2025_SRGP Engineering Services RFP Shedd Fire Station 52.pdf

1 | P a g e

HALSEY-SHEDD RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES

SHEDD FIRE STATION 52

CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR:

TRAVIS HEWITT

FIRE CHIEF

Phone: 541.369.2419 Email: thewitt@halseyfire.com

ISSUE DATE: July 17th, 2025 RFP CLOSING (DUE) DATE August 7th, 2025 (2:00 PM)

NO LATE RESPONSES WILL BE ACCEPTED

SUBMITTAL LOCATION

740 W 2nd STREET

HALSEY, OR 97348

Attention: TRAVIS HEWITT, FIRE CHIEF

2 | P a g e

Introduction:

Halsey-Shedd Rural Fire Protection District (the “District”) is seeking proposals from firms for the structural engineering and design services for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Halsey-Shedd Rural Fire Protection District - Shedd Fire Station 52 (the “Project”), located at 31922 B Street, Shedd, OR 97377.

In January 2025, the District applied for and received a Seismic Rehabilitation Grant (“SRG”) for the project through the Infrastructure Finance Authority: Business Oregon, based on the application prepared by ZCS. The intent of this RFP is for the consultant to provide an integrated design solution for the entire building. As part of this grant, a preliminary rehabilitation feasibility report was prepared for the project and is enclosed. The District was awarded $1,793,680.00 for the design and construction of the Halsey-Shedd Rural Fire Protection District - Shedd Fire Station 52 Seismic Rehabilitation.

The structure to be rehabilitated was constructed in 1992 and is classified as a W2 structure per ASCE

41. The building is single story apparatus bay with a two-story office and living area with an approximate square footage around 4,600 SF. There have been no major additions since the original construction.

The District intends to use either the typical Design-Bid-Build procurement project delivery method or the CM/GC procurement project delivery method for this Project. Pre-Design/Schematic Design would begin immediately upon award and approval of the resulting design contract. Construction is anticipated to start in March 2026 with the Project completion expected by July 2026. The Project may be vacated during the construction period.

Scope of Work:

Perform a seismic evaluation of the building, per American Society of Civil Engineers (“ASCE”) Standard 41-17 “Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings”. Develop rehabilitation and mitigation strategies per ASCE Standard 41-17 and the 2022 Oregon Structural Specialty Code (“OSSC”). It is the wish of the District to rehabilitate the building to meet the rehabilitation objective of “Immediate Occupancy”.

Based on research and evaluation efforts performed during the Seismic Rehabilitation Grant (“SRG”) in preparation for the project, the structural improvements listed in the enclosed evaluation report should be considered for the existing structure. Preliminary rehabilitation drawings (enclosed) were prepared to assist in defining the necessary scope of potential rehabilitation work for this structure.

The scope of work also includes the following services:

• Develop all construction documents for the project required for a CM/GC or hard bid construction delivery methods.

• Assist the District in the selection process for a CM/GC firm if CM/GC is selected as the method of delivery. The selection process will include the preparation and administration of the “Facts and Findings Report” and the “RFP” for the proposed alternative contracting method as outlined in the OAR 137-049-0600.

• Assist the District with the entitlement of the projects through the Authorities Having

Jurisdiction and the State Historical Preservation Office.

3 | P a g e

• Provide all construction administration services necessary for the implementation of the projects. Services include but are not limited to: Administering project logs, RFI administration, manages progress meetings, submittal review, change order review and verification of certified pay requests.

• Assist District Staff with SRG reporting requirements for the project as required.

Selection Process:

This Request for Proposals (“RFP”) and the selection process will be conducted pursuant to the terms of this RFP, the Oregon Attorney General's Model Rules for Consultant Selection, OAR Chapter 137, Division 48, and the District’s applicable Board Policies.

Compensation:

Compensation will be based on a total “not-to-exceed” amount for services and reimbursable expenses, with “not-to-exceed” maximums for the following individual phases of the design: Pre-Design/ Schematic Design, Design Development, Construction Documents, Bidding, and Construction Administration services, including record documentation. Project Management services are requested in addition to the individual phases list above. The amount of compensation will be negotiated with the Apparent Successful Proposer.

Proposal Requirements:

The Proposer and all firms, subsidiaries and individuals providing professional services shall be currently licensed to practice in each of their respective areas of professional expertise in the State of Oregon, and shall comply with all State of Oregon Architect and Professional Engineer licensure requirements.

The submittal must include the following, in addition to what is required to comply with the Evaluation Criteria below:

• The firm’s name, address, phone number, and facsimile number;

• The name of the contact person within the firm and his/her email address;

• A list of the firm’s key personnel who would be assigned to this Project, by discipline;

• The name and Oregon registration number of the Project engineer who will serve as the Engineer of Record;

• The names of additional Project engineer(s) the firm proposes to provide services on this project, along with specific projects each of these persons has worked on in the past three years;

• Illustrations or photographs of at least three (3) relevant projects completed by the firm and involving the above named individuals; and

• The construction cost and building area (in gross square feet) of each reference project;

• Date of completion of each reference project;

• Location of each reference project;

• The function of each reference project;

4 | P a g e

• The construction delivery method used for each reference project;

• Whether the project was completed on schedule and within the budget or not;

• Responsibilities of those involved on each reference project who would provide services on these projects;

• Name, address and current telephone number of the owner representative most appropriate to discuss your firm’s performance on each reference project;

• A Gantt chart providing a proposed schedule for the Pre-Design/Schematic Design, Design Development, and Construction Documents phases for each project.

If awarded the Contract, the Proposer must accept, as Contract performance obligations, the duty to actively pursue the plans as set forth in the Proposer’s response.

Evaluation Criteria:

Please indicate in writing the following information about your firm’s ability and desire to perform this work. Firms will be rated based upon the weight assigned to each item as noted in parentheses at the end of each statement below.

1) Firm Capabilities (10 points)

a) Describe your firm's background and experience, including company history, length of time in the industry, service area, staffing size and capabilities.

b) Describe your firm's design philosophy.

c) Describe your firm’s recent (past ten years) experience with design of renovations to public agency facilities (i.e. Fire Stations, Police Stations, etc.), and implementing the agency’s design criteria.

2) Project Team (15 points)

a) Provide your firm’s staffing plan and specify key personnel to be assigned to this project. Include an organizational chart, staff roles and a current resume of key personnel.

b) Describe what scope of services will be provided by proposing firm and whether sub-consultants are needed to complete this work. Identify the sub-consultants and the key personnel of the sub-consultants that you propose to use on this project.

