TT0339_GILBERTROADBRIDGE_CO3_20171129.PDF

Maricopa County — Formal (2018-01-17)

Extracted text (via pymupdf_layout) 40113 characters

November 29, 2017
Bill Hahn
Maricopa County Department of Transportation
2901 West Durango Street
Phoenix, AZ 85009
Dear Mr. Hahn,
We are pleased to submit this scope and fee proposal for adding the SRP waterline and additional two-
dimensional hydraulic modeling to the Gilbert Road Bridge at Salt River Project.
Please find attached the proposal for HDR Engineering.
Thank you very much for the opportunity and welcome the chance to further work with you on this project.
Please don’t hesitate to contact Avi Schmerer (602-522-7786, avi.schmerer@hdrinc.com) should you have
any questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
HDR Engineering
David Skinner (Nov 29, 2017)
David Skinner Avi Schmerer
Area Operations Manager, Senior Vice President Senior Project Manager
hdrinc.com
3200 E Camelback Road
Suite 350
Phoenix, AZ 85018

FEE PROPOSAL - TABLE A
CONSULTANT
COST PROPOSAL SUMMARY
CONSULTANT: HDR Engineering CONTRACT NO.: 2015-039
PROJECT NAME: Gilbert Road Bridge at the Salt River
DIRECT LABOR
Classifications Man-Hours Hourly Rates Labor Costs
Principal 0.0 $99.31 $0.00
Project Manager 50.0 $73.00 $3,650.00
Senior Project Engineer 291.0 $76.14 $22,156.74
Project Engineer 560.0 $55.43 $31,040.80
Senior Engineer 44.0 $44.99 $1,979.56
Engineer 776.0 $40.72 $31,598.72
Designer 144.0 $29.90 $4,305.60
Technician 489.0 $43.45 $21,247.05
Project Administrator 8.0 $38.47 $307.76
Secretary/Clerical 34.0 $30.36 $1,032.24
Consultant's Subtotal Direct Labor $117,318.47
Consultant's Overhead @ 155.49% of Direct Labor $182,418.49
Consultant's Profit @ 10% of Direct Labor + Overhead $29,973.70
Consultant's Total Direct Labor $329,710.65
DIRECT AND OUTSIDE EXPENSES
Description Expense Amount
Envision remaining budget (credit) - see Sec. 300 of Scope -$85,169.37
Consultant's Total Direct and Outside Expenses -$85,169.37
Cost Proposal Summary (No Optional Tasks)
Maricopa County Department of Transportation Page 1 of 2

FEE PROPOSAL - TABLE A
CONSULTANT
COST PROPOSAL SUMMARY
SUBCONSULTANT(s)
Name of Subconsultant Task Total Cost
Total Subconsultant(s) $0.00
Consultant's Total Direct Labor $329,710.65
Consultant's Total Direct and Outside Expenses -$85,169.37
Total: $244,541.28
Consultant's Totals of Direct Labor and Direct and Outside Expenses $244,541.28
TOTAL PROPOSED FEE $244,541.28
(Inclusive of Consultant and Subconsultant[s] total proposed fee.)
HDR Engineering
Firm
David Skinner (Nov 29, 2017)
Signature
Area Operations Manager, Senior Vice President
Title
Nov 29, 2017
Date
Cost Proposal Summary (No Optional Tasks)
Maricopa County Department of Transportation Page 2 of 2

