other improvement alternatives may be available to alleviate the downtown
stormwater drainage problems.
2.3.4 Meet with City personnel to further evaluate improvement alternatives. Also consider ff other
improvement alternatives may be desirable for analysis under this study.
2.3.5 Roughly design each of the improvement alternatives and prepare sketches of the possible
improvement alternatives for modeling as well as discussion purposes.
2.3.6 Modify the drainage basin and sub-basin network on the Drainage Basin map for each of the three
improvement alternatives identified above. Also, mark sub-basin boundaries of the Pump Branch
system at proposed points of connection to complete analysis of the alternatives.
2.3.7 Prepare model flow diagrams which represent each of the three stormwater pipe system
improvement alternatives.
2.3.8 For each of the improvement alternatives, prepare a modified computer database summary of
contributing drainage basin and hydrologic parameters from Task 2.2.
2.3.9 Assimilate computer model input data for computer aided analysis of the improvement
altarnatives, to include data on the existing and the proposed pipe systems (ie: pipe lengths,
inverts, sizes, material, condition).
2.3.10 Generate a computer model of each of the stormwater pipe system improvement alternatives
utilizing the Hydraflow computer program. Perform model simulations applying the design
storm(s) established in Task 2.2. Summarize results.
2.4 EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION OF IMPROVEMENTS
2.4.1 Evaluate simulation results of the improvement alternatives and quantify drainage flow
improvements through the downtown stormwater pipe systems. Report to City personnel,
offering recommendations.
2.4.2 Refine the computer model(s) as necessary based upon City feedback; finalize simulations.
2.4.3 For each of the improvement alternatives analyzed, prepare a general snramary of improvements.
Also, prepare plan maps from the base map and drainage basin maps (Task 2.2) depicting the
improvements.
2.4.4 Determine a preliminary opinion of probable cost for each of the three stormwater improvement
alternatives.
2.4.5 Meet with City personnel to present summary results and opinion of probable costs.
2.4.6 Prepare an engineering summary report, with supporting documentation, current understanding
of regulatory requirements, model simulation results, probable costs and Engineer's
recommendations of stormwater improvements.
Attached as Exhibit "A" , is a Plan of Study which is hereby made a part of this Amendment showing in
more detail the scope of work contemplated, the time estimates, and overall cost estimates for the initial
scope of work generally described herein.
SECTION 3
ADDITIONAL SERVICES OF TI-IE ENGINEER
3.1 ff authorized by the CITY, the ENGINEER shall furnish or obtain from others the following
additional services, or the CITY may provide these services separately or directly with the
provider. Such additional services will be paid for by the CITY as outlined in Section 5.
3.1.1 Additional services due to significant changes in the scope of the project or its design including,
but not limited to, changes in size, complexity, character of construction or due to time delays
in initiating or completion of the work as described herein.
3.1.2 Provide through subconsultants, survey, environmental scientist (jurisdictional and permitting)
services, construction quality control testing, or other specialist services including real
estate/right-of-way agents, project/construction management, financial/budgetary consultant, and
bookkeeping/accounting services. ffthese services are subsequently determined advisable during
the course of the work, they may be considered for authorization as an additional service under
this Section or separately provided by the CITY.
3.1.3 Except as otherwise provided herein, services or additional costs associated with revising
previously accepted studies, reports, or other documents prepared by the ENGINEER when such
revisions are due to causes beyond the ENGINEER's control.
3.1.4 Additional services resulting from public protests. administrative hearings, or similar matters.
3.1.5 Preparing to serve and/or serving as an Expert Witness for the CITY in any litigation, public
hearing, condenmation proceeding, right-of-way or easement acquisition or negotiation, or other
legal / administrative proceeding.
3.1.6 Furnishing additional sets of prints of drawings and other Documents beyond those typically
furnished.
3.1.7 Additional engineering services required by revisions to regulations (after the date of this
Amendment) as applicable to the Florida Depa~hnent of Environmental Protection, the St. Johns
River Water Management District, Corps of Engineers, Seminole County, FDOT, or other
regulatory agency requirements.
3.1.8 Additional services in connection with the project including services normally furnished by the
CITY as described in Section 4 herein and services not otherwise provided for in this Agreement.