3) Experience with the State of Oregon Seismic Rehabilitation Grant Program (25 points)

a) Describe your experience completing seismic rehabilitation projects funded by the Business

Oregon SRG Program.

b) Provide record of performance on previously completed projects funded by the Business Oregon

SRG Program. Indicate whether the project met budget and schedule expectations.

c) Provide case studies on three (3) similar projects completed within the last 5 years. Include information about the size, construction type, building uses, construction delivery method and whether the project was completed on time and within budget.

4) Record of Performance & References (20 points)

a) Describe your firm's past record of performance on contracts with governmental agencies and private owners with respect to such factors as cost control, quality of work, ability to meet schedules, and contract administration.

5 | P a g e

b) Three (3) letters of reference must be provided, preferably for projects of similar type and size.

Provide contact information for each reference.

5) Project Approach (20 points)

a) Describe your approach to completing seismic rehabilitation projects and what special services, systems, or qualifications the firm has that would benefit the District in this project. Include familiarity with this project specifically and its specific requirements.

b) Provide examples of lessons learned and examples of how your firm has worked with Owners and Contractors to minimize surprises during seismic rehabilitation projects.

c) Proposed cost management & quality control techniques to be employed.

6) Project Location (10 points)

a) Describe your availability to and familiarity with the area in which the Project is located, including knowledge of design and construction techniques unique to the area.

b) Describe proposer’s plan to maximize and document local participation.

Evaluation Process:

The selection committee will score each submittal on the basis of responses to the evaluation categories.

Submittals will be rated based upon the weights assigned to each item as noted in the parentheses at the end of the categories.

Each category will be assigned a weight between 0 and 25. Each member of the evaluation committee will rank each firm in each category between 0 and 5, and multiply that number by the weight assigned to the category. The individual evaluation committee members will then total the weighted score from all of the criteria to obtain the total score. The result of this total score will be used to rank all respondents.

The RFP also requires reference information for your firm. The District will utilize this information and any other independently obtained references that can provide background on the firm. This information will not be separately scored, but results obtained from these and/or other reference checks will be utilized in evaluating and scoring in the other categories and in the final ranking.

The evaluation committee will meet and use the individual evaluation committee member rankings as a beginning of their discussion. The discussion of the responses will include firm strengths and weaknesses and the individual evaluation committee member scorings. The committee reserves the option to interview finalists as ranked from the results of the evaluation committee discussion and scoring.

Selection Procedure and Timetable:

The selection procedure described below will be used to evaluate the capabilities of interested firms to provide the professional services to the District for this Project.

July 17, 2025 Issue RFP

July 24th, 2025 at 11:00 am Mandatory Site Visit/Pre-Proposal Conference

July 30th, 2025 at 2:00 pm Questions and Solicitation Protests Deadline

6 | P a g e

July 31st, 2025 Owner’s written response to questions

August 7th, 2025 at 2:00 pm RFP response due

August 8th, 2025 Optional Interviews with Selection Committee

August 12th, 2025 Notice of Intent to Award

August 20th, 2025 Selection Protest Deadline

September 9th, 2025 Board Action to Approve Selection

September 10th, 2025 District Finalized Contract

Submission:

Submit one original and three (3) copies of your written proposal, along with an electronic version on a USB flash drive, to be received by the closing date and time listed in this document to:

TRAVIS HEWITT, FIRE CHIEF

Address: 740 W 2ND STREET

PO BOX 409

Your response must be contained in a document not to exceed fifteen (15) single-sided pages including pictures, charts, graphs, tables and text the firm deems appropriate to be part of the review of the firm’s response. Resumes of key individuals proposed to be involved in this project are exempted from the 15-page limit and should be appended to the end of your response. No supplemental information to the 15-page Proposal will be allowed. Appended resumes of the proposed key individuals and client reference letters, along with a transmittal letter, table of contents, front and back covers, and blank section/numerical dividers, etc., will not be counted in the 15-page limit.

Information shall be presented in the same order as the above evaluation criteria. The response should be submitted in soft-bound (comb or spiral, spiral preferred – no three-ring binders) format. The basic text information of the response should be presented in standard business font size (minimum 10-point), and reasonable (prefer 1 (one) inch) margins. Your response must be signed by an officer of your firm with the authority to commit the firm.

The District may reject any submittal not in compliance with all prescribed public bidding procedures and requirements, and may cancel this solicitation or reject for good cause, all responses upon finding by The District that it is in the public interest to do so.

Please note that throughout this Project, the District will not accept responses or queries that require the District to pay the cost of production or delivery.

Telephone, facsimile, or electronically transmitted submittals will not be accepted. Responses received after the closing date and time will not be considered.

7 | P a g e

Questions:

All questions and contacts with the District regarding any information in this RFP must be addressed in written form to the Contract Administrator at the address, email or fax listed in this document.

Solicitation Protests:

Respondents may submit a written request for clarification or change or protest of particular solicitation provisions and specifications and contract terms and conditions (including comments on any specifications that a firm believes limits competition) to the Contract Administrator at the address, email or fax listed in this document. Such requests and protests must be received no later than 2:00 pm, July 30th, 2025. Such requests or protests must state the reasons for the request or protest and any proposed changes to the solicitation provisions and specifications and contract terms and conditions.

Failure to file a protest by this time will be deemed a waiver of any claim by a respondent. The District will issue a written disposition of each such protest no less than three (3) business days before proposals are due. If the District upholds the protest, in whole or in part, the District may, in its sole discretion, issue an addendum reflecting its disposition or take other appropriate action.

Change or Modification:

Any change or modification to the specifications or the procurement process will be in the form of an addendum to the RFP and will be made available to all firms via email from the Contract Administrator.

No information received in any manner different than as described herein will serve to change the RFP in any way, regardless of the source of the information. Any request for clarification or change or protest of anything contained in an addendum must be received by the date and time stated in the addendum, or they will not be considered.

Selection Protests:

Any respondent to this RFP who claims to have been adversely affected or aggrieved by the selection of a competing respondent may submit a written protest of the selection to the Contract Administrator at the following address within seven days after notification of that selection:

TRAVIS HEWITT, FIRE CHIEF

Address: 740 W 2ND STREET

PO BOX 409

Any such protests received by the Contract Administrator after the seven days will not be considered.

