The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About25G - ENGINEERING SRVS GRADE SEPARATION REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: JANUARY 4, 2011 TITLE: APPROVED Q As Recommended AGREEMENT WITH AECOM FOR Q As Amended E3 Ordinance on 1' Reading ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE E3 Ordinance on 2 - Reading SANTA ANA BOULEVARD GRADE Il Implementing Resolution SEPARATION (PROJECT NO. O Set Public Hearing For 106727) CONTINUED TO 7~71~ FILE NUMBER CI MANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION Authorize the City Manager and Clerk of the Council to execute the attached agreement with AECOM, subject to nonsubstantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney for engineering and environmental services related to the Santa Ana Boulevard Grade Separation Project in an amount not to exceed $1,200,000. DISCUSSION Santa Ana Boulevard is a six-lane east-west principal arterial and carries in excess of 20,000 vehicles per day. Within the City, the OCTA Metrolink RR is a north-south, two-track railroad. At the Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center (SARTC) this railroad serves Metrolink, Amtrak, Union Pacific (UP), and Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF), which connects freight and residents of central Orange County with the outlying areas of nearby regions, including Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, San Diego and beyond. Due to increasing demand for inter- and intracounty rail services resulting from growth in population and employment in the surrounding areas, a grade separation at Santa Ana Boulevard and the OCTA Metrolink RR is required to alleviate the current and potential traffic impacts and hazards posed by the existing at-grade rail crossing. City staff, in conjunction with OCTA, secured $1,500,000 for the preparation of a Project Study Report Equivalent (PSRE) and conceptual engineering plans for the Santa Ana Boulevard Grade Separation Project. The funding is a combination of Measure M Transit and Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) funds. Since the RSTP funds are federal, the procurement of consultant services requires following the guidelines set forth in the Local Assistance Procedures Manual, a Caltrans publication. For consultant contracts in excess of $250,000, a pre-award audit is required for the highest rated firm to determine the Consultant's accounting, estimating, administrative systems, proposed costs, financial condition, and the proposed contract language. Staff released a Request for Proposals (RFP) for these engineering services. Qualified firms were contacted and six firms submitted proposals. Personnel from the Public Works Agency 25G-1 Agreement with AECOM for Engineering Services for the Santa Ana Boulevard Grade Separation (Project No. 106727) January4, 2011 Page 2 evaluated the proposals. Each firm was rated according to its qualifications, experience, and capacity to perform the required work. The fee proposals for the top three firms were opened. The ratings for all six firms and fees for the top three firms are as follows: FIRM SCORE FEES AECOM 94 $1,199,208 Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. 85 $1,102,322 RBF Consulting 82 $1,011,351 JL Patterson & Associates, Inc. 76 Huitt Zollars 73 HDR 72 The highest ranking firm, AECOM, submitted two fees. The fee based on the scope in the RFP is $498,676. The alternate fee includes the RFP scope, a Project Report, and a complete environmental analysis for $1,090,386. By having a formal Project Report and certified Environmental Document, the project is better positioned for funding. Because of the experience of key personnel, client satisfaction, a competitive fee proposal, the additional services, their score, and the results of the pre-award audit, it is recommended that the firm of AECOM be retained to perform the required services in the not-to-exceed amount of $1,200,000, which includes a 10 percent contingency. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT In accordance with CEQA, the proposed request is not considered a project. Separate environmental documentation will be prepared for the grade separation project. FISCAL IMPACT Funds are available in the Measure M Street Construction Fund (account no. 03217660-66220, project no. 106727, project no. 106727) and the Select Street Construction Fund (accounting unit 05917660-66220, project no. 106727). APPROVED AS TO FUNDS AND ACCOUNTS: MI-Raul Go IF z II Francisco Gutierrez r Executive irector Executive Director Public Wor s Agency Finance & Management Services Agency RG/JG Exhibit: 1. Agreement 25G-2 AGREEMENT FOR PROVISION OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 4th day of January, 2011 by and between AECOM, a California corporation (hereinafter "Consultant"), and the City of Santa Ana, a charter city and municipal corporation organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California (hereinafter "City"). RECITALS A. The City desires to retain a consultant having special skill and knowledge in the field of engineering to prepare a Project Study Report Equivalent and Conceptual Engineering Plans for the Santa Ana Boulevard Grade Separation Project. B. Consultant represents that Consultant is able and willing to provide such services to the City. C. The project will be funded in part through funds administered by the Federal Highway Administration and Caltrans retains oversight over the project. D. In undertaking the performance of this Agreement, Consultant represents that it is knowledgeable in its field and that any services performed by Consultant under this Agreement will be performed in compliance with such standards as may reasonably be expected from a professional consulting firm in the field. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual and respective promises, and subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, the parties agree as follows: 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES Consultant shall provide professional and technical engineering services necessary to investigate alignment alternatives, prepare a Project Study Report Equivalent (PSRE) for the Santa Ana Grade Separation Project, as set forth in City's Request for Proposal, attached hereto as Exhibit A, as further detailed in Consultant's Proposal dated April 6, 2010, attached hereto as Exhibit A-1 and revised Scope of Services and Fee Schedule submitted on December 20, 2010, attached hereto as Exhibit A-2. Exhibit A, A-I and A-2 are incorporated by reference. a. Scope of Work. The PSRE shall include preliminary environmental studies either PEAR or PES as determined by the guidelines., cost estimates for construction and right-of-way, conceptual engineering plans, evaluation of alternative alignment impacts, including right-of-way and traffic detour routes during construction. The PSRE shall include 1) Project Management 2) research and data collection; 3) aerial mapping and field survey; 4) utility survey 5) design and alignment alternatives analysis and development of preferred alternative features and standards; 6) traffic analysis and traffic management plan ; 7) structural analysis; 8) hydraulics and hydrology study; 9) site constraints analysis; 10) conceptual engineering plans; 1 1) right-of-way requirements; and 12) preliminary cost estimates and project schedule Consultant shall also provide an environmental assessment including the preparation of necessary studies and reports, holding the required public hearings, and submittal of documentation to the necessary governing bodies. 1 25G-3 b. Time for Performance. Consultant shall perform and complete all services as may be requested pursuant to the Scope of Work in a timely and expeditious manner. Consultant shall perform such services in accordance with the schedules which Consultant and City may mutually agree as to any particular deliverable, study, job or analysis. In the event that Consultant determines that a proposed schedule for work as requested by the City is not possible or achievable, Consultant shall immediately notify the City's Representative, in writing and seek modifications. No extension of time shall be accepted unless it is evidenced in a writing executed by each Party's Representative. C. Progress Report. Consultant shall submit progress reports at least once a month. The report shall be sufficiently detailed for City's Project Manager to determine whether Consultant is performing to expectations and on schedule, to communicate interim findings, and to specifically address any difficulties or special problems encountered, so remedies can be developed. 2. REPRESENTATIVES a. For purposes of implementing this Agreement, the representative of City shall be the Executive Director of the Public Works Agency, or his designated representative, and the representative of the Consultant shall be James Faber, or his designated representative. Except as may be otherwise stated herein, such representatives shall have the authority to act on behalf of their respective parties in carrying out the terms of this Agreement. b. Consultant shall assign the appropriate key personnel to perform the services required by this Agreement, as set forth in the RFP and Consultant's Proposal. Consultant shall maintain the Project Manager identified in its Proposal, and approved by the City. 3. OWNERSHIP OF REPORTS AND DOCUMENTS Upon completion of all work under this Agreement, ownership and title to all reports, documents, tracings, plans, specifications, estimates and maps prepared or obtained under the terms of this Agreement shall be delivered to, and become the property of City. Basic survey notes and sketches, charts, computations, and other data prepared or obtained pursuant to this Agreement shall be made available upon request of the City without restriction or limitation on their use. Consultant shall furnish the City all necessary copies of data needed to complete the review and approval process. 4. FINISHED AND PRELIMINARY DATA All of Consultant's finished technical data, including but not limited to illustrations, photographs, data including without limitation source code, binary code, all media, technical documentation and user documentation, photoprints and other graphic information required to be furnished under this Agreement, shall be City's property upon payment and shall be furnished with unlimited rights and, as such, shall be free from proprietary restriction except as elsewhere authorized in this Agreement. Consultant further agrees that it shall have no interest or claim to such finished, City-owned, technical data; furthermore, said data is subject to the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 USC 552. 5. COMPENSATION a. The method of payment for this contract will be based on actual cost method. The City will reimburse the Consultant for actual costs (including labor costs, employee benefits, travel, equipment rental costs, overhead and other direct costs) incurred by the Consultant in performance of the work. The Consultant will not be reimbursed for actual costs that exceed the estimated wage rates, employee benefits, travel, equipment rental, overhead and other estimated costs set forth in the approved 2 25G-4 Consultant's Cost Proposal (Exhibit A-2), unless additional reimbursement is provided for by contract amendment. In no event, will the Consultant be reimbursed for overhead cost at a rate that exceeds the City's approved overhead rate set forth in the Cost Proposal. In the event that the City determines that a change to the work from that specified in the Cost Proposal and contract is required, the contract time and/or actual costs reimbursable by the City shall be adjusted by contract amendment to accommodate the changed work. The maximum total cost shall not exceed $1,200,000 unless authorized by contract amendment. b. Reimbursement for transportation and subsistence costs shall not exceed the rates specified in the approved Cost Proposal. C. When milestone cost estimates are included in the approved Cost Proposal, the Consultant shall obtain prior written approval for a revised milestone cost estimate from the Contract Manager before exceeding such cost estimate. d. Progress payment will be made monthly in arrears based on services provided and allowable incurred costs. If consultant fails to submit the required deliverables in accordance with the time schedule set forth in the Scope of Services, City shall have the right to delay payment and/or terminate this Agreement in accordance with the provisions of Section 15, Termination. e. Payment will be made as promptly as City fiscal procedures will permit following receipt of itemized invoice in triplicate, evidencing work performed. The invoice shall be submitted no later than forty-five (45) calendar days after performance of the billed services. Invoices shall follow the format stipulated in the approved Cost Proposal, and shall reference this Agreement number and Project title. Final invoice must contain the final cost and all credits due to the City, including any equipment purchased. Final invoice shall be submitted not later than sixty (60) calendar days after completion of the work. Invoices shall be mailed to City's Project Manager at the following address: Jason Gabriel 20 Civic Center Plaza (M-36) P.O. Box 1988 Santa Ana, CA 92702 f. No payment will be made prior to approval of any work, nor for any work performed prior to approval of this Agreement. g. Salary increases will be reimbursable only if the new salary is within the salary range identified in the approved Cost Proposal and is approved by City's Project Manager. For personnel subject to prevailing wage rates, all salary increases which are the direct result of changes in the prevailing wage rates are reimbursable. h. All subcontracts in excess of $25,000 shall contain the above provisions. i. The parties mutually agree that this project will be funded through Federal funds, and that said funding is contingent on approval of the Project by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and FHWA allocation of funds to the Project. Consultant shall not commence services until it receives a written Notice to Proceed (NTP) executed by the Executive Director of Public Works. Said NTP is contingent on 1) City's receipt of FHWA and California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) approval of the Project and appropriation of FHWA funds for completion of the Project. If the FHWA does not authorize funding for said Project, the City may terminate this Agreement, as set forth in Section 15, below. 3 25G-5 6. PERFORMANCE PERIOD a. This contract shall go into effect on January 4, 2011, contingent upon approval by the City, and the Consultant shall commence work after notification to proceed by the City's Contract manager. The contract shall end on January 1, 2013, unless extended by contract amendment. b. The Consultant is advised that any recommendation for contract award is not binding on the City until the contract is fully executed and approved by the City. 7. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR Consultant shall, during the entire term of this Agreement, be construed to be an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. This Agreement is not intended nor shall it be construed to create an employer-employee relationship, a joint venture relationship, or to allow the City to exercise discretion or control over the professional manner in which Consultant performs the services which are the subject matter of this Agreement; however, the services to be provided by Consultant shall be provided in a manner consistent with all applicable standards and regulations governing such services. Consultant shall pay all salaries and wages, employer's social security taxes, unemployment insurance and similar taxes relating to employees and shall be responsible for all applicable withholding taxes. 8. INSURANCE Prior to undertaking performance of work under this Agreement, Consultant shall maintain and shall require its subcontractors, if any, to obtain and maintain insurance as described below: a. Commercial General Liability Insurance. Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance which shall include, but not be limited to protection against claims arising from bodily and personal injury, including death resulting therefrom and damage to property, resulting from any act or occurrence arising out of Consultant's operations in the performance of this Agreement, including, without limitation, acts involving vehicles. The amounts of insurance shall be not less than the following: single limit coverage applying to bodily and personal injury, including death resulting therefrom, and property damage, in the total amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence, $2,000,000 in the aggregate. Such insurance shall (a) name the City, its officers, employees, agents, volunteers and representatives as additional insured(s); (b) be primary with respect to insurance or self-insurance programs maintained by the City; and (c) contain standard separation of insureds provisions. b. Business automobile liability insurance, or equivalent form, with a combined single limit of not less than $2,000,000 combined single limit. Such insurance shall include coverage for owned, hired and non-owned automobiles. C. Worker's Compensation Insurance. In accordance with the provisions of Section 3300 of the Labor Code, Consultant, if Consultant has any employees, is required to be insured against liability for worker's compensation or to undertake self-insurance. Prior to commencing the performance of the work under this Agreement, Consultant agrees to obtain and maintain any employer's liability insurance with limits not less than $1,000,000 per accident. d. Professional liability (errors and omissions) insurance, with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 per claim, and $2,000,000 in the aggregate. e. The following requirements apply to the insurance to be provided by Consultant pursuant to this section: 4 25G-6 (i) Consultant shall maintain all insurance required above in full force and effect for the entire period covered by this Agreement. (ii) Certificates of insurance shall be furnished to the City upon execution of this Agreement and shall be approved in form by the City Attorney. (iii) Certificates and policies shall state that the policies shall not be cancelled or reduced in coverage or changed in any other material aspect without thirty (30) days prior written notice to the City. f. If Consultant fails or refuses to produce or maintain the insurance required by this section or fails or refuses to furnish the City with required proof that insurance has been procured and is in force and paid for, the City shall have the right, at the City's election, to forthwith terminate this Agreement. Such termination shall not effect Consultant's right to be paid for its time and materials expended prior to notification of termination. Consultant waives the right to receive compensation and agrees to indemnify the City for any work performed prior to approval of insurance by the City. 9. INDEMNIFICATION Consultant agrees to and shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, employees, consultants, special counsel, and representatives from liability for personal injury, damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable relief caused by the negligent acts, omissions or willful misconduct of the Consultant or its contractors, subcontractors, agents, employees, or other persons acting on its behalf, arising out of the performance of this Agreement, except to the extent caused by the sole negligence, active negligence or intentional misconduct of the City or any other indemnified party. The Consultant further agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and pay all costs for the defense of the City, including fees and costs for special counsel to be selected by the City, asserting that personal injury, damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable relief due to personal or property rights arises by reason of the negligent acts or willful misconduct of the Consultant, its contractors, subcontractors, agents, employees or other persons acting on its behalf. City may make all reasonable decisions with respect to its representation in any legal proceeding. 10. CONFIDENTIALITY OF DATA a. If Consultant receives from the City financial, statistical, personal, technical, or other data and information which are designated confidential or proprietary, Consultant agrees that it shall not use or disclose such information except in the performance of this Agreement, and further agrees to exercise the same degree of care it uses to protect its own information of like importance, but in no event less than reasonable care. b. Permission to disclose information on one occasion shall not authorize the Consultant to further disclose such information, or disseminate the same on any other occasion. C. Consultant shall not comment publicly to the press or any media regarding the Agreement or City's actions regarding the same, except to City staff, Consultant's own personnel involved in the performance of this Agreement, at a public hearing relating to the Agreement, or in response to questions posed by a Legislative committee. d. Consultant shall not issue any news release or public relations item of any nature whatsoever, regarding the work performed or to be performed pursuant to this Agreement, without City's prior review of the contents thereof and written approval. 5 25G-7 C. Any subcontract entered into as a result of this Agreement shall contain all of the provisions of this Section. 11. CONFLICT OF INTEREST CLAUSE Consultant covenants that it presently has no interests and shall not have interests, direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner with performance of services specified under this Agreement. 12. NOTICE Any notice, tender, demand, delivery, or other communication pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be properly given if delivered in person or mailed by first class or certified mail, postage prepaid, or sent by facsimile or other telegraphic communication in the manner provided in this Section, to the following persons: To City: Clerk ofthe City Council City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza (M-30) P.O. Box 1988 Santa Ana, CA 92702-1988 facsimile 714- 647-6956 With courtesy copies to: Executive Director of the Public Works Agency City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza (M-36) P.O. Box 1988 Santa Ana, California 92702 facsimile 714- 647-5635 and City Attorney City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza (M-29) P.O. Box 1988 Santa Ana, California 92702 facsimile 714- 647-6515 To Consultant: AECOM Mr. James Faber 999 Town & Country Road Orange, California 92868 facsimile 714-567-2441 A party may change its address by giving notice in writing to the other party. Thereafter, any communication shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. If sent by mail, communication shall be effective or deemed to have been given three (3) days after it has been deposited in the United States mail, duly registered or certified, with postage prepaid, and addressed as set forth above. If sent by facsimile, communication shall be effective or deemed to have been given twenty-four (24) hours after the time set forth on the transmission report issued by the transmitting facsimile machine, addressed as set 6 25G-8 forth above. For purposes of calculating these time frames, weekends, federal, state, County or City holidays shall be excluded. 13. EXCLUSIVITY AND AMENDMENT This Agreement represents the complete and exclusive statement between the City and Consultant, and supersedes any and all other agreements, oral or written, between the parties. In the event of a conflict between the terms of this Agreement and any attachments hereto, the terms of this Agreement shall prevail. This Agreement may not be modified except by written instrument signed by the City and by an authorized representative of Consultant. The parties agree that any terms or conditions of any purchase order or other instrument that are inconsistent with, or in addition to, the terms and conditions hereof, shall not bind or obligate Consultant nor the City. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party, which are not embodied herein. 14. ASSIGNMENT Inasmuch as this Agreement is intended to secure the specialized services of Consultant, Consultant may not assign, transfer, delegate, or subcontract any interest herein without the prior written consent of the City and any such assignment, transfer, delegation or subcontract without the City's prior written consent shall be considered null and void. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to limit the City's ability to have any of the services which are the subject to this Agreement performed by City personnel or by other consultants retained by City. is. TERMINATION a. This Agreement may be terminated by the City upon thirty (30) days written notice of termination. In such event, Consultant shall be entitled to receive and the City shall pay Consultant compensation for all services performed by Consultant prior to receipt of such notice of termination, subject to the following conditions: (i) As a condition of such payment, the Executive Director may require Consultant to deliver to the City all work product completed as of such date, and in such case such work product shall be the property of the City unless prohibited by law, and Consultant consents to the City's use thereof for such purposes as the City deems appropriate. However, any use of unfinished work product shall be at City's sole risk. (ii) Payment need not be made for work which fails to meet the standard of performance specified in the Recitals of this Agreement. b. City may terminate this Agreement for Consultant's default if a federal or state proceeding for the relief of debtors is undertaken by or against Consultant, or if Consultant makes an assignment for the benefit of creditors, or if Consultant breaches any term(s) or violates any provision(s) of this Agreement and does not cure such breach or violation within ten (10) calendar days after written notice thereof by City. Consultant shall be liable for any and all reasonable costs incurred by City as a result of such default, including but not limited to re-procurement costs of the same or similar services defaulted by Consultant under this Agreement except that, Consultant shall not be liable for any costs exceeding the amount of total compensation payable under this Agreement to Consultant by the City, as identified in Exhibit A-2. 7 25G-9 16. AUDIT AND INSPECTION OF RECORDS Consultant shall provide City, the FHWA, Caltrans or other agents of the City, such access to Consultant's accounting books, records, payroll documents and facilities ofthe Consultant which are directly pertinent to this Agreement for the purposes of examining, auditing and inspecting all accounting books, records, work data, documents and activities related hereto. Consultant shall maintain such books, records, data and documents in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall clearly identify and make such items readily accessible to such parties during Consultant's performance hereunder and for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment by City. Consultant shall permit any ofthe foregoing parties to reproduce documents by any means whatsoever or to copy excerpts and transcriptions as reasonably necessary. 17. AUDIT REVIEW PROCEDURES a. Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under an interim or post audit of this contract that is not disposed of by agreement, shall be reviewed by the Executive Director of the Public Works Agency. b. Not later than 30 days after issuance of a final audit report, the Consultant may request a review of unresolved audit issues by the City's Chief Financial Officer. Such request shall be made in writing. C. The filing or review of an audit dispute will not excuse the Consultant from full and timely performance ofthis Agreement. 18. SUBCONTRACTING Consultant shall perform all work contemplated in its Proposal, and no work pursuant to this Agreement shall be subcontracted without the written authorization by City, except that work expressly identified in Consultant's Proposal. Any subcontract in excess of $25,000 shall contain all the provisions of this Agreement which are applicable to subcontractors. 19. FORCE MAJEURE Either party shall be excused from performing its obligations under this Agreement during the time and to the extent that it is prevented from performing by an unforeseeable cause beyond its control, including but not limited to: any incidence of fire, flood; acts of God; commandeering of material, products, plants or facilities by the federal, state or local government; national fuel shortage; or a material act or omission by the other party; when satisfactory evidence of such cause is presented to the other party, and provided further that such nonperformance is unforeseeable, beyond the control and is not due to the fault or negligence of the party not performing. 20. COST PRINCIPALS a. Consultant agrees that the Contract Cost Principles and Procedures, 48 CFR, Federal Acquisition Regulations System, Chapter 1, Part 31.000 et seq., shall be used to determine the allowability of cost individual items. 8 25G-10 b. Consultant agrees to comply with federal procedures in accordance with 49 CFR, Part 18, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments. C. Any costs for which payment has been made to Consultant that are determined by subsequent audit to be unallowable under 48 CFR, Federal Acquisition Regulation System, Chapter 1, Part 31.000 et seq., are subject to repayment by Consultant to City. 21. PROGRAM FRAUD / FALSE OR FRAUDULENT STATEMENTS a. Consultant acknowledges that the provisions of the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986, as amended, 31 U.S.C. § 3801 et sue. and U.S. DOT regulations, "Program Fraud Civil Remedies," 49 C.F.R. Part 31, apply to its actions pertaining to this Project. Accordingly, by signing this Agreement, Consultant certifies the truthfulness and accuracy of any statement it has made, it makes, it may make, or causes to be made, pertaining to this Agreement or the FHWA assisted project for which this contract work is being performed. In addition to other penalties that may be applicable, Consultant further acknowledges that if it makes, or causes to be made, a false, fictitious, or fraudulent claim, statement, submission, or certification, the Federal Government reserves the right to impose the penalties of the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986 on Consultant to the extent the Federal Government deems appropriate. b. Consultant acknowledges that if it makes, or causes to be made, a false, fictitious, or fraudulent claim, statement, submission, or certification to the Federal Government under a contract connected with a project that is financed in whole or in part with Federal assistance originally awarded by FHWA under the authority of 49 U.S.C. § 5307 et seq., the Government reserves the right to impose the penalties of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 and 49 U.S.C. § 5307, et seq. on the Consultant, to the extent the Federal Government deems appropriate. C. Consultant agrees to include the above two clauses in each subcontract financed in whole or in part with Federal assistance provided by FHWA. It is further agreed that the clauses shall not be modified, except to identify the subcontractor who will be subject to the provisions. 22. SUSPENSION AND DEBARMENT Consultant's signature affixed herein, shall constitute a certification under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that the Consultant has complied with Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 29, Debarment and Suspension Certificate, which certifies that he/she or any person associated therewith in the capacity of owner, partner, director, officer or manager, is not currently under suspension, debarment, voluntarily excluded, or determined ineligible by any federal agency within the past three (3) years; does not have a proposed debarment pending; and has not been indicted, convicted, or had a civil judgment rendered against it in a court of competent jurisdiction in any matter involving fraud or official misconduct within the past three (3) years. Any exceptions to this certification must be disclosed to the City. 23. DISCRIMINATION Consultant shall not discriminate because of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, age, national origin, ancestry, or disability, as defined and prohibited by applicable law, in the recruitment, selection, training, utilization, promotion, termination or other employment related activities. 9 25G-11 Consultant affirms that it is an equal opportunity employer and shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations. 24. JURISDICTION - VENUE This Agreement and all questions relating to its validity, interpretation, performance, and enforcement shall be government and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. This Agreement has been executed and delivered in the State of California and the validity, interpretation, performance, and enforcement of any of the clauses of this Agreement shall be determined and governed by the laws of the State of California. Both parties further agree that Orange County, California, shall be the venue for any action or proceeding that may be brought or arise out of, in connection with or by reason of this Agreement. 25. PROFESSIONAL LICENSES Consultant shall, throughout the term of this Agreement, maintain all necessary licenses, permits, approvals, waivers, and exemptions necessary for the provision of the services hereunder and required by the laws and regulations of the United States, the State of California, the City of Santa Ana and all other governmental agencies. Consultant shall notify the City immediately and in writing of her inability to obtain or maintain such permits, licenses, approvals, waivers, and exemptions. Said inability shall be cause for termination of this Agreement. 26. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS a. Each undersigned represents and warrants that its signature hereinbelow has the power, authority and right to bind their respective parties to each of the terms of this Agreement, and shall indemnify City fully, including reasonable costs and attorney's fees, for any injuries or damages to City in the event that such authority or power is not, in fact, held by the signatory or is withdrawn. b. Captions and headings in this Agreement, including the title of this Agreement, are for convenience only and are not to be considered in construing this Agreement. c. All Exhibits referenced herein and attached hereto shall be incorporated as if fully set forth in the body of this Agreement. 10 25G-12 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the date and year first above written. ATTEST: CITY OF SANTA ANA MARIA D. HUIZAR DAVID N. REAM Clerk of the Council City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: JOSEPH W.FLETCHER City Attorney By: Laura Sheedy Assistant City Attorney AECOM RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: RAUL OODINEZ II PATRICK L. SOMERVILLE, PE Executive Director Vice President Public Works Agency Tax ID# 11 25G-13 EXHIBIT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL SANTA ANA GRADE SEPARATION 12 25G-14 ~.y r rr { d '~.M' ~ ~i ~ r . - - ~ I~'I1 ~ ~'"II ~ ill i~ ~ I ~4~+J ~J~'.a ~ . , t.. { REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROJECT STUDY REPORT EQUIVALENT AND CONCEPTUAL ENGINEERING PLANS FOR SANTA ANA BOULEVARD GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT ?8 f ~PPM~ ~ 4 I ~ Y ~ p h x ~ ~ ~ * ul a P(~ ~ I : i `Y ,F + L it I ~ x ~ i w ~ I ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ f ' ~ ~ ~ r ~y y ~ I ~ c ~ ~ y r G ~ s f ~~r~ s, C ~ ~ f .i Ire; ~ r r~f' i~d. Ar. fi. _ ~ ~ ~ " ~a i ~ ~ r ' 7 P ry v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' a ~ ~ I p~ I 1 ~ ; ~`F ~ ~ ~ w~"~n,,.,. ~ 1" ~ ~ , u'~ ~ ~ IIII I ,y ~v~ sir, ~ ~'d'~ 6 { ~ ~ ~ it p ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i,ti ~ p ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ r ~ ' k L/1 ~ ~ I yf + ~ K r ~ / J~ k' m~ r ~ .I F ~s,Y,f,~~"~ ' M'~. ~ y~ 6~ Itt1~l ~ ~ r .,L ~ ~ ~r Yyfj~~'~A ,~f~,,., ~ ;v 7 i d 14 ~ t 4 TIi" F l., ~ 1 ~ w tY _ ~ y' ~ 1 E V9'~ ,I , ~ u ~ ~ ~ 4 y 33 I i ~ M' 5 ~ ~d d r w p ~ ~ qtr f m, ~ ~`r I ~ 4.. *x i , r ~ ~ I ~'F it ~ ~ ~.i?„'~ u i - ~ e ~ ~ ~ h ~ ~ ' h I ,r .~r , ~ ~ ,~°'~ht ' ~ti 7 ~ I ~ ~ q~ ~ J" day ~ y Y.... ~ 'i w ~ ~ o a r, W ! 6 aWr , ~ "h. w + ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a `~,n J ~ ; ~ ~ ~ : ~ °~w ~ pu a " ' n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r- ,I , , i , . , ~ j# ~ i~ ~ I~~ to"" ~ di k I I~ ! u"11 ~ f s~ 9 i m i ~ P,~ ~ ~"1~Y"~~~ 1~i + i ~ ' ~ 1 r i I ~ 7 ~ P. ar ~ a .a , r . n ~ y,,q w suer rd I ~ m i rr , x ~ A ~~~'g~~y-~~/~~/~ I Z, e. ..~,7,~ k~~. .i V_. - e im a ti5~191~L^Y-40..7\.,F ~+YL .t ~~r? pi o, ,F R. p CITY OF SANTAANA PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY 20 CIVIC CENTER PLAZA SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92702 Issued by: Souri Amirani, Deputy City Engineer City of Santa Ana REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROJECT STUDY REPORT EQUIVALENT AND CONCEPTUAL ENGINEERING PLANS FOR SANTA ANA BOULEVARD GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION 3 II. PROJECT BACKGROUND 3 III. CONTENT OF PROPOSAL 4 IV. SCOPE OF WORK 5 V. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS ...............................................................................14 VI. PROJECT BUDGET .............................................................................................15 VII. PERFORMANCE PERIOD ...................................................................................15 VIII. CONSULTANT SELECTION COMMITTEE ..........................................................16 IX. ESTABLISHING OF FEES ...................................................................................16 X. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT .......................................................16 XI. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS ...........................................................................16 XII. CITY RESPONSIBILITY .......................................................................................16 XIII. EXAMINATION OF SITE PRIOR TO SUBMITTING PROPOSAL ........................17 XIV. RIGHT TO REJECT PROPOSALS .......................................................................17 XV. SCHEDULE ..........................................................................................................17 XVI. PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL DEADLINE .................................................................18 XVII. ISSUING OFFICE .................................................................................................18 XVIII. ADDENDA ............................................................................................................18 XIX. CLARIFICATIONS ................................................................................................18 XX. JOINT VENTURES ...............................................................................................19 XXI. PRIME CONSULTANT RESPONSIBILITIES .......................................................19 XXII. DELAYS ................................................................................................................19 XXIII. PROJECT CONTROL ...........................................................................................19 XXIV. RULES FOR PROPOSALS ..................................................................................19 XXV. METHOD OF PAYMENT ......................................................................................19 XXVI. REGULATIONS 20 XXVII. THE CITY'S AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAM 20 XXVIII. DBE GOAL 20 XXIX. WAGE RATES 20 APPENDICES APPENDIX A -LOCATION MAP APPENDIX B -PROPOSED SANTA ANA BOULEVARD GRADE SEPARATION APPENDIX C -SAMPLE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT APPENDIX D-SAMPLE CERTIFICATION OF INSURANCE APPENDIX E -CERTIFICATION OF NON-DISCRIMINATION BY CONSULTANT APPENDIX F -FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS 2 REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROJECT STUDY REPORT EQUIVALENT AND CONCEPTUAL ENGINEERING PLANS FOR SANTA ANA BOULEVARD GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT I. INTRODUCTION The City of Santa Ana Public Works Agency City} desires to enter into an agreement with a qualified consulting engineering firm for the preparation of Project Study Report Equivalent (PSRE} for the Santa Ana Boulevard Grade Separation project at the LOSSAN Corridor crossing. The proposed grade separation is adjacent to the Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center (SARTC}. The major elements of the PROJECT's PSRE are: • Environmental evaluation documents • Cost Estimates for construction and right-of-way • Conceptual engineering plans • Evaluation of right-of-way impacts • Evaluate traffic detour routes for Santa Ana Blvd. and trains during construction. The PSRE and conceptual engineering plans of the grade separation shall address land use and impacts associate with future improvements. For all questions, requests for clarification, and comments on this Request for Proposal (RFP}, see section XIX. Clarifications. II. PROJECT BACKGROUND The proposed grade separation at Santa Ana Boulevard is in conjunction with the City's Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center (SARTC} Master Plan located at 1100 East Santa Ana Boulevard, which entails new station areas, additional parking and improved pedestrian and bicycle access to accommodate the expansion of ~etrolink services, Santa Ana's Fixed Guideway Project and the addition of the Bus Rapid Transit ~BRT}. Santa Ana Boulevard is a six-lane east-west principal arterial and currently carries in excess of 20,000 vehicles per day. Within the City, OCTA ~etrolink RR is a north-south two-track railroad. At SARTC, this railroad serves Metrolink, Amtrak, Union Pacific (UP} and Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF}, which connects freight and residents of central Orange County with the outlying areas of nearby regions, including Los Angeles, Inland Empire, San Diego and beyond. Due to increasing demand for inter and intea-county rail services resulting from 3 . 7 growth in population and employment in the surrounding areas, the City proposes the grade separation to alleviate the current and potential trafi~ic impacts and hazards posed by the existing at-grade rail crossing at Santa Ana Boulevard and OCTA ~etrolink RR. Based on the land use and the proximity of the Interstate 5 (I-5} ramps to the east and Santiago Street to the west, the proposed PROJECT will likely depress Santa Ana Boulevard under the railroad tracks to provide uninterrupted flow of roadway and rail traffic, which will improve freight movement, corridor crossing safety, and air quality. III. CONTENT OF PROPOSAL In order to maintain uniformity with all proposals furnished by the Consultants, all proposals are limited to a maximum of 30 pages (excluding front and back covers, section dividers and resumes} and shall include the following: A. Cover letter highlighting the Prime Consultant's qualifications and the primary location where the PROJECT work will be performed. There shall be indication that the proposal will be valid for 90 days and must be signed by an ofi~icer that has authority to bind the Consultant. B. Project understanding and approach discussing the PROJECT, key issues, and any suggestions or special concerns that the City should be made aware of. This section should demonstrate experience and expertise in all areas required to perform work described in the Scope of Work. C. A detailed scope of work identifying each required task for the preparation of PSRE in accordance with the City, OCTA, Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA}, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA}, Federal Railroad Administration (FRA}, BNSF, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans} and other involved agencies' policies and requirements, along with any additional tasks not currently identified in this RFP, but are necessary for the successful completion of the PROJECT. D. Project schedule, project management plan (PMP} and quality assurance/quality control (QAIQC} plan to be implemented on the PROJECT that will ensure the required services to complete in a timely manner and a quality acceptable to the City. The QA/QC shall ensure that reports, plans, estimates, and other documents are complete, accurate, proofread, and checked to meet professional engineering and environmental practices prior to submitting for review. The Consultants shall provide the firm's workload and the ability to perform the work requested, specifically as it relates to the Project Manager and key personnel. E. Project team organizational chart identifying the Project Manager and those who will be performing the work along with a brief resume of each team member, including similar type of projects in which he/she has been directly 4 involved in. A minimum of three references for similar size and type projects, including contact name, organization, and phone number, shall be provided for the Project tanager. The Project tanager will be the primary contact person to represent the firm and will be the person to conduct the presentation, if invited for an interview. Sub-consultants, if any, shall be identified with the same requirements as for the prime consultant. F. List of similar projects which your firm completed within the last five (5}years. Project information shall include project description, agency, client name along with contact information, year completed, project construction and design costs, and team members that worked on the projects. G. Five (5) bound copies and one electronic copy in PDF format on a Compact Disc (CD} of a complete responsive proposal shall be submitted. IV. SCOPE OF WORK The Consultant shall be responsible for the preparation and submittal of the PSRE through completion, with the approval from the City and other involved agencies. The PROJECT is federally funded and Caltrans retains stewardship responsibility for project development documents to be reviewed by Federal Highway Administration (FHUVA}, the Consultant shall prepare the PSRE in accordance with the Caltrans Preparation Guidelines for Project Study Report in the Caltrans Project Development Procedures Manual (PDPM}. All necessary documentation, studies, estimates, conceptual engineering plans and exhibits shall be in accordance with the compliance documentation for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA} and National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA}, unless otherwise noted, under the direction of a California registered Civil Engineer. The following is the breakdown of the scope of work for the PROJECT as well as the minimum deliverables required. Any additional tasks or deliverables deemed necessary by the Consultant shall be clearly identified in the proposal. A. Management and Administration The Consultant is fully responsible for the overall project management, administration and coordination of the PROJECT, including but not limited to the following: 1. Management and Coordination -The Consultant shall be the liaison with responsiblelcooperating agencies and other stakeholders, monitor project progress and maintain project files. Other responsibilities of the Consultant include supervising sub-consultants, coordinating, monitoring and reviewing design for conformance with the standards, policies and procedures of all affected agencies, including but not limited to the following: 5 a. City of Santa Ana b. Southern California Regional Rail Authority c. OCTA Metrolink d. Amtrak e. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Rail f. California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) g. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) h. Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) i. Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) j. Southern California Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) k. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) I. US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 2. Project Schedule -Within two (2) weeks of the Notice to Proceed, the Consultant shall prepare a project schedule in Microsoft Project 2003 format utilizing the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) to be approved by the City. The project schedule shall clearly identify the critical path and include the required tasks and subtasks of the Consultant, sub-consultants and all involved agencies to complete the PROJECT. All deliverables shall clearly be identified. The project schedule shall be updated on a regular basis reflecting the actual progress and distributed at the PDT meetings. Any change to the project schedule must be approved by the City. Additionally, the Consultant shall develop the project schedule for the design, right-of-way, and construction phases of the PROJECT for both design-build and design-bid-build options. Deliverable -Project Master Schedule with biweekly updates and status tracking 3. Meetings - Project Development Team (PDT) meetings shall occur monthly with all stakeholders and shall be held at the City of Santa Ana. The Consultant shall prepare and send out the agenda and any necessary communication documents a minimum of five (5) business days in advance, prepare and distribute meeting minutes, new action/decision items and disposition of previous action/decision items and other communication documents within five (5) business days after the meeting to all attendees and invitees. The Consultant shall identify any additional meetings, including agency coordination and technical workshop meetings, as they deem necessary. Deliverables -Agendas, minutes and action items; attendance at monthly PDT meetings. 