SECTION 4
CITY RESPONSIBILITIES
4.1 The CITY will:
4.1.2 Advise the ENGINEER of his requirements for the project and designate a person to act as the
CITY's representative with respect to the work to be performed under this Amendment, and such
person shall have complete authority to transmit instructions, receive information, interpret and
define the CITY's policies and decisions pe~inent to the work covered by this Amendment.
4.1.3 Obtain and provide data requested that is reasonably available on the project along with
operational and maintenance requirements and easement and right-of-way requirements.
4.1.4 Guarantee access to and make all provisions for the ENGINEER to enter upon public and private
lands as required for the ENGINEER to perform his work under this Amendment.
4.1.5 Make facilities accessible for inspection.
4.1.6 Examine all studies, reports, sketches, schedules, and other documents presented by the
ENGINEER and render decisions pertaining thereto within a reasonable time so as not to delay
the work of the ENGINEER.
4.1.7 Assist in obtaining approval of all governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the project,
and such approvals and consents from such other individuals or bodies as may be necessary for
completion of the Project.
4.1.8 Furnish or direct the ENGINEER in writing to provide at the CITY' s expense, any subconsultant
services not designated in Section 2, if advised by the ENGINEER and CITY concurs that they
are necessary.
4.1.9 Furnish, or direct the ENGINEER in writing to provide at the CITY's expense, necessary
additional services as stipulated in Section 3 of this Amendment, or other services as required.
4.1.10 Provide such legal, accounting, financial and insurance counseling services as may be required
for the project, and such audifmg services as the CITY may require.
4.1.11 Give prompt written notice to the ENGINEER whenever the CITY observes or otherwise
becomes aware of any defect in the Project.
SECTION 5
PAYMENT
5.1 Payment
Payment for services and expenses of the ENGINEER to be as set forth below:
5.1.1 Principals and Employees of the ENGINEER.
5.1.2 Compensation paid ENGINEER for services described herein and rendered by principals and
employees assigned to the Project will be computed by multiplying Direct Personnel Expense
(defined in paragraph 5.2.3 herein) times a factor of 1.95 plus all reimbursable expenses. The
esfnnated total engineering fee for services described in Section 2, plus out of pocket expenses
of 5.2.1 at actual cost thereof, is $17,725.00.
5.2 Reimbursed Expenses
5.2.1 Expenses for items not specifically valued herein are to be reimbursed to the ENGINEER at the
actual cost thereef. Said expenses shall include transportation and subsistence of principals and
employees, when traveling in connection with the project, Wll telephone calls, telegrams, prints,
photocopies, and similar project-related items.
5.2.2 The CITY will make prompt monthly payments in response to ENGINEER' s monthly statements
without retention for all categories of services rendered under this Agreement and for
reimbursable expenses incurred.
5.2.3 Direct Personnel Expense used as a basis for payment shall mean the salaries and wages paid to
principals and employees of all classifications engaged directly on the Project, plus the cost of
fringe benefits including but not limited to, social security contributions, worker's compensation,
health and retirement benefits, bonuses, sick leave, vacation and holiday pay applicable thereto.
For purposes of this Amendment, Direct Personnel Expense shall be considered an mount equal
to 1.48 times applicable salaries and wages.
5.2.4 Charges for the services rendered by principals and employees as witnesses in any litigation,
hearing or proceeding w~l be computed at a rate of $600.00 per day or any portion thereof (but
compensation for time spent in preparing to appear in any such litigation, hearing or proceeding
will be computed in accordance with the payment method as set forth in Paragraphs 5.1.2 and
5.2.1 herein).
5.2.5 If this Agreement is terminated during prosecution of the services prior to completion of the
services of Section 2, payments to be made in accordance with Paragraph 5.1.2 and 5.2.1 on
account of that and all prior work under this Amendment shall be due and payable, and shall
constitute total payment for services rendered. In addition, upon termination, the ENGINEER
shall be paid for any additional services authorized and rendered under Section 3.
