HomeMy WebLinkAboutFluor Daniel Consultants - 1988-03-21 REQ UIEW FOR CITY COUNCP ACTION
Date February 25, 1988
Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Submitted by: Paul E. Cook, City Administrator
Prepared by: Les G. Evans, Acting Director of Public Works CWrole L6�
Subject: Engineering Services for Municipal Pier Analysis APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL '
.3 _ 19
Consistent with Council Policy? ] Yes [ ] New _
Policyor Exce ---�---- --�2 -
ii=
p CITY CLER
Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments:
Statement of Issue:
The city needs assistance in evaluating alternatives for rehabilitation or replacement of
the Municipal Pier.
Recommendation:
Approve the agreement with Fluor Daniel Incorporated Consultants in the amount of
$56,135.00 for engineering services in evaluating alternatives for repair or replacement of
the Municipal Pier.
Approve the transfer of $57,000 from the general fund unappropriated fund balance to
account 486390.
Analysis:
On January 17, 1988, storm waves destroyed the outer 250 feet of the Municipal Pier
including the End Cafe. On January 19, 1988, the City Council approved the expenditure
of up to $20,000 to study the pier and make recommendations for repair or replacement.
Since that time, the city has received numerous proposals to study the pier. The proposals
range from those submitted by marine divers to firms with equipment similar to that used
to find the Titanic, to structural engineers, to joint ventures. The two firms with the
strongest proposals were Fluor Daniels Incorporated Consultants and Moffatt & Nichol.
Both firms are local and both have extensive recent experience in oceanographic study
and pier damage.
Based on qualifications and scope of work, we recommend the Fluor Daniels Incorporated
Consultants' proposal.
The cost of the proposed work is considerably more than originally anticipated. However,
the in-depth study which has been proposed, is considered necessary to help the Council
reach a decision on the fate of the pier.
Funding Source:
General fund unappropriated fund balance account A301. Funds should be tranferred from
account A301 to account 486390. /
P10 5/85
RCA
Engineering Services for Municipal Pier Analysis
February 25, 1988
Page 2
Alternative Action:
1. Agree to a less comprehensive study and a lower fee.
2. Select another firm and negotiate scope of work/fee.
3. Leave the pier as is.
Attachments:
Agreement
Fiscal Impact Statement
LE:Iw
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
AND FLUOR DANIEL, INC. FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES
FOR RESTORATION OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH PIER
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 69/ 3T day
of ,/ �p(�1 , 19 �, by and between the CITY OF
HUNTINGTON BEACH , a municipal corporation of the State of
California, hereinafter referred to as "CITY, " and FLUOR DANIEL,
INC . a California corporation, hereinafter referred to as
"CONTRACTOR. "
WHEREAS, CITY desires to engage the services of an Engineering
Consultant to evaluate and make recommendations for possible
restoration of the storm damaged Huntington Beach Pier in the City
of Huntington Beach; and
CONTRACTOR has been selected to perform said services,
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by CITY and CONTRACTOR as follows :
1 . WORK STATEMENT
CONTRACTOR shall provide all services as described in the
Request for Proposal , dated February 3, 1988 , and CONTRACTOR' S
proposal for Engineering Services dated February 11, 1988 , as
revised February 22 , 1988 , (hereinafter collectively referred to
as Exhibit "A" ) , which is attached hereto and incorporated into
this Agreement by this reference . Said services shall sometimes
hereinafter be referred to as "PROJECT. "
CONTRACTOR hereby designates Robert Bachman, who shall
represent it and be its sole contact and agent in all
consultations with CITY during the performance of this Agreement .
2 . CITY STAFF ASSISTANCE
CITY shall assign a staff coordinator to work directly
-1-
with CONTRACTOR in the prosecution of this Agreement .
3 . TIME OF PERFORMANCE
Time is of the essence of this Agreement . The services
of the CONTRACTOR are to commence as soon as practicable after the
execution of this Agreement and all tasks specified in Exhibit "A"
shall be completed no later than twelve ( 12 ) weeks from the date
of this Agreement, with an additional two ( 2 ) weeks for all
revisions . These times may be extended with the written
permission of the CITY. The time for performance of the tasks
identified in Exhibit "A" are generally to be as shown in the
Scope of Services on the Work Program/Project Schedule. This
schedule may be amended to benefit the PROJECT if mutually agreed
by the CITY and CONTRACTOR.
4 . COMPENSATION
In consideration of the performance of the engineering
services described in Section 1 above, CITY agrees to pay
CONTRACTOR a fee of Fifty-Six Thousand One Hundred Thirty-Five
($56,135 ) Dollars.
5 . EXTRA WORK
In the event of authorization, in writing by the CITY, of
changes from the work described in Exhibit "A" , or for other
written permission authorizing additional work not contemplated
herein, additional compensation shall be allowed for such Extra
Work, so long as the prior written approval of CITY is obtained.
6 . METHOD OF PAYMENT
A . CONTRACTOR shall be entitled to progress payments
toward the fixed fee set forth in Section 4 herein in accordance
with the progress and payment schedules set forth in Exhibit A" .
-2-
B . Delivery of work product : A copy of every technical
memo and report prepared by CONTRACTOR shall be submitted to the
CITY to demonstrate progress toward completion of tasks . In the
event CITY rejects or has comments on any such product, CITY shall
identify specific requirements for satisfactory completion. Any
such product which has not been formally accepted or rejected by
CITY shall be deemed accepted .
C . The CONTRACTOR shall submit to the CITY an invoice
for each progress payment due . Such invoice shall :
1) Reference this Agreement;
2 ) Describe the services performed;
3 ) Show the total amount of the payment due;
4 ) Include a certification by a principal member
of the CONTRACTOR' S firm that the work has been
performed in accordance with the provisions of
this Agreement; and
5 ) For all payments include an estimate of the
percentage of work completed.
Upon submission of any such invoice, if CITY is
satisfied that CONTRACTOR is making satisfactory progress toward
completion of tasks in accordance with this Agreement, CITY shall
promptly approve the invoice, in which event payment shall be made
within thirty (30 ) days ' of receipt of the invoice by CITY. Such
approval shall not be unreasonably withheld . If the CITY does not
approve an invoice, CITY shall notify CONTRACTOR in writing of the
reasons for non-approval , within seven ( 7 ) calendar days of
receipt of the invoice, and the schedule of performance set forth
-3-
in Exhibit "A" shall be suspended until the parties agree that
past performance by CONTRACTOR is in, or has been brought into
compliance, or until this Agreement is terminated pursuant to
Section 12 hereof.
D . Any billings for extra work or additional services
authorized by the CITY shall be invoiced separately to the CITY.
Such invoice shall contain all of the information required under
paragraph 6C, and in addition shall list the hours expended and
hourly rate charged for such time. Such invoices shall be
approved by CITY if the work performed is in accordance with the
extra work or additional services requested, and if CITY is
satisfied that the statement of hours worked and costs incurred is
accurate. Such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Any
dispute between the parties concerning payment of such an invoice
shall be treated as separate and apart from the ongoing
performance of the remainder of this Agreement .
7 . DISPOSITION OF PLANS, ESTIMATES AND OTHER DOCUMENTS
CONTRACTOR agrees that all materials prepared hereunder,
including all original drawings, designs, reports, both field and
office notes, calculations, maps and other documents, shall be
turned over to CITY upon termination of this Agreement or upon
PROJECT completion, whichever shall occur first . In the event
this Agreement is terminated, said materials may be used by CITY
in the completion of PROJECT or as it otherwise sees fit . Title
to said materials shall pass to the CITY upon payment of fees
determined to be earned by CONTRACTOR to the point of termination
or completion of the PROJECT, whichever is applicable . CONTRACTOR
-4-
shall be entitled to retain copies of all data prepared hereunder .
8 . WARRANTY
CONTRACTOR warrants that it will perform its services in
a professional manner in keeping with generally accepted industry
standards . If within one year of completion of its services, or
termination of this Agreement, whichever first occurs, CITY
informs CONTRACTOR in writing that any part of the services fail
to meet the standard set forth in the preceding sentence,
CONTRACTOR will reperform to the standard established in the
preceding sentence such part of its services that are deficient ,
at its own cost, provided the corrective services are within the
original scope of work . The foregoing is CONTRACTOR' s sole
warranty and CITY ' s exclusive remedy in respect of the services .
In any event, (a) CONTRACTOR shall have no liability to CITY for
special, incidental, indirect or consequential damages, including
without limitation loss of profit, interest, or use, (b) releases
from liability apply even in the event of the fault, negligence,
strict liability or other legal theory of blame attributable to
the party whose liability is released or limited, and (c) implied
warranties are expressly disclaimed and waived.
9 . INDEMNIFICATION, DEFENSE, HOLD HARMLESS
CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and save and hold harmless
city, its officers and employees, from any and all liability,
including any claim of liability and any and all losses or costs
arising out of the negligent performance of this agreement by
CONTRACTOR, its officers or employees or from any willful
misconduct of CONTRACTOR, its officers or employees while engaged
-5-
in the performance of this agreement .
10 . WORKERS ' COMPENSATION
CONTRACTOR shall comply with all of the provisions of the
Workers ' Compensation Insurance and Safety Acts of the State of
California, the applicable provisions of Division 4 and 5 of the
California Labor Code and all amendments thereto; and all similar
state or federal acts or laws applicable; and shall indemnify,
defend and hold harmless CITY from and against all claims,
demands, payments, suits, actions, proceedings and judgments of
every nature and description, including attorney ' s fees and costs
presented, brought or recovered against CITY, for or on account of
any liability under any of said acts which may be incurred by
reason of any work to be performed by CONTRACTOR under this
Agreement .
11 . INSURANCE
In addition to the Workers ' Compensation Insurance and
CONTRACTOR' S covenant to indemnify CITY, CONTRACTOR shall obtain
and furnish to CITY the following insurance policies covering the
PROJECT:
A. General Liability Insurance. A policy of general
public liability insurance, including motor vehicle
coverage. Said policy shall indemnify CONTRACTOR,
its officers and employees, while acting within the
scope of their duties, against any and all claims of
arising out of or in connection with the PROJECT,
and shall provide coverage in not less than the
following amount : combined single limit bodily
-6-
injury or property damage of $1,000 ,000 per occurrence .
CONTRACTOR shall provide to the CITY an owner ' s and contractor ' s
protective liability insurance policy naming the CITY as insured
to a maximum limit value of One Million ($1 ,000 ,000 ) Dollars .
B. Professional Liability Insurance. CONTRACTOR shall
provide evidence of a professional liability
insurance policy covering the work performed by it
hereunder . Said policy shall provide coverage for
CONTRACTOR'S professional liability in an amount not
less than $300 ,000 per occurrence .
Certificates of Insurance for said policies shall be
approved in writing by the City Attorney prior to the commencement
of any work hereunder. All Certificates of Insurance (and the
policies of insurance or endorsements thereof) shall provide that
any such Certificates and policies shall not be cancelled or
modified without thirty (30 ) days ' prior written notice to CITY .
12 . INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
CONTRACTOR is, and shall be, acting at all times in the
performance of this Agreement as an independent contractor .
CONTRACTOR shall secure at its expense, and be responsible for any
and all payments of all taxes, social security, state disability
insurance compensation, unemployment compensation and other
payroll deductions for CONTRACTOR and its officers, agents and
employees and all business licenses, if any, in connection with
the services to be performed hereunder .
13 . TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT
All work required hereunder shall be performed in a good
-7-
and workmanlike manner . CITY may terminate CONTRACTOR' S services
hereunder at any time with or without cause, and whether or not
PROJECT is fully complete. Any termination of this Agreement by
CITY shall be made in writing through the City Engineer, notice of
which shall be delivered to CONTRACTOR as provided in Section 16
herein.
14 . ASSIGNMENT AND SUBCONTRACTING
This Agreement is a personal service contract and the
supervisory work hereunder shall not be delegated by CONTRACTOR to
any other person or entity without the consent of CITY.
15 . COPYRIGHTS/PATENTS
CONTRACTOR shall not apply for a patent or copyright on
any item or material produced as a result of this Agreement, as
set forth in 41 CFR 1-9 . 1 .
16 . CITY EMPLOYEES AND OFFICIALS
CONTRACTOR shall employ no CITY official nor any regular
CITY employee in the work performed pursuant to this Agreement .