4. Progress Reporting -Progress reports shall be submitted at monthly intervals, indicating progress achieved during the reporting period in 6 25G-20 relation to the progress scheduled. The progress report shall discuss significant issues and present proposed corrective action, show status of major changes, and identify next month's activities. The Consultant shall provide the City with two (2} copies of the progress report. Deliverables -Monthly Progress Reports submitted in both hard copy and electronic format. B. Permits The Consultant shall be responsible for securing all necessary encroachment permits for field studies and work related to document preparation, such as surveying and geotechnical activities. Additionally, the Consultant shall submit any required traffic control plan to the City for review and concurrence prior to beginning any field study. The Consultant shall obtain necessary training including applicable rail safety program prior to performing field study. The Consultant shall identify all potential project-related permit requirements in the PSRE and include the cost in the cost estimate. Deliverables - Documentation of all potential project-related permit requirements. C. Research & Data Collection The Consultant shall thoroughly research and collect information related to the PROJECT, including existing field conditions, as-built plans, studies, encumbrances and record drawings (including utilities}, reports, agreements, right-of-way data, and all future improvement plans adjacent to or affecting the project site. The Consultant shall review and document the collected data, physical constraints, and deficiencies and include the cost estimate for design solutions. Deliverables -Documentation of pertinent project information including photographs, mapping, schematics, field notes, existing studies and any study findings. D. Utility Survey The proposed grade separation will greatly impact public services and utilities. The Consultant shall conduct a survey that identifies all impacts to these facilities and is solely responsible to conduct all necessary research to complete this task. City staff will be available to answer questions and provide guidance. At a minimum, the Consultant shall consult with Public Works Agency staff and the following service and utility providers: 7 1. Sewer/waste water (Santa Ana PWA) 2. Water/water well replacement (Santa Ana PWA) 3. Solid waste/refuse (Santa Ana PWA) 4. Fire service/paramedics/fire alarm system (Santa Ana FD) 5. Police services (Santa Ana PD) 6. Recreational Facilities (Santa Ana Parks, Recreation & Community Services Agency) 7. Street and site drainage (Santa Ana PWA) 8. Electricity (Southern California Edison) 9. Natural gas (Southern California Gas Company) 10. Communication services (AT&T) 11. Cable T.V. (Time Warner) 12. Bus Services (OCTA) As part of this survey, the Consultant shall include both a field review as well as a review of available as-built drawings, encroachment permits, and utility franchise agreements for the projects areas. The results of this review shall be a database of utility records indicating type of utility, owner, drawing number, and other relevant information. Consultant shall also prepare a utility base map of the PROJECT area showing locations of all existing utilities. Deliverables -Utility Database and Base Map. E. Field Survey/Topography The Consultant shall perform all surveys and aerial mapping necessary to complete the requested scope of services. The Consultant shall prepare an aerial topographic survey map at a scale of 1" = 20' of the PROJECT site and surrounding area to provide all necessary information for horizontal and vertical controls. Survey of the PROJECT site shall be prepared in US Customary English units by a California licensed Land Surveyor in Microstation V8 format. The horizontal datum shall be NAD 83 and the vertical datum shall be NAVD 88. Survey shall be done to cover at least 100 feet beyond the PROJECT's ultimate right-of-way and shall include locating building foot prints, utilities, trees, sidewalks, fences, poles, meters, vaults, structures, street furniture, curb and gutters, etc. Deliverables -All electronic files and field notes for field survey/topography data collection. F. Traffic Studies The Consultant shall perform the traffic analysis in accordance to the PSRE development. The analysis shall support the preparation of the traffic impact section of the required environmental evaluation documents. The Consultant shall analyze travel-demand model and prepare future traffic projections for 8 25G-22 impacted roadways and intersections. A trafi~ic analysis for each developed alternative (mentioned in Conceptual Engineering Plans} is required. The Consultant shall identify all unavoidable adverse traffic-related impacts and the mitigation measures. The Consultant shall develop a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) for each developed alternative to provide continuous trafi~ic circulation and access, with adequate space for safe and efficient construction. The TAP shall include construction handling practices, including lane closures, detour routes, accommodation for bicycle and pedestrian traffic, mass transit, work- hour restrictions, and others. The Consultant shall include the associated cost for each developed alternative along with the mitigation solutions for TMP in the cost estimate section. Deliverables -Traffic analysis and TMP for each developed alternative. G. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation The Consultant shall prepare a preliminary geotechnical review of the projects areas. Existing subsurface information for the projects areas shall be collected, including geologic maps published by the California Division of Mines and Geology, geologic maps published by the United States Geological Survey, and ground water well information. The Consultant shall provide seismic and geological hazards that may have a significant impact on the design and construction of the projects. Deliverables -Geotechnical Analysis. H. Conceptual Hydraulics and Hydrology Study The Consultant shall analyze existing drainage systems for their ability to accommodate future design flows in accordance with applicable agency standards including proposed improvements. A Preliminary Hydraulics and Hydrology Study shall be prepared summarizing potential storm water quality impacts and develop options to avoid, reduce, or minimize the potential for storm water quality impacts. These results shall be coordinated with the City's existing faster Plan of Drainage. The Consultant shall ensure that the PROJECT includes sufficient right-of-way and budget for required storm water controls and identify PROJECT specific permanent and temporary measures that may be required to mitigate anticipated impacts. Drainage areas and total disturbed area will be defined, as will climatic conditions, existing drainage site conditions, site permeability, soil texture, existing vegetation (if any), and groundwater. Deliverables -Hydraulics and Hydrology Study. 9 I. Constraints Analysis The Consultant shall prepare an evaluation of site constraints that may limit PROJECT design options, including the need to maintain ongoing freight and passenger rail operations, and the need to maintain adequate vehicle and transit access on affected arterials. All constraints developed by all studies and investigations carried out for this PSRE shall be considered in this analysis. Deliverables -Site Constraints Analysis. J. Alternatives Analysis and Structural Type Selection The Consultant shall develop a minimum of three ~3} viable alternatives for the grade separation and develop initial screening criteria. Based on the land use and the proximity of the I-5 ramps to the east and Santiago Street to the west, Santa Ana Boulevard will likely be lowered to cross the existing railroad tracks in an undercrossing configuration. Consideration of alternatives and criteria should be given to unique construction requirements such as "shoofly" track, California PUC vertical and horizontal track clearances, Metrolink and OCTA requirements and criteria, construction staging requirements and the TMP. Each alternative must efi~iciently accommodate the existing platform at SARTC and limit the construction cost and right-of-way impacts. Based on the screening criteria, the Consultant shall work with City and stakeholder staff to reach consensus on the alternatives to be carried forward. The Consultant shall then develop criteria for evaluating the remaining alternatives and shall consider construction impacts as one factor. The remaining alternatives shall be further refined and evaluated using the evaluation criteria and the results of all studies and investigations carried out for this PSRE. To assist in the documentation of comparisons between alternatives, the Consultant shall prepare a matrix of selection criteria and evaluation results for each alternative. Based on the evaluation, the Consultant shall recommend one or more alternatives and include an assessment of potential risks and strategies to mitigate, minimize, or eliminate risks as the recommended PROJECT proceeds through design and construction. Deliverables -Alternatives recommendation, criteria for evaluation, refined alternatives, matrix of selection criteria, and assessment of alternative risks. K. Conceptual Engineering Plans The plan development shall include two (2) milestone deliverables -Draft Conceptual Engineering Design and Final Conceptual Engineering Design. A plan set shall be prepared for each alternative. The Consultant shall prepare 10 five (5) sets of half-size (11" x 17"} engineering plans and preliminary quantities and estimates plus electronic files for each conceptual engineering plan submittal to the City. Additionally, the Consultant shall provide the necessary number of copies of engineering plans to participating agencies and other interested parties for review and comment. Plans shall be prepared in conformance with the latest City Computer-Aided Design and Drafting (CADD}standard. The Consultant shall coordinate review and approval of rail realignment and shoofly design with appropriate agencies. The conceptual engineering plans shall be at a scale of 1" = 20' and shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 1. Existing and proposed centerlines and right-of-way lines, curb lines, easements, medians, sidewalks and join lines on public and private properties. 2. Topographic survey for the PROJECT area to facilitate the preparation of engineering drawings, right-of-way maps and itemized cost estimates for traffic handling, construction and right-of-way acquisition. 3. Plans for Santa Ana Boulevard and OCTA Metrolink RR (proposed track and shoofly} including profiles and superelevation diagrams. 4. Plans and details for railroad bridge to accommodate the existing two tracks and an additional future track (including Advanced Planning Study level of detail}. 5. Plans for retaining walls} and soundwall(s} (if necessary}. 6. Plans for existing utilities and drainage, including relocation of existing utilities and assessment of a pump station for the sump condition resulting from the proposed depressed roadway (if necessary}. 7. Plans and details for access modifications, including creating cul-de- sacs at affected intersections as needed. 8. Street approaches for all legs of the intersections at Interstate 5 (I-5} ramps, Santiago Street, and Santa Ana Boulevard to ensure appropriate lane transitions. 9. Plans for necessary preliminary grading. 10.PIans forchannelization and signal modification. 11.PIans for stage construction, traffic handling, and detour (including detour layouts, profiles and superelevation diagrams, construction area signs, etc...}. Deliverables -Conceptual Drawings. L. Right-of-Way The Consultant shall determine the right-of-way required and the right-of-way data sheet estimates for each PROJECT's alternative. The Consultant shall prepare right of way maps on the scale of 1" = 20'. Right-of-way map shall include existing and new street centerlines, existing and proposed right-of way lines, property lines, agency boundaries, all adjacent parcels and cross 11 streets, topography, building foot prints (including set-back to proposed right- of-way lines}, parcel numbers, addresses, indication of full or partial take of each property and amount of right-of-way needed per parcel for each alternative. The Consultant shall identify in detail any loss of on-site parking for each parcel affected by the PROJECT. The Consultant shall submit the right-of-way map to the City and participating agencies for review and approval. Final maps shall be delivered on mylar and electronically as both .PDF and .DGN files. All electronic files related to the right-of-way maps shall become property of the City. Following approval of the right-of-way map, the Consultant shall prepare a cost estimate for acquiring right-of-way. The Consultant shall provide sufficient information to the City to facilitate the preparation of cost estimates for land acquisition, structure demolition, relocation, administration and other miscellaneous costs. The Consultant shall identify the public improvements cost per parcel for the purpose of right-of-way dedication in exchange for public improvements for all partial takes. The Consultant shall utilize a California licensed land surveyor to prepare legal descriptions and exhibits for all partial and full takes as well as a plan for the reuse of remnant parcels of the partial takes. Deliverables -Right-of Way survey. ~ . Cost Estimates The Consultant shall prepare a cost estimate for final design, shoofly, permitting, right-of-way acquisition, TMP, construction, utilities relocation, and potential mitigation measures. The construction estimate shall include details of estimated quantities and unit costs for major items of work based on current prices. The Consultant shall verify current prices with manufacturers, material suppliers and contractors. The cost estimates shall be prepared for each alternative and submitted at each milestone along with the conceptual engineering plans. Deliverables -Cost Estimates. N. Environmental Evaluation The Consultant shall prepare the environmental evaluation documents for the PROJECT in accordance with CEQA and NEPA guidelines. The procedures shall include the City of Santa Ana adopted environmental rules for the implementation of CEQA and NEPA. The Consultant shall prepare the Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report SPEAR} in accordance to Caltrans PEAR Handbook to comply with the requirement of the PSRE. 12 The environmental analysis and documentation activities required by the CEQA and NEPA shall include, but not be limited to, the following specific requirements: 1. The Consultant shall research and review previous studies and environmental documentation applicable to the PROJECT. The Consultant shall prepare a technical memorandum summarizing the review of pertinent documents. 2. The Consultant shall submit five (5} copies and participant agencies' required number of copies of the environmental evaluation documents plus electronic files for City and participant agencies to review. After the review, the Consultant shall incorporate revisions to the document and submit the required number of revised copies plus electronic files for review and approval. The Consultant shall be responsible for re- submittals until all City and participant agencies' comments have been addressed to the satisfaction of all stakeholders. Deliverables - Environmental Checklist ,PEAR and I SA. 0. PSRE Submittal The Consultant shall submit ten (10} copies of the Draft PSRE plus electronic files for review and comment. The Consultant shall also provide a sufficient number of copies for all stakeholders. In addition of the requirements of Caltrans' PSRE, the Consultant shall analyze, describe, and evaluate all potential environmental impacts of the proposed PROJECT, provide any necessary and available mitigation measure, and compare the relative impacts for each alternative and indicate the level of impacts after mitigation. After the review, the Consultant shall incorporate revisions to the document and submit the required number (same number as Draft PSRE} of Final PSRE plus electronic files for review and approval. The Consultant shall be responsible for re-submittals until all City and participant agencies' comments have been addressed The Consultant shall draft the Resolution of Certification with the required findings. The City Council will review and approve the Draft Resolution and City staff will prepare the Final Resolution. Deliverables -Draft and Final PSRE. P. Submittal Format At Completion The Consultant shall maintain PROJECT files using the City's specified filing system. The Consultant shall be responsible for obtaining information on the filing system, file naming convention, and CADD standard at the beginning of the PROJECT. At the PROJECT closing, the Consultant shall submit all 13 . 7 drawings, reports, estimates, letters, exhibits, and other project-related documents in the correct filing and on a CD or Digital Video Disc (DVD}. The submitted files' format shall be: 1. Drawings shall be prepared in ~icrostation V8 format based on the latest City CADD standard. All final conceptual plans shall also be submitted in PDF format. 2. Electronic copies of the environmental reports shall be submitted in Microsoft Word 2007 format, the exhibits of the environmental reports shall be in PDF format, and the cost estimates shall be in Microsoft Excel 2007 format. V. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS A. All work shall be performed in conformance with the latest City of Santa Ana, Caltrans, and other involved agencies' policies, procedures and standards. B. The Consultant shall carry out the instructions received from the City of Santa Ana and shall cooperate with the City and other involved agencies. C. The Consultant has total responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of all documents and plans prepared and shall check all such materials accordingly. The documents and plans will be reviewed by the City for conformity with the requirements of the Agreement. Reviews by the City do NOT include detailed review or checking of environmental reports and designs or the accuracy with which such reports and designs as depicted in the documents and the plans. The responsibility for accuracy and completeness of such items remains solely that of Consultant. D. The documents and plans furnished under the Agreement shall be of a quality acceptable to the City of Santa Ana. The criteria for acceptance shall be a product of neat appearance, well organized, technically and grammatically correct, checked, and dated and having the maker and checker identified. The minimum standard of appearance, organization and content of the documents shall be that of similar types produced by the City and set forth in related City of Santa Ana and other involved agencies' manuals. The Consultant shall modify its work as necessary to meet the level of acceptability defined by the criteria above. E. The Consultant shall have a QA/QC plan in effect during the entire time work is being performed under the Agreement. The QA/QC plan shall establish a process which includes checking procedures for report preparation, a discipline and interdisciplinary check of the environmental reports and conceptual engineering plans, correcting and back checking procedures, and all job related correspondence and memoranda dated and received by 14 affected persons and then bound in appropriate job files. The City of Santa Ana reserves the right to request proof of said documentation. F. ~anualslStandards -Where applicable, engineering design of all PROJECT improvements shall be compatible and in accordance with the following, but not limited to: • A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (AASHTO} • CPUC General Orders Requirements • California Regional Water Quality Control Board Requirements • Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD} • Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (SSPWC} • Caltrans Project Development Procedures Manual (PDPM} • Caltrans Highway Design Manual • Caltrans Guidelines for Preparing a Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report (PEAR} • Caltrans Standard Environmental Reference • OCTA Right of Way Manual • BNSF Design Guidelines for Industrial Track Projects • BNSF Utility Accommodation Policy • SCRRA Grade Separation Guidelines • City of Santa Ana Standard Plans and Specifications It shall be the responsibility of the Consultant to verify that the latest version and/or update of these documents are obtained. G. The Consultant's work will be subject to inspections by representatives of the City of Santa Ana and other involved agencies. VI. PROJECT BUDGET The maximum project budget for performing all tasks defined in the scope of work is $1.3 million. VII. PERFORMANCE PERIOD A. The contract shall begin upon approval by the City Council, and the Consultant shall commence work after notification to proceed by the City. Unless extended by contract amendment, the contract shall terminate upon acceptance by the City of Santa Ana of the PROJECT and upon completion of the terms of this agreement by the Consultant. B. The Consultant is advised that any recommendation for contract award is not binding on the City until the Agreement and all pertinent paperwork are fully executed and approved by the City Council. 15 VIII. CONSULTANT SELECTION COMMITTEE The City has established a Consultant Selection Committee to evaluate each consultant's proposals. The evaluation of each proposal will be based on technical criteria and qualifications listed in the RFP, reference checks, and other information which will be gathered independently. A final listing of the most qualified consultants will then be established for possible interview. IX. ESTABLISHING OF FEES A fee proposal is to be submitted separately in a sealed envelope plainly labeled "Fee Proposal". The fee proposal shall include anot-to-exceed fee and a detailed labor hour breakdown by task and classifications. Include all incidental costs estimated to accrue during the life of the contract. Include a billing rate schedule for the prime consultant and any sub consultants with an hourly billing rate by classification. The hourly rate shall remain in effect during the life of the PROJECT. The fee proposal will not be opened until the consultants have been evaluated by the proposal selection committee. In conformance with the Brooks Act, the City will select the consultant based on qualifications, and then negotiate a contract price based on available funding and a further breakdown of the not-to-exceed cost submitted in the fee proposal. The City will retain 10% of the final contract until final delivery of the deliverables. X. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT A sample Professional Services Agreement is enclosed for your review, as Appendix C. The RFP and the consultant's proposal will be attached and become part of the agreement as exhibits. XI. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS A certificate of insurance is enclosed for your reference as Appendix D. Please refer to the sample agreement for the necessary amounts of general liability, automotive, worker's compensation and professional liability insurance. The appropriate endorsements are also shown within the sample contract agreement. The certificate shall include the Cities of Santa Ana and Irvine, Caltrans and their officers and employees as insured or additional insured. XII. CITY RESPONSIBILITY The City of Santa Ana will be responsible for the following: 16 A. Making available existing City plans and records. The Consultant shall be responsible for researching available records and paying for copies of records. B. Boiler plate of the City of Santa Ana general provisions and specifications. C. City of Santa Ana Standard Plans. XIII. EXAMINATION OF SITE PRIOR TO SUBMITTING PROPOSAL Each consultant must inform himself/herself fully of the conditions relating to the PROJECT and the employment of labor thereon. Failure to do so will not relieve a successful consultant of the obligation to carry out the provisions of the contract. XIV. RIGHT TO REJECT PROPOSALS A. The City of Santa Ana reserves the right to reject any or all proposals submitted and no representation made hereby that any contract will be awarded pursuant to this RFP or otherwise. B. All costs incurred in the preparation of the proposal, the submission of additional information and/or any aspect of a proposal prior to award of a written contract will be borne by the respondent. The City of Santa Ana will provide only the stafi~ assistance and documentation specifically referred to herein and will not be responsible for any other cost or obligation of any kind, which may be incurred by the respondent. All proposals submitted to the City of Santa Ana become the property of the City. XV. SCHEDULE The City's tentative schedule for this PROJECT is as follows: RFP Issued: March 2, 2010 Pre-Proposal Meeting: March 16, 2010 Question Due Date: March 31, 2010 Proposal Due Date: April 6, 2010 Interview Date: April 22, 2010 Contract Award: May 17, 2010 Upon issuance of Notice to Proceed, the Consultant shall submit a detailed schedule for the PROJECT. 17 XVI. PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL DEADLINE Proposals are due in the office of the Executive Director of the Public Works Agency at 20 Civic Center Plaza -Ross Annex (M-36}, 3rd Floor, Santa Ana, CA 92701 Attn: Souri Amirani on or before 5:00 p.m.,Tuesday, April 6, 2010. XVII. ISSUING OFFICE Santa Ana Public Works Agency, ofi~ice of the Executive Director. XVIII. ADDENDA Any subsequent changes in the RFP from the date of issuance to date of submittal will result in an addendum by the issuing office. Any written addenda issued pertaining to this RFP shall be incorporated into the terms and conditions of any resulting Agreement. Consultants shall acknowledge receipt of addenda in their proposals. XIX. CLARIFICATIONS A. Examination of Documents If the Consultant requires clarification to any part of this RFP, the Consultant shall notify the City in writing as described below. If the City feels a clarification is warranted, the City will issue a written addendum clarifying the matter, which will be sent to all firms in receipt of this RFP. B. Submitting Requests 1. All questions, including questions that could not be specifically answered at the pre-proposal conference must be put in writing and must be received by the City no later than 5:00 p.m., March 31, 2010. 2. Requests for clarifications, questions and comments must be clearly labeled, "Written Questions" and reference the RFP in question. The City is not responsible for failure to respond to a request that has not been labeled as such. 3. Any of the following methods of delivering written questions are acceptable as long as the questions are received no later than the date and time specified above: a. U.S. fail/Personal Courier: City of Santa Ana Attn: Jason Gabriel 20 Civic Center Plaza Ross Annex (~-36) Santa Ana, CA 92701. b. Facsimile: (714} 647-5635 18 c. E-Mail: Submit questions by email to both Souri Amirani, Deputy City Engineer at samirani(a~santa-ana.orq and Jason Gabriel, Senior Civil Engineer at~ga. oriel :,santa-ana.orq. C. City Responses Responses from the City will be emailed to all Consultants in receipt of this RFP no later than April 2, 2010. Consultants may also request responses be sent via U.S. fail by e-mailing or faxing the request to Jason Gabriel, Senior Civil Engineer. Inquiries received after March 31, 2010, will not be responded to. XX. JOINT VENTURES The City intends to contract with a single firm and not with multiple firms doing business as a joint venture. All responses to this RFP shall be on a prime - subcontractor basis. XXI. PRIME CONSULTANT RESPONSIBILITIES The selected consultant will be required to assume responsibilities for all services offered in his/her proposal. The selected consultant will be the sole point of contact with regard to contractual matters, including payment of any and all charges resulting from the contract. XXI I . DELAYS The City reserves the right to delay scheduled dates if it is to the advantage of the City of Santa Ana. XXIII. PROJECT CONTROL Control of the PROJECT shall remain the total responsibility of the City of Santa Ana. XXIV. RULES FOR PROPOSALS The signer of the proposal must declare in writing that the only person, persons, company or parties interested in the proposal as principals are named therein; that the proposal is made without collusion with any other person, persons, company, or parties submitting a proposal; that it is in all respects fair and in good faith without collusion or fraud; and, that the signer of the proposal has full authority to bind the principal proposer. XXV. METHOD OF PAYMENT The consultant shall submit invoices to the City of Santa Ana. The invoice shall include a detailed breakdown of the services, the tasks, the hours, and hourly 19 rates. It should be noted that no more than 90 percent of the total payment amount will be made prior to the final completion and approval of all work and delivery of final products. XXVI. REGULATIONS The selected consultant shall be expected to comply with all applicable federal and state regulations, and contract provisions. The ensuing contract shall contain such contractual provisions and conditions necessary to define a sound and complete agreement. XXVII. THE CITY'S AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAM The City has an afi~irmative action program. The purpose of the affirmative action program is to encourage certified minority business enterprises and women business enterprises. All Submitting firms must have established affirmative action programs approvable by the City. The attached Appendix E, "Certification of Non-Discrimination by Contractors" shall be completed by each submitting firm and included in the proposal. XXVIII. DBE GOAL The Disadvantage Business Enterprise (DBE} goal for this PROJECT is 1.67%. The Underutilized Disadvantage Business Enterprise (UDBE} goal for this PROJECT is 2.22%. This information may be submitted with your proposal. If it is not, it must be submitted and received by the administering agency no later than the time specified in the federal requirements attached (Appendix F}. XXIX. WAGE RATES Because this PROJECT is federally funded, the rate of wages for each craft or type of worker or mechanic employed under this contract shall be specified under the current determinations of the Department of Labor as required under the Davis-Bacon Act. The current wage determination can be obtained at the following location: http:llfrwebgate.access.gpo.go~, i-bin/_, etdoc.cgi?dbname=Davis- Bacon&docid=CA20080035 Notwithstanding the conditions hereinabove, the California Labor Code stipulated that not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for each craft or type of worker or mechanic needed to execute the contract in the locality in which the work is to be performed, and not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for holiday and overtime work as determined by the Director of Industrial Relations of the State of California shall be paid to all workers employed. A copy of the prevailing rate of per diem wages is on file at the City of 20 Santa Ana Public Works Agency -Construction Division, and is available on request to any interested party. Where a discrepancy exists between federal and state prevailing wage rates, the policy of the California Department of Labor is to require that the higher of the two prevailing wage rates shall apply. 21 APPENDIX A LOCATION MAP 25G-36 z w J Q U 17TH ST I a > p a o 0 p 3 Z Z a J WA H T AV Tq WASHINGTON AV 13TH ST) qNq ~r 0 ~G FRUIT ST o n ~ ~P I OCTA ~ P P RRTRO~INK z 5~ I a bTH ST ~ 6TH ST ~ ~ ~ ~ a 1 a 4TH T ~ ~ S T ~ 1 ~ 1 z 1ST ST W ~ cs > a WALNUT S T W ~ is ~ ~ a ~ a 1 a 1 CHESTNUT AV ® PROJECT AREA J~p't~oNa ~OCATI0~1 f~AP o ~'~s w SANTA ANA Title » SA~1TA ASIA BOU~EIIARD~ ' EPARATI0~1 PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY APPENDIX B PROPOSED SANTA ANA BOULEVARD GRADE SEPARATION 25G-38 I, ~ r~ ~ .,Y. , v . I \ ~a S , .7~ l`~ uuIIIIVIe _T Xr.i ` ~ V P / ~ f " ~ N w~ , ~ ~ I / ~ - ~ ~ ,p, ~ _ ~ Q ~ - ~ c~„ ~ 1 , W 'hM I ~ / _ ~ / I' m N ~ A " . ~ ~/a ~ ~ Q D ~ S 1~ . ,M r r6' ~ ~ } w ~ Q lip * / • ~ ~ ~ a / A ~ r ~ N LLJ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ j ~ ~ ~ ,pr ~ ~ ~O~COO / \ I ~ 4 . ~ r 91 • ~I . ~ ~ ~ ~ i t i ~ i-~ . ~ ~ y / a~ ~ r ~ ~ . ~ ~o ~ ~ ~ d r l II l y i ~ ~ ~ d. ~ y ~ ~ : r ~ t ~ / 'fit $ ~ ~ ~ • ' ' \ ~ z ~ / ~ tk ~ ~~II ~ ~ ~v at,~ t V '~y~ r t i~ ip \ ~~r it fa, r i ~I a ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~ . , ~ ~ 4~ ~ III • ~ y, ~ ~,,F ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ . ~ . A \ ' r r . d ya' v. w~ . ~ ~t 19 7,n l ~ i '~~iq ~ ~ in,. - ~{~.w 11 ~I I \b d 1. ' . ~ i ~ r` ~ ~ ~.v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,I ICI F . ~ J ~ ` ~ ~ I,, ~ ~,I ~ t ~ a ~ , . ~ ~ ~ v, .v,, 3 i~ s., ~ r~. ~ v~~ ; iii , y,,:. ~ w ~ d! ~ ~ \ ~ ~ ~ a • I ' a r ' Vli ~ Vii,;, ( ~ s,, ~ ~ li~ \ \ j / 7 \ ~ ° ' l~/" i to„l/a ~ J ~ '~I I~ I • y I s rr ^F ` ,h.r ~sV~ a ,~\~P.,. ` ~ _ \ ~ li 1 "i. r i • ~ _ ~y . 1~I r ~ ` f Q l ~ ~ ~ I of , d ~ I I I_ ' 'F ~ „ i • . i i ~ V ~I .+y ib P e ~'~7 ~ ~ r V'y ~ ~ A ~ r ~ ~j', t~ 'y " / / ~ ..1: W I i ~~~,gil ,,'°„G~~~,',',r4~~ LI'r ` w; ~ a ~ ~ F ~'I i it ~ Q I ~ 9 ~ ~ ~I I M~ Pa ^ S . t ~ ~ ~ , ~ E , ,t' ' - i k 117 * ~ ; / < !,gyp „ ~ ~ ~ , t, 1 ~ r : ~ - Ivl O~ rr ~ ~'A1r~ I' a, ` ~ ~ } R r \I t n ~w i ~c I O , ~~~y.~ ~ i 1 ~~I 1 .,.,..1''k'.\~. _ ~ . I I,• ' I ~ 7, ~ j i ,.i d~ 11i ~ IhM~ lbt~?~ . M~dw It'~www ~ /l~lh ~ a!!a . ~ ~r4r?'- ~ /l~ft~ M~ - T p ~ y . ~ ~ ~~k ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i G: ~ F , i , of ` ~ a • i i , l , f #P~' nk ~ III . I - ' . II r ~ ~ C ~ , .~C. tits ~ ~ ~ ~ uli,, ~a' T >W ~ ~,,i ~ ~ 'ulllllll Im 0~ ~ I y ~ ~ ~ } J ~ R 'a$' / ~ 4Y ~ ~i,.l,, \ ` e it v ~ V 1 t \ ~ / t ~ ~ ~ z ~ ~ _ ,u.l ~ : WF E . r \ 1~ E ^4 ~ ~ I~ M1, _ _ ~ ~ , i ~ ~ r. • * i~" j/ 5": :Yq r ~ J~ ~ 4 ' ~ ~ ~ , ,~7' / fit,, ' \ yil, '~~_Z1 ,x.'.~ ~ 'BSI q.: .~t a . ~ ~ . ~ 9 ~ ~ Fem. ~ ' ~,r ; °l ~ ~ ' • i Pn7,(' K` S r ii ~ ~ I w _ { M. I~ ry(, y~ A\,,., ~I'W ~ 'ri11I' \ / TV oti.' °"~A~ f, t^.., /nip ~ ~r ~ ~ 'KJ!. ~ I ~ N'- - ~ ~!~ti ' k ~ A ,'~'~I v, R l % a ~ r~' ~ 1 m g,~ o s,~' ~ 1 „ ~ ' ~ a-'7-i ,Y ~ I;,*~'` - - I XXO I 1?q~`"' P. ~ I ''I" L ~ l _ i ! \ ~'a. J I.,, r t# w, i~ ~riy ; / n" 'r rb \ 1~,q~ ,~t 'i'L }~1r~~ ~Y,Itif ~~t'~~~' ~ Iii ~ o' / . , ~ ~ ~~II . r ~ . . ~ ~ lI ~ 2'~/ 'til is iY l ti Ru + ~ ~ r I ~ r,, x, a I J~ : ~ ~ r ~ ~ -1 ~ , ' ~ ' ~ ~ ~ _ a a~ -~~,~s,~ J ,4- i ' , ` x i APPENDIX C SAMPLE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT 25G-40 CONSULTANT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 2006 by and between (NAME OF CONTRACTING ORGANIZATION, a California TYPE ~JF ENTITY (hereinafter "Consultant"), and the City of Santa Ana, a charter city and. municipal corporation organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California (hereinafter "City"). RECITALS A. The City desires to retain a consultant having special skill and knowledge in the field of B. Consultant represents that Consultant is able alld willing to provide such serf%ices to the City. C. In undertaking the performance of this Agreement, Consultant represents that it is knowledgeable in its field and that any services performed by Consultant under this Agreement will be perfor~»ed in compliance ~~~-ith such standards as may reasonably be expected from a professional consulting firm in the field. NOW THEREFORE, inconsideration of the mutual and respective promises, and subject to the terms and conditions h ereinafter set forth , th e p a rt i e s agree a s fo 1 lows 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES Consultant shall perform those services as set forth in Exhibit A to this Agreement. 2. COMPENSATION a. City agrees to pay, and Consultant agrees to accept as total payment for its services, the rates and charges Identified in Exhibit A. The total sum to be expended under this Agreement shall not exceed $ during the term of this Agreement. b. Payment by City shall be made within thirty (30) days following receipt of proper invoice evidencing work performed, subject to City accounting procedures. Payment need not be made for tivork tivhich fails to meet the standards of performance set forth in the Recitals which may reasonably be expected by City. 3. TERM This Agreement shall commence on the date first written above and terminate on 200 ,unless terminated earlier in accordance with Section 12, below. The term of this Agreement may be extended upon a writing executed by the Executive Director of NAME OF RELEVANT AGENCY) and the City Attorney. 1 4. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR Consultant shall, during the entire term of this Agreement, be construed to be an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. This Agreement is not Intended nor shall it be construed to create an employer-employee relationship, a joint venture relationship, or to allow the City to exercise discretion or control over the professional manner in which Consultant performs the services which are the subject matter of this Agreement; howe~-~er, the services to be provided by Consultant shall be provided in a manner consistent with a 11 applicable standards and regulations governing such services. Consultant shall pay all salaries and wages, employer's social security taxes, unemployment insurance and similar taxes relating to employees and shall be responsible for all applicable withholding taxes. 5. INSURANCE Prior to undertaking performance of wort; under this Agreement, Consultant shall maintain and shall require its subcontractors, i f any, to obtain a n d maintain ins a ra n c e as described below: a. Commercial General Liability Insurance. Consu}taut shall maintain commercial general liability insurance naming the City, its officers, employees, agents, volunteers and representatives as additional insureds) and shall include, but not be limited to protection against claims arising from bodily and personal injury, including Beat}1 resulting therefrom and damage to property, resulting from any act or occurrence arising out of Consultant's operations in the performance of this Agreement, including, without limitation, acts involving vehicles. The amounts of insurance shall be not less than the follo~~~ ink :single limit coverage applying to bodily and personal injury, lnCludlnv~ death resulting therefrom, and property damage, in the total amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence. Consultant shall supply City with a fully executed additional i n cured endorsement i n substantiall y th e form attached hereto as Exhibit B upon execution of this Agreement and shall be approved in form by the City Attorney. b. Business automobile liability insurance, or equivalent form, with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. Such insurance shall include coverage for owned, hired and non-owned autorl~obiles. c. Worker's Compensation Insurance. In accordance with the provisions of Section 3300 of the Labor Code, Consultant, if Consultant has any employees, is required to be insured against liability for ~~~orker's compensation or to undertake self insurance. Prior to commencing the performance of the ~~~ork under this Agreement, Consultant agrees to obtain and maintain any employer's liability insurance with limits not less than $1,000,000 per accident. d. I f Consultant is or employs a licensed professional such as an architect or engineer: Professional liability (errors and omissions) insurance, with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 per claim. 2 e. The following requirements apply to the insurance to be provided by Consultant pursuant to this section: (i) Consultant shall maintain all insurance required above in full force and effect for the entire period covered by this Agreement. (11) Certificates of insurance shall be furnished to the City upon execution of this Agreement and shall be approved in form by the City Attorney. (111) Certificates and policies shall state that the policies shall not be canceled or reduced in coverage or changed in any other material aspect `~-ithout thirty (30) days prior written notice to the City. f. If Consultant fails or refuses to produce or maintain the insurance required by thi s section or fails or refuses to furnish the City with required proof that insurance has been procured and is in force and paid for, the City shall have the right, at the City's election, to forthwith terminate this Agreement. Such termination shall not effect Consultant's right to be paid for its time and materials expended prior to notification of termination. Consultant waives the right to receive compensation and agrees to indemnify the City for any `~~ork performed prior to approval of insurance by the City. 6. INDEMNIFICATION Consultant agrees to and shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, employees, consultants, special counse}, and 1-epr-esentatives from liability: (1) for personal injury, damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable relief arising out of claims for personal injury, including health, and c}aims for property damage, which may arise from the direct or indirect operations of the Consultant or its contractors, subcontractors, agents, employees, or other persons acting on their behalf which relates to the services described in section 1 of this Agreement, and fio111 any c}aim that personal injury, damages, just compensation, restitution, judic i a } or equitab }ere } i of is due by reason of the terms of or effects arising from this Agreement. This indemnity and hold harmless agreement applies to all claims for damages, ,j ust compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable relief suffered, or alleged to have been suffered, by reason of the e~~ents referred to in this Section or by reason of the terms of, or effects, arising frorll this A~~reenlent. The Consultant further agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and pay a] }costs for the defense of the City, including fees and costs for special counsel to be se}ected by the City, regarding any action by a third party challenging the validity of this Agreement, or asserting that personal injury, damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable i-elief due to personal or property rights arises by reason of the terms of, or eff-ects ari s i n~ from th i s Agreement. City may make all reasonable decisions with respect to its representation in any legal proceeding. 7. CONFIDENTIALITY If Consultant receives from the City information which due to the nature of such infor111ation is reasonably understood to be confidential and/or proprietary, Consultant agrees that it shall not use or disclose such information except in the performance of this Agreement, and further agrees to exercise the same degree of care it uses to protect its own information of 3 like importance, but in no event less than reasonable care. "Confidential Information" shall include all nonpublic information. Confidential information includes not only written information, but also information transferred orally, visually, electronically, or by caller //leans. Confidential information disclosed to either party by any subsidiary and/or agent of the other party is covered by this Agreement. The foregoing obligations of non-use and nondisclosure shall not apply to any information that (a) has been disclosed in publicly avvallable sources; (b) is, through no fault of the Consultant disclosed in a publicly available source; (c) is in rightful possession of the Consultant without an obligation of confidentiality; (d) is requihed to be disclosed by operation of law; or (e) is independently developed by the Consultant without reference to information disclosed by the City. 8. CONFLICT OF INTEREST CLAUSE Consultant covenants that it presently has no interests and shall not have interests, direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner wit11 perfor111ance of services specified under this Agreement. 9. NOTICE Any notice, tender, demand, deli~Tery, or other communication pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be properly given if delivered in person or mailed by first class or certified mail, posta` e prepaid, ol~ sent by telefacsimile or other telegraphic communication in the manner provided in this Section, to the following persons: ToCity: Clerk of the City COllllcll City of Santa Arta 20 Clvlc Center Plaza (M- ~0) P.O. Box 198 Santa Ana, CA 92702-1988 teletacslmlle (714) 647-6956 with Colll'tesy CopleS to: Executive Director of (NAME OF RELEVANT AGENCY) City of Santa Ana ?0 Civic Center Plaza (M-~ P.O. Box 1988 Santa Ana, California 92702 telefacsimile (714) and, 4 City Attorney City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza (M-29) P.O. Box 1988 Santa Ana, California 92702 telefacsimile (714) 647-6515 To Consultant: INSERT NAME, ADDRESS, TELEFACSIIVILE Attn: A party may change its addre s s by ~ i i ng notice in wri t i n ~ to the oth e r p a rty . There after, any notice, tender, demand, delivery, or other communication shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. If sent by mail, any notice, te~~der, dema~ld, delivery, or other communication shall be effective or deemed to hay-re been liven three (3) days after it has been deposited in the United States mail, duly registered or certified, with postage prepaid, and addressed as set forth above. If sent by telefacsimile, any notice, tender, demand, delivery, or other communication shall be effective or deemed to have been given twenty-four (24) hours after the time set forth on the transmission report issued by the transmitting facsimile machine, addressed as set forth above. For purposes of calculating these time frames, weekends, federal, state, County or City holidays shall be excluded. 10. EXCLUSIVITY AN D AMEND NEE NT This Agreement represents the complete and exclusive statement between the City and Consultant, and supersedes any and all other agreements, oral or written, between the parties. In the event of a conflict between the terr~ns of this Agreement and any attachments hereto, the terms of this Agreement shall prevail. This Agreement may not be modified except by written Instrument signed. by the City and ~by an authorized representative of Consultant. The parties agree that any terms or conditions of any purchase order or other instrument that are inconsistent with, or in addition to, the terms and conditions hereof, shall not bind or obligate Consultant nor the City. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party, which are not embodied herein. 11. ASSIGNMENT Inasmuch as this Agreement is intended to secure the specialized services of Consultant, Consultant may not assign, transfer, delegate, or subcontract any interest herein without the prior written consent of the City and any such assignment, transfer, delegation or subcontract without the City's prior written consent shall be considered null and void. Nothing in this Agreement 5 shall be construed to limit the City's ability to have any of the services which are the subj ect to this Agreement performed by City personnel or by other consultants retained by City. 12. TERMINATION This Agreement may be terminated by the City upon thirty (30) days ~~~ritten notice of termination. In such event, Consultant shall be entitled to receive and the City shall pay Consultant compensation for all services performed by Consultant prior to receipt of such notice of ter~~~ir~ation, subject to the following conditions: a. As a condition of such payment, the Executive Director may require Consultant to deliver to the City all work product completed as of such date, and in such case such work product shall be the property of the City unless prohibited by law, and Consultant consents to the City's use thereof for such purposes as the City deems appropriate. b. Payment need not be made for work `~~hich fails to meet the standard of performance specified in the Recitals of this Agreement. 13. DISCRIMINATION Consultant shall not discriminate because of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, age, national or•i~in, ancestry, or disability, as defined and prohibited by applicable law, in the recruitment, selection, training, utilization, promotion, termination or other employment related activities. Consultant affirms that it is an equal opportunity employer and shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations. 14. JURISDICTION - E N [1 E This Agreement has been executed and delivered in the State of California and the validity, Interpretation, performance, and enforcement of any of the clauses of this Agreement shall be determined and governed by the laws of the State of California. Both parties further agree that Orange County, California, shall be the venue for any action or proceeding that may be brought or arise ollt of, ill connection with or by reason of this Agreement. 15. PROFESSIONAL LICENSES Consultant shall, throughout the term of this Agreement, maintain all necessary licenses, permits, approvals, ~~~~aivers, and exemptions necessary for the provision of the services hereunder a~~d required by the laws and regulations of the United States, the State of California, the City of Santa Ana and all other governmental agencies. Consultant shall notify the City immediately and in writing of its inability to obtain or maintain such permits, licenses, approvals, tivaivers, and exemptions. Said inability shall be cause for termination of this Agreement. 16. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 6 a. Each undersigned represents and warrants that its signature hereinbelow has the power, authority and right to bind their respective parties to each of the terms of this Agreement, and shall indemnify City fully, including reasonable costs and attorney's fees, for any injuries o~• damages to City in the event that such authority or power is not, in fact, held by the signatory o~~ i s withdrawn. b. All Exhibits referenced herein and attached hereto shall be incorporated as if fully set forth in the body of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the date and. year first above written. ATTEST: CITY OF SANTA ANA PATRICIA E. HEALY DAVID N. KEAM Clerk of the Council City Mana,~er APPROVED AS TO FORM: JOSEPH W. FLETCHER City Attorney By: Name of Attorney City Attorney RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: CONSULTANT (DIRECTOR NA M E) (NAME) Executive Dlrectar of the TITLE) Employer ID # or Individual SS # 7 APPENDIX D SAMPLE CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE 25G-48 a C~~4DM CERTIFICATE A F L IA B I L I TY I N S U RAN C E DATE (MMlDDlYY) a11311zaa1 PRODl1CER THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE INSURED INSURER A: INSURER B: INSURER C: INSURER D: INSURER E: COVERAGES THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. AGGREGATE LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. INSR TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFFECTIVE POLICY EXPIRATION LIMITS GENERAL LIABILITY X111111111 a11a112aa1 a11a112aa2 EACH OCCURRENCE $ 1,aaa,aaa X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY FIRE DAMAGE (Any one fired $ 5a,aaa CLAIMS MADE ~ OCCUR MED EXP (Any one persons $ J,aaa PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $ 1,aaa,aaa GENERAL AGGREGATE $ 2,aaa,aaa GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: PRODUCTS - COMPIOP AGG $ 2,aaa,aaa POLICY PRO- LOC Al1TOMOBILE LIABILITY X222222222 a11a112aa1 a11a112aa2 COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT ~Eaaccident) ~ 1,aaa,aaa X ANY AUTO ALL OWNED AUTOS BODILY INJURY $ SCHEDULED AUTOS Per person HIRED AUTOS BODILY INJURY NON-OWNED AUTOS Per accident) $ PROPERTY DAMAGE $ E E ATTA H E D AD D I T I NAL Per accident) S C ~ GARAGE LIABILITY AUTO ONLY - EA ACCIDENT $ ANY AUTO INSURED E N D ~ RS E M E N T OTHER THAN EA ACC $ AUTO ONLY: AGG $ EXCESS LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $ OCCUR ~ CLAIMS MADE CAVE RAG ES D E P E N D ~ N TYPE AGGREGATE $ ~FAGREEMENTIC~NTRACT DEDUCTIBLE $ RETENTION $ $ WORKERS COMPENSATION AND XXX333333333 a11a112aa1 a11a112aa2 X ORY LIMITS ~ R EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY E.L. EACH ACCIDENT $ 1,aaa,aaa E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE $ 1,aaa,aaa E.L. DISEASE -POLICY LIMIT $ 1,aaa,aaa OTHER PL444444 a11a112aa1 411a112oa2 Each Occurrence 1,aaa,aaa Professional Liability DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONSlLOCATIONSlVEHICLESlEXGLl1SI0NS ADDED BY ENDORSEMENTlSPECIAL PROVISIONS Certificate Holder is additional insured per attached. Project No. CERTIFICATE HOLDER ADDITIONAL INSURED; INSURER LETTER: CANCELLATION SHOl1LD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION City of Santa Ana DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING INSURER WILL MAIL 3a DAYS WRITTEN 20 Civic Center Plaza -Ross Annex ~M- ~ NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT, Santa Ana, CA 92701 Al1THORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ACORD 25-S (7191 ~ ACORD CORPORATION 1988 L- ~ EXHIBIT B ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT FOR COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY POLICY Insurance Company This endorsement modifies such insurance as is afforded by the provisions of Policy # relating to the following: 1. The City of Santa Ana, 20 Civic Center P1 aza, Santa Ana, California 92701; its officers, employees, agents, volunteers and representati~~~es are named as additional insureds ("additional insureds") with regard to liability and defense of suits arising from the operations and uses performed by or on behalf of the named insured. 2. With respect to claims arising out of the operations and uses performed by or on behalf of the named insured, such lnstlrallce as is afforded by this policy is primary and is not additional to or contributing with any other insurance carried by or for the benefit of the additional insureds. 3. This insurance applies separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought except w ith respect to the company's 1 i mits of liability. The inclusion of any person or organization as an insured shall not affect any right which such person or organization would have as a claimant if not so included. 4. With respect to the additional insureds, this insurance shall not be cancelled, or materially reduced. in coverage ur- limits except after thirty (30) days written notice has been given to the City of Santa Ana, 20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, California 92701. (Completion ofthe follotivin`~, including countersignature, is required to make this endorsement effective.) Effective ,this endorsement form as a part of Policv # Issued to Named Insured Countersigned by Authorized Representative 8 APPENDIX E CERTIFICATION OF NON-DISCRIMINATION BY CONSULTANTS 25G-51 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROJECT STUDY REPORT EQUIVALENT AND CONCEPTUAL ENGINEERING PLANS FOR SANTA ANA BOULEVARD GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT PROPOSAL AND CONTRACT AGREEMENT CERTIFICATION OF NONDISCRIMINATION BY CONTRACTOR The undersigned contractor or corporate officer, during the performance of this contract, certifies as follows: 1. The Contractor shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The Contractor shall take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment without, regard to their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The Contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices to be provided setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. 