5.2.6 Services provided by outside subconsnitants will be billed at the direct cost without increase.
SECTION 6
GENERAL CONDITIONS
6.1 Since the ENGINEER has no control over the cost of labor, materials, or equipment or over any
construction Contractor's method of determining prices, any opinion of probable construction cost
which may be provided in the services of this Amendment are made on the basis of his
experience and qualifications and represent his best judgment as a design professional familiar
with the construction industry, but the ENGINEER cannot and does not guarantee that bids or
the construction cost will not vary from opinions of probable cost prepared by him. Similar
limitations apply to construction schedules reviewed or prepared by the ENGINEER.
6.2 The CITY and the ENGINEER each binds himself and his partners, successors, executors,
administrators and assigns to the other party of this Agreement and to partners, successors,
executors, administrators, and assigns of such other party in respect to all covenants of this
Amendment. Nothing herein shall be construed as creating any personal liability on the part of
any officer or agency of any public body which may be a party hereto, nor shall it be construed
as giving any rights or benefits hereunder to anyone other than the CITY and the ENGINEER.
6.3 The ENGINEER agrees to initiate work promptly upon receipt of authorization to proceed and
to prosecute the work in an expeditious and timely manner until the Project is completed based
on timely performance by the developer and his engineers, construction contractors and others
involved.
-8-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have made and executed this Amendment the day
and year first above written.
C~ITY:
City of 3anford, Florida
ENGINEER:
Conldin, Porter & Holmes - Engineers, Inc.
-9-
(~rl'Y (]1~ SANt:OI~,D .....................................................
DO%VNTOV/',~ .~ PUMP BRANCII
S'r0RMWATItR I)I~AiNAe]E IMPROVI~:MI:NTS
PHASE I - ~GIN[~I~RING ANAI,YSlS ~::~::~::~::~::~::~::~::~:.~:.~::~::~
Mimhou~
DI~SCRfI~rlON P E T D S Ex~
Eug~g ~i~ ~ ~ pro~ ~ ~fion ~ ~e Planning ~d
Sch~g, Da~ Rovi~ ~d Eval~fion, ~lysis of S~wa~r ~m~ove~
S~ific ~ ~ ~ provid~ s~l ~clude th~ follo~g:
PL~G ~D SC~D~G 2 8 2
2.1 DATA COLLEC~ON ~ ~W
2.1.1 Ga~er eftstag sWmwa~r ~wer rips of the City do~ ~, g~e~ly ~t 2
of F~ch Ave. ~d w~t of P~o Ave.
2. 1.2 Ga~er previo~ ~age sm~ ~d exist~g aveable ~ge ~omtion 4 2 2
~hthg ~ ~e do~W~ ~. Review exis~g ~age ~ ~es ~d
~wat~pi~n~ork. Util~exist~g~omd~frompre~o~sm~W~e
m exit ~ssible.
2.1.3 Ga~er R~ Atl~ Map ~fi~ photographs of ~e CiW do~W~ ar~ ~ 1 $5.~
~but~g ~ge ~ ~.
2.1.4 CoH~t exis~g av~ble ~stofic wa~r elevation ~m for ~e Mo~ ~m City 1 4 1 $10.~
~d/or oth~ ~s. Review ~fom~on ~d esmbli~ ~pmble l~e eleva~o~
for ~ ~ ~ilwater con~tions for ~ysis of the stonw~ ~H~tion pi~s.
-10-
DOWNTOWN / PUMP BRANCH ............................................. ~ ..................................., ..........................................................
STORMW.~TER DRAINAGE LM PROVEM ENTS :.?.~ii!i:.:.~:?::.:.i!i:.~?.?.:.?.?:i:.::i::~:~:.::!?:~i~!~:i~::
PHASE I - |:NGINEERINC; ANALYSIS
Manhours
DESCRIPTION P E T D
2.1.5 M~t ~ Ci~ ~1 m ga~ ~y ~fi~ ~fo~fioa not ~ifi~y I 2 4 1
sho~ ~ ~e ~wer ~ps, ie: ~fic pu~ s~ey &M, new or repl~
sm~at~ pi~, e~. ~, id~ ~ifi~ bo~ a~ ~ ~e
~ch have a ~sto~ of &~ge problem.
2.1.6 Meet with the Water Management District to identify the drainage problems, 2 4 0 0 1
review alternatives as identified bereinafter end ascertain from the District the
requirements for physical system improvements and permitting requirements.
