Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06121990 - 2.4 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: J. MICHAEL WALFORD, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: June 12, 1990 SUBJECT: Approving Plans and Specifications for Deer Valley Road Bridge Project No. 0662-6134097-87, Brentwood Area. CP# 87-82. SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) &BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION I. Recommended Action: APPROVE the Plans and Specifications for the Project and ADVERTISE for bids to be received on Thursday, July 5, 1990, at 2:00 p.m. DIRECT the Clerk of the.Board to publish the Notice to Contractors in accordance with Section 20392 of the Public Contract Code, and FIND, on the basis of the initial study and all comments received, that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment, ADOPT the Negative Declaration, and DIRECT the Director of Community Development to file a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk. II. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The estimated contract cost of the project is $661,500, funded by Federal funds (86%) and East County Area of Benefit funds (14%). Continued on Attachment: X SIGNATURE: _ RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR _ RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): . ACTION OF BOARD ON JON 1 1990 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED Ll OTHER_ VO OF SUPERVISORS r� UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) AYES: NOES: ABSENT:—. ABSTAIN: JRB:drg d\bo:12.t6 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of Orig. Div: Public Works (DESIGN DIV) an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. cc: County Administrator ATTESTED: AIN 12 1990 Attn: E. Kuevor PHIL BATCHELOR,Clerk of the Board Auditor-Controller of Supervisors and County Administrator PW Accounting . Construction gt91 _�44 •�p"ri Community Development Attn: Gus Almquist Approving Plans and Specifications for Deer Valley Road Bridge June 12, 1990 Page Two III. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND: On June 5, 1990, the Board deferred approval of Item 1.5 and requested the Public Works Director to prepare a report addressing project background and need. The project consists of constructing a new prestressed "I" girder bridge on a new alignment and removing the superstructure of the existing bridge. The new bridge will be 80 feet long and 37.5 feet wide supported on spread footing abutments. The approach road will be raised and vary in width from 24 to 34 feet. The existing bridge is structurally deficient and eligible for replacement under the Federal Highway Bridge Rehabilitation and Replacement Program. The bridges in the County are inspected for structural adequacy by Caltrans. This bridge was rated in October, 1985. and given a rating of 2 which means that it is in a 'basically intolerable condition requiring high priority of replacement". A load limit was mandated by Caltrans in 1971 because of the structural condition of the bridge. The existing bridge is also substandard in width (15.2 feet) and alignment making it a potential traffic hazard. The curve just south of the bridge has a 225 foot radius compared to other curves on the road with 400 to 500 radii. In addition to about 50 residents, the Fire District uses the bridge on a daily basis for patrol during the fire season and school buses use the road during the school year. An Initial Study of Environmental Significance was prepared in July 1987. The review period was from August 12 through August 26, 1987. No comments were received. As part of the process the Public Works Department was required to perform many studies: Cultural Resource Reconnaissance . Report, Location Hydraulics Study and Floodplain Encroachment Study, Farmland Conversion Impact Rating and a Bridge Evaluation. Caltrans performed the check for rare and endangered species and a wetlands impact analysis. Afterreview, it was determined by Caltrans and the Federal Highway Administration that there were no significant impacts. The Cultural Resources Report specifically addressed the historical importance of the existing bridge. A literature search of early historical maps of Contra County.was conducted and there was no indication of any historical structures at the site. Also, the President of the East Contra Costa Historical Society determined that the bridge did not have historical significance. It is important that this project be constructed this year or we risk losing approximately$720,000 in Federal funds. The project has been determined to be in compliance with the General Plan. A Negative Declaration of environmental significance pertaining to this project noticed with no protest, and the Board has considered the negative declaration together with all comments received during the public review period. The general prevailing rates of wages, which shall be the minimum rates paid on this project, have been filed with the Clerk of the Board and copies will be made available to any interested party upon request. IV. CONSEQUENCES OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the project is not approved for advertising, it will not be constructed.