Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 7.1 DwntwnStscapeMonument CTTY CLERK AGENDA STATEMENT. CITY COUNCTL MEETTNG DATE: December 3, 2002 SUBJECT: Downtown Streetscape Implementation Plan for the Downtown Specific Plans - Gateway Monument Simulations Prepared by: Janet Harbin, Senior Planner~T~ ~ ATTACHMENTS: 1. Downtown Dublin Gateway Monument Simulations 2. City Council Agenda Report for November 5, 2002 RECOMMENDATION: 1. Receive Staff Report 2. Receive presentation by Singer Fukushima Evans, Consultants  Staff and Consultant 3. Question 4. Direct Consultant to: A. Finalize the approved Task Force recommended monument design, or B. Modify the design of the monument 5. Instruct Consultant to prepare construction bid documents for first monument 6. Direct Staffto request bids following preparation of bid-level documents. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The estimated cost for the monument and related improvements during Phase I of the project is $195,035.40. The funding for the ~' monument is included in Capital Improvement Program Project #94060 for Fiscal Year 2002-2003, as part of the Downtown Streetscape Implementation Program. Approximately $249,000 remains in the Capital Improvement Program budget for the development and construction of the monument (see further details in report in Attachment 2). BACKGROUND: In November 1999, the City Council directed staffto prepare three Specific Plans for various portions of the downtown area of Dublin to guide the development and revitalization of the West Dublin BART, Downtown Core and Village Parkway areas. The Specific Plans were adopted by the City Council on December 19, 2000. As a part of the implementation of the three downtown Specific Plans adopted by the City Council on December 19, 2000, streetscape improvements are necessary in the West Dublin BART, Downtown Core and Village Parkway Specific Plan areas to provide continuity and unifying elements to establish a positive image in the downtown area. Prior to construction of these improvements, the basic designs for the streetscapes, plazas, monuments, gateways, and street furnishings associated with the COPIES TO: In-House Distribution Singer Fukushima Evans Task Force Members ITEM NO. ~ GSDowntown Streetscape Imp\CC- sr MonumentSimulations downtown planning area were to be determined, cost estimates obtained, and a phasing plan w/th priorities developed based on direction from the City Council. The City's consultant for this project, Dave Evans of Singer Fukushima Evans, Inc. presented this information to the City Council at its meeting on May 1, 2001. The City Council determined that the initial priorities for improvement of the streetscape in the downtown area should be focused on establishing a gateway monument at the northwest comer of Village Parkway and Dublin Boulevard which is an entryway to the downtown, a gateway arch at St. Patrick Way and Amador Plaza Road, and intersection improvements at Village Parkway and Lewis Avenue. Additionally, the locations for the gateway features were selected based on those suggested by the Downtown Specific Plans adopted in December 2000, and also on the volume of traffic at critical intersections in the downtown area. Previous City Council Action on Recommended Monument Design: On June 18, 2002, the City Council selected a group of 15 residents and business owners to serve on the Task Force to review alternative designs for the downtown monuments and recommend a preferred design. On November 5, 2002, the City Council reviewed and gave preliminary approval to the Task Force recommended design for the first gateway monument to be constructed on City property at Village Parkway and Dublin Boulevard. This conceptual design is discussed in detail in Attachment 2, City Council Agenda Report for November 5, 2002, and consists of a Campanile style with a modem stone faqade column and turret. The monument would be approximately 29 ½ feet in height, with a 5 foot 5 inch base. The column of the monument would incorporate an open grillwork, as would the turret, which would be lighted. Metal grillwork on the lower portion of the column reflects a similar style used on the Murray School bell tower presently being restored by the City. The City insignia would be located near the top of the column, and either aluminum or brass lettering stating "Downtown Dublin" would encircle the column approximately 10 feet above the base. With approval of the conceptual design for the first monument, the