The protest must state clearly the basis (or bases) for the protest and any legal authority in support thereof. At the request of the protester, a hearing will be conducted before District staff. At such hearing, the protester and other interested parties will have the opportunity to appear and make an oral presentation of the basis for protest. The Director of Business Services will either uphold or deny the protest. If the protest is denied, the District will proceed to award the Contract as planned. The selection decision notification will be made by the Contract Administrator via email.

8 | P a g e

Proprietary Information:

The District will retain this RFP and one copy of each original response received, together with copies of all documents pertaining to the award of a contract. These documents will be made part of a file or record, which will be open to public inspection after responder selection and award is announced. If a response contains any information that is considered a trade secret under ORS 192.501(2), mark each sheet with the following legend: “This data constitutes a trade secret under ORS 192.501(2), and must not be disclosed except in accordance with the Oregon Public Records Law, ORS Chapter 192.”

The Oregon Public Records Law exempts from disclosure only bone fide trade secrets, and the exception from disclosure applies only “unless the public interest requires disclosure in the particular instance”. Therefore, non-disclosure of documents or any portion of a document submitted as part of a response may depend upon official or judicial determination made pursuant to the Public Records Law.

In order to facilitate public inspection of the non-confidential portion of the response, material designated as confidential must accompany the response, but must be readily separable from it. Prices, makes, model or catalog numbers of items offered, scheduled delivery dates, and terms of payment will be publicly available regardless of any designation to the contrary. Any response marked as a trade secret in its entirety will be considered non-responsive and will be rejected.

Project Contract:

The District is seeking to award a contract to an engineering firm for pre-design / schematic design, design development, construction documents, bidding, and construction phases. Project Management services are requested in addition to the individual phases list above. The successful proposer is required to provide and execute a contract satisfactory to the District.

Certification of Compliance with Tax Laws:

By submission of your proposal, the signatory (a duly authorized representative of the submitting firm) must certify that the firm is not, to the best of their knowledge, in violation of any Oregon tax law. For purpose of this certification, “Oregon Tax Laws” means a state tax imposed by ORS 320.005 to 320.150 and 403.200 to 403.250, ORS Chapters 118, 314, 316, 317, 318, 321 and 323; the elderly rental assistance program under ORS 310.630 to 310.706; and local taxes administered by the Oregon Department of Revenue under ORS 305.620.

Insurance Provisions:

During the term of the resulting contract, the successful proposer will be required to maintain in full force, at its own expense, from insurance companies authorized to transact business of insurance in the state of Oregon, each insurance coverage/policy as set forth in the contract.

ESB/MBE/WBE:

The District is committed to increasing opportunities for Emerging Small Businesses and Minority and Women Owned Businesses, and the District strongly encourages its consultants to utilize these businesses in providing services and materials for the District contracts and projects.

9 | P a g e

Additional Requirements:

Pursuant to OAR 580-061, by submitting a proposal, the proposer certifies that the proposer has not discriminated against Minority, Women or Emerging Small Business Enterprises in obtaining any required subcontracts.

Pursuant to OAR 580-061-0040, Proposers are hereby notified that policies applicable to consultants and contractors have been adopted that prohibit sexual harassment and that proposers and their employees are required to adhere to the District’s policy prohibiting sexual harassment in their interactions.

Exhibits:

Exhibit A - Structural Seismic Evaluation Report (including Preliminary Rehabilitation Drawings) prepared by ZCS – Halsey-Shedd Rural Fire Protection – Shedd Fire Station 52 Seismic Rehabilitation

End of RFP www.zcsea.com

Seismic Evalua� on Report For:

SHEDD FIRE STATION 52

740 W 2nd St, Halsey, OR. 97348

Halsey-Shedd Rural Fire Protec� on District

Prepared By:

ZCS Engineering & Architecture

Ma! hew R. Smith, PE, SE, Principal

524 Main Street, Suite 2, Oregon City, OR 97045

503.659.2205 | Ma! S@zcsea.com

Halsey-Shedd RFPD December 2024

Halsey-Shedd Fire Station 52 P-2968-24

Building

Part

Building Part

Name

Included in

Retrofit

Year

Built

Building

Type***

Nonstructural

Retrofits Included in

Scope Y/N***

Previous Seismic

Retrofit Y/N*** (Year if Yes)

A Fire Station 52 Yes 1992 W2 Yes No

Yes, Liquefaction per DOGAMI

Retrofit Square Feet

Retrofit Cost per Square

Foot

Note: The hazard level of tsunami, flood zone, landslide/slope instability, and liquefaction must be explicitly answered either via DOGAMI website, DOGAMI consultation, and/or a geotechnical report. If the hazard level is unknown, it must be assumed to exist and be mitigated or otherwise resolved in the conceptual retrofit scope of work.

4,600

$ 389.93

Is the campus within a tsunami, FEMA flood zone, landslide/slope instability, liquefaction potential or other high hazard area? If so, provide documentation (e.g. the

Oregon Statewide Hazards Viewer by DOGAMI). ** Projects within the code defined

Tsunami Design Zone require consultation with DOGAMI prior to application submittal.

Applicant shall include such documentation with the application.

Project Summary Information

*** Entries required ONLY for building parts included in proposed seismic retrofit. If building part was previously or is currently being retrofit, please list the building part’s Risk Category and retrofit design

Performance Objective, if known.

Nonstructural deficiencies posing life safety risk MUST be included in the scope of work and budget.

Seismic fragility inputs for existing buildings with previous seismic retrofits MUST be adjusted to reflect previous seismic retrofit measures completed for a building part.