TABLE C
CONSULTANT/SUBCONSULTANT
ESTIMATED MAN-HOURS AND DIRECT LABOR
CONSULTANT/SUBCONSULTANT NAME: HDR Engineering Contract No.: TT0339
PROJECT NAME: Gilbert Road Bridge at the Salt River
DATE: November 15, 2017
DIRECT LABOR CLASSIFICATIONS TOTAL TOTAL
No. of Principal Proj. Mgr. Sr. Prj. Eng. Proj. Engr. Sr. Engr. Engineer Designer Technician Proj. Admn. Sec./Cler. MAN-
CONTRACT TASK/PHASE LABOR
Shts $99.31 $73.00 $76.14 $55.43 $44.99 $40.72 $29.90 $43.45 $38.47 $30.36 HOURS
Task 200: Salt River Project Waterline Design
Structures Design to Accommodate SRP Waterline
Bridge Design and Details
Additional Abutment Details Sheet 1 4.0 12.0 16.0 20.0 52.0 $2,140.60
Additional Girder Details Sheet 1 4.0 16.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 $2,423.08
Additional Abutment Diaphragm Details Sheet 1 2.0 8.0 16.0 16.0 42.0 $1,651.64
Additional Pier Diaphragm Details Sheet 1 4.0 12.0 20.0 20.0 56.0 $2,260.20
Additional Intermediate Diaphragm Details Sheet 1 2.0 8.0 16.0 16.0 42.0 $1,651.64
Pipe Support Details 2 12.0 24.0 40.0 44.0 120.0 $4,998.76
Special Provisions 2.0 4.0 6.0 $315.16
Quantities and Cost Estimates 4.0 8.0 16.0 28.0 $1,108.72
QA / QC 21.0 21.0 $1,598.94
Coordination with Other Technical Disciplines 16.0 16.0 $1,218.24
Coordination with SRP (2 meetings) 8.0 8.0 $609.12
Salt River Project Waterline Design
Project Design 0.0 $0.00
60% Progress Construction Documents 4.0 24.0 48.0 12.0 72.0 96.0 8.0 264.0 $12,665.80
95% Progress Construction Documents 4.0 24.0 36.0 12.0 48.0 76.0 8.0 208.0 $10,154.36
100% Progress Construction Documents 4.0 16.0 24.0 12.0 36.0 76.0 6.0 174.0 $8,330.72
Sealed Construction Documents 4.0 16.0 24.0 8.0 24.0 48.0 4.0 128.0 $6,384.80
Project Management and Meetings 18.0 18.0 36.0 $2,368.26
Subtotal Man-Hours - 16.0 177.0 150.0 44.0 272.0 144.0 432.0 - 26.0 1,261.0
Subtotal Labor $0.00 $1,168.00 $13,476.78 $8,314.50 $1,979.56 $11,075.84 $4,305.60 $18,770.40 $0.00 $789.36 $59,880.04
Task 400: 2D Hydraulic Analysis - already completed
Develop initial 2D models (Alternatives A-F) 32.0 72.0 104.0 $4,705.60
Review preliminary models and revise model runs 24.0 36.0 60.0 $2,796.24
Model QC 3.0 12.0 12.0 27.0 $1,382.22
Develop tech memo and figures 48.0 18.0 66.0 $3,393.60
Internal coordination meetings 8.0 8.0 $443.44
Prepare for and Meet with Bill Hahn (8/18/17) 3.0 4.0 7.0 $440.72
Prepare for and Meet with MCDOT and project staff (8/22/17) 3.0 6.0 9.0 $551.58
Prepare for and Meet with stakeholders (9/11/17) 4.0 14.0 18.0 $1,068.02
Subtotal Man-Hours - 10.0 3.0 148.0 - 138.0 - - - - 299.0
Subtotal Labor $0.00 $730.00 $228.42 $8,203.64 $0.00 $5,619.36 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $14,781.42
Task 500: 2D Hydraulic Analysis - additional work
PAGE 1 OF 3
Contracts Templates\Table C - Est Man Hrs Direct Labor
Maricopa County Department of Transportation