2. The Contractor shall, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of the Contractor, state that all qualmed applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. 3. The Contractor shall send to each labor union or representative of workers with which he/she has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, a notice to be provided advising the said labor union or workers' representatives of the Contractor's commitments under this section, and shall post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment. 4. The Contractor shall comply with all provisions of Executive Order 11246 of September 24,1965, and of the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor. 5. The Contractor shall furnish all information and reports required by Executive Order 11246 of September 24,1965, and by rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor, or pursuant thereto, and will permit access to his/her books, records, and accounts by the administering agency and the Secretary of Labor for purposes of investigation, to ascertain compliance with such rules, regulations, and orders. 6. In the event of the Contractor's non-compliance with the nondiscrimination clauses of this contract or with any of the said rules, regulations, or orders, the contract may be canceled, terminated, or suspended in whole or in part and the Contractor may be declared ineligible for further Government contracts or federally assisted construction contracts in accordance with procedures authorized in Execution Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and such other sanctions may be imposed and remedies invoked as provided in Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, or by rule, regulations, or order of the Secretary of Labor, or as otherwise provided by law. CITY OF SANTA ANA PROJECT STUDY REPORT EQUIVALENT AND CONCEPTUAL ENGINEERING PLANS FOR SANTA ANA BOULEVARD GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT PROPOSAL AND CONTRACT AGREEMENT CERTIFICATION OF NONDISCRIMINATION BY CONTRACTOR (continued 7. The Contractor shall include the portion of the sentence immediately preceding paragraph (1) and the provisions of paragraphs (1) through (7) in every subcontract or purchase order unless exempted by rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary of Labor issued pursuant to Section 204 of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, so that such provisions will be binding upon each subcontract or purchase order as the administering agency may direct as means of enforcing such provisions, including sanctions for noncompliance; provided, however, that in the event the Contractor becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a subcontractor or vendor as a result of such direction by the administering agency, the Contractor may request that the United States enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States. 8. Pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1735, as added by Chapter 643 Stats. 1939, and as amended, No discrimination shall be made in the employment of persons upon public works because of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical handicaps, mental condition, marital status, or sex of such persons, except as provided in Section 1420, and any contractor of public works violating this Section is subject to all the penalties imposed for a violation of the Chapter. Signed Title Firm Date APPENDIX F FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS Certification of Consultant ............................................................................Exhibit 10-F Certification of Local Agency Exhibit 10-G Local Agency Proposer UDBE Commitment Consultant Contracts Exhibit 10-01 Local Agency Proposer DBE Information Consultant Contracts)......... Exhibit 10-02 Nonlobbying Certification for Federal Aid Contracts Exhibit 10-P Disclosure of Lobbying Activities Exhibit 10-Q Equal Employment Opportunity Certification .....................Exhibit 12-E Attachment C Non-Collusion Affidavit .........................................................Exhibit 12-E Attachment D Debarment and Suspension Certification ............................Exhibit 12-E Attachment E Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 10-F Certification of Consultant, Commissions & Fees Exhibit 10-F Certification of Consultant, Commissions & Fees CERTIFICATION OF CONSULTANT I HEREBY CERTIFY that I am the ,and duly authorized representative of the firm of ,whose address is ,and that, except as hereby expressly stated, neither I nor the above firm that I represent have: (a) employed or retained for a commission, percentage, brokerage, contingent fee, or other consideration, any firm or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely forme or the above consultant) to solicit or secure this agreement; nor (b) agreed, as an express or implied condition for obtaining this contract, to employ or retain the services of any firm or person in connection with carrying out the agreement; nor (c) paid, or agreed to pay, to any firm, organization or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely forme or the above consultant) any fee, contribution, donation, or consideration of any kind, foror in connection with, procuring or carrying out this agreement. I acknowledge that this Certificate is to be made available to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in connection with this agreement involving participation ofFederal-aid Highway funds, and is subject to applicable state and federal laws, both criminal and civil. (Date) (Signature) Page 10-43 LPP 06-02 ~ May 1, 2006 Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 10-G Certification of Local Agency Exhibit 10-G Certification of Local Agency CERTIFICATION OF LOCAL AGENCY I HEREBY CERTIFY that I am the of the (local agency) ,and that the consulting firm of ,or its representative has not been required (except as herein expressly stated), directly or indirectly, as an express or implied condition in connection with obtaining or carrying out this Agreement to: (a) employ, retain, agree to employ or retain, any firm or person, or (b) pay or agree to pay, to any firm, person or organization, any fee, contribution, donation, or consideration of any kind. I acknowledge that this Certificate is to be made available to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in connection with this Agreement involving participation offederal-aid highway funds, and is subject to applicable state and federal laws, both criminal and civil. (Date) (Signature) Page 10-45 LPP 06-02 25G-56 May 1, 2006 Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 10-01 Local Agency Proposer UDBE Commitment (Consultant Contracts) EXHIBIT 10-01 Local Agency Proposer UDBE Commitment (Consultant Contracts) NOTE: PLEASE REFER TO INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE SIDE OF THIS FORM LOCAL AGENCY: LOCATION: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: PROPOSAL DATE: PROPOSER'S NAME: CONTRACT UDBE GOAL WORK DESCRIPTION OR SERVICES TO BE UDBE CERT N0. NAME OF EACH UDBE PERCENT ITEM N0. SUBCONTRACTED (or contracted if AND EXPIRATION (Must be certified at the time PARTICIPATION the proposer is a UDBE) DATE proposals are due -include UDBE OF EACH UDBE address and phone number) For Local Agency to Complete: Local Agency Proposal Number: TOtal Claimed UDBE Federal-Aid Project Number: COmmltmerit % Federal Share: Proposal Date: Signature of Proposer Local Agency certifies that the UDBE certifications have been verified and all information is complete and accuratelunless noted otherwise. Date (Area Code) Tel. No. Person to Contact (Please Type or Print) Print Name Signature Date Local Agenc Representative (Area Code) Telephone Number: Local Agency Proposer UDBE Commitment (Consultant Contracts) (Rev 6/27/09) Distribution: (I) Original -Local agency files Page10-73 LPP 09-02 ~ ~ July 31, 2009 EXHIBIT 10-01 Local Assistance Procedures Manual Local Agency Proposer UDBE Commitment (Consultant Contracts) INSTRUCTIONS -LOCAL AGENCY PROPOSER UDBE COMMITMENT (CONSULTANT CONTRACTS) ALL PROPOSERS: PLEASE NOTE: It is the proposer's responsibility to verify that the UDBE(s) falls into one of the following groups in order to count towards the UDBE contract goal: 1) African Americans; 2) Asian- Pacific Americans; 3) Native Americans; 4) Women. This information must be submitted with your proposal. Failure to submit the required UDBE commitment will be grounds for finding the proposal nonresponsive. A "UDBE" is a firm meeting the definition of a DBE as specified in 49 CFR and is one of the following groups: African Americans, Native Americans, Asian-Pacific Americans, or Women. The form requires specific information regarding the consultant contract: Local Agency, Location, Project Description, Proposal Date, Proposer's Name, and Contract UDBE Goal. The form has a column for the Work Item Number and Description or Services to be subcontracted to UDBEs (or performed if the proposer is a UDBE). The UDBE prime contractors shall indicate all work to be performed by UDBEs including work to be performed by its own forces, if a UDBE. The UDBE shall provide a certification number to the Consultant and notify the Consultant in writing with the date of decertification if their status should change during the course of the contract. Enter UDBE prime consultant and subeonsultant certification numbers.The form has a column for the Names of certified UDBEs to perform the work (must be certified on the date proposals are due and include UDBE address and phone number). There is a column for the percent participation of each UDBE. Enter the Total Claimed UDBE Participation percentage of items of work submitted with proposal pursuant to the Special Provisions. (If 100% of item is not to be performed or furnished by the UDBE, describe exact portion of time to be performed or furnished by the UDBE,) See "Notice to Proposers Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Information," (Exhibit 10-I) to determine how to count the participation of UDBE firms. Note: If the proposer has not met the contract goal, the local agency must evaluate the proposer's good faith efforts to meet the goal in order to be considered for award of the contract. Exhibit 10-O1 must be signed and dated by the consultant submitting the proposal. Also list a phone number in the space provided and print the name of the person to contact. For the Successful Proposer only, local agencies should complete the Proposal Number, Federal- aid Project Number, Federal Share, and Proposal Date fields and verify that all information is complete and accurate before filing. Page 10-74 July 31, 2009 ~ LPP 09-02 Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 10-02 Local Agency Proposer DBE Information (Consultant Contracts) EXHIBIT 10-02 Local Agency Proposer DBE Information (Consultant Contracts) NOTE: PLEASE REFER TO INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE SIDE OF THIS FORM LOCAL AGENCY: LOCATION: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT PROPOSER'S NAME: WORK DESCRIPTION OR SERVICES TO BE DBE CERT N0. NAME OF EACH DBE DOLLAR AMOUN T OF ITEM N0. SUBCONTRACTED (or contracted if AND EXPIRATION (Must be certified at the time EACH DBE the proposer is a DBE) DATE proposals are due -include DBE address and phone number) For Local Agency to Complete: Total Claimed DBE Local Agency Contract Number: Participation Federal-Aid Project Number: % Federal Share: Contaact Award: Local Agency certifies that the DBE certifications have been verified and all informations is complete and accurate. Signature of Proposer Print Name Signature Date Date (Area Code) Tel. No. Local Agency Representative (Area Code) Telephone Number: FOr CaltrallS ReVIeW: Person to Contact (Please Type or Print) Print Name Signature Date Local Agency Proposer DBE Information (Consultant Conttarcts) Caltrans District Local Assistance Engineer (Rev 6127109) Distribution: (I) Copy -Fax or scan a copy to the Caltrans District Local Assistance Engineer (DLAE) within 15 days after contract execution. Failure to send a copy to the DLAE within 15 days after contract execution may result in deobligation of funds for this project. (2) Original -Local agency files Page 10-74a LPP 09-02 ~ July 31, 2009 EXHIBIT 10-02 Local Assistance Procedures Manual Local Agency Proposer DBE Information (Consultant Contracts) INSTRUCTIONS -LOCAL AGENCY PROPOSER DBE INFORMATION (CONSULTANT CONTRACTS) SUCCESSFUL PROPOSER: The form requires specific information regarding the consultant or other contract: Local Agency, Location, Project Description, Total Contract Amount, Proposal Date, and successful Proposer's Name. The form has a column for the Work Item Number and Description or Services to be Subcontracted to DBEs. The prime consultant shall indicate all work to be performed by DBEs including, if the prime consultant is a DBE, work performed by its own forces, if a DBE. The DBE shall provide a certification number to the prime consultant. Enter DBE prime consultant's and subconsultant's certification number. The form has a column for the Names of DBE certified contractors to perform the work (must be certified on or before the proposals are due and include DBE address and phone number). Enter the Total Claimed DBE Participation dollar amount of items of work in the total DBE Dollar Amount column. (If 100% of item is not to be performed by the DBE, describe exact portion of time to be performed by the DBE.) See "Notice to Proposers Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Information," (Exhibit 10-I) to determine how to count the participation of DBE firms. Exhibit 10-02 must be signed and dated by the successful proposer at contract execution. Also list a phone number in the space provided and print the name of the person to contact. Local agencies should complete the Contract Number, Federal-aid Project Number, Federal Share, and Contarct Award fields and verify that all information is complete and accurate before signing and sending a copy of the form to the District Local Assistance Engineer within 15 days of contract execution. Failure to submit a completed and accurate form within the 15-day time period may result in the deobligation of funds on this project. District DBE Coordinator should verify that all information is complete and accurate. Once the information has been verified, the District Local Assistance Engineer signs and dates the form. Page 10-74b July 31, 2009 LPP 09-02 Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 10-P Nonlobbying Certification for Federal-aid Contracts Exhibit 10-P Nonlobbying Certification For Federal-Aid Contracts The prospective participant certifies by signing and submitting this proposal/bid to the best of his or her knowledge and belief that: (1) No federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any federal agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any federal contract, the making of any federal grant, the making of any federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. (2) If any funds other than federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any federal agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form-LLL, "Disclosure of Lobbying Activities," in accordance with its instructions. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by Section 1352, Title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subj ect to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. The prospective participant also agrees by submitting his/her proposal/bid that he/she shall require that the language of this certification be included in all lower-tier subcontracts which exceed $100,000 and that all such sub-recipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. Page 10-75 LPP 09-02 ~ July 31, 2009 Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHBIT 10-R Disclosure of Lobbying Activities Exhibit 10-Q Disclosure of Lobbying Activities DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES COMPLETE TKIS FORM TO DISCLOSE LOBBYING ACTIVITIES PURSUANT TO 31 U.S.C. 1352 1. Type of Federal Action: 2. Status of Federal Action: 3. Report Type: ? a. contract ? a. bid/offer/a lication ? a. initial pp b. grant b. initial award b. material change c. cooperative agreement c. post-award d. loan For Material Change Only: e. loan guarantee year quarter f. loan insurance date of last report 4. Name and Address of Reporting Entity 5. If Reporting Entity in No. 4 is Subawardee, Enter Name and Address of Prime: Prime ?Subawardee Tier , if known Congressional District, if known Congressional District, if known 6. Federal Department/Agency: 7. Federal Program Name/Description: CFDA Number, if applicable 8. Federal Action Number, if known: 9. Award Amount, if known: 10. a. Name and Address of Lobby Entity b. Individuals Performing Services (including (If individual, last name, first name, MI) address if different from No. l0a) (last name, first name, MI) (attach Continuation Sheet(s) if necessary) 11. Amount of Payment (check all that apply) 13. Type of Payment (check all that apply) $ ? actual ? planned ? a. retainer b. one-time fee 12. Form of Payment (check all that apply): c. commission a. cash d. contingent fee b. in-bind; specify: nature e deferred Value f. other, specify 14. Brief Description of Services Performed or to be performed and Date(s) of Service, including officer(s), employee(s), or member(s) contacted, for Payment Indicated in Item 11: (attach Continuation Sheet(s) if necessary) 15. Continuation Sheet(s) attached: Yes ? No ? 16. Information requested through this form is authorized by Title 31 U.S.C. Section 1352. This disclosure of lobbying reliance Signature: was placed by the tier above when his transaction was made or entered into. This disclosure is required pursuant to 31 U.S.C. print Name: 1352. This information will be reported to Congress semiannually and will be available for public inspection. Any person who fails to file the required disclosure shall be subject Title: to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. Telephone No.: Date: Authorized for Local Reproduction Federal Use Only: Standard Form - LLL Standard Form LLL Rev. 04-28-06 Page 10-77 LPP 06-02 ~ May 1, 2006 EXHIBIT 10-Q Local Assistance Procedures Manual Disclosure of Lobbying Activities INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETION OF SF-LLL, DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES This disclosure form shall be completed by the reporting entity, whether subawardee or prime federal recipient at the initiation or receipt of covered federal action or a material change to previous filing pursuant to title 31 U.S.C. Section 1352. The filing of a form is required for such payment or agreement to make payment to lobbying entity for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress an officer or employee of Congress or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with a covered federal action. Attach a continuation sheet for additional information if the space on the form is inadequate. Complete all items that apply for both the initial filing and material change report. Refer to the implementing guidance published by the Office of Management and Budget for additional information. 1. Identify the type of covered federal action for which lobbying activity is and/or has been secured to influence, the outcome of a covered federal action. 2. Identify the status of the covered federal action. 3. Identify the appropriate classification of this report. If this is afollow-up report caused by a material change to the information previously reported, enter the year and quarter in which the change occurred. Enter the date of the last, previously submitted report by this reporting entity for this covered federal action. 4. Enter the full name, address, city, state and zip code of the reporting entity. Include Congressional District if known. Check the appropriate classification of the reporting entity that designates if it is or expects to be a prime or subaward recipient. Identify the tier of the subawardee, e.g., the first subawardee of the prime is the first tier. Subawards include but are not limited to subcontracts, subgrants and contract awards under grants. 5. If the organization filing the report in Item 4. checks "Subawardee" then enter the full name, address, city, State and zip code of the prime federal recipient. Include Congressional District, if known. 6. Enter the name of the federal agency mal~ing the award or loan commitment. Include at least one organization level below agency name, if known. For example, Department of Transportation, United States Coast Guard. 7. Enter the federal program name or description for the covered federal action (item 1). If known, enter the full Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number for grants, cooperative agreements, loans and loan commitments. 8. Enter the most appropriate federal identifying number available for the federal action identification in item 1(e.g., Request for Proposal (RFP) number, Invitation for Bid (IFB) number, grant announcement number, the contract grant. or loan award number, the application/proposalcontro1 number assigned by the federal agency). Include prefixes, e.g., "RFP-DE-90-001." 9. For a covered federal action where there has been an award or loan commitment by the Federal agency, enter the federal amount of the award/loan commitments for the prime entity identified in item 4 or 5. 10. (a) Enter the full name, address, city, state and zip code of the lobbying entity engaged by the reporting entity identified in Item 4. to influenced the covered federal action. (b) Enter the full names of the individual(s) performing services and include full address if different from 10 (a). Enter Last Name, First Name and Middle Initial (Ml). 11. Enter the amount of compensation paid or reasonably expected to be paid by the reporting entity (Item 4) to the lobbying entity (Item 10). Indicate whether the payment has been made (actual) or will be made (planned). Check all boxes that apply. If this is a material change report, enter the cumulative amount of payment made or planned to be made. 12. Check the appropriate box(es). Check all boxes that apply. If payment is made through an in-bind contribution, specify the nature and value of the in-kind payment. 13. Check the appropriate box(es). Check all boxes that apply. If other, specify nature. 14.Provide a specific and detailed description of the services that the lobbyist has performed or will be expected to perform and the date(s) of any services rendered. Include all preparatory and related activity not just time spent in actual contact with federal officials. Identify the federal officer(s) or employee(s) contacted or the officer(s) employee(s) or Member(s) of Congress that were contacted. 15. Check whether or not a continuation sheet(s) is attached. 16. The certifying official shall sign and date the form, print his/her name title and telephone number. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 30-minutes per response, including time for reviewing instruction, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0348-0046), Washington, D.C. 20503. SF-LLL-Instructions Rev. 06-04-90«ENDIF» Page 10-78 May 1, 2006 ~ LPP 06-02 Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 12-E PS&E Checklist Instructions Attachment C (THE BIDDER'S EXECUTION ON THE SIGNATURE PORTION OF THIS PROPOSAL SHALL ALSO CONSTITUTE AN ENDORSEMENT AND EXECUTION OF THOSE CERTIFICATIONS WHICH ARE A PART OF THIS PROPOSAL) EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY CERTIFICATION The bidder ,proposed subcontractor ,hereby certifies that he has , has not , participated in a previous contract or subcontract subject to the equal opportunity clauses, as required by Executive Orders 10925, 11114, or 11246, and that, where required, he has filed with the Joint Reporting Committee, the Director of the Office of Federal Contract Compliance, a Federal Government contracting or administering agency, or the former President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity, all reports due under the applicable filling requirements. Note: The above certification is required by the Equal Employment Opportunity Regulations of the Secretary of Labor (41 CFR 60-1.7(b) (1)), and must be submitted by bidders and proposed subcontractors only in connection with contracts and subcontracts, which are subject to the equal opportunity clause. Contracts and subcontracts which are exempt from the equal opportunity clause are set forth in 41 CFR 60-1.5. (Generally only contracts or subcontracts of $10,000 or under are exempt.) Currently, Standard Form 100 (EEO-1) is the only report required by the Executive Orders or their implementing regulations. Proposed prime contractors and subcontractors who have participated in a previous contractor subcontract subject to the Executive Orders and have not filed the required reports should note that 41 CFR 60-1.7(b) (1) prevents the award of contracts and subcontracts unless such contractor submits a report covering the delinquent period or such other period specified by the Federal Highway Administration or by the Director, Office of Federal Contract Compliance, U.S. Department of Labor. Page 12-79 LPP 01-04 ~ March 15, 2001 Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 12-E PS&E Checklist Instructions Attachment D Noncollusion Af~davlt (Title 23 United States Code Section 112 and Public Contract Code Section 7106) To the CITY I COUNTY of DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS. In accordance with Title 23 United States Code Section 112 and Public Contract Code 7106 the bidder declares that the bid is not made in the interest of, or on behalf of, any undisclosed person, partnership, company, association, organization, or corporation; that the bid is genuine and not collusive or sham; that the bidder has not directly or indirectly induced or solicited any other bidder to put in a false or sham bid, and has not directly or indirectly colluded, conspired, connived, or agreed with any bidder or anyone else to put in a sham bid, or that anyone shall refrain from bidding; that the bidder has not in any manner, directly or indirectly, sought by agreement, communication, or conference with anyone to fix the bid price of the bidder or any other bidder, or to fix any overhead, profit, or cost element of the bid price, or of that of any other bidder, or to secure any advantage against the public body awarding the contract of anyone interested in the proposed contract; that all statements contained in the bid are true; and, further, that the bidder has not, directly or indirectly, submitted his or her bid price or any breakdown thereof, or the contents thereof, or divulged information or data relative thereto, or paid, and will not pay, any fee to any corporation, partnership, company association, organization, bid depository, or to any member or agent thereof to effectuate a collusive or sham bid. Note: The above Noncollusion Affidavit is part of the Proposal. Signing this Proposal on the signature portion thereof shall also constitute signature of this Noncollusion Affidavit. Bidders are cautioned that making a false certification may subject the certifier to criminal prosecution. Page 12-81 LPP 01-04 ~ March 15, 2001 Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 12-E PS&E Checklist Instructions Attachment E DEBARMENT AND SUSPENSION CERTIFICATION TITLE 49, CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS, PART 29 The bidder, under penalty of perjury, certifies that, except as noted below, he/she or any other person associated therewith in the capacity of owner, partner, director, officer, and manager: • Is not currently under suspension, debarment, voluntary exclusion, or determination of ineligibility by any federal agency; • Has not been suspended, debarred, voluntarily excluded or determined ineligible by any federal agency within the past 3 years; • Does not have a proposed debarment pending; and • Has not been indicted, convicted, or had a civil judgment rendered against it by a court of competent jurisdiction in any matter involving fraud or official misconduct within the past 3 years. If there are any exceptions to this certification, insert the exceptions in the following space. Exceptions will not necessarily result in denial of award, but will be considered in determining bidder responsibility. For any exception noted above, indicate below to whom it applies, initiating agency, and dates of action. Notes: Providing false information may result in criminal prosecution or administrative sanctions. The above certification is part of the Proposal. Signing this Proposal on the signature portion thereof shall also constitute signature of this Certification. Page 12-83 LPP 01-04 ~ March 15, 2001 EXHIBIT A-I CONSULTANTSPROPOSAL APRIL 6, 2010 13 25G-67 il~ ~ li llr~ m i., q o,,,. ~ "u^.p ~=.i,~ q'.. " a ~ - IIII, 9': 'M^ r ."pig M '"~a ~ Vix Of'~1Q V u~. '.x.. ~ ~ w~'v ~N. iii d I I III ~ I! my~ III ~ , ~i~ III III ~ ~ II ~ III ~ Ik Ik ~ III III 4r III III , II Iflr III E i i ; d III: 1 ~ ~r Y Iv"i. ~ ~ ir,~,.,, , ray eiiiyr ~.~.wt ~ ~~i F f ua f ~ / ~ ,w ~ r ,r l ~ 1 , ~ ~ e y f. n „v A . r riF' F i w w i, T r ~ ~ ~ 1 i i ~Y_^- ry 1~ ~i 2 rt.. ` L ~ ~ ~ ~i w t. ti z 1 r N ~ ~ ~ # : t - 4 * ~ ~ « a i _ ~ y I j ~ . ~ i~ y, ~ ~ .X M . .y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ iI f - _ . f +ij , ' ~ .n i i ma ~ f ~ f JJJ H r y 4 ~ ? fi~ I r' _ i ~ ~I~ i~ i Ilh i ; i ti's ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1. IIII ~ i ~1 ~ i I rr ~ i t ' , ~ II I ~ -r,; 1 re.Yt~ i I 1 . IIWM 17f. Ylk' ~ ~ ~ T" I'. ~~f lid i l l n i i ~ . ...Y,....... v w. _ a iii. r, - R , ~ _ uu . iii w9i... ~ . ~ u .,m l ii ¢ ~M,r~ "gyn.. i ,y v. ~ vo "sa. ~ 3m v.MU `Nh4~s. ~ Nn ~ _ rv nvi ~ AECOM 714.567.2501 tel ~ 999 Town & Country Rd. 714.567.2441 fax Orange, CA 92868 www.aecom.com April 6, 2010 SouriAmirani Public Works Agency 3rd Floor 20 Civic Center Plaza -Ross Annex (M-36) Santa Ana, CA 92701 Subject: Proposal for Project Study Report Equivalent and Conceptual Engineering Plans for Santa Ana Boulevard Grade Separation Project Dear Ms. Amirani: Situated between I-5 to the east and downtown Santa Ana to the west, Santa Ana Boulevard offers the traveling public true regional mobility with freeway access for vehicles and the adjacent Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center (SARTC) for both bus and rail. Mobility through this passageway however can sometimes be cumbersome due tothe at-grade rail crossing of the OCTA/SCRRA railroad (2-track configuration), The construction of a railroad grade separation would greatly enhance travel mobility, reducing delays, and provide a significant safety enhancement for both vehicles and pedestrians. The challenge will be to determine the most cost effective solution which enhances the community while limiting impacts to the SARTC and I-5 freeway ramps, the traveling public during construction, and the residential neighborhood. Here is where AECOM excels. Railroad grade separations are one of our specialties and we can bring a wealth of grade separation expertise to the City. In the last 10 years alone, we have been at the helm of close to 50 railroad grade separations, ranging from simple to the very complex. In doing so, we have served a broad range of clientele. In addition to our relevant project experience, we also bring a vast knowledge of how the City does business, coming from our Project Director, Mr. Pat Somerville, who has worked for the City for the past ten years through our on-call engineering services contract. We are eager to bring this expertise to the City to assist in moving this railroad grade separation project forward. To do so, we are committing Mr. James Faber as the Project Manager. He has led the effort on many similar projects and has successfully and efficiently delivered them on time and within, or below, budget. We are committing two well seasoned veterans in Edward Ng (35 years) and Mohan Char (15 years) to lead the Civil and Structural efforts, respectively. To summarize, the AECOM advantage on this project consists of: A complete understanding of a grade separation project and the process it entails, based upon our extensive project expertise and the in depth know-how of our committed staff Staff availability; we are ready to start immediately Extensive experience of successfully working with the city, OCTA, and SCRRA Proven track record in timely and cost effective project delivery Demonstrated flexibility and responsiveness to changing project needs On behalf of AECOM, I am proud to present this team of firms and staff to the City. We recognize the importance of the City's undertaking and want to make sure "it happens" successfully. The undersigned hereby states that: only the person, persons, company or parties interested in the proposal as principals are named therein; the proposal is made without collusion with any other person, persons, company, or parties submitting a proposal; the proposal is, in all respects, fair and in good faith without collusion or fraud; and, the signer of the proposal has full authorityto bind the principal proposer. Sincerely M Patrick L. Somerville, PE Vice President (714) 567-2755 pat.somervi lle@aecom.com ~`~II °.II fl rc 1111111 "1111 where projects with environmental approval are clearly IIL IIL. IIL.. 111111 favored. We understand clean this ro~ectis rou ed b Y p J g p Y The purpose of this Project Approach is to demonstrate to OCTA into the next phase of grade separation projects, with the City of Santa Ana (City) our team's grasp of the project the current phase under design, so with this next phase, there challenges and key issues, and to demonstrate our ability to may be stiff competition from other projects/cities with OCTA achieve the project objectives efficiently, cost effectively, and for a potentially limited pool of available funds. Moving Santa expediently. Our technical review of the project requirements Ana Boulevard ahead of the others likely will yield budgetary and the site-specific constraints has enabled us to identify a dividends. number of key project objectives: We also provide, within AECOM, the ability to seek project Maximize the City's "Bang for their Budget" funding. On our team is Mr. John Barna, whose expertise Effective coordination with Southern California is project funding. As a former member of the California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) and the Orange County Transportation Commission (CTC), Mr. Barna was intimately Transportation Authority (OCTA) involved with project funding decisions made by the CTC. Define/maintain a realistic and comprehensive We plan on using Mr. Barna to assist our team and the City schedule for completion in the hunt for funding. Additionally, with a project that has Define a detailed scope of services sufficient to achieved environmental clearance at an early time within the eliminate contract change orders project's development, we will have a strong candidate for Maintain project budget any funding that can be identified and competed for. AECOM Identify and study (a minimum of) three (3) alternatives also has advocates that can seek out funding opportunities at that meet the need and purpose of the project the Federal level. Maintenance of traffic during construction II I~ I I~ I I I .,I i i i ~ ~ It is very critical to the success of this project to effectively We have visited the project site, have come to a clear coordinate and communicate with both SCRRA and OCTA. understanding of the project challenges and issues, have As the City well knows, the railroad right of way within the reviewed the scope of services, and have produced a schedule for the completion of the scope of services. During this time of coming to a thorough understanding of the project, we have arrived at the conclusion the City can get more for the budget they have allotted for this phase of the project. We offer for the City's consideration, to complete this phase and the next phase of the project, the Project Approval/Environmental Document (PA/ED) Phase, for less than the $1.3M stated as the Project Budget on page 15 of the RFP. Therefore, we propose to complete a PSRE, a Project Report, and obtain environmental approval through an approved ED for the project, all for under the budgeted amount listed in the RFP. We can say this because we have solicited a complete scope of services and a fee for obtaining environmental clearance from our subconsultant ICF-Jones and Stokes. The full scope for this is included for the City's u reference in the appendix, along with a schedule for this u proposed, expanded project definition. Our fee for this expanded project definition is included separately, along with our fee for the services defined in the RFP. ii This strategy yields benefit to the City for the delivery and completion of the project, since moving expediently into the environmental phase will result in better project readiness. The project becomes a real project sooner. With the environmental phase completed, it can be better positioned for funding, whether funding may ultimately come from OCTA, or from another source, such as Federal stimulus funds, a i , II II ~~r ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ I ' ~ III II I I I ir~ ~ ~ . ~~II~~'~'~'~'~~~~~° II , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , project limits is owned by OCTA, and the railroad is operated is included as ~ on page 17. We are committed to and maintained by SCRRA (BNSF, Amtrak, and the UPRR aggressively pursue the schedule, once it is reviewed have user rights). Because of this, any and all impacts to the and approved by the City. We will constantly monitor progress railroad infrastructure and operations need the approval of to identify variances from said schedule to ensure that the first, and foremost, SCRRA, and ultimately OCTA, project is delivered on schedule, and institute corrective measures in order to get back on track, if the need arises. AECOM offers the City the benefit of a vast amou nt of experience working with SCRRA and OCTA, both at a company, I~ ~ II . and an individual, level. On the company level, AECOM At AECOM, we partner with our clients in developing a currently holds on-call contracts with SCRRA for both design comprehensive scope of services, looking forward in planning and project management/construction management, and the tasks necessary to complete the project. We also through these contracts, have become very familiar with their understand that projects take many unexpected turns along project development procedures and policies, and with their the way, and we have a strong history of being able to roll with staff. On an individual level, our proposed Project Manager, these changes within our original budget. Our team will make Mr. James Faber, has recently completed an assignment with every attempt to address the unforeseen changes as they SCRRA where he served as Project Manager for the Orange arise in order to deliver the project within the agreed upon County Grade Crossing Safety Enhancement Project. Through budget with the City. this assignment, Mr. Faber gained valuable experience, I I I ~ developed valuable relationships with their managers of ~ ~ ~ I bothSCRRA and OCTA, and obtained a clear understanding With these uncertain times, due to the State budget crisis, of how they conduct their business of running the Metrolink project budgets, and the ability to fund such projects, or Railroad. programs, have become increasingly difficult and important. AECOM is also leading the effort on the Orangethorpe We are acutely aware of the importance of maintaining and Avenue grade separation project for OCTA, which gives us maximizing the Project Budget. We will be constantly looking a solid understanding of the OCTA expectations on grade for ways to engineer project savings with the design. In separations, especially related to the balance of project addition, we think it is important to attempt to save design dollars, by working more efficiently, and completing the needs and cost control. project with budget to spare. We feel if we are able to save We will bring this important experience and knowledge of our clients a portion of the budget, then it will give them SCRRA and OCTA to bear on this project to assist the City the flexibility to utilize these savings to help fund other with its delivery, knowing full well we are working for the City, projects. This has consistently been our practice in managing as our client, and working with our partner stakeholders to our projects. We feel that, if we give something back to our ensure this project's success. clients, while providing excellent client service, we have done our job. II I We feel one of the best ways to demonstrate our knowledge ' ' I and our strategy for developing the project is to produce For the Project Study Report Equivalent (PSRE), we will a comprehensive project schedule. This project schedule develop roadway alternatives to meet the need and purpose of the project, and when these are developedlnsufficient I iiiiiiii iiiiiiii II II II I ~ iui 1111111 II II r, ~ i I, II II ~ ~ ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ I ' ~ III II I I ir~ ~ ~ . II ° . II ~v detail, they will be scored based upon criterion defined by Some of the disadvantages are: the Project DevelopmentTeam (PDT), includingthe definition of the importance, in terms of point values, for each of the Introduces two sets of reversing curves to the factors used for comparison. It will be our responsibility horizontal alignment, resulting in the most degraded to thoroughly study these alternatives, so an accurate and final alignment, when compared to the other two defensible account of each relative to the other can be alternatives achieved. The RFP mentions developing "initial screening Has the least effective land use planning, given the criteria" to assist in this process, and this is exactly how we remnant parcels from the current street alignment develop the grade separation projects we have successfully adjacent to the residential properties completed. We use a Comparison Matrix shown as I Requires additional work to reestablish access to and have included an example within this proposal, located Fruit Street and the adjacent properties. Even though immediately after the alternatives figures.This example has the RFP states this leg of Fuller Street is to become a been populated with very preliminary data, but serves well cul-de-sac, it may be prudent to revisit keeping this to show how this tool assists in the differentiation ofthe access to Santa Ana Boulevard in support of future studied alternatives. development Three (3) alternatives are included in this proposal, more fully Alternative 3: North Alignment described as follows: This alignment is also shown in II I ,.Beginning from the Alternative 1: Centerline Alignment-Undercrossing western limit of the project, this alternative turns northerly, continues northwesterly on tangent, then turns southerly This alternative follows the existing centerline of the matching the existing alignment easterly of the I-5 SB on- roadway,and is shown in plan and profile in I„ ,,.The ramp. Similar to Alternative 1, the profile daylights at or near profile for Alternative 1 daylights at or near the Santiago the Santiago Street centerline requiring, at most, a minor Street centerline requiring, at most, a minor overlay on the overlay on the westerly project limit, and for the easterly westerly project limit, and for the easterly limit, also meets limit, also meets the existing roadway at or near the I-5 SB the existing roadway just west ofthe I-5 Southbound (SB) off- off-ramp. Some of the advantages of this alignment are: ramp. Some of the advantages of this alignment are: • Similar to Alternative 2, it minimizes utility relocations • Requires no additional right of way, and incurs no Similar to Alternative 2, it can be constructed with less foreseeable relocation or severance costs disruption to the traffic than Alternative 1 • Most effective for Land Use, since it maintains the existing use through-out the project Some of the disadvantages are: • Maintains the existing tangential alignment for Santa .The City has stated right of way acquisition within the Ana Boulevard residential parcels located between Santiago Street Some of the disadvantages are: and Lincoln Avenue, north of Santa Ana Boulevard, is very controversial to the neighborhood; therefore this • Requires the most utility relocations, those affected disadvantage is fairly encompassing, and probably is being gas, water, sewer, and storm drain enough to classify Alternative 3 as non-viable • Requires traffic to be detoured away from the existing/ Impacts the alignments of both the I-5 on and off- futurepath oftravel for a longer duration, when ramp, resulting in the need to involve Caltrans in a compared to the other two alternatives permit/oversight role, increasing both the schedule and Alternative 2: South Ali nment the cost of the project g May be the most environmentally impactful,due tothe This alignment is shown in III°~° ...Beginning from the need to construct the new roadway on the currently western limit of the project, this alternative turns southerly vacant parcel westerly ofthe I-5 SB off-ramp using a set of reversing curves, continues for a short distance Overcrossing Alternative parallel to the existing centerline, then turns northerly using another set of reversing curves, finally matching the Our site visitations, and our discussions with the City, have existing alignment west ofthe I-5 SB off-ramp. Similar to educated us on the constraints of the project, such that at Alternative 1, the profile daylights at or near the Santiago this early stage of the project development, it can be safely Street centerline requiring, at most, a minor overlay on the stated that the roadway overcrossing alternatives can be westerly project limit, and for the easterly limit, also meets discounted (although we will study them to ensure the the existing roadway just west ofthe I-5 SB off-ramp. Some alternative analyses are thorough and complete). It appears of the advantages of this alignment are: that overcrossings will not be the most cost effective solution to this project, nor without substantial public controversy, • Requires the least amount of utility relocations due to the visual impact and close proximity of the residential • Can be constructed with the least amount, and properties to Santa Ana Boulevard (as mentioned above in duration, of traffic disruption the discussion on Alternative 3). Acquisition of right of way from this development, or even the construction of a bridge adjacent to the neighborhood, will be highly controversial. a i , II II ~~r ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ I ' ~ III II I I ~vir~ ~ ~ ~ L ~,~~„fii~ il,,,, „ ir~ t°usa ' / F f ~ " ! ~ ~ i O O O O O O O O O I ~ ~ m ao I~ l0 In Q M N ~ f, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ r r r r r r r r r G"... II II II ` ~ r F ~ ~ ° ~ ,4 ~ Q F Z y ~ ~ I ` ~ . ' N t. a d.. u II a u ~ uul it ~ . M J S' 111111 ~ CI III , f, m ~ Z rya ' m ~ ~ r it n, r ~ ~ W~ o ~ as ~ 111111 III ' d J n ~~,I + ~ ; l ~ r r ~ ~ ~ aW oa r ~ ~ J I I II ~Ilu IIIIIIIII~II~ ~III~IIIIIIIIII~~~II~ I' ' a °z a II _ ~iOC/ III i I. ~ ~ „ o uu' ill w ~ II ~ + M ~ ~ Z ~ ~ du „ ~ a Z p ao I' u' jllll I r N Z L'b~ dal ~~r ~x~~, III ~~°I I;nl ~ ~ ~ a W I III i " I ~ V o ~ d o r i ~ z J Pia a .u ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~r o u~ ~ ~ il~I ugllllllllV ~ ul,i ul i,,,,,,, O u it ~ % ~ i. uuulli ~u r ' • 1 i m°'I / e I ~ 'III' ~ ~ I 4 Irr W ~r II 4 ~i. L t f t ~ I I I I I II~ ~ I, o ~ ~ - II v + W > ~ ii ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ J k M~ p WIi ~ F V , ~ ~ k II 00' Z+ II o ' ~ , + a , . Q MM ' v i ~I r u l ~TYl~.Va..~r xx4 i.n447"% ~lkky~nG.J~.,Y., 0 5Z~ na13 M 00' +Z5 GI Q ~ o / ~ ~ ~ I;~ + ~ i / ~ ~ i.~IIV~~I m~ N u ~ 1 ' ^ M. ~ a~w'' 7Y", I 4 110111111 IIII ~ ` r~,,~ y s 7 , a II ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M~~ ~ ~ Z II ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ II ~ I I z ~ , w ~ ;a. Ex, ~I ~ ~ k ~ ~ J Y ~ i ` ,ii r Frti ~ ~ ~ M~~~ f U ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ K 1 ~ O ~ ~ j~f~~'~ ~ ~ y r'~~ a III + ~ Y T 1 IIII ~ ~ p I 0 ~ im 1 h ~ ~ ~ . <rt it ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ i ~ u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d. I i'i~~, °o gin,, ~ r~ ~ o ~ ~J I, ~ ~ . ~ , p v ~ ~ ~ ~ 00'0 +Lb ~/1d _ i p~~, ~ ~ ~E I ~ ; " I Q I r ~ r... d I a~ i ~ a ti ' ~ g ~d I F a ~ ~ tiea „ M~ cG `I tI ~°'I u; a r ~ , I, i N i " II U I ~ ~ tl:: r. ry ~ V r 0 ~ ~ Y u I `4 J ~ C7 r I 0 rM. ~ , ~ y ~ ~ - ~ E 1 Q ~ ~ ~ II Q ~ ,~i x~. / v I ` ..r ~ F f ~ ii 5~ ar ,f~/?ra r+, rr,' 711 ~"1 ` IuVVUllllum ~ ~ # pp'O uuuuViiiiiiiiilulllV ~ ~irllllllllllllllllllllu o~ °il IQl u~ T r r u CI H ^~u,. R ~ I t.~... W.. , ~ purr ~ . re:;, r u M ) Q ~ a ( ~ Pll" ~ 17- ~ f ~ I v~ ~ P~~ iir f fI r, r ,f ,~r~ "~,p,;,~w~ ~ 01 OD O lD In Q I'7 N O ~ ~ ~ 'Py ~C1 I i~~ li "u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ IIII ~ ~J~lf 1 ` ; ~a t~7 ~ k~ ~ ' Ma ~r, ~ - r, r „,w. . I u ~b P~~ t,ll..Il .&....u • ~ ~'I~~~~~~ ~I^ Z ~ Z ~ '"°dtl NWW MWW M~ Z fi H F Z H F Z - p 0 W ,d,,,,N J J O ~ ~ a! I r~ ~p ~t'3 QOC~'3 p r J F N~ N Na Za II ~ OF ~ ~ a a W z W a. 1 ~ ~ ~ - z a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - F ~ 1~ - ~ N ~ d,,,,u - ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ r ~ J H W Z ~ J 4~ ~ ~ Q Z W Q v.,~ Illulull ~ WI ~ f ~ N a ~H~ . " ~ N ~ ~ r= ~ J ~ , a _ r ~ ~ , ~9 ;f , u ~ y 7; 6 a , i I ~ ~1 P„ ` ` ! ~E ~ y _,+w~~d',tcu~.b.uu.r , {~~~,~...xreye.'~ ~Y A' h' ~ I ` r ~ f~. ~ ~i ~ F jy~-~p v < ~ ^ i t~ - a 1 r 4 x _ f I f ` .Y, * it t: I ~ ~ ~ ~ kwM r F rt ~ I a v ~,r! , I',-~. ~ r ~`W.nr I ry/ «"o.d ~ 'H , J ~ 4 A~ A f b A N. M _ _ _ i ~xri- ' yr„ Is;r illll c I ~ I ti~ r i µ r~ i ~ ~ ~ E , ~ ~ rx ; ~ I . ~ , I ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ' r I, k.. , r l~"' ,.t I ~ ~ ~,~ea~usa r i, ' f~ ~ I ri ~ s 1 ;;2""Y,r,s . ~ , w`,I . 1d, ~ r. 1 l 'd, I n i .t a~ ~ ~ 1 i e~ p I'io~ ~y~,:. s' ~~~y.5. ~ I ey e s ' LL , . ~ ~ a I , ,a - a ~r~ i ~ tom, I.; ~ ly e, r'~': r 1 ~ ~ ,,,~,~J I Y 1' * ~ x+remJ w~~ _ ~N ~ I ~ ~ t~~,+cen+ rwte ~ ~fl n t w , 4 r. r1 ' - ~ Ir ; 9 ~ ~ s Y , ~ ~ ~ I 1 1 ~ ~ _ ~ 4 lu' rya h'~ ~ t I AL " ~ i / pop, _ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~y r ~ sa ~ ~ h v ti~ ~ ~u, ~ t 4 . u ~ rc ~ , i ; r I 5 ~ ~ ~ e~rsrtJ~~o<P' N~` 5 v~axab"',.. y' r~~. ~ 4 ~ f y ; 1 . r ~ I u r,,, -/k ~ ~ r, . yr ~ 'l ~rt~ Farr „a,, { hide \ h;: ~ ~ i , r t ~ \ r t _ vt y' - , , ~ ~ 7; ~ ' , II I ql , I F r_ \ ~ r _ _ ,n ;L r ,5 ~y i _ m J ~ ~ ~ . ~ uuuuuumllll ~ ~ ~ w.. ~ ~ - I + ul pm Ili ~ ( / II ~ a ~ \ o. i. YI IIIIIIV ~ ~t '~a I VI I ~ T \ I F i ~ ~ n iii I r ~ III ~ ~ ~ , . II ~ I. o r Y's II I n _ ~ ~ p W ~ ~ r, ~ T v-+ ~ r f F'^'wz .A r Hw 2,ltr,p~""~,.EYJ~~''J~dx"fir. ~ ) vow l "mo"d 71~ wr umV m ul~ R 1 ~ ma x... I tI~'f, ~..?':"~'ds! a uuV i~ 'gym IrN ~ I, r , u"ly S~ ~ ~ \ \ r^~.. ~ ~ ~~i °mi i ~r.:ua ..4 v%"r G~ ~ \ \ ~ { ~ Ir°>, ~.ti~.~, I Ili ~ r i,, x, Ij ~ Illlllli i a ..r \ \ y i - 1 ~ v~..~.. I ~ ~ inn ' f, , b Illlu , ,;,W~ . ~ ~ ~ . s. _ l .cawuv a~.waw.,~v . ~ raw ~ ~ ~ _.u.....~v... m.oa:wr+baoo u.- a ii i 1 '1 .k G'i r \ 7.` muuws ~~F cu I~ i ~ I ~ i r' ~ udw6 tiij.. ' I 1 L W ? - I ~J r _ l }";Y ~ q,~ " 1 w"~~F x ~ ra r.• _ ~ v ~ ryw,e~m+,s~ Twin, it,, k..~r. m~, I 1, ~ Ti.... ~ i` ? ~ry -:1^ ~Ua - ww \ ` n ~ 1 rid ~ ,C S. G~ , III Illlu Vi,gi ullllllm ~ dx 1 IIII IIIIIIV { { r. ~I _ Y/i ter„ i . ~ " i ~ ^r ~ ir~fu.. y~.._ x r 4~ ~ , 4 } Ny I~ ~ ~ I ~ < ' , Ip 1 r, ~ µ~.e ' ~ ,C rGm>r ~ , I f I I~ II{ ~ ~ „,m y, tt7 , . ,t~ 'I" y fJ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 , Ott' ~ r r s ~ ~J ~ Iti^~ ~ ~ iX~ ~r! I €a(~f°,~ y. a~M' ~ fir' ti^ ~ F ~ J t I ~ . ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ` Vie- I.ul - n ~ ~ ~uw - - rye' , _ r 1 r 'y ? I ~ :rte IIIIIIV a rM pl I r"" ~ I N VIII ~ II' F. I ~~w r ~ f , of 4; °i~ ) ~ ~ o, ' W• t~ ; ~ c NJ~f , i. i~ r III ,w ~ ~ v,G~ ~ ~ a, ~ 1„ , ~ a _ wl ~ III W~~; .u } ICI ;F. ~ r r d ,fie I ,~I ~,r. a' ~ " ~ ~ F: b I w~ ~ Y F I I. ID"_ J a r ~r 1 r ik~..~", ~rv ' i ~ ` n~ A 0.~.. 1 9v ~ ~ ~ ~ i y ~ III x~ yt l.