City Council requested that the consultant for the project, Dave Evans of Singer Fukushima Evans (SFE), prepare simulations of the monument for the three other downtown gateway locations to assist them in determining if the size and the scale of the structure would be appropriate for all of the proposed locations. DESCRIpTION: The consultant has prepared simulations of the approved monument design at the three other locations designated in the Village Parkway and Downtown Core Specific Plans (see Attachment 2, Downtown Dublin Gateway Monument). These key locations are the northeast comer of San Ramon Road and Amador Valley Boulevard; the northeast comer of San Ramon Road; and, the southwest comer of Amador Valley Boulevard and Village Parkway. In Attachment 2, the consultant has included the following for each location: 1. Photo of the existing conditions at each location 2. Simulation of the approved 29 ½ - foot monument design (Task Force Recommended Design) 3. Simulation of an alternate, slightly smaller 25-foot monument design (Reduced Version) 4. Plan view of the monument location with potential improvements Alternate Sites for Monuments: The consultant has also suggested alternate sites for two of the proposed gateway monuments in Attachment 2. An alternate site for the monument at the southeast comer of San Ramon Road and Amador Valley Boulevard in the landscaped area of a shopping center has been included as Option 1 for that intersection. The consultant suggests this alternate site as possibly a better gateway to the downtown area than that at the northeast comer of the intersection in front of Casa Orozco. For the southwest comer of Amador Valley Boulevard and Village Parkway, the consultant includes two siting options in front of the Oil Changers business, depending on whether or not the electrical transmission box for the intersection signals is relocated. Complete information on these alternate sites is not yet available. Further information related to each location and the exact siting details will be brought back to the City Council at a later phase of the Downtown Streetscape Implementation Plan following implementation of the first monument project. Presentation by Consultant: The project cOnsultant, Dave Evans, will be making a presentation to the City Council at the meeting, and will further discuss the monument design at the various locations and illustrate how the associated features and improvements will appear following installation. Following Council's confirmation of the approval of the monument design, the consultant will prepare Construction bid documents and issue a request for bids on the first phase of the project. After bids are received, the Staff will bring the bid proposals back to the Council for review and selection of a contractor for the construction of the monument. Financial Considerations of the Proposed Monument and Improvements The preliminary cost estimate for the monument structure and related improvements is estimated at approximately $195,035.40, and is discussed in detail for the first monument location at Dublin Boulevard and Village Parkway in Attachment 2. However, at this time, an estimate of all associated costs for each gateway monument at the other three locations has not been developed. The estimate for each location and the exact siting information will be brought back to the City Council at a later phase of the Downtown Streetscape Implementation Plan following implementation of the first monument project. CONCLUSION: As requested by the City Council at the meeting on November 5, 2002, the consultant has provided simulations of the approved gateway monument design recommended by the Task Force for the other monument locations designated by the downtown Specific Plans. Although the basic gateway monument design was approved by the City Council with a 29 ½ -foot height, the City Council may determine to amend the design reducing the overall height of the prototypical monument to 25 feet as shown in the alternate monument simulations (Reduced Version) in Attachment 1. Once the City Council confmns the approved monument design, or gives the Consultant further direction on the design, the construction bid documents can be prepared for the first monument. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council: 1) Receive Staff report; 2) Receive the presentation by Singer Fukushima Evans; 3) Question Staff and Consultant; 4) Direct Consultant to: A. Finalize the approved Task Force recommended monument design, or B. Modify the design of the monument; 5) Instruct the Consultant to prepare construction bid documents for the first monument; and, 6) Direct Staff to request bids on the project following preparation of bid-level documents. Downtown Dublin Gateway Monument City Council Presentation December 3rd, 2002 Downtown Gateway Monument ~ SE Corner of San Ramon Rd and Amador Valley Blvd Existing Conditions ~ Task Force Approved Gateway Monument (29'-6" Ht) k~ SE Corner ot: San Ramon Rd and Amador Valley Blvd OPtion I ~ Alternate Gateway Monument (25'-0" Ht) Reduced Version ot~ Approved Monument ~ SE Corner of San Ramon Rd and Amador Valley Blvd ~ Option 1 ~ Amador Valley Blvd Proposed Landscape Downtown Gateway Monument Existing Traffic Controller Existing Wall O E Relocate Bert's Big and Tall Sign Downtown Gateway Monument Plan ~ SE Corner of San Ramon Rd and Amador Valley Blvd Option I ~ Downtown Gateway Monument NE Corner of San Ramon Rd and Amador Valley Blvd ~ Existing Conditions ~ Task Force Approved Gateway Monument (29'-6" Ht) NF Corner ot: San RamOn Rd and Amador Valley Blvd ~ Option 2 ~ Alternate Gateway Monument (25'-0" Ht) Reduced Version of Approved Monument NE COrner of San Ramon Rd and AmadOr Valley Blvd Option 2 Relocate Existing Chamber of Commerce Sign Existing Landscape Downtown Gateway Monument Amador Valley Blvd Downtown Gateway Monument Plan NE Corner of San Ramon Rd and Amador Valley Blvd Option 2 Downtown Gateway Monument ~ ~ NE Corner of San Ramon Rd and Dublin Blvd ~ Existing Conditions ~ Task Force Approved Gateway Monument (29'-6" Ht) ~ NE Corner ot: San Ramon Rd and Dublin Blvd ~ Alternate Gateway Monument (25'-0" Ht) Reduced Version of APproved Monument NE Corner of San Ramon Rd and Dublin Blvd i Chevron 1 1 I Existing I Covered I Gas Pumps !  Relocate Existing 1 Chevron ) Sign I I ..~!-.,. .D°wnt°wn~2~~-, Gateway Monument ~ Proposed Landscape Downtown Gateway Monument Plan NE Corner of San Ramon Rd and Dublin Blvd ~.~ Downtown Gateway Monument SW Corner of Amador Valley Blvd and Village Parkway Existing Conditions Task Force Approved Gateway Monument (29'-6" Ht) SW Corner of Amador ValleYoptionBIVdl and Village Parkway Alternate Gateway Monument (25'-0" Ht) Reduced Version of Approved Monument SW Corner of Amador Valley Blvd and Village Parkway Option I Proposed Landscape Downtown Gateway Monument Existing Traffic Controller Downtown Gateway Monument Plan SW Corner of Amador Valley Blvd and Village Parkway Option 1 I Task Force Approved Gateway Monument (29'-6" Ht) SW Corner of Amador Valley Blvd and Village Parkway Option 2 Alternate Gateway Monument (25'-0" Reduced Version of Approved Monument SW Corner of Amador Valley Blvd and Village Parkway Option 2 Task Force Approved Gateway Monument (29'-6'' Ht) SW Corner of Amador Valley Blvd and Village Parkway Option 2 :ate Traffic Controller ,wntoWn Gateway Monument Proposed Landscape Downtown Gateway Monument Plan SW Corner of Amador Valley Blvd and Village Parkway ~-~ Option 2 ~.~ CTTY CLERK AGENDA STATEMENT CTTY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 5, 2002 SUBJECT: Downtown Streetscape Implementation Plan for the Downtown Specific Plans -- Reconsideration of Monument Design Prepared by: Janet Harbin, Senior Planner ~ ATTACHMENTS: 1. Task Force Recommended Monument Design with Signage 2. Simulations of Recommended Monument at Intersection 3. Concept Plan Layout for Recommended Monument and Improvements 4. Minutes of Task Force Meeting of September 19, 2002 with attached list of Task Force Members 5. Schematic Design Cost Estimate RECOMMENDATION: 1. Receive Staff Report 2. Receive presentation by Singer Fulcus~a Evans, Consultants 3. Question Staff and Consultant 4. Approve Task Force Recommended Monument design 5. Instruct COnsultant to prepare construction bid documents for first monument 6. Direct Staff to request'bids following preparation of bid-level documems. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The estimated cost for the monument and related improvements /~C~2~ during Phase I of the project is $195,035.40. The funding for the monument is included in Capital Improvement Program Project #94060 for Fiscal Year 2002-2003, as part of the Downfown Streetscape Implementation Program. Approximately $249,000 remains in the Capital Improvement Program budget for the development and construction of the monument (see further details in report). BACKGROUND: In November 1999, the City Council directed staffto prepare three Specific Plans for various portions of the downtown area of Dublin to guide the development and revitalization of the West Dublin BART, Downtown Core and Village Parkway areas. The Specific Plans were adopted by the City Council on December 19, 2000. As a part of'the implementation of the three downtown Specific Plans adopted by the City Council on December.19, 2000, streetscape improvements are necessary in the West Dublin BART, Downtown Core and Village Parkway Specific Plan areas to provide COntinuity and unifying elements to establish a positive image in the downtown area. Prior to construction of these improvements, the basic COPIES TO: In-House Distribution Singer Fukushima Evans ITEM NO. G:XDowntown Streetscape Imp\CC- sr Tfrecmd Monument .doc /~ TI'ACitt4EIfI' designs for the streetscapes, plazas, monuments, ' gateways, and street furnishings associated with the downtoWn planning area were to be determined, cost estimates obtained, and a phasing plan with priorities developed based on direction from the City Council. The City's consultant for this project, Dave Evans of Singer Fukushima Evans, Inc. presented this information to the City Council at its meeting on May 1,2001. The City Council determined that the initial priorities for improvement of the streetscape in the doWntown area should be focused on establishing a gateway monument at the northwest comer of Village Parkway and Dublin Boulevard which is an entryway to the downtown, a gateway arch at St. Patrick Way and Amador Plaza Road, and intersection improvements at Village Parkway and Lewis Avenue. Additionally, the locations for the gateway features were selected based On those suggested by the DowntoWn Specific Plans adopted in December 2000, and also on the volume of traffic at critical intersections in the downtown area. Previous City Council Action on Monument Design: On May 1, 2001, the City Council reviewed and approved the preliminary conceptual design for the first gateway monument to' be constructed on City property at Village Parkway and Dublin Boulevard'and the gateway arch, and directed staff to finalize the design and cost estimate for the gateway monument and arch with the related improvements. On March 5, 2002, the City's consultant for the implementation plan for the streetscape improvement project, Dave Evans of Singer Fulcushima Evans, presented the final design of the first monument to be constructed at the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Village Parkway to the City Council. At that time, the City Council approved the design of the monument and instructed the consultant to proceed with preparation of the construction bid documents. FollOwing the March 5th meeting, some Council members received input from the public on the design of the monument and requested that Staff bring the item back for reconsideration at the April 2nd meeting. In reconsidering the monument design, the City Council determined that a Task Force should be established to assist and review an appropriate design for the initial doWntown monument, and that past members of the DoWntown Task Force which was active in 1998 to 1999 prior to the preparation of the Specific Plan should be contacted to serve on the new committee. The City Council selected a group of 15 residents and business oWners to serve on the Task Force on June 18, 2002 to review alternative designs for the downtown monument and recommend a preferred design (see list of Task Force members attached to Attachment 4). At that meeting, the City Council also approved an amendment to the consultant' s contract to provide funds for assistance from Singer. Fukushima Evans, Inc. to facilitate the Task Force meetings and work with the TaSk Force to redesign a preferred monument for presentation to the City Council. ' DESCRIPTION: The Task Force first convened on July 3, 2002 and met on two other occasions to provide input to the consultant for development of alternative monument designs. At the third Task Force meeting on September 19th, the Task Force selected the preferred monument design 'to present to the City Council. The recommended monument design is shown in Attachment 1. Members of the Task Force will be present at the City Council meeting. Additionally, the consultant for the project, Dave Evans, will be making a presentation to the City Council at the meeting, and will further discuss the selected.monument design, the Task Force process, and illustrate how the associated features and improvements will appear following