TABLE C
CONSULTANT/SUBCONSULTANT
ESTIMATED MAN-HOURS AND DIRECT LABOR
CONSULTANT/SUBCONSULTANT NAME: HDR Engineering Contract No.: TT0339
PROJECT NAME: Gilbert Road Bridge at the Salt River
DATE: November 15, 2017
DIRECT LABOR CLASSIFICATIONS TOTAL TOTAL
No. of Principal Proj. Mgr. Sr. Prj. Eng. Proj. Engr. Sr. Engr. Engineer Designer Technician Proj. Admn. Sec./Cler. MAN-
CONTRACT TASK/PHASE LABOR
Shts $99.31 $73.00 $76.14 $55.43 $44.99 $40.72 $29.90 $43.45 $38.47 $30.36 HOURS
Mini Kick-Off Meeting with MCDOT 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 20.0 $951.92
Mapping Verification 2.0 4.0 6.0 $273.74
Terrain Conversion and Surface Development 2.0 8.0 24.0 4.0 38.0 $1,746.80
Extension of LandUse for Coverage 2.0 4.0 6.0 3.0 15.0 $748.67
New HEC-RAS 2D Modeling 0.0 $0.00
Rebuild Existing Condition (Current Existing) 2.0 20.0 32.0 3.0 57.0 $2,694.27
Existing Condition with Alternative Return Periods (EX10-,EX25-,EX50-year) 2.0 18.0 24.0 3.0 47.0 $2,257.65
Rebuild 60% Profile Base (Current Alt A) 2.0 8.0 12.0 3.0 25.0 $1,214.71
Rebuild Elevated NB Analysis - No Overtopping (Prev Alt2) (Current Alt B) 2.0 8.0 12.0 3.0 25.0 $1,214.71
Rebuild Outbreak Analysis (Prev Alt3) (Current Alt C) 2.0 12.0 16.0 3.0 33.0 $1,599.31
Rebuild Culvert Analysis (Prev Alt 4A) (Current Alt D) 2.0 12.0 16.0 3.0 33.0 $1,599.31
Proposed Mini Bridge Analysis (Current Alt E) 2.0 20.0 32.0 3.0 57.0 $2,694.27
Proposed Custom South Bank (Current Alt F) 2.0 8.0 16.0 3.0 29.0 $1,377.59
Proposed 6" Overtopping Analysis (Current Alt G) 2.0 10.0 18.0 3.0 33.0 $1,569.89
Proposed SRPMIC Levees (Current Alt H) 2.0 18.0 24.0 3.0 47.0 $2,257.65
QA/QC of Modeling / Results/ Reasonableness of Findings
QC Rebuild Existing Condition (Current Existing) 8.0 8.0 $609.12
QC Existing Condition with Alternative Return Periods 8.0 8.0 $609.12
QC Rebuild 60% Profile Base (Current Alt A) 6.0 6.0 $456.84
QC Rebuild Elevated NB Analysis - No Overtopping (Prev Alt2) (Current Alt B) 2.0 2.0 $152.28
QC Rebuild Outbreak Analysis (Prev Alt3) (Current Alt C) 2.0 2.0 $152.28
QC Rebuild Culvert Analysis (Prev Alt 4A) (Current Alt D) 2.0 2.0 $152.28
QC Proposed Mini Bridge Analysis (Current Alt E) 4.0 4.0 $304.56
QC Proposed Custom South Bank (Current Alt F) 4.0 4.0 $304.56
QC Proposed 6" Overtopping Analysis (Current Alt G) 4.0 4.0 $304.56
QC Proposed SRPMIC Levees (Current Alt H) 8.0 8.0 $609.12
Reporting Production
Modeling Report Maps for RAS2D Models defined above 4.0 16.0 24.0 8.0 52.0 $2,516.32
Rebuild impoundment evaluation cross sections 1.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 13.0 $634.54
Rebuild northern impoundment profile 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 5.0 $259.19
Rebuild breakout evaluation maps 1.0 3.0 16.0 2.0 22.0 $980.85
New Mini Bridge Calibration for Size vs Benefit 1.0 6.0 16.0 2.0 25.0 $1,147.14
New SRPMIC Levee concept map 1.0 6.0 16.0 2.0 25.0 $1,147.14
New Technical Memorandum for models and results 4.0 24.0 21.0 49.0 $2,477.44
QC Reporting Production 0.0 $0.00
QC Modeling Report Maps for RAS2D Models defined above 8.0 8.0 $609.12
QC Rebuild impoundment evaluation cross sections 4.0 4.0 $304.56
PAGE 2 OF 3
Contracts Templates\Table C - Est Man Hrs Direct Labor
Maricopa County Department of Transportation

Scope of Services – Gilbert
Road Bridge at the Salt River
Change Order for Final Design
Gilbert Road Bridge at the Salt River
Consultant: HDR Engineering
Project No: TT0339
Contract No.: 2015-039
Maricopa County
Department of Transportation
2901 W. Durango Street
Phoenix, AZ 85009
November 2017

Scope of Services
Project Specific
Table of Contents
SCOPE OF SERVICES – PROJECT SPECIFIC .................................................................................. 3
Project Overview .................................................................................................................................... 3
Project Location .................................................................................................................................. 3
Project Background ............................................................................................................................ 3
Project Purpose ................................................................................................................................... 3
Length of Services .................................................................................................................................. 4
100.3.3 Matrix of Responsibilities ................................................................................................ 4
100.3.4 Matrix of Deliverables ..................................................................................................... 4
100.3.5 Communication Plan ........................................................................................................ 5
200 SRP Waterline .................................................................................................................. 5
200.1 Structural Design to Accommodate SRP Waterline on Bridge........................................ 5
200.1.1 Structural Deliverables ..................................................................................................... 5
200.2 SRP Waterline Design ..................................................................................................... 6
200.2 SRP Waterline Deliverables............................................................................................. 6
200.3 Special Provisions, Quantities and Cost Estimate ............................................................ 7
200.4 Coordination with Other Technical Disciplines and SRP ................................................. 7
200.5 Waterline Project Management and Other Meetings ....................................................... 7
300 Cancellation of Envision .................................................................................................. 7
400 Additional Two-Dimensional Hydraulic Studies Already Completed ............................ 8
500 Additional Two-Dimensional Hydraulic Studies To Be Done ........................................ 8
500.1 Project Meetings and Coordination .................................................................................. 8
500.2 HEC-RAS 2D Modeling .................................................................................................. 9
500.2.1 Terrain and Land Use Development ................................................................................ 9
500.2.2 HEC-RAS 2D Modeling .................................................................................................. 9
500.2.3 Reporting Production ..................................................................................................... 10
500.2.4 Assumptions ................................................................................................................... 10
1200.1 Project Submittals .......................................................................................................... 11
List of Tables
Table 1 – Matrix of Responsibilities .......................................................................................................... 4
Table 2 – Matrix of Deliverables ............................................................................................................... 4
Table 3 – Contact Table ............................................................................................................................. 5
Project No.: TT0339 Contract No.: 2015-039
Revised: November 2017 Page 2 of 12