No officer or employee of CITY shall have any financial interest
in this Agreement in violation of California Government Code
Sections 1090 et seq.
17 . NOTICES
Any notices or special instructions required to be given
in writing under this Agreement shall be given either by personal
delivery to CONTRACTOR'S agent ( as designated in Section 1
hereinabove ) or to CITY ' S Director of Public Works, as the
situation shall warrant, or by enclosing the same in a sealed
-8-
envelope, postage prepaid, and depositing the same in the United
States Postal Services, addressed as follows :
TO CITY: TO CONTRACTOR:
Mr . Les Evans Fluor Daniel, Inc .
Acting Director of Public Works 3333 Michelson Drive
City of Huntington Beach Irvine, California 92730
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
18 . ENTIRETY
The foregoing, and Exhibit "A" attached hereto, set forth
the entire Agreement between the parties .
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this
Agreement to be executed by and through their authorized officers
the day, month and year first above written.
CONTRACTOR: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH,
FLUOR DANIEL, INC . a municipal corporation
a California corporation of the S e o Ca fornia
By : Alf ed Sack"er Mayor
APPROVED Vice-President
t-je-
?AW. DEPT. ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
1W__ F--Ij -1-1 1 1. ;
City Clerk i y AV
ney -2_�;`7
REVIEWED AND APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED:
Ci y Administrator Acting Dir ctor of
Public Works
be
-9-
a
s •
c
FLUOR DAN 1 E L
3333 MICHELSON DRIVE
IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92730 U.S.A.
TELEPHONE: (714)975-2000
February 11 , 1988
Mr. Les Evans
City Engineer
City of Huntington Beach
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, California 92648
PROPOSAL FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES
HUNTINGTON BEACH MUNICIPAL PIER
Dear Mr. Evans:
In response to your request of February 3, 1988, Fluor Daniel and Noble
Consultants, Inc. , are pleased to present this proposal for engineering
services to evaluate and make recommendations for your recent storm
damaged pier and its possible restoration.
Our suggested scope of work to perform this evaluation and recom-
mendations consists of the items addressed in your letter of February 3,
1988 to Mr. Bob Bachman of Fluor Daniel, plus additional items which we
feel are relevant for the City of Huntington Beach's use in assessing
their course of action in the rehabilitation of the pier. The following
scope of work addresses costs to replace what was actually damaged for
FEMA funding use, recommendations and costs to replace and upgrade
the destroyed pier section and restaurant, recommendations and costs to
rehabilitate the existing deteriorating concrete pier piles and beams,
estimated cost to demolish and replace the entire pier structure including
buildings, and the recommended engineering design work and fees to
perform these above scope of work items.
1 . Estimate replacement cost of 250 plus lineal feet of wooden pier and
2300± square feet of restaurant to replace as previously constructed
for FEMA funding use. Please note that we recommend that any
new end of pier section be built at a higher elevation than has been
used previously.
2. Develop preliminary oceanographic design criteria for use in
evaluating the upgraded design of replaced pier sections and also
for evaluating a shorten pier alternative.
3. Assess the impact of the end 250 feet of pier on beach stability and
considerations of potential underwater hazards from recent storm
damaged pier/restaurant debris.
FLUOR DAN 1 E L
Mr. Les Evans February 11 , 1988
City of Huntington Beach 2
Huntington Beach, California
4. Evaluate different structural materials (wood, concrete, steel,
other) and systems for comparison in replacing the destroyed end
pier section.
S. Recommend the structural material and system for the destroyed
pier and restaurant replacement and associated replacement cost.
6. Evaluate the need for and rehabilitation of the existing concrete
portion of the pier (i.e. , piles, caps, stringers) and estimate the
associated rehabilitation cost of the existing concrete portion of the
pier.
7. Estimate the most extreme option of demolishing and replacing the
entire pier structure including the buildings.
8. Recommend the scope of engineering studies and design required
for preparation of final design drawings and specifications for the
pier's replacement and provide an estimate of the engineering fees
and schedule to perform this work.
9. A report formally documenting the above recommendations and cost
estimates.
In the remainder of this proposal, a summary of our understanding of
the piers history and previous restoration is described. Also provided
is our proposed technical approach, project organization and assignment
of responsibility between Fluor Daniel and Noble Consultants, estimated
costs to perform the tasks, fee schedule, team relevant experience and
resumes of key staff. We have included as separate attachments a
description of Fluor Daniel's background and capabilities and a brochure
describing Noble Consultants.
The work for this project will be performed by Fluor Daniel and Noble
Consultants in our Irvine, California offices. We are conveniently
located less than one mile from each other and less than 10 miles from
the pier and Huntington Beach civic center. The only consultant we
intend to employ is Scientific Services, Inc. , to perform the bathymetric
survey, side scan survey, and magnetometer survey .
We recognize that the City of Huntington Beach's budget for performing
these studies is limited (currently $20,000 has been appropriated by the
City Council). At the same time, we recognize the need for the City's
staff to obtain adequate data to formulate an informed opinion and
recommendation. Therefore we have structured our proposed tasks and
estimated costs in such a manner to allow the City staff to proceed with,
or defer tasks depending upon available funds and priorities. A
not-to-exceed cost will be established based upon the City's decision
regarding activities which are to be performed at this time. It is
FLUOR DAN I E L
Mr. Les Evans February 11 , 1988
City of Huntington Beach 3
Huntington Beach, California
currently estimated that a preliminary draft report can be completed and
submitted to the City 4 weeks after authorization to proceed.
As a leading engineering contractor, Fluor Daniel's experience and
technical reputation for engineering excellence is well known together
with our track record for meeting tight project schedules. Noble
Consultants is a well established and recognized consulting firm
specializing in coastal engineering and the design of coastal structures.
Together our team provides the experience and technical expertise you
require for developing the information needed for making a sound and
informed decision.
Of particular interest to the City of Huntington Beach should be our
recent experience with the Oceanside Pier. This newly reconstructed
wooden pier and restaurant, dedicated in September of last year,
extended over 100 feet further into the open ocean than did the
Huntington Beach Pier to depths of water exceeding 30 feet. During the
recent storm in January, it experienced storm waves which were at least
as great (and possibly greater than) as those experienced by Huntington
Beach. The Oceanside Pier, restaurant and under pier utilities suffered
no damage. Noble Consultants performed the initial engineering
feasibility study, acted as project manager, construction manager, full
time inspection, and provided wave, bathymetric, and geotechnical
design criteria for the project. Fluor Daniel provided all design
engineering for the pier, restaurant, and all pier utilities as well as
providing an accurate engineer's estimate and construction coordination.
Fluor Daniel and Noble Consultants look forward to working with the
City of Huntington Beach and stand ready to begin work immediately. If
you have questions, please feel free to contact Ron Noble at (714)
752-1530 or Bob Bachman at (714) 975-4950.
Very truly yours,
Robert E. Bachman
Principal Structural Engineer
Fluor Daniel, Inc.
Ron Noble
President, Noble Consultants
REB: RN :os
016/10642
HISTORY OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH PIER
To gain a better understanding of the existing condition of the Huntington
Beach Pier, we have reviewed the plans of the pier provided by the City
during various stages of construction and rehabilitation. The pier is actually
three separate structures; the old pier, the concrete extension and the wooden
end section. In the following discussion, the history of each of the sections is
described.
The Old Pier (Bents 1-57)
The Old Pier was designed and built in 1914. As originally designed, the pier
had 52 bents and was 1201'-4" long including a 22'-8" concrete approach
structure. As actually constructed, the pier had 57 bents and was 1314'-8"
long including a 22'-8" concrete approach structure. The average span of the
bents was 22'-8" and utilized solid precast concrete piles 18" and 20" in
diameter. The height of the deck was 30'-6" above MLLW.
As part of the pier modification work performed in 1930, an 8 foot long
3" thick wire reinforced concrete shell was placed over each pile in the old
pier. The shell was positioned to be in the tidal zone of each pile. A
pressure grout infill 1" thick for the 18" piles and 1-1/2" thick for the 20"
piles filled the void between shell and the pile. Above the shell a 2" thick
layer of gunite was applied to piles and a 1-1/4" thick layer of gunite was
applied to all concrete beam surfaces.
In 1949, there was general rehabilitation of the old pier upper work. The
wooden stringers and concrete decking were replaced and the gunite layer
over the beam and piles was repaired were required.
Some of the onshore piling have been encased with cast-in-place concrete
within the past several years. Precise documentation on the design of these
casings was not available at the time of this writing.
A study was performed in 1979 by Swanson Services and William Simpson
Structural Engineer for the City of Huntington Beach to evaluate the condition
of the existing pier. They recommended that because of extensive corrosion of
reinforcing steel in the concrete portion that the old pier be demolished and
replaced.
The old pier did not appear to experience any damage either in the storms of
1983 or 1988. It also does not appear that the old pier experienced any
damage during the 1933 Long Beach earthquake or the 1939 major tropical
storm.
The Concrete Extension (Bents 57-67)
The concrete extension was designed and built in 1930 as part of a general
pier modification program. As originally designed, the concrete extension
added Bents 58-80 to the old pier. This increased the total length of the pier
to 1816'-4" including the 22'-8" concrete approach. The pier utilized 16"
FLUOR DAN I EL
016/10642 4
diameter precast concrete piles with a 4" diameter hollow core center used for
jetting. The bent spans continued at 22'-8" . An unusual feature of the
pier was the fact that the deck elevation was reduced to 26'-6" above MLLW for
this extension. No reason is currently understood for this reduction in
height except perhaps the fact that there was a boat access ramp on the
pierhead and a lower height made the ramp easier to handle.
In 1939 there was a major tropical storm which destroyed the pier from
Bents 68 through 80. This section was replaced by a wooden pier in 1940.
Minor repair to the remaining concrete extension (Bents 57-67) were also made
in 1940. The length of pier to the end of the concrete extension is
1521'-8" including 22'-8" concrete approach structure.
In 1970, the concrete extension was rehabilitated. The deck and wooden
stringers were replaced with precast concrete beams and a new 6-1/2" thick
concrete deck and asphalt topping. Also a 1-1/2" thick wire reinforced gunite
layer was applied to all beam surfaces.
In the 1979 study performed by Swanson Services and William Simpson, it was
recommended that an epoxy coating be applied to the piles to inhibit corrosion
of the reinforcing steel. It is not known at the time of this writing whether
this recommendation was followed.
The concrete extension did not appear to experience any damage either in the
storms of 1983 or 1988.
The Wooden End Section
In 1940, the wooden end section was designed and constructed to replace the
concrete extension which was destroyed in the 1939 storm. The pile bents
for this new wooden section were offset 5 feet from the old concrete pier.
The new wood section added Bents 68-81 with the new total length of 1821'-4"
including 22'-8" concrete approach structure. The elevation of the deck
remained at 26'-6-1/2", the same as the concrete extension.
In the 1979 study, Swanson and Simpson indicated that the wooden end
section was in good shape and only minor replacement of corroded metal
fasteners was required.
In 1983, the northern corners of the pierhead were damaged in the winter
storm. The damaged pierhead was repaired utilizing similar design details as
had been used in 1940. Furthermore, new piles were added to support a new
two-story restaurant. In 1985, the new restaurant was constructed on the
pierhead.
On January 17, 1988, storm waves destroyed virtually all of the end wooden
section, leaving only portions of Bents 68-70 above water. The new
restaurant was also lost.
FLUOR DAN I E L
"'r /10642 5
TECHNICAL APPROACH
A brief description of our technical approach to perform the suggested
scope of work is presented below.
Cost to Replace Damaged Pier Section and Restaurant
We will estimate the construction cost in todays dollars to replace all
damaged and lost portions of the pier including the restaurant structure
as a result of the January 1988 coastal storm. This replacement cost will
be based on pier and restaurant sections using like materials, elevations,
square footage and design sections as those that were damaged and lost
for the sole purpose in applying for FEMA funding.
Preliminary Oceanographic Design Criteria
A preliminary assessment will be made of the oceanographic design
criteria for use in selecting adequate structural members and systems
and developing cost estimates to upgrade replaced pier sections and
restaurant to withstand a one hundred year storm event. Oceanographic
design criteria will consist of estimating an extreme eroded ocean bottom
profile along the pier structure, a maximum stillwater level, design wave
characteristics along the entire pier structure, and the distribution of
wave loads throughout the pier structure. This information will be used
to assess the required pier deck elevation, pile sizes and spacing, and
other pier structural elements for both a full length and shortened pier
structure.
