New Search
!i'e Think die !i'orld oj{G'uter <br /> PACIFIC 503.671 9709 <br /> fax: 503.671.0711 <br /> info@pacificwr.com <br /> WATER RESOURCES, INC. www.pacificwr.com <br /> 4905 SW Grif}ith Drive, Suite 200, Beaverton. Oregon 97005 <br /> ~.wi <br /> Phase II <br /> Upper Amazon Creek Enhancement at Frank Kinney Park <br /> SCOPE OF WORK <br /> INTRODUCTION <br /> The Predesign Phase (i.e. Phase I) has been completed for the Frank Kinney Park Project. The original Scope <br /> of Work dated July 22, 2003 identified the Predesign Phase as the first task of a multi-task project approach. <br /> This Phase II Scope of Work covers the remaining tasks needed to complete the work and to carry the project <br /> through completion. The main tasks remaining are the Design Feasibility Analysis, Preliminary Design of <br /> Selected Alternatives with review stages, Final Design, Open Bid process, and Construction Observation. <br /> Outlined below are the remaining tasks. <br /> All of the project elements that were included in the Predesign Phase Memorandum dated Feb. 23, 2004 <br /> (Phase I of the project) will be weighted for functional and economic feasibility in this scope. Task 1 will <br /> address major project elements on Martin Street that represent the various alternative crossings with or without <br /> fish passage. The feasibility of the remaining project elements will be essentially addressed in the Preliminary <br /> Design task. <br /> However, based on City Staff comments, project elements P-B and P-C will be addressed currently in this <br /> scope as both an erosion and stability fix. Also, as an option in this scope, the City can elect to have PWR <br /> evaluate the feasibility of an open bottom culvert channel crossing that is fish passable at this location. <br /> However, before this feasibility study option is committed to by the City, an ODFW fish biologist needs to <br /> look at possible constraints upstream for validity of such a proposal. If this feasibility option is exercised by <br /> the City, then PWR will complete the evaluation described in Task 1, Activity 4. The same logic can be <br /> applied to the P-Al andJor P-A2 alternatives. If the fish passage option is exercised by the City at these <br /> locations, then PWR will complete the evaluation described in Task I, Activity 3. The preliminary design and <br /> final design tasks outlined below do not include the cost of implementing the fish passable design for an open <br /> bottom culvert channel crossing between P-B and P-C. However, these design tasks do include fish passage at <br /> P-A 1 or P-A2 if the fish passable option were to be chosen by the City. <br /> The design feasibility evaluations outlined below in Task 1 below also include the development of appropriate <br /> HEC-RAS models needed to assess the hydraulics of these various alternatives. <br /> Task 1 -Feasibility of Selected Predesign Alternatives <br /> Objective: <br /> To arrive at a consensus and test the feasibility of project elements that will be taken through the design <br /> process. Document the decisions that are made. <br /> <br /> scope of»~ork.doc Page 1 3/8/05 <br /> <br />