~,e ...n. ~ .,fir II ~b ,m^ Y~s_ 5, ~ O 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O M N t0 N O O O 0 0 0 0 ~ LL~ II°", v r ~ r ~ ~~N~~MM~ M r r r N r t0 r r Y = C r ~ N r N NNrNNrrN O O N N N N r Y;:~,,, a~M O U C U C O N G~",'d ~ N N f6 N f6 ~ a N ~ ~ U ~ U ;~;,Y ~ a X ~ X ~ N ~ m° We We ~ 3 r,~1 ~ f6 U N C Q C O_ ~ N N O N N N O ~ O LL Q ~ ~0°-a Q °c °c N c ~ r o Q~~ ° as ~ o ~ 0 3 co 3 r _ ~ O m O m ~ O_ r L ~ ~ m°> ~ as ~m ~m m co o p p ° a o o ~ ~ Q 3 ° ~ _ ~ _ ~ ~ Z V ~ c3" o s~ a~ ° c c m U U N N E N ~ Q~ m ~ ~ ~ C C C C ~ ~ C > ~ > i ~ N ~ N M ~ u°, Ww ° ~ m ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ m Z m Z m m•` ~ c ° ~ r ~m o L aac aa~ a ~ ° as ~ .o Z > > m~~ co m m m ° o a L rn ~ a aa~ aa° N a a~ ~I ~ N ~ N f0 f0 f0 O rn O N O N O O = L N f~ o ~ ate' c ~ m m m m ° ° ~ ~U ~U ~ ~ ~ u, ~ m ~ c c c c c~~ c c ° L u, ~°c ~ mmommccm ~.o o ~ Dui ~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v f6 U E o ~~m m cc ° m~ ~ ~f6 ~ Q c ° 3 ~ ~o~ m m ° m m ° ~ o u;~ ~ ° m mc~ m 00000==o o'~3a~3 om=c ~ Q J o y J Z Z U Z Z Q Q Z m~°~ Z~_~ J~ o O D O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O D O O D O ~ CO OJ ~ N ~~CO~~(O(0~ O Ltd ~ O O O O O ~ ~ r ~ ~ r (Q r r M M Q1 o N u~ r r r Q O M r N r N N M N N N N N M r N M N M N a' 3 i C r C N ~ ~ ~ N f6 V ~ c w ~ N N ~ o c m N V V O f0 ~ C ~ ~ f6 (n ~ Q Q ~ O. ~ N ~ ~ ~ O ° ~ ~ U ~ a ~ _ Q ~ Q N N fU6 a V' 3 N N ~ O N N N O_ O O ~ ~ ~ f0 f0 0 0 U fO L N ~ U1 0 ~ ~ cn N ~ C m ~ a ~ ,co ~ ' fA C N W N - ~ O L~ ~ V m O U m m° Q c° m ~ L ~ m m c cam' c c~~ c •c ~ c a m c a~ N~ ~ w a mm~mmo°m ~ m ~ o m N f6 N ~ N f6 ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ f6 6 ~ f6 d~ p~ r°n m aa'u~ aa~ ~ a 0 ° L Q u o a Q ~ c° aa° aao ° a o ~ a c L m E ° ca m~ m co aam ~ vw ° I ° ° d V fa m > m c c m ~ ~ ° ~ c c' ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ ~mcc~cc°DC ~ f0N c c ~ ° c i o ~ ~ m~ m m~ m° c c° m c m ° o o~ m L N E 7 ~ p N N f N N O O N Q- N U ~ U ~ ~ ~ m ~ m c c~ w ° cQ ~ o ° ~ = Q w me x°oo~oo~~'~~'o ~O o m~ ~ o L Q J O W E Z Z w Z Z Q Q Z U a Q N Z~ ~ J Z Q ~ D O O O O O O D O O O O O G~ O 00000000 O M ~ ~ d0 N O O W D~ O L() u7 O O~ 0 0 O LL~ ~ r r C7 ~ ~ ~ O r r r M t0 M N ma ~z r r Q~ M M M M NNNNNMMN M M N r N r N J ~W ~ ~ ~ > ~ a m ~ ~ ~ ~ ° _ N ~ .L ~ ° ~ N ~ p m m ° c c Q ~ ~ ~ c m o L N N N C N ~ ,a O O. Q f6 O. O Q~ a~a V~ = X X ~ a_ L r.::: ~ co m m m~ Q ~ ~m~ r U U U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ tM... r O O O ~ O ~ C C C C C C~ C L ~ f6 N N ~rj N N O O N N C O N ~ ~ L L L L ~ ~ L ~ ~ L (Q ~ L ~ p c ~ aa~= aa~ ~ a ~ ~ a~ ~ o~ a m ~ m aaQ aao ° a m m a o c° a t.u.a ~ a~ m o cam~mco~~co a a °~~~L ° ~ ~ a o .m .m m .m c c m ~ ~ cn L c ~ s aI ~ 'V ~ C C to C C O) C N (p ~ i ~ N ~ _ i'").. Q~ (A N N O N N (0 (6 N U U N~ p C ~ ~ Q O Q ~ N N V N N 01 O N Q Q 0 0~ U D C N r.::: r> E °~~.c.c~ ~ 3~ L o o v°i 0 0 0 0 o'X'X o 0 0 0 m° c m~ o n;' Q Z ~ ZZZZZWWZ Z Z Z(~.=~~~ Z Qy r.::: ~ p O ~Ti ~1::t.. O O 0 O 00000000 O O O O 0 0 0 0 O O O ~ A- ~ CD ~ ~ N NNNNNMMN N ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O A t LL I..u.a u.., L o N o 0 0 ~ o P;'„, ~.s 3 Q 7 N 7 3 fa ~ fn ~ fA ~ fn fA ~ _ N L ~ L O L L ~ ~ p,.. 0 ,N V ~ V U ~ V V v i:a ~ ~ LL J ~i Q v ~i N ~ ~i ry mr:~ ~ V ~ ~ Q 'c ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ r y~~, V~ E W o a~ a~ o m r, O Q ~ C ~ ~ ~ U ~ s V 3 ~ ~ ~ u O ~ a W a t7 Z m ~ t° ~ ~ ~ c ~ LL ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ Q cn o C'J ~ ~ o ~ a/ cn ~ a i t,a,u ~ ~ a3 ~ 03mo~~~a ~ ° ~ a~ ° o °Q W 0~ a a o (1,~ a~~~~ = c o W a E ~ ~ o ° ° ~ ~ m., o a~ o ~ ~ a a~ 2'~ c'o ° o W ~ o~ Z c~Qzi~m~T t~ ~ ~ ~m ~ ~ ~ ~ t~ W ~ 0 "~"`t~ 2 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ~ i Development of the Project Study Report Equivalent (PSRE) ii J ~I 4 will require the preparation of a bridge Advance Planning ~ ~ ! ~ i~ II, it ~r r , i~: d did . ,"a. Study (APS) for Santa Ana Grade Separation Improvements. ~ ~ ~ " ! W. The purpose of Advance Planning Study is to evaluate ~ „ ~ ~ ~ .;A . ~ ~ I, ~ feasible structure types, understand City, County, OCTA, , , ~ w SCRRA, and Caltrans requirements, identify constraints, ~ ~ , ~ ~ "w,r ~ ~ and develop associated cost estimate summary for the i ~ I~~~~L N ~ ~ _ ti, r.; ; ~ ~ structure work involved. Additional APS's will be re ared as a"~ ~ ~ ~ ` ~ y appropriate to consider alternative structure types. ~ ~,r-~i~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r,,~~~~,-~~~~~ A com rehensive desi n memo must be re ared to ~ ~ ~ ~ ~n p g p p ~ 7, ~>t ar ~ - summarize and document the following key items:1) ti important, or unusual, design assumptions or structure ~ ~ ~ ~ features, particularly any deviations from standards .,.u..: ~ ~ ~ ~ : . ~ ~n to accommodate the site constraints, 2) discussions with City/County/OCTA/SCRRA/Caltrans/Stakeholders/ ~ ~ I:~~. Resource Agencies concerning any key assumptions, 3) I~.,I.~,,, ~.~~~~,-n,~,~ ~,r~~r°~'~~~il~'11 cit re uirements such as aesthetics im rovements in the The span length required to span the Santa Ana Boulevard y q p roadbed is approximately 134'. The typical span range for vicinity of the structure, or other obstructions, 4) special this type of construction extends to about 150-ft under foundation requirements, special excavations such as Type Cooper E-80 loading. Therefore, even though the required A, Type D (if ground water is shallow), and/or hazardous span is nearing the upper limit of the typical structure span or contaminated material, shoring adjacent to the tracks, length, this structure type is suitable for construction of new 4) special construction requirements, including limited underpass. The total structure depth for the replacement of site accessibility, 5) stage construction, and 6) SCRRA the double track would be approximately 13'-6". Provisions Requirements (closure windows, flagmen etc.). can be made in the bridge design so that is capable of The information identified in the APS as listed above supporting a future third track, should this become a and preliminary structure costs are used as a part of the requirement of OCTA/SCRRA. To support a possible third evaluation to select the best project structure alternative, track, the through girder, on the either left or right side of which will be carried into the design phase along with the the underpass, will be required to have a structure depth preferred roadway alignment alternative. approaching 15' in order to support the full weight of a Cooper E-80 live load. Two structure alternatives are presented and discussed in detail in the ensuing sections. The abutments will be precast type and will be supported on drilled shafts (the shafts can be constructed under Construct Through Girder Underpass on-site and Roll normal, single track weekend closures prior to the 56 hour into Place for Final work window, while the abutments would be placed as one This structure alternative has the distinct advantage of of the first operations during said window). The through constructing the bridge in place without long-term disruption girder underpass structure can be constructed in the of Metrolink's service operations, thereby eliminating the staging areas near the project site. Once the substructure need of shoofly tracks and station modifications, and work is completed, and the 56 hour work window has been minimizing the time for the vehicular traffic to be detoured implemented, the bridge superstructure can be placed on around the construction site. While the traveling public has rollers and moved from the staging area location to the been moved to a detour road, this completed structure can finished main line alignment. be rolled into place over a 56 hour weekend work window, Special details will be required, including jacking stiffeners from Friday night to Monday morning, when train service can in the through girders where the bridge jacks are to be then be restored. What will remain will be the construction placed for raising the bridge off of its bearings, and bearing of the depressed roadbed for Santa Ana Boulevard, in a "top stiffeners at the locations where roller bearings are to be down" construction sequence, that is to build the walls first, placed in order to support the bridge and roll it from the and then excavate the roadway in front of the wall to final staging area to its final installation location on the main line grade. Upon completion of roadway construction, traffic can alignment. In addition, a system must be constructed to resume the normal pattern on the new facility. This method support the dead load of the bridge superstructure on the for construction of the bridge has been done successfully, roller bearings and guide its movement from the staging area previously in 1994, for the double track bridge over the Santa to its final installation position. The bridge bearings used to Ana River. I"" ~ shows the general plan sheet of this support the bridge at the staging area can be removed and proposed structure type, and the construction sequencing placed on the finished abutment seats in the final installation associated with buildingthis structure. location. Construct Precast Prestressed Box Girder Underpass a . i„ ~ii „ ~~~~~~ii~ Iir~~~ e~,k~~~ . ~ „d i~~,~~ IE;;;;;~~~~ iii , ~ I~ ~ . i , I~~~ ~ ~ ,,,,,v ir~o~~,~ ~ir~a . ~~,,,,y ~a,~ii~~,~ ird ~ ~ ~t'ii~~iu~~n I~~r,u „,I I ~ ~ , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , This superstructure alternative will require shoofly tracks, construction due to adequate redundancy in the system or station modifications, and detoured traffic to isolate the the ability to backfeed the service to the end users. bridge site com pletely for construction. Th is alternative proposes to construct a railroad bridge by lowering the Santa Construction Staging: Where a utility corridor is not Ana Boulevard. Atwo-Span Structure Alternative would work feasible and services must remain in service, construction very well at this location. This proposed double track railroad staging must account for both the existing and permanent bridge structure is approximately 126.7 feet long and 40.3 location of the utilities to ensure continual service. With feet wide, with no skew to Santa Ana Boulevard. A Pier Bent the staged construction approach on this project, this is needed in the median of Santa Ana Boulevard, which will is a feasible approach, though it may require temporary result in the maximum span length of 63.3 feet, and therefore relocations to clear the stage one construction. a SCRRA Standard Precast/Prestressed (PC/PS) Double Cell Box Girder Structure can be used for the structure type. Attention is directed to General Plan - PC/PS Con Box Alternative, . A precast, simply supported structure is the preferred railroad bridge type because of its flexibility for repair and replacement in the future. Significant shoring would be r, ~ ~ r~"" " required around the construction area when constructing the ' i W r ham.. tr~~.l bridge. Retainingwalls would be required forthe roadway M~`'~ ~ ~ ~d, ~ ~ `2z-~ ~ ' A, ~ , r, de ression. In order to facilitate the traffic sta in /handlin ~ ~ ' p gg g ~ - ~ during the construction, the walls constructed parallel to „I~,1,~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~s Santa Ana Boulevard could be constructed using "top-down" " ~ r'tA`~'" ,~F',; ter„ ~w,~~„~ Diu R~awdh~Y~ 1 9,,t.~, y. M1~~ I r+k~1 ~kc ,~~~~~.n~ ~ ~ ~ <r~ construction. - f~~~~, ~ ~,~x ~ ~ .!N...... ~ } ~'61 / rW~ kr °"ref ~ r Ili i° ~ ...III Always a significant concern on any grade separation due A-~-~ ~ r ;y to the impact to existing facilities, AECOM takes a tried and trued approach to coordinating these efforts. This starts with ~ „ ~ ~ s,.. our current relationships that we have developed on past iip"~ ~ projects with each of the utility companies, which allows us ~ ~ ~ to understand each of their needs, to develop a strategy for ~ their relocation and to address im acts both Burin and after ~ . p g r ~ ,r, uu,llllluu~' construction ~ ~ P ` /~'i~v a' The key is to be proactive, meeting early and often, and ~~~aV,;~.,~~,~iiii I ~~~i~~ ~r~~p~~~7~ liiii~ ~~~~u.a„~~~~~~~~ ~,~a„~~~.~~, disseminatingthe project information to each utility ii~~~~.a~~~a~tli~ii°~~u i~~~~.~; ~6 '~,p~~ ~~i~~aii~a,~iiir~~u company. AECOM will develop a conceptual relocation plan and refine this further with input from the utility companies. No one will know the impacts and obstructions to be encountered better than our designers, and it is up to us to convey this information to the utility companies. Our goal will be to provide a single relocation, when feasible, for each utility within the project site. We have effectively achieved this on past projects through the use of: Utility Corridors: Utilize easements or acquired right-of- wayoutside the Santa Ana Blvd. footprint, combining with access roadways to better utilize space.The utility corridor allows for a single relocation of each utility, eliminating the need for temporary relocations, especially as the agency typically will bear the cost of one of these relocations. This will be the preferred method, especially with City owned land on the south side, as well as many utilities already located within the old Fruit Street right-of-way, outside of the grade separation improvements. Temporary Shutdowns: Early discussions with the utility companies, especially water and gas, might yield the fact that particular pipelines may be taken out of service during a . ~~~~~ii Il~ir~~ ~,k~~~ ~„d I~ ~ i~~,~~ IE;;;;;~~q~,~fia~~ ~ i... .~ii ir~ot,~ ~ir~a . ~~,,,,y ~a,~ii~~,~ ird ~ ~ ~t'ii~~iu~~n I~~i~,u d....U Y~ YF L ~ ~ y y ~ a 3 , # ~ ~ m a m 3 i ro a~ ~ W JZ ` m ~ N m ~ n ~ ~ ~ 0~ y U aQ ~m w~ ~ ~m ~ ~ ~W a~ a m ~ Uwe ~ A! ' w o ~ ~ m r N~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ a W a a h... a - ~ ; ~ m ~ U° o m a W a °u~ N i u... o ~ ~ ~ I ~ i ~ W (r~ a~ ~ o Q E ~ a W Z a~ ~ 3 Z U Q~~ w J J y Q W N ~ D ~ HI ~ ~ ~ ~ my c~ ~ ° W a Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W H ~ ~ ~ U I~ 2 0.a ~ ro p ~ ~ o ~ - ~ . i ~ W ~ ~ a~iQ U m m ~ ~ Q N ~ o ~ ~ W o ro ~ - ' Q a; , ~ ~ ° m ~ 0 0 0 0 " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o ~ U ~ N c0 ~ o ~ ~ ~ 3 ' j [ ~ p - i ~ Z a c i Oa3 i i Q ~ m ,Ol ~l~ WW m~ ,Ol ~ m~ ' ~ C~ ~I~ J~e~ UlW I ti ~ ~ llhj 1 i ~ I ~ II' IF VIII ~ I; %~/fir„~ u~~ ,v~; ~ r ~ ! lily, N' ~lui~ll R VII ~ IIrrIIIII III il? 'III # ~ uilll ~ / ~ ~ ~ I1, f # '1 u, ~ ~ r 3 C C ~ ;F o~ um1 II Illli ~ ~ ~ ' ~ y ~ t 11 u i ( N 4 ~ F~, ~ J ~ YII 0 ~ ~ II 111111' ~ r ~ + t !duuo i i ~ m E, ~ ~ o II ~ ~ ~ ~ Q r a ~ I t . ~ " ~ Z o ~ ~ 0 1~' m I N uupilll ~ 1 ~ ~ ' ( ~f N u ~ ~ u Q ~ `l ) ~ ' J ~ ud, ~ o W r-.,,: 1111 ~ I~~~ , i; G Illuuullllll .J I ul I i o . ~ m i "a ~U II p a s IIIIIK O CI 111u 11° ~ ~ ~ II (0 ~ 3 / 1 ~ n#s ~ , ~ I o` a ro Q i L Ql Y i. ;i , O ~ y. 1 ~i % tii~.. f tiea b ~ ~ 1 ~P< a uu ~ ,o- Ir, }}NL Q i 1 ~ ~ \ n # \ ~ I 1 t.u.a ro Q rn ;r T li ~I ~ ~ 3 pp rt_ m m ~ U ~ C I Ilm ra"i~' ~ o ul I 1 ~ s i.. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y~ ] IIII ~ ! ~ j '.Y ~ r ar u ~ i x I ~7 IIII I ~ .~.e tt': ~ w ~ Vag!. 'n tt . II a. r. s 1 uuum I ~ ~ a 1a VII ~ ~ lul ¢ I U n ~ ~ I~ ,.y r ~ ~ u ( ~ 1~ ~ N III 1 11 ~ Pll:" t IIIIIIIIV I 1( u1 um ~ IIII uu ~ ~ii~~; ~ ~i YYD ~ 'u:•:, IIIIIII. n.... i, 4.;; d..o q :::5 I.:p Py ~:I tii~.... y pus 0::).. rv II ~b ,m^ Y~s_ i ~ I a ` , c $ o ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ V"M,,, U 0 ~ W a ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z ~ ~ rya ~ a I~~r r--------------------~~ Y ill ~ ~ ~ r, ~Z aW a ~ m u ~ N; ~ M I'I ~ m ~ W Z W N ~ III ~ ~ a ~ y W Z a i ~ lilll ~ ~ ??W~~ o a ray , g ro 2 U o E ~ ~ ~ ro W2 = a ' ~E c b ~ ~ ~ W V ~ i .O0 U b J 0 y I ~ W ! II 0~ U ~ ~ i II Q ~ ~ ~ II \ •0 ~ ~ i i 0 ~ cv i ~ I, IIII i ~ W ~ i , ~ ~ : : ~ i U ~ U m>Q m ~ UW~ ~ I ~e ti upI IIII aw IIIIIII {k ! I~'I yr, ? ulll! ~w ~ , III r .II.. k IIIIIII III fb",, I W~ 4. I I IIIII~~ IIIIIIG Y M ~ ~ ~ III'. I tl, IIIIII. IIIIIII III \ ~ ~ I J; ~ ai III ~ r~ r b y Ol ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~t , III. i I fy' C y C rs w Y ~ ~ IIII° a III ,r,.wb uuulllllllllllllu m r G i I I I w, t y^ ~ L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~A m ° k, ~ ~ ~ ~T ~ VIII III ~ ~ P plullpuoo / ~ aQ ~ p ~ i~ iii m ~ ~ ~ la ~ ~ v IIII' ® 1 ~ O ~ Y ` i~ ~ r i ~ ~ VuVi utluIIII~UViu lu L ~ ~ r IIII muuum Illulllullllllllllll~p b ! uqV um III n m III ICI/s, I ul! g Illuuuu um I'. 7' I I u Ilulu J f; ftl e'~G~'~' N , I um Iluu I~'i~mu 3 ~ p ~C , r) ,III Rf ~ ' I s d' Q1 ~ ul Im a O r u O1 ~ ~ ~ Q r , I "y~ I ~ ,~I I ~b , `I w I i i EN O ~ J. ~ I II~~;: ~ 0 II i uIIVNlllllllllu I I I r. m ~ ~ ~ O 0.1 ~ p IIII luu,uu I u~ I,, ~ a p a J ~ ,I I Io ' ~ I ! s~ III -t IIII . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~u.. ~ I ~ uuu l'1;1 I ~ end O r ~ b ill tt:: ~ r ~f1 • ..a O I ~Irt , I r~ IIIIIII _ ~ - ---g ; A~F a h III ~ ~ ~ y N Q I i ^~1 ~ s # Q / y~ mm ~ ~ `b I u.l I m ctl 3 ~I Ij u ~i it ~ ai m r Ilu I ul ~ ~ lu u., ~ ~ C ~ I I I I ~ ~ O n I~ ~ ~ ~ ~r 911 I ~ " ~ ~ r. 0.1 N Q Ir ! ~ g. I III I I Y ~ ~ IIII ~7 ~ ~+Q IIII ~ ~ 9, II I uuuouuuuuuulo tl III ~ x~ I u~ I q I~ guy -p ~Yr IIIIIII I ~ e 1 VIII 1 I i I r t"1 ti. "fit ~ ~ uullVl I i IMoll I f ~ ,y O ' uuuuu 6 VIII ~ r Sul ,n ul ~,3~ s f. i ' ~ Plt" 5.~ ull II r: Y I ~ I ' I ~ f ly I i ~t uumll I~, ~ u ?IIIIIIIII ii ~1~. ~.:a Py ~:I tii~.... y pus 0::).. rv II ~b ,m^ Y~s_ "~"`t~ i p , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , I ~~i~r ' ~ ~ r~ The City has stated, and our study of the project has a ~ ~ ~ reinforced, that the maintenance of traffic during ~ ~ construction is very critical to the success of this project. ~ ~ j~~... We have discussed previously in this proposal a potential ~ ~ strategy to minimize the duration of traffic interference, , R _ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ this being the roll in structure alternative for the bridge ~ ~ superstructure, since the bridge can be manufactured onsite, ~ ~ ~ ~ while traffic is still in its existing pattern. Only when the new bridge is moved into its final location and during the ~ ° ' ~ ` construction of the majority of the approach work is there a ~ ~ . ~ '~~~~'r^r , ,~1 y r ~ i need to detour the traffic. We have included one ossible lan fortraffic handlin and construction sta in and this lan g g~ g~ p . , . corres onds to this ro osed construction scheme. Please ~ IIII t p p p A , ~ ~w reference „ ~ ~ ~ ~ `q+q P~ ~ ; "'""'r~ shows utilizing the south side of Santa Ana ~g ' ~ Boulevard for a detour road, beginning from the [insert detour ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ , r II ~e0 r h n rli rvi mil n hi r r h oad p oto se tea e a e a adjace t to t spa ag ap ] M ; ~ ~ ~u~, ~ intersection with Santiago Street on the westerly limit of , ~wM> b ~ the project, then turning southerly, before running parallel a ~ to Santa Ana Boulevard, finally meeting the existing street ~ ~r M~ . alignment and profile near the Fuller Street intersection. This ~ ~ ° ~P~ ' ~ detour road is proposed to be two lanes in each direction. ~ ~ ~ ~ ° ~ ~ Of course this reduction of the third lane in each direction ~ ~ . for the detour road would require the need for further " ~ ~ I~ ~ I AIC,~ ~ r ~ . o Iw~, ' I , n traffic studies to confirm the viability of this configuration ~ in terms of Level of Service (LOS) for both the road and the The RFP mentions the possible need for temporarily locating intersections, and surrounding network of streets. The figure the railroad operations onto shoofly tracks. This would shows the proposed first stage of the construction, during be necessary for all other strategies for constructing the which the majority of the improvements can be completed, underpass bridge structure. We have included II°~~~°'~~~ and with only the south side (eastbound traffic direction) of Santa this figure shows one possible plan for the alignment of the Ana Boulevard, both at and near the west, and east, end shoofly tracks, this being easterly of the existing alignment, tie-ins to the existing alignment and profile needing to be beginning just southerly ofthe I-5 crossing, turning easterly constructed. The next stage would shift traffic to north side and then running parallel to the existing tracks until well of the roadway, while completing the final work elements. southerly of the station, and then turning easterly to join the existing track alignments. The RFPalso mentions To evaluate the traffic impacts during construction, our the importance of the shoofly alignments to utilize the approach will look at several alternatives for traffic flow station platforms.This alignment achieves that need, with through the project site, and impacts to the surrounding passengers being able to access the westerly track from street and freeway network, including: the existing platform, with a temporary, probably asphalt The use of a reversible lane to address peak hour concrete, platform, which can be constructed for access to traffic movements. A moveable barrier could be used the easterly track. An SCRRA Standard Pedestrian Crossing to provide three westbound lanes in the morning, and would be required at both ends of the platform to cross the three eastbound lanes in the evening. shoofly tracks for access to the easterly track. Due to physical constraints at Fuller consideration ~ - r~,_ . might begiven to aone-way couplet using Fruit Street ~ for eastbound traffic to Grand Avenue with westbound G ~ ~ traffic onSanta Ana Boulevard. This couplet would be join together prior to Santiago Street. Close evaluation ofthe I-5 ramps for circulation will ~ ~~j;iill also be a key component. With advance notification, i. "y traffic utilizingthe Grand Avenue exits may instead ~ ~ ~ , ~ use 17th Street and 4th Street with alternative routes, , , . , , further reducing the load on Santa Ana Boulevard Burin construction. ~ g T _ R~~ ; " _ ~ I 6 it ° II ~ d _ II • o u.„~ i. u ~ ~ p ~ II"II ~ . ~I ~ IY~'n a,;~ IY' ~ ~ IY'" II ~ a~ . i ,~~~~II~ Ii~lY~~b~~,k'~ . „d I""~ IE;;;;;q~,~fi~~ I ~ ~ ~ li l , li~~~ „ , ~ ,,,,,v Ir~o'~,~ ~Ir~a . ~~,,,,y ~a,~ll~~,~ Ir ~ ~ ~t'ii~~lY~'n IPIYR„p Ira ~ r N d....A z Z J W ~ p a fi Z pZZ ~ C7 Q Q Q O Ga H ~ ~ ~ J ~ N Q ma w z V (n G o o z I I ~r r ~;b ~~i' rfj nt ~ !":d ~J ~ ~U OL1.J ~ A ~ ~ „ ~ r y' 'r ~ ;v W ~ ~ r Iwi Q a ~ Q Q Z ~ \:I ~ ~ w a . . ~Rd oz W I ~ ' ,a ~ ~v z- J H w H III z~ - ~ k ~ ~ o w ° ~ a z p ~ ~ ~ p ~ ~ ~ , " ~ ,r Q 'i...u... t~z ~r ~ ~ f n u ~ Q { w , ~,r r _ r ~ _ r „ W. . ~ ~y. r 4~ ~ ~ 1 11 _ ems. , . ~ i r,r z h w yp Ix. ~s. i ~ u..~ y. ~ ~ ( I ` ''I ~ 4 ~ ~ ; - ~ ~ 1 ,.z ~ e~~ ~ , { TM I I '~-e. _ ~ Fes,; r ~ ~ ~ v E I4 i P ~ ~ a m~ A ~ 3'~. f` r I iii ' i i M ~I ~ re i i - - r ~ use _ i a-1 o ~ .r... .tee ~.~ra:. ~ w~rtm, w .sr~.,-~..,, - ~ - . ~ ~I ~xarx.;,.,x.a ~ I ~ 1 I ~ ~ _ i~ 4 ~ Vii, ~ ; ~ _ t.__ . s, i i? I ,{r~ Irk ~ d ~ i ~ I~= r, a I v f 7' Fi n ~ i rl :z~ ,I ~ 1 x:r ~ ~ rll~ tii~~, r~,s ~A r rf ii ' rr~r I~x~~4`~r+e~~` _ ~ ~ lai ~ i~: in ; ,..`"l4 , i ~ ~g~~, c.., r t ii f ~„w. ,fd "F ~ ~ d i;j 1" I ' III ~ 4~~~ Y ' ( ~i r ' i ~ ^x ~y~... n rnlf aM~r~ ~ ~r+ f: I V74 ,w~~y'~,m M ~i4rr{'„ai ~i ~~jn+w•~m, ~yr~u,'M t 3 r t'n~' v -a~- ~a ~Y? v, ro . ~a ~ 'h' y~. * d• I. _l~ w.~:f'" ,t', ~ye~^ ~..im ~„~y 1 j: ~ f~ ~,.+.:1`~.:-~'. '~`W~ ~P;,~, 1 a l~ ~ 4s r ` tl { h ` ! ~ r" u IIII!! ,y ~''Ad'r ~ I ~ , " ~ s ~ J! ~.tl"t"'~' a „ro' r~i a _ , i., 11 i k IIIV i M ~ ! ~ .,,.u1. m pr ~ ',u t \ 4y r• G ~y. f w - n - ~ r I ~n r,, ~ , , N.. ~ ~ ~ m ~ I~ I ~ „z. ~';J y .I ~ > . mr. ~ P ~ f i mW ~m ~ II ~ u'il ~ mrn i i 4 a P~ e, . , ~ ~ r~ ~ ~ ~ ! .t ' , I r. 1 ~,r,~ wY4~ hu~ I,~tm~ik/'~ ,~.i ..r~u ~`.~1~ ur7',~'Iw'~,"r.~t',°'f',.^,. ,,h r~\ V~ ~ 1 ry ~~a KbK~I~." IIU" ~ ~ any r, i nJ w d+r(. ~ M ~ I ~ ~ ~ " f ~ \ ~ .V 1 rat ~ ~ .Ili. 4Swm m y~ ,m d~rA pr t r Z/i.! ~ ~ w,mrrw.ma S . C K' H ~JF: ~9 ~ ~ o t y " ucuwa~ww.aru~,-+r.'u',a m. ~ I Lv' ~^ry. . .Nr. var ,dwa .w+" rvaas ...6d. - e~ } f _ _ u r aJ '1k ~ ~'.~d,~-~~-rw. rl'h'~fi, a y. ~ ~r ~ ~ O Z ~ ''?rte FI. ¢ n ~ k ~ W r _ . , . , ~ ~ ~~w ~ u. ~ ~,H 3 J ~ rI . , ~ ~ , W a ~ .,ate "~>t ..moo s~. s t Id. W i r r ~ 0 OC W - ~ ~ ° - r:: ¦x', ~ a w a~ ll1 a'1~; l`am` w I ~ ~ v~ r - 'ry ~.w ~ 7 a Y r... e >r ~ a 'A ' ~ 1r 0.).. v~r J . u' ,t ~ F,~ : ~ a~: ~ ' r d ~ ~ 'sue tt": r. 1 I ~ r~ . r,~ ~.e I ~ r~"' fix, E.1 ~,sar ~ ~ I + n. m+ t I aw~p µw~n" IIIIII P fl 1. r, o, ,y , ~ uuuuu~l „ ~ ~ a l "fir r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ply ,erg % ~7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ti ' i F,' F I u W ~ ~ I ~ . ~ I~ I I' ~ "u , I i to ~ { m 1, 7 i ~ ~~r P ' 1 y~ ~rs o::x.. r, u 0 P~~ t,ll..Il . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ J i ~p Y ~ ~ I I. ~ I J 0 I~~.. I~,.i~, a., M III III M I II ,:~A N ~ r., II II! II ~ 111111,,, If ~ ~ plll'Il~ ~ , ~ W ' ~ ~ I If fA O N 1V 1111 ~ ~ . . ~ ~ f b III III uVu 1 ~ ~,,4a ~.n, W 11 VIII 1 ~ Q Z ti W a r ~ ~ II M YI ~ ~ r. I r 3, I~ ~ ~ II „~k d' Ul H ,~r ~ ~ ,y;~,;l I ry ; I ~ ~d , Z ~ ~P;u ' I ~ N ~ Ir, ~ II..A.... z I z I r I ~.3 ~W D a I° a z r 1. I ..w a ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,r w a ~ ~ rill ~ ~ W II=~. "~a 1 .I ~ , v II ~ ~ ~ 11' ~ N n tv .I ~ I ~ , 0 OC O OC , ' ' 1. Z ~ ~ Q I"'W F' ~ III L,; I ~ ~ O ' r II ~ _ , k s I III uV IIII W N ~ ~ ~ ~ ` ~ Ilfi ~ ~ Q ~ ~i ~ li 1, d / I . e ~ II I , f. III ~ r ~ 4 1f+, i 1 ,k I rr 9.~ ~ ~ 5 III ~ ~ e€ 4 ~ I { ^'~d III °'`4 m III r ~ r%' ~ i , ~ f.. ~ o ~ / * I ~i ~ I~ o ~ 1 I ~ o a , f I IIII"' U1 I 'r III vl.. r III uu I y1 11 ~ ~ I I ~ i ~,:~r.~a.r ,Y ~,I" u1 Im. ?o ~__O I a N I I O I ifi'" i41 y ~ ~ IS' I~ ~ ~ I r' . , o I' I III, I a ~ II k a ~ ; i. x` ` II 1111111 r ~C u~" 1 ~ urc. I, c p,T I ~l / ~F IIIIIIIII IIII t~r ' p ,roi/1~/~ Yf ~^~,n' f r' ` "V y. Q1 III Q1 ~ ire a ~ ~ ~ ~r, k < s I~~ ull III rT ~ ~ ~q ~ isr . II * 1 r 1 M ~ ~ r ~Viny~' ~ 1; ~ r .r h ! ~ N1r A,_ u o I ~ / M1' y ' u" n u I! 11 , u I ~ , ~ " ~~'"'~~G~ Irr a f,'le.~"Er ~.„~,4f ~~~i,,, I~ ~5 ~ _ ~.~dti i ~ s'ry l! ~ » - uu J~/ ~ , `t~ b a~d~ ~~~`~r II QaO~7Yl~ ~ oooa~== ~ ~I ~ 11111 p , r1 ~ OODOOd~ N ~ pCary'p p(L[l ~r r ~ a r~,' to o ~NCO~~ M U ~w v 'a,;Oi~~CO~~ N ~ 1 MN ~ y 1h i ' a _ I I; I ~l I ~ t ~ ~ w N I I I I ~ t(i Q U II IM1 N Lf1N ~ i ~ ,I LL rl. ~ ' r ~8" ~Ct iv I I LL 4, j ~ u N ~ I I II N t ~ Q it 4, ~ i > n to :JI u ~ I; ~ ~ ~ ~~s:QJi.,.'~wwll II ~ ~A IIt~~ ~ u W w» M...rr Z ''~;a~ iw. U - ~ I : ~ .fl~, r:. Q a ~;g r, ~ ~ ~ 1 Y i r~ Z c~ ~ 1 ! ~ v~ qF, I k air, 1'` II I ~c( vw.,; . h ~ H d t 1 I + In rI~ D o 1 I a ~,~r ~ x~ M I~ M w _5 II A~, 111 _ ~ ~ M ~ M X ~,ar ; ~ ~tti iA I a ~ G ~ 119 x I(~ ~ a q ~ ul ~ , i , IC / ~ a VIII I,li,1~ f e ~ ~ ' ~ ,~4, I x U VVIN 4 W Q1 ~ ~ Ili M - M ~ 1 ~ ti « 1 ~ ~ w ~ IIII ~ ~ s" 1 n W ~ v Iuliu , a r , ~ ~ m;; a II a uuml' J ~1 r~ I ~ 1 J, ii ~I J 1 r~ ~ r i, ~ N r "~'O J iip ~'i' P (f Pa a 1 ii,. I I,i r ~ ~ 2 d_ to r M I/~j M M1 J r ~ 0 r r ~ LL I 11, O ~ u i 2 0 u e ~ bar r,, i 1 I V1 ~ i r al ~ R ~ ~ r ~ y iGii; ~ yy 1r °a ~ i f~ ~ II ~ i `~I II. : ' ~t ~ Diu ~ R~ r a II / ~r - 4kiri rwd i ,rt k O ~ 9" u ~ I © aLLa~ IRr"~Ili'~'~ ~ ~'~Z 5'i III fin,. 'My~,: y ~ QpfVppdd [ D~ 1 4 t I 1 i m ij°I ~ ~r+a $i ~ ,~yv o-r r III r, h• t0 I tll O '00~~ ~ r~?iz ~ III I ~~F 1 ~ , IIII ~x Y ~ ~MN III r b ~ ud~ I/pm i v r I ' W II II ( I d y/~ ~3~ ~ ? I r II lf)V wi I ,~iON 1' k r,.~ruc o , .A CJ ~ ~ I Y, ~(h ~ ~ r + 6 ~ N I u~ r ~ a ;a ~ 1 ~ ` t a. .>F6 ~ ~ III ~ x fi 1 r 0 ~jn~'r.~, b ~ u Pn II WI..... L I ' 1 I N I I C`Y I~,~1 JIN I H~ X11 Iii $ ~ III I~ ,r, VIII ~ `~I ~~,xra „ >F,,, ,1111 ~ a ~r~ ~ IIII II W o, ~ ~ , ~ IIII II x, e i I ~ of m, ~r, e„ r ' Dui t7 i I i , 1,, to P. I~ ~ u.,..u , _ ~ ~ ~ 1111: Z ~ I~ Y O u "a~ r. I ~ ~ ja~:, C.Y.. - I, S 'AY II ~ V I v O N z ~ + I 1' ~ a xx Cn ~~5. ~ N V~ } ^~b r I i IIII ~ ~ >r~ j ~~~~'C:: ~ Q ~ i~' v ~ ITC dmN ^ I ~ W - I~ lgpllul, u ~ W ~ J a u- J 4 i'' r ~ I' IL! J ; ~tF:; 1 ~ x J 3 2 O .111 111 u'Q ~ r"~ 4V J Q V I~ ~ r Pp. J Vl O - N 1 Q ail v, " ~ Yb.. VIII ~M ^ ~ Q x ~ I uli ` I~ ~ A ~y I~ In W r J4 J' * w 11 , F N 111' I~ ~ M h ~ A ~ n -*'Q rS, 1 II + C C~ +r:; 'r 7 Ir CN u I ~ II h j x, nlre ~ n ca W...... NN~~~. "~M. 1 pp y~yY 1~~ I~~~~~~ rN" ~'i_ "~"`tl I ~ ~ II AECOM has thoroughly reviewed the scope of work included of the environmental evaluation to produce a Preliminary in the RFP. We believe it to be comprehensive and adequately Environmental Survey (PES) form. Therefore the deliverable cover the needs related to the Project Study Report under this task is proposed to be a PES, and not a PEAR or an Equivalent for this project. For brevity, we will not repeat the ISA. scope of services herein, accepting as provided in the RFP with the following clarifications, inclusions or exclusions Task Q Aesthetics: AECOM suggests the inclusion of an from the scope of work. aesthetics task as part of the scope of services. Having prepared severalaesthetic plansforgradeseparations, Task B. Permits: Permits will not be required for including the recent Aesthetic Guidelines for the OCTA Grade geotechnical activities, since the geotechnical work, per Separations along the Orangethorpe Corridor, the ability Task G, will be limited to research of existing subsurface to provide photo-quality images of the completed project information for adjacent project areas. greatly enhances the public understanding and acceptance of the project. AECOM can provide static photosimulations or Task E. Field Survey/Topography: Aerial mapping will a dynamic visual flythrough (video) of the project. In addition, be provided for the project limits as requested, noting all of AECOM has enlisted Glenn R. Johnson Scale Models, located the identified surface features. If OCTA grants permission in downtown Orange, on past projects to create a scale model and the City approves, this aerial mapping can utilize and of the project. This model can be used at public outreach augment existing mapping of the project site, gained from our meetings and be put on display in the lobby of City Hall, Each surveyor's work on an adjacent project for OCTA. The scale of of these are great tools that AECOM can provide to the City. this topographic map is at 1 "=40'. Field survey will be limited to establishing the record centerline for Santa Ana Boulevard As noted in the Project Understanding and Approach section, and its cross streets as well as top of rail elevations adjacent we firmly believe that we can take this project to the next to Santa Ana Boulevard. This information is sufficient fora step within the given budget identified in the RFP. Included in planning level document. the appendix of this proposal is a detailed scope of services and associated schedule to provide a complete Project Task L. Right-of-way: Existing right-of-way and property Report/Environmental Document (PR/ED), readying this lines will be established from record documents. As noted project for the final design phase and better positioning the in Addendum 2, legal descriptions and plats will not be City for funding. required at this time. The Deliverable will be a right-of-way impact map clearly delineating the need for fee acquisition, In providing the PR/ED, a full PSRE will not be required, and easements for utilities, subsurface features, or slopes, and the initial phase will be the alternatives analysis. A value temporary construction easements. A matrix will be included analysis, required on any State or Federally funded project for each parcel listing any right-of-way impact, square over $25 million in value, will be provided at the conclusion footage of acquisition and/or easement, along with additional of the alternatives analysis. At that point, the Project Report severance impacts such as loss of access or parking. will be developed with a preferred alternative and the environmental clearance process will commence. Task N. Environmental Evaluation: Sincethe project is not on Caltrans system (an interstate or state highway), We look forward to the opportunity to discuss this approach where a Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report further with the City. (PEAR) is required, it is sufficient for the commencement r,,,.. ~a Ir s ''19' k r • ~ u r r. { ai rf ~ m ~h ~ ~ r• ~u u,~"1d sY r.«~nwlr,~,ES~x2k5~; ~ Y~ N . ~ ~ SbWMY i III':. r ~i'i'. 9, ~ r I ~ 2 ` + 1] { 1 ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . . II"~ ii ir° II"~ . w„~~ n c. i, ,r, ~ i ~~~~~ii Il~ir~~ ~,k~~~ . ~ ~„d ~ i~~,~~ IE;;;;;~~q five , I~ ~ I~ i... ii „ I, ~ , ~ , i I~~~ I ir~ot,~ ~ir~a . I~,,,,y ° ~a,~ii~~,~ ird ~ ~ ~t'ii~~iu~~n I~~i~,u I~~;.~~ II ~ . , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 111111 uu uuu ~ ' iiiii .VIII iiiiii iii. 111111 II iiiiii~i~l Ilo n, Ilo III ull I Ilo Ilo II Ilo The AECOM team's project manager, Mr. James Faber, will Quality is essential on all ~M serve as our single point of contact for the City of Santa Ana engineering projects. AECOM is ISO "°v `~~`~°'°'°NB'~~°'°~ c~~ri~ic;ar~ r and will be proactive in the processing of the project through 9001:2000 certified and employs .4 ACCOM USA Inc. if M ~ DMJM fIARRI$ & CTCI Caltrans. In this capacity he will be responsible for: a quality management system as shown below in I ~ .This Delivering the project scope of work and meeting the program incorporates quality review project schedule and budget at each working level from the , Serving as primary contact with the City and other project manager down and from the agencies, as required,to meet project needs discipline level up, and is continually 15n9oo,zooo° Managing the AECOM team, including the authority to reinforced during the project. make decisions on behalf of the team and to commit There are four components to this corporate resources to meet project requirements approach. They address all aspects Scheduling and internally coordinating the team's work of the project and are performed Ensuring that the project's technical/professional and continually and at major milestones contractual requirements are thoroughly fulfilled during project development. They include: Establishing clear lines of communication both internally and externally IL ~ ~ ~ ~ . _IL During the project, prior to any Chairing all regular project team meetings and being formal submittal, the design and reports are reviewed by the the primary respondent to the City discipline managers. Initiating and maintaining a quality management program tailored to the project ~ i'~~ ~°I The project manager and discipline lead engineers will review the construction documents I ~ 'I for coordination, accuracy, client drafting standards, and The effectiveness of our communication with the City definition of work. of Santa Ana and all project participants is crucial to a i I ~Ilf Following review by the lead successful project. Mr. Faber is dedicated to fostering a engineers, the QC team will coordinate an independent productive communication process and to providing proactive constructibility review to verify criteria compliance, evaluate design issue resolution, working with the City as an extension the comprehensive quality of the geometric plans and design of staff. plans, and resolve potential constructibility issues. II""°Im III H ' I ~ ~ ~ ° ~ °~~°"'I III'"I ~ I Imm~l ° ° . I ~ . II ~ II I QA/QC reviews AECOM takes a very proactive stance in addressing issues will be conducted on an impromptu basis and prior to each and comments as they arise. This eliminates the need milestone submittal. These will be independent reviews led by for rehashing previous issues ormulti-cycle reviews and the project manager with the involvement and management responses at each submittal milestone, thus allowing afast- review of the Project Director, James Faber, PE. tracked project delivery. There are several components in In addition, we will draw upon our own vast construction achieving this: management resources to review the bid documents for items Develop an action list, each uniquely numbered, from that may lead to potential contractor change orders at each each meeting, tracking them through resolution milestone submittal. Conduct workshop meetings with Caltrans and other Planning & Engineering C!ualityfAssurancel stakeholders prior to submittal milestones to review alsciprlneRevlew CoordnationRevieu~ Constru~tibllityRuview Cuallty'~antral the product and receive feedback, as well as allow project Managers Project Manager ConstructibilityTeam Independent Caltrans and the other stakeholders to familiarize Technical Leaders QA/QCTeam • Calculations ' Checkaccuracy • Completeness • Formal Review themselves with the submittal package • Consistancy &accuracy • Documentation • Dimensions between disci lines • Constructibili • Detailed a royals Develop a comment response matrix to track • DesignTheory p pp • Physics! interference • Change order comments through to closeout • Errors&omissions potential Meet as necessary to ensure agreement on comment 'Claims potential resolution prior to submittal ar I ,I i , ' k II II ~ ~ II M N~~~ W ~ I ' ~ III II I I I ~v ird ~ ~ ~ L ,~"l',; fi ire il,,,, „ , ~ , ir~ ~ ~ . II ~ . II 111111 iiiiii III. Environmental -Engaging the environmental planners II during the initial alignment studies will be critical to ensuring AECOM has developed the schedule shown in III ° I I that the all components are adequately covered in the PES based upon past experience on similar projects. We have or PEAR, which will facilitate approvals through the City for demonstrated our ability to deliver planning documents on CEQA and Caltrans for NEPA. grade separations, from Feasibility Studies and PSRE's to Response Procedures - AECOM takes a very proactive full Project Report/Environmental Documents. Within the stance in addressing issues and comments as they arise. last 12 months, AECOM has worked on the following grade This eliminates need for rehashing of previous issues separation planning documents: or multi-cycle reviews and responses at each submittal Raymond Avenue milestone. There are several components in achievingthis: Orangethorpe Avenue 1. Develop and action list, each uniquely numbered, to Baldwin Park Avenue track them from inception to closure. Puente Avenue Jurupa Avenue 2. Conduct workshop meetings with stakeholders prior to McKinley Street submittals to review the product and receive feedback. Streeter Avenue 3. Develop a comment response matrix to track comments through to closeout. Our experience also helps us understand the critical AECOM is confident that in our approach to this project, along elements which need to be address to ensure the project with our relationships with the City, SCRRA, OCTA, Caltrans, schedule is met, and these include: and the utility companies, we will meet the schedule as Third Party Coordination -Actively engaging third parties, shown. from the railroads to the utility companies, from day one of the project is essential. Maintaining the open line of communication and flow of information is crucial to timely responses, direction and approval. Early agreement on design parameters, such as vertical clearances for the railroad, as well as relocation alternatives for utilities, will help pave the path for approvals. ID Task Name Duration M-1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7 M8 1 NTP 0 days 2 Phase I- PSR and PES or PEAR 175 days 3 Project Management/Coordination 170 days 4 Project Study Report 175 days _ 5 Research & Data Collection 5 days ~ 6 Obtain ROE from SCRRA 30 days 7 PreparelObtain Approval Traffic Control Plan 15 days 8 lJtility Identification 50 days ~ 9 Topo/BaselField WorklDesign Surveys 20 days ~ 10 Pre are Alternatives Conce is 3 Min. 50 da s p p ~ ) y 11 Prepare Traffic Analysis and TMP for Alts. 30 days 12 Geotechnical Recommendations 30 days 13 Structural APS's 30 days ~ 14 Hydraulics and Hydrology Study 30 days ~ 15 Right-of-Way _Identification 10 days ~ ~ 16 Cost Estimates 20 days e ' ~ ' 17 Structural Type Selection 20 days ~ 18 Conceptual Engineering Plans for Alts. 20 days ~ ~ _ 19 Draft Project Study Report Equivalent 30 days ~ 20 Submit Draft PSRE to City 0 days 21 City Review Draft PSRE 15 days P 22 Final PSRE 10 days ~ 23 City Review/Approve Final PSRE 15 days ~ 24 Environmental PES or PEAR 40 days 25 Environmental PES _or PEAR 40 days ~i ~ II~~ ire I~~~s~~d S~~ I~~ ~~d u„~ I,~~ ar ,I~ ~ , II II ~r ~ II x „N~~~ I~~~~~~W ~ I III II I I I ~vir~ ~ ~ l ~,~~„ficn u.... „ ir~ ~ ~ . II ~ . II 111111 AECOM has formed a team of leading professionals ~Wpry who have delivered stellar quality grade separations for - ~ i i ~ III ~~~t agencies throughout southern California. This section of our Earth Mechanics Inc. EMI w proposal presents the AECOM team and key personnel and ~ ~ ( ) as founded as a California demonstrates our capability to deliver the best value to the Corporation in February,1989. EMI is a geotechnical and City of Santa Ana. earthquake engineering consulting company. The firm specializes in site investigation and foundation design • AECOM is a full service engineeringfirm for projects related to transportation and infrastructure A_COM providing services since 1933.The firm is a constructions and rehabilitations. The firm is experienced leader in the planning, engineering, program in providing services to local county and city agencies management and construction management of highway, bridge and transportation commissions. EMI has offices located projects and has unparalleled experience on grade separations. throughout southern California. The headquarters is in AECOM has held Engineering News-Record's #1 ranking in Fountain Valley, Orange County. ~ ~ ~W - transportation in the nation since °P 2001 EMI has long been supporting AECOM on numerous I ~dersla~fVed ~.a~suit r ~ ~n~,~~~~~ e,~an ~zwrcl.l~l ,offering the City strong local ~ I ~u~~°~~~~'~ ~`re'~~~A knowledge and resources, proven transportation projects throughout southern California, i ~ I, J ~y~n~gariy ~car+e' J ~ 10~"~~~~~~~~~ ~ effective project delivery and quality including the First Street Bridge widening for the city of ~~r Santa Ana, as well as three recent grade separations on U systems, and specialty expertise ~ ~ . ~ from around the world when it's Raymond Avenue, city of Fullerton; Monte Vista Avenue, a~ city of Upland; and State Street/University Avenue in San needed. AECOM has specialized ~ ractices that include Bernardino. I, P transportation, facilities, environmental services, water ~o~e~ r,,, m Y k v~y!! ~ I ~ N,~~~t~ _,~~~~~I III III III III III II. III .resources, and energy. The firm is .gin I~ f r ° - PM c:idAne~ - c-=~#~, ~rra~~p~~~t1°~ focused on client satisfaction and for N'r~~consecu~eve Founded in 1969 ICF International is a local multidisci linar ~e~~s high quality performance and is a ~ p y ~ ~ Fortune 500 company with more environmental consulting firm with along-standing ~1 ~ than 46,000 employees around the reputation of excellence in environmental analyses and world and current annual California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National revenues exceeding $6 billion. Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance. As such, we have a firm understanding of environmental laws and AECOM has included four specialty subconsultants to assist regulations, and we bring this knowledge to our role on the on this project. The selection of these subconsultants was AECOM team. based on our extensive experience working with them, their proven history of high quality work on similar projects, and Their staff has worked on numerous southern California their proven ability to produce and deliver work products that transportation projects relevant to this project, including will meet the City's standards and are completed on time the preparation of the environmental documentation for the and within budget. To help the City achieve its participation Auto Center Drive Grade Separation, Riverside Avenue Grade goals, we have included two DBE firms on our team. Coast Separation, and Streeter Avenue Grade Separation in support Surveying is a DBE and Earth Mechanics is aDBE/UDBE. of AECOM. . , V III Ili u v Xmh~ r^v / ~ / 16 9 r ~~~t ui~~~~~~~ ~ ui~~~~~~~~~~~ Coast Surveying, Inc., a California Corporation, was founded in 1981 and has over twenty-eight years of surveying, Overland, Pacific & Cutler, Inc. (OPC) was established in mapping and right of way engineering experience working 1980 to provide professional services for clients with projects for such governmental agencies as: Caltrans, OCTA, SCRRA, involving land and Right of Way acquisition, relocation counties of Orange and Los Angeles, and numerous cities assistance, project planning and property management. throughout the area. The firm is a Certified DBE firm and is Over the years, the company has developed a reputation financially stable. for consistent quality, continues to set the standard for the Coast Surveying has a long standing relationship with the professional right of way community. City of Santa Ana, providing services as part of an on-call OPC has provided Right of Way services to hundreds of surveying contract, aswell assupporting AECOM ontheir on- clients throughout the United States. OPC has a long standing call engineering services since 2000, delivering over 16 task working relationship with AECOM, providing right-of-way order projects. services or support on several grade separations, including Monte Vista Avenue, Raymond Avenue, and Orangethorpe Avenue. a . i , II II ~~r ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ I ' ~ III II I I I ir~ ~ ~ . II ~ . II ~o~ IIL IIIIII ....111111 IIII VIII 111111 IIIIIIIL.IIIIIII ~ 111111 IIII III Project Manager, James Faber, has developed our project organization focused on providing comprehensive coverage of the main project functions. Where applicable, James reached out to subconsultant firms where we have a strong working relationship. The project organization chart in III it ~ shows the lines of communication and areas of subcontract work. James Faber will serve as the single point of contact and be solely responsible for directing the team as we work together to deliver this project for the City of Santa Ana. Dual Role t,} r E ~ ui f I All staff are AECOM, except as noted: ~ C =Coast Surveying ~ E =Earth Mechanics J =Jones & Stokes Pat So me rvi lle, P E WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW 0 =Overland Pacific Cutler James Faber, PE* Roadway Bridges Traffic Studies/TMP Tanja Brix, PE Bob Fish, PE Tim Erney, AICP Traffic/Staging Retaining Walls Survey Carmen Gendusa, PE, TE Bob Price, PE Calvin Yoshitake, PLS, RLS (C) Utilities Geotechnical Environmental Albert Pan, PE Lino Cheang, PE, GE (E) Brian Calvert (J) Drainage Aesthetics Right-of-Way James Enriquez, PE J.T. Barr, RLA Ray Armstrong, SR/WA (0) Rail Shoofly Rail Coordination Alan Bosch, PE Dan Davis ' f i :p ~ II ~ I ii ii it ~,:II w,.~ ii ii , , Ir~u, ii ui IIII uu° 111111 IP° VIII IIIIII uuuuu a uuuu... uuuuuuui. uuu uu IIIIII IIIIII IIIIII VIII IIIIII IIIIII ~ VIII IIL IIIIII 111111 IIIIII 111111 111111 The key personnel delivering the PS&E are available to perform the work and are committed for the duration of the contract. identifies their current assignments and average availability through the life of the project. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I l . rr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~II::: u : ~c~ I J L. If.°~II,;; ~~~~9 pII p ~p ~ V~~'~I IM1,:~1 "W.: kMN M„x 16Y IIkaWa ~y ....'4.w RAM ~.A ~ ~I.k "W::~M N.. I A.r I" " R..M N.II Y.F II" C eirrro ,'~V c~'~116~IY~ i , i ~II~~Ir1 II I~ 1~ ~~~:rlr~~~u°~~ V ii ~:~u°71 r °II;°; ~P'i~ G ~ ~ ~'IY'~; I 1`11 II , ~ ~ , , a, II I~ . _I I ~ . . II=~h ID, II~IL, _ ~ _I ~ I I I ''ii W If ~ rn~~ II::.II/Il:lllf::~ '1f'"ir~~ II...rr'ny,Alllf~°~ lf~lr~a~~~i~~'~:~~ ,a ~IIIf~~~ yy r,r ,a I ~ ~i ~ ALU, o~f .~~Ih~~il e ' ~ II Ilr~lrnl , ~ a co ir~in nra it .a ~ ~ , l co In c l,~„au s ii Ire o ~~~Ih~~i1 ii s I~~ ir~~ , ,r I I ,I I , II Il 0 ~ II M „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ ~ ~'M I ' ~ III II I I ~valr~J ~ ~ ~ L ~,i~„lion IL... „ Salle ~ ~ . gym, p i ~ ~ uuumiu~~~~~ ~ i 111111 • AECOM has assigned Mr.James Faber, PE, as Project Auto Center and McKinley Grade Separation Projects Manager and single point of contact for this project. Mr. for the City of Corona; Faber is a registered civil engineer with 25 years experience 3rd Street and Iowa Grade Separation Projects for the in railroad, highway and bridge design, construction City of Riverside management, and project management. Mr. Faber's Glen Helen Parkway Grade Separation Project for San expertise is successfully managing and delivering grade Bernardino County separation projects, having worked on 10 such projects in Rancho Vista Grade Separation Project for the City of the last 14 years, including: Palmdale. Redondo Junction and Pacific Coast Highway Following are cameo resumes for Mr. Faber along with the key Grade Separation Projects for the Alameda Corridor personnel for the project. Provided in the Appendix are the Transportation Authority (ACTA) full resumes for all individuals on the team. Dillon Road Grade Separation for the City of Coachella University Parkway Grade Separation Project for the San Bernardino Association of Governments (SANBAG) IIi~ Irm_ul~or is a i~e~;~i~t~e:~ed ci~~i i enin~~~sr wit e~mtnsii~ e°'~~ei~iience in N ~~~~a~~~~ ~ irii desii in, cons~~truc~~t°~ n~ and pro"c~t~ ~Tl~lis sin iraN ~iroa ~ loin mane em t~, ~ ~ mains einnn~~ Project Manager exleriiince includes orkiiin ii in ,~I~e iroad desk in sectlion of Cau.trains District 12~~, Ili~~~~~°~~t ~~i ii~ III"~° ~ ~ H e its I~ ro~~ icy eint ~ n tl~e mainageme~t of lar scale, m u l~~~i,~~.~~,d iisc ii Ip li ine prop ec~~~s, wind docuir~en . y lairo° Ii true n ~s ..or o . eve io . iraii an e~ s~~, e e BS/1984/Civil Engineering IVii~~~~~ Faber is ~atNOn, INR III.., aind project i ainagemen p in Ncro t software rya ~icii tin M PE/1990/California, No:45668 (ncludliin M~ ~ N iiirosoft II:. ro~ect),~~ Il wm Chris Saed ~ Glen Helen Parkway Grade Separation over UPRR+BNSF, San Bernardino, San Bernardino County California 909.387.7877 ~ Iowa Ave Grade Separation over BNSF, Riverside, California 3rd St. Grade Separation over BNSF, Riverside, California Linda Bazmi ~ McKinley St. Grade Spp?ra:;~n over BNSF, Corona, California City of Corona ~ Auto Center Drive Grade Separation over BNSF, Corona, California 951.739.4960 ~ PM Services for Orange County Grade Crossing Safety, Orange County, CA Dillon Road Grade Separation over UPRR, Coachella, CA Mike Livingston ~ University Parkway/State Street Grade Separation over BNSF, San City of Palmdale Bernardino, California 661.267.5300 ~ Redondo Junction Grade Separation, Los Angeles, California Pacific Coast Highway Grade Separation, Alameda CountyTransportation Authority (ACTA), Los Angeles County, California . ~ ~ ~ r y yr,.r h a zape,~ ~ f .t i, r 4 - 4 I ~ F 1 11 ^ . 'r, ~ + ~ ~ ~ `.r3 P ~Il~, ,p F ~ ~ S' _ ~ r i IC;~ ii ir~ ~ ~ in„~,„ i~~ I~"~ i~~~li~ I ir~~u~ ii n~t~,~ . ~ ,r ~~~~~ii Il~ir~~ ~,kt~ . ~ ~„d ~ i~~,~~ IE;;;;;~~~~ five , ~ ~ i... ii ir~o~t~ Dina . ~~,,,,y ~a,~ii~~,~ ird ~ ~ ~t'ii~~iu~~n I~~r,u II~~~~~~~~~ , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , w'~III'i, ~m~:°~~~~vllll~" Sp~''Ilallll.E"~ In cIIlVllll ~~'~~II~1~"~': ~ II~1 ~'~~ld ma~~~',~"~II~`~~~'~~l't~, wlllth "~cUS mun~ ndof pro rams~~~ % mane ed iciipa transportationa ercaprta iiimprovement He as Project Director the study, preliimiiinary engineering, and final desii n ~~or ~iiie reds separatiions and i p i p p lance 'includes easiiibiiiliity IIIIIIIIIIC~~°~ ~~~~'i'I~uiui, III~~~ "ii ~'ill~~~~~uiu~~ rovi°ded iinde endent reviiiews onfour others~~~ Hiiis e er~~ studiiies, f~ IF, preparatiion of rii ht.~of..way maps, permiiittiin , constructiion sta iin , construction support, and claims analysiis,~ Ilr~, omerviiille began hiis career wiith the PE/1995/California, No: 56141 (Civil) Ciiity of IFullerton iiin 1 6~, Il~iis eleven years of experiience iin the public sector proiiides hiiim wiith a detained understandiiin of overnmental and a ency processes, project fiiinance~, and needs analysiiis, as well as the techniiical and contractual reuiiirements for the desii nand construction of ciiviiil projects, • First Street Bridge widening/Replacement Project, City of Santa Ana, California • Raymond Avenue Grade Separation, Fullerton, California • Nogales Street Grade Separation (Alhambra Subdivision), City of Industry, California • Nogales Street Grade Separation (Los Angeles Subdivision), Los Angeles County, California • Brea Canyon Road Grade Separation, City of Industry, California • Orangethorpe Avenue Grade Separation, Anaheim and Placentia, California III~I~, I~~'! vs ~~~~o~~~essio~~~l c~iviil en ine~~~~~~iiin e.:periiience sns bctN~~~ government end priivate consultant en iiineeriiin Hiiis work experiience iiincludes mane ement and Civil Lead desii n of roadways, hii hways, transiiit faciiliiities, draiinage systems, and water III'~IIIIIII~ Viii III~° 'li ~m~~~ ~~,lii systems, as ell as buiiildin and retaiiining wall structures~~~ Hiiis tasks have iincluded geometric layout productiion; report preparatiiion~ preliiminary and fiiinal desiii n; y g y h t,. o... way BS/1972/Civil Engineering utiliiit coordiination~ draiiina e desiii n~ structural desiii n; serve ii ~i n ,rii PE11991/California, No:46767 coord~inatiiion~ and preparation of plans, speciiifiiicatiiionsy and est~imates,~ Ilr,~ N ys experiience comes from a variiiety of projects, iincludiiin roadway iiimprovements, new freeways, interchan es, free ay ideniiin ,railroad overheads, and briiidge replacements, • Jurupa Rd Railroad Grade Separation over UPRR, Riverside County, California • Magnolia Avenue/BNSF Railroad Grade Separation Project, Riverside, California • McKinley St. Grade Separation over BNSF, Corona, California • Design Services for Heritage Springs Pedestrian Bridge and Roadway Improvements, Santa Fe Springs, California • Compton Creek Railroad Bridge, Los Angeles County, California • Margarita Road Undercrossing,Temecula,California • Turner Avenue Railroad Bridge, Ontario, California • Auto Center Drive Grade Separation over BNSF, Corona, California • City College LRT Station Bicycle/Pedestrian Crossing, Sacramento, California a i , II II ~~r ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ I III II I I I ~vaird ~ ~ ~ L ~,~~~„fin il,,,, „ ir~ ~ II Ii ~ fl ~~~~~~~rc~~~~~~~ ( ii~.