Amend 3 ICF Jones & Stokes Inc - Laserfiche WebLink

Exhibit A — Scope of Work Amendment #3 City of Everett 12th Street Advanced Mitigation Permitting and Design & DD5 Advanced Mitigation Credit Support January 20, 2017 Based on coordination and consultation with the City of Everett Department of Public Works (EPWD), ICF has prepared this Scope of Work(SOW)to provide EPWD with services related to completing final design, stamped construction plans,and specifications for a dike breach on the EPWD land located south of 12'Street NE and north of the existing EPWD polishing pond and Smith Island/Union Slough Habitat Mitigation site. This amendment is necessary to support the extended duration of the project(originally scoped to conclude in December 2015) and the additional required iterations of the design and specifications in coordination with Snohomish County's Smith Island Restoration project team that were not anticipated in the original contract. The original SOW anticipated a 60%draft PS&E package that would be reviewed and revised based on comments,then advanced to a final PS&E submittal. However, draft submittals at 70%,75%, 90%, 95%,and 99%completion,and production of full size stamped plans have been added to the deliverables for this project, increasing the effort beyond that originally anticipated. This amendment also provides EPWD with requested construction support services for the 2017 and 2018 construction years, as well as requested contingency and South Smith Island support services. New Task 17: Final Design and Specifications Task 17 includes accomplishment of the requested 70%, 75%, 90%,and 95%draft PS&E submittals over the hours originally scoped.Creation of 70%and 75%design was necessary due to the changes to site topography that occurred as a result of the poplar tree plantation harvest and modifications to the fish exclusion and turbidity control elements of the project as a result of the type of Endangered Species Act permit that was issued for the project by the National Marine Fisheries Service. Creation of the subsequent 90%and 95%submittals included a level of effort above that anticipated in the original scope of work as a result of a more integrated process with Snohomish County than originally anticipated. It was assumed that the County would administer the combined construction contract with the approach that the City's plan set was independent; however,the County's review of draft submittals produced dozens of comments that were mostly style based (one engineer's preferred method compared to another's, both likely leading to the desired results) but required effort to change to the plans to accommodate. This resulted in two additional special provisions submittals, attendance at unanticipated design review meetings and conference calls, responding to comments three additional times, integrating accepted comments into plans and or special provisions three additional times,and multiple occurrences of writing detailed e-mails to respond to questions or seek clarification for an item