Beach Stability and Underwater Hazards
A bathymetric survey will be performed to obtain the existing ocean
bottom depths along the existing, pre-existing damaged and destroyed
pier structures. Included in this survey will be a side scan sonar
survey to obtain a relief picture of bottom debris, a magnatometer
survey to locate metal debris and a diver survey for visual verification
purposes. An assessment will also be made of a shortened pier's
potential impact on the adjacent beach stability. We will assess if a
shortened pier could result in the change of wave energy reaching the
City beaches thus impacting the movement of onshore-offshore and along-
shore sediment transport and the potential alteration of beach profiles.
Evaluate Structural Materials and Systems
Using the preliminary oceanographic design criteria plus seismic, wind
and geotechnical considerations, we will evaluate pier structural elements
using timber, steel, concrete or a composite of these materials for
replacement of the destroyed pier section. This evaluation will consider
the replaced pier section being able to structurally stand on its own with
partial or no credit taken for the existing concrete pier structure. A
comparison of the advantages and disadvantages will be made of various
pier structural systems using these materials considering such items as
first cost, operation and maintenance cost, design load limits, con-
structibility, and suitability for the ocean environment.
FLUOR DAN I E L
016/10642 6
Recommended Structural Material and System
Based on the comparison of various pier structural materials and systems we
will make our recommendations for structural materials and systems to replace
the destroyed pier section and restaurant including an estimate of the
associated replacement cost. Our recommendation will include the pier deck
elevation and any replacement or alteration of existing concrete pier structure
such as the outer lower elevated concrete pier section.
Evaluate Rehabilitation of Existing Concrete Pier Sections
We will perform a visual inspection and make our best judgement regarding
remaining life of the existing concrete pier sections. Based on this assessment
we will provide recommendations pertaining to the rehabilitation of degraded
piling, pile caps, pier stringers, decking and/or their structural connections,
and will include an estimate of the rehabilitation costs. For example, certain
concrete piling and pile caps have spalled and cracked sufficiently to expose
the steel reinforcement to severe corrosion where no structural credit should
be taken for the reinforcement.
Cost to Demolish and Replace Entire Pier
We will provide the City with an estimated cost if the existing pier structure
were completely demolished and replaced with a new designed pier and pier
buildings. This estimate will be provided only as an upper bound number for
use in the City's planning process.
Recommended Engineering Design Studies
In addition, we will provide a scope of our recommended engineering studies
and required design to prepare the final design drawings and specifications for
the pier's replacement as discussed above. Our estimate of engineering fees
and schedule will be provided for these recommended engineering services.
Report Preparation
The above described scope of work, including our findings and recommen-
dations, will be presented in a draft report and a final report after receiving
the City's review comments.
FLUOR DAN I EL
016/10642 7
ESTIMATED COSTS
Total Average
Activity Description Manhours Rate Cost
1 . Replacement Cost of Destroyed 24 $65.00 $ 1 ,560
Pier and Restaurant
2. Develop Preliminary Oceanographic 40 65.00 2,600
Criteria
3. A. Beach Stability 24 65.00 1 ,560
B . Underwater Hazards Study Subcontract --- 5,000
4. Evaluate Different Materials/ 40 65.00 2,600
System for Replacing Destroyed
Pier Section
5. Recommendation & Preliminary 60 65.00 3,900
Design/Cost for Upgraded Pier
for Replacement Section
6. Evaluate/Provide Recommendations 100 65.00 6,500
and Cost for Rehabilitation of
Existing Concrete Portion
7. Preliminary Design and Cost for 80 65.00 5,200
Replacing Entire Pier
8. Engineering Scope and Estimate No Charge
of Engineering Fees for Detailed
Engineering for Above Work
9. Report Preparation 100 70.00 71000
Total $35,920
FLUOR DAN I EL
1 Ct42 8
REIMBURSABLE FEE SCHEDULE
Fluor Daniel and Nobel Consultants shall be reimbursed for all personnel
directly engaged in the services in accordance with the following fee schedule:
Project Director (Principal-in-Charge) $85.00/Hour
Project Manager $78.00/Hour
Geotechnical Engineer $70.00/Hour
Design Engineer $65.00/Hour
Cost Engineer $60.00/Hour
Designer $50.00/Hour
Clerical/Word Processing $30.00/Hour
The above rates are all inclusive and include all expenses. They also include
reproduction and binding of 4 copies of the draft report and 12 copies of the
final report including incorporation of comments.
FLUOR DAN I E L
(1,16.110642 9
RECENT RELATED FLUOR DANIEL DESIGN EXPERIENCE
Construction
Project Name/ Construction Completion Clients Name
Location Cost Date Address
Oceanside Pier $3,650,000 September, City of Oceanside
Reconstruction 1987 Glenn Prentice
Project Public Services Dir.
Oceanside, 307 N. Nevada
California Oceanside, CA
(619) 439-7143
Design of Berths $25,000,000 1990 Port of Los Angeles
174-181 (Estimated) (Estimated) Contact:
Port of Los Angeles Gerald Ruse
California P.O. Box 151
San Pedro, CA 90733
(213) 519-3637
Design of Container $30,000,000 October, Port of Los Angeles
Terminal and 1987 Contact:
Wharf Berths Gerald Ruse
136-139 P.O. Box 151
Port of Los Angeles San Pedro, CA 90733
California (213) 519-3637
Hermosa Offshore $180,000,000 1986 Chevron Oil Company
Platform Contact:
Santa Barbara Sam Chase
California Concord, CA
(415) 827-6000
Loading Dock $ 3,000,000 1982 Texaco Refinery, Inc.
Berths 84, 84A Mr. P. East
Port of Long Beach (213) 835-8261
Long Beach,
California
FLUOR DAN I E L
016/10642 10
RELEVANT NOBLE CONSULTANTS PIER EXPERIENCE
1 . Oceanside Municipal Pier, Oceanside, California (City of Oceanside) -
Project Engineer/Manager for demolition of storm damaged pier and
reconstruction of new 1600-foot long ocean timber pier section, including
two story restaurant, retail shop, restrooms, lifeguard tower and bait
shop. Performed engineering feasibility study, developed geotechnical/
oceanographic design criteria, prepared RFP for detailed design,
recommended pier's structural elements and reviewed final design, plans
and specifications, prepared construction bid documents, and performed
construction administration and residential inspection.
2. Point Pinole Recreational Fishing Pier, Point Pinole, California (East Bay
Regional Parks) - Performed engineering investigation, site plans, final
engineering design, plans and specifications, and construction inspection
for pre-stressed concrete pier.
3. Port Kaiser Wharf, Port Kaiser, Jamaica (Alumina Partners of Jamaica) -
Performed engineering investigation/final engineering design of finger pier
berthing using anchored sheet pile pier with rock slope protection,
detailed cost estimate, construction plans and specifications.
4. Leshi Park Recreational Pier, Leshi Park, Seattle, Washington (City of
Seattle) - Performed planning studies and final engineering design for
timber pier, marina and breakwater facility. Prepared plans and
specifications and provided construction inspection.
5. Frenchman's Recreational Pier, Frenchman's Bay, Toronto, Canada
(Frenchman's Bay Yacht Club) - Performed planning studies and final
engineering design for a composite steel-timber pier and for marina
launching facility. Prepared construction plans and specifications.
FLUOR DAN I EL
C. 6110642 11
KEY STAFF
Resumes of the following key staff are provided in the following pages:
Fluor Daniel
Project Director (Principal-in-Charge) R. E. Bachman
Project Manager R. E. Walliham
Structural Design Engineer F. S. Chao
Corrosion and Protective Coatings Expert S. Reddi
Evaluation and Rehabilitation of Existing M. Tan
Concrete Expert
Cost Engineer N. A. Pick
Noble Consultants
Project Manager R . Noble
Technical Review M. Noble
Beach Stability, Pier Cost Studies J. Moore
Wave Design Criteria S. Noble
FLUOR DAN 1 EL
016/10642 12
7. Brief Resume of Key Persons, Specialists, and individual Consultants
Anticipated for this Project.
a. Name & Title: ROBERT E. BACHMAN
b. Project Assignment: Project Director (Principal-in-Charge)
c. Name of Firm with which associated: FLUOR DANIEL
d. Years experience: 20 With This Firm 13 With Other Firms 7
e. Education: Degree(s)/Year/Specialization B.S./Civil Engineering;
M.S./Structural Engineering
f. Active Registration: Year First Registered/Discipline Civil Engineer (CA) No. C21285
Structural Engineer CA No. S2123
g. Other Experience and Qualifications relevant to the proposed project:
SPECIFIC EXPERIENCE:
Mr. Bachman has 20 years of civil/structural engineering experience on a variety
of domestic and foreign projects. On several projects he has had responsible
charge for all structural engineering activities including development of design
criteria, preparation of specifications, procurement and subcontract packages, bid
evaluations, supervision of engineering design, and providing home office support
during construction.
Recently constructed projects on which Mr. Bachman has had project manager design
responsibility include the new Oceanside Pier and restaurant in Oceanside,
California. He also has had civil and structural engineering responsibility for a
110 MW cogeneration facility for Union Carbide in Seadrift, Texas and a 250 MM SFD
gas conditioning plant for ARCO in Dubai , United Arab Emirates. Other projects in
which Mr. Bachman has been the project structural engineer include conceptual
studies for nuclear fuel reprocessing facility for the U.S. Department of Energy,
a seawater desalting plant for Saudi Arabia , a gas conditioning plant for Qatar,
and a liquified natural gas (LNG) receiving terminal for the Southern California
Gas Company. His experience with the LNG terminal includes overviewing the
preliminary design of the 4500 foot long concrete open water pier near Pt.
Conception.
Mr. Bachman is considered an in-house expert in design and analysis of structures
for earthquakes , tornados , blast, ground shock, thermal and other extreme loads as
well as vibration and vibration isolation. He has had involvement in the
development in state-of-the-art soil structure interaction seismic analysis and
tornado missile impact analyses for several nuclear projects. He also has had
involvement in the vibration analysis and design of a gas compression module for
the North Slope of Alaska, and a solar power plant at Carissa Plains near San Luis
Obispo.
TECHNICAL SOCIETIES:
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
American Concrete Institute (ACI)
Structural Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOC)
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI)
016/10644
USE/DISCLOSURE OF THIS MATERIAL IS SUBJECT TO THE RESTRICTION
ON THE"NOTICE'' PAGE IN FRONT OF THIS DOCUMENT.
7. Brief Resume of Key Persons, Specialists, and individual Consultants
Anticipated for this Project.
a. Name & Title: SATYA V. REDDI
b. Project Assignment: Corrosion and Protective Coatings Expert
c. Name of Firm with which associated: FLUOR DANIEL
d. Years experience: 14 With This Firm 14 With Other Firms 0
e. Education: Degree(s)/Year/Specialization B.S./Chemical Engineering
f. Active Registration: Year First Registered/Discipline Professional Engineer (CA)
g. Other Experience and Qualifications relevant to the proposed project:
SPECIFIC EXPERIENCE:
Design and consultation experience in the fields of insulation, industrial
coatings (paints) , elastomeric and nonelastomeric linings, chemical cleaning and
corrosion inhibitors , cathodic protection and fireproofing coatings.
Developed microcomputer application programs for insulation design, materials
takeoff, budget estimating, and quotation summaries.
Insulation responsibilities include design of insulation systems for hot and cold
services, specification development, request for quotations, and contract
packages. Provide consultation services for removal of insulation containing
asbestos.
External coating engineering responsibilities include review of client standard
paint specifications, evaluation of atmospheric and plant corrodants and their
effect on paint systems, evaluation of indigenous paint materials and their
characteristics , selection of paint materials, design of paint systems,
specification preparation, provision of consulting services to client personnel ,
troubleshooting of surface preparation and paint application problems, quality
assurance and quality control .
Internal coating/lining responsibilities include review of chemical and physical
properties of solutions, selection of surface preparation criteria and lining
systems , troubleshooting and quality control .
Project conceptualization, design of experimental systems, bench-scale and pilot
plant operations , interpretation and analysis of data and evaluation of technical
and economic feasibilities of coatings.
Research and development of coating for aluminum (U.S. patent 3,776,783 and French
patent 2,160,809) .
016/10644
USE/DISCLOSURE OF THIS MATERIAL IS SUBJECT TO THE RESTRICTION
ON THE "NOTICE'' PAGE IN FRONT OF THIS DOCUMENT.