~ M i~ ~ a v ~i i ui ~ n y "a i"~ ~ ` ~ ' i di P ~ ~ w~.a i ~I'~~ di i~ ~ I'~ i~~1 ~ ~ ~ iif ~ E. n , to l IIIIIIII agenciiies, and land developers, and evelopiiin oontract documents for briiid e plans, specificatiiions, and construotiiion cost estii jects~~~ He ii Structures Lead 'mates lip I~ pro s specialized iiin seiiismic nonlii hills y liiinear tiiime dependent creep/ rill r IIIIIIIII~' Iii ill III III~~ "ii ill 'iii ill II shriiinka e analyses. He has an iintiiimate kno lei e of the Caltrans procedures for evelo mentof ro ect..speciiifiiics ial roviiisiiions~~~ Heha, lve PhD/1993/Structural Engineering p p J tankard spec p ~ s been iiinvo BE/1986/Civil Engineering iiin several ohallen iin structural projects for interchan es, rake separatiions, ME/1988/Structural Engineering freeway overcrossiiin s and unercrossiiings, railroad overheads and underpasses, PE/1998/California No: 57894 major toll brie es, and briid e wiiieniin s.~ Monte Vista Grade Separation over UPRR, Montclair, California Auto Center Drive Grade Separation over BNSF, Corona, California Dillon Road Grade Separation over UPRR, Coachella, California Ramona Boulevard Grade Separation over UPRR+Metrolink, El Monte, California University Parkway/State Street Grade Separation over BNSF, San Bernardino, California Compton Creek UPRR Railroad Bridge and Utility Bridge, Rancho Dominguez, California M~m~ E~rn~y iiin the t~ _~ns,~o~mt_~tion ~~aniin ~~~riiin d°~pa~~mtm~~ant ~~n ~n > 'r _.nd a s ~nior prof g y ana e ect mane er or t e I~ III Il..mos n e , s success u m , Traffic Stud ies/TM P ~ es o~ iice~~~ Ike ha over ~0 transportatiion planniiin and en ineeriiing projects throe hoot Calrforniia~~~ IIIIIIIIII~ Iii ~ iii a i~~~ III°~ ii, ~ iii Viii III He ills a certified professional planner wiith experiience mane iiing analyses and MS/1997/Transportation Engineering docu entatiiion for environmental reiiiew pro~eotsy aooess and ciiirculatiion studies, sustaiiinable transportatiion practiiioes, .laDll measures, parking evaluations, MCP/1997/City and Regional Planning BS/1995/Mechanical Engineering peestriiian and bicyole reviiiews, and data oollectiiion pro rams. they experience AICP/2000/United States, No: 015998 iiinclues etaile technical analysiiis of local and re Tonal roadway faciliiities~, ncluing traffio foreoas ~ g pliiit analyses, traffiiio diver ~ p tiional Professional Transportation Planner tin , modal s s°ion'' and o era analyses~~~ He has experiience ooordiiinatiin wiiith local and re iiional transportatiion and enviiironmental a encies iiin outhern Californiia~~~ Nogales Street Grade Separation (LA Subdivision), Alameda Corridor East, Los Angeles, California Temple Avenue and Baldwin Park Grade Separations, City of Industry, California Puente Avenue Grade Separation Feasibility Study, City of Industry, California Los Angeles Metro Exposition Line Phase II Technical Studies, Los Angeles County, California Third Street Light Rail Project US 101 Overcrossingfroject Study Report/ Project Report, San Francisco, California Los Angeles Metro Exposition Line Phase II Technical Studies, Los Angeles County, California Anaheim Fixed-Guideway Project, Anaheim, California Port of Hueneme Truck Access Study, Ventura County, California a i , II II ~~r ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ I ' ~ III II I I I ~air~ ~ ~ ~ L ~,~~„fii~ il,,,, „ ir~ ~ ~ . ~ II , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , The AECOM Team brings unparalleled experience in The matrix below (I"" shows recent AECOM projects providing both preliminary and final design services on which are directly relevant examples that our team has grade separation projects. This, coupled with Mr. Faber's completed and which encompass the project elements experience working with municipal agencies and SCRRA, important to the Santa Ana Boulevard grade separation provides the in-depth understanding from the top-down of project. Following this matrix are brief profiles of ten projects the multi-faceted components which make grade separations which include a reference name and telephone contact. We so complex. This knowledge and lessons learned will allow encourage you to contact these references for a full review of the team to understand and address the unique challenges the firm's performance. that this project will encounter. II I If II Ir I~ I~ Irk ~ Irk Ism IC ~ e d~, I oI .I o~E~ ~-~Wan~t I ~ ii ii u~,~~~ i~' a , I' ~ ~o IC'' II"~w u e ~ ~ ~ II ~w u ~I , . ~:C'y x; x; x: a. " ~~i i i II ~o I~°~ _ ~ i I~ ~ 11, Ilo a~ I,~Ie, ~ , , II I, u '~°d~;e °d~;~ Irk ii a I~~,~„ II ii ir, ,~o. ~ _ I d~ ~A&~II ~ II I ; a ~b). I~ ~ u ~°d~~l V ~I I I u' ' ~ II ~ II m p ii t ~ , If,,,,,~ii ~r ~ II i~~ur gir~~:~,d ~,a~ Il~~,~.i~~,~,tii ii~~~ ~~~Ip irfi e ir7~ e ~,~a ,r ,I~ I , II II ~ ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ ~ I ' ~ III II I I ir~ ~ ~ . "~"`t~ , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , El Monte, California Ramona Boulevard is a secondary highway striped for two lanes in each direction, . „gym with an at-grade crossing of Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) and Metro Link tracks ° between Cypress Avenue and Stewart Street. The AECOM project team provided i...~~ ~ the design and engineering services tograde-separate this crossing. °x'20 AECOM was the prime consultant and was responsible for coordinating the - - - design with several involved stakeholders including Caltrans, the City of El Monte, UPRR, Metrolink, ACE, the Gas Company, Sprint, Southern California Edison, the ~ , Los Angeles Cou my Flood Control District, and Pacific Bell. The scope of work included preparation of Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E) for the project. AECOM also provided full construction management services. The construction e o Ii.W„~iii, ~ work consisted of a new railroad bridge to accommodate two tracks for UPRR and Metro Link crossing at Ramona I, ~ lii o ii~~ Boulevard, depressing east-west III~~ ~t ~n. Ramona Boulevard to provide for the .~..q... „ 1°~ grade separation. The project also ~ ' - - .-I mi II' i, S 1l M included design of retaining walls, ~ x y r I new depressed and grade-separated ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ,r~, ~ ~ - r'` .y Sx~ sidewalks, storm drain pump station - kw ~y ~~;~tl f ~ loin m and draina e s stems landsca in ~~~~`~~,,a,_ IIPll~llfi~~ I g y p g~ r } ~ Ill~lli and major utility relocations (such ~a, as a 102-inch RCP, fiber optic lines, ~ ~ , ~ ~~`r ~ - telephone trunk lines, and water and ~ ~1 :~s ~ ~ , ; gas main lines). ~ nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn Anaheim and Placentia, California The Orange County TransportationAothority (OCTA) selected AECOM to provide preliminary and final design services for a new railroad grade separation to o , ~ replace the existing OrangethorpeAvenue/Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) ~ Railroad at-grade crossing. The project calls for the design of an overcrossing of Orangethorpe Avenue with the BNSF tracks, with Orangethorpe Avenue being ~ ~ . widened to a six-lane facility that includes a raised median island, six-foot wide sidewalks, and Class II bike lanes. Since Orangethorpe Avenue crosses the BNSF ° Railroad at an approximate 70-degree angle, AECOM developed an innovative ~ ~ approach using precast girders oriented perpendiculartothe railroad tracks.This m. configuration lowers the roadway profile providing significant cost savings while maximizingthe available right-of-wayfor BNSF. A temporary two-lane detour road is to be constructed, enabling Orangethorpe ~e~ II~ ~ ii~~~ ~mw ~ Ave n u e t o re m a i n o p e n d u r i n g Y .I ' i , ~ construction. Significant ~ ~ coordination efforts are provided ~ ~ due to the numerous utilities to be b relocated, including a 36-inch high ' r } pressure gas line, and overhead y electrical facilities. Structural efforts ~ ° ~w a ~ ~ also include two bridges crossing ~ ~ M i J~ r 'i~, ~ over flood control channels, and ~ ~~r~~- extensive MSE walls for the elevated ~ ~~a~~rr~ ~ ~ roadway. Additionally AECOM is ' ~i . r~~wr' , i~~ a preparing acorridor-wide aesthetics ~ ~ ~ ~°'r ~ ~ ~-s ~~;v=~ guideline for OCTA for use in other , ~ ~ t ~ ~ grade separations. ~ ,f ~ w t $~'u ~ ,,;r, I ~ ~<I ~~~~~ii Il~ir~~ ~,k~~~ . ~ ~„d ~ i~~,~~ IE;;;;;~~~~ five , ~ „ ~ i„ . ii „ . ~ , ~ , i g I~~~ gym, p i ~ 6 City of Industry, California AECOM provided complete PS&E for grade separations along 2 transportation corridors located within the City of Industry. As part of the Alameda Corridor ~e „i ,,,,,M East, AECOM provided PS&E for the Nogales Street Grade Separation. AECOM conducted extensive field reviews including utility identification and verification. Project deliverables included a traffic management plan, structure advance planning study, roadway design, drainage design, staged construction and traffic ~~'~~i i~~ detour planning for the construction of the grade separated underpass. i The project included a railroad bridge, a highway bridge, new roadway improvements along Nogales Street and Valley Boulevard, a loop road to provide anew connection between Nogales Street, special design retaining walls, four lane detour road, traffic signals, landscape, right of way and coordination with the cities of Industry and West Covina and property owners. The key project " issues addressed bythe design ~~~iii~i,iiiiir~ was maintain vehicular through ~ ~ ~ ~ traffic, rail operations and access , ~ III~~ wrc k ~ i ~,~i„ to businesses duringconstruction. 1~ r ~ ~ ~ This ro~ect followed Caltrans Pro~ect p J J ~ - ,`~a ~ ~~~~il.. ii ~ F Develo ment rocedures as well ~ , . ~ , p p , r . r i i~,~ ~Ill~i as the uidelines of Union Pacific ~r~;',~ I~~~ g . Railroad. The project was performed ~ ~ f,~~ ~ ~ - U~ on an accelerated schedule to meet , ~ ~e ~ ~ ~ fundin commitments. The ro~ect ~ V ~ ' ~ value is estimated at $22 million. ~ ~ 4 .~y~ ' ~Y ,;i~~ , " Funding is through local state and ~ ~ ~ ~ h 1 , ~ t 1 federal sources. , A, ~ County of Los Angeles, California AECOM provided complete PS&E for the design of the Nogales Street Grade ~~~~,~m Separation project. The project entailed lowering Nogales Street, asix-lane major arterial highway, below the UPRR tracks.The project funding was through state, S°~,,,,,~ °~1~ federal, and local redevelopment monies. The project included athree-track rail bridge, a vehicular bridge for the extension of Railroad Street which is immediately adjacent to the UPRR R/W, concrete pavement for the entire length of the project, retaining walls, special design walls ~ ~ ~ due to close proximity of structures, the relocation of a double 10'x11' box culvert, w relocation of a 54"Sanitation District trunk sewer, widening of the Nogales/Gale intersection to provide dual left turn lanes, and modifications ofthe SR-60 on and off ramps to provide the additional roadway width for the widening. Several ~i~~~~~ ~ ~I~~~~~ alternatives were evaluated in the preparation of the hydrology report in an effort ' to reduce the flows tributary to the pump station. In the existing condition,120cfs III~~ `~r~ ~~r°~~t would be tributary to the proposed pump station, however, with the inclusion of i ~~liil~iii ; gravity storm drain systems outside of the ro osed lowered roadwa ° this volume was reduced to 20 cfs q,. ~ ~ ~ r ~ VIII ~I~~ ~ ' ~ providing a significant savings in pump " ~~2~~ r~' ~~ti~, station costs. Additional deliverables .~w~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~a k . ~ "III ~ _ ~ ~r. ~ ~ included atraffic managementplan, ~ ~ 1 I , ,,r, ' structure type selection report, and ~ photosimulations. AECOM provided all coordination with Caltrans in acquiring permits to modify facilities within their ii ~m* " " I R/W, the utility companies, and the UPRR. a . ~~~~~ii Il~ir~~ e~,k~~~ . ~ ~„d ~ i~~,~~ IE;;;;;~~~~ five , ~ „ ~ i„ . ii ir~ot,~ ~ir~a . ~~,,,,y ~a,~ii~~,~ it ~ ~ ~t'ii~~iu~~n IPr,u "~"`t~ , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , City of Industry, California AECOM provided complete plans, specifications, and estimate (PS&E) for grade separations along two transportation corridors located in the City of Industry. As part ~e „I ~ ,,,,,M„ of its work on the Alameda Corridor East, AECOM provided complete design services for the Brea Canyon Road Grade Separation. AECOM conducted an extensive field review, including utility identification and verification. Project deliverables included a traffic management plan, structure advance planning study, roadway design, drainage design, staged construction and traffic detour planning for the construction of the '~~~~~E~°~' grade separated underpass. The AECOM team also prepared visual aids for the client's ~ ~ ~ ~ use in informing the public of the project. The project included a railroad bridge, reconstruction of Brea Canyon Road, a ~.~A railroad shoofly, temporary modifications to the Brea Canyon Road Metrolink Station, permanent modifications to the station's parking lot and access, specially designed w, ~!;w retaining walls, afour-lane detour road, ~ traffic signals, landscape design, right- III~~°~~~ of-way engineering, and coordination with the Cities of Industry and West Covina and " ~ ~ property owners. Key issues addressed _ ~ . ~ ~ in the design included maintenance of ~ ~ . ^ ~ ~ ~ . vehicular throu h traffic rail o erations g ~ p A III~IIIII~;, ~"III~II~ and access to businesses during construction. The project was performed ~ . ' ~ ~ on an accelerated to schedule to meet ~ funding commitments. Funding for the $40 million project was acquired through local, ;~~b state, and federal sources. Riverside, Californ is AECOM designed a new railroad grade separation to replace the Jurupa Avenue/ Union Pacific Railroad at-grade crossing.The City received approximately $6 million in ~e am Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funds for the project. The project called for the design of an underpass of Jurupa Avenue with the Union Pacific Railroad tracks to create afour-lane road that included a median island and provided on-street parking and six-foot-wide sidewalks. The new bridge now accommodates the three tracks previously located within the railroad right-of-way atthe at-grade crossing. The project also included a shoofly track to detour train traffic while the railroad bridge was under construction, and a minimum of one lane in each direction on Jurupa m~~~ ~ Avenue remained open during construction. ~ A number of parcels within the project limits were acquired in order to construct the improvements. Other impacts included relocation and undergrounding of electrical ~°~~°~i~, p w„~ii~~, ~ ~~~M~ facilities, relocation of sewer and water facilities, and construction of a new storm ~~iii~,~ni drain system to handle the flows tributary to the new sump created by the underpass. III~~~ ~n Services included type selection and ~ design of railroad bridge atJurupa Avenue, ii~~ type selection and design for a pedestrian tunnel or bridge at Mountain View Avenue, - _ =1_____~ n bllll~; landscape and irrigation design, roadway - geometrics, hydrology and hydraulics, traffic detours and shoofly, drainage, utility Y" = ~ j~° relocations and coordination railroad ~ `K~~~~°~ ~ ' ~~~~a,~,~~ coordination, geotechnical services, right- ~ ~ " ~ of-way engineering supporting acquisition, n, r aesthetic considerations, environmental v~. , , approvals, and public outreach. a . ~~~~~ii Il~ir~~ ~,k~~~ . ~ ~„d ~ i~~,~~ IE;;;;;~~q five , ~ „ ~ , i„ . ii ir~o~~,~ ~ir~a . ~~,,,,y ~a,~ii~~,~ ire ~ ~ ~t'ii~~iu~~n I~~r,u ...e ~ `iii A a , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Corona, California The City of Corona awarded AECOM the Auto Center grade separation project over the BNSF railway line in Corona. The City of Corona is the lead agency. Auto ~e Center Drive runs north/south. Immediately north of the railroad, Auto Center h p ~ is intersected by Railroad Street, which runs east/west, parallel to the railroad. The West Corona Metrolink Station is located on the southeast quadrant of the railroad crossing. ~ ° ,I' AECOM is responsible for all aspects of the project, from start to bid, including obtaining a PUC order to construct; developing and participating in the negotiations with BNSF for the `I"""' construction and maintenance agreement; environmental clearance; right-of-way; surveying; . ~ utl it coor Inatlon; roa wa ; ~ ~ ~ ~R; y y r ` r 4 ~ ~ v brill e' traffic' and eotechnical. ~ ~y, ~ g , g iii The selected alternative consists ~ ~ ~~~III of s annin the roadwa over the ~ p Y g 11 II~~ ~~F~~F railroad and then connecting to Sa ~ Railroad Street northerly of the ~ ~ ~ ~~jf.'' r ~ 4 ? 1 r ~ ' ~ railroad crossing.This alternative ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ was selected because it minimizes ~p,`~~y~~~h. , ~n~°}~ y~x z` `w ti . ~ right of way and environmental ~ , '''by;:~-~ ; i t,~,r ~.Y' Lam. "r ;i~~M w 1 rt u< .\.~i,' impacts. Montclair, California AECOM provided preliminary and final engineering design and construction II ~ management for the Monte Vista grade separation. AECOM was responsible for all aspects of the project, from start to constructioncompletion.Theproject included an investigation of the most cost-effective alternative for separating _ the grades, as well as environmental studies and clearance; right-of-way ~ appraisals and acquisition; final design; plans, specifications, and cost estimates s` for the construction of bridge, roadway, drainage, and grade separation related improvements; relocation of utilities and coordination; surveying; obtaining a PUC order to construct, develop, and participate in negotiations with various agencies; landscaping; traffic; geotechnical; construction engineering; and construction „„,,,,g management services. ~ ~III'~~~~~III~W~w°°~~~ ~~m~~~~~ The selected alternative spanned the roadway over the railroad and the existing ~ ~~fiil,w~'~ State Street Channel, over State Street itself, and provided a connector back to ~ State Street to replace the existing Monte Vista/State Street intersection. This III alternative was selected over an . ~ ~ iii ui ui ui ~~~,ui III"'~ ° undercrossing because of a variety ~~~~~L i of factors, including high cost I', due to the necessity of providing ~ 'I ..I ~ I ~~~~r~~~~~~~' a flume bridge and afour-track r railroad bridge over a depressed JI y g roadwa .The ali nment is offset ~ ~ 10 feet to the east of the existing ~ ' ~ '114 K~ rrw~ .:'~[IRi~INlrt¦rl¦NM ~ 1 ~ J alignment, due to the existing ~ ~ utilities and the need to maintain ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~a rivate railroad crossin under the J p g bridge for the UPRR to access its ` right-of-way. a . ~~~~~ii Il~ir~~ ~,k~~~ . ~ ::d ~ i~~:~~ IE;;;;;~~q five : ~ ~ i... ii gym, ~ o i ~ ~ San Bernardino, California AECOM provided preliminary engineering for a project Report (PR) and Environmental Document (ED) for the Glen Helen Parkway grade separation ~e over both Union Pacific (UP) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad I,,,,,,,,,W„~M „I„I„~~ tracks. Glen Helen parkway will be realigned and widened to four lanes to improve regional traffic circulation, improve access to the Hyundai Pavillion at Glen Helen, improve fire and emergency service response time, and provide anall-weather i i i io io ~i m i ii i io ~~~m crossing over the Cajon Wash. To support the regional park, the concert venue, and the recreational potential of the area, the project includes an equestrian trail undercrossing and the pedestrian facilities will be ADA compliant.This project is strongly supported by the County Board of Supervisors. The project tasks include development of realignment alternatives, bridge alternatives, evaluation of impacts to utilities and adjacent properties, developing u engineering cost estimates, and assessing right-of-way impacts. Several major ,~iii~ii~~iii~iir~ utility lines cross Glen Helen Parkway and accommodations or relocations of utilities need to be made to construct the proposed improvements. The Cajon III~~ ~ ~ ~ Wash experiences severe flows i , f,.. from the Cajon Pass.The bridge - ~ ~ ,~~s~~~ ~,~,,w~ ~~~~il.. ° must accommodate the flows and ~ . . channel hydraulics will be studied ~ to determi ne the appropriate level x ~ti ~ , , , ~ ~ , ,~q ii r~~y „ a ~ yv ~ of scourprotection and bridge 7~.~ - ~ foundations. Major bridge structures " ~ and retaining walls will be used ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ to span the creek and railroads. ~ It is anticipated that substantial - ~ protection from flood damage will be require construction of dikes and hard surfacing of embankments. ~ ~ Coachella, California AECOM provided preliminary and final engineering design for the Dillon Road .w,,~. grade separation project. AECOM was responsible for all aspects of the project, ~ from start to bid, including obtaining a PUC order to construct; developing and participating in the negotiations with UPRR for the construction and maintenance ~ agreement; environmental clearance; right-of-way; surveying; utility coordination; roadway; bridge; landscape; traffic; and geotechnical. s a,~w The selected alternative consists of spanning the roadway over the railroad and Grapefruit Blvd./Indio Blvd., and then connecting to Avenue 48 westerly of the intersection with Grapefruit Blvd./Indio Blvd. The alignment was offset from the existing alignment to avoid impacting the traffic along Dillon Road/Avenue °~~w 48, but mainly to avoid business ~e ~,,,,,,,,,i„~~~i,;„r,,, loss due to modifying the frontage of Dillon Road, west of Grapefruit Blvd./Indio Blvd.The alternative ~ was selected over an undercrossin IIII due to a variety of factors, including z 1 ,.t, iyY,..- cost, and because of the necessity ~ to connect the tracks to two existing siding tracks, each located less than II'llflllll~ 1000 feet from the current at-grade crossing with Dillon Road. a . ~~~~~ii Il~ir~~ ~,k~~~ . ~ ~„d ~ i~~,~~ IE;;;;;~~~~ five , ~ „ ~ i„ . ii ir~o~~,~ ~ir~a . ~~,,,,y ~a,~ii~~,~ it ~ ~ ~t'ii~~iu~~n I~~r,u ~~II~~'~'~'~'~'~~~~° II Mr. Faber is a registered civil engineer with extensive experience in highway, bridge, Project Manager and railroad design, construction management, and project management. This ex- perienceincludes working in the road design section of Caltrans District 12. He is IIIIIIIIIII; : II II Iii ~ ii~ III~~~. ~°1~'°~° proficient in the management of large scale, multi-discipline projects, and the de- BS/1984/Civil Engineering velopment of construction documents for both rail and highway projects. Mr. Faber PE/1990/California, No:45668 is proficient in MicroStation, INRAIL, and project management software (including Microsoft Project). III' ~ ~ II ~ m m _ ~ II Chris Saed ~ Project manager. Responsible for managing the preliminary I San Bernardino County engineering for the project report (PR) and environmental document (ED) for the 909.387.7877 Glen Helen Parkway grade separation over both Union Pacific (UP) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad tracks. Project tasks include development Linda Bazmi of realignment alternatives, bridge alternatives, evaluation of impacts to City of Corona utilities and adjacent properties, developing engineering cost estimates, and 951.739.4960 assessing right-of-way impacts. The project tasks include development of realignment alternatives, bridge alternatives, evaluation of impacts to utilities Mike Livingston and adjacent properties, developing engineering cost estimates, and assessing City of Palmdale right-of-way impacts. Several major utility lines cross Glen Helen Parkway and 661.267.5300 accommodations or relocations of utilities need to be made to construct the proposed improvements. II' I I "~°~ii~r~~~' Project director. Responsible for construction of the grade separation bridge structure for Iowa Avenue over the BNSF triple tracks. The project will entail the project approval, the environmental document, for both NEPA and CEQA clearance, and the production of the ultimate PS&E construction documents. The structure is a 3-span, 454-ft long,102-ft wide CIP/PS box girder bridge supported on high cantilever seat type abutments and 6-column bents. Both abutments and bents are supported on driven steel piles. w I I ~ ~ , lu~~~~~~: Project manager responsible for the organization of the preliminary engineering on the project report and the environmental document for the grade separation of BNSF's main line tracks at 3rd Street. The grade separation involves three BNSF tracks, a potential future Metrolink track, and a nearby set of UPRR tracks. The City of Riverside contracted AECOM as prime consultant to provide preliminary engineering for a project report and environmental document for the great separation of BNSF's main line tracks at 3rd Street. The grade separation involves three BNSF tracks, a potential future Metrolink track, and a nearby set of UPRR tracks. II II II iI .a~~~ Project manager. Responsible for the production of a project study report and a preliminary environmental analysis report. AECOM is responsible for the production of a project study report (PSR) and a preliminary environmental analysis report (PEAR) for the McKinley Street grade separation over the BNSF railroad. III"'Nn _ n'.. I ~ I _ ~ I Project manager. Responsible for administering all aspects of the project, including obtaining a PUC order to construct; developing and participating in negotiations with BNSF for construction and maintenance agreements; environmental clearance; right-of-way; surveying; utility coordination; roadway; bridge; traffic; and geotechnical reports. The Auto Center Drive overhead is a three-span cast- in-place concrete box superstructure that carries four vehicular traffic lanes and a median over the BNSF ROW. The bridge has a high skew and design features have adapted to the many utility lines present in the area. The structure is a 353-ft long, 76-ft wide CIP/PS box girder bridge supported on high cantilever seat type abutments and drilled shaft bents. a i , II ~~r ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ ~ I ' ~ III II I I gird ~ ~ ~ L ~,~~„fii~ il,,,, „ ir~ ~ ~ . ~`~II °.II fl rc Mr. Somerville specializes in civil engineering and management, with a focus on municipal transportation and other capital improvement programs. He has man- ProjectDirector aged the study, preliminary engineering, and final design for five grade separations IIIIIIIIIIC~u~~~~,°~lii~iilll~ , II' "ii ~~~II ~'iii~~~~ii and provided independent reviews on four others. His experience includes feasibil- itystudies, PS&E, preparation of right-of-way maps, permitting, construction stag- BS/1993/Civil engineering ing, construction support, and claims analysis. Mr. Somerville began his career with PE/1995/California, No: 56141 (Civil) the City of Fullerton in 1986. His eleven years of experience in the public sector provides him with a detailed understanding of governmental and agency process- es, project finance, and needs analysis, as well as the technical and contractual requirements for the design and construction of civil projects. i I ~ ~ ~ II ~ I II II Project director for this bridge replacement and widening of the First Street crossing over the Santa Ana River. The bridge will be widened from four lanes to six lanes of traffic and provide 8-foot sidewalks on either side for pedestrians. I ~ ~ _ „ , ~ i ~ ~ ~ ° Project manager working as an extension of city staff to provide engineering services in support of the city's capital improvement program. Projects have an estimated construction value of $2 million and have included First Street rehabilitation; traffic controls plans for Bristol and McFadden; New Horizons Neighborhood rehabilitation; studies, evaluations, and reports for several projects throughout the city; and building improvements at Thornton Park. The project value was $7 million. I I I r Project Manager for the preliminary engineering and final design for the grade separation of Orangethorpe and the BNSF tracks. This $60 million project will raise Orangethorpe over the tracks. AECOM developed a cost effective approach to the bridge addressing the 70-degree skew to provide BNSF will better use of their R/W while minimizing impacts to surrounding properties by minimizing the increase in the roadway profile. Provided coordination for significant utility relocation as well as impacts to three OCFCD drainage channels. ATMP was developed and the design of a temporary bypass road was included for maintenance of traffic. i ~ ~ I ~ ~ Project manager involved in PS&E preparation for the $30 million Nogales Street Grade Separation Project; responsible for the civil design elements, including roadway, drainage, sewer, and utility relocations. Also responsible for the overall coordination efforts with all structural components, elements of the project designed by the subconsultant, and agency interaction. Additionally, coordinated with the 12 utility companies affected by the civil improvements. ~~i~~~: Pro~ect mana erforthe preparation of a Project Report and Environmental Document for the construction of a grade separation at the BNSF railroad tracks. I i II III~~. .Project manager involved in PS&E preparation for the $35 million Brea Canyon Road Grade Separation Project, taking the lead in the civil design elements, including roadway, drainage, sewer, and utility relocations. Also responsible for the overall coordination efforts with Union Pacific, SCRRA, as well as local utilities and agencies. Additionally Mr. Somerville was responsible for extensive coordination with numerous utilities, including MWD, whose main feeder line required relocation. a . i , II II ~~r ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ I ' ~ III II I I I ir~ ~ ~ . ~~II~~'~'~'~'~~~~~° II , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Mr. Ng's professional civil engineering experience spans both government and pri- CivilLead vate consultant engineering. His work experience includes management and de- IIIIIIIII~' II II III~~ "ii 'iii ii~„ sign of roadways,highways,transitfacilities, drainage systems, and water systems, °1 ° as well as building and retaining wall structures. His tasks have included geometric BS/1972/Civil Engineering layout production; report preparation; preliminary and final design; utility coordi- PE/1991/California, No:46767 nation; drainage design; structural design; surveying; right-of-way coordination; and preparation of plans, specifications, and estimates. Mr. Ng's experience comes from a variety of projects, including roadway improvements, new freeways, inter- changes,freeway widening, railroad overheads, and bridge replacements. II ,I I ~ I ~ I I Project manager. Responsible for preliminary engineering development of alternatives, assessment of impacts, and preparation of funding applications for the Jurupa Road/UPRR railroad crossing in the Pedley area of Riverside County. This crossing is considered one of the most hazardous railroad crossings in the entire county. The crossing is located in close proximity to Van Buren Boulevard, designated to be a six lane expressway, which parallels and abuts the railroad right-of-way. The alternative is included combinations of OH over both the railroad and Van Buren Boulevard, and elevating both Van Buren Boulevard and Jurupa Road. Connections between Van Buren Boulevard and Jurupa Road include interchange ramps and loop connector roads. Critical issues included impacts to local businesses, retail malls, and residential properties; drainage, closure and realignment of local streets, and right-of-way impacts. Two spur track connections are proposed to be realigned to shorten the OH structure and vertical profile. Planning and layout of the proposed improvements spanning Van Buren Boulevard had to take into consideration the existing road alignment as well as the future expansion of the roadway and heard the County's general plan. ~ I ~ . I I . II II Project manager. Responsible for preliminary engineering development of alternatives, assessment of impacts, and preparation of funding applications for the Magnolia Avenue/BNSF railroad crossing in the Home Gardens area of Riverside County. This crossing is considered one of the most hazardous railroad crossings in the entire county. The crossing is located in close proximity to the Buchanan Avenue/BNSF crossing. During very heavy traffic conditions, congestion at each of the crossings interact with each other to further exacerbate the congestion and hazards of the crossing. The alternatives developed and evaluated include three overhead alternatives and one underpass alternative involving elevated railroad tracks. The alternatives ranged from a standalone grade separation Project to one that is coordinated in conjunction with the Buchanan Avenue/BNSF crossing in the city of Riverside and the McKinley Street/ BNSF crossing in the city of Corona. Critical project issues included access to adjacent businesses, work adjacent to two flood control channels, extreme skew angle of crossing, potential phasing of improvements, construction staging alternatives facilitating traffic movement, complex bridge column and foundation configurations, and coordination with the railroad and multiple jurisdictions. ,I ~ ~ i~ Pro~ectengineer. Responsible for development of alternatives during planning phase of project. McKinley Street from the SR-91 freeway to Magnolia Avenue is a major arterial lined with retail malls and businesses. Because of the lack of crossings across the Arlington flood control channel and railroad tracks, McKinley Street is a heavily traveled route for access tothe SR-91 freeway by the local community and businesses. Alternatives included a typical OH alternative as well as a UP alternative involving elevating over a mile of railroad track. AECOM was responsible for the production of a project study report (PSR) and a preliminary environmental analysis report (PEAR) for the McKinley Street grade separation over the BNSF railroad. a i , II II ~~r ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ I III II I I I ir~ ~ ~ . II ° . II ~v Ms. Brix has considerable experience as a consultant for both large and small firms Roadwa with clients that include both public and private agencies. In the public transpor- t' tation field, her experience includes the design of roadways, rail, utility systems, IIIIIIIII~' °~'il iil III III~~ "ii ~~ill 'iii iil II i parking facilities, grading, and site engineering for building projects. Her land de- velopment experience includes grading, drainage, water, sewer, street, and storm BS/1997/Civil Engineering drain design for entitlement and final design. As a project manager, her responsi- 2001/Civil Engineer/California #61498 bilities have included oversight and input into the design, coordination and work load scheduling of the design team, and budget management. II I I 'i I I ~ ~ ~ .'i I ~ ~ Deputy project manager for the preparation of a Project Report and Environmental Document for the construction of a grade separation at the BNSF rai lroad tracks. I I I II III IIW6' II ~ I ~ ~ ~ Ww I I ~ i I ~ i i I ~ Project engineer responsible for developing preliminary alignments. i ~ IIP~~~~~ ' III II ~~~911~~~~ I II I I II I, d ~w, Design engineer on this $75 million project responsible for design and grading of the marina parking lot using MicroStation SE and InRoads SelectCAD. Cii~~~ ~ P'"""'i I ~ I ~ ~ ~ ° Lead engineer for multiple task orders. Projects included the preparation of PS&E for the First Street rehabilitation project, providing rehabilitation strategies, cost analysis, and final design services; the parking lot reconstructions at Fire Stations #4 and #8 included site assessments and final design services; and Thornton Park, providing grading, drainage, and utility design for this castle-themed administration building. ~~~~~~u II iir I IIL..... ~ ~ III oii~l,~~~ Design engineer responsible for as-built plans using MicroStation for this major rail access project. The project consisted of geometric cross-sections, and horizontal and vertical track alignments for this 2-mile railroad project creating a direct connection from Thenard Junction to the Badger Avenue Bridge for the BNSF, the UPRR, and the SPRR. ""III""III°~oii~in°~~~~~~~ I ~ ' ~ ~ ' iui'ma~~~~ Design engineer responsible for field assessment and site grading. Designed drainage facilities, sewer line, and water line for a recreation facility; and prepared quantities and cost estimates. II II~. ~I Design engineer for parking lot rehabilitation, including field assessments and A.D.A. improvements. Analyzed options for rehabilitation and provided cost estimates for each option. Revised the site grading to improve drainage. III"Olli II II III _III ~ I i ~ Deputy project manager for I I I development of the plans, specifications, and estimates for a new $250 million, 7-mile parkway ranging from four to eight lanes in width. The project will provide a vital east-west link through Bakersfield and will tie into the SR-99 freeway. Responsible for providing design services from the geometric approval drawings through final PS&E, which is divided into three segments to correlate with funding cycles. Improvements included as part of this project were three full interchanges at major arterial street crossings, one bridge widening, four overcrossing structures (including two over the Friant-Kern canal), drainage systems (including pump stations), retaining walls, sound walls, and canal relocations. Extensive coordination is being provided with the utility and water agencies, identifying and addressing the relocation of their facilities. Environmental assistance is being provided with the preparation of a kit fox study to assess the impacts of the parkway on their habitat, and to develop measures to minimize these impacts, including kit fox crossing structures. a i , II ~ ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ ~ I ' ~ III II I I ~ir~ ~ ~ . II ° . II ~m~ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIWIIIIIIIIIIIII ~...,IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~.~.~~ ~...,IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ~ ~ . ~ wm.~wm.~ Mr. Gendusa's extensive experience in civil design and construction projects in- Traffic/Staging dudes port intermodal and rail facilities, highways, land development, survey- ing, grading plans, sanitary sewer, traffic signals, street lighting, signing/striping, IIIIIIIII~' II II Iii ~ III~~~ "ii iii and detour design. He is experienced in traffic engineering design, operations, BS/1995/Civil Engineering and maintenance. He has conducted feasibility, environmental impact, parking, PE/1999/California, No: 2017 (Traffic} and design studies; solicited project funding; as well as prepared budgets, project PE/1996/California, No: C 54957 (Civil) designs, and construction plans for both highway construction and traffic related projects. I i I I iii I II This is a current project for the Metrolink service extension from riverside tothe I-215 in the City of Perris, CA. Project Engineer and Traffic Engineer for the design of 20 at-grade crossings, including traffic engineering consulting on 5 commuter rail stations, including coordination with the City/County of Riverside and the City of Perris. ~ ~ ~o ~o ~mm u u i ~ ~ i ~ II' I i I I i Project Engineer for the grade crossing safety enhancements along Metrolink right of way between City of Los Angeles and Simi Valley for a total of 63 at-grade crossings, one of which is currently under construction in the City of Glendale. This safety enhancement project also included development of new SCRRA standards and procedures. ~ i I II ~I ~I II II I I .I ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ Traff i s engineer responsible for design of modified grade crossings, including signing and striping. Also advisor on street and intersection design. i . i ~ ~ i . ~ Tra is engineer responsible for staged construction and final design for traffic signal modification and signing and striping. Also advisor on property access and intersection design. Responsible for quality control of signing and striping. w I ~ . II'I i I ~ i "i I II . Traffic engineer for this $4.5 million widening of a 4,000-foot segment of Gale Avenue within the City of Industry and County of Los Angeles. Conceptual and final design services were provided for two lanes in each direction with a continuous two-way left turn lane. The design included the evaluation of geometric alternatives, coordination with utility companies, materials testing, traffic signals, construction staging, traffic signing and striping, storm drain modifications, and private property restoration. „ I L. II I I i . I I „ L..... I Traffic engineer for the widening and improvement of 5 miles of major arterial roadway. Also signing and striping advisor responsible for quality control of signing and striping. III e~ I __.m_ nm VIII I. I II~~'& ~ ~ II i,L,.I„ _,L.w.„i,L, ~~Trafficengineer for this $75 million, 3-mile freeway widening project through downtown San Bernardino. The project included the construction of a braid ramp/split diamond system with an at-grade ramp connection at Third Street. This alternative was selected by the team members after a comprehensive value engineering process. The geometric approval drawings (GAD) was prepared in close coordination with Caltrans, who prepared the GAD for segments 2 and 3. Also included was the reconstruction of interchanges at 2nd and 5th Streets; eight new bridges, and two bridge widenings. The 5th Street overcrossing required coordination with BI~SF due to its span over existing rail facilities. a . i , ' k II II II ~ ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ ~ ~ ~ I ' ~ III II I I ir~ ~ ~ . II~~'~'~'~'~'~~~ ° ~ II , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , IIIIIIIII Albert has more than five years of roadway design experience and three years of Utilities claims and scheduling experience in California. He has qualified experience in the IIIIIIIII~' °~'il iil III III~~ "ii ~~ill 'iii iil II local agency and Caltrans project delivery process, and has extensive knowledge of ~ the Primavera (P3) scheduling system. BS/1998/Civil Engineering MS/2002/Construction Management ~ ~ II U II PE/2009/California, No: 74856 Project engineer responsible for horizontal and vertical geometric I design on the proposed alignment, proposed grading, right of way engineering, temporary traffic controls during construction, coordination between our sub consultants, the County, and utility companies, and project plan delivery. I ~ I , I I'~ Project engineer responsible for horizontal and vertical geometric design on the proposed alignment, proposed grading, right of way engineering, value engineering, retaining wall design, temporary traffic controls during construction, coordination between our sub consultants, the City, and utility companies, and project plan delivery. I .I I II -Asa Scheduler, Albert was responsible for review of monthly schedule updates and time impact analysis in direct response to claims by the contractor and for future claims.Grade separation of the UPRR Alhambra Branch crossing at Nogales Street. The major components of work consist of a UPRR grade separation bridge, an overcrossing at Valley Boulevard, retaining walls, depressing Nogales Street, a loop connector road, utility relocations, a pump station, detour roads, landscaping and irrigation, drainage & sewer, and signalization & lighting and other miscellaneous items of work. Avenue S Grade Separation and Avenue Corridor Improvements, Palmdale, CA: Senior scheduler responsible for review of monthly schedule updates and time impact analysis. In addition, Albert reviewed the baseline for approval and acceptance by the resident engineer. AECOM provided full construction management, engineering and inspection services for the City of Palmdale's Avenue S grade separation and Avenue S corridor improvement projects. These projects included the widening of Avenue S, construction of a bikeway, bridge replacement, and traffic signal installations & upgrades. II I . II ~ . I I I I II . As a Scheduler, Albert was responsible for review of monthly schedule updates and time impact analysis in direct response to claims bythe contractor and for future claims. Grade separation at the UPRR and Metrolink crossings of Ramona Boulevard. Ramona Boulevard was lowered to cross under the two existing tracks, as well as to accommodate the construction of a future third track. The project consists of the construction of two railroad bridge structures and a substructure for a future bridge to the north. Also, a temporary shoofly track for both Metrolink and UPRR, a pump station and various retaining walls, a water line and several storm drain lines. I I I ~ II II 'I ~ Project engineer responsible for construction support, final right of way engineering and preparing as-built plans. The structure is atwo-span, 296 foot long, 62 foot wide cast- in-place/prestressed box girder bridge supported on high cantilver seat type abutments and athree-column bent. „ i I :Project engineer responsible for horizontal and vertical geometric design, cost estimates, value engineering between alternatives, and coordination between sub consultants, the City, and utility companies. a i , II II ~ ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ ~ I ' ~ III II I I ir~ II ° . II , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Mr. Enriquez has considerable civil engineering experience with public works proj- Drainage ects. His background has concentrated on hydraulics, drainage design, and under- IIIIIIIIIIC~~~~~°~liioiilll~ , III" 'lii ~~~II ~liii~~~~ii~ ground construction, including trenchless construction methods. He has served as project engineer on over $70 million of storm drain, channel, and sewer construc- BS/1993/Civil Engineering tion projects. He has also supervised the design of over $120 million of storm drain PE/1996/California, No: 55520 (Civil) and sewer projects, including $5 million of sewer rehabilitation work. Mr. Enriquez is also very familiar with public works design standards for storm drains and sew- ers, and experienced in the use of standard specifications for public works con- struction. v IuIII~I ~ ~I I ~ I~~ ~~~iia~~~ Lead drainage engineer responsible for the onsite and offsite hydrology and drainage design as part of the overcrossing structure at the Columbia Avenue/BI~SF grade crossing in the City of Riverside. The project includes relocation of a 66-inch regional storm drain under the jurisdiction of the Riverside County Flood Control District. I ~~~~2 ~ Lea rai Wage engineer for this project to prepare the drainage and structural BMP plans and the hydrology and hydraulic calculations/report. The project included drainage for the proposed roadways and conveyance systems for off-site cross drainage. it i i o Iii ~ I V III I I III :::..I_ As project engineer for this $27 million project, prepared the final PS&E for the construction of over 15,000 linear feet of 24-inch to 108-inch diameter reinforced concrete pipe. I I I II I . uuww III I ' I , I I As project engineer, prepared the final PS&E for the construction of over 30,000 linear feet of numerous types and diameters of pipelines. This $12 million project was to construct the underground infrastructure for an automated well re-development system, including 30 existing single, double, and triple casing water injection wells stretched over a 5-mile alignment. The project alignment traversed various types of transportation facilities, including rail roads and sea port container terminals. These facilities were heavily congested with traffic and subsurface utilities, and required special construction methods to minimize construction impacts, including pipe jacking and microtunneling for steel casings up to 54 inches diameter at numerous locations. High groundwater and unfavorable soil conditions also required microtunneling and dewatering. The pipelines included electrical and telecommunication conduits, compressed air lines, and pressurized water and chlorine lines. Gravity disposal lines and were installed in open trenches and through the 54-inch casings. Provided construction support and coordinated the design with engineering consultants for the microtunneled portions of the project and for the integration of the entire automated system. I u I I I I i~lll Project design manager for the design of pump stations to divert low flow urban runoff to sanitary sewers. Coordinated the civil, traffic control, mechanical, and electrical designs, and prepared the final PS&E for six projects. Several projects were located within Pacific Coast Highway and required trenchless methods to minimize traffic impacts. Coordinated utility relocations and provided construction support. Combined project value was $3 million and included six projects. a I. I , II .I II ~ ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ ~ I ' ~ III II I I gird ~ I ~ L ~,~~„fii~ il,,,, ,I irl I ~ . , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Mr. Bosch has demonstrated experience in computer aided design and planning of Rail Shoofly railroad track and terminals, and general civil engineering projects. He has been IIIIIIIII~' II II III~~ "il 'iii ii~„ involved in both the conceptual and final design of rail projects usingAutoCAD, Mi- °1 ° croStation, and InRoads design software for the Port of Long Beach, the Port of Los BS/1995/Civil Engineering Angeles, BNSF Railway, Union Pacific Railroad, Amtrak, Metrolink, California High Studies in Railroad Tracks (Design, Speed Rail Authority, and Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority. In addition, Analysis, and Maintenance), Institute for he is knowledgeable about highway and freeway design, particularly Caltrans and Railroad Engineering at Wilmington, DE AASHTO standards. (1997) PE/2000/California, No: 60849 (Civil) II ~ ~ ~ ' , , I II I I s' ' I I I Civil engineer on a 5,500-foot-long multi segment railroad/highway grade separation structure. Duringthe conceptual stage, designed horizontal and vertical alignment alternatives, including the feasibility of grade separatingthe West Basin lead track over Henry Ford Avenue. Designed detour roads and shoofly tracks, including horizontal alignment, vertical alignments, and typical sections. f. I I I ~ I II I I i C i v i l engineer for an $8.6 million railroad/road grade separation project. Designed shoofly horizontal and vertical alignments. Developed cross-sections and rail details for shoofly tracks; assisted in the design and layout of turnouts, mainline tracks, industry tracks, and various water, storm drain, and utility plans, and in the grading and drainage design. ~I I ~ I Lead track designer/planner to study the feasibility of constructing two rail to rail grade separations for the BNSF and Union Pacific railroads in the city of Colton. II II III II i w I pPnnn m pPnnn~ Ilf °°I~ III ~ ~ ~ ~ Project engineer responsible for the design of arailroad/highway grade separation structure as part of the ACE corridor. Work consisted of designing roadway horizontal and vertical alignments, utility coordination, storm drain and sewer design. In addition, assisted in the preparation of hydrology and hydraulic reports per Los Angeles County Department of Public Works standards. „.m, ,m, ~ I ~ ~ I . w _ ~ ~ Civil engineer for this major grade separation project for the Alameda Corridor. Determined and prepared plans showing construction details for the removal and replacement of various structures around bridge bents and abutments, and assisted in the design of stage construction and utility plans. W 4 IIMP II'.. II. III ~ i III i.... 110 ~ I ny III III ~II~ I ~ W Il~b Ifl ~ AM iWp u1MY I I ~ Civil en ineer for this major rade separation project. Compiled the g g utility file from existing utility as-built plans; identified conflicting utilities and designed relocation plans for conflicting utilities; assisted in coordinating with utility companies; and created pot-hole plans. During the preliminary phase of design,designed stage construction plans and identified needed signageand pavement markings per Caltrans standards. ~ . I'I I ~ I 1 I I I ~ .I I. "~Illlal~~ ivi engineer on a $3.2 million design of a Union Pacific yard facility, including a team track, a loading dock track, four industry spur tracks, and a 220-foot-long covered loading dock. Designed and prepared plans for the railroad track horizontal and vertical alignments, grading, and drainage for the project site. Oversaw final CAD production and coordinated with the Union Pacific engineering staff throughout the duration of the project in order to meet Union Pacific technical specifications for construction of the tracks. All design utilized InRoads for MicroStation. a . I I , II II ~ ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ ~ ~ ~ III II I I ir~ ~ ~ . ,o~ Dr. Mohan Char has many years of experience working with Caltrans, local agen- Structures Lead cies, and land developers, and developing contract documents for bridge plans, 'i'~ II' 'ii ~~~II i~~ specifications, and construction cost estimates (PS&E) projects. He is specialized III ~ i in seismic nonlinear time-history and nonlinear time dependent creep/shrinkage PhD/1993/Structural Engineering analyses. He has an intimate knowledge of the Caltrans procedures for develop- BE/1986/Civil Engineering ment ofproject-specific standard special provisions. He has been involved in sev- ME/1988/Structural Engineering eral challenging structural projects for interchanges, grade separations, freeway PE/1998/California, No: 57894 overcrossings and undercrossings, railroad overheads and underpasses, majortoll bridges, and bridge widenings. ~ i, i ~ ~ i~ ~ Project manager. AECOM was retained to provide preliminary and final engineering design and construction management for the Monte Vista grade separation over the UPRR. AECOM was selected based on its in-depth understanding of grade separation design and construction management gained from the completion of numerous complex projects, including similar significant projects on the Alameda Corridor such as the Redondo Junction and Pacific Coast Highway grade separationslll °°~°~w ~~w ~ ' I °°Structural iii task manager. Mohan Char is responsible for responsible for developing PS&E for structural portions of this project which included a number of MSE walls. The Auto Center Drive overhead is athree-span cast-in-place concrete box superstructure that carries four vehicular traffic lanes and a median over the BNSF ROW. The bridge has a high skew and design features have adapted to the many utility lines present in the area. The structure is a 353-ft long, 76-ft wide CIP/PS box girder bridge supported on high cantilever seat type abutments and drilled shaft bents. II ~1~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~liia~: Structural task manager responsible for developing plans, specifications and estimates for structural portions of this project which included a number of MSE walls. The structure is atwo-span, 296 foot long, 62 foot wide cast-in-place/prestressed box girder bridge supported on high cantilever seat type abutments and athree- columnbent. ~~~~m~~~~ ~ ~ u ~ . Submittals/RFI engineer. Grade separation at the UPRR and Metrolink crossings of Ramona Boulevard. Ramona Boulevard was lowered to cross under the two existing tracks, as well as to accommodate the construction of a future third track. The project consists of the construction of two railroad bridge structures and a substructure for a future bridge to the north. Also, a temporary shoofly track for both Metrolink and UPRR, a pump station and various retaining walls, a water line and several storm drain lines. .Structural task manager. The project straddles the City of San Bernardino and the County of San Bernardino border. University Parkway changes its name to State Street at the city/county boundary. The City of San Bernardino was the lead agency with regards to environmental work. University Parkway/ State Street runs north/south. Immediately south of the railroad, University Parkway/State Street is intersected by Cajon Boulevard, running southeast to northwest, parallel to the railroad. I I i ~ I I Bridge engineer. Civil engineering design for bridge type selection, preliminary engineering design, utility design and relocation, channel hydraulic modeling and studies, final design, and preparation of the construction documents (plans, specifications and estimates) for the Compton Creek bridge, which also included a parallel utility bridge. a . i , II II ~ ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ ~ ~ ~ III II I I ~ir~ ~ ~ . ~`~II~.II ~m~ , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ..............