2.2 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING STORMWATER DRAINAGE COLLECTION SYSTEM
2.2.1 Prepare a Drainage Basin base map from the existing City sewer maps, including 2 4 8 8 $50.00
removal of non-essential information on the existing City sewer maps that is
unrehted to the stormwater system. Mark on the base map the existing overall
drainage basin boundaries of the downtown area which generally encompasses the
area east of French Ave., west of Pine Ave. and north of 23rd St. Also mark on
the base map the overall drainage basin boundary of Pump Branch which is )
generally east of Cypress Ave., west of Willow Ave., and north of 25th St.
2.2.2 From previous studies, mark on the base map the sub-basin boonchries for each of 2 8 8 8
the existing main stormwater pipe lines that ultimately drain through the downtown
area between Laurel Ave. and Pine Ave.
2.2.3 Coordinate with City personnel to review both the overall basin and sub-basin 1 1 1 1
boundaries, tailwater conditions for analysis, end the design storm(s) to evaluate
under the Tasks which follow.
-11-
PLAN OF STUDY .....................................................................................
(?1 1 ~ OF SANFORD ..... ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ...................................................................
DOWNTOXIN / PUMP BRANCll ............................................................................................
STORMWATI:R DRAINAGE |MPROVEMENTS .......................................................................
PHASE I ENGINEERING ANAl YSIS ~:.~:.~?.~:.?~::::::~:.~?::.?~::~::~:~:~::~::~::~::~:::~::?:~:~::~::::::~::~:~::::~:~::~::~::~::~:;~:~:;~:~:~::~:::~?:~
' · :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~E~:~:~::~:~E~
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~:::~:~:::~.~:~:~:~C~3::~:~::~Z~:~:~:~:~
Manhours Estimate
DESCIH~ION P E T D S Ex~
2 2.4 Prepar~ m~l~l flow dmg~ms which ~p~esent ~ch of Ihe ~x~ung sR~rnl~aler pipu 6 4
sys~ now ~w~ ~e do~ a~.
2.2.5 For ~h of ~e ~go ~b~s ~ well ~ ~e ov~H ~, v~ ~e 1 2 8 4
~mge ar~ qafi~ av~lable ~m p~vio~ sm~. U~li~ e~sfmg
~fomti~ ~m p~vio~ pwlimin~ sm~ ~ ~o ~i~ exit ~ssible.
2.2.6 B~ u~ ~fiM photo~p~ ~d ~e Enter' s ~owl~ge of ~e study n, 1 4 6
eval~ moff ~ffici~B m ~ appH~ for ~ffi ~io~ ~d i~io~
~. ~cffie ~e ~si~ moff ~fficient ~thin ~h of the ~b-b~.
2.2.7 Mark ~go ~m ~d ~ &c time of ~n~tmfi~ ~i ~h of ~e i 4 8
~bHi~ ~ge ~b~.
2.2.8 P~p~ a ~u~r &~ ~mm~ ~ hclu~ gch hydmlo~c pan~ ~ 1 2 8 $10.~
~ge ~, ~site moff ~ffici~t, ~d ~m of ~n~n~fion.
2.2.9 ~s~a~ co~u~r m~el ~put ~ for ~u~r ~d~ ~ysis, to ~cl~ &~ 4 8 4
on the exis~g pi~ sysW~ (ie: pi~ l~g~, ~vem, s~, rowtiM, ~n~fion).
2.2.10 G~m~ a ~u~r m~el of ~h of ~e stewart pi~ sys~ uffi~g the 2 4
Hy~ow~ut~pro~m. Peffomm~lsi~atio~appl~g~ed~i~
s~m(s) ~blish~ ~ T~k 2.2.3. Summ~ ~.
2.3 ~YSIS OF STO~WA~R ~PRO~ME~ ~TEffA~VES
-12-
PLAN 0|: .$'l'l..It)y
CITY OF SANFORD
D()WNTOWN ! PUMP BRANCH
STORMWATER DI~,AINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
PHASE 1 - ENGINEERING ANALYSIS
Manhours I.;stimate
DFSCRIPTION P E T D S Expenses
Evaluat,~ Ihe thr~.~ previously pnqx>s,.xl imln'ovemenl. altenuitiv,..s, which ar~ as 2 4 4 1
follows:
2.3.1 Raroute drainage between MyRle Ave. and Pine Ave. westward along 2rid. St. to
Pump Branch
2.3.2 Reroute drainage betweea Park Ave. and Pine Ave. westward along 2nd St. to
Pump Branch
2.3.3 Rereute drainage between Magnolia Ave. and Pine Ave. westward along 6th St. to
Pump Branch. AIm consider if other improvement alternatives may be available to
alleviate the downtown stormwater drainage problems.