7. Brief Resume of Key Persons, Specialists, and individual Consultants
Anticipated for this Project.
a. Name & Title: NORMAN A. PICK, Cost/Scheduling Engineer
b. Project Assignment: Cost/Schedule Engineer
c. Name of Firm with which associated: FLUOR DANIEL
d. Years experience: With This Firm 7 With Other Firms 4
e. Education: Degree(s)/Year/Specialization B.S./1974/Construction
Graduate Courses/Business Administration
f. Active Registration: Year First Registered/DisciplineAmeri can Association of Cost Engineers
g. Other Experience and Qualifications relevant to the proposed project:
RELEVANT QUALIFICATIONS - Mr. Pick has specialized in Cost Engineering/Project
ontro s for facility construction projects. He has experience both in the office
during design and field construction.
SPECIFIC EXPERIENCE - Mr. Pick was selected for this project because of his recent
experience as the responsible Cost Engineer on Pier/Wharf Upgrade projects for
Fluor Daniel .
o He was responsible for Cost Engineering of the demolition and installation of
the New Oceanside Pier which was dedicated in September of 1987.
o He was the responsible Cost/Schedule Engineer for the Port of Los Angeles
upgrade of Berths 136-139 including demolition of existing facilities,
modification of existing structures, and provision of new facilities.
o He was the responsible Cost/Schedule Engineer for the design of berths
174-181 at Port of Los Angeles. This project also included demolition of
existing facilities, design of a new concrete wharf, dredging and various new
utilities and buildings. It also provided for phased construction to
maintain tenant operations during the construction period.
o He was responsible for the Cost Engineering for the design of the new Lone
Star Cement Terminal project in Port of Redwood City.
016/10644
USE/DISCLOSURE OF THIS MATERIAL IS SUBJECT TO THE RESTRICTION
ON THE "NOTICE'' PAGE IN FRONT OF THIS DOCUMENT.
7. Brief Resume of Key Persons, Specialists, and individual Consultants
Anticipated for this Project.
a. Name & Title: FRANK S. CHAO, Senior Structural Engineer
b. Project Assignment: Civil-Structural Design Engineer
c. Name of Firm with which associated: Fluor Daniel
d. Years experience: With This Firm 12 With Other Firms 15
e. Education: Degree(s)/Year/Specialization B.S./1956/Civil Engineering
M.S./1969/Civil Engineering
f. Active Registration: Year First Registered/Discipline 1968, Civil Engineering (CA)
1972, Structural Engineering CA
g. Other Experience and Qualifications relevant to the proposed project:
RELEVANT QUALIFICATIONS - Mr. Chao has significant experience in the upgrade of
waterfront structures as well as an extensive list of civil work and industrial
projects. He was selected as the project Civil/Structural Engineer because of
his recent experience on three projects involving new construction and repair of
large concrete pier facilities and because he was the structural engineer for
the new Oceanside Pier.
SPECIFIC EXPERIENCE
o Oceanside Municipal Pier - Engineering Services for the 1600 foot long timber
pier. This new pier, along with its concrete approach, is the longest open
water pier on the West Coast and is designed to withstand the 100 year design
storm.
o Port of Los Angeles Berths 174-181 : Engineering for a 1000-foot long
reinforced concrete wharf supported on prestressed concrete piles . The
project included dredging, fendering, rock revetment, and 30 acres of
backland improvements to handle container and bulk cargoes. The work
included specifications , soils investigations and permitting.
o Port of Los Angeles Berths 136-139: Engineering for strengthening an
existing 1 ,800-foot reinforced concrete wharf and for adding a new reinforced
concrete wharf section supported on prestressed concrete piles. The project
included fendering, dredging, rock revetment, and 70 acres of backland
improvements for container traffic. The work included inspection of the
existing wharf, soils investigation, specifications , and permitting.
o Lone Star Cement Terminal : Engineering services for a new 600-foot
reinforced concrete wharf for cement unloading and sheet piled barge landing.
o Port of Long Beach Berth 84: Engineering for a 480-foot long reinforced
concrete wharf supported on prestressed concrete piles.
016/10646
USE/DISCLOSURE OF THIS MATERIAL IS SUBJECT TO THE RESTRICTION
ON THE ''NOTICE'' PAGE IN FRONT OF THIS DOCUMENT.
7. Brief Resume of Key Perso , Specialists, and Individual Consultants Anticipated for this Project.
RESUME: FRANK S. CHAO 2
o Mr. Chao has also designed:
- A 1,000-foot long concrete quaywall .
- A 1,000-foot long precast concrete caisson wharf.
- A 28-foot deep by 1,400-foot long steel sheet piled wharf.
- A 1/2 mile long outer harbor breakwater.
- Backland facilities for bulk and break-bulk cargoes.
016/10646
USE/DISCLOSURE OF THIS MATERIAL IS SUBJECT TO THE RESTRICTION Y.,rewaaaiwwrs
ON THE"NOTICE"FACE IN FRONT OF THIS DOCUMENT.
�'+�•tee s 6M ti0�c� •� M OJ
IbeelQfO(Nwu S26S6)
7. Brief Resume of Key Persons, Specialists, and individual Consultants
Anticipated for this Project.
a. Name & Title: M. A. TAN
b. Project Assignment: Structural Engineer Expert in Evaluation of Existing
Concrete Structures
c. Name of Firm with which associated: FLUOR DANIEL
d. Years experience: 28 With This Firm 21 With Other Firms 7
e. Education: Degrees)/Year/Specialization B.S./Civil Engineering
M.S./Structural Engineering
f. Active Registration: Year First Registered/Discipline Civil Engineer (CA) No. C15304
Structural Engineer CA No. S1633
g. Other Experience and Qualifications relevant to the proposed project:
EXPERIENCE SUMMARY:
Project Structural Engineer responsible for the direction and management of civil
and structural engineering activities.
Engineering analysis and design of steel and concrete structures, foundations
and buildings . Developed design criteria specifications and handling
procedures for modular construction. Also developed design and construction
techniques for marine facilities and large dock systems . Worked on project in
an advisory capacity in the development of marine structure and the design of
highway bridges.
Project Structural Engineer for a modular production project in Prudhoe Bay,
Alaska. Responsible for the direction and management of civil and structural
engineering activities.
Project Structural Engineer as part of Managing Contractor Team for a large
complex in Saudi Arabia using modular construction. Responsible for the
development of criteria, specifications and standard drawings for design,
handling, transportation, erection of modules, monitoring and coordinating all
structural activities.
Project Structural Engineer for facilities in Saudi Arabia. Responsible for site
evaluation and the development of design criteria based on Saudi Arabia
environment.
Technical Consultant in California and Alaska. Worked in an advisory capacity
for the development of marine structures, concrete storage tanks and the
design criteria for construction and handling of modules.
SPECIFIC EXPERIENCE:
o Structural Engineer
Building Inspection
Fluor Daniel
Responsible for the structural evaluation of existing building, including
determination of code nonconformance and potential loss of structural
016/10647
USE/DISCLOSURE OF THIS MATERIAL IS SUBJECT TO THE RESTRICTION
ON THE "NOTICE" PAGE IN FRONT OF THIS DOCUMENT.
7. Brief Resume of Key Persons, Specialists, and Individual Consultants Anticipated for this Project.
RESUME: M. A. TAN 2
integrity due to environmental and/or operational conditions. Field
investigations, inspections and preparation of reports, including sketches
and cost estimates for recommended repairs. Special attention was given
to evaluation for seismic loads and member connections for code defined
lateral excitations.
Responsibilities included supervision, review of existing drawings and
calculations, field investigations and inspections, preparation of reports
and special analysis and studies.
o Structural Engineer
Watson Modernization Project
Fluor Daniel
Technical consultant to Project Structural Engineer for a modification
project located in California.
o Structural Engineer
Lisburne Facilities Project
Fluor Daniel
Project Structural Engineer for project located in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska.
Responsible for overall management and supervision of the civil and
structural activities, scheduling, material requisitioning, subcontracts and
cost estimates.
016/10647
USE/DISCLOSURE OF THIS MATERIAL IS SUBJECT TO THE RESTRICTION Irir.ewr»ar.r.s
ON THE"NOTICE"PAGE IN FRONT OF THIS DOCUMENT.
2"NOW47d(Now 5-2s-w)
t •
7. Brief Resume of Key Persons, Specialists, and individual Consultants
Anticipated for this Project.
a. Name & Title: ROGER E. WALLIHAN, Project Manager
b. Project Assignment: Project Manager
c. Name of Firm with which associated: Fluor Daniel
d. Years experience: With This Firm 9 With Other Firms 19
e. Education: Degree(s)/Year/Specialization B.S./1959, Engineering
M.S./1966/Hydraulic (Coastal ) Engineering
f. Active Registration: Year First Registered/Discipline 1968/Civi 1 C17039
g. Other Experience and Qualifications relevant to the proposed project:
RELEVANT QUALIFICATIONS - Mr. Wallihan has over 25 years of experience in the
design and construction of marine facilities in all parts of the world. His
responsibilities have included overall management as well as the preparation of
feasibility and environmental studies, design, contracts administration,
construction supervision, permitting, quality control , safety, and cost and
scheduling.
Mr. Wallihan was selected as project manager for the Pier 3 upgrade because of
his recent successful experience in managing a number of similar upgrades for
the Port of Los Angeles.
SPECIFIC EXPERIENCE
o Current assignment: Berths 174-181 Wharf and Backland Improvements, Port of
Los Angeles. The project involves engineering and design, preparation of
construction plans and specifications, permitting, and engineering services
during construction. Scope of Work includes demolition, dredging, rock
revetment and construction of a new 1000 foot container ship wharf. The
wharf consists of a reinforced concrete relieving platform supported on
prestressed concrete piles. Backland improvements include roads , railroads,
buildings, electrification, sanitary sewers, storm drainage, potable water,
fire water, communications, pavements and fencing. Design activities
included soils investigations, cathodic protection studies and disposal of
contaminated dredge spoils.
o Mr. Wallihan managed the design and assisted the Port of Los Angeles during
construction this past year for Berths 136-139 Wharf and Backland
Improvements. This project is essentially complete. The project involved
engineering and design, preparation of construction contract documents,
permitting, and engineering services during construction . Work includes
demolition, dredging, rock revetment, strengthening of existing reinforced
concrete wharf, and construction of a new 1800 foot container ship wharf.
The new wharf consists of a reinforced concrete relieving platform supported
on prestressed concrete piles. The 70 acres of backland improvements include
roads, railroad, buildings, electrification, sanitary sewers, storm drains,
potable water, fire water, gas , communications, pavements, fencing,
transtainer runways, wash pods, repair areas, fuel station and reefer storage
areas. Design activities included inspection and analysis of the existing
016/10648
USE/DISCLOSURE OF THIS MATERIAL IS SUBJECT TO THE RESTRICTION
ON THE ''NOTICE'' PAGE IN FRONT OF THIS DOCUMENT.
7 Brief Resume of Key Persons, Specialists, and Individual Consultan s Anticipated for this Project.
RESUME: ROGER E. WALLIHAN 2
wharf structure, soils investigation, investigation of toxic wastes, and
cathode protection studies.
o Lone Star Cement Terminal , Redwood City, California. The project involved
engineering studies and permitting for a bulk cement receiving and shipping
facility. The marine facilities included 600 foot long reinforced concrete
wharf, a sheet pile barge loading dock, dredging, and slope protection. Work
activities included soils investigation, dredge disposal studies, sedi-
mentation studies, permitting applications and hearings with the Corps of
Engineers and other agencies.
o ADNOC Sulfur Terminal , United Arab Emirates. The project involved engi-
neering, design of a sulfur receiving, storage and shipping facility
consisting of a dredged basin and channels, steel pile pier, steel pile
dolphins, cathodic protection systems, 1,000 ton per hour ship loader for
loading 25,000 DWT vessels, 40,000 ton storage building, truck receiving
station, conveyors , dust control , buildings, roads, power and utilities.