~I~I~I~I~I~I~I~I~I~I~I~I~I~I~I~L............._. Bob Fish is a former Caltrans bridge engineer with extensive structural engineer- - ~ ing experience, ranging from bridge and tunnel design to bridge engineering design Bridges support and construction. He is acompany-wide resource for seismic analysis and IIIIIIIIIII; lui° ~~li~ . II' . 'iii design, and has demonstrated expertise in designing with all major forms ofbuild- ingmaterials, including reinforced and prestressed concrete, welded steel, timber, BS/1981/Civil Engineering and masonry PE/1985/California N o: 39540 Civil ( ) SE/1993/California, No: 3674 (Structural) _~'i' gym" Lead structural engineer. II II I I I The structure is a 3-span 454-ft long,102-ft wide CIP/PS box girder bridge supported on high cantilever seat type abutments and 6-column bents. Both abutments and bents are supported on driven steel piles.This project is currently under design, and Robert is responsible for developing PS&E for the Structural portions of the projects which include a number of temporary and permanent MSE walls. II ~ II II ~ ~ II ~ ~ I ~I' ~ , ~ Project manager coordinating the project team subconsultants for surveying, geotechnical, civil, environmental and public outreach. Developing crossing alternatives, working with stakeholders for approval of preferred alternative, developing 30 percent-level design, producing the feasibility study report. I II Lead structural engineer on a new bridge structure carrying First Street over Napa Creek and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' future Napa Bypass. The new bridge will be athree-span, cast- in-place prestressed, haunched box girder. The total length is 344 feet and the approximate width is 64 feet. Foundations are designed to accommodate a deep scour potential. Performed the analysis and design, and wrote the specifications for the new bridge. ~ I I r I ~ III Y ~ II IIIIIIIWw I u~ur AS a senior structural engineering manager, developed very detailed cost estimates for three Caltrans projects prior to bid. The task order No.1 cost estimate ($52.6 million) was provided as part of a report "study of cost estimating," containing detailed methodology and practices for developing quantities and cost estimates. The report also provides an evaluation of "risk" (cost and project delay) associated with each item in regards to bidding and construction. Caltrans will use the report to augment and enhance their methodologies. The AECOM estimate was within 2 percent of actual bid. Bid results are still pending for tasks 2 and 3, which required similarly comprehensive and detailed cost estimates. AECOM was retained by Caltrans Division of Structures (District 59) for contract No. 59A0481 to perform on-call structures project development for Caltrans projects within Districts 5, 6, 8, 9, and 10. Under this contract, AECOM completed the first task order assigned by Caltrans Program/Project & Resource Management. Work included developing an extremely detailed cost estimate of a Caltrans project prior to bid. The cost esti mate was provided as part of a report "Study of Cost Estimating," which detailed AECOM methodology and practices for developing both quantities and cost estimates. , ~ ,I, II I., I i, ..i..I,.w. ; IIII'I ~~StructureTask Manager.The -215, Segment 1 project consists of widening and reconstructing the existing six-lane freeway to accommodate the addition of HOV and mixed-flow lanes, with an ultimate 10-lane configuration.This includes new overcrossings and widened undercrossings to accommodate the wider freeway design. Bob was responsible for Type Selection, Independent Check, Seismic Analysis (including fault rupture), project standard special provisions,and Plans, Specifications,andConstruction Cost Estimates (PS&E). a i , II II ~ ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ ~ ~ ~ III II I I ~vird ~ ~ ~ L ~,~~„fii~ il,,,, „ ir~ ~ ~ . II ~ . II Mr. Price has extensive experience in the bridge field including over 14 years in the design of steel girder, post-tensioned and reinforced concrete box girder, precast- RetainingWalls prestressed concrete I girder, and segmental box girder bridges for highways and IIIIIIIIIII;: II II ~,~lii~ii~~~~ III~~~~~~ railroads from conceptual to final design. He is also experienced in the design of li Viii iii special steel erection equipment and precast concrete segmental viaducts; travel- BS/1992/Civil Engineering ing maintenance scaffolding for major bridges; and seismic retrofit and repair of Coursework, Reinforced and Prestressed steel plate girder, truss, and concrete bridges. He has been a project engineer on Concrete Design, Arizona State University highway bridge replacement and rehabilitation (HBRR) projects in California and is PE/1995/Arizona No: 29684 (Civil) familiar with Caltrans local programs procedures. He has supervised preparation PE/1997/California No: 56855 (Civil) of construction documents and prepared engineering estimates and specifications for roadway and bridge projects in Arizona, Nevada, California, and international projects. He also has designed major arterial street projects for large metropolitan cities, and is experienced in many design-build projects. ~ Ilf~~~iil i ~ j ~~oii Sen for Bri dge Engineer for the independent design check for two underpass structures. I ~ ill III , II II III III II I i II I~ I i I Project Manager for interim safety improvements for two intersections in close proximity.The safety improvements included adding lanes, right turn pockets, re-stripping and signals. Plans included drainage improvements and retaining walls. °"III"° IIL.. I I I . I I I ~I I II Engineer of record, responsible for the design review and PS&E of the bridge. The widening ofThe Old Road at Honor Ranch Road Overcrossing required a tieback wall of 13.5 feet in height. Plans included separate plans for the Tieback Wall. I , i iI „III„ i ul~ J I ~ ~ I Project Manager for interim safety improvements for two intersections in close proximity.The safety improvements included adding lanes, right turn pockets, re-stripping and signals. Plans included drainage improvements and retaining walls. The environmental documentation included a mitigated negative declaration prepared by PMC, our sub. ~ I I I ~i I I, I ~~I~~~~~~~~ Engi Weer of record, responsible for the design review and PS&E of the 3 span, 250 foot long, 4'-3" deep, 76'-9"wide post-tensioned cast-in-place concrete box girder bridge. The bridge plans are staged with the construction of the western section while the existing bridge remains in service. The pier walls line up with the neighboring twin I-5 bridges to maximize hydraulic capacity of the creek. The footings are below scour depth and use steel H-piles. Approaches include a type 5 (L shaped) retaining walls atthe I-5 right-of-way. The widening of The Old Road at Honor Ranch Road Overcrossing required a tieback wall of 13.5 feet in height. Plans included separate plans for the Tieback Wall. III ~ I ~ II III~uRor Engineer of record, responsible for the design of a bridge widening, and a specially designed retaining wall (mechanically stabilized earth) for this project. The submittal for the Structure Type Selection and Seismic Analysis for the 99.518 meter long four span cast-in-place, prestressed concrete boxgirder NutTree Road OC received approval from Caltrans since it passes over I-80. The bridge was widened on both sides from 12.313 meters of existing width to 31.355 meters in width. As part of our type selection submittal, prepared the General Plan and Estimate for two different widening alternatives to meet the restricted vertical clearance associated with the existing structure. Alternatives considered both an 1100mm a . i , II ~ ~ ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ ~ ~ I ' ~ III II I I ir~ ~ ~ . II ~ . II rc Mr. Cheang has provided foundation design for close to three hundred new, re- placed and widened structures, statewide, for various transportation and public Geotechnical Services works agencies. These structures include railroad bridges, major water crossings, IIIIIIIII~' °~°'il ~ iil III II"' "ii III 'iii iil II i long viaducts, and overcrossings and undercrossings at major interchanges. He is currently providing foundation design recommendations for two grade separation MS/1979/Civil Engineering BS/1978/Civil En ineerin projects (Streeter Avenue and Riverside Avenue) in the City of Riverside. He is fa- g g miliar with Caltrans design philosophy and criteria, and the review process. He has PE/1987/California No: C41401 (Civil) worked closelywith civil and structural engineers to develop and refine cost-saving GE/1997/California No. 2345 schemes for foundations. Mr.Cheang iscurrently apart-time faculty at California State University, Long Beach, teaching courses on soil mechanics and soil labora- torytesting. ~ I I I wow ui ui ur i These two grade separation projects involve depressed roadways with R/R tracks on a R/R bridge. This project is currently in the field exploration phase. . _ ° I . ° . I ,I ° ° ~ ;;The project i ncludes providing geotechnical recommendations for construction of a R/R bridge and adjoining high retaining walls. I I, I II ° Provided all aspect o foundation design including design of a subdrain system for the depressed roadway. I ~ ~ ' Provided foundation .III ~ ~ design recommendations fora 16-span railroad overpass including several tall retaining walls at the approaches. I i .I x u sill' Collected and reviewed field and laboratory test results to assist Civil and Structural engineers in foundation design for bridges, retaining walls and cut-and-cover structures. I i I ~ I I I ~ T is is a mayo r I I south-end project for the Alameda Corridor. The project includes 2 bridges crossing Dominguez Channel and a long R/R viaduct. I ,I I ' I e~~~ Provided preliminary foundation design recommendations for alternative analyses. II , ~ II II I„ Co llected a nd reviewed field and laboratory test results to assist Civil and Structural engineers in foundation design for bridge alternatives, one of these alternatives is an underpass option with groundwater issues. I I I _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ _ i ~ This is a underpass but no groundwater issues. The foundation system consists of large-diameter drilled shafts atthe bents and driving piles attheabutments. a . i , II II ~ ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ ~ I ' ~ III II I I ir~ ~ ~ . II ~ . II , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , J.T. Barr is a licensed landscape architect. His professional experience includes Aesthetics the design and implementation of dynamic urban spaces, including plazas, water- IIIIIIIII~' II II III~~ "ii 'iii ii~„ fronts, parks, transportation corridors, and mixed-use developments. Mr. Barr pro- °1 ° vides leadership for projects of varying scales and budgets. His expertise encom- BS, Landscape Architecture, The Ohio passes design and development of landscape architectural plans and all technical State University, 2002 aspects of project and site development. Licensed Landscape Architect: State of California #5209 I State of Utah #5301 I I II II ~ ' State of Texas # 2552 Produced a visual simulation showingthe existing and proposed condition at a current at-grade crossing. The goal of the project was to separate vehicular and locomotive traffic at an intersection along Columbia Avenue in Riverside, CA. The proposed project entailed the construction of a vehicular bridge over three active BNSF rail lines to ease traffic congestion and improve public safety. Created a photo-realistic simulation illustratingthe size, positioning and architectural detail of the proposed structure. Additionally, key site details were simulated to reflect the resulting changes to the current configuration of the intersection. I ~ ~ I I I I I I ~ li I I I I I I Landscape Architect/Project Manager. AECOM is in the process of preparing comprehensive aesthetics guidelines fora 3.5 mile stretch of Orangethorpe Avenue in Orange County, CA. These guidelines will provide an integrated approach to addressing the future aesthetics integrity of the Orangethorpe Avenue Corridor. This will be achieved by providing consistency in the use of form, materials, textures and finishes, while still being flexible enough to respond to unique project conditions and changes in construction technology. The guidelines focus on the importance of integrating the grade separations into their greater urban context. The corridor structures and adjacent landscape will compliment and relate to the adjacent land uses, creating a distinct and positive identity for the Corridor. II ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ III I I .11111111111 ~ I Simulations were created to assess the visual and spatial impacts of a proposed interchange realignment and bridge expansion over the I-215 corridor. Orange County Transportation Authority, Orangethorpe Corridor Aesthetics Guidelines, Orange County, California: Landscape Architect/Project Manager. Responsible for preparation of comprehensive aesthetics guidelines fora 3.5 mile stretch of Orangethorpe Avenue in Orange County, CA. These guidelines will provide an integrated approach to addressing the future aesthetics integrity of the Orangethorpe Avenue Corridor. ~ ~w,, II ' We have developed a design to redefine a one block area of the Mercado District in downtown Escondido. The design maximizes the use of rich pedestrian paving to expand the pedestrian realm and provide opportunities for gathering during community events. Planting areas were extended into the street to soften the expanse of hardscape. The plant palette consists of native and culturally relevant species which add a layer of texture and scale to the design. String lights are strung between the pedestrian luminaries lining Grand Ave further reinforcing the festival atmosphere in the space. a i , II II ~ ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ ~ ~I ' ~ III II I I gird ~ ~ ~ L ~,~~„fii~ il,,,, „ ir~ ~ ~ . II ~ . II ~v Mr. Yoshitake has over 35 years of experience in surveying and engineering, includ- ing a 13 year career with the A.T. & S.F. Railway Company (currently BNSFF). Mr. Yoshitake has managed both field and office operations for all phases of surveying Survey Services and mapping services. His experience spans projects for 30 transit centers and 114 bridges /grade separations. He has also played a major surveying role on 5 iiiiiiiii i II~IV ~ ~ ~ III III Vi ~ ili III IV ~ large design-build projects and 20 railroad yards, including 7 intermodal container Major course work/1988/Boundary transfer facilities. Mr. Yoshitake is well-versed in the specifications and protocol Control for CalTrans, CPUC and railroad companies. He has performed Right-of-Way sur- BS/1973/Forestry veys, design surveys and construction staking for 1,000 projects/tasks for public Major course work/1971/Engineering agencies, engineers, contractors, architects, railroads, utilities, private developers PLS/California No: 5822 and owners. RLS/Arizona, No: 24538 a i l ~ I I I I i ~ ~ ~ Survey Project Manager -San Gabriel Trench Phase 1 and 2 (2.2 miles & 4 grade separations) Reference: Duane Kenagy, PE, Sr. VP, Moffatt & Nichol (562) 423- 9551,Nogales Grade Separation (UPRR LA Subdivision), Nogales Grade Separation (UPRR Alhambra Subdivision) and the Brea Canyon Grade Separation. . I ~ ' I ~ ~ ~ _ _ _ I Survey Project Manager. (10 miles & 32 grade separations). The Mid- Corridorsegment is arailroad corridor trench that is 33 feet deep, 40 feet wide, and 50 feet wide, running between the Artesia (91) Freeway in Compton to the Santa Monica (10) Freeway in Los Angeles. 32 railroad grade separations were built over the trench. Mr. Yoshitake managed the combined efforts of 3 survey companies and an aerial mapping company. ~ ~ Survey Project Manager- (14 miles, l3 RR stations, 2 RR boxes and RR yard). Exposition Line Design-Build Project (8 miles, 9 RR stations, 3 grade separations, RR river bridge & RR box). Bus Rapid Transit Orange Line Design-Build Project (13 miles) and the Chinatown Aerial Design-Build Project (3,000 foot long aerial bridge). a i , II ~ ~ II „ ~ W ~ I ' ~ III II I I ir~ ~ ~ . , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Brian Calvert brings several strong qualifications, including an extensive back- EnvironmentalServices ground working with Caltrans District 8 and in Riverside County, as well as prior IIIIIIIII~' II II III~~ "ii 'iii ii~„ experience with local roadway/highway transportation projects and other infra- °1 ° structure efforts involving bridges. Over his 14-year career, Brian has managed BA (cum laude)1993/Geography and the planning and environmental work associated with a number of relevant pub- RegionalScience, lic infrastructure projects, including overseeing an on-call environmental services MA/2000/Environmental Planning contract for Caltrans District 8, in which 34 task orders were completed, and other projects such as the Clinton Keith Road and I-215 Interchange Project Study Report (PSR) and I-15 Duncan Canyon Crossing Interchange PSR/Preliminary Environmen- talAssessment Report (PEAR). Brian specializes in preparing environmental docu- mentsand reports to meet federal (National Environmental Policy Act [NEPA]) and state (California Environmental Quality Act [CEQA]) regulations. i I, I I °'i~~ I I I I ° °~~~I~ Brian is managing and overseeing the environmental services provided for the proposed grade separation of Streeter Avenue and UPRR at-grade railroad crossing. Environmental services involve preparing the necessary NEPA documents for approval by Caltrans as the NEPA lead agency under NEPA delegation. The project was statutorily exempt from CEQA. Project involves a PES, Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impact), HPSR, Noise Report, Community Impact Assessment, Visual Impact Assessment, and Relocation Impact Document to support the Categorical Exclusion for the proposed project. ~~~~~f~~~ Brian is managing and overseeing the environmental services provided for the proposed grade separation of Riverside Avenue and UPRR at-grade railroad crossing. This project involves preparing the necessary NEPA documents for approval by Caltrans as the NEPA lead agency under NEPA delegation. The project was statutorily exempt from CEQA. Brian is overseeing the preparation of the PES, Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impact), HPSR, Noise Report, Community Impact Assessment, Visual Impact Assessment, and Relocation Impact Document to support the Categorical Exclusion for the proposed project. I ~i ~ III Uw II III ~ II I uM II NW I II ~ I II II I~ WmT M II I ; II II ~ Brian managed and oversaw the environmental services provided for the proposed grade separation Auto Center Drive and BNSF at-grade railroad crossing. The project involves preparation of necessary NEPA documents for approval by Caltrans as the NEPA lead agency under NEPA delegation. The project was statutorily exempt from CEQA. Brian oversaw the preparation of the PES, Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impact), and HPSR, to support the Categorical Exclusion for the proposed project. I „ ,w, „ , , ~ ~,w, „ I ~ III.. ~ I II I .Project Manager. Responsible for managing the preparation of an IS/EA/MND/FONSI for the widening of SR-91, from SR-57 to I-5 in the cities of Anaheim and Fullerton. The widening would include adding a fourth general purpose lane within two segments of the westbound SR-91. The additional lane would be achieved by connecting existing auxiliary lanes through State College Boulevard, Raymond Avenue, Euclid Street, and Brookhurst Road/Brookhurst Street interchanges. The total length of the project is approximately 3.8 miles. a I , II II ~ ~ II x „N~~~ ~~~~~~~W ~ ~ ~ ~ I ' ~ III II I I ir~ ~ ~ . II ~ . II , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Working in the industry since 1987, Mr. Armstrong is a proven leader in the right of way and acquisition community with both practice and management experience. Right-of-Way Services Mr. Armstrong's management and consulting strength stems from his keen under- IIIIIIIIII"~ ~IIIII~~°~lii~ii ~i~~~~ III°~~°~~ °ii ~~ill ~'iiiii standing of the working relationship between local government agencies and the communities in which they serve. He began his career at a public agency and pro- BA/Business/Finance, Real Estate gressed in the consulting community by providing workable, real-world solutions. Advanced Real Estate Finance Curriculum He earned his reputation by consistently delivering projects without compromise Real Estate Broker, California of his clients or his personal integrity. Today, he handles many of the firms' most challenging, multi-disciplinary projects. Due to his broad perspective into the pub- licagency acquisition/relocation process, Mr. Armstrong is one of the few consul- tantsproviding comprehensive project cost studies for the firm. I , ~ I If Mr. Armstrong has been responsible for the preparation of dozens of cost studies and right of way data sheets in concert with major public works projects throughout California. Notable project examples include Orange County's Centerline project involving hundreds of properties, MagLev train from Los Angeles to Ontario involving more than one- thousand properties, and Right of Way Data Sheets at various interchanges along Interstate 5,10,15, 60, 91, and 215; and State Routes 1, 74, and 90. ~ III II ~ulll Mr. Armstrong was instrumenta in delivering the total probable right of way costs for the Centerline Light Rail Project in Orange County, California, and right of way costs for a series of over crossings for the OnTrac Railroad Lowering Project in Orange County. He also assisted apublic/private developer with assemblage budgets of their property acquisition and relocation assistance program for a project involving hundreds of properties and displacements. II' II III III I I. Mr. Armstrong directed several major Capital Improvement Projects involving regional arterial highways including State Route 90 (Imperial Highway) widening improvements, a project covering five municipalities and 200 full- and part-take acquisitions, and the City of Laguna Niguel's Golden Lantern SmartStreet. He directed the Mid-Valley Parkway Extension Project consisting of acquisition and relocation through numerous municipalities in California's Coachella Valley and participated in management and acquisition activities on the 100+ parcel California State Highway 111 Acquisition and Relocation Project for the cities of Cathedral City and Rancho Mirage. a ~ , II ~ ~ II „ ~ W ~ I ' ~ III II I I gird ~ ~ ~ L ~,~~„fii~ il,,,, „ ir~ ~ ~ . II ~ . II Mr. Erney is the transportation engineering department manager and a senior proj- ect manager for the AECOM Los Angeles office. He has successfully managed over Traffic Studies/TMP 100 transportation planning and engineering projects throughout California. He is IIIIIIIII~' III Iii- iillll III~~'~ °ii ~~ill '°'iii iil II a certified professional planner with experience managing analyses and documen- tation for environmental review projects, access and circulation studies, sustain- MS/1997/Transportation Engineering able transportation practices,TDM measures, parking evaluations, pedestrian and MCP/1997/City and Regional Planning bicycle reviews, and data collection programs. Other experience includes detailed BS/1995/Mechanical Engineering technical analysis of local and regional roadway facilities, including traffic fore- AICP/2000/United States, Registration casting, modal split analyses, traffic diversion, and operational analyses. He has No: 015998 experience coordinating with local and regional transportation and environmental Professional Transportation Planner agencies in Southern California. ~ i I Led the initial planning efforts for the proposed Nogales Street grade separation (Los Angeles subdivision), including preparing estimates of future traffic volumes in the area, estimating the effects of the proposed grade separation on traffic volumes, and evaluating the potential impacts to queues and intersection operating conditions. Provided analysis on proposed bypass road with reduced number of lanes to determine the impact on surrounding streets, intersections, and interchanges. Developed mitigation measures to ensure adequate level of service during the construction period. ~ ~ ~ i ~ o 0 o a i. ~ ~ ly ~ ~ iii". Led the analysis assessments task for the review of possible grade separation options for Temple Avenue and Baldwin Park Boulevard in the City of Industry. For each location, reviewed the traffic impacts of various roadway configurations and possible reconfiguration ofthe northbound and southbound I-605 on-ramps and off-ramps. III ~ I i I i ~ I I I Tim led the transportation evaluation for the proposed new grade separation for the intersection of Puente Avenue and Valley Boulevard in the City of Industry, CA. For this assessment, projected the future background traffic volumes and estimated the vehicles that would be affected by the grade separation. To support the development of the preferred project alternative, conducted multiple intersection level of service and queuing analyses used to rank the effectiveness and secondary effects of each proposed alignment. ~ i I II . ° Performed a peer review of the grade separation evaluation and transportation section of the environmental impact report for this proposed new transit line from downtown Los Angeles to Santa Monica. Using the Metro Grade Crossing policy, assisted in the determination of whether crossings needed to be grade separated (considering upstream and downstream queues and intersection levels of service). In addition, conducted a detailed review of the preliminary draft and draft EIR sections with regards to all traffic, transit, parking, pedestrian, and safety evaluations. n'inr, ~~mw ir. mme ~ ~~mw ~~~~~u i m, i i ; I I II' I u I I .I . I ~ Prepared documentation for the reconstruction of the US 101 overcrossing in conjunction with the Third Street Light Rail project in San Francisco. As part of this effort, investigated the level of service conditions, accident data, and freeway mainline and ramp volumes for future conditions, both with and without the proposed changes. Based on the results of the assessment, recommended revised intersection signalization,signing and striping, and geometrics to minimize impacts to the freeway and adjacent streets. a i , II ~ ~ II „ ~ W ~ I ' ~ III II I I ir~ ~ ~ . II ~ . II Mr. Davis has extensive experience in the planning, design, and construction of rail- RailCoordination road projects,tunnels,bridges,andunderground excavations and support systems. As market segment leaderforfreight rail in the west region, Mr. Davis is responsible IIIIIIIIIII; Iii ~ iil III ~ III~~~~~~~. ii ~~ill ~iii~~ii for the oversight of AECOM projects for BNSF, Union Pacific, and other freight rail Book of Rules - Qualified, BNSF and intermodalgoods-movement clients. His experience includes over 16 years of Studies in Mathematics and Sociology, heavy high-speed freight and passenger line work with Southern Pacific Transpor- College ofthe Redwoods, Grants Pass, tation Company (SPTC) where he was responsible for supervision, budget prepa- Oregon ration, and safety procedures for bridge and tunnel maintenance forces. He also Qualified Roadway Worker, Employee-in- served as project manager for remediation of a mayor chemical spill in the Sacra- - mento River, and cleanup ofBunker-C fuel contamination in railyards. c har e E I C Current g ( ) Qualified Maintenance-of-Way Rules, SCRRA ' N ~ II ~ II 'I Trained in Fall Arrest Equipment II' I ~ ~ ~ Construction relations manager for ACTA's $2.4 billion, Trained in Fall Rescue 23-mile grade-separated urban freight rail corridor. Managed and supervised Railroad Workers with emphasis on consultant teams and multi-discipline staff that provided public outreach Bridges and Fall Protection Requirements assistance. As representative of the Alameda Corridor, organized and executed Thoroughly familiar with CPUC and FRA community and business forums along with open houses. Responsible for Regulations Governing Railroad development and distribution of construction information to business owners, as well as public and special interest groups by providing flyers, construction alerts, and collateral material in English and Spanish. As liaison officer, worked directly with construction crews, owners, tenants and special interest groups to resolve construction related disputes. II II it ~ II II I I ~ ~ III~~~~~~ II ~ I ~I As s u pervi so r/ structure inspector, supervised work force in the repair, maintenance, and construction of railroad bridges and structures under live track conditions for the heavy freight and high-speed passenger line serving the greater Los Angeles area. Reviewed drawings and specifications, prepared reports, and conducted field inspections of railroad bridges, tunnels and structures. Provided construction management and prepared work orders for construction of railroad projects. Responsible for bridge, structures and drainage maintenance schedules with emphasis on safety and adherence to standard railroad specifications ~I i ~ i II' Provided project management for special projects, including environmental post chemical contamination and rehabilitation of ecosystems; and construction and installation of extraction wells for long term remediation of oil contaminated soil. Coordinated between departmental staff, regulatory agencies, municipalities, contractors and engineers to minimize delays to freight and passenger train movements and construction schedules. Served as a member of the railroad emergency disaster response team for derailments, chemical spills, washouts, tunnel fires and earthquakes. ~ ~ ~I~ ~~~~~vp ~~w iii ~ ~ 'wW III mm ii. a . Ilm~ ~~~~~~~~~~~lm~ a ~ I ~~vw ~w mm I ~n i II II II I Force account manager for the Alameda Corridor Engineering Team (ACET)-the program, utility, and real estate management consultant responsible for providing design and construction support services for ACTA's $2.4 billion, 23-mile, grade-separated, urban freight rail corridor from the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach to the Los Angeles area. Coordinated preparation of preliminary/final design drawings and bid documents; prepared engineering reports; recommended alternatives; reviewed and reconciled force account invoices and payment authorizations. Coordinated rail, infrastructure and private utility relocations with railroads and engineers; coordinated construction phasing among various project stakeholders including, railroads, municipalities and regulatory agencies. Provided technical and managerial support to the Division Construction Manager. a ~ , II ~ ~ II „ ~ W ~ ~ III II I I gird ~ ~ ~ L ~,~~„fii~ il,,,, „ ir~ ~ ~ . APPENDIX E CERTIFICATION OF NON-DISCRIMINATION BY CONSULTANTS 25G-115 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROJECT STUDY REPORT EQUIVALENT AND CONCEPTUAL ENGINEERING PLANS FOR SANTA ANA BOULEVARD GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT PROPOSAL AND CONTRACT AGREEMENT CERTIFICATION OF NONDISCRIMINATION BY CONTRACTOR The undersigned contractor or corporate officer, during the performance of this contract, certifies as follows: 1. The Contractor shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The Contractor shall take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment without, regard to their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The Contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices to be provided setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. 2. The Contractor shall, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of the Contractor, state that all qualmed applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. 3. The Contractor shall send to each labor union or representative of workers with which he/she has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, a notice to be provided advising the said labor union or workers' representatives of the Contractor's commitments under this section, and shall post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment. 4. The Contractor shall comply with all provisions of Executive Order 11246 of September 24,1965, and of the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor. 5. The Contractor shall furnish all information and reports required by Executive Order 11246 of September 24,1965, and by rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor, or pursuant thereto, and will permit access to his/her books, records, and accounts by the administering agency and the Secretary of Labor for purposes of investigation, to ascertain compliance with such rules, regulations, and orders. 6. In the event of the Contractor's non-compliance with the nondiscrimination clauses of this contract or with any of the said rules, regulations, or orders, the contract may be canceled, terminated, or suspended in whole or in part and the Contractor may be declared ineligible for further Government contracts or federally assisted construction contracts in accordance with procedures authorized in Execution Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and such other sanctions may be imposed and remedies invoked as provided in Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, or by rule, regulations, or order of the Secretary of Labor, or as otherwise provided by law. CITY OF SANTA ANA PROJECT STUDY REPORT EQUIVALENT AND CONCEPTUAL ENGINEERING PLANS FOR SANTA ANA BOULEVARD GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT PROPOSAL AND CONTRACT AGREEMENT CERTIFICATION OF NONDISCRIMINATION BY CONTRACTOR (continued 7. The Contractor shall include the portion of the sentence immediately preceding paragraph (1) and the provisions of paragraphs (1) through (7) in every subcontract or purchase order unless exempted by rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary of Labor issued pursuant to Section 204 of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, so that such provisions will be binding upon each subcontract or purchase order as the administering agency may direct as means of enforcing such provisions, including sanctions for noncompliance; provided, however, that in the event the Contractor becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a subcontractor or vendor as a result of such direction by the administering agency, the Contractor may request that the United States enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States. 8. Pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1735, as added by Chapter 643 Stats. 1939, and as amended, No discrimination shall be made in the employment of persons upon public works because of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical handicaps, mental condition, marital status, or sex of such persons, except as provided in Section 1420, and any contractor of public works violating this Section is subject to all the penalties imposed for a violation of the Chapter. Signed Vice President Pat Somerville, PE Title Fig AECOM Technical Services Date 4/6/2010 25G-117 APPENDIX F FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS Certification of Consultant ............................................................................Exhibit 10-F Certification of Local Agency Exhibit 10-G Local Agency Proposer UDBE Commitment Consultant Contracts Exhibit 10-01 Local Agency Proposer DBE Information Consultant Contracts)......... Exhibit 10-02 Nonlobbying Certification for Federal Aid Contracts Exhibit 10-P Disclosure of Lobbying Activities Exhibit 10-Q Equal Employment Opportunity Certification .....................Exhibit 12-E Attachment C Non-Collusion Affidavit .........................................................Exhibit 12-E Attachment D Debarment and Suspension Certification ............................Exhibit 12-E Attachment E Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 10-F Certification of Consultant, Commissions & Fees Exhibit 10-F Certification of Consultant, Commissions & Fees CERTIFICATION OF CONSULTANT I HEREBY CERTIFY that I am the Vice President ,and duly authorized representative of the firm of AECOM Technical Services ,whose address is 999 Town and Country Road, Orange, CA ,and that, except as hereby expressly stated, neither I nor the above firm that I represent have: (a) employed or retained for a commission, percentage, brokerage, contingent fee, or other consideration, any firm or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely forme or the above consultant) to solicit or secure this agreement; nor (b) agreed, as an express or implied condition for obtaining this contract, to employ or retain the services of any firm or person in connection with carrying out the agreement; nor (c) paid, or agreed to pay, to any firm, organization or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely forme or the above consultant) any fee, contribution, donation, or consideration of any kind, foror in connection with, procuring or carrying out this agreement. I acknowledge that this Certificate is to be made available to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in connection with this agreement involving participation ofFederal-aid Highway funds, and is subject to applicable state and federal laws, both criminal and civil. 4/6/10 (Date) (Signature) Pat Somerville, PE Page 10-43 LPP 06-02 ~ May 1, 2006 Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 10-G Certification of Local Agency Exhibit 10-G Certification of Local Agency CERTIFICATION OF LOCAL AGENCY I HEREBY CERTIFY that I am the of the (local agency) ,and that the consulting firm of ,or its representative has not been required (except as herein expressly stated), directly or indirectly, as an express or implied condition in connection with obtaining ar carrying out this Agreement to: (a) employ, retain, agree to employ or retain, any firm or person, or (b) pay or agree to pay, to any firm, person or organization, any fee, contribution, donation, or consideration of any kind. I acknowledge that this Certificate is to be made available to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in connection with this Agreement involving participation offederal-aid highway funds, and is subject to applicable state and federal laws, both criminal and civil. (Date) (Signature) Page 10-45 LPP 06-02 2 5 V ~ ~ 2 0 May 1, 2006 Information regarding a vendor's racial or gender ownership status will not be used as a factor in the City's selection process for any contract. Exhibit 10-02 Local Agency Proposer DBE Information (Consultant Contracts) NOTE: PLEASE REFER TO INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE SIDE OF THIS FORM AGENCY: City of Santa Ana LOCATION: 20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92701 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Project Study Report Equivalent and Conceptual Engineering Plans for Santa Ana Blvd. Grade Separation Project TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT: $1.3 million PROPOSAL DATE: 4/6/2010 PROPOSER'S NAME: AECOM Technical Servuces CONTRACT DESCRIPTION OR SERVICES TO BE BE Cert. No. AME OF DBEs ERCENTAGE OF ITEM N0. SUBCONTRACTED ND EXPIRATION (Must be certified on the date bids BE ATE are opened -include DBE address and phone number) Task IV.G Geotechnical Investlgatlon CP Firm No. 6956, Earth Mechanics, Inc. 4.0% exp. 12/19/2013 17660 Newhope St., Ste. E ountaln Valley, CA 92708 714.751.3826 Task IV.E Field Survey/Topography CUCP #21228, Coast Surveying Inc. 5~3% etro #287, exp. 15031 Parkway Loop, Ste. B 12/4/2013 Tustin, CA 92780 (714) 918-6266 For Local Agency to Complete: Total Claimed ~ tbd Local Agency Contract Number: Participation 9.3 Federal Aid Project Number: Federal Share: Contract Award Date: Local Agency certifies that the DBE certification(s) has been verified and all information is complete and accurate. w Signature of Proposer Pat Somerville, PE Print Name Signature Date Local Agency Representative 4/h/2~1 ~ 714 5h7 2755 Date (Area Code) Tel. No. (Area Code) Telephone Number: For Caltrans Review: Pat Somerville, PE Person to Contact (Please Type or Print) Print Name Signature Date Caltrans District Local Assistance Engineer Local Agency Bidder - DBE Commitment(Rev 3/09) Distribution: (1) Copy - Fax or scan a copy to the Caltrans District Local Assistance Engineer (DLAE) within IS days of contract execution. Failure to send a copy to the DLAE within 15 days of contract execution may result in de-obligation of funds for this project. (2) Original -Local agency fil Exhibit 10-01 Local Agency Proposer UDBE Commitment (Consultant Contracts) NOTE: PLEASE REFER TO INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE SIDE OF THIS FORM AGENCY: City of Santa Ana LOCATION: 20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92701 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Project Study Report Equivalent and Conceptual Engineering Plans for Santa Ana Blvd. Grade Separation Project TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT: $1.3 million PROPOSAL DATE: 4/6/2010 PROPOSER'S NAME: AECOM Technical Servuces WORK DESCRIPTION OR SERVICES TO BE BE Cert. No. AME OF UDBEs PERCENTAGE ITEM N0. SUBCONTRACTED ND EXPIRATION (Must be certified on the date the AMOUNT ATE roposals are opened -include OF EACH UDBE DBE address and phone number) Task IV.G Geotechnical Investlgatlon CP Firm No. 6956, Earth Mechanics, Inc. 4.0% exp. 12/19/2013 17660 Newhope St., Ste. E ountaln Valley, CA 92708 714.751.3826 For Local Agency to Complete: Total Claimed ~ tbd Local Agency Contract Number: Participation Federal Aid Project Number: 4.0% Federal Share: Proposal Award Date: Local Agency certifies that the UDBE certification(s) has been verified and all information is complete and accurate. Signature of Proposer Pat Somerville, PE Print Name Signature Date Local Agency Representative 4/6/2010 714.567.2755 Date (Area Code) Tel. No. (Area Code) Telephone Number: Pat Somerville, PE FOr C altrallS ReVIeW: Person to Contact (Please Type or Print) Print Name Signature Date Local Agency Bidder -UDBE Commitment (Rev 3/09) Caltrans District Local Assistance Engineer Distribution: (1) Copy - If this Proposer is successful fax or scan a copy to the Caltrans District Local Assistance Engineer (DLAE) within 15 days of award. Failure to send a copy to the DLAE within 15 days of award may result in de-obligation of funds for this project. (2) Original -Local agency files Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 10-P Nonlobbying Certification for Federal-aid Contracts Exhibit 10-P Nonlobbying Certification For Federal-Aid Contracts The prospective participant certifies by signing and submitting this proposal/bid to the best of his or her knowledge and belief that: (1) No federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any federal agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any federal contract, the making of any federal grant, the making of any federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. (2) If any funds other than federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any federal agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form-LLL, "Disclosure of Lobbying Activities," in accordance with its instructions. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by Section 1352, Title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. The prospective participant also agrees by submitting his/her proposal/bid that he/she shall require that the language of this certification be included in all lower-tier subcontracts which exceed $100,000 and that all such sub-recipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. Patrick Somerville, PE, Vice President Page 10-75 LPP 09-02 ~ July 31, 2009 Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHBIT 10-R Disclosure of Lobbying Activities Exhibit 10-Q Disclosure of Lobbying Activities DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES COMPLETE TKIS FORM TO DISCLOSE LOBBYING ACTIVITIES PURSUANT TO 31 U.S.C. 1352 1. Type of Federal Action: 2. Status of Federal Action: 3. Report Type: ? a. contract ? a. bid/offer/a lication ? a. initial pp b. grant b. initial award b. material change c. cooperative agreement c. post-award d. loan For Material Change Only: e. loan guarantee year quarter f. loan insurance date of last report 4. Name and Address of Reporting Entity 5. If Reporting Entity in No. 4 is Subawardee, Enter Name and Address of Prime: Prime ?Subawardee Tier , if known Congressional District, if known Congressional District, if known 6. Federal Department/Agency: 7. Federal Program Name/Description: CFDA Number, if applicable 8. Federal Action Number, if known: 9. Award Amount, if known: 10. a. Name and Address of Lobby Entity b. Individuals Performing Services (including (If individual, last name, first name, MI) address if different from No. l0a) (last name, first name, MI) (attach Continuation Sheet(s) if necessary) 11. Amount of Payment (check all that apply) 13. Type of Payment (check all that apply) $ ? actual ? planned ? a. retainer b. one-time fee 12. Form of Payment (check all that apply): c. commission a. cash d. contingent fee b. in-bind; specify: nature e deferred Value f. other, specify 14. Brief Description of Services Performed or to be performed and Date(s) of Service, including officer(s), employee(s), or member(s) contacted, for Payment Indicated in Item 11: (attach Continuation Sheet(s) if necessary) 15. Continuation Sheet(s) attached: Yes ? No ? 16. Information requested through this form is authorized by Title 31 U.S.C. Section 1352. This disclosure of lobbying reliance Signature: was placed by the tier above when his transaction was made or entered into. This disclosure is required pursuant to 31 U.S.C. print Name: Pat Somerville, PE 1352. This information will be reported to Congress semiannually and will be available for public inspection. Any person who fails to file the required disclosure shall be subject Title: Vice President to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. Telephone No.: 714.567.2755 Date: 416/2010 Authorized for Local Reproduction Federal Use Only: Standard Form - LLL Standard Form LLL Rev. 04-28-06 Page 10-77 LPP 06-02 ~ May 1, 2006 Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 12-E PS&E Checklist Instructions Attachment C (THE BIDDER'S EXECUTION ON THE SIGNATURE PORTION OF THIS PROPOSAL SHALL ALSO CONSTITUTE AN ENDORSEMENT AND EXECUTION OF THOSE CERTIFICATIONS WHICH ARE A PART OF THIS PROPOSAL) EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY CERTIFICATION The bidderAECOM Technical Services ,proposed subcontractor ,hereby certifies that he has xx has not , participated in a previous contract or subcontract subject to the equal opportunity clauses, as required by Executive Orders 10925, 11114, or 11246, and that, where required, he has filed with the Joint Reporting Committee, the Director of the Office of Federal Contract Compliance, a Federal Government contracting or administering agency, or the former President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity, all reports due under the applicable filling requirements. Note: The above certification is required by the Equal Employment Opportunity Regulations of the Secretary of Labor (41 CFR 60-1.7(b) (1)), and must be submitted by bidders and proposed subcontractors only in connection with contracts and subcontracts, which are subject to the equal opportunity clause. Contracts and subcontracts which are exempt from the equal opportunity clause are set forth in 41 CFR 60-1.5. (Generally only contracts or subcontracts of $10,000 or under are exempt.) Currently, Standard Form 100 (EEO-1) is the only report required by the Executive Orders or their implementing regulations. Proposed prime contractors and subcontractors who have participated in a previous contractor subcontract subject to the Executive Orders and have not filed the required reports should note that 41 CFR 60-1.7(b) (1) prevents the award of contracts and subcontracts unless such contractor submits a report covering the delinquent period or such other period specified by the Federal Highway Administration or by the Director, Office of Federal Contract Compliance, U.S. Department of Labor. Pat Somerville, PE, Vice President Page 12-79 LPP 01-04 ~ March 15, 2001 ~;r ~ ~~il a~ f~ "pit' ~.i~ ~.la~ r~~~~i~~ l ia~~~~~~:ti~ r~~ti. R.. 1 ~ - ~ ~oc~~ ~sis~~~~c~ t#a~c~urw~ [an«~~ .HBIT P '~~e~~~list ~ N~~f~°~wc~iots tt~tc~m~~~t LEA. ~cl~li° ELI ~ech~r~i~c~l ~ervic~s z~a~a~~ s~~~a~~t~°c~a• a~ ~ch~nics ,1~~°el~ ~e~°tfie ~l~ ~15 11~~ , ~l°~1C1~~~~ Ili ~"V1~~1 fll' ~1~~~1~1`~ ~p1~ lk~~ C1~~{~l"~U~~~~ ~:U~~ ~1 1"~~l~~l" l~ Ex~~~r~ 1~, ] 1 l ~4, I ~~d vl~e~° ~°c~~~~,1~~ ftld the ~~i~~t ~~~°~i~ a~~~~r~~ee, ~ ~~~tal° ~~th ~f~ ~'"er~~°al a~1t~° ~rn~~inc, ~ ~~~~1 c~v~°r~~~~~t ~~at~W~i~~ ~ani~litelyn, ai° ~'nz°~~~~° '~°r~t' ~r7~~~t~ a E~~l E~r~~l~~~en app©~~t~nity, ~~l r°~~~°ts ~u ~~~~~de~° ~p~licale llin rc~u~e~r~n~. ~1~~ a1~~v ~t°tif ~,t~r~ is ~°c~u~i~°d t~~e E1~1~1~~nt ~~a~°~~~~y eg~~~t~n +~f tl~ ~c~°~t~° ~bc~~.