installation. Recommended Monument Design: During the Task Force meetings, the members reviewed and considered several alternative designs for the .proposed downtown monument presented by the consultant to be located at Dublin Boulevard and Village Parkway. The Task Force selected the preferred monument design after considering the location of the monument, architecture in the downtown area and other areas o£the City, estimated cost of the. structure, and also the potential landscaping and improvements which ~ould be included in the project. The Task Force felt that one of the main factors in determining the ultimate design of the monument was that the structure should be a unifying element in the downtown area, reflecting both the modem and the past architecture of the City. The preferred monument design selected by the Task Force members is a Campanile style which blends a modem stone fagade with the traditional column and turret (see Task Force Recommended Design in Attachment I). The monument woulc[ be approximately 29 ½ feet.in height, with a 5 foot 5 inch base. The column 0fthe monument would incorporate an open grillwork, as would the turret, which would be lighted. Metal grillwork on.the lower portion of the column reflects a similar style used on the Murray School bell tower presently being restored by the City. The City insignia would be located near the top of the column, mud either aluminum or brass lettering stating "Downtown Dublin" would encircle the column approximately 10 feet above the base. When both phases of the project are completed, a seatwall and landscaping with paving would be located at the base. of the column (see Concept Plan Layout in Attachment 3) for pedestrian seating, and a walkway to the adjacent McDonald's site would be provided. Staffhas met with the franchise owner of the McDonald's restaurant located at Village Parkway and Dublin Boulevard to discuss the City's plans for the monument and improvements at this intersection adjacent to the restaurant property. The owner has been considering renovating the existing building exterior and intends to Work with the City to develop a design plan that is compatible with the monument and the related improvements. Attachment 2 shows the recommended monument design in context with the McDonald's restaurant in the background. The frrSt illuslzation in the attachment demonstrates how the monument would appear at the comer with the McDonald's unchanged, but additional landscaping provided. The second illustration in the attachment demonstrates how the monument would appear at the comer with a new tile roof and additional landscaping around the perimeter of the restaurant site. Future Improvements around the Monument (Phase II) To accentuate the monument, the consultant has included in the site plan design decorative concrete paving, shrubs, some small trees and other landscaping to the area between the property owned by McDonald's and the Sidewalk and the area surrounding, the monument (see Concept Plan Layout, Attachment 3). Most of these items could be constructed with the second phase of development which would be proposed to' be funded in the 2003-2004 fiscal year Capital Improvement Program. For design consistency, the planned improvements would also include four new boulevard-style streetlights selected previously by the City Council (May 2001), and represent the initial installation of this type of lighting in the downtown streetscape. Along with the Phase II installation of the improvements related to the monument, one of two traffic signals at the intersection will require relocation approximately 15 to 20 feet to the north to allow full visibility of the monument at the intersection. Following Council's approval of the monument design and cost estimate, the consultant will prepare construction bid documents and issue a request for bids on the first phase of the project. After bids are received, the Staff will bring the bid proposals back to the Council for review and selection of a contractor for the construction of the monument. Financial Considerations of the Proposed Monument and Improvements Attachment 5, Monument and Improvements Cost Estimate, outlines the estimated costs to complete the monument and improvements. Preliminary cost estimates were presented to the City Council in March 2002'for the original monument design work, The preliminary cost estimate for the monument at that time was estimated at approximately $191,585.40. The recommended monument design is slightly higher