Work included feasibility studies, optimization studies, soils investi-
gations, contract drawings and specifications, and bid evaluation.
o ADNOC Bulk Cargo Terminal , United Arab Emirates. Represented owner in
supervising and managing the investigations, studies, design and construction
of a three berth, reinforced concrete, steel-pile wharf, dolphins and walk-
ways, dredged basins and channels, navigation aids, bag/bulk ship loaders,
conveyor system, cathodic protection system, roads , utilities, and anhydrous
ammonia piping and loading arm. Facility used for loading bulk or bagged
materials and anhydrous liquid ammonia.
o ADNOC Construction Cargo Wharf, United Arab Emirates. Represented owner and
supervised general cargo operations at a three berth terminal . Provided
ongoing facility inspection, including underwater inspection, and scheduled
maintenance for the steel piled wharf structure and the backland support
area. Supervised cathodic protection studies.
o Alyeska Valdez Marine Terminal , Valdez, Alaska. Supervised the design and
construction of four tanker berths, a small boat harbor, ballast water
treatment facilities and a sea water outfall at the Valdez Marine Terminal .
The loading berths were major tubular steel jacketed structures capable of
handling 250,000 DWT oil tanker. Work included soils investigations,
hydrographic studies, sub-bottom profiling, side-scan sonar, environmental
studies and controls, rock breakwaters, marine landfills, cathodic protection
and navigation aids.
As a Project Engineer and Project Manager for nine years with the Los Angeles
District of the Corps of Engineers, Mr. Wallihan was responsible for harbor and
beach protection studies and designs for Dana Point, Redondo Beach, Marina Del
Ray, San Luis Obispo, and Port of Los Angeles.
016/10648
USE/DISCLOSURE OF THIS MATERIAL IS SUBJECT TO THE RESTRICTION �����
ON THE"NOTICE"FACE IN FRONT OF THIS DOCUMENT.
w.....e a cw tie wu+q,..CM"r Q7
ZU lomma(N"S.")
PROJECT ORGANIZATION
The organization for our project team is reflected on the organization chart
found on the following page. Please note that key staff will be assigned on an
as needed basis. The division of responsibilities between Fluor Daniel (FDI)
and Noble Consultants (NCI) for the proposed tasks identified earlier is as
follows:
Activity Description Responsibility
1 Estimate Replacement Cost of Destroyed Both
Pier and Restaurant
2 Develop Preliminary Oceanographic Data NCI
3 Beach Stability/Underwater Hazards NCI
4 Evaluation of Materials/Systems Both
for New Replacement Pier Section
5 Recommend Pier and Restaurant Design Both
and Replacement Cost
6 Evaluate/Provide Rehabilitation of FDI
Existing Concrete Pier Recommendations
7 Total Replacement Cost Estimate FDI
8 Scope and Fee Development for Detailed Both
Engineering
016/10642 13
NOBLE CONSULTANTS •
RONALD M. NOBLE
Principal /Vice President
EXPERTISE Civil Engineering specializing in coastal - ocean
engineering, coastal -riverine flooding , port-
harbor projects, and waterfront developments. Mr.
Noble has specialized in the coastal -ocean and
hydrologic engineering fields for over twenty
years in which he has directed projects throughout
the United States and overseas involved with coas-
tal erosion, oceanographic investigations, sedi -
ment transport, sediment budgets, beach management
plans, design of coastal and waterfront facili -
ties, flood analysis, shore protection, and dred-
ging studies.
EXPERIENCE
• Performed coastal processes investigations consis-
ting of wave-shoreline interaction , sediment
transport, sediment budgets and coastal erosion to
develop shoreline management plans for the beaches
at the City of Del Mar and the City of Oceanside.
These plans consisted of combinations of beach
renourishment and shore protection and / or groin
systems. Also was involved in the first regional
erosion management study of its kind in the nation
for the development of a comprehensive beach ero-
sion management plan for the State of New Jersey's
entire 120 mile shoreline.
• Project manager for the National Shoreline Study,
California Regional Inventory. This study identi -
fied shoreline erosional conditions for the entire
state ' s shoreline area. Recommended and identi -
fied beach nourishment and/or other suitable pro-
tection including estimated costs and priorities
of importance.
• Performed an investigation for the potential reuse
of dredged sands within San Francisco Bay.
Considered various reuses, especially its economic
feasibility and suitability as beach nourishment
material. Directed the engineering, geotechnical ,
and environmental work for preparation of reports,
permits, plans, and specifications for maintenance
dredging at Huntington Harbour/Sunset Harbor .
• Directed preparation of reconnaissance reports,
feasibility reports and conditional surveys for
southern California harbors for the U. S. Army
Corps of Engineers . These studies included
•
Ronald M. Noble
Page Two
coastal processes investigations and recommended
alternative improvements to mitigate navigation
and storm damage due to harbor shoaling and wave-
induced flooding.
• Performed shoreline investigations of numerous
exposed ocean beaches, including evaluation of
erosion, sediment transport, and wave conditions
to recommend types of shore protection. Performed
engineering designs and prepared plans, specifica-
tions, and cost estimates.
• Project engineer for overseeing rehabilitation of
City of Oceanside ocean pier . This project
included feasibility studies , development of
design criteria, demolition of storm damaged pier,
design of new pier including buildings , and con -
struction management of pier and buildings.
• Performed coastal investigation for new Sunroad
Marina in San Diego Bay, and performed engineering
design, plans and specifications for prestressed
concrete breakwater and entire 550 boat marina
. dock system and appurtenances.
• Performed marine investigations for a petrochemi -
cal harbor complex at Dos Bocas, Tobasco, Mexico.
This included the planning and implementation of
an oceanographic data gathering program; develop-
ment of a numerical wave hindcast computer model
for the Gulf of Mexico; and shoreline stability,
design flood elevations and design wave analyses.
• Review of master plan for Ruwais industrial deve-
lopment's multipurpose port facility. This inves-
tigation included recommendations for the
layout and configuration of port facilities.
• Developed oceanographic design criteria, port and
harbor layouts , and breakwater and channel
schemes , for several ports , harbors , and water-
front developments , including preparation of
designs , plans , and specs for bulkheads, piers ,
etc .
• Siting and design investigation for dock struc-
tures at 15 atolls within the Marshall Islands
Group. This investigation included site selec-
tion , development of design criteria , and the
design, configuration, and alignment schemes for
dock structures.
• NOBLE CONSULTANTS •
y .
Ronald M. Noble
Page Three
• Site selection, coastal and hydrology studies for
nuclear and conventional power plants for over 40
utility companies located in the United States and
overseas . These studies were prepared for envi -
ronmental , preliminary safety analysis and final
safety analysis reports. Provided expert testi -
mony before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and
the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safety.
9 Coastal engineering and oceanographic studies for
first planned offshore nuclear power plant off -
shore of New Jersey for Public Service Electric
and Gas Company.
s Manager of Dames and Moore' s firmwide Marine
Services Group consisting of approximately 50
coastal engineers , oceanographers , marine
geologists / geophysicists , offshore soils
engineers, and marine biologists. Responsible for
overseeing staffing and technical quality of all
marine work throughout the U. S . and overseas .
EDUCATION MSCE , Specializing in Coastal and Ocean
Engineering , University of California, Berkeley
BSCE, San Jose State University
REGISTRATIONS Civil Engineer, California
NAUI Scuba Diver
PROFESSIONAL Appointed U. S. Expert Representative on the
RECOGNITION International Atomic Energy Agency Committee For
Development of an International Standard on
Design Basis Floods for Nuclear Power Plants on
Coastal Sites .
Member of the Coastal Engineering Research
Counci 1 .
Director of The American Shore and Beach
Preservation Association .
Past Director and Co-Founder of the California
Shore and Beach Preservation Association.
Chairman of an American Nuclear Society Committee
that developed an American National Standard on
Design Basis Flooding at Power Reactor Sites .
General chairman of the National Shoreline
symposium , "Shoreline Forum 179" held in Los
Angeles .
Ronald M. Noble
Page Four
Member of the Conference Planning Committee for
OCEANS 177 , an international conference to
discuss and explore developing technology and its
impact on public policy and education , with a
focus on the Pacific rim, held in Los Angeles .
Member of an American Nuclear Society Committee
on Site Evaluation of Power Reactor Sites .
Member of an American Nuclear Society Committee
to develop an American National Standard on
Evaluating Site- related parameters for an
Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation .
Past Member of the Board of Councilors to the Los
Angeles Regional Section of the Marine Technology
Society.
Participated in a special symposium on Modern
Techniques of Port Development given in Moscow,
USSR, to the Soviet government to present a paper
entitled, "Conceptual Design Considerations for
Port Development."
Lecturer on floods on coastal sites for Argonne
National Laboratory courses entitled, "Siting for
Nuclear Power Plants. " These courses wereto
provide training to middle management and lead
technical personnel from developing countries
undertaking nuclear power programs.
Coordinator of the University of California at
Los Angeles short course , " Planning and
Engineering in the Marine Environment," held in
1973 .
PROFESSIONAL Fellow , American Society of Civil Engineers ;
AFFILIATIONS Member : American Shore and Beach Preservation
Association; California Shore and Beach Preserva-
tion Association; Permanent International Asso-
ciation of Navigational Congresses ; American
Nuclear Society.
PUBLICATIONS Author of numerous publications .
NOBLE CONSULTANTS •
H . MORGAN NOBLE
Harbor and Coastal Engineer
President
EXPERTISE Mr. Noble, an internationally recognized consulting
engineer in coastal and harbor engineering , has
over 40 years experience in analysis, problem sol -
ving , and engineering solutions regarding beach
erosion, beach nourishment, shoreline protection,
and marina and harbor facilities . Work has
involved bathymetric and beach surveying , analysis
of oceanographic and meteorological conditions ,
studies of littoral drift, wave and wind ac ti on ,
water currents , beach erosion and accretion ,
planning and preparation of feasibility reports ,
preparation of construction drawings and
specifications, inspection, and post- construction
monitoring .
EXPERIENCE
a Analysis, planning, and design of methods to recon-
struct 1 , 000 feet of ocean beach at Omaha Beach ,
New Zealand, lost due to cumulative erosion. Anal -
ysis consisted of sediment sample evaluations ,
beach profiling, oceanographic analysis, longshore
sediment transport analysis, and determination of
design conditions. Solution consisted of two
groins and a training jetty at the end of the spit,
beach nourishment of one million cy, and a buried
seawall in front of structures as a last line of
defense under severe storm damage beach erosion.
Since construction in 1980, the beach has remained
in dynamic equilibrium and the seawall covered.
• In 1983 , analysis and preparation of concepts to
protect a major highway and retain a recreational
ocean beach in San Francisco, California. Analysis
consisted of beach sediment analysis, oceanographic
analysis , sediment source availability , and
concepts for shoreline protection involving beach
nourishment. Solution consisted of a low height
bulkhead covered with sand, similar to an existing
structure in the project area that has been buried
for most of its 40 years. Coarse-grained material
was to be placed to form a perched beach behind the
bulkhead. Local sand sources and transportation
and placement methods were evaluated. Construction
costs and sand renourishment costs were determined .
• Since 1983 , monitoring of beach conditions along
8,000 feet at Stinson Beach, California. After
initial seawall construction to protect homes ,
beach surveys have periodically been performed to
H . Morgan Noble
Page Two
determine the condition of the beach . Since
construction, 3-5 feet of the beach has filled in .
• As a condition to a Coastal Commission permit, a
long-term beach nourishment program for a two-mile
stretch of beach was developed. Analysis consisted
of sediment sample evaluations , historical beach
profiles , sediment transport and sediment budget
analysis, proposed nourishment of beach, sources of
nourishment material , and estimated costs.
• During 1970-1971 participated in the California
Shoreline Inventory and Protection Study. Over
1,400 miles of shoreline and nine bays and offshore
islands were reviewed for analyzing shoreline
erosion and methods to mitigate erosion problems .
• During 1983-1984 analyzed beach erosion along 1,500
feet of ocean beach in Pacifica, California. Work
involved methods to protect an 80 boot bluff with
minimum structure and minimizing impact on the
beach. Evaluated oceanographic conditions and
prepared concepts including the proposed "S" shaped
seawall . The purpose of the unique shape was to
maximize protection of the bluff while minimizing
beach erosion .
• Mr. Noble was the first Chief Harbor and Marina
Engineer for Orange County Harbor District, Newport
Beach, California. During the 12 years with Orange
County, his work included planning in Newport
Harbor, Upper Newport Bay, Sunset Beach Harbor, and
Dana Point Harbor - all leading marinas on the
Pacific Coast. In 1958 , Mr. Noble formed Noble
Harbor Engineering . His firm planned and
engineered 15 of the 30 harbors first developed
with state harbor funds. In 1965, Mr. Noble joined
Dames and Moore, an international geotechnical
firm, becoming a partner in 1967 . During his 13
years with Dames and Moore, he worked worldwide on
beach erosion and shoreline protection problems ,
beach nourishment, harbor development and dredging
projects .