° 1 ~FT~. ~-~..7(~ ~ ~ ~ ~~1us~ ~ ~~~ie~ ~ id~r ~~°aa~~ ~~~~°ta~° ~~~y cc~nnect~an wig ~t~#ts n~ s~.~:C~~~~~°~ct, l~~l~ u~~ct tl~e ec~u~ ~~p~~tun~y ~a~~se. ~i~ti°t s~~acanti°~~~ ~v~~ih rat tl~~ ~~a~tl~it~' ~laue fc~~~~~ in 4l ~ C~~] .S° ~~~~~l~~ll~ a~~1~ ~c~~~t~°~~s a~~ ~~~~tr .c~ 1 ~n~~• a~°e e~np~t. ~~r~t~r~~~y, ~,n~r°d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~1 ~°~~~~t ~~c~~~~°~ Excut~v +~~%c~~° ~t° tla~~~° r~~l~l~~~~~in ~x~~latiai~. ~'~°~ae~ }~~°ii ~~~ta°~cta~° ~~c~r~t~°.t~~°s ~~.e ~a~°~icj~~~d i~~ ~ ~°~v~~us ~~n~°t ~~c~tlti°~ct ~~l~~ect to dl~s h.v t~~~ t1~e ~°~~uirNed ~°~oY°ts l~~uld nab ~~~~t ~ 1 FF~ ~ .7(4~~ ~ 1 ~ pi°~~~~t c~nt~°t ~ ~~al~~nt~°~.ct ~~h c~~ti°~~~w ~~~~~~u ~~~~~~°t cc~~~°i~~ tl~ dl~~~~~~~~~ ~°i~c~ ~r s~~~~ c~hl° ~~~i~ ~if~d ~y t1~ F~~°~~ Hil~v~a A.~tlnist~°at~c~n ~y ~17~ ~~~•ctc~r, ffe af~"~°~1 ~nt~t~~i~~~lian, ~ep~.~°~~ne~~~ ~~'L1~~a1~. Lind ears, E, __m P~i~, l ~,acal ~ssista~c~~ ~~~ce~ur~~ l~ianual ~~I~IT PE ~he~klist~ I~~str~ctior~s #tachrr~~nt. ~~f11IJ~1~C~f~.} l'~~1~4~ ~~~T~[[~!#Y ~ ~]~111~Y~I ~'IIL~'~ ~~1Ll~lJ~Y LJ~' ~~1'rJ" L~LT~~i~~~]~~ k.i~L~ i,~ ~.f C +J1. Y x! i ~~J'~ ~1 Y !~1 Y!J La~l.~111~! Y 1~ d,~i1~Y~ ~~ir ~1 411 Y 1 ! 1 L.IxJL' 4~~~ ~~I'~ l ill Y Yi` 1 I~ ~ ~~9 A~~~II T~~f~r~c~l ~~~vi~~~~~ The° hidd~x,...~~...... ~ proposed subcoritrae~or IMF ~~ne~ hereh ce~ifies~ th~t~he hay. has nod artici at~d in a revious contract or subcontract sul~'ect to the° e4 ual . , p p p ~ q opportunity clauses, required by Executive girders ~ ~9~~, 11 ~ 14;~ or 11 ~4~, and, that, where rc~uireda he has ~lcd with the° point Reporting; orr~rnittee, the Director of the office of Federal contract ~orr~pliance a Federal ~iovcrncr~t contracting or administering agenc}~;, or' the forrrrer~ President's ~~ornmitt~ee an Equah Emplornent ~'pportunity ~ alb rcpo~s due under tho appli~abl~ f lln requirements ~1ot~: Tl~e~ a~ov~~ eertif icatio~ is`~ te~u~red h~ the Equal Ei~pl`ornent ~pportunt}~ Regul~ti~~i~~ off' the ~eretary of Labor {41 FR~, ~~-1, 7~~} ~ 1)~, and must he suhrnitted by bidders and proposed subcontractors in conne~ctor~ witk~ contracts a~ady subcontracts, which are subject to the equal opporfunt' clause. contracts" and ~~ubcar~tract~s which a~'e exempt from fihe e'qu~l ~pp~rturti~ty clause are set forth ~ 41 FR ~~~~~1:~ M ~eneralty only contracts or subeontraets~ ofd l 0,000 or under are eempt. ~rr~rttl.. tardard Forrta~ l ~a~~- l 1s the onl re ort re aired b the Executive ~`rders or the Y ~ ) ~ Y nl~ ~ Y ~ irnplernenting regulations: Proposed prime contractors and subcontractors who have participated in a~ previous contract or subcontract subject to the l~ecutive girders and have~~ not filed. t~. he requirod reports should note that ~ ~ ~~-1.7~b~ ~l prevertsa the a~vaxd of corttxacts artd su~corttracts unless such contractor suhruits a- report covering the delinquent period or such other period specified by the 1~ederal I~igl~way drnnstration or b}~ the Director, off ce of Federal contract compliance, ~J.~ lr]epartrrier~t of~al~ar ,.r~ s, ~ .ti . f Darr ~ ; Fre 4~~ ~ .a~e~ 1 - L~P~' ~~-0~ arch , M t,~Wi~~r ~ra ~~i.~~ll y I ~ ~ I ~P I !i ~I ~ ~ P ~~I+~ i "YM•~ ' ~ 'I ~ a'~. rl p,.. N ~ ~ N Ir l~" i~E Y~~ I Y~~_ r ~"1 ~Y~~ ki A ~,~Y, ~S Isp ~'Y,,. II. ~p~ 11'' ~ J'~I^~ ~~i '"Y+ ~ F rr h ~'Glt l~ w ~ ~~'1, a ~'r~ C," Y ~ ~"I IIyY"~ ~ I.°+ Y~"Y;° ~ 4 If...J .I-" J. rJ ?P~T ~ I~ y;,.~~oA.~h Y ~iM.l't . u~ u... C I ~ I. y~ ~ ~m~ 'r ~ ~ ~ ~ t Y + v Y I I A 1 ~ r h ~ I I I " u r 1~ YY I ~;.ti Y ~ + ~ Y v 11 it I~ V . YF Y I ~ 1. i~' ~ i, ! ~r.i, ~ Y~1 i ~Y~~ ~I~~ 1 ~ ~ I,N'N ~ 4 eI~ ~ r ~11~, B y$ NV"rr I.~+M ~?i~ yh ! ~ ,~~.„j~ r J? i Y, ;5 ~.%i ~ y?,~~Y~~PRigm 'I~~ 1~ k'M I, ~MYI ~'~~A~5 irAl ~r 1~Y 11 ~r "~.~,'~~'v~.~ u uY a i ~ ~'+"IF'' ICI t ~p~y~,,,ry~~,~~ f~:. ~ ~y~ 'J~.i~ i 0 r I ~y ; y F ~r ~ r r ,.h~~Rti,lAl17~"~;I~.~~~.~I ~~:~~ti~~~~~'~"~~„ ~~f~G~ v~~~~~'~~„ II,,r ~ I""~ 'I~I~lr.',~ I~"~..?~ R, o ~ ~ ~ I~~ r,. ~ W~~, IT ~ .,p ~,~•+.Y wp. ,,I 45,~°,. ~I I.. ~k~Y ''^1 ..~~+~Y. o+ ~~p.~~+„ mn`', ` ? "~:"ihE E~" ? +I 9E.~ti~ r~~I,,..I 1•~~.' .1 I~ ,•I. I o~., i:r,r ..L Y;' Im I~~+.I ~ ~h ~I~_a~ YI., Y~ ~I~ L:".. ~ ~ .I. ~I~I~ . ~.I~I"~Y,?Y.~ I.~Y.:. ~.Y . ~r..~.?~I ~ ; ?I~. ~..?.I..~ ..I ~~,.~1: a , . " _ ~ ~`,''+r~~`,:~:[+I'~~.~,Y~ !I"ti""til"-~• ~ L~`~~~.~'~~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ __.~~~I_ ,':~I~It~ I~':IL. ~;~rr'I I'a~~~ll'1?"~~i~~u," ~i"r_' ~"~I~~ ~ ~~~_,`Inm I~;' h;~1~' .~~",Ifl'If ~~~Y:N~I•~"il'II~'.:~:' ~ h h''~~ ^ ~ ~h. I ^ . ~ ~ ~ ~~ti r~~~"'~4';I~ ~ Y^ ^,°h'II~~'I~~ ? M'~~ I:' fl I ~1 d I• ~ r ~ I Al I a, I . Y.. ~ flh. ~ h'h ~ rl I ^Xm~ h~l ~ hi. I I ? r ~ I ? ~ h I I.~`a i ^ + ~ r~ I. I ~ uiu ? ? ~ + ~.E ~ ~ rl~i~ ^ h . '6 IM ~ ; , G 4. I r. Y "r Y ~ ;Y pe .1 . " ~ + ~ ~ T~ ' I . ~ i" . ~j ^r w, " ~ ~ INWN ' i°: .~16~?~I~fl'I°=~~,+~?~i7~_"" ?'.a~~l;;.., rn~? L~I~ ~~I?I~?~~~:r~~~~l.;~l l~::l~~~? ~°++~?1q??~~?:,_~ II~~~?a 1~.~.~~..?,,:~. L~LI?o~.+~~_ ~.11.1?~~.. ~,?~.L~~?_.~ „dl':~L.~~~ d ~!ol.,t ti,`~' I~'i~` .I~N'1'.'+ 1~..??';~'' I ~ :~°'I"~~_• I"~. Y.~I,IIh"'~c~ll~,'I''I`A" ?~~~4`rIN ~ IAA' 1.y!~YI'11 ,.pr.~I;?! ~~~.•..IL1~?? I ? •.1.~~:Il~~wr9, ~ ?~I~ ~ Y.~~.A1.l~ ~ r?A~'~~;I ~ Y~~I"wYvl ~A,~II C.+ . w.~.?~~,IuJ~~,'Y,hl',. ~ ~~M~ I, IN~.' ~1.''^.?~t'~M?h ' I" ' ~ ~ "l i I } i I . ~ I I ~ I M p V, n ry~ ~ ! % ~ ~ I "1 i'.I I I, ~ l , : I ~I ~ I h l I I ~ I ° . I. I '4 4 'i •I I. I . ~ ? I d l ? e h "i l . I I 1 1 I... ! ,~II~ I+C~?. ~ hip °II~.II~.L . ~,,II111~'.~ _w~~~ rl~ °r, "``'d.'• ~I +..r,.?,`~~„. I_' I. 'I'~~. "I„.w ~;~!I.?:Ii "+.I~a~'I,'"'I.~.IhII~~~° "~~,~..?1.yY~'. ~,,,,I~~?,~~ti~~~'•Y Y ~ I"I 1.. FI I I`Ih~.Y.h~ ~I IR ~P ! ~.I ~II~'~.A Y. I' I~ t, I I. I~ ~ i . I pp ~y ^ ~p . ;~J ~.ui ~+'++r ~Wr Ili; .I I I 4^~~ 9 ~ I P Yy irn ~?~.o? NI`Iy~'I,rII,?l~;I I"~_. +~:??+~rr. ~.~~I~ I"I II•,I ~ Irk IY ~~~.~'~u~~~~ u" I r. I ~ 1 ~ h ~h ~ I ~ ? L ~I Y~ 0 7 'I , . r ~ I ~ ~ I r ~ z ~I~ I ~ . ; ~ I''.:. l 1,~ ~ , 4 ~ h ~ I ? I I. I ~ I 'o J-" •~>I r"~ ~u? ~ #w"'' o ~ ~ . h,'1_ I.:•s I ~ ~ I.~,~ .I "I I I D~,1 ~ ~ ~ b Y~~,L ~ l 1 ~ ~ ~ Ik1°C'~~'I I?: t`5w `~~".~f~l;` ~ I I''~ . II ~ ..~i I`." ° ~ ~~~i.~ef l ~I t I I'ti ~u~' u. Y' w' ~I ~~'_'I I?" ,liar„i?~_'u' m ,d ~i111Y h,N~IM.,r"I~I~h~~ll,! ~ Jy t4 YI-I4'.A Ii ,~I?I~"s { pp ` R,i ~.+M 5r, i Yi 4, L ' + y," I I n, II I, I t f I ~Y ~ i Y 1 V ' . a. 4i Q! ~ ~ + " I, I lrr• ~ .Y RI I,.I ~il ~I~M N ~I N~ ~ I IY.r~sl.~+ I. "I l,h r.l~. i I ~i biYi ~'I r•'~~?fii I.~a i I I h ~.•I?; h.'i' `III IE MI I:.,r:l ~4' °i IM~~~~jh~~'rt ~i^~l.,~Y Iml~ IY:•I ~LI~"+~~,;a'II'II I".~~_' ~ ~rti~.b'~ r_'~_+~ L,t l~'~~~~' •~~~?I I "~'Y~" ~I 1.'~;~'I ,I'~'~?~r,'{ ~'I1.~~~'1, I'.~p~~~~I. ~~~_'`1+.~ ~"~',~~?I' I'~~ I ~ ~~i,~o'°l` '•~~'~r'~'M~LI.~~.~~ I I~ ~I.~_` C~1.! I I $I II Y1I E P " • " " YI 1 yR~ ~H I A N 1 ~ Ly f `I I Y . I ~ •IL ? I ~ _ ^ [ ~ ~I I 1 I ? I.. Y'+ 1~' ~ •I~X " 9 6 '.~u h. I I.. I I. 1 I r II it Y, + I ll•~ "i I ? I L~ 1 ' I I ICI 7 ly I. ~ i I I h ~i Y~., ~ •TI I I Y I I., 1 I ~h 11. I. ~ I ^C 1 ~ V, f ! ? ~ ~P v X 1 . ' ~I I~R I I ~rMwl~• ~Yil~. 4 I r 1 ~I_•~"lux `III Y_~,~s°~, ;_6h~ ti~l h'.' l~ i+_ ~ ~I ~ IMP'-~~?~~Lh l : ~'`~~~'Il.~+~.~~ i .r"e.?i~`~"v ~'Il~~~°?` C~~ I~'I I~, I'1.~ '•~`~o°~? ~ I~`s.~ I ~ RL"i_~I_'.B',?'~ ~ ~ I .?Y" • T o ~ ; ~ 'N I ~~"~~Y..~II~.III -,hpn.+:lIY+, MI?~ I? ~~r. I~„~~1.~'~~~M"Y~h. ?'.?~~I'.:rr~Y ~6M ~ I+.~.Il~~~~'4~~"Ifihl>Io.~:Yw~ ~ I'"p[?i~~~~I1.~I{`~~, ;~tlti'~~+Y,~II~ ••.~JfJ,~.~~'~ •~Y".~~?IY ~ ~„I ,,r•~..~ + r~~ uY f N;' M :P.• I''r~Yr?~~,~' ~~~~~;r Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 12-E PS&E Checklist Instructions Attachment D Noncollusion Af~davlt (Title 23 United States Code Section 112 and Public Contract Code Section 7106) To the CITY I COUNTY of Santa Ana DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS. In accordance with Title 23 United States Code Section 112 and Public Contract Code 7106 the bidder declares that the bid is not made in the interest of, or on behalf of, any undisclosed person, partnership, company, association, organization, or corporation; that the bid is genuine and not collusive or sham; that the bidder has not directly or indirectly induced or solicited any other bidder to put in a false or sham bid, and has not directly or indirectly colluded, conspired, connived, or agreed with any bidder or anyone else to put in a sham bid, or that anyone shall refrain from bidding; that the bidder has not in any manner, directly or indirectly, sought by agreement, communication, or conference with anyone to fix the bid price of the bidder or any other bidder, or to fix any overhead, profit, or cost element of the bid price, or of that of any other bidder, or to secure any advantage against the public body awarding the contract of anyone interested in the proposed contract; that all statements contained in the bid are true; and, further, that the bidder has not, directly or indirectly, submitted his or her bid price or any breakdown thereof, or the contents thereof, or divulged information or data relative thereto, or paid, and will not pay, any fee to any corporation, partnership, company association, organization, bid depository, or to any member or agent thereof to effectuate a collusive or sham bid. Note: The above Noncollusion Affidavit is part of the Proposal. Signing this Proposal on the signature portion thereof shall also constitute signature of this Noncollusion Affidavit. Bidders are cautioned that making a false certification may subject the certifier to criminal prosecution. r Pat Somerville, PE, Vice President Page 12-81 LPP 01-04 ~ March 15, 2001 Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 12-E PS&E Checklist Instructions Attachment E DEBARMENT AND SUSPENSION CERTIFICATION TITLE 49, CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS, PART 29 The bidder, under penalty of perjury, certifies that, except as noted below, he/she or any other person associated therewith in the capacity of owner, partner, director, officer, and manager: • Is not currently under suspension, debarment, voluntary exclusion, or determination of ineligibility by any federal agency; • Has not been suspended, debarred, voluntarily excluded or determined ineligible by any federal agency within the past 3 years; • Does not have a proposed debarment pending; and • Has not been indicted, convicted, or had a civil judgment rendered against it by a court of competent jurisdiction in any matter involving fraud or official misconduct within the past 3 years. If there are any exceptions to this certification, insert the exceptions in the following space. Exceptions will not necessarily result in denial of award, but will be considered in determining bidder responsibility. For any exception noted above, indicate below to whom it applies, initiating agency, and dates of action. Notes: Providing false information may result in criminal prosecution or administrative sanctions, The above certification is part of the Proposal. Signing this Proposal on the signature portion thereof shall also constitute signature of this Certification, Pat Somerville PE Vice President Page 12-83 LPP 01-04 ~ March 15, 2001 AECIM u 'I~ III I later within this Scope of Services. The development and construction of this project is IIIII~ ~I being undertaken by the City of Santa Ana (City), who ~ ~~~n~~l~'~ Inn will also be serving as the project's administrator for the The proposed project is to grade separate Santa Ana preliminary studies, environmental documentation, Boulevard at the Metrolink at-grade crossing. design, right-of-way engineering, right-of-way acquisition, and construction. The roadway width, and subsequent right of way width, The selection of the preferred alignment for the Santa will be determined based upon the City's General Plan Ana Boulevard Grade Separation will require the for Santa Ana Boulevard, as reinforced by the projected approval of the City and SCRRA/OCTA. The selection of traffic volumes generated by our traffic studies, as the locally preferred alternative, early in the project described later within this scope, and the number of development process, is critical in maintaining the lanes required for the year 2035 (or 2040) to provide a schedule for the project's completion. As stakeholders minimum Level of Service required by the City. in the project, local community and business owner The vertical alignment of the road will be designed to acceptance of the recommended alignment is a conform to sight distance and safety standards. prerequisite for City approval and a successful project. The proposed project will construct a Grade Separation at the crossing of Santa Ana Boulevard, with the The proposed Santa Ana Boulevard Grade Separation, SCRRA/OCTA Metrolink line (Metrolink). Phase 1 of the and the associated retaining walls, shall be studied to Project is Preliminary Engineering, requiring an determine the most cost effective and efficient investigation as to the most cost-effective alternative structural type, and this will include both pre-cast for separating the grades, beginning with a simplified concrete and steel through plate girder alternatives. The Project Study Report Equivalent (PSRE), and crossing will also be studied in terms of providing an culminating in a Project Report Equivalent (PRE), a aesthetic bridge structure consistent with the recommendation; and submitting a Notice of Exemption surrounding community. (Statutory Exemption) as a part of the California „ „ Environmental Quality Act CEQA .Phase 1 concludes I „ with the approval of the PA/ED. Phase 2 of the Project Thel PSRE shall be prepared similar to CALTRANS' development will require right-of-way acquisition, final regulations, policies, procedures, manuals and design: plans, specifications and cost estimates for the standards. The following items a. through d. are not all- construction ofproject; and relocation of utilities. We inclusive but are intended only to illustrate types of shall submit a CD to the City, which will include all sources. surveying, environmental reports, technical studies, the PSRE, the PRE, the design files, both plans and a. The PSRE will be prepared similarto Caltrans' specifications, and any supporting documents produced Project Development Procedures Manual during the course of the project development. This Appendix L -Preparation Guidelines for Project scope of services is written for Phase 1 only. Study Report. b. Roadway design shall be in general ~ conformance with the current CALTRANS Highway Design Manual, Standard Plans and AECOM shall provide professional and technical Specifications in English Units. engineering services necessary to investigate alignment c. Plans and estimates shall be prepared in alternatives, prepare a PSRE, documenting potential general conformance with the current editions solutions tothe project's purpose and need; a PRE, oftheCALTRANS Plans, Specifications and recommending an alternative; and providing the Estimates Guide, Standard Plans and Standard necessary documentation to obtain environmental Specification, and Basic Engineering clearance. Work will include, but not necessarily be Estimating System or as required by the City. limited to, preliminary engineering, field surveys, d. This PSRE shall be performed in accordance obtaining SCRRA/OCTA design requirements, traffic with CALTRANS and AASHTO standards and studies, geometric layouts, preliminary right-of-way practices. Any exceptions to applicable design layouts, and order of magnitude cost estimates. AECOM standards shall be approved by the City via the shall assist the City in any public meetings, City Council process outlined in CALTRANS' Highway Design presentations, and meetings with area business Manual and appropriate memorandums and owners. The work in Phase 1 is more fully described design bulletins published by CALTRANS. r~i f~, fr. ~~,.~~.o~, IE~:~ir~l~~s~l fir p~~:~~r~~e~t t~~~y Re~~~~r~~~: I~;q~uiiv~~e~~~~: ~ir~ ~ I::' ~'i p~~:~~l~in~ fair w,~~~ ir~~ Il~~l~v~ir~ r~~ e ~~~r~t'i~n I~° r~"eat ~ ~ ' AECIIV The PRE shall be in accordance with CALTRANS' 2. Solicit input regarding the goals for the regulations, policies, procedures, manuals and project desired by each agency. standards. The following items a. through d. are not all- 3. Agree on the intended scope of the project. inclusive but are intended only to illustrate types of 4. Agree on the basic design standards to be sources. met. a. The PRE will be prepared in accordance with The first step in the project development process will be Caltrans' Project Development Procedures to develop the conceptual alternatives for the project. Manual Appendix K -Preparation Guidelines for Project Report. Those elements to be considered will include: • Environmentallssues; b. Roadway design shall be in conformance with Traffic Requirements (Existing and Future); the current CALTRANS Highway Design Manual, Utility Impacts; Standard Plans and Specifications in United ExistingTopography; States Customary Units. Horizontal and Vertical Geometric Requirements; c. Plans and estimates shall be prepared in Right-of-way Impacts; conformance with the current editions of the Crossing Type Selection; and CALTRANS Plans, Specifications and Estimates Project Costs. Guide, Standard Plans and Standard Specification, and Basic Engineering After completion of this initial step, the City will review Estimating System, or as required by the City. the conceptual alternatives, the impacts and costs of d. This PRE shall be performed in accordance with each alternative within the PSRE and make a decision of CALTRANS and AASHTO standards and which alternatives are feasible and should be carried to practices. Any exceptions to applicable design the next step in the project development process - standardsshall beapproved by the City and preparation of the PRE. The PRE is the engineering document that provides the Caltrans via the process outlined in the transition between the conceptual plans and the CALTRANS' Highway Design Manual and proposed project. At the pre-PSRE meeting, the appropriate memorandum and design bulletins engineering specifics of the design scope will be published by CALTRANS. discussed. These will include the major features of work associated with the project, such as alternatives that substantially lessen or avoid environmental . ' ~ ~ I . I . impacts, number of lanes (current and future), and most We will obtain Project Approval and Environmental efficient crossing type. Additional items that need to be Clearance for the Santa Ana Boulevard Grade considered are roadway drainage systems, impacts to Separation Project, and this shall be done by preparing both existing and future utilities, and cost. a PSRE, a PRE, a Statutory Exemption (SE), and Categorical Exclusion (CE). ~ ~ , We will prepare and obtain approval from the City the , SCRRA/OCTA, Caltrans, and the Federal Highway ~ I ~ ' " I Administration (FHWA). The PRE will examine roadway ' ~ ,..I,.. alternatives documented in the approved PSRE, based II ~ ~ If~~~~ ~ I ~ ~ f ~Il~i ~Il~i°~~I ~~~'ii ilk ~~~,~~t l upon forecast traffic volumes, and existing topography, as well as alternatives for the crossing type, and shall The AECOM will assist the City on this phase of the recommend a preferred alternative, as well as the project with responsibility for the work effort within its approval of the environmental document. team. This task includes project management and administration; meetings; quality control/quality We will establish relationships with all the stakeholders assurance; agency, subconsultant railroad and utility in the project to solicit input and develop consensus coordination; project permit coordination; scheduling; duringthe project development process. Input from all budgeting; progress reporting, and invoicing. Progress stakeholders will be solicited early in the process and meetings will be held at monthly intervals, or as needed will continue throughout project development to between the City, SCRRA/OCTA, other stakeholders, and facilitate timely review and approval of the project. the Project Team. The purpose of these meetings will be A meeting with the City, Caltrans, the SCRRA/OCTA, and to review project status to ensure the contract other stakeholders will beheld before any significant objectives and milestones are being achieved. To work is started on the project. The purpose of this supplement these meetings, the AECOM Team will meeting will be to: maintain on-going communications with the City, 1. Review the PSRE and PRE Document SCRRA/OCTA, and other agencies as necessary. It is development process. anticipated several meetings with these agencies will be required to gain project approval for the locally r~i f~, fr. ~~,.~~.o~, Ii:~ir~l~~s~l fir p:~r~Ue~~ t~~y Re~~~r~: ~;q~uiiv~~e~~: ire ~ I::' i p:~l~ins fair w,~~~ ir~~ Il~~l~v~ir~ r~~ e ~~~r~t'i~n I~° r~"eat ~ ~ ' AECIIV preferred alternative. A schedule will be developed, maintained and updated for tracking the project. The aerial mapping will be prepared in conformance with Caltrans CAD mapping standards and Deliverables: photogrammetricspeclfications. Horizontal and • Required Copies ofMeetingMinutes vertical aerial control panels will be set to meet aerial • Updated Pro~ectSchedule triangulation requirements. The mapping will be • Public Meeting Exhibits prepared to 1" = 40' scale with 1-foot contours and will be delivered in a Microstation v8 format. Existing reports, studies, proposed and "as-built" plans, Survey crews will field verify the aerial mapping to mapping or other information will be obtained from the delineate planimetrics obstructed by tree coverage or City, utility companies and other agencies as applicable shadows and to verify the contours and spot elevations and reviewed by the design team. Data to be obtained generated from the aerial mapping. and reviewed includes: A color digital orthophoto with 3"pixel resolution will be • Mapping and design information from the City prepared from the 40-scale imagery. The digital for improvement projects; orthophoto will coverthe same mapping limits • Hazardous material/waste information; described above. • Preliminary materials (geotechnical) information; Deliverables: Traffic data (existing and forecasted traffic, ~ Aerial Mapping& Field Surveyin electronic and level of service, capacity adequacy, operational hard copy analysis, accidents, etc.); and DigitalOrtho Photo • Right-of-way and utility plans. We will prepare a traffic operations analysis for the Santa Ana Boulevard grade separation project. The Horizontal and vertical corridor control will be traffic operations analysis will examine existing and established along the corridor to support the aerial forecast future year conditions in the vicinity of the photogrammetry, land net surveys, engineering surveys OCTA/SCRRA at-grade crossing with Santa Ana and future design and construction activities along the Boulevard. The future year conditions examined will be corridor. The survey control will be set in accordance the project opening year and the project design year (20 with Caltrans survey standards and will be tied into the years after opening, assumed to be 2035). Conditions North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83 NSRS 2007) and examined will include the No Project Alternative and up the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88 to three build alternatives. Riverside County) or as specified by the client. The analysis will include examination of the following intersections: This task entails cadastral research within Caltrans District 12 and the County of Orange for existing ~ Santa Ana Bld./I-5 On and Off-ramp. centerline and right-of-way files and/or available Santa Ana Bld./Fuller St.. cadastral records in support of the centerline and right- Santa Ana Bld./Lincoln Ave. of-way of I-5, Santa Ana Boulevard, and Lincoln Street. Santa Ana Bld./Santiago Street. Field surveys will be performed to locate the centerline. We will coordinate with City staff and the PDTto develop In addition, key monuments will be located in order to an appropriate methodology for forecasting year 2035 calculate the centerline of the corridor and adjacent volumes at the study locations, relying on the SCAG RTP intersecting routes. The right-of-way will be based upon or OCTA OCTAM traffic model (or as the City requires) record calculations only and will not be surveyed. data to forecast year 2035 volumes. Aland net base map will be prepared at a scale Specific tasks to be performed for the traffic operations comparable to the aerial mapping and will include said analysis include the following: record centerlines and rights-of-way as well as underlying cadastral information, ownership 1. Peak period traffic counts will be collected at up to information as recorded with the Riverside County three study intersections, for two (a.m. and p.m.) assessor's office. All these data will be incorporated three-hour peak periods. The peak periods to be with the aerial mapping and delivered in a Microstation evaluated will be determined in conjunction with v8 format. the PDT. 2. Futureyeartrafficvolumesforthelocations identified for examination will be developed using r~i f~, fr. ~~,.~~.o~, Ii:~ir~l~~s~l fir p:~r~Ue~~ t~~y Re~~~r~: ~;q~uiiv~~e~~: ire ~ I::' i it p:~l~ins fair w,~~~ ir~~ Il~~l~v~ir~ r~~ e ~~~r~t'i~n I~° r~"eat ~ ~ ' AECIM growth rates calculated from the RTP model SED, reconstruction of atemporary at-grade crossing to as described above. facilitate construction ofthe grade separation. 3. Future year traffic volumes will be developed for the four build alternatives described above. Railroad Permitting 4. Opening year traffic volumes will be developed We will be responsible for assisting the SCRRA/OCTA in using growth rates calculated from the RTP model obtaining the Agreement with the SCRRA/OCTA. This will SED for an intermediate year, to be determined by be done by: the PDT. 5. The resulting intersection levels of service will be Coordinate with the SCRRA/OCTA duringthe calculated using Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) development of the preliminary plan for the 2000 analysis methodologies. grade separation and solicit their input and 6. Based on the future levels of service, intersection separation requirements. lane geometrics will be identified to maintain minimum level of service standards. Request the SCRRA/OCTA to prepare the 7. The results of the traffic operations analysis will be Construction and Maintenance Agreement. presented in a technical study. This study will document the level of service analysis Meet and confer with the SCRRA/OCTA methodologies employed, existingtraffic regardingtheterms and conditions ofthe conditions, forecast future (openingyear and Agreement. design year) traffic conditions for each alternative, and improvements needed to maintain satisfactory Furnish plans and cost estimates to the operations in each analysis year. SCRRA/OCTA for said agreement. Deliverables: Coordinate with the Project Surveyor for the • Traffic Analysis legal descriptions for the permanent bridge • Traffic Management Plan crossing of the SCRRA/OCTA right of way and the temporary construction easement. 1~ ~ I L II~"I d ~II1111II ~I W, ~ Iwo' ' ~ ~~~~~'w~ • Monitor and coordinate the development of the I ~ III' " I~~!' ~ W~ III III III '~~i~ ri~~~ I ~M m~~~m II~~~~N~ wu,~ III III II ~6wu~ III III MI~~ Agreement with the SCRRA/OCTA and the City. • Keep City updated with regards to the progress Preliminary engineering will focus on the physical of the Agreement development. characteristics ofthe project area and the engineering features and standards required to develop the project. Make recommendations tothe City regarding The alternatives we will develop will need to address the terms of project specific conditions cost effective ways to resolve access issues, for both addressed in the Agreement. vehicle traffic and rail traffic, to the local businesses. They will also address the potential expansion/changing With City concurrence, negotiate with the needs of the SCRRA/OCTA. SCRRA/OCTA the terms of project specific Deliverables: conditions. • Preliminary Roadway Plans, Profile and Typical Coordinate with and provide assistance to the Sections City staff and City attorney regarding the terms of the agreement. Track Design Coordinate the development and approval by Provide track design plans, draft shoofly layout plans, to the SCRRA/OCTA of shoofly plans. Shoofly include shoofly track geometry plans, mainline track plans prepared by AECOM. geometry plans, shoofly typical sections, mainline typical sections, track grading plans, and special Coordinate the development and approval by trackwork plans. the SCRRA/OCTA of temporary at grade Railroad Coordination crossing for the shoofly. We will coordinate with the SCRRA/OCTA regarding alternative grade separation study alternatives, Deliverables: including additional trackage, construction activity ~ City/Railroad Construction and Maintenance constraints due to train operations, both freight and Agreement passenger trains, clearances, modifications to and r~i f~, fr. ~~,.~~.o~, Ii:~ir~l~~s~l fir p:~r~Ue~~ t~~y Re~~~r~: ~;q~uiiv~~e~l~: ire ~ I::' i p:~l~ins fair w,~~~ ir~~ Il~~l~v~ir~ r~~ e ~~~r~~~'i~n I~° r~"e~~~ ~ ~ ' AECIIV . . ~~~~i~~.°~~w~~~~:~.L. ~ Structure can be used forthe structure type. Development of the PSRE and PRE will require the preparation of a bridge Advance Planning Study (APS) Precast units can expedite the construction schedule, for Santa Ana Boulevard Underpass. The purpose of the helping to reduce impacts to both the rail and the road APS is to evaluate feasible structure types, understand traffic. In addition, a precast, simply supported City requirements, identify constraints, and develop structure is the preferred railroad bridge type because associated cost estimate summary for the structure of its flexibility for repair and replacement in the future. work involved. The APS General Plan (GP) clearly Significant shoring would be required around the delineates all the structural elements identified in the construction area when constructing the bridge. PSRE and the PRE typically usingthe minimum detailing Retaining walls would be required for both the roadway necessary and basic dimensions, which will help depression and the raise of the rail profile. In order to develop a reasonable cost estimate. As a minimum, the facilitate the traffic staging/handling during the APS GP will show Plan, Elevation, and Typical Section construction, the walls constructed parallel to Santa views and will make note of all critical assumptions. Ana Boulevard could be constructed using "top-down" Additional APS's will be prepared as appropriate to construction; that is to build the wall first, and then consider alternative structure types. The APS General excavate the roadway in front of the wall to final grade. Plan and APS Report will be prepared on the most We will perform Value Analysis to determine the most current Caltrans APS formatted plan sheet, and cost effective retaining wall type, top down approach vs. templates respectively. conventional cantilever retainingwall usingtemporary shoring. Structure Preliminary Geotechnical Reports (SPGR) are required as part of APS to identify basic site A Single Span Structure Alternative can also be parameters, which may have a significant impact on the considered. The span length required to span the Santa structure scope and cost. In addition, a comprehensive Ana Boulevard roadbed is approximately 134'. The design memo must be prepared to summarize and typical span range for this type of construction extends document the following key items: to about 150-ft under Cooper E-80 loading. Therefore, even though the required span is nearingthe upper limit • Important or unusual design assumptions or of the typical structure span length, this structure type structure features. is suitable for construction of new underpass. The total • Discussions with City/OCTA/SCRRA personnel structure depth for the replacement of the double track concerning any key assumptions. would be approximately 13'-6". Provisions can be made • Modifications from Structure Maintenance in the bridge design so that is capable of supporting a Records recommendations. future third track, should this become a requirement of • Seismic retrofit modifications. OCTA/SCRRA. To support a possible third track, the • City requirements such as aesthetics, through girder, on the either left or right side of the improvements in vicinity of the structure, underpass, will be required to have a structure depth airspace usage, or other obstructions. approaching 15' in order to support the full weight of a • Special foundation requirements, special Cooper E-80 live load. excavations such asTypeA, Type D, and/or hazardous or contaminated material. During the APS development, through a careful and Special construction requirements, including deliberate process, we will study a number of different limited site accessibility. structure alternatives and configurations against Stage Construction. various interchange alternatives, and develop associated costs. The information identified in the APS, as listed above, and preliminary structure costs are used as a part of the Deliverables: evaluation to select the best project alternative. Draft and Final Structure Type Selection Report I i i ~~d If~ ~ ~ ~ l .R iii llii i It is proposed to construct a railroad bridge by lowering the Santa Ana Boulevard. III ~~lo ~ilil~~t~~~~~ We will identity and coordinate with the various utility A 2-Span Structure Alternative would work very well at companies for the location and descriptions of their this location. This proposed double track railroad facilities, including any potential for future utility bridge structure is approximately 126.7 feet long and improvements. 40.3 feet wide, with no skew to Santa Ana Boulevard. A Pier Bent is needed in the median of Santa Ana Utility Meetings and Utility Coordination Boulevard, which will result in the maximum span Coordinate and schedule meetings with Utility Owners length of 63.3 feet, and therefore a SCRRA Standard and project stake holders as may be required. Precast/Prestressed (PC/PS) Double Cell Box Girder r~i f~, fr. ~~,.y~on. Ii:~ir~l~~s~l fir p:~r~Ue~~ t~~y Re~~~r~: ~;q~uiiv~~e~~: ire ~ I::' i p:~l~ins fair w,~~~ ir~~ Il~~l~v~ir~ r~~ e ~~~r~t'i~n I~° r~"eat ~ ~ ' AECII Existing Utility Research mapped for use in the right of way acquisition phase of We will provide utility research services to include: the project. • Notify Underground Service Alert and request a Deliverables: listing of member utility companies within the Rightof VUayRequirements Maps project area. i Make a field reconnaissance of the utilities "i' i"~' "i ~ ~ within the project area. AECOM will prepare a hydrology study for the project • Send a written notice to the identified utility area in order to recommend drainage systems adequate companies in the proposed project area for the project improvements. These recommendations notifying them of the proposed project, and will be in the form of drainage plans, and associated request copies of their existing utility maps and cost estimates for these facilities, for inclusion into the information regarding their plans for future PRE, and will ultimately form the basis of the Hydrology improvements. and Hydraulics Report prepared duringthe PS&E phase of the project. In addition, a preliminary WQMP will be • Prepare a preliminary Utility Conflict Maps prepared to identify any permanent BMP requirements from record information and field observations forthe project. showingthose utilities to be protected in place and those to be relocated to clear construction. Deliverables: • Hydrology Study • Overhead lines will be located and vertical PreliminaryVUQMP clearance will be determined over the proposed o ~owi ~ ~ ~~iwi~~ I ~ ui~ wdw %i;;il~ wow o I o i ooa ~o~~ %i;;in improvements to assure that minimum vertical clearance is maintained. AECOM will calculate the preliminary level quantities, produce a preliminary level cost estimate, and produce • Determination of prior rights as they relate to a preliminary project schedule for inclusion into the responsibility for the cost of relocations. PRE. ,,,,i,,,, ~~~i °'i °'i If~~~~o~~~° i; I,,,,,,II~~~~ „ ~I ~,~I,,,,,., ~ I~~~~~~1) Deliverables: i • Preliminary Utility Conflict Maps AECOM will produce a Project Report, perthe • Utility Data Summary requirements previously mentioned in this document. • Matrix of Utility Owners • Description of Utility Conflicts Deliverables: • Project Report Equivalent (Draft and Final • Responsibility for the cost ~ ~~~i 'i i~ i I I iii ~ iii,,,. ii__.~~ I ii~ ~ ,,,,m I~~ ~,,m, " ilm~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ (~'N ~ ~ ~ ~ As with all projects the environmental phase of the Existing right-of-way information, including parcel boundaries will be shown on the alternative layout plans project controls the schedule. In order for us to have a and used to determine the preliminary right-of-way firmer grasp on this critical part of the schedule, AECOM requirements, which maybe required for each will provide a task manager who was previously alternative alignment. The cost of potential right-of- employed by Caltrans environmental. Every Technical way acquisitions, if any, will be included in the cost Report written by our environmental subconsultant will estimate for each alternative. Legal descriptions will be be reviewed prior to submission to the District, and to prepared, and it is assumed up to 50 (this is excessive, perform this review with an eye towards commenting on but conservative) shall be required, and this shall be what the Caltrans reviewer would comment on for the determined during the design. initial submittal of these reports. This process should ensure the team only receives a limited set of comments As the proposed alternative layout sheets are refined to once the reports are submitted to Caltrans, that can be include the information required for the PRE, the easily addressed, and therefore the approval of the impacts to right-of-way will also be more thoroughly report should be expected by the CITY upon the second defined. This updated information will be shown on the submission. right-of-way layout sheets and used to determine the . preliminary right-of-way requirements for each The environmental subconsultant, ICF Jones & Stokes, alternative alignment. The cost of potential right-of- will perform the following specific scope of work way acquisitions, including construction easements, required to complete the environmental documentation will be included in the cost estimate for the PRE. A for the proposed project. Additional tasks or effort not Right-Of-Way Data Sheet will be prepared and included specifically identified in this scope of work is not in the PRE. During the design, right of way needs will be assumed or implied. r~i f~, fr. ~~,.~~.o~, ~ Ii:~ir~l~~s~l fir p:~r~Ue~~ t~~y Re~~~r~: ~;q~uiiv~~e~l~: ire ~ I::' i p:~l~ins fair w ir~~ Il~~l~v~ir~ r~~ e~~~~r~ti~n I r~~e~t AECIM using primarily project layouts/graphics Tasks associated with completion of the proposed work provided byAECOM, sign in sheet, and effort are as follows: comment cards) • Attendance at informational meetingby the Environmental TaskManagerand one After receiving a notice to proceed and preliminary additional ICFJones & Stokes staffinember, if layout from AECOM for the build alternative, a Caltrans needed Preliminary Environmental Study (PES) form will be Direct mailing to propertyownersand residents prepared for submittal to City and Caltrans for review. located within 500 feetof the proposed project The purpose of the PES is to identify and receive (assumed thatAECOM'sright-of way concurrence from Caltrans regarding the technical consultantorthe City will provide the listof studies that will need to be prepared for the proposed owners and addresses) project and to receive concurrence regardingthe Preparation and publication ofineetingnotice environmental document to be prepared. The PES will once foreach meetingin one English and one be prepared using existing, available information and no Spanish language newspaper(assumed that new analyses or detailed evaluations are assumed or City will pay the newspaperdirectlyforthe included. As directed in the PES, cultural information publication) will be provided entirely by Caltrans. The PES will be revised twice following Caltrans review. Figures will include a vicinity map, a location map, and the layout All technical studies will be consistent with meeting the provided by AECOM. No additional figures or graphics requirements of CEQA and NEPA, as well as those of are assumed to be necessary. related environmental statutes and regulations. The technical studies will be prepared to cover both related Deliverables: statutory documentation requirements and to support • Draft, revised Draft, and Final PES, preparation of a joint NEPA/CEQA document required for project approval. Although not legally required for the level of Preparation of all technical analyses and reports will environmental document that is proposed, it is assumed follow local, state, and federal environmental that two public information meetings will be conducted guidelines, primarily consisting of the Caltrans for the proposed project. One at the outset of the Standard Environmental Reference (SER) website, project after the build alternative has been developed, Caltrans Project Development Procedures Manual, local and one during the PA/ED process at times to be and state CEQA Guidelines, and FHWA Technical determined by the City and Caltrans. The meetings will Advisory 6640.81 Guidance on Preparing and Processing utilize boards that present the project alternative. ICF Environmental and Section 4(f) Documents. The Jones & Stokes will assist the City and Caltrans in formats to be used for the technical studies will follow organizing and holding the informational meetings. It is the guidance available on the Caltrans SER website as assumed that the City will secure the location for the of the date that those studies are initiated. public meeting. For each meeting a notice will be prepared by ICF Jones & Stokes for publication in a Please see scope of work for each technical study for newspaper of local circulation (Orange County Register, details regarding studies to be prepared. etc.). This notice will be submitted to the City and Caltrans for review and approval. It is assumed that ICF Unless otherwise noted, the deliverables for the Jones & Stokes will coordinate publication of the notice following technical studies will be a separate bound in the newspaper and that the City will be responsible report including a standardized project description, a for paying the newspaper directly for the publication methodology relevant to each topic area, description of cost. It is assumed that the notice will be published in the affected environment, impact assessment, and one English and one Spanish language newspaper. ICF mitigation measures. The screencheck technical study Jones & Stokes will prepare asign-in sheet, comment will be submitted to the City (two copies) and to cards, and up to three display boards using project Caltrans (four copies) for concurrent review. Following layouts/graphics provided by AECOM. In addition, direct City and Caltrans review a Draft of each technical study mailings to property owners and residents living within will be submitted to the City (two copies) and to 500 feet of the proposed project will be distributed Caltrans (four copies) for concurrent review. Following using a mailing list generated and provided by AECOM's Caltrans and City second review it is assumed that a right-of-way consultant or the City. No other direct revisions workshop will be held to address any mailings are assumed. It is assumed that ICF Jones & outstanding comments, if any comments remain. Stokes Project Manager along with one additional Following the revisions workshop a final version of each individual, if needed, will attend the meetings. report will be prepared. The final technical studies (two copies to the City and four copies to Caltrans) will be Deliverables: submitted following the workshop for final concurrence • Meeting Materials (up to three 3Ox4Oboards r~i f~, fr. ~~,.y~on, Ii:~ir~l~~s~l ~~r p:~r~Ue~~ t~~y Re~~~r~: ~;q~uiiv~~e~~: ire ~ I::' i p:~l~ins fair w,~~~ ir~~ Il~~l~v~ir~ r~~ e ~~~r~~~'i~n I~° r~"e~~~ ~ ~ ' AECII (no additional comments are assumed to be received and no-build) and horizon year (build and no- associatedwith the final concurrence review). build) broken down into five mph speed bins. For this scope of work, the technical studies for which a This data is needed in order to evaluate GHG specific scope of work has been included have been emissions consistent with the latest guidance assumed based on a review of existing project from Caltrans Headquarters. This stems from information. If additional studies are identified during the fact that GHG emission factors vary the environmental phase of the project a scope of work depending on travel speed. and cost will be submitted for approval prior to their NEPA/404 integration process will not be initiation. required. • It is assumed that all rights of entry and access Deliverables (6Copies ofEachJ: for field work and surveys, if required, shall be • Screencheck technical studies obtai ned and provided by the City or AECOM. • Draft technical studies Public meetings and/or hearings are not • Final technical studies for concurrence assumed or included. • Final approved technical studies Section 4(f) Evaluation will not be required. • A Community Impact Assessment will not be The following assumptions have been made with regard required to the technical studies that are to be prepared: Relocations would not occur and a relocation document will not be required. • Engineering plans, including limits of construction, staging areas, and borrow/disposal sites, if needed, will be The proposed project improvements will be subject to provided by the engineering team at a level of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic detail sufficient for preparing the technical Preservation Act. This requires consideration of studies (roadway lanes, topographic potential project effects to historic properties including information [including changes in topography archaeological and historical resources listed in or resulting from the proposed project], state eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic plane tick marks, station numbers, and existing Places according to criteria listed in 36 CFR800. structures within 500 feet of the proposed Caltrans administers Section 106 compliance on behalf project). of FHWA and requires that documentation conform to • Mapping showing existing conditions (roadway specifications contained in Caltrans Standard lanes, topographic information, state plane tick Environmental Reference. As of January 1, 2004, marks, station numbers, and existing cultural resource studies must be prepared and structures within 500 feet of the proposed processed in accordance with the Programmatic project) will be provided by the engineering Agreement among the Federal Highway Administration, team. the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the • Cross sections along the alignment showing California State Historic Preservation Officer, and the existing and proposed conditions at an interval California Department of Transportation Regarding sufficient for preparing the noise analyses will Compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic be provided by the engineering team. Preservation Act, as it Pertains to the Administration of • Focused protocol surveys for any species are the Federal-Aid Highway Program In California. not included in this scope and cost, other those specified under the Natural Environment Study ICF Jones & Stokes shall conduct a records search at scope. If additional focused surveys are the Information Center of the California Historical identified during the biological field Resources Information System and through the Sacred reconnaissance then this will be communicated Lands File at the Native American Heritage Commission. to AECOM and the City and a scope and cost for This records search will consult California's database of this work will be provided. previous studies and previously recorded sites within • Traffic information shall contain 24-hour and the proposed project area and within a 0.5-mile radius, hourly traffic counts separated by direction and per Caltrans guidelines. Historic maps and photographs vehicle classification (autos, medium trucks, shall also be reviewed, if available. ICF Jones & Stokes heavy trucks) over at least three weekdays, shall establish an Area of Potential Effect (APE) map in along with peak hour and average daily traffic consultation with the City and Caltrans for obtaining (ADT) forecast traffic volumes for existing Caltrans approval. The map shall provide the survey conditions, opening year, and design year with boundaries for cultural resources to be evaluated during and without the project for roads in the project project studies. The APE map shall be based on the area, and posted speeds. In addition, total anticipated disturbance footprint associated with subregional/regional traffic information will be project activities (e.g., road widening/interchange provided that includes vehicle miles travelled construction, staging areas, detours, drainage facilities, (VMT) data for existing year, openingyear (build and parcels containing impacted structures, if any). ICF r~i f~, fr. ~~,.