Total Retrofit Cost $ 1,793,680.00

Engineering Report Cover Page

Project Summary Page Page 1

Building Parts Identification Page 5

Statement of the Performance Objective Page 6

Summary of Deficiencies

Structural Seismic Deficiencies Page 10

Nonstructural Seismic Deficiencies Page 11

Summary of Mitigation/Retrofit

Structural Mitigation/Retrofit Page 10

Nonstructural Mitigation/Retrofit Page 11

Summary Construction Cost Estimate

Direct Cost Page 13

Indirect Soft Cost Page 13

Certification Statement by Engineer Page 14

ASCE 41-17 Tier 1 Checklist

Basic Configuration Checklist Appendix B

Building System Structural Checklist Appendix B

Nonstructural Checklist Appendix B

Retrofit Drawings & Sketches Appendix C

DOGAMI or Geotechnical Report Appendix D

Itemized Construction Cost Estimate Appendix E

Rapid Visual Screening Appendix F

Engineering Report Checklist

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

1.0 Project Introduction

31922 B St, Shedd, OR 97377

ASCE 41-17 (Tier 1 Analysis)

IV

Immediate Occupancy for

BSE-1E and Life Safety for BSE-2E

Position Retention for BSE-1E and Hazards Reduced for BSE-2E

W2

$1,793,680.00

$389.93

Halsey-Shedd RFPD is located in Shedd, Oregon in Linn County. The Department operates stations located within the community including the property of interest, Halsey-Shedd Fire Station 52. The Department has retained

ZCS Engineering and Architecture (ZCS) to perform a seismic evaluation of Halsey-Shedd Fire Station 52 that provides the Department with an objective, comprehensive analysis of the condition of the building’s seismic resisting systems. The purpose of the evaluation is to determine the seismic lateral resisting system deficiencies when compared to buildings designed using modern building codes. This evaluation was performed in accordance with the American Society of Civil Engineers “Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings ASCE/SEI 41-

17”.

SEISMIC EVALUATION SNAPSHOT

Street Address

Evaluation Standard

Building’s Risk Category

Target Building Performance Level

Target Non-Structural Performance Level

ASCE 41 Building Type

Cost Estimate

Cost/Square Foot

2.0 Building Description

The building being considered in this report includes the part listed in the Project Summary Information. ZCS has reviewed the building and its construction to classify its lateral system as identified in ASCE 41-17. This lateral determination will be used throughout this evaluation. The lateral system present is noted below. This determination was made after observing the subject facility and reviewing the available existing drawings. A description of this structure type is listed below and specifically identifies the lateral load resisting system. In addition to the lateral system present, ZCS has summarized the gravity load carrying systems of the subject facility included later in this section.

Wood Frames, Commercial and Industrial W2

These buildings are commercial or industrial buildings with a floor area of 5,000 ft or more. There are few, if any, interior walls. The floor and roof framing consists of wood or steel trusses, glulam or steel beams, and wood posts or steel columns. The foundation system may consist of a variety of elements. Seismic forces are resisted by wood diaphragms and exterior stud walls sheathed with plywood, oriented strand board, stucco, plaster, or straight or diagonal wood sheathing, or they may be braced with rod bracing. Wall openings for storefronts and garages, where present, are framed by a post-and-beam framing.

Construction Year: 1992

Building Name: Fire Station 52

ASCE 41-17 Building Type: W2

In Scope?: Yes

Figure 1 - Halsey-Shedd Fire Station 52 Key Plan

Building Part A Construction:

o ASCE 41-17 Building Type:

o Roof Structure:

o Exterior Walls:

o Floor:

o Foundation:

o Unblocked 1/2" CDX plywood diaphragm supported by light timber trusses o Dimensional studs with gypsum board.

o Unblocked plywood diaphragm supported by dimensional floor joists bearing on exterior and interior wood stud walls with gypsum sheathing interior and exterior.

o W2

Below is a figure identifying the building parts on campus and listing applicable information. See below for descriptions of building parts included in the evaluation and applicable building types as noted above.

BUILDING PARTS

A

Slab on grade with strip footings.

3.0 Seismic Evaluation Methodology

The subject structure was evaluated using information gathered from site observations, available historic construction documents, and interviews with District staff. This information was then utilized to perform a structural evaluation as outlined in the American Society of Civil Engineer’s “Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of

Existing Buildings – ASCE 41-17” (ASCE 41-17). ASCE 41-17 is referenced as the standard for seismic evaluations of existing buildings by the International Existing Building Code (IEBC) which is referenced by the Oregon Structural

Specialty Code (OSSC). Further, ASCE 41-17 is the evaluation tool required by the Seismic Rehabilitation Grant

Program for grant applications.

ASCE 41-17 provides several levels of evaluation (Tiers 1-3) depending on the level of evaluation and/or retrofit being performed. The Tier 1 evaluation is a quick checklist selected based on the type of construction and the performance objective of the building and is the baseline tool for preliminary seismic evaluations. In the case of this evaluation, a Tier 1 was performed to identify the likely structural deficiencies requiring retrofit to meet the performance objective stated below.

The OSSC classifies buildings into risk categories based on the type of building and occupancy type. The building’s risk category informs the required performance objective post retrofit. Risk categories I and II cover low risk structures. Risk category III includes school buildings that are not required to be used as emergency shelters . Risk category IV includes emergency service buildings and school buildings that are required to be designed as emergency shelters. Figure 2, below, identifies the performance objective for each risk category.

For risk category IV structures, the intent is that the building can be inspected then immediately reoccupied following a seismic event to continue to function as an emergency service building or function as an emergency structure.

In accordance with the table below, this building is categorized as a risk category IV structure and was evaluated to meet the Life Safety structural performance and Hazards Reduced nonstructural performance level for BSE-2E loading and the Immediate Occupancy structural performance and Position Retention nonstructural performance level for BSE-1E loading.

Figure 2 - Building Performance Objectives

Source: Table 2-2, ASCE 41-17: American Society of Civil Engineers – Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings

D

High

High

0.735

0.581 fa = 1.371 | fv = 2.026

0.243

0.154

Fa = 1.6 | Fv = 2.4

Source: SEAOC and OSHPD Seismic Design Maps, https://seismicmaps.org/

4.0 Seismicity

Seismic design is based on site specific parameters that relate to the location of the building relative to faults and the soil that supports the building. The United States Geologic Survey has developed seismic design data that is utilized to perform the calculations specified in ASCE 41-17. The table below summarizes the factors appropriate for computing the seismic lateral loads for the design earthquake specified in ASCE 41-17.

Sx1

Soil Condition Amplification Factors (Fa, Fv)

SITE SPECIFIC SEISMICITY

ASCE 7-16 Site Soil Classification

FEMA P-154 Seismicity Region (Table 2-2)

ASCE 41-17 Level of Seismicity (Table 2-4)

BSE-2E:

Sxs

Sx1

Soil Condition Amplification Factors (fa, fv)

BSE-1E:

Sxs

5.0 Site Specific Hazards

Site specific hazards were assessed as part of our engineering evaluation. The hazards evaluated in our analysis included liquefaction, slope failure/landslide, surface fault rupture, and tsunami potential. These potential hazards were evaluated using ASCE 41-17 guidelines, as well as information provided by the online Oregon HazVu:

Statewide Geohazards Viewer, maintained by the Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI).