EDUCATION B . A. Engineering , Stanford University, Stanford ,
California, 1942
Post Graduate School , U. S . Naval Academy,
Annapolis , Maryland, 1943
NOBLE CONSULTANTS • •
4
H . Morgan Noble
Page Three
AFFILIATIONS American Society of Civil Engineers ;
American Shore & Beach Preservation Association ;
Society of American Military Engineers ;
President, Pacific Chapter World Dredging Associa-
tion ;
Member, Pacific Coast Association of Port Authori -
ties ;
President, Rotary Club of Newport Beach ;
State President, California Marine Parks and Harbor
Association ;
Member , California Navigation Conference and
California Marine Affairs Conference.
REGISTRATION Civil Engineer, California - 1950
PUBLICATIONS Author and coauthor of numerous papers including
several on breakwaters and concrete structures in a
marine environment.
NOBLE CONSULTANTS •
•
SCOTT M. NOBLE
Coastal Engineer
Vice-President
EXPERTISE Mr. Noble specializes in planning, design and
inspection of coastal protection works, harbor and
marina facilities, and dredging projects: Studies
that he has managed and been involved in include
analysis of wave conditions, sediment transport,
beach erosion and accretion characteristics, wave
runup and flooding studies, effects of structures
on beaches, dredging problems and ship motion char-
acteristics. Solutions to coastal problems have
involved planning and design of shoreline protec -
tion structures, planning and preparation of beach
management and nourishment plans, and improvement
of harbor facilities.
EXPERIENCE
9 In 1986, preparation of beach nourishment and man-
agement plan for a two-mile stretch of Ocean Beach
in San Francisco, California. Work involved anal -
ysis of wave conditions, sediment transport analy-
sis, sediment budget analysis, analysis of monthly
beach surveys performed over a ten -year period ,
evaluation of potential sediment sources , and
determination of costs. Recommendations included
timing of beach nourishment, aerial extent and
cross -sections to be obtained, placement techniques
and methods for making management decisions.
• In 1985 , analyzed methods to regain an historic
beach at Berkeley, California. Work involved ana-
lysis of hydraulic conditions, including waves ,
tidal currents and creek flows , analysis of exis -
ting sediment characteristics , determination of
sediment sources, recommendations for constructed
beach profiles, and estimation of costs.
• In 1986, studied protential sand reuses of dredged
material from San Francisco Bay, California. Work
involved analysis of dredged material and determi -
nation of the quantity of material that was
suitable for beach nourishment. Recommendations
involved uses of dredged material , including beach
nourishment.
e Prediction of extreme tidal events and evaluation
of hydraulic and sedimentation impacts of manmade
islands on coastal beaches.
Scott M. Noble
Page Two
• Analysis of wave conditions and beach characteris-
tics for design of groins and beach nourishment at
Omaha Beach, New Zealand. Post-construction moni -
toring of the project.
• Design, inspection and monitoring of emergency
shoreline work to protect houses along 8, 000 foot
length of Seadrift Spit in Stinson Beach, Califor-
nia.
e Coastal engineering analysis of wave conditions and
beach characteristics at Pacifica, California.
Analysis of alternative shore protection methods.
Recommended alternative to provide protection to an
80 foot bluff and minimize impacts on the beach.
Seawall design and preparation of plans and speci -
fications. Construction inspection.
• Numerous coastal engineering studies on the pro-
tection of the Great Highway along Ocean Beach, San
Francisco, California. Studies included : evalua-
tion of alternative protection schemes ; analysis of
wave conditions , sediment transport characteris -
tics , and beach erosion ; preparation of design
criteria, including management of hydraulic model
study, for design of concrete recurved seawall ;
preparation of beach nourishment program ; and,
preparation of specifications for short term pro-
tection .
• While with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Port-
land District, between 1976 and 1981, Mr. Noble
worked on dredging projects and planning and design
of Federal navigation projects along the coast of
Oregon. Managed studies involving wave refraction,
longshore sediment and channel shoaling analyses ;
coastal shoreline entrance channel accretion and
erosion problems ; and , analysis of prototype ship
motion monitoring results and subsequent prepara-
tion of design criteria for modification to the
Columbia River entrance channel .
EDUCATION B . A. , 1973 , U. C . Santa Barbara
M. Oc . E . , 1976, Oregon State University
REGISTRATION Civil Engineer, California, No. 38563 , 1984.
NOBLE CONSULTANTS . •
Scott M. Noble
Page Three
AFFILIATIONS Associate Member , American Society of Civil
Engineers
Member , American Shore & Beach Preservation
Association
Member, Western Dredging Association
PUBLICATIONS Noble, Scott and Richard Dornhelm, "A Post Con -
struction Survey of Several Manmade Islands Off
the Coast of California", Shore and Beach, Vol 43
No. 1 , April 1975.
Noble, Scott and L.S. Slotta , "Use of Benthic
Sediments as Indicators of Marina Flushing", Pro-
ceedings_of_the Seventeenth Congress , Interna -
tional Association for Hydrdulic Research, August
1977 , V of 3 , pp. 93-102.
Noble, Scott and L.S. Slotta, "Use of Benthic
Sediments as Indicators of Marina Flushing",
ORESU-T-77-007, Oregon State University, Sea Grant
College, October 1977 (was also Masters Thesis).
Noble, Scott M. , "Ship Motion Study at the Colum -
bia River Entrance", presented at the 14-18 April
1980, ASCE National Convention , Oregon (Preprint
80-160) .
Noble, Scott and Herndon, Harold, "Prototype Ship
Motion Measurements and Modeling Techniques Ap -
plied to a Channel Design", Proceedings of WODCON
IX, World Dredging Association, October 980, pp.
403-415 .
Noble, Scott ( Contributor) , The Encyclopedia_of
Beaches and Coastal _Envir_onments , edited by
Maurice L. Schwartz , Hutchinson Ross Publishing
Company, Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, 1982.
Noble, Scott ( Contributor) , Design and Construc-
tion of Mounds for Breakwaters and Coastal Protec-
tion, edited by Per Bruun, Elsevier Science Publi-
shers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1985.
NOBLE CONSULTANTS
JON T . MOORE
Senior Engineer
EXPERTISE As a civil engineer, specializing in coastal
engineering with expertise in the development,
improvement and protection of shoreline
structures and water related projects .
EXPERIENCE • Supervised the preparation of long range erosion
protection plans for the 12.8 mile long shoreline
relative to the Town of Palm Beach, Fl orida.
Studies included review of existing coastal
protection structures dating to the 1930' s ,
developing funding strategies, dealing with
environmental issues and permitting , and
political implementation .
• Participated in the preparation of a
comprehensive beach preservation and erosion plan
for Indian River County Florida. Studies
included historical shoreline analysis ,
collection of additional topographic data , and
analysis of the effects of a tidal inlet on the
downdrift shorel ine.
• Responsible for providing direction to the South
Carolina Coastal Council in preparation of the
Hilton Head Island Shoreline Erosion Study.
Specific areas of consultation included base
mapping techniques, review of existing data, and
review of staff analysis .
• Project Engineer for the preparation of a beach
erosion master plan for Pawleys Island and Edisto
Beach , South Carolina . Study involved
f ormu 1 ati on of comprehens i ve eros i on control
strategies. Existing conditions were analyzed.
Beach nourishment plans were formulated , and
modifications to existing coastal structures were
recommended .
• Performed preliminary engineering analysis for a
sand bypassing facility at Bald Head Inlet, North
Carolina
• Responsible for the planning , analysis , and
design of numerous coastal structures. Projects
have included groin field evaluations , seawall
design, breakwater design, and revetment/beach
fill projects.
w
Jon T. Moore
Page Two
EDUCATION MSCE, University of California at Berkeley, 1972
BSCE , University of California at Berkeley, 1971
PROFESSIONAL Civil Engineer, California
REGISTRATION Professional Engineer , Florida
Professional Engineer, South Carolina
PROFESSIONAL Chairman Waterway , Port, Coastal & Ocean
RECOGNITION Division , ASCE, 1978-1982
Chairman , San Francisco Section , Waterway ,
Port, Coastal & Ocean Division Technical Group,
1977-1979
Treasurer, San Francisco Section ASCE, 1979-80
Director, American Shore & Beach Preservation
Association
Co-chairman, Coastal Zone 78, The First Symposium
on Coastal Zone Management, 1978
PROFESSIONAL American Society of Civil Engineers
AFFILIATIONS American Shore & Beach Preservation Association
Tau Beta Pi
Chi Epsilon
HUNTINGTON BEACH PIER RESTORATION PROJECT
ORGANIZATION CHART
CITY OF
HUNTINGTON
BEACH
CITY ENGINEER
PROJECT EQUIVALENT TO
DIRECTOR PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE
R. BACHMAN OF SMALLER FIRM
FLUOR DANIEL NOBLE TECHNICAL
PROJECT MANAGER CONSULTANTS REVIEW
PROJECT MANAGER
R. WALLIHAM R. NOBLE M. NOBLE
EXISTING CORROSION DESIGN BATHYMETRIC/
CONCRETE & PROTECTIVE CRITERIA HAZARDS
PIER COATINGS SURVEY
EVALUATION EXPERT
SCIENTIFIC
M. TAN S. REDDI S. NOBLE SERVICES
NEW OUTER COST BEACH
PIER ENGINEER STABILITY
STRUCTURAL EVALUATE PIER
DESIGN ENGINEER SYS/COSTS
F. CHAO N. PICK J. MOORE
48L/C076-1
O� _ . ISSUE DATE(MM/DDNY)
PRODUCER THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS
NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND,
EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW.
Marsh & McLennan, Inc.
P.O. Box 7650 COMPANIES AFFORDING CO
Newport Beach, CA 92658
COMPAN
LETTER Y A U.S.F. & G.
COMPANY —
INSURED LETTER B
Fluor Corporation, Including LETTER COMPANY
C
Fluor Daniel , Inc. COMPANY p
3333 Michelson Drive LETTER
Irvine, CA 92730
COMPANY E
LETTER
THIS IS TO CEH I4-s THAT POLICiLS OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED.
NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT,TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY
BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN,THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS,EXCLUSIONS,AND CONDI-
TIONS OF SUCH POLICIES.
CO TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFFECTIVE POLICY EXPIRATION LIABILITY LIMITS IN THOUSANDS
LTR DATE(MM/DONY) DATE(MM'DD,^'Yi EACH AGGREGATE
OCCURREN E
GENERAL LIABILITY BODILY
A COMPREHENSIVE FORM RICCO90257926 11/1/87 11/1/88 INJURY $ $
PREMISES/OPERATIONS DPROPERTY
AMAGE $ $
UNDERGROUND i
EXPLOSION&COLLAPSE HAZARD
PRODUCTS/COMPLETED OPERATIONS
CONTRACTUAL COMBINED $ $
1,000 1 ,000
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS
BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE
PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY $
AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY BODILY
INJURY
A ANY AUTO BAP093971933 11/1/87, 11/1/88 (PER PERSON)
ALL OWNED AUTOS(PRIV. PASS.) BODILY
OTHER THAN INJURY
ALL OWNED AUTOS PRIV, PASS. (PER ACCIDENT)
HIRED AUTOS PROPERTY
NON-OWNED AUTOS APPROVED AS TO FO M:1 DAMAGE $
GARAGE LIABILITY GAIL HUTTON BI s PD
TTY A NEY I
COMBINED $ 1,000
Ua
EXCESS LIABILITY
UMBRELLA FORM By COMBINED $ $
OTHER THAN UMBRELLA FORM Deputy City At orney,
STATUTORY
A WORKERS' AND 0610897870 11/1/87 11/1/88 $1 000(EACH ACCIDENT)
EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY CEP093682380 1 000 (DISEASE-POLICY LIMIT)
$1 000 (DISEASE-EACH EMPLOYEE)
OTHER
A Professional i RICCO9025719 11/1/87 11/1/88 $300
Liability
DESCRIPIIONOFOPERATIONS/LOCATIONSNEHICLES/SPECIALITEMS RE: Fluor Daniel , Inc. Proposal No. GA-20079 -
Engineering studies for restoration of the Huntington Beach Pier.