Scope of Services
Project Specific
SCOPE OF SERVICES – PROJECT SPECIFIC
Project Overview
Project Location
The project will reconstruct Gilbert Road between Thomas Road and SR 87 (Beeline Highway) in
Maricopa County to provide an all-weather roadway over the Salt River and connection to SR 87.
Project Background
This change order accounts for the following four scope items:
1. Design for new 36-inch diameter waterline for SRP Irrigation
2. Cancellation of Envision
3. Additional out-of-scope two-dimensional hydraulic studies already completed
4. Additional two-dimensional hydraulic studies to be done once additional mapping has been
provided
Once the additional studies have been completed as noted in Item 4 above, MCDOT will be able to
reach a consensus with stakeholders on the path forward and what the design of Gilbert Road Project.
Once the design team received that direction from MCDOT, the design team will evaluate the impact to
the schedule and design effort, which may require another change order.
Project Purpose
The purpose of the change order is as follows:
1. New 36-inch waterline - Salt River Project (SRP) desires to construct a new 36-inch pipeline
within the project limits. This pipeline is intended to convey water from water wells located
south of the project limits to canal infrastructure located north of the project limits. The new
pipeline will be constructed in conjunction with the roadway and bridge improvements, under a
single construction contract. SRP will reimburse MCDOT for the cost of this work through an
IGA.
2. Cancellation of Envision – MCDOT directed HDR to stop working on the Envision task on
September 20, 2017. HDR stopped work and the remaining budget for that task will be applied
to tasks included in this change order.
3. Additional two-dimensional hydraulic studies previously completed – HDR reviewed the
hydraulic models generated as part of the 60% design and identified areas of concern, which
required additional modeling to further define. Two-dimensional hydraulic models were
prepared to further determine the character of the behavior of the Salt River north of the bridge
and identify risks and liabilities for breakouts. This effort determined preliminary risks
associated with the 60% and the existing conditions of Salt River. It was determined upon
review of the model results that additional topographic mapping would be required sufficiently
quantify the risks identified and eliminate assumptions applied. This additional work was
unanticipated and was not included in the original scope of work.
4. Additional two-dimensional hydraulic studies to be developed – This additional work is needed
to reanalyze and refine the limitations identified within the previous studies and prepare
additional mitigation evaluations to further quantify the existing conditions and risks associated
with the Salt River. Tasks will include looking at various alternative storm events and
mitigation scenarios to provide an enhanced understanding of the hydraulic behaviors,
Project No.: TT0339 Contract No.: 2015-039
Revised: November 2017 Page 3 of 12

Scope of Services
Project Specific
mitigation options, and aid in obtaining the final direction by MCDOT and stakeholder for
adjustments to the design of Gilbert Road.
Length of Services
Services will last the duration of design services schedule. The milestones for the design schedule will
have to be revised once the final two-dimensional hydraulic studies have been completed and the final
direction is provided for revision of the current 60% design plans.
100.3.3 Matrix of Responsibilities
Table 1 – Matrix of Responsibilities
Scope
Description Consultant MCDOT
Section
Structural Design to
200.1 accommodate waterline on X
bridge
200.2 Waterline design X
200.3 Special Provisions
200.3 Quantities and Cost Estimate X
200.5 Coordination with SRP X X
500.2 HEC-RAS 2D modeling X
500.2 Add’l topographic mapping X
100.3.4 Matrix of Deliverables
Table 2 – Matrix of Deliverables
Design Phase
Item Deliverable 60% 95% 100% Sealed
Design Design Design Design
SRP Waterline:
Add’l Bridge Plans Plans P D F S
Waterline Plans Plans P D F S
Hydraulic Tech Memo, including:
• Alternative Results
Maps
• Supporting Figures for
Hydraulic Results
Memo D,F
• Northern Mini-Bridge
Span Evaluation
• Electronic copy of
HEC-RAS 2D modeling
package
Project No.: TT0339 Contract No.: 2015-039
Revised: November 2017 Page 4 of 12