2.3.4 Meet with City personnel to fuRher evaluate improvement alternatives. Also I 2 1
consider if other improvement altematives may be desirable for analysis under this
study.
2.3.5 Roughly design each of the improvement alternatives and prepare sketches of the I 2 6 4
possible improvement alternatives for modeling as well as discussion purposes.
2.3.6 Modify the drainage basin and sub-basin network on the Drainage Basin map for 1 2 4 8 $20.00
each of the three improvement alternatives identified above. Also, mark sub-basin
boundaries of the Pump Branch system at proposed points of connection to
complete analysis of the alternatives.
2.3.7 Prepare model flow diagrams which represent each of the three stormwater pipe 4 4
system improvement alternatives.
-13-
LAN O| STUDY
(?ITY OJ: S~NI':ORD
DOWNTOWN / PUMP I~RANCI[
STORMWATt~R DRA[NAG[~ IMPROVeMEnTS
PIIASE I - E~OINEE~I~G ANAI.YSIS
D~SCRI~IO~ P [~ T D S ~x~
2.3 8 For ~ch of the iml~ovcment alternatives, prcl~ a m~glifi~l coralinter datal~ I 2 6
~mm~ of ~ntfibut~g ~age b~ ~d hy~lo~c ~ ~om T~ 2.2.
2.3.9 Assi~la~ ~u~r m~el ~put ~ for ~u~ ~ ~ysis of ~ 2 6
2.3.10 G~e~ a ~ute~ m~el of ~h of the s~wa~r pi~ sys~m i~veme~t 1 2 6 $10.~
~tiv~ utilizing ~ Hy~ow ~u~[ p~o~. Poffo~ m~ol simula~ons
appl~ ~e ~i~ s~(s) ~lish~ ~ T~ 2.2. ~mms~
2.4 EV~UA~O~ ~D ~COHHE~DA~ON OF
2.4.1 Ev~ s~a~on ~l~ of ~e ~vem~t al~v~ ~d q~ti~ ~age 2 4 4 2
flow ~rovem~B ~ugh ~e ~ smawa pi~ sys~$. R~ to
Oty ~rso~el, offeag r~mm~ons.
2.4.2 Re~ ~e co~u~r m~el(s) ~ n$ ~ u~n City f~b~k; ~& 2
s~a~o~. )
2.4,3 For ach of ~e implyeat al~ativ~ a~y~, p~p~e a gene~ ~mm~ of I 4 4 8 2 $20.~
~roveaB. ~, p~a~ pla aps from ~e ~ ap ad age b~
mps ffa 2.2) depic~g ~e ~oveaB.
2.404 DeWmine a preli~ op~on of p~bable ~st for ~ch of the ~ stoawa~r 2 4 12 4
i~roveat alternative.
2.4~5 M~t ~th City ~o~el to p~nt summa~ ~ ad o~on of probable 1 1 1
~sB.
-14-
PLAN OF STIJI)Y .......................
f,'iTY OF SANFORD
STORMWAI'~I~ DRAINA(iE LMPROVLiMI..'N'TS
..............
Mallhotlrs E.NtHlu~te
...............
.................
2.4.6 Prepare au eugineerhxg sumrosary report, with suppoztiug documeutatio,~, model 2 8 8
simulatiou results, probable costs aud Ellghmeer's reeol]i~lelldations of 8tollllwater
improvemezxts.