City of Huntington Beach SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EX-
PIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL ENDEAVOR TO
MAIL- () DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 LEFT,BUT FAILURE TO MAIL SUeW NOTICE SHALL IMPOSE NO CIPLIGATION OR LIABILITY
Attn: Mr. Les Evans OF ANY KIND UPON THE COFtANY,ITS AGrAJTS OR REPRESFNTATIVES,
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
Marsh & McLennan Inc.
`FuNITE® STATEODEILNTY AND GUAKA W COMPANY
_ OWNERS' AND CONTRACTORS' PROTECTIVE LIABILITY INSURANCE
COVERAGE FOR OPERATIONS OF DESIGNATED CONTRACTOR
,M
DECLARATIONS
Item 1. NAMED INSURED and Address (No. & Street, City, County, State, Zip Code) Policy Number 3CC 085809229
Renews NEW
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
2000 MAIN STREET The Named Insured is: ❑ Individual ❑ Partnership ❑ Corporation
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 ❑ Other (specify)
Business of Named Insured -
L— Agent or Broker and Address MARSH & MCLENNAN, INC
Item 2. Policy Period GREENVILLE, SC
From 3/21/88 to 6/27/88
12:01 A.M. standard time at the address of the Named Insured as stated herein.
Item 3. The insurance afforded is only with respect to such of the following Coverages as'are indicated by specific premium charge or charges. The limit of the Company's liabil-
ity against each such Coverage shall be as stated herein, subject to all the terms of this policy having reference thereto.
COVERAGES LIMITS OF LIABILITY ADVANCE PREMIUMS
A. Bodily Injury Liability $ ,000 each occurrence SEE GL9917 $ 1648
B. Property Damage Liability $ ,000 each occurrence $ ,000 aggregate $ INICT
Audit Period: Annual, unless otherwise designated below.
❑ Semi-annually ❑ Quarterly ❑ Monthly Total Advance Premium $ 164:
If the policy period is more than one year and the premium is to be paid in installments, premium installments are payable as follows:
Effective Date $ 1st Anniversary $ ; 2nd Anniversary $
Description of Hazards (Subline 315) Code No. Rates Advance Premiums
The rating classifications below do not modify Premium Basis Bodily Property Bodily Property
the exclusions or other terms of this insurance. Injury Damage Injury Damage
Cost Per $100 of Cost
CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS CONTRACTOR 56,135: ,090 INCL 51. INCL
(NOT RAILROADS) EXCLUDING
OPERATIONS ON BOARD SHIPS — 16291
Increased Limits Basic Charge (Subline 325) 99901 113: INCL
Endorsement Nos.
(1) GL9917 Total Advance Premiums $ 164: $ INCL
Designation of Contractor:
FLUOR DANIEL, INC.
Mailing Address:
3333 MICHELSON DR. , IRVINE, CA 92730
PRtOPOSAL Op rations:
HUNTINGTO##FFN BEACH, CA (NEAREST CROSS—STREETS ARE MAIN STREET AND
PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY)
❑ Check here if the following provision is applicable: .
The person or organization designated above as the Contractor has undertaken to pay the premium for this policy and shall be entitled to receive any return premiums, if any,
which may become payable ,under the terms of this policy.
APPROVED AS TO Ff3RMa (SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR COVERAGE PROVISIONS)
GAIL BUTTON
C,IZ`VTTI Yl
Countersigned by
Authorized Representative
�r ttoa'aA►
Casualty 39 (11-82) (Rev. 1.1.73)
COVERAGE A—BODILY INJURY LIABILITY (j) to loss of use of tangible property which has not been physically injured or destroyed
resulting from
COVERAGE B—PROPERTY DAMAGE LIABILITY
:(1) a delay in-or-lack-of performance by-or-on behalf-of-the Named Insured of aThe Company will pay on behalf of the Insured all sums which the Insured shall become contract or agreement, or
legally obligated to pay as damages because of (2) the failure of the Named Insured's products or work performed by or on behalf
A. bodily injury or of the Named Insured to meet the level of performance, quality, fitness or dura*
r z.c,,: __ ..0..bi(iity warranted or represented by the Named Insured;
B. property damage but this exclusion does not apply to loss of use of other tangible property resulting
to which this policy applies, caused by an occurrence and arising out of (1) operations from the sudden and accidental physical injury to or destruction of the Named
performed for.the=Named insured by the:contractor designated in tiie declarations at-the Insured's products or-work performed tty-or--on behalf of-the Named Insured after
location:.designated!therein or (2) acts ot;.omjssions of.the Named.Ansured in connection such.products or work have been put to use by any person or organization other
than'=an'-Insureds`wifh✓`his general supervision oT such operations,"and'the Company"shall have the rig' '' so,
and duty-to def.end:any.suit:against.,the.Insured seeking damages on account of such
bodily-injury or-property damage, even if-any of the allegations of the suit-are groundless, -11 PERSONS INSURED ---- - - -- - . .
false or fraudulent, and_may make-such investigation and settlement of any claim or suit
as it deems' expedient,`but the_'Comp'ny shall`not be_obligated to pay any claim or
Each of the following is an Insured under this policy to the extent set forth below:
judgment.or to-defend any,suit.after;t a applicable`limit.of,the-Companyrs Iiability-has' :(a) if tfie`Named'Insured is`designated m the''declarations as an individual, the person
been exhausted:by payment.,d judgments or settlements. so designated and his spouse;
Uilusioiis:. i� ' ' ', ' (b) if the Named Insured is designated in the declarations as a partnership or joint
venture, the partnership or joint venture so designated and any partner or member
'This policy does not apply: thereof but only with respect to his liability as such;
(a) to liability assumed by athe Insured under any contract or agreement except an inci- (c) if the Named Insured is designated in the declarations as other than an individual,
dental contracts but this exclusion`does not apply to a warranty that work performed partnership or joint venture, the organ zation so designated and any executive officer,
by,the designated contractor will be done in a workmanlike manner; director or stockholder thereof while acting within the scope of his duties as
(b) to bodily injury.or property damage occurring such;.and after � --
0) all work on`the,project (other than service, maintenance or repair) to be per (d) any person (other than an employee of the Named `insured) or, orgarii ation'while
formed by.or.on behalf of the Named Insured at the site of the covered.00erations acting as real estate manager for the Named Insured.
-nos'been,:completed, or
,._.
(2) that portion of the designated contractor's work out of which the injury or
Ill LIMITS OF LIABILITY:
dama_gg tarises.has been:put to its'_Inten.ded,ose by--any personl-or organization Regardless of the number of (1)' Insureds under this policy, (2) persons or organizations
other than another contractor or subcontractor engaged in performing operations who sustain bodily injury or property damage, or (3) claims made or suits brought on
fora principal as a part of the same project; apcount of bodily injury or property damage,' the Company's liability is limited as
(c)-to bodily injury or'property damage arising out of'any act or emission of the Named follow-,: -
Insured or any cf h s employees, other than general supervision of work performed Coverage A—The total liability of the Company for all damages, including damages
for the Named Insured by the designated contractor; p for care and loss of services,:.because of bodily injury sustained by one or more
- persons as the result of any one occurrence shall not-exceed the limit of bodily injury..
O to any cbliga,ql L;., vih.ch ,the Insured or any carrier as his insurer may be held liability stated in bhe;•declarationsl as applicable to "each occurrence '
able under,ani. wur en,'s compensation, unemployment, compensation or disability " '
benefits law, or under any similar law;' i Coverage B—The total'liability of}he Company for all!damages because of all property
damage sustained by-one or-more persons-or'organizations as the:Jesult of any one
(e)�to hodilyrinjurytoi any employee of the Insured arisingout of and-in the course of "-—occurrence shall not exceed the-limit of property damage 'liability stated in the
his .employment by the Insured or �to any obligation of the Insured to indemnify', "decfarations as applicable to "each occurrence"
another,because of damages arising,out of 'such injury; -but this.exclusion does.'not -,Sub ect fo the above' rovrsior r'espzcticg "each occurrence", the total liability of Elie
-apply to liability.assumed by the Insured urrder an incidental contract: I p -
Company for all damages because of air preperty.damage.to which this coverage applies
(f) to property damage, to _ :;_ , shall not exceed the limit of property damage liability stated in the declarations as
- ) -- aggregate'.'_ If more than.one projec,-is designated in the-declarations such aggre-
(1, property•o'sned Ithe Insured,
by or rented to the Insured; ..;;:.gate limit shall apply separately with fespectito:each project.
- (4 proPerty used bq the Insured, .Coverage-s A and.B-Jor the purpose of determining the limit of the Company's r:liabiIity,
(3) property in the care custody or control of the Insured or as to which the Insured" all bodily injury and property damage ns� ,ng out-of continuous or repeated exposure to
s for any purpose exercising physical control, or substantially the same general conditions shall be considered as arising:'eut of.ione.
- - - - - occurrence. -
(4) work rperformed.for the Insured by the designated contractor;.
(g) to bodily injury or property damage due to war, whether or not declared, civil war, IV ADDITIONAL DEFINITIONS ""
insurrection, rebellion or.revolution.or„to_any, ,act or condition. incident to any.of the When used in reference to this insurance (including endorsements forming a part of
foregoing, with respect to' (1)-liability"assumed'by-the Insured 'under an`incidental the policy):
contract,`or (2)'expenses for first aid under the Supplemei)tary Payments provision
of the.policy;. "cost" means the total cost to the Named Insured,with_respect�to-.opperations per-
formed for the Named Insured during the 'policy period'by independent'6ontractors of
(h) to bodily injury or property damage arising out of (1) the ownership, maintenance, all work let"or Sub-let in connection with-each specific project,`.including the,cost ofi#
operation, use, loading or unloading of any mobile equipment while being used in any all labor, materials and equipment Turn-shed, used or delivered for use in the execution
prearranged or organized racing, speed or demolition contest or in any stunting of such work, whether furnished by the owner, contractor or subcontractor, including
activity or in practice or preparation for aQy such contest or activity or (2) the all fees, allowances "bonuses'or'eomm:ssions made, paid or due;
operation or use of any snowmobile.ortrailer designed for use therewith; "work" includes materials, parts and equipment furnished in connection therewith.
(i) to bodily injury or property damage arising out of the discharge, dispersal, release or
escape of smoke vapors, soot; fumes, acids;alkalis, toxic chemicals, liquids or gases, V POLICY TERRITORY
waste materials or other irritants, contaminants or pollutants into or upon land,
the atmosphere or any watercourse or body of water; but this exclusion does-not This policy appljes,�only to botjily;injury or property damage which occurs within the
apply if such discharge, dispersal, release or escape is sudden and accidental; policy territory.
(Rev.
Casualty 39 (11-82) ... _ " r y J 1'•73)
r GL 99 17
(Ed.03 81)
This endorsement forms a part of the policy to which attached,effective on the Inception date of the policy unless otherwise stated herein.
A .(The following information is required only when this endorsement is Issued subsequent to preparation of policy.)
Endorsement effective Policy No. Endorsement No.
Named Insured
z Countersigned by
(Authorized Representative)
This endorsement modifies such Insurance as is afforded by the provisions of the policy relating to the following:
COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE
COMPLETED OPERATIONS AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY INSURANCE
CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY INSURANCE
MANUFACTURERS AND CONTRACTORS LIABILITY INSURANCE
OWNERS AND CONTRACTORS PROTECTIVE LIABILITY INSURANCE
OWNERS, LANDLORDS AND TENANTS LIABILITY INSURANCE
AMENDMENT--LIMITS OF LIABILITY
(Single Limit)
(Individual Coverage Aggregate Limit)
SCHEDULE
Coverage limits of Liability
Bodily Injury Liability and Property Damage Liability S 1,00 Q000 each occurrence
$ 1,000000 aggregate
It is agreed that the provisions of the policy captioned "LIMITS OF included in subparagraph (2)below,
LIABILITY"relating to Bodily Injury Liability and Property Damage Lia-
bility are amended to read as follows: (2) all property damage arising out of and occurring in the course
LIMITS OF LIABILITY of operations performed for the named insured by independ-
ent contractors and general supervision thereof by the named
Regardless of the number of(1)insureds under this policy,(2)persons Insured,including any such property damage for which liabili-
or organizations who sustair,bodily injury or property damage,or (3) ty is assumed under any incidental contract relating to such
claims made or suits brought on account of bodily injury or property operations,but this subparagraph(2)does not include prop.
damage,the company's liability is limited as follows: erty damage arising out of maintenance or repairs at premises
BodilyInjury Liability and Pro owned by or rented to the named insured or structural altera-
tions ry ty perry Damage liability: tions at such premises which do not involve changing the size
(a) .The limit of liability stated in the Schedule of this endorsement of or moving buildings or other structures;
as.applicable to"each occurrence' is the total limit of the com-
pany's liability for all damages including damages for care and loss (3) it Products—Completed Operations insurance is afforded,all
of services because of bodily injury and property damage sustained bodily injury and property damage included within the comp-
by one or more persons or organizations as a result of any one leted operations hazard and all bodily injury and property
occurrence,provided that with respect to any,occurrence for which damage included within the products hazard;
notice of this policy is given in lieu of security or when this policy (4) if Contractual liability Insurance is afforded, all property
is certified as proof of financial responsibility under the provisions damage for which liability is assumed under any contract to
of the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law of any state or which the Contractual Liability Insurance applies.
province such limit of liability shall be applied to provide the sepa-
rate limits required by such law for Bodily Injury Liability and Such aggregate limit shall apply separately.