than the original, and would be $195,035.40. Although the new monument's cost is slightly higher than that of the original design, the cost'of the monument would still be within the funds allocated in the 2002- 2003 Capital Improvement Program Budget for the Downtown Streetscape Implementation Plan, CIP #94060. To date, approximately $76,000 has been spent on the design work for the monument. The total funds remaining in the monument project budget at this time are approximately $249,000. This allocation will sufficiently fund the construction and bid documents, and the construction (including inspections and testing) of the recommended monument design, if approved by the City Council. However, there is no money available in the present budget for further work related to design development. Phase II of the project, the associated concrete work, pavement, landscaping, seatwall and relocations of streetlights and the traffic signal, would be proposed to be fimded in the budget for Fiscal Year 2003-2004 as a part of the Capital Improvement Program. As the city presently owns the property where the monument is proposed to be located, no further land acquisition is necessary for the project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council: 1) Receive Staff report; 2). Receive the presentation by Singer Fukushima Evans; 3) Question Staff and Consultant; 4) Approve the Task Force Recommended Monument Design as shown in Attachment 1 and 3, the Concept Plan Layout; 5) Instruct the Consultant to prepare construction bid documents for the first monument, and 6) Direct Staff to request bids on the project following preparation of bid-level documents. Task Force Recommended Monument Design with Signage Si~mulations of Recommended Monument at .Intersection '""?' Low Ornamental Trees ~'~ ~,.'~'L Monumen[ with Seat Wail Concept 'Plan Layout for Recommended Monument and lmprovem~ents DOWNTOWN DUBLIN GATE'WAY.MONLqVI~]NT MEETING MINUTES September 19, 2002 Committee Members present: Bernice Bywater, Mary Beth Acuff, Julie Nielsen, Connie Mack, Diana Day, Mike Perkins, Tom Odam, Dale Garr~n, and Kick Camach0 Staff Members present: Eddie Peabody, COmmunity Development Director, Janet Harbin, Sr. Planner; Dave Evans, Consultant; Chris Foss, Economic Development Director; and Maria Carrasco, Kecording Secretary Ms. Harbin informed the committee that the monument design would be presented to the City Council at the NoVember 19, 2002 meeting. She explained that representatives of the McDonalds restaurant at the comer of Village Parkway and Dublin Blvd. (directly behind the proposed monument site) contacted the City and has discussed plans for improvements (interior and exterior) to their building. Mr. Evans reviewed the actions of the committee at the last meeting in which the committee reviewed four monument concepts and narrowed it down to two. At that meeting, the committee asked for seating around the monument and that Mr. Evan~ consider different materials for the monument fagade other than brick. Mr. Evans explained the different materials and options for the two monuments - the Tripod Gateway and Stone/Brick campanile. He expl~ed that by adding the seat wall to the Campanile monument; it becomes more of a public use area. 'Following his review of the proposed monuments., he opened the meeting up for discussion, A member asked about the increased costs to add the seat wall. Mr. Evans .stated that it would cost approximately $10,000 to add the seating area~ A member stated there is not a lot of foot traffic in that area and the seat wall would be a waste. Mr. Evans stated the restaurant users (McDonaids) Would be more inclined to use the seat wall. The goal is make the area more pedestrian friendly. A member asked if the walkway leads straight to McDonalds. Mr. Evans stated yes. .. A member asked if the monument with the seat wall is within the budgeted cost, Ms. Harbin stated yes. A member asked the size of the sear wall. Mr. Evans stated approximately 80-90 lineal feet. A member asked about the number of banners on the Tripod. (Banner) monument. Mr. Evans stated 3 banners are used in the Tripod monument. A member asked about the type of materials used on the stone campanile structure. Mr. Evans explained the materials, A member stated the brick monument does not flow w/th the other s~rucrures in the area and prefers the stone monument. A member, Mr. Camacho, stated that he thought the seating area for the downtown area would farther the City's goal to increase