Tsunami risk was evaluated using the ASCE Tsunami Hazard Tool. Results from the HazVu analysis are included in

Appendix D. Unless noted below, the hazards listed above are not present at the site.

Liquefaction

This project is located within a liquefaction hazard area as identified by the DOGAMI Oregon HazVu. Due to the severity of the hazard and our knowledge of the local subsurface conditions, we have included mitigation for the hazard within the scope of the retrofit.

6.0 Deficiencies and Repairs

Tier 1 Deficiency

Description Deficiency Statement Repair Statement

Plan Key

Note

IO BASIC CHECKLIST

LOAD PATH The structure does not contain a complete, well-defined load path, including structural elements and connections, that serves to transfer the inertial forces associated with the mass of all elements of the building to the foundation.

Provide a complete, well-defined load path by installing new elements and connections as needed to transfer inertial forces from all elements of the building to the foundation. (A)

Diaphragm attachments -in-plane shear.

(B) Diaphragm attachments -out-of-plane.

S1

LIQUEFACTION Liquefaction-susceptible, saturated, loose granular soils that could jeopardize the buildings seismic performance exist in the foundation soils at the depths within 50 ft under the building.

Provide deep foundations solutions to depths greater than 50 ft. Provide new grade beams and/or pile caps as required for deep foundations.

S2

W2: IO CHECKLIST

SHEAR STRESS

CHECK

The shear stress in the shear walls, calculated using the Quick Check procedure of Section

4.4.3.3, is higher than the following values:

Structural panel sheathing 1,000 lb/ft

Diagonal sheathing 700 lb/ft

Straight sheathing 100 lb/ft

All other conditions 100 lb/ft

Provide new plywood sheathing on existing stud wall.

S3

WALLS CONNECTED

THROUGH FLOORS

Shear walls do not have an interconnection between stories to transfer overturning and shear forces through the floor.

Install new holdown devices or strapping between stories to ensure transfer of overturning forces, as well as hardware required for transfer of in-plane shear forces from one floor to the floor below.

S4

The table below summarizes both the structural and nonstructural deficiencies noted in the Tier 1 evaluation and states both the proposed retrofit methodology and the plan key note that corresponds to the scope items in the preliminary plans and the cost estimate. See Appendix B for complete Tier 1 check sheets. Drawings illustrating the proposed retrofit measures are attached in Appendix C.

Tier 1 Deficiency

Description Deficiency Statement Repair Statement

Plan Key

Note

OPENINGS Walls with openings greater than 80% of the length are not braced with wood structural panel shear walls with aspect ratios of not more than

1.5-to-1 or are not supported by adjacent construction through positive ties capable of transferring the seismic forces.

Provide new plywood sheathing on existing stud wall.

S5

HOLD-DOWN

ANCHORS

Not all shear walls have hold-down anchors attached to the end studs constructed in accordance with acceptable construction practices.

Install new hold-down hardware. S6

DIAGONALLY

SHEATHED AND

UNBLOCKED

DIAPHRAGMS

Not all diagonally sheathed or unblocked wood structural panel diaphragms have horizontal spans less than 30 ft and have aspect ratios less than or equal to 3-to-1.

Renail Existing plywood diaphragm. S7

WOOD SILL BOLTS Sill bolts are not spaced at 4ft or less with acceptable edge and end distance provided for wood and concrete.

Provide new anchor bolts from wood sills to the foundation.

S8

NONSTRUCTURAL CHECKLIST

LENS COVERS Lens covers on light fixtures are not attached with safety devices.

Install safety devices for light fixture lens covers.

N1

CANOPIES Canopies at building exits are not anchored to the structure at a spacing no greater than the following: for Life Safety in Low or Moderate

Seismicity, 10 ft; for Life Safety in High Seismicity and for Position Retention in any seismicity, 6 ft.

Seismically anchor existing canopies to the structure.

N2

FALL-PRONE

CONTENTS

Equipment, stored items, or other contents weighing more than 20lb whose center of mass is more than 4 ft above the adjacent floor level are not braced or otherwise restrained.

Brace equipment to structure. N3

SUSPENDED

CONTENTS

Items suspended without lateral bracing are not free to swing from or move with the structure from which they are suspended without damaging themselves or adjoining components.

Remove suspended items or ensure that items are free to swing from structure without damaging themselves or adjoining components.

N4

FALL-PRONE

EQUIPMENT

Equipment weighing more than 20 lb whose center of mass is more than 4 ft above the adjacent floor level, and which is not in-line equipment, is not braced.

Brace and anchor equipment weighing more than 20 lb, whose center of mass is more than 4 ft above the adjacent floor level.

N5

MECHANICAL

DOORS

Mechanically operated doors are not detailed to operate at a story drift ratio of 0.01.

Remove and replace with doors detailed to operate at a story drift ration of 0.01.

N6

SUSPENDED

EQUIPMENT

Equipment suspended without lateral bracing is not free to swing from or move with the structure from which it is suspended without damaging itself or adjoining components.

Remove suspended equipment or ensure that equipment is free to swing from structure without damaging itself or adjoining components.

N7

Tier 1 Deficiency

Description Deficiency Statement Repair Statement

Plan Key

Note

FLEXIBLE

COUPLINGS

Fluid and gas piping does not have flexible couplings.

Install flexible couplings for fluid and gas piping.

N8

7.0 Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate

Special Notes

$ 1,256,400.00

$ 237,700.00

$ 43,000.00

$ 17,900.00

$ 238,680.00

$ 1,793,680.00

$ 1,793,680.00

4,600

$ 389.93 Cost/Square Foot

Construction Contingency

TOTALS AND SUMMARY

Total Cost Estimate

Match Funds

Total Amount Requested from SRGP

Total Area

The attached engineer’s opinion of probable cost has been developed by ZCS. ZCS has a successful record of completing seismic rehabilitation projects within the State of Oregon. The prices provided in the attached cost estimate have been developed using the extensive list of past projects as a baseline for this project. These prices are based on Oregon BOLI wage rates. The cost estimate is broken down into multiple line items associated with each major task (general conditions, foundation, structural steel, MEP, etc) associated with the rehabilitation. Additional line items are included for design associated permit costs, and owner construction management. A complete breakdown of the cost estimate can be found in Appendix E.