~~.o~, Ii:~ir~l~~s~l fir p:~r~Ue~~ t~~y Re~~~r~: ~;q~uiiv~~e~~: ire ~ I::' i p:~l~ins fair w,~~~ ir~~ Il~~l~v~ir~ r~~ e ~~~r~t'i~n I~° r~"eat ~ ~ ' AECIIV Jones & Stokes will also contact the Native American however, no resources or sites were identified during Heritage Commission and consult with Native American the field work that was performed for the Centerline groups and other interested parties to request project alongthe portion of Santiago Street where it information regarding the types of potential cultural intersects Santa Ana Boulevard. resources in the study area. Consultation will be conducted in accordance with appropriate and current Following completion and approval of the APE and state and federal regulations. detailed reports discussed above, a summary document (the HPSR) shall be generated in accordance with Following completion of the record search/review, ICF Caltrans/FHWA standards for Section 106 compliance Jones & Stokes shall conduct a field survey of the APE with the NHPA. It is anticipated that the proposed for archaeological resources. It is assumed thatthe City project shall result in an HPSR with a findingthat only or AECOM will be responsible for obtaining access for properties previously determined not eligible for conducting the surveys. This scope of work assumes inclusion in the NRHP or that are determined to be not that no archaeological sites will be identified in the APE eligible for inclusion in the NRHP are present within the and that no testing and/or evaluation will be required. It Project APE. No further cultural work, including Phase II is anticipated that an Archaeological Survey Report analyses/investigations and/or a Finding of Effect, are (Finding of No Archaeological Resources Present) will be assumed or included in this scope of work. prepared. for guidelines, the visual analysis will be prepared under the direction of a licensed Landscape Architect and Following completion of the record search/review, an based on FHWA's Visual Impact Assessment for ICF Jones & Stokes qualified architectural historian will Highway Projects. The existing visual environment and conduct a field survey of the proposed project area to viewshed will be analyzed using available mapping, record buildings, structures, and historic features aerial photos, GIS, and site reconnaissance. Project through photography and written descriptions. If plans and profiles will be analyzed to identify proposed buildings are substantially altered or are less than 50 physical changes to the study area and to aid in the years old, a qualified architectural historian can exempt identification of key observer viewpoints. them from further evaluation in accordance with the Section 106 PA. It is anticipated that up to four (4) Key viewpoints (visual quality "sensitive receptors")will buildings and structures will not be exempt under the be identified for the proposed project. Visual quality of PA and will require evaluation on California historic proposed conditions will be evaluated OF and FROM the resource inventory forms (series DPR 523). Any key viewpoints. That is, visual quality will be evaluated buildings beyond this number would be considered out "OF"the proposed improvements and "FROM" the of scope. ICF Jones & Stokes will send out letters improved facility toward the viewpoint. It is assumed requesting information on historic properties to local that up to three key viewpoints will be identified and governments, historical societies, and historic assessed. These viewpoints will be submitted to preservation organizations. The evaluation of Caltrans for approval prior to starting the analysis. properties within the APE will be reported in the FHWA methodology, includingthe evaluation of unity, Historical Resource Evaluation Report (HRER), which intactness, and vividness, will be applied. Mitigation will include a historic context statement. In addition, measures, such as finish treatment of structures and ICF Jones & Stokes will review the Caltrans historic sound barriers and plantings, will be recommended, if bridge inventory, and identify previously evaluated state necessary. Noise mitigation, including walls and/or and local bridges within the APE. berms will be included in the analysis if identified in the noise report. As part of the project an evaluation of several portions It is assumed that up to two visual simulations will be of what is anticipated would comprise the APE were included. evaluated. The depot that is located at the east end of the project alignment was constructed in 1986 and would not require evaluation (the original depot was ICF Jones & Stokes will prepare a noise study report demolished when the new depot was constructed). The evaluating the noise impacts and potential noise Juvenile Detention Home (located at 1207 Fruit Street) abatement/mitigation measures, if any, associated with was also evaluated as part of the Centerline project and the proposed project. Because federal and Caltrans it was concluded that the property does not appear to oversight is involved, the report will be prepared in meet the criteria for listing on the National Register of accordance with procedures specified by FHWA in Title Historic Places (NRHP) or the California Register of 23, Section 772 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Historical Resources (CRHR), and has not been (23 CFR 772) and the Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis designated as historic by the City of Santa Ana. No Protocol (Protocol). other resources were identified that required evaluation within what would be the anticipated APE for the ICF Jones & Stokes will conduct a site visit to identify proposed project. It was noted that the area along noise sensitive land uses and other features of the Santiago Street to the south of Santa Ana Boulevard has project area relevant to the noise study. Noise sensitive a high potential for buried archaeological resources, receptors have been identified, including those homes r~i f~, fr. ~~,.~~.o~, IE~:~ir~l~~s~l ~~~r p~~:~~r~~e~t t~~~y Re~~~~r~~~: ~;q~uiiv~~e~~~~: ~ir~ ~ ~ I::' ~'i p~~:~~l~in~ fair ~ . w,~~~ ir~~ Il~~l~v~ir~ r~~ e ~~~r~t'i~n I~° r~"eat ~ ~ ' AECIM located to the east ofthe rail line alongthe north side of Environmental Study Minimal Impacts (NES/MI) report Santa Ana Boulevard. ICF Jones & Stokes will consult analyzing potential impacts to biological resources. An with the Caltrans District 12 noise specialist assigned to NES/MI has been identified due to the limited amount of this project to ensure that all requirements are habitat located within the identified project area. The addressed. report will be prepared in accordance with Caltrans SER guidance and will conform to the Caltrans NES/MI Afield noise study will be performed to quantify and annotated outline that is available at the time that the assess existing noise conditions at the potential noise- NES/MI is initiated. The following tasks will be sensitive areas. It is estimated that short-term (10 to 15 performed during the preparation of the reports: minutes duration) sound-level data will be collected at up to four (4) representative noise-sensitive locations Review of Project Information and Applicable throughout the area. In addition continuous 24-hour Literature noise monitoring will be conducted at up to one location A literature review will be conducted to identify special- if asecure measurement location can be identified. status species known or reported from the project area. The literature review will include: ICF Jones & Stokes will conduct traffic noise modeling Special status species lists from the California related to the proposed project using the FHWA Traffic Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and U.S. Noise Model (TNM) Version 2.5 and traffic data to be Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS); provided by the project traffic engineer. TNM will be Database searches of current versions of the used to model worst-noise-hour noise conditions at California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) representative modeled receiver locations under and the Online Inventory of the California existing conditions and design-year conditions with and Native Plant Society (GNPs); without the proposed project. The most recent applicable Federal Register Traffic noise impacts ofthe proposed project under listing package and critical habitat 23CFR772 will be assessed by determining if determination for each federally listed implementation ofthe project is projected to result in Endangered orThreatened species potentially traffic noise levels under design-year conditions that occurring within the project site; approach or exceed the FHWA noise abatement criteria The most recent CDFG Annual Report on the or if implementation of the project is predicted to result status of California's listed Threatened and in a substantial increase innoise atnoise-sensitive Endangered plants and animals; and uses. If traffic noise impacts are projected to occur, Other available biological studies conducted in information on the preliminary feasibility and the vicinity of the project site. reasonableness of noise abatement as defined in the Protocol will be evaluated and presented for use by Field Evaluation for Biological Resource Constraints decision makers in considering noise abatement. ICF After reviewing relevant information, the project area Jones & Stokes will also evaluate potential construction will be evaluated, with a thorough walkover covering all noise impacts using methods recommended by the U.S. portions relevant to potential biological resource Department of Transportation. constraints. Detailed field notes will be compiled including conditions, visible disturbance factors, ICF Jones & Stokes will prepare a noise study report species, habitats, and more general biological resource addressing the requirements of 23CFR772 in issues observed or detected. The site will be evaluated accordance with guidance in the Protocol and following regardingthe presence, absence, or likelihood of the noise analysis report format outlined in the Caltrans occurrence for all special status species, habitats, or Technical Noise Supplement (TeNS). If warranted the more general biological resource issues potentially noise study report will include a preliminary noise posing a constraint to the project through applicable abatement design to schematically identify the location, laws and regulations. Adjacent areas will also be briefly height, and extent of noise walls needed to abate noise examined to provide context. It is assumed that access impacts. It is assumed that any noise abatement design shall be provided by the City or AECOM for the field and or Noise Abatement Data Report (NADR) would be surveys. If focused habitat evaluations for any species prepared and provided by AECOM. In accordance with other than those included in this scope of work or Protocol guidance, the description of noise walls will be focused surveys are required for any species then this sufficient for environmental review of the proposed will be communicated to the City and AECOM project, but not for final design of the walls. Abatement immediately and a separate scope and cost for this allowances will be provided for each wall evaluated. It work will be provided. The study area is assumed to be is assumed that any final noise wall designs would be the proposed project footprint plus 100 feet (where prepared by AECOM due to the detailed engineering that access is permissible). is required for the design of any such noise walls. This task includes evaluations/determinations for the following potential resource issues: • Habitat Evaluation for Burrowing Owl-A ICF Jones & Stokes will conduct a literature search, qualified biologist will perform an evaluation of perform field surveys, and prepare a Natural r~i f~, fr. ~~,.~~.o~, Ii:~ir~l~~s~l ~~r p:~r~Ue~~ t~~y Re~~~r~: ~;q~uiiv~~e~~: ire ~ I::' i p:~l~ins fair w,~~~ ir~~ Il~~l~v~ir~ r~~ e ~~~r~~~'i~n I~° r~"e~~~ ~ ~ ' AECIIV the potential for Burrowing Owl (Athene betaken. As noted, it is assumed that no cunicularia) to occur. All areas to be evaluated jurisdictional waters or wetlands will be will be examined carefully for habitat identified and no Jurisdictional Delineation characteristics and disturbance factors. The Report will be required. study area for this work is assumed to be the proposed project footprint and a 100-foot Technical Report Preparation buffer, as accessible to ICF Jones & Stokes. An A draft NES/MI will be developed based on results of the additional 400-foot buffer beyond the 100-foot biological surveys and analysis and will conform to the buffer will be visually assessed only. This current Caltrans NES/MI annotated outline, as scope and cost assume that the City or AECOM previously described. The report will describe: will be responsible for providing access. The study methods used in identifying and Potentially suitable habitat will be mapped. No assessing the biological resources at the permits are required to perform a habitat project site, the personnel who conducted the evaluation, but the biologist must be studies, contacts made with agencies, and any experienced with the species' biology, limitations associated with the study; identification of direct and indirect sign, and The environmental setting including both the physical characteristics ofpotentially suitable biological and physical setting at the project habitat. Habitat evaluations for this species site; can be performed any time of year. The results (The results, including special-status species will be directly incorporated into the NES/MI. present on the site, if any, and a discussion of This scope of work assumes that a focused impacts and mitigation, as necessary; and survey for burrowing owl will not be required. The appropriate regulatory requirements and necessary permits, if any. • Jurisdictional Waters Delineation -A qualified biologist will examine all relevant portions of At this time it is assumed that jurisdictional waters will the site and perform aroutine-level delineation not be impacted and permitting (i.e., Section 401 Water of the extent of potentially jurisdictional waters Quality Certification, Section 404 permit, or Section under both state and federal regulations. The 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement) would not be following field evaluations will be performed, required. Therefore, the processing of permits are not however, it is assumed that no jurisdictional included in this scope of work. If based on the field resources will be identified. Evaluation for work performed it is determined that these permits federal wetlands will follow the applicable would be required then a scope and cost for the methods in the 1987 manual from the Corps of preparation and processing of these permits can be Engineers, the 2006 Arid West supplement from provided by ICF Jones & Stokes if desired by the City the Corps of Engineers, and the Rapanos and AECOM. Guidance (2007), along with subsequent supporting materials and applicable regulations, policy, and case law. The study ICF Jones & Stokes will prepare a Community Impact area for this work will include the proposed Assessment. ICF Jones & Stokes will identify the project footprint along with a 50-foot buffer. community impacts on neighborhoods, businesses, and This scope and cost assume that the City or minority and low-income populations, as well as the AECOM will be responsible for providing project's consistency/compatibility with the existing access. The work will be at a routine (rather and future land uses and plans in the area. The than comprehensive) level of detail, that is, community impact analysis will be prepared in point sampling and standard criteria accordance with Caltrans Environmental Handbook (hydrology, soils, and vegetation) will be used Volume 4: Community Impact Assessment. Topics to be to identify, map and calculate total area for addressed in the community impact analysis will federal and state jurisdiction, but no laboratory include social impacts, economic impacts (change in testing of soils or water, no hydrological or employment and tax base changes), land use/growth hydrogeomorphicanalysis ormodeling, no (consistency with local plans, development formal statistical analysis, and no extensive opportunities), farmland, and public services impacts records searching, will be provided. Evaluation (accessibility and parking, utilities). of existing functions and values for jurisdictional areas will be addressed at a The community impact assessment considers how the qualitative level. Mapping will be performed at proposed project activity would affect the people, a scale of 1 inch equals 200 feet (1:2400) or institutions, neighborhoods, communities, better, with a minimum mapping unit of no organizations, and larger social and economic systems. more than 0.05 acres, and will reflect the The community impact analysis will provide a clear delineated boundaries of any jurisdictional description of the existing conditions, the potential waters and wetlands present. Photographs impacts of the project on the community and how the representative of relevant site conditions will r~i f~, fr. ~~,.~~.o~, IE~:~ir~l~~s~l ~~~r p~~:~~r~~e~~~ t~~~y Re~~~~r~~~: I~;q~uiiv~~e~~~~: ~ir~ ~ I::' ~'i p~~:~~l~in~ fair w,~~~ ir~~ Il~~l~v~ir~ r~~ e ~~~r~~~'i~n I~° r~"e~~~ ~ ~ ' AECII project relates to other development (existing and the number of employees, building size, parking areas, proposed) in the area. The significance of the identified and owner/tenant mix. In addition, ICF Jones & Stokes impacts, and mitigation measures to best avoid the will identify and evaluate potential relocation resource adverse impacts resulting from the project will be areas and any difficulties that may arise, relocation- identifiedand discussed, as appropriate. related business issues, and the project's effects on the local tax base. Potential impacts to minority and low-income populations, if any, will be addressed in compliance Following public availability of the environmental with Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address document, a Final Relocation Impact Report (FRIR) will Environmental Justice in Minority and Low-Income be prepared that identifies relocation resources, timing Populations. Data from the 2000 U.S. Census will be of acquisition, and more detailed displacee data. This used to identify characteristics of populations within scope of work does not include interviewing the census block groups traversed by or adjacent to the affected owners and tenants of the displaced proposed project. Community profiles will also be properties, if required. collected for the local project area, City, County, and the State of California to help identify regional and local trends in regards to demographics, local industry, occupations, and tax base. Potential impacts during the It is assumed that a combined Paleontological construction phase due to access limits will be analyzed Information Report/PaleontologicalEvahiation Report and measures to address these impacts proposed, if (PIR/PER) will be prepared that will identify and required. document the viability of paleontological resources existing with the project's study limits. The following Existing planning documents will be reviewed and identifies the tasks to be performed. potential beneficial and adverse land use impacts of the proposed project and mitigation measures, if required, Literature Search and Field Review will be identified. Applicable Laws -ICF Jones & Stokes shall review relevant State and federal statutes, regulations, and guidelines to determine the requirements for It is anticipated that relocations and property protection of paleontological resources specific to acquisition would be required as part ofthe project, this project. particularly to the west of the rail line. ICF Jones & Coordination with Agencies and Schools -ICF Jones Stokes will analyze the primary and secondary effects & Stokes shall coordinate with appropriate of potential acquisitions and displacements that would agencies and educational facilities to collect data be caused by the proposed project. The relocation regarding paleontological sensitivity. impact document is anticipated to be a Relocation Library Search -ICF Jones & Stokes shall search Impact Report (Draft and Final) based on past relevant published information, including technical experience within the District. A Draft Relocation geologic and paleontological articles, discussions Impact Report (DRIR) will be prepared pursuant to of fossil localities and their geologic context, FHWA guidelines/policies to comply with the Uniform geologic maps, and descriptions of sedimentary Relocation and Assistance and Real Property geologic units in the project area. Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended, the Museum Record Search -ICF Jones & Stokes shall California Relocation Act, and as described in Chapter examine unpublished specimen records in 10 ofthe Caltrans Right-of-Way Manual. The DRIR will museums to obtain information relatingto resource provide the City, Caltrans, and the public with distribution in the project area. information on the impact this project will have on Field Review -ICF Jones & Stokes shall visit the residential and non-residential occupants. It is proposed project site to observe stratigraphic assumed that adequate relocation resources would be features, bedding geometry and other relevant available for displacees. geologic features. Using aerial photography, 2000 U.S. Census data Data Compilation & Sensitivity Assessment (supplemented with additional State, County, and City Data accumulated from the above sources will be data, as available), windshield surveys, and interviews integrated and summarized to provide a description of with local real estate agents, if needed, ICF Jones & the known aspects of the resource, if relevant. These Stokes will identify characteristics of potential aspects include the probability that the affected relocations, includingthenumber/type of residences, geological units include paleontological resources, the businesses, farms, and/ornon-profit organizations. ICF probable/possible significance of any likely fossils, and Jones & Stokes will identify the characteristics ofthe the effects of any historic surface modifications. residential displacements including lot size, The goal of the PER portion of the report is to identify improvements on parcel, age of structures, general the potential for impacts to significant paleontological condition, and the number ofbedrooms/bathrooms. For resources within the project's limits. The report businesses characteristics to be documented include r~i f~, fr. ~~,.~~.o~, Ii:~ir~l~~s~l ~~r p:~r~Ue~~ t~~y Re~~~r~: ~;q~uiiv~~e~~: ire ~ I::' i p:~l~ins fair w,~~~ ir~~ Il~~l~v~ir~ r~~ e ~~~r~~~'i~n I~° r~"e~~~ ~ ~ ' AECII prepared will identify and document anticipated impact The air quality technical report will provide the following to paleontological resources existing with the project's discussions and analyses: limits of disturbance (both vertical and horizontal), if potential impacts exist. RegulatorySettingand Existing Conditions. Summarize the existing federal, state, and local air ICF Jones & Stokes shall prepare aPIR/PER that quality regulatory environment as it affects the includes the following: proposed project, and describe the location of sensitive • Summary of the proposed project receptors in the project vicinity. Using data provided by • Delineation of the project limits the California Air Resources Board (GARB) and the • Delineation of the project excavation locations and SCAQMD, characterize existing air quality conditions in depths the project area and explain how those conditions are • Document efforts to avoid or minimize effects on affected by local climate and topography. paleontological resources • Identify significance and/or sensitivity of Evaluation of Construction Emissions. Based on paleontological resources and/or rock units current District 12 procedure, provide a qualitative following the guidance provided at: discussion related to construction emissions. http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/volt /sec3/physical/Ch0 8Paleo/chap08paleo.htm#pir Evaluation ofOperations-Period Mass Emissions. • Identification of sources consulted and results of Evaluate whether the project meets transportation that consultation conformity requirements by determining whether it is Identification of any consultation related included, as currently defined, in the most recent constraints Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and Regional Identification of a course of action, including Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) prepared identification of specific geologic formations and by the Southern California Association of Governments paleontological resources (SCAG). It is assumed that the projects will be included in the RTIP and that a regional analysis will not be • Identification ofthe persons preparingthe PIR/PER and their qualifications required. • Identify whether a Paleontological Mitigation Plan Localized Carbon Monoxide HotSpotAnalysis. (PMP) is recommended Analyze the degree to which project-related traffic volumes have a potential to effect local carbon It is assumed that a PMP will not be recommended or monoxide (CO) concentrations usingthe California required for the proposed project and one is not Department of Transportation CO Hotspot Protocol. It is included in this scope and cost. It is further assumed anticipated that the CO screening procedure will be that the findings of the PIR/PER will be negative and no appropriate. However, it is assumed, based on additional paleontological tasks or effort will be experience within the District that CALINE-4 dispersion required. modeling will also be performed. It is assumed that up to two intersections will be modeled. Based upon the last three road/rail grade separation Localized PM2.5/PM~OHotSpotAnalysis. Analyze projects that ICF Jones & Stokes has performed in the degree to which project-related traffic volumes have southern California an air quality report may not be a potential to affect local PM2.5 and PM10 required forthe project. It has been determined on concentrations, based on the United States these other three projects that as long as the project Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidance does not add additional capacity or include the document entitled Transportation Conformity Guidance installation of new stop signs or traffic signals that an for Qualitative Hot-spot Analyses in PM2.5 and PM10 Air Quality Report is not required. However, an Air Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas. This scope and Quality Report has been included in this scope and cost cost assumes that a screening level analysis is in case it is ultimately determined to be required by the appropriate, and that no modeling will be required by District. This will be discussed early in the process with Caltrans or FHWAto address PM2.5 and PM10. Caltrans and further document in the PES that is prepared. Mobile Source Air Toxics. Evaluate proposed project- related mobile source airtoxics (MSATs) emissions in ICF Jones & Stokes will prepare an air quality technical accordance with FHWA interim guidance on how MSATs report that analyzes air pollutant emissions associated should be addressed in NEPA documents. It is not with changes in vehicle speed and traffic distribution assumed that extensive qualitative analyses would be patterns resulting from the proposed project. All impact required to address MSATs. If an extensive quantitative analyses will be performed consistent with the analysis is required for the project, then a scope and technical requirements and methodologies outlined in cost estimate would be provided for this additional the Caltrans' Standard Environmental Reference (air effort, however, such an analysis is not anticipated. quality chapter). r~i f~, fr. ~~,.~~.o~, Ii:~ir~l~~s~l fir p:~r~Ue~~ t~~y Re~~~r~: ~;q~uiiv~~e~~: ire ~ I::' i it p:~l~ins fair w,~~~ ir~~ Il~~l~v~ir~ r~~ e ~~~r~~~'i~n I~° r~"e~~~ ~ ~ ' AECIIV Climate Change/Greenhouse Gas Emissions. A project. If components are added to the project that are quantification ofoperational-period greenhouse gas not related to the grade separation then the statutory (GHG) emissions associated with implementation of the exemption may not apply and additional work not proposed project will be conducted. Consistent with covered in this scope and cost, including a CEQA current Caltrans policy, construction-period GHG document, may be required. emissions will not be quantified. Operations-period GHG emissions will be quantified using regional daily peak-period and non-peak-period vehicle miles traveled (VMT) apportioned into 5 mph speed bins for speeds A Notice of Exemption (NOE) will be prepared and between 5 mph and 75 mph; and the CT-EMFAC provided to the City for approval and submittal to the emissions model. ICF Jones & Stokes will present a State Clearinghouse. This notice starts the statue of comparison of GHG emissions associated with the Build limitations under CEQA so it is recommended that the Alternative(s) to the No-build Alternative to characterize City file this notice. No additional CEQA documentation effects of the proposed project on GHG emissions. The beyond the completion of the NOE form is assumed as analysis of climate change also will also incorporate the part of this scope and cost. most recent guidance found on the Caltrans Standard Based on the environmental technical studies Environmental Reference and Caltrans annotated previously discussed a Categorical Exclusion (CE) will be outline. prepared pursuant to NEPA. ICF Jones & Stokes will prepare the CE in compliance with the latest format Air Quality ConformityAnalysis Reportand Checklist. identified on Caltrans Standard Environmental Under NEPA delegation, the federal air quality Reference website. In addition, the Categorical conformity determination has not been delegated to Exclusion Checklist will be prepared. Caltrans and must be made by FHWA. We will prepare a As part of the CE a detailed project description will be separate Air Quality Conformity Analysis using the included. The CE will also include a very brief (two to annotated outline for this report on the SER at the time three sentence) summary of the findings of each of the that the report is initiated and will also prepare the technical studies. No separate environmental Conformity Checklist based on the checklist that is document is assumed to be prepared to support the CE available on the SER at the time that the Air Quality and none is included in this scope and cost. Conformity Analysis Report is prepared. It is assumed that ICF Jones & Stokes will revise the CE twice based on commentsfromtheCityand Caltrans (to SCAG Transportation Conformity WorkingGroup. The be reviewed concurrently). required TCWG form will be completed and submitted for forwarding to SCAG for inclusion on the agenda for Environmental Commitments Record determining if the project is a project of air quality For the project an environmental commitments record concern (POAQC). It is assumed the project will be (ECR) will be prepared in a matrix table format. The ECR found to not be a POAQC and that no specific analysis will be submitted to the City and Caltrans in hard copy will be required related to the TCWG determination and electronic form. The matrix table will include a other than what is already included in this scope of description of each mitigation measure organized by work. topic numbered to correspond with the impacts. For each mitigation measure, the Reporting Process, Timing Mitigation Measures. ICF Jones & Stokes will develop of Measure, Responsible Party, and Verification of mitigation measures, where applicable, to address Compliance will be identified through coordination with significant air quality impacts, if present. resource agencies and experience on other similar projects. The ECR will be included with the CE and it is assumed that this document will be reviewed as part of For the proposed project it is assn med that the N EPA the City and Caltrans review of the CE. document to be prepared will be a Categorical Exclusion with technical studies. Railroad grade separations are Deliverables (S Copies Each).• identified as NEPA Categorical Exclusions under 23 CFR Notice ofExemption 771.117(4). Railroad grade separations are statutorily Draftand Final Categorical Exclusion and exempt from CEQA, as identified in Section 21080.13 of MMRP the Public Resources Code and in Section 15282(8) of the CEQA Guidelines. Statutorily exempt projects are excused entirely from the environmental review process and the requirements of CEQA. In addition, all activities performed to support these projects are also included in If for some reason a NEPA CE were found to be not the exemption. It is assumed that all project appropriate for the proposed project then an components are associated with the railroad grade Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant separation and would be covered under the exemption. Impact (EA/FONSI) would be prepared. Under this Therefore, it is assumed that no CEQA document or scenario the previously identified Section 4.0 documentation will be required forthe proposed (Environmental Document) scope would be replaced r~i f~, fr. ~~,.~~.o~, Ii:~ir~l~~s~l fir p:~r~Ue~~ t~~y Re~~~r~: ~;q~uiiv~~e~~: ire ~ I::' i p:~l~ins fair w,~~~ ir~~ Il~~l~v~ir~ r~~ e ~~~r~~~'i~n I~° r~"e~~~ ~ ~ ' AECII with this Section 4.0 scope of work. In addition, the Revised Draft EA following modifications would be made to the meeting Second Revised Draft EA and project management tasks for the project. Final Draft EA forapproval/concurrence • Final Draft EA 30 hard copies and one electronic (pdfJ Draft EA for a vailability (including the 75 copies for submittal to the Draft Environmental Assessment State Clearinghouse) (Volume 7J; ~SCDs with It is assumed that if a NEPA CE is not agreed upon by technical studies; ~OOCDs with Final Draft ED Caltrans then the appropriate document for the Itis assumed that up to 700 notices will be proposed project will be an Environmental Assessment distributed. (EA) followed by a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). If a higher-level document is required then a separate scope and fee will be provided for preparing the increased level of documentation. While the final Draft EA is being reviewed by the City and Caltrans a Notice of EA Availability and Notice of Utilizing the information contained in the technical Opportunity for Public Hearing announcing the reports, along with additional information and analyses publication of the EA will be prepared for publication. that are performed, as necessary, a Screencheck Draft The notice will also identify the date, time, and location EA will be prepared based on the current version of the for the public information meeting that is to beheld. NEPA-only document annotated outline that is available This notice will be submitted to the City and Caltrans for at the time that the document is initiated. The review and comment. A public hearing would beheld for Screencheck Draft EA will be submitted to the City and the project if a request for a public hearing were Caltrans for review. Along with the Screencheck Draft received in response to the Notice of Opportunity. It is EA, the external QA/QC form and environmental not anticipated that a public hearing will be requested document checklist will be prepared and submitted. or required. ICF Jones & Stokes will coordinate the The QA/QC form and checklist are assumed to be publication of the Notice in an English and Spanish included with each submittal. language newspaper; however, it is assumed that the City will be responsible for paying the publications Following the incorporation of comments from the City directly for the publications. The cost of and Caltrans the Draft EA will be prepared and advertisements is not included in this scope and cost. submitted for City and Caltrans review. Followingthis review the revised Draft EA will be prepared and Deliverables: submitted for City and Caltrans review. Following this Draftand Final NDA/NOPH (assumed to be review any comments will be addressed and a revision transmitted electronically with no hard copies) workshop will be conducted, if needed. Followingthe workshop the second revised Draft EA will be submitted Response to Comments to the City and Caltrans for concurrence and for the At the close of the public availability period for the Draft Caltrans NEPA QC review. Followingthe incorporation EA, ICF Jones & Stokes will review and respond to all of comments from the Caltrans NEPA QC review the comments received. In addition, ICF Jones & Stokes will final Draft EA will be submitted for Caltrans review and attend a meeting with City and Caltrans staff to review approval/concurrence. It is assumed that the project any written comments on the Draft EA that were will qualify as a regular and not a complex EA. It is received and to discuss potential responses to these assumed that 30 hard copies and one original of the comments, if the comments received warrant such a Final Draft EA will be printed for circulation, including meeting. The responses to comments will be forwarded the 15 copies to be submitted to the State to the City and Caltrans for review and approval priorto Clearinghouse. It is assumed that technical studies will making any changes to the EA, if the comments received be provided on CD only for inclusion with the documents are substantial enough to warrant this process. It is that are made available at the City, Caltrans, and the assumed that no comments requiring new analyses or local library. ICF Jones & Stokes will utilize a substantial revisions to existing analyses, or from distribution list developed with the City and Caltrans for lawyers, will be received. distribution. It is assumed that distribution to agencies will consist of a CD and not hard copies of the Deliverables (SCopiesJ: document. All other recipients would receive the Notice Responses to comments to the Cityand of Availability (NOA) only. The NOA will be mailed to Caltrans forreviewand concurrence property owners and residents living within 500 feet of the proposed project using a mailing list generated and provided by AECOM's right-of-way consultant or the City. U on a royal of the res onnes to comments b the Cit p pp p y Y and Caltrans, if warranted, ICF Jones & Stokes will Deliverables(two copies City; eight copies Caltrans): revise the EA to respond to the comments, to document • Screencheck EA Draft EA r~i f~, fr. ~~,.y~on, Ii:~ir~l~~s~l ~~r p:~r~Ue~~ t~~y Re~~~r~: ~;q~uiiv~~e~~: ire ~ I::' i p:~l~ins fair w,~~~ ir~~ Il~~l~v~ir~ r~~ e ~~~r~~~'i~n I~° r~"e~~~ ~ ~ ' AECIIV the circulation period and coordination, and if any Environmental Commitments Record changes to the project have occurred. Also, included For the project an environmental commitments record will be a Draft Finding of No Significant Impact (EONS/). (ECR) will be prepared in a matrix table format and ICF Jones & Stokes will submit the Draft Final EA/EONS/ included as an appendix in the EA/EONS/. It is assumed to the City and Caltrans for review. Along with the Draft that the ECR will be reviewed as part of the EA/EONS/. Final EA/EONS/, the external QA/QC form and The matrix table will include a description of each environmental document checklist will be prepared and mitigation measure organized by topic numbered to submitted. The QA/QC form and checklist are assumed correspond with the impacts. For each mitigation to be included with each submittal. Followingthe measure, the Reporting Process, Timing of Measure, incorporation of one set of comments from the City and Responsible Party, and Verification of Compliance will Caltrans a revised Draft Final MND/EONS/ will then be be identified through coordination with resource prepared and submitted to Caltrans along with a agencies and experience on other similar projects. response to comments document for concurrence and for conducting the NEPA QC review. Following the Deliverables: Caltrans NEPA QC review the Final EA/EONS/ will be Included in Final EA/EONS/ prepared and submitted to the City and Caltrans for review. It is assumed that no additional comments will be received. ICF Jones & Stokes will prepare a notice for publication in the Federal Register by FHWA to start the NEPA Deliverables (two copies City; eightcopies Caltrans): statute of limitations. This notice will be prepared in • Draft Final EA/EONS/ compliance with the SER and it is assumed that a Draft • Revised Draft Final EA/EONS/ and Final version of the notice will be prepared and that • Final Draft Final EA/EONS/for coordination and publication of the notice will be the approval/concurrence responsibility of Caltrans and FHWA. • Final EA/EONS/ (70 hard copies and 70 CDs with pdf version) Deliverables: • Draft and Final Federal Register Notice (all transmittals assumed to be done electronically) r~~ f~ fr. ~~,.~~.o~, ~ Ii:~ir~l~~s~l ~~r p:~r~Ue~~ t~~y Re~~~r~: ~;q~uiiv~~e~~: ire ~ I::' i p:~l~ins fair w ir~~ Il~~l~v~ir~ r~~ e~~~~r~ti~n I r~~e~t M N M '_U M O ~i -ry N N n N (D N ~n._ V N N N N O W n co 0 ~ ~ 111 M S ~ ~ ~a~~s N ~ r c~Na Q ~ L ~ Q ~ W N~Qa _ 0 I J 0 ~ ~ ~ . V m a,,, ~ V 0 ~ j ~ ~ ~ a _ ~ N V M ' ~ ) 'I V1 y N y N N N N N N N N N N N N W N N N IA N N N y y N ill N N N N N N N N N N N Vl lq N N U1 Ul Ul N N N N N N N W N N U1 Ul U1 N N U1 N N N lU N T~~~ T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T~ T T T~~ T T T T T T T T T T T T T T~~ T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T c N 16 !6 f6 N N lO N (9 N (0 N'.. l0 fO N (0'.. N (0 N N',. R N (9 N',. R 16 N N'.. N (0 N lU N lO N (9 N (0 N'.. N R R N N lU N'.. N N N N'.. (0 N'.. N N'.. N (0 N N N lO N (9 f0 (O fO N N'.. N °'6'6'Caaaa,-oa-oa,-o~-o-o,-o-aaa',-aa-oa','o'o -oa,-o-a-oaaaa,-oa-oa,-o'0~a-oaaaa-oa,-o~,-o-o,-o-a-oaaaa,-oa-oa-o~,-o SON N NlO Ol00'.0000'.OOlt~O'.O lO Ol0 I.0000',.~ ~ ch lfi'.000OIf)l00'.0000'.0000000'.0000'.00'.00'..0 lOOl0 lf10 r'. lOr~lOrO'.O ~ Onn C7r 47.N 47 C7 C7 t`7rrN. rrr..n V t'7 r o7 V VN r47.N Nr.. 00 r(p (D OC77V V lt7 lDO~rOOP7 f7 C7 C7 C7 C7 ~ f0 r r '..N ~ N In r r r N Q ~ I ~ ~ I N I Q ~ H W U ~ a ~ c Q ~ m is m c ~ m W N d ' ~ ' ' ' 'v of c m N ~ ~ (7J L OL E O O N "6 ~ Q N ~ j Q N N C N NW+, V U ° 0 al, ~ W - L a v N~u1 ~ E o r a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a Qo E ~ ~ U t3 E m 3~a ~ L ~ ~o~"~~ a ~ ~ ~ ° ~ ~ N a°i ~ ~ rn ~ N c ~ N ~ t W m ~ ~ Q a a ~m~~ rn E ~ ~ a a U~ a ~~d~ w~,~mwaci~m~EaQE~a~ c~~o c = rn ~ a - o ° mQ~ me Eo~Ha~,~ W Z L c > al~-~m W d m m~ w~~m~ ~ v ~ ~°(q~ ~,N~o~~~o~~Ua~U~~O ~ °O-Q° °O°~ c ° m ~,o> T w o~ U "Q ~"a E.°~ uJpyQ$ool> p c o a m e >,o' `m c a m o m rn o~ Q 3 0> 0 3 c m o p 0 ~ ~ a Y O N ° ~ aU W ° ~ ~,W ° ~ - o o c o, o 0 0 ~ c a.= N, (n ~ a~ ° al 3 3 a ~ Z O Q U ~ ° N O Q' W o w '6 c rn Q u o ~ ~ a ~ v o w N N N a~ ~N U a j U~ U> W ~ 0~ in a U o U o ul ~ w ~ (A a~ ~ c c Q c ~ m ~ Y m~ m2~ m a~ ° c~ c m a>i m m'~ a~ c ~UfA~ c~m~o ~ TWd L ~U~R mW ~m~, >~wom~`om~ a me g.'~mmwa~Q~~~o~(IJ~U~ooLQ~ 41 0~ O ~ Q UI N "6 Q' W C N Q ~ >l0 Q Q C_ 3 d~ C a O N > C N ~ N~ ~ fl_ N O E N a tQ O~ 16 0 C U~ ~ y (n a W Y a~ 0 ~ ~p N y 0~ w> N d O~ W O 7 N D C" S O N T C Q~ N N N 16 ~ C~ C; N O- N O Nd~pw4 v ~ d Tm p Qa m mU a ° ac mwa o w0+. c o o. „UUU O ~U to °~Q ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~0 ~ Q f>0 1° U ~ ~ W ~ ~s c c (n ~ ~ c al w a ~ ° 16 ~ ~ U m 3 ° > R N c a W U m Q o m Q ~ ~ m N-o N m ° u, ~ a~ ul = m ='C>'s~mcaQ~~ >~m m~m*'moW+.O °~~m~ ~Es_° m~°*'~o°~~~O~~mvEmU~c~U°U,~U.~mmam ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a m ~ ~ ~ ~ o W d,~ a>i d m ~ c c d v N W o a ~ ~ ~ ~j ~ ~,d ~ ~ d a v'~ c ~ m d ~ ~ m ~ o m o ~ ~ ~ a°i a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m c ~ ~,~W °~m a.~ ° aa°1 ~r ~ E~ ~ E o o F•o~ m a~ E v m ~ E~ Q ~twQZSii~=QZ~U>iiQrnQi~aUQUaaUWa 0 d ~ a~ ~ ~+~'o ~ ~ o ~ c ~',p c c ~''a ~ m o,~`., o c c'~ ~ ~ c',~ 0 V os ~~Oap~adc7cn~UOrnUWU >wwcnN ~>s~n(~~n=U~i~ocnU~U Qs 's YaYa a N ~ ~ R HZH ~ ~ N M V N f0 h o7 O O ~ N M V 1f7 (D I~ W Qi O N M V N (D [ M V (D N M V N (D f~ of 0 0 N M V If1 (D I~ W 61 O N M V N (D I~ o] ~ N N N N N N N N N M V V V V V V V V V lf1 N N 1f7 N 1f7 N In N v1 fD f0 f0 (0 (0 (0 fD fD f0 ~ ~ . ~ e , ~ ~ ~ r Y° '.I' ~ h~ i F y Ja d I. _ ~ f ~ i ~ 1 f Pu '9~"~ R w w+o u ~~l a . e n ~ ~ u a. e 7 per ~d~ ,vi: r ~f: r ~i:, ~ A r ~ v f; r e~ `'d ` ~ i ~~"~4 z /F a , r ~b s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ jr d e 4 ~ ~ ~ i ti, ~ yrv~»~ , ~ yet ~n 4~ i, yy, ~{r t e 97 e~1 r a ~ ~ ~ ~ / II ~ / 1 , e N ~ ~ 1 Y. n J f C t I~ ~l~ n ~ Y 0. , i o Mr / V A F. ;r.~;. I I c d; ~ P?~ ~ ~ `1„Qua., Gi/r/ Y I, I ~ j ° III ~ : i . ~ ~ iii ~ i( ~ ~ Ash#~~'~ © -u , ` o ~ ~ ~ Y. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ n S # ~ ~ ~ i i ~ ~ iii. `r ~ kl' A, ~ i~,; ~ II i i 6 i ~ r ~ ~ "a m u r it ~r ~r t ~ ~ u~~ ~ ~4~~ _ U ~ z ~ f ~ ~ . ~a ~ ~ ~p~ u " ~ ; . ,,.,~u ~ w a a ~ 4 ~S . ~ ~ ¢ k ~ ,i ~ ' ,t t ! II~d 1 i.i iy f Il~ ~ , u j ; i oq ~ r rr w~ r r ~ ~ t ~ t~ ~ I~' ^ r ~ r ~ w ~5' L,.s a a i.M' l r, ~ I ~ b x R° Y YI ~ .r r - i !f~„ u~~ Q,. ~ . P ,r7~ ~ 6 .~fi'IYIIYYY!'~i ~r~Q , .v ~ ;,..i,... ,.~a d~ , , a~w~ i~~ ~ ~ , II°,~ ii~..~ .~~r ~ ~ it i~ ~ i~~°~ ii°~, , i I,,. i ii ~ ~ r~~~ ii a r II 111 I ~ 'I II`~ J ~ II`~ w~ ~a u u ii ii it ~ '~w~;~ ~~Wr ~ ~~~W~ I~ II I~ I 'i iii ~ ~u~ ins I~~ ~ i i .'I , ins II°~ i~~°l I'~,~ ~~'il N i ~'il l a~w~ i~ ~i i~~° i~ ii° a~w~ i~~~ II,,,,, ~ , i m,~ , III u~ a u,~w. , ~,.M iii, . ~ i~~°~~~ I ~ I ~ i ~ II 111 Q ~ I ~ ~ ~ II 25G-150 EXHIBIT A-2 REVISED SCOPE OF WORK 8z FEE SCHEDULE December 20, 2010 14 25G-151 Exhibit A-2 Santa Ana Boulevard Grade Separation Project Scope of Services for Completion of the Project Approval/Environmental Document Phase Description of Project The development and construction of this project is being undertaken by the City of Santa Ana (City), who will also be serving as the project's administrator for the preliminary studies, environmental documentation, design, right-of-way engineering, right-of-way acquisition, and construction. The selection of the preferred alignment for the Santa Ana Boulevard Grade Separation will require the approval of the City and SCRRA/OCTA. The selection of the locally preferred alternative, early in the project development process, is critical in maintaining the schedule for the project's completion. As stakeholders in the project, local community and business owner acceptance of the recommended alignment is a prerequisite for City approval and a successful project. The proposed project will construct a Grade Separation at the crossing of Santa Ana Boulevard, with the SCRRA/OCTA Metrolink line (Metrolink). Phase 1 of the Project is Preliminary Engineering, requiring an investigation as to the most cost-effective alternative for separating the grades, beginning with a simplified Project Study Report Equivalent (PSRE), and culminating in a Project Report Equivalent (PRE), a recommendation; and submitting a Notice of Exemption (Statutory Exemption) as a part of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Phase 1 concludes with the acquisition of right of way. Phase 2 of the Project development will require final design: plans, specifications and cost estimates for the construction of project; and relocation of utilities. We shall submit a CD to the City, which will include all surveying, environmental reports, technical studies, the PSRE, the PRE, the design files, both plans and specifications, and any supporting documents produced during the course of the project development. This scope of services is written for Phase 1 only. Description of Work General Description of Required Services Phase 1 - Preliminary Engineering, PSRE, and PRE AECOM shall provide professional and technical engineering services necessary to investigate alignment alternatives, prepare a PSRE, documenting potential solutions to the project's purpose and need; a PRE, recommending an alternative; and providing the necessary documentation to obtain environmental clearance. Work will include, but not necessarily be limited to, preliminary engineering, field surveys, obtaining SCRRA/OCTA design requirements, traffic studies, geometric layouts, preliminary right-of-way layouts, and order of magnitude cost estimates. AECOM shall assist the City in any public meetings, City Council presentations, and meetings with area business owners. The work in Phase 1 is more fully described later within this Scope of Services. Proposed Project The proposed project is to grade separate Santa Ana Boulevard at the Metrolink at-grade crossing. Highway Alignments The roadway width, and subsequent right of way width, will be determined based upon the City's General Plan for Santa Ana Boulevard, as reinforced by the projected traffic volumes generated by our traffic studies, as described later within this scope, and the number of lanes required for the year 2035 to provide a minimum Level of Service required by the City. The vertical alignment of the road will be designed to conform to sight distance and safety standards. Citv of Santa Ana 25G-152 Structural Improvements The proposed Santa Ana Boulevard Grade Separation, and the associated retaining walls shall be studied to determine the most cost effective and efficient structural type, and this will include both pre-cast concrete and steel through plate girder alternatives. The crossing will also be studied in terms of providing an aesthetic bridge structure. Applicable Standards The PSRE shall be prepared similar to CALTRANS' regulations, policies, procedures, manuals and standards- The following items a. through d. are not all-inclusive but are intended only to illustrate types of sources. a. The PSRE will be prepared similar to Caltrans' Project Development Procedures Manual Appendix L - Preparation Guidelines for Project Study Report. b. Roadway design shall be in general conformance with the current CALTRANS Highway Design Manual, Standard Plans and Specifications in English Units. C. Plans and estimates shall be prepared in general conformance with the current editions of the CALTRANS Plans, Specifications and Estimates Guide, Standard Plans and Standard Specification, and Basic Engineering Estimating System or as required by the City. d. This PSRE shall be performed in accordance with CALTRANS and AASHTO standards and practices. Any exceptions to applicable design standards shall be approved by the City via the process outlined in CALTRANS' Highway Design Manual and appropriate memorandums and design bulletins published by CALTRANS. The PRE shall be in accordance with CALTRANS' regulations, policies, procedures, manuals and standards. The following items a. through d. are not all-inclusive but are intended only to illustrate types of sources. a. The PRE will be prepared in accordance with Caltrans' Project Development Procedures Manual Appendix K - Preparation Guidelines for Project Report. b. Roadway design shall be in conformance with the current CALTRANS Highway Design Manual, Standard Plans and Specifications in United States Customary Units. C. Plans and estimates shall be prepared in conformance with the current editions of the CALTRANS Plans Specifications and Estimates Guide, Standard Plans and Standard Specification, and Basic Engineering Estimating System, or as required by the City. d. This PRE shall be performed in accordance with CALTRANS and AASHTO standards and practices. Any exceptions to applicable design standards shall be approved by the City and Caltrans via the process outlined in the CALTRANS' Highway Design Manual and appropriate memorandum and design bulletins published by CAI-TRANS. Project Understanding We will obtain Project Approval and Environmental Clearance for the Santa Ana Boulevard Grade Separation Project, and this shall be done by preparing a PSRE, a PRE, a Statutory Exemption (SE), and Categorical Exclusion (CE). We will prepare and obtain approval from the City, the SCRRA/OCTA, Caltrans, and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The PRE will examine roadway alternatives documented in the approved PSRE, based upon forecast traffic volumes, and existing topography, as well as alternatives for the crossing type, and shall recommend a preferred alternative, as well as the approval of the environmental document. We will establish relationships with all the stakeholders in the project to solicit input and develop consensus during the project development process. Input from all stakeholders will be solicited early in the process and will continue throughout project development to facilitate timely review and approval of the project- City of'San/a Ana 25G-153 A meeting with the City, Caltrans, the SCRRA/OCTA, and other stakeholders will be held before any significant work is started on the project. The purpose of this meeting will be to: 1 . Review the PSRE and PRE Document development process. 2. Solicit input regarding the goals for the project desired by each agency. 3. Agree on the intended scope of the project. 4. Agree on the basic design standards to be met. The first step in the project development process will be to develop the conceptual alternatives for the project. Those elements to be considered will include: • Environmental Issues; • Traffic Requirements (Existing and Future); - Utility Impacts; • Existing Topography; • Horizontal and Vertical Geometric Requirements; • Crossing Type Selection; and - Project Costs. After completion of this initial step, the City will review the conceptual alternatives, the impacts and costs of each alternative within the PSRE and make a decision of which alternatives are feasible and should be carried to the next step in the project development process - preparation of the PRE. The PRE is the engineering document that provides the transition between the conceptual plans and the proposed project. At the pre-PSRE meeting, the engineering specifics of the design scope will be discussed. These will include the major features of work associated with the project, such as alternatives that substantially lessen or avoid environmental impacts, number of lanes (current and future), and most efficient crossing type. Additional items that need to be considered are roadway drainage systems, impacts to both existing and future utilities, and cost. Phase 1-Preliminary Engineering, PSRE, and PRE Task 1.1 Project Coordination/Management/Public Outreach The AECOM will assist the City on this phase of the project with responsibility for the work effort within its team. This task includes project management and administration; meetings; quality control/quality assurance; agency, subconsultant railroad and utility coordination; project permit coordination; scheduling; budgeting; progress reporting, and invoicing. Progress meetings will be held at monthly intervals, or as needed between the City, SCRRA/OCTA, other stakeholders, and the Project Team. The purpose of these meetings will be to review project status to ensure the contract objectives and milestones are being achieved. It is also anticipated AECOM will lead one (more if needed) public meeting, and will be chairing two coordination meetings with the consultants working on other, adjacent projects. To supplement these meetings, the AECOM Team will maintain on-going communications with the City, SCRRA/OCTA, and other agencies