Property Damage Liability to the extent of the coverage required
by such law,but the separate application of such limit shall not (i) to the property damage described in subparagraphs(1)
increase the total limit of the company's liability. and (2) and separately with respect to each project
(b) Subject to the above provision respecting"each occurrence",the !way from premises owned by or rented to the named
total liability of the company for all damages because of all bodily
injury and property damage which occurs during each annual (ii) to the sum of the damages for all bodily injury and
period while this policy is in force commencing from Its effective property damages described in subparagraph (3);and
date and which Is described in any of the numbered subparagraphs
below shall not exceed the limit of liability stated in the Schedule (iii) to the property damage described in subparagraph(4)
of this endorsement as"aggregate": and separately with respect to each project away from
(1) all property damage arising out of premises or operations
premises owned by or rented to the named insured.
rated on a remuneration basis or Contractor's equipment rat- (c) .For the purpose of determining the limit of the company's liability,
ed on a receipts basis,including property damage for which all bodily injury and property damage arising out of continuous or
liability is assumed under any incidental contract relating to repeated exposure to substantially the same general condition shall
such premises or operations,but excluding property damage be considered as arising out of one occurrence.
GL 99 17 03 81
;. CITY OF H1. NTIN TON BEACH
2000 MAIN STREET CAL' IFORNIA 92648
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
March 25, 1988
Fluor Daniel , Inc.
3333 Michelson Drive
Irvine, CA 92730
Attn: Robert E. Bachman, Principal Structure Engineer
The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at its regular
meeting held Monday, March 21 , 1988, approved an engineering
services agreement with your firm for Municipal Pier analysis.
Enclosed is a copy of the agreement for your records.
Alicia M. Wentworth
City Clerk
AMW:bt
Enc.
(Telephone:714-536-5227)
FLUOR DAN 1 E L
3333 MICHELSON DRIVE
IRVINE,CALIFORNIA 92730 U.S.A.
TELEPHONE:(714)975-2000
r
March 4, 1988
Mr. Jack Miller
City of Huntington Beach
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, California 92648
Dear Mr. Miller:
TRANSMITTAL OF SIGNED CONTRACT
AND CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE
FOR HUNTINGTON BEACH PIER PROJECT
Per your request, attached please find the signed contract
and certificate of insurance for the engineering study of
the Huntington Beach Pier.
We welcome this opportunity with the of Huntington
Beach and look forward to wo ' g together.
Very truly yours,
� 5. ��A-r' ,,_
Robert E. Bachman
Principal Structural En n er
REB:ls
Enclosures
cc: R. G. Smith
A. Sacker
m� ,X
HNCITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION
HUNTINGTON BEACH `
To PAUL E. COOK From ROBERT J. FRANZ
City Administrator Deputy City Administrator
Subject REQUEST FOR APPROPRIATION Date MARCH 2, 1988
TO ACCOMMODATE MUNICIPAL PIER
ANALYSIS, FIS 88-3
As requested under the authority of Resolution 4832, a Fiscal Impact statement has been
prepared and submitted relative to the proposed appropriation for providing the professional
evaluation of viable alternatives in the rehabilitation or replacement of the Municipal Pier.
Estimates are that an appropriation of $57,000 would be adequate for this purpose.
An affirmative response by the City Council would reduce the balance of the City's
unappropriated General Fund to $2,694,992.
*BERTJ. trator
RJF:skd
3667j
Fiscal Impact Statement
ENGINEERING SERVIVES FOR MUNICIPAL PIER ANALYSIS
1 . Budget Status
-------------
This proposal is not budgeted. The collapse of the Municipal
was not anticipated.
2 . Total Costs
a. Direct : $ 57 ,000 as a one-time expenditure from the
General Fund .
b . Indirect : Loss of earnings on these funds .
3 . Funding Source
--------------
a. Funds : General Fund revenues now on deposit in account
A 301 to be transferred into expenditure account
486390 (contractual services) .
b. Revenue Source : General Taxation.
c . Alternative Funding Source : None at present .
d . History: General Fund revenues have been used for this
purpose in the past .
FLUOR DAN 1 E L
3333 MICHELSON DRIVE
IRVINE,CALIFORNIA 92730 U.S.A.
TELEPHONE: (714) 975-2000
February 22, 1988
Mr. Les Evans
City Engineer
City of Huntington Beach
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, California 92648
Dear Mr. Evans:
REVISED PROPOSAL FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES
HUNTINGTON BEACH MUNICIPAL PIER
In accordance with your request, Fluor Daniel and Noble Consultants,
Inc. , are pleased to present this revised proposal for engineering
services to evaluate and make recommendations for your recent storm
damaged pier and its possible restoration.
Based on our discussions, we have revised the scope and estimated costs
associated with Tasks 2, 3, and 6 in our proposal. We have also
redistributed costs between Tasks 4 and 7. Attached are revised
Pages 6, 7, and 8. We are of the opinion that the revised scope is
sufficient to provide an evaluation of the existing condition, possible
future wave loadings, and pier design and rehabilitation options which
will meet your immediate needs. Based on the revised scope, it is
estimated that a preliminary draft report can be completed and submitted
to the City twelve weeks after authorization to proceed.
We will review your terms and conditions as quickly as we can with the
goal of resolving any issues by the afternoon of Wednesday, February 24,
1988.
We welcome this opportunity with the City of Huntington Beach and look
forward to working together.
Very truly yours,
Robert E. Bachman
Principal Structural Engineer
REB:os
016/10955
• •
Revision 1
February 22, 1988
TECHNICAL APPROACH
A brief description of our technical approach to perform the suggested scope
of work is presented below.
Cost to Replace Damaged Pier Section and Restaurant
We will estimate the construction cost in todays dollars to replace all damaged
and lost portions of the pier including the restaurant structure as a result of
the January 1988 coastal storm. This replacement cost will be based on pier
and restaurant sections using like materials, elevations, square footage and
design sections as those that were damaged and lost for the sole purpose in
applying for FEMA funding.
Preliminary Oceanographic Design Criteria
A preliminary assessment will be made of the oceanographic design criteria for
use in selecting adequate structural members and systems and developing cost
estimates to upgrade replaced pier sections and restaurant to withstand a one
hundred year storm event. Oceanographic design criteria will consist of
estimating an extreme eroded ocean bottom profile along the pier structure, a
maximum stillwater level, design wave characteristics along the entire pier
structure, and the distribution of wave loads throughout the pier structure.
Available bottom depth data that has been taken in the pier area will be
reviewed along with the new bathymetric survey and similar data from other
pier structures to estimate a design bottom scour profile for the Huntington
Beach Pier. Offshore wave data for tropical and subtropical storms and
southern hemisphere swell will be analyzed to establish return period wave
characteristics. Wave characteristics will then be assessed along the pier
structure for breaking and nonbreaking conditions using the offshore return
level waves and the design stillwater level. Wave crest elevations and wave
forces acting on the pier structure will be determined using the Dean Stream
Function approach. This information will be used to assess the required pier
deck elevation, pile sizes and spacing, and other pier structural elements for
both a full length and shortened pier structure.
Beach Stability and Underwater Hazards
A bathymetric survey will be performed to obtain the existing ocean bottom
depths along the existing, pre-existing damaged and destroyed pier
structures. Included in this survey will be a side scan sonar survey to obtain
a relief picture of bottom debris, a magnatometer survey to locate metal debris
and a diver survey for visual verification purposes. An assessment will also
be made of a shortened pier's potential impact on the adjacent beach stability.
We will assess if a shortened pier could result in the change of wave energy
reaching the City beaches thus impacting the movement of onshore-offshore
and alongshore sediment transport and the potential alteration of beach
profiles.
FLUOR DAN I EL
016/10956-6
Revision 1
February 22, 1988
Evaluate Structural Materials and Systems
Using the preliminary oceanographic design criteria plus seismic, wind and
geotechnical considerations, we will evaluate pier structural elements using
timber, steel, concrete or a composite of these materials for replacement of the
destroyed pier section. This evaluation will consider the replaced pier section
being able to structurally stand on its own with partial or no credit taken for
the existing concrete pier structure. A comparison of the advantages and
disadvantages will be made of various pier structural systems using these
materials considering such items as first cost, operation and maintenance cost,
design load limits, constructibility, and suitability for the ocean environment.
Recommended Structural Material and System
Based on the comparison of various pier structural materials and systems we
will make our recommendations for structural materials and systems to replace
the destroyed pier section and restaurant including an estimate of the
associated replacement cost. Our recommendation will include the pier deck
elevation and any replacement or alteration of existing concrete pier structure
such as the outer lower elevated concrete pier section.
Evaluate Rehabilitation of Existing Concrete Pier Sections
We will perform a visual inspection and a thorough evaluation of the existing
concrete pier sections. This evaluation will include an analysis for the wave
loads developed as part of the Oceanographic Design Criteria. Based on this
assessment we will provide recommendations and options pertaining to the
rehabilitation of degraded piling, pile caps, pier stringers, decking and/or
their structural connections, and will include an estimate of the rehabilitation
costs. For example, certain concrete piling and pile caps have spalled and
cracked sufficiently to expose the steel reinforcement to severe corrosion
where no structural credit should be taken for the reinforcement.
Cost to Demolish and Replace Entire Pier
We will provide the City with an estimated cost if the existing pier structure
were completely demolished and replaced with a new designed pier and pier
buildings. This estimate will be provided only as an upper bound number for
use in the City's planning process.
Recommended Engineering Design Studies
In addition, we will provide a scope of our recommended engineering studies
and required design to prepare the final design drawings and specifications for
the pier's replacement as discussed above. Our estimate of engineering fees
and schedule will be provided for these recommended engineering services.
FLUOR DAN I E L
016/10956-7
0 0
Revision 1
February 22, 1988
Report Preparation, Meetings, Coordination,
and Technical Review
The above described scope of work, including our findings and recommen-
dations, will be presented in a draft report and a final report after receiving
the City's review comments. Also included in this task is general
coordination, meetings, and technical reviews.
FLUOR DAN I E L
016/10956-8
Revision 1
February 22, 1988
ESTIMATED COSTS
Total Average
Activity Description Manhours Rate Cost
1 . Replacement Cost of Destroyed 24 $65.00 $ 1 ,560
Pier and Restaurant
2. Develop Preliminary Oceanographic 135 65.00 8,775
Criteria
3. A. Beach Stability 40 65.00 2,600
B. Underwater Hazards Study Subcontract --- 5,000
4. Evaluate Different Materials/ 80 65.00 5,200
System for Replacing Destroyed
Pier Section
5. Recommendation & Preliminary 60 65.00 3,900
Design/Cost for Upgraded Pier
for Replacement Section
6. Evaluate/Provide Recommendations 300 65.00 19,500
and Cost for Rehabilitation of
Existing Concrete Portion
7. Preliminary Design and Cost for 40 65.00 2,600
Replacing Entire Pier
8. Engineering Scope and Estimate No Charge
of Engineering Fees for Detailed
Engineering for Above Work
9. Report Preparation, Meetings, 100 70.00 7,000
Coordination, and Technical
Reviews
Total $56,135
FLUOR DAN I E L
016/10956-9