!iiii:!:!:::!~iii:i~s~~ ~:~:~L:,:!:~!i~iiii~i .................
kh._, Porter and Holmes
2808
FAX #407-330~0639
Mr. William A. Simmons, P.E., City Manager
City of Sanford
P O Box 1788
Sanford, FI 32772-1788
Re: Downtown Storm Water Drainage Improvements
Phase I - Preliminary Analysis
Amendment Request
CPH Project No. S0602.94
Dear Mr. Simmons:
This amendment is to provide follow-up work in connection with Amendment 19 for the Downtown/Pump
Branch Storm water Drainage Improvements, Phase 1. During the Phase 1 work, several alternatives were
examined for intercepting storm water immediately south of the downtown area and conveying that flow castward
to the Pump Branch syster~ Some additional services have been provided beyond the scope of our original Phase
I Study in order to better eval~_~__a.t_e- the proposed drainage improvements, including a preliminary route feasibility
field investigation, preliminary funding evaluation, preliminary evaluation of alternative street surface
restorations (due to the existence of the brick streets in the historic district), and preparation and addition of an
executive summary for the Phase I report to assist in City staff and commission reviews.
Also, since our initial meeting with the SJ~WIVID, it appears that some stormwater treatment measures may be
necessary. Note that none of the improvement alternatives under evaluation included any stormwater treatment
measures, as the area being served is heavily developed, and conventional treatment techniques do not appear to
be practical. For this reason, as the stody progressed, th~ City directed that wc not include any stormwater
treatment, and that we go to the Water Management District after th~ alternates were developed, explain the
drainage system conditions and possible improvements, and attempt to get the proposed improvements exempt~l
from any treatment requirements.
We and the City met with the Water Management District on May 9, 1996, and reviewed the nature of the
contributory area, the flooding problems and difficulties with them, and approached the problem from the
standpoint that the improvem~ts arc really more of a hydraulics issue. Th~ District advised that wc Would need
to obtain a pen'niL When asked what level of treatment we would need to provide for this retrofit project, they
indicated that their roles do not differentiate between old existing areas and new development, and the treatment
raeasm~ are the sara~. However, the District did state if it is not practical to provide full treatment, we need to
present a proposal to the District as to what measures the City will ~ to abate stormwater pollution. They
referred us to rifle 40C-42.024, F.A.C., for guidance on what factors could be taken into account to mitigate
complete pollution abatement treatment as would be required for a new development. The District also suggested
that we review what will be needed for the EPA NPDES permitting and identify those items as measures the City
will take to improve stormwater quality.
ConklL_, Port:r and Holmes
June 17, 1996 ~x
We propose to continue to assist the City by studying the stormwater system further end identifying alternatives
for stormwater treatment, reviewing them with the City, providing costs of the systems that appear to have
promise for use in this specific area, and presenting them to the Water Menagement District for their review end
concurrence as to the appropriateness for the improvements the City wishes to make in this downtown area.
At this time we are requesting en amendment to the original Phase I Scope of Study to include our additional
services previously mentioned as well as provide further assistence in studying end evaluating possible
stormwater treatment alternatives. The following Additional Services end Scope of Study Amendment describes
in greater detail our extra work previously provided and our proposed additional assistance. Engineering costs
associated with these serviens have also been provided.
ADDITIONAL SERVICES PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED:
1. We have cendueted a preliminary route feasibility field investigation, which has included a visual field
investigation for the recommended interceptor route along Second St. as well as en alternate route along
Third St., evaluation of potential conflicts with water, gravity sewer, vaeum sewer, or other utilities,
end censideration of pipe trench requirements given existing Right-of-Way eonditious. Our findings
have been incerporated into the Engi~ear' s opinion of probable construction cost, end a conceptual
profile view of the proposed interceptor has been prepared that graphically describes how existing
utilities might be arussed under or over by the proposed interceptor.
2. To further assist the City in evaluating funding aspects for the proposed interceptor project end in
addition to estimating probable construction cests as outlined in the original Scope, preliminary
financing inquiries were made, considering "Pay as You Go" versus bonding scenarios, and initial
recommcndetions were made toward obtaining the estimated funds necessary for this project.
Additionally, funding aspects have been briefly summarized in the Phase I report.
3. After considering the recommended interceptor route along Second St., it was identified that street
surface restoration/improvements will be sensitive for the City. To that end, a praliminaty review of
some possible sweet restoration methods was included in the project evaluation.
4. To assist City staff end cemmission in reviewing the Phase I report, en executive summary was drafted
end incorporated into the ~port
Total .................................................................... $5000.00
PLAN OF STUDY AMENDMENT - PROPOSED ADDITIONAL SERVICES:
1. We propose to research what other similar cities have done with regard to stormwater treatment within
existing historic drainage collection systems, examine literature for retrofit alternative stormwater
treatment systems, research best menagement practices, end other measures that might be employed in
Sanford.