Relocation

It should be noted that the cost per square-foot of the this retrofit may seem abnormally high.

The higher-than-average costs are a result of several factors including the following:

The building is in a liquefaction zone and the costs to mitigate the liquefaction hazard are included in the cost estimate.

DIRECT COST

Construction

Engineering

Construction Management

Matthew R. Smith, PE, SE

ZCS Engineering & Architecture’s professional staff has reviewed the subject building and the deficiencies noted in the Tier 1 evaluation, developed seismic retrofit solutions to rectify the deficiencies, and developed the engineering cost estimate. The project cost estimate was developed by ZCS based on unit costs from our extensive list of past seismic retrofit projects as a baseline. We certify to the best of our knowledge, based on known and readily identifiable existing conditions, that all the seismic deficiencies present in the building are included in the retrofit scope of work and that all the retrofit’s scope of work elements are included in the cost estimate.

8.0 Conclusion and Certification Statement

The findings described in this report have been limited to the lateral force-resisting structural system and general assessment of the gravity force-resisting elements. Based on our visual observations, we find the structure to be in relatively good condition and generally safe for occupancy. No significant damage to the existing structural system was discovered.

Given the current condition of the structure, the current code section on existing buildings does not mandate that upgrades are required unless the building is scheduled for repairs, alterations, additions, or change in occupancy. To clarify, upgrades outlined in this report are strictly at the discretion of the Department.

Please contact our office if you would like to discuss our findings. Please review the attached schematic drawings that can be used to refine a scope and budget.

Certification Statement

Appendix A:

Figures

Figure 1: West Exterior Elevation

Figure 2: East Exterior Elevation

Figure 3: North Exterior Elevation

Figure 4: West Interior Elevation

Figure 5: Lower Floor Conference Room

Figure 6: Upper Floor Attic

Appendix B:

Tier 1 Check Sheets

Appendix C:

Preliminary Seismic Retrofit

Drawings

Appendix D:

Geotechnical Information

9/29/23, 11:06 AM U.S. Seismic Design Maps https://www.seismicmaps.org 1/2

USGS web services were down for some period of time and as a result this tool wasn't operational, resulting in timeout error.

USGS web services are now operational so this tool should work as expected.

Halsey Shedd RFPD Fire Station 52 B St, Oregon 97377, USA Latitude, Longitude: 44.4596678, -123.1102707

Date 9/29/2023, 11:04:52 AM

Design Code Reference Document ASCE41-17 Custom Probability Site Class D - Default (See Section 11.4.3)

Type Description Value Hazard Level BSE-2N

SS spectral response (0.2 s) 0.774

S1 spectral response (1.0 s) 0.418

SXS site-modified spectral response (0.2 s) 0.929

SX1 site-modified spectral response (1.0 s) 0.787

Fa site amplification factor (0.2 s) 1.2

Fv site amplification factor (1.0 s) 1.882 ssuh max direction uniform hazard (0.2 s) 0.885 crs coefficient of risk (0.2 s) 0.875 ssrt risk-targeted hazard (0.2 s) 0.774 ssd deterministic hazard (0.2 s) 1.5 s1uh max direction uniform hazard (1.0 s) 0.485 cr1 coefficient of risk (1.0 s) 0.861 s1rt risk-targeted hazard (1.0 s) 0.418 s1d deterministic hazard (1.0 s) 0.679

Type Description Value Hazard Level BSE-1N

SXS site-modified spectral response (0.2 s) 0.619

SX1 site-modified spectral response (1.0 s) 0.525

9/29/23, 11:06 AM U.S. Seismic Design Maps https://www.seismicmaps.org 2/2

Hazard Level BSE-2E

SS spectral response (0.2 s) 0.536

S1 spectral response (1.0 s) 0.287

SXS site-modified spectral response (0.2 s) 0.735

SX1 site-modified spectral response (1.0 s) 0.581 fa site amplification factor (0.2 s) 1.371 fv site amplification factor (1.0 s) 2.026

Hazard Level BSE-1E

SS spectral response (0.2 s) 0.152

S1 spectral response (1.0 s) 0.064

SXS site-modified spectral response (0.2 s) 0.243

SX1 site-modified spectral response (1.0 s) 0.154

Fa site amplification factor (0.2 s) 1.6

Fv site amplification factor (1.0 s) 2.4

Hazard Level TL Data

T-Sub-L Long-period transition period in seconds 16

DISCLAIMER

While the information presented on this website is believed to be correct, SEAOC /OSHPD and its sponsors and contributors assume no responsibility or liability for its accuracy. The material presented in this web application should not be used or relied upon for any specific application without competent examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability and applicability by engineers or other licensed professionals. SEAOC / OSHPD do not intend that the use of this information replace the sound judgment of such competent professionals, having experience and knowledge in the field of practice, nor to substitute for the standard of care required of such professionals in interpreting and applying the results of the seismic data provided by this website. Users of the information from this website assume all liability arising from such use. Use of the output of this website does not imply approval by the governing building code bodies responsible for building code approval and interpretation for the building site described by latitude/longitude location in the search results of this website.