Scope of Services
Project Specific
100.3.5 Communication Plan
Table 3 – Contact Table
Phone
Name Role Agency Email Address
Number
Bill Hahn Project Manager MCDOT 602-506-4611 billhahn@mail.maricopa.gov
Avi Schmerer Designer Project
Consultant 602-522-7786 avi.schmerer@hdrinc.com
(HDR) Manager
Waterline Design
Ed Junod (HDR) Consultant 602-522-4341 ed.junod@hdrinc.com
Lead
Mark Fountain Drainage Design
Consultant 602-522-7762 mark.fountain@hdrinc.com
(HDR) Lead
200 SRP Waterline
Salt River Project (SRP) desires to construct a new 36-inch pipeline within the project limits. This
pipeline is intended to convey water from water wells located south of the project limits to canal
infrastructure located north of the project limits. The new pipeline will be constructed in conjunction
with the roadway and bridge improvements, under a single construction contract. Tasks anticipated are
as shown in the following sections. MCDOT will invoice SRP for reimbursement of the cost of this
work (design and construction). HDR will clearly show in separate line items the SRP Waterline work
performed in its invoice to MCDOT.
200.1 Structural Design to Accommodate SRP Waterline on Bridge over Salt River
This task consists of the structural design and development of details required to support a 36-inch
diameter SRP Irrigation pipe on the new Gilbert Road Bridge at the Salt River. The structural elements,
including the pipe supports, will be designed in accordance with the current AASHTO LRFD Bridge
Design Specifications as modified by the ADOT Bridge Group Design Guidelines. ADOT Standard
Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction and any applicable ADOT Standard Drawings will
also be used.
It is assumed that the pipe will be made of either ductile iron or steel. It is anticipated that the pipe will
be located in the second bay from the west (between the 2nd and 3rd girders). For aesthetic reasons, the
pipe is required to be placed above the bottom of the girders for the entire length of the bridge (pipe will
follow the bridge profile) and can not be supported along the exterior fascia of the bridge. Due to the
size of this pipe, it is assumed that a custom designed support will be necessary to distribute the weight
directly to the adjacent girders. Our understanding is that the pipe will be pressurized and full of water
for the entire length of the bridge.
200.1.1 Structural Deliverables
Details and plans related to the support of this pipe will be included with the rest of the bridge
plans for this project. There will be only one submittal at 60%, 95%, 100% and Sealed Plans of
the project development phase of the project. It is assumed that there will be no additional
submittals explicitly for SRP. Additional plans and details required to accommodate the
support of this pipe include:
• Additional Abutment Details (1 Sheet)
• Additional Girder Details (1 Sheet)
• Additional Abutment Diaphragm Details (1 Sheet)
• Additional Pier Diaphragm Details (1 Sheet)
• Additional Intermediate Diaphragm Details (1 Sheet)
Project No.: TT0339 Contract No.: 2015-039
Revised: November 2017 Page 5 of 12

Scope of Services
Project Specific
• Pipe Support Details (2 Sheets)
The hours estimated for the Additional Girder Details sheet include time to redesign the girders
for the additional load and develop the necessary details to accommodate the pipe support
attachments
200.2 SRP Waterline Design
This task involves pipeline design that will commence upon authorization of this contract amendment.
The pipeline conceptual design will be included in a 60% design submittal, and design will progress in
conjunction with the design of the roadway and bridge project. No additional submittals beyond the
scoped progress design and final submittals are anticipated.
The proposed pipeline will be constructed starting from near the southern project termination at the
intersection with Thomas Road (Sta 15+00) to near the northern project termination at SR 87 (Sta
99+10), a total distance of approximately 8,410 LF. At the proposed bridge structure, the pipeline will
be designed to be permanently suspended from the bridge structure or deck, as determined by the
structural design of the bridge structure. The assumptions identified are associated with this design:
• SRP will provide hydraulic modeling and pipe sizing. SRP will provide HDR with the
pipeline diameter (36-inch) and either a hydraulic grade line or design pressure for the
pipeline.
• HDR will not consider surge pressure as part of the design of the pipeline system. If surge
analysis is required, SRP will perform the required analysis.
• SRP has requested that the pipeline be constructed of either ductile iron (AWWA C150) or
steel (AWWA C200). HDR will analyze and recommend preferred pipeline materials for
this project.
• Base mapping and survey will utilize the existing project mapping. Supplemental survey, if
required, will be provided by others.
• Within the on-grade roadway sections of the project, the pipeline will be located within the
existing and/or proposed rights-of-way. Where practical, SRP desires that the pipeline be
located outside of roadway pavement.
• In locations on the bridge structure, the pipeline will be located between the bridge girders.
Location will be coordinated with the structural engineer and other planned utility conduits.
• Isolation valves, either gate valves, plug valves or butterfly valves, will be designed at both
ends of the bridge crossing. Additional isolation valves will be specified at locations
requested by SRP.
• Expansion joints will be designed at both ends of the bridge crossing
• HDR will not be responsible for land rights, land acquisition or other services associated
with permanent easement acquisition for the pipeline.
• No external agency permits or approvals are required for this pipeline. Progress reviews and
approvals will be limited to SRP and MCDOT.
• HDR assumes that the pipeline construction plans and specifications will be developed
consistently and concurrently with the roadway and bridge improvement plans.
Development of construction plans conforming to SRP CAD standards and/or plan
presentation standards is not anticipated.
Project No.: TT0339 Contract No.: 2015-039
Revised: November 2017 Page 6 of 12