~
ConklL_, Porter and Holmes
Jun~ 17, 1996 ~.roRo. ~tO.,OA S~r2-2~
2. We will look at these altexnatives from the standpo'mt of how they could be implemented and as
appropriate, where thee would be located in this specific area. We will r~wiew them with the City, and
dete~nlne the potential for use in this project
3. After selection by the City, we will de~rmine planning level cost estimates of the systems, and review
those costs with the City.
4. We will also generally consider what other measures the City is already taking or considering to take to
generally abate stormwater pollution. District Rule 40C-42.024, F.A.C., will be used for guidance as
to what factors may be taken into account toward reasonable assurance that District treatment objectives
will be met. These factors include proposed Best Management Practices, consideration of serving the
public interest, probable efficacy and costs of alternative stormwater treatment/controls, and provisions
for adequate operation and maintenance of the stormwater system. As suggested by the District we will
also briefly review with the City what may be needed for the EPA NPDES permitting and identify any
of those applicable items as measures the City will take to improve stormwater quality.
5. Whenth~Citydet~nnimswhichmeasurestheyw~uld~iket~imp~emant,ifany~wewi~~pmpareabriof
proposal in an outline format to present to the Water Management District, and assist the City in making
the presentation.
Total .................................................................... $9570.00
We are hereby requesting that our original contract be amended with a fee adjustment in the amount of $14,570,
bringing the project total fee through this phase to $32,295.
If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please advise. If this request meets with your
approval, please so indicate by signing below, and return one copy of this letter for our files.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
CONKLIN PORTER AND HOLMES-ENGINEERS, INC.
omas . Memott, E.I.
Project Engineer President
ACCEPTED:
City of Sanford, Florida
William A. S~araons, P.E.
Date: c
recycled paper
ConklL, Porter and Holmes
ENGINEERS, INC.
~I][~AN O1~' ~'I'~D~Z' - O~O~D ~D ~ W. FUL~N STREET
ITEM I)I.:SCRIlYFION P E T D S ESTIMATI~I)
EXPENSES
I. Wc propose to research ~hai oLhcr similar cities ha~c 4 24 4 S25.00
done ~ffi rcg~d ~ s~m wa~ ~ca~t m~o~
~ c~s~g ~age collation ~stc~, ex~c
Ht~a~ for redofit ~t~ativc sto~ wa~ ~ca~cnt
~stc~, resc~ch best m~agm¢nt practices,
me~as ~at ~t be employed ~ Sdord.
2. W~ ~11 look at ~cs~ ~Wmativ~ ~om ~c st~dpo~t of 4 8 2
how ffi~ co~d be ~pl~n~ ~ ~¢ sp~ific ~ We
· e po~fl~ for ~ ~ ~s proj~t
3. A~r sel~on by ~c CiW, we ~H dc~c plmg 2 24 24 4
level cost as~at~
Ci~ is ~eady ~g or consid~g to t~c to g~aHy
abate store wat~ pollution. ~s~ct R~c 40C~2.024,
may be ~cn ~ ~t ~w~d re~onabl¢ ~s~
· at Dis~ct ~ca~ent objectives ~11 be met. These
f~rs ~lud¢ propos~ B~t M~agemcnt Practi~s,
~id~a~on of s~g ~ public ~Wrcs~ probable
effic~ ~d cos~ of alt~a~v¢ store wa~ ~ca~cn~
~n~ols, ~d provisio~ for adequate op~afion ~d
m~tcn~c¢ of ~ s~ wa~ ~stm. As suggcst~
by ffi¢ Dis~ct we ~H ~so bd~y r~icw~ffi ~e CiW
what may be n~ for ~ EPA ~DES p~g
· c CiW ~ ~e to ~pmv~ sto~ wa~ q~HW.
5. When the City determines which measures they would 4 8 4 2 $25.00
like to implement, ff any, we will prepare a brief
proposal in an outline format to present to the Water
Management District, and assist the City in making the
presentation
TOTALS 16 80 36 0 14 $50.00
ENGINEERING FEE ............................................................... $9,072.00