�/�D�Q�G�V�O�L�G�H

�0�D�[�D�U�����0�L�F�U�R�V�R�I�W

�'�H�W�D�L�O�H�G���6�X�V�F�H�S�W�L�E�L�O�L�W�\���5�H�I�H�U�H�Q�F�H���0�D�S�V

�'�H�H�S���6�X�V�F�H�S�W�L�E�L�O�L�W�\

�/�R�Z���V�X�V�F�H�S�W�L�E�L�O�L�W�\���W�R���G�H�H�S���O�D�Q�G�V�O�L�G�H�V

�0�R�G�H�U�D�W�H���V�X�V�F�H�S�W�L�E�L�O�L�W�\���W�R���G�H�H�S���O�D�Q�G�O�L�G�H�V

�+�L�J�K���V�X�V�F�H�S�W�L�E�L�O�L�W�\���W�R���G�H�H�S���O�D�Q�G�V�O�L�G�H�V

�6�K�D�O�O�R�Z���6�X�V�F�H�S�W�L�E�L�O�L�W�\

�/�R�Z���V�X�V�F�H�S�W�L�E�L�O�L�W�\���W�R���V�K�D�O�O�R�Z���O�D�Q�G�V�O�L�G�H�V

�2�F�W�R�E�H�U������������������ �� �������� ���������������� �P�L

�� �������� ���������������� �N�P

�/�L�T�X�H�I�D�F�W�L�R�Q���+�D�]�D�U�G

�/�L�T�X�H�I�D�F�W�L�R�Q�B�6�X�V�F�H�S�W�L�E�L�O�L�W�\�B�0�D�S

�1�R�Q�H

�9�H�U�\���/�R�Z

�/�R�Z

�0�R�G�H�U�D�W�H

�+�L�J�K

�9�H�U�\���+�L�J�K

�6�H�S�W�H�P�E�H�U������������������ �� �������� ���������������� �P�L

�$�F�W�L�Y�H���)�D�X�O�W�V

�$�F�W�L�Y�H�B�)�D�X�O�W�V

�2�F�W�R�E�H�U������������������ �� �������� ���������������� �P�L

�1�D�W�L�R�Q�D�O���)�O�R�R�G���+�D�]�D�U�G���/�D�\�H�U���)�,�5�0�H�W�W�H

�)�H�H�W

�š

�6�(�(���)�,�6���5�(�3�2�5�7���)�2�5���'�(�7�$�,�/�(�'���/�(�*�(�1�'���$�1�'���,�1�'�(�;���0�$�3���)�2�5���)�,�5�0���3�$�1�(�/���/�$�<�2�8�7

�6�3�(�&�,�$�/���)�/�2�2�' �+�$�=�$�5�'���$�5�(�$�6

�:�L�W�K�R�X�W���%�D�V�H���)�O�R�R�G���(�O�H�Y�D�W�L�R�Q�����%�)�(�� �=�R�Q�H���$�����9�����$����

�:�L�W�K���%�)�(���R�U���'�H�S�W�K �=�R�Q�H���$�(�����$�2�����$�+�����9�(�����$�5

�5�H�J�X�O�D�W�R�U�\���)�O�R�R�G�Z�D�\

�����������$�Q�Q�X�D�O���&�K�D�Q�F�H���)�O�R�R�G���+�D�]�D�U�G�����$�U�H�D�V �R�I���������D�Q�Q�X�D�O���F�K�D�Q�F�H���I�O�R�R�G���Z�L�W�K���D�Y�H�U�D�J�H �G�H�S�W�K���O�H�V�V���W�K�D�Q���R�Q�H���I�R�R�W���R�U���Z�L�W�K���G�U�D�L�Q�D�J�H �D�U�H�D�V���R�I���O�H�V�V���W�K�D�Q���R�Q�H���V�T�X�D�U�H���P�L�O�H �=�R�Q�H���;

�)�X�W�X�U�H���&�R�Q�G�L�W�L�R�Q�V���������$�Q�Q�X�D�O �&�K�D�Q�F�H���)�O�R�R�G���+�D�]�D�U�G �=�R�Q�H���;

�$�U�H�D���Z�L�W�K���5�H�G�X�F�H�G���)�O�R�R�G���5�L�V�N���G�X�H���W�R �/�H�Y�H�H�����6�H�H���1�R�W�H�V�� �=�R�Q�H���;

�$�U�H�D���Z�L�W�K���)�O�R�R�G���5�L�V�N���G�X�H���W�R���/�H�Y�H�H �=�R�Q�H���'

�1�2���6�&�5�(�(�1 �$�U�H�D���R�I���0�L�Q�L�P�D�O���)�O�R�R�G���+�D�]�D�U�G �=�R�Q�H���;

�$�U�H�D���R�I���8�Q�G�H�W�H�U�P�L�Q�H�G���)�O�R�R�G���+�D�]�D�U�G �=�R�Q�H���'

�&�K�D�Q�Q�H�O�����&�X�O�Y�H�U�W�����R�U���6�W�R�U�P���6�H�Z�H�U

�/�H�Y�H�H�����'�L�N�H�����R�U���)�O�R�R�G�Z�D�O�O

�&�U�R�V�V���6�H�F�W�L�R�Q�V���Z�L�W�K���������$�Q�Q�X�D�O���&�K�D�Q�F�H �������� �:�D�W�H�U���6�X�U�I�D�F�H���(�O�H�Y�D�W�L�R�Q

�&�R�D�V�W�D�O���7�U�D�Q�V�H�F�W

�&�R�D�V�W�D�O���7�U�D�Q�V�H�F�W���%�D�V�H�O�L�Q�H �3�U�R�I�L�O�H���%�D�V�H�O�L�Q�H �+�\�G�U�R�J�U�D�S�K�L�F���)�H�D�W�X�U�H

�%�D�V�H���)�O�R�R�G���(�O�H�Y�D�W�L�R�Q���/�L�Q�H�����%�)�(��

�(�I�I�H�F�W�L�Y�H���/�2�0�5�V

�/�L�P�L�W���R�I���6�W�X�G�\ �-�X�U�L�V�G�L�F�W�L�R�Q���%�R�X�Q�G�D�U�\

�'�L�J�L�W�D�O���'�D�W�D���$�Y�D�L�O�D�E�O�H

�1�R���'�L�J�L�W�D�O���'�D�W�D���$�Y�D�L�O�D�E�O�H

�8�Q�P�D�S�S�H�G

�7�K�L�V���P�D�S���F�R�P�S�O�L�H�V���Z�L�W�K���)�(�0�$� �V���V�W�D�Q�G�D�U�G�V���I�R�U���W�K�H���X�V�H���R�I �G�L�J�L�W�D�O���I�O�R�R�G���P�D�S�V���L�I���L�W���L�V���Q�R�W���Y�R�L�G���D�V���G�H�V�F�U�L�E�H�G���E�H�O�R�Z�� �7�K�H���E�D�V�H�P�D�S���V�K�R�Z�Q���F�R�P�S�O�L�H�V���Z�L�W�K���)�(�0�$� �V���E�D�V�H�P�D�S �D�F�F�X�U�D�F�\���V�W�D�Q�G�D�U�G�V