Scope of Services
Project Specific
200.2.1 Waterline Deliverables
The pipeline design will be included with the overall project design and construction documents. HDR
does not anticipate creating a separate, stand-alone set of construction documents for the pipeline. The
design is anticipated to add the following drawings to the construction plan set:
Project No.: TT0339 Contract No.: 2015-039
Revised: November 2017 Page 7 of 12

Scope of Services
Project Specific
Sheet Title No. of Sheets
Cover sheet (modified) 1
General notes (modified) 1
Plan & Profile (1” = 20’) 18
Termination Details 1
Bridge Connection Details 1
Pipeline Civil Details 2
Total Sheets (new & modified) 24
Construction will reference applicable Maricopa Association of Governments standard specifications
and details where appropriate. Supplementary technical special provisions will be prepared as required
for bidding and construction of the work.
Progress and final deliverable submittals will be made in conjunction with the roadway construction
documents. The following submittals are anticipated:
• 60% Progress Construction Documents
• 95% Progress Construction Documents
• 100% Pre-final Construction Documents
• Sealed Construction documents
200.3 Special Provisions, Quantities and Cost Estimate
This task includes preparation of any special provisions related to the support of the pipe. It
also involves development of quantities and cost estimates related to the pipe support, as well
as additional time necessary to track the incremental costs due to attaching the pipe to the
bridge. There will be only one submittal at 60%, 95%, 100% and Final Special Provisions /
Estimate of the project development phase of the project. It is assumed that there will be no
additional submittals explicitly for SRP.
200.4 Coordination with Other Technical Disciplines & SRP
This task includes coordination with the Water and Utility disciplines during the development of
the design, plans, special provisions and cost estimate. This task assumes two meetings for the
lead bridge engineer are assumed for coordinating with SRP. All submittals will be made to
MCDOT, who will then distribute to stakeholders and reviewers, per the PDM. SRP is expected to
review and comment on the submittals for 60%, 95%, and 100%.
200.5 Project Management and Other Meetings
HDR will provide project management services in support of the pipeline design and construction
document development. This task includes coordination with the project team and SRP staff for design
configuration and requirements.
It is assumed that comments from SRP on the waterline design at the 60%, 95%, and 100% will be
resolved with at a common comment resolution meeting with all other comments. No additional
comment resolution meetings will be held.
Project No.: TT0339 Contract No.: 2015-039
Revised: November 2017 Page 8 of 12