pedestrian use. Mr. Evans stated the committee should come to an agreement and choose one of the monuments under review. The monument design will be used as an architectural basis for markers, lights and monument,s, to pull the downtown area Together. There was discussion on downtown street improvements. As a point of clarification, Staff noted that the Stone Campanile would become the model for the other four downtown monument locations, but the other locations would not include a seating base unless the site would accommodate it. Mr. Evans stated the monumem design chosen by the committee would be serve as the foundation for the archWay at St. Patrick's Way. A member stated he preferred the stone facing to the brick finish. Mr. Evans asked if there were any other comments from the committee. A member stated it is not the intent to have the monument match City Hall and.preferred the brick finish. Mr. Evans stated the intent of the stone finish is to match the warm colors and give it the crisp edge cut stone look of City Hall. He suggested the committee choose between th,e 'two monument designs. There was discussion on the materials and colors for the monument. The committee chose the campanile monument over the tripod (banner) monument, Mr. Peabody stated the option of brick or sandstone facing is still on the table. Discussion continued on the design, color and materials of the monuznent. Ms. Harbin asked the committee to vote on brick or stone facing by a show of hands. A vast majority of the committee chose the stone facing for the monument sign. Mr. Peabody advised the committee that the monument design might be reviewed by the City Council on November 5, 2002. An inquiry was made about the time necessary to complete the project if the City Council approves.the design on November 5m' Mr. Evans stated approximately 7-12 months.. Ms. Harbin and Mr. Peabody thanked the committee for their time and commitment. The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 a.m. LIST OF APPOINTED TASK FORCE MEMBEi S Downtown Monument Project Mary Beth Acuff Bmoc Fiedler Michael Perkins 8048 Via Zapata 6589 Hemlock Street 2500 Bisso Lane #100'A Dublin, CA 94568 Dublin, CA 94568. Concord, CA 94520 Patricia Benavidez Nancy Finley-King Kick Camacho 8475 Beverly Court 8348 Creekside Drive 7136 Village Pkwy Dublin, CA 94568 Dublin, CA 94568 Dublin CA 94568 Nancy Feeley Connie Mack /Bernice Bywater Chamber of Commerce 8110 Peppertree Road 6767 Hickory Lane Dublin, CA 94568 7080 Dordon Way #t 10 DUblin, CA 94568 Dubtin,. CA 94568 Jutie Nielsen Tom Odam Larry Barbier t 1755 Juarez Lane 411 San Roberto Pl. 7735 Creekside Dr Dublin, CA 94568 San Ramon, CA 94583 Dublin, Ca 94568 Diana Day Dale Garren Arlene Raffo 11395 Rolling Hills Dr 7254 Tina Pt 4745 Chestnut Ct. Dublin, CA 94568 Dublin, CA 94568 Dubl/n, CA 94568 Dublin 'Gateway Monument: Schematic Design Cost Estimate Gateway Monument and Site Development @ Village Parl~voy Dublin Boulevard; 5-Nov-02 · ~ase I - Monument cost for FY 2002~2003 New Gateway Monument 1 $ 158,000.00 158,000.00 Mobilization .1 5,556.00 $ 5,556.00 ~ove Existing Unit Pavers 200 $2.50 $ 500.00 Reinstall Unit Pavers 200 $2.50 $ 500.00 New Gateway Monument lights 4 $960.00 $ 3,840:00 Remove Existing Tree & Grind Stump 2 $ 600.00 $ 1,200.00 Total of Phase I to Construct Monument 169,596.00 15% contingency $ 25,439.40 Total of Phase I $195,035.40 Phase II - Site Improvement costs for FY 2003-2004 Remove Existing Concrete Curb 120 $ 10.00 $ 1,200.00 Hove Existing Concrete Sidewalk 210 8.00 $ 1,680.00 Remove EXisting Street Light & Traffic Signal 1 3,500.00 $ 3,500.00 Traffic & Crosswalk Signal on New'Pole 1 6,800.00 $. 6,800.00 New Boulevard-Scale Pedestrian Light 4 $ 11,000.00 $ 44,000.00 New Concrete Band .65 $ 23.00 1,495.00 Textured & Colored Concrete Pavement 350 $ 9.50 $ 3,325.00 ,ncrete Seatwall' 1 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 New Gateway Monument Uplights 4 $ 960.00 $ 3,840.00 Irrigation system 2431 $ 3.40 $ 8,265.40 New Topsoil 90 $ 40.00 $ 3,600.00 New Perennial Groundcover 1413 $ 1.00 $ 1,413.00 New Annual Flower Planting 573 $ 0.75 $ 429.75 New Ornamental Tree (24" Box) 3 $ 290.00 $ 870.00 New Flowering Shrub 21 $ 45.00 $ 945.00 Remove Existing Unit' Pavers 2111 $ 2.50 $ 5,277.50 Mobilization 1 $ 2,624.00 $ 2,624.00 Total of Phase II of Monument Construction $ 99,264.65 15% contingency $ 14,889.70 Total of Phase !! $114,154.35 g:Downtown Streetscape Improvements/Cost Estimate ~ SFE.xlsBudget '~[ T~A C~NE[~T j