�7�K�H���I�O�R�R�G���K�D�]�D�U�G���L�Q�I�R�U�P�D�W�L�R�Q���L�V���G�H�U�L�Y�H�G���G�L�U�H�F�W�O�\���I�U�R�P���W�K�H �D�X�W�K�R�U�L�W�D�W�L�Y�H���1�)�+�/���Z�H�E���V�H�U�Y�L�F�H�V���S�U�R�Y�L�G�H�G���E�\���)�(�0�$�����7�K�L�V���P�D�S �Z�D�V���H�[�S�R�U�W�H�G���R�Q �������������������������D�W�������������3�0�� ���D�Q�G���G�R�H�V���Q�R�W �U�H�I�O�H�F�W���F�K�D�Q�J�H�V���R�U���D�P�H�Q�G�P�H�Q�W�V���V�X�E�V�H�T�X�H�Q�W���W�R���W�K�L�V���G�D�W�H���D�Q�G �W�L�P�H�����7�K�H���1�)�+�/���D�Q�G���H�I�I�H�F�W�L�Y�H���L�Q�I�R�U�P�D�W�L�R�Q���P�D�\���F�K�D�Q�J�H���R�U �E�H�F�R�P�H���V�X�S�H�U�V�H�G�H�G���E�\���Q�H�Z���G�D�W�D���R�Y�H�U���W�L�P�H��

�7�K�L�V���P�D�S���L�P�D�J�H���L�V���Y�R�L�G���L�I���W�K�H���R�Q�H���R�U���P�R�U�H���R�I���W�K�H���I�R�O�O�R�Z�L�Q�J���P�D�S �H�O�H�P�H�Q�W�V���G�R���Q�R�W���D�S�S�H�D�U�����E�D�V�H�P�D�S���L�P�D�J�H�U�\�����I�O�R�R�G���]�R�Q�H���O�D�E�H�O�V�� �O�H�J�H�Q�G�����V�F�D�O�H���E�D�U�����P�D�S���F�U�H�D�W�L�R�Q���G�D�W�H�����F�R�P�P�X�Q�L�W�\���L�G�H�Q�W�L�I�L�H�U�V�� �)�,�5�0���S�D�Q�H�O���Q�X�P�E�H�U�����D�Q�G���)�,�5�0���H�I�I�H�F�W�L�Y�H���G�D�W�H�����0�D�S���L�P�D�J�H�V���I�R�U �X�Q�P�D�S�S�H�G���D�Q�G���X�Q�P�R�G�H�U�Q�L�]�H�G���D�U�H�D�V���F�D�Q�Q�R�W���E�H���X�V�H�G���I�R�U �U�H�J�X�O�D�W�R�U�\���S�X�U�S�R�V�H�V��

�/�H�J�H�Q�G

�2�7�+�(�5���$�5�(�$�6���2�) �)�/�2�2�'���+�$�=�$�5�'

�2�7�+�(�5���$�5�(�$�6

�*�(�1�(�5�$�/ �6�7�5�8�&�7�8�5�(�6

�2�7�+�(�5 �)�(�$�7�8�5�(�6

�0�$�3���3�$�1�(�/�6

�7�K�H���S�L�Q���G�L�V�S�O�D�\�H�G���R�Q���W�K�H���P�D�S���L�V���D�Q���D�S�S�U�R�[�L�P�D�W�H �S�R�L�Q�W���V�H�O�H�F�W�H�G���E�\���W�K�H���X�V�H�U���D�Q�G���G�R�H�V���Q�R�W���U�H�S�U�H�V�H�Q�W �D�Q���D�X�W�K�R�U�L�W�D�W�L�Y�H���S�U�R�S�H�U�W�\���O�R�F�D�W�L�R�Q��

�������ƒ��� �������:�������ƒ����� �������1

�������ƒ��� �������:�������ƒ����� �������1

�%�D�V�H�P�D�S���,�P�D�J�H�U�\���6�R�X�U�F�H�����8�6�*�6���1�D�W�L�R�Q�D�O���0�D�S����������

Appendix E:

Construction Cost Estimate

Worksheets

Description Deficiencies

(Ref. Seismic Evaluation

Report Sec. 6.0)

Quantity Units Unit Price Total Price for

Construction Item

General Conditions 10% % 92,657.00$

Preconstruction Services 2% % 18,531.40$

Escalation 7% % 72,643.09$

Bonding & Insurance 3% % 31,132.75$

Contractor Profit & Overhead 5% % 51,887.92$

General Conditions Subtotal $ 266,852.16

Misc MEP N6,N8 1 Lump Sum 80,800.00$ 80,800.00$

Misc Non-Structural N1-N5,N7 1 Lump Sum 32,400.00$ 32,400.00$

Apparatus Bay Doors N6 4 EA 15,000.00$ 60,000.00$

New Restroom S2 2 EA 25,000.00$ 50,000.00$

Non-Structural Subtotal $ 223,200.00

BUILDING PART A: Fire Station 52 Sub-Total $ 703,370.00

Sub-Total Construction Cost $ 1,193,400.00

Contingency 20% $ 238,680.00

Total Construction Cost $ 1,432,080.00

Engineering 237,700.00$

Architectural Consulting 21,500.00$

Structural / Rehabilitation Engineering 157,500.00$

Geotechnical Consulting 43,000.00$

Materials Testing for Design 10,700.00$

Feasibility Study Reimb. (Fire Stations) 5,000.00$

Construction Management 43,000.00$

Construction 1,256,400.00$

Sub-Total Construction Cost 1,193,400.00$

Special Inspection Services for Construction 20,000.00$

Permitting Fees 43,000.00$

Relocation of FF&E 17,900.00$ Contingency 238,680.00$

1,793,680.00$ Total Project Funding Requirement

ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - SEISMIC REHABILITATION

SUMMARY

GENERAL CONDITIONS

Non-Structural Elements

Construction Cost Per Building Part

Cost Estimate Summary

Description Deficiencies

(Ref. Seismic Evaluation

Report Sec. 6.0)

Quantity Units Unit Price Total Price for

Construction Item

Soft Demolition S1,S4,S5,S6,N2,N6 5160 Square Foot 2.00$ 10,320.00$

Hard Demolition S2,S6 1400 Square Foot 20.00$ 28,000.00$

TPO / Comp / Metal Roof Demo S7 4500 Square Foot 2.00$ 9,000.00$

$ 47,320.00

Bolting of Extg Walls to footings S5,S8 350 Linear Foot 35.00$ 12,250.00$

Micropile S2 43 Each 5,000.00$ 215,000.00$

Shear Wall Footings - Wood Walls S2 50 Linear Foot 300.00$ 15,000.00$

Deep Foundation Mobilization S2 1 Each 20,000.00$ 20,000.00$

Concrete Repair & Patching S2,S3,S6,S8 2500 Square Foot 15.00$ 37,500.00$ Holdowns S4,S6 10 Each 1,500.00$…