Scope of Services
Project Specific
300 Cancellation of Envision
Envision project documentation was added to the Gilbert Road Bridge project via Change Order No. 1
on March 28, 2017 for $94,074.24. MCDOT notified HDR on September 20, 2017 to stop work on all
Envision activities. As of that date, a total of $8,904.87 had been spent, leaving $85,169.37 in the
budget. This remaining budget will be shown as a credit in this change order.
400 Additional Two-Dimensional Hydraulic Studies Already Completed
For the 60% design, a one-dimensional hydraulic analysis was done to size the bridge over the Salt
River, which is industry standard. A preliminary two-dimensional hydraulic analysis was done to design
the scour abutment and embankment protection. During HDR’s review of this two-dimensional model,
it was noticed that while it confirmed the results of the 1D analysis at the bridge, it was showing
inconsistencies north of the bridge.
HDR then initiated a two-dimensional model with sufficient upstream detail, localized terrain modeling
matching the current bridge design, and QC to support the validation of the embankment protection and
depth to scour as shown on the plans. As this model was developed it became abundantly clear that
issues for both at the extents of the model and internal routing along the proposed roadway needed to be
further examined. This was required due to the finding of questionable flood routing at data boundaries,
losses of flow from Salt River to City of Mesa, and impoundments of floodway at Roma Ave.
The HDR team responded quickly to develop advanced models in HEC-RAS 2D Version 5.0.3 to
further quantify the extents of the challenges identified, evaluate a range of potential solutions for
mitigation strategies, prepare a technical presentation and memorandum of findings for MCDOT. A vast
number of models were prepared at and extremely quick pace to define the risks identified within the
rigid boundary model with assumptions applied based on terrain limitations. On August 10, 2017 as a
result of communications to resolve coverage comments between FCDMC and J2, HDR modified the
mapping request and advocated for additional mapping (about 6 square miles) divided into a northern 2-
ft and southern 1-ft area of interest. This was deemed necessary to remove the assumptions in the
upstream (right bank) flood routing of the Salt River and further quantify the risk at left bank near the
CEMEX landfill plant.
A meeting was held with Bill Hahn, Avi Schmerer and Mark Fountain at MCDOT on August 18, 2017
to present the findings for the risks identified.
Bill request that HDR conduct three additional case alternatives in the two-dimensional modeling to
evaluate potential upstream improvements. Bill requested HDR to prepare a formal presentation for the
MCDOT management team and stakeholders, which was conducted on August 22, 2017 at MCDOT.
An additional meeting was requested for September 11, 2017 at MCDOT to provide an overview of
findings to additional stakeholder.
This two-dimensional hydraulic analysis as described above was not anticipated in the original scope
and recovery for this work is requested in this change order. The specific tasks and hours spent are
shown in the hour estimate.
500 Additional Two-Dimensional Hydraulic Studies To Be Done
For the 60% design, a one-dimensional hydraulic analysis was done to size the bridge over the Salt
River, which is industry standard. A preliminary two-dimensional hydraulic analysis was done to design
the scour abutment and embankment protection. During HDR’s review of this two-dimensional model,
it was noticed that while it confirmed the results of the one-dimensional analysis at the bridge, it was
showing inconsistencies north of the proposed bridge.
500.1 Project Meetings & Coordination
This task includes internal meetings, client meetings with MCDOT and stakeholders, and general
project coordination. This task includes a task specific kick-off meeting with MCDOT to support a
Project No.: TT0339 Contract No.: 2015-039
Revised: November 2017 Page 9 of 12

Scope of Services
Project Specific
discussion of path forward for the two-dimensional modeling and evaluation of the 60% design, current
risks, and mitigation opportunities. The path forward meeting includes the development of a technical
presentation for the hydraulic modeling results as obtained from this assignment.
500.2 HEC-RAS 2D Modeling
500.2.1 Terrain and Land Use Development
This task includes the verification of the additional terrain requested for hydraulic model enhancement
and accuracy. This includes verifying extent and accuracy of coverage. The terrain will be converted to
the required HEC-RAS format and incorporated into the previously developed existing conditions
terrain to be used as base mapping for project enhancements and alternatives.
The existing land use definition will be extended and modified to reach the extents of the new hydraulic
modeling boundary domain. The land use coverage will update the previous definitions for surface
roughness and redefine Manning’s n-value for the enlarged model domain. This effort will take into
account feedback previously provided by the Flood Control District of Maricopa County. This task does
not include calibration or sensitivity analysis of the Manning Roughness values.
500.2.2 HEC-RAS 2D Modeling
HDR will use the previously developed truncated 100-year storm event hydrograph for use in the
hydraulic modeling of the Salt River to assess the Gilbert Road Bridge Project.
This task includes the reconstruction of the existing conditions model to incorporate the new terrain
extents. This includes the redevelopment of the hydraulic model mesh, breaklines, hydraulic structures,
manual mesh modifications, boundary condition definitions, and simulation troubleshooting.
The existing conditions hydraulic model will be further modified for representation of the following
evaluation alternatives. The modifications to the existing model include; development of new terrains to
represent modeled conditions, additional breaklines, proposed grading, additional hydraulic structures,
additional manual mesh modifications, model iterations for optimal hydraulic structure sizing, and
simulation troubleshooting.
• Existing Conditions 10-yr, 25-yr, and 50-yr
• 60% Profile Base (Alternative A)
• Elevated North Bound Analysis (Alternative B)
• Salt River Outbreak Analysis (Alternative C)
• Northern Culvert Analysis (Alternative D)
• Northern Mini-Bridge Analysis (Alternative E)
• Custom South Bank (Alternative F)
• 6” Overtopping Analysis (Alternative G)
• Proposed SRPMIC Levees (Alternative H)
This assignment will be strictly limited to the alternatives defined within this task order. The previously
applied assumptions for hydraulic modeling will be considered acceptable for use within this
assignment of additional analysis.
The hydraulic modeling assumes no calibration or verification with previous storm events or developed
hydraulic models. The analysis assumes a rigid bed per the existing and proposed terrain. Any effects
due to sediment transport or stream migration are not accounted for.
The hydraulic modeling conducted with this task is intended to support the revised evaluation of
hydraulic risks, modified design alternatives, and inform project management toward the adjusted
design of Gilbert Road Bridge. This analysis is not intended to provide FEMA regulatory floodplain
Project No.: TT0339 Contract No.: 2015-039
Revised: November 2017 Page 10 of 12

Scope of Services
Project Specific
modeling or mapping. Results from this analysis will serve to help inform the forthcoming develop of
the CLOMR, defined under a separate scope of services.
This task includes quality control checks by HDR internal staff for reasonableness of approach and
accuracy of hydraulic modeling parameters, use of data, engineering assumptions, and the defensibility
of results obtained.
500.2.3 Reporting Production
HDR will prepare a new Technical Memorandum document for the presentation of the results for the
services defined within this scope of work. HDR assumes one round of review by MCDOT and partner
agencies with comments and revisions to the technical document for final record.
This task includes post-processing of hydraulic modeling results for use in the recreation of modeling
report maps. This will include 1-24x36” map for representation data profiles and key terrain features,
structural and nonstructural components. This will include 1-24x36” map per alternative for hydraulic
results per alternative for presentation of modeling results. A total of up to 8 map products will be
produced in PDF, with 2-sets of hard copies presented at meetings.
For areas of key hydraulic importance, additional figures will be developed as needed to support the
technical documentation. Figures shall include cross-sections for impoundment evaluation, profile for
the resulting northern impoundments, and other locations as needed or requested by MCDOT. Tables of
modeling results will be prepared in support of the hydraulic analysis to record velocity and flow
conditions at previously defined key locations along Gilbert Road Bridge.
In addition HDR will perform a review for size versus benefit on the Alternative E (Northern Mini-
Bridge). This review will be limited to 5 bridge span alternatives with one design configuration. The
Northern Mini-Bridge design will use information from the proposed Gilbert Road Bridge as the basis
of reference for span lengths and abutment features.
This task includes quality control checks by HDR internal staff and coordination with the HDR Bridge
and Geotechnical group.
500.2.4 Assumptions
The following assumptions are made for this task:
• Rigid Bed Assumption
o No breaching for upper gravel mine existing conditions
o Low Flow Access Road to upstream gravel mine will be removed, no culverts at
this location.
• This task does not include calibration or sensitivity analysis of the Manning Roughness
values.
• Proposed conditions culverts will be analyzed for conveyance capacity and not detailed
design hydraulics.
• SRP conveyance ditches in the overbanks of Salt River will be ignored
• Outlet structures from SRP irrigation channel on south bank of Salt River will be ignored.
• Existing Condition model will include existing low water crossing and culverts
• Existing Condition model will include current GRB Bridge piers
• Existing Condition model will include culvert at GRUSP crossing
• Existing Condition model will include ditch culvert at Thomas
• Existing Condition models will include roadside ditch and culverts at Roma Ave
• All models will be truncated for downstream extents near Mesa Drive.
Project No.: TT0339 Contract No.: 2015-039
Revised: November 2017 Page 11 of 12

Scope of Services
Project Specific
• Prorated 100-year hydrographs will be used for EX10-, EX25-, and EX50- unless provided
by FCDMC for Salt River at Gilbert Road Bridge.
• Proposed SRPMIC Levees will be located outside of MCDOT ROW and will be modeled in
HEC-RAS as elevated floodwalls of existing ground +20’.
• Proposed SRPMIC Levees will begin upstream right bank at northern area breakout and
extend downstream for connection along the northern ridge at GRUSP and terminate at
GRB northern roadway alignment.
1200.1 Project Submittals
The initial waterline submittal and additional structural sheets will be made independently as a separate
submittal as noted. After the initial submittal, the waterline and structural submittals will be made as
part of the overall plans, specifications and estimate submittals.
The technical memorandum, along with the electronic model, will be submitted prior to the stakeholder
meeting presenting the findings.
Project No.: TT0339 Contract No.: 2015-039
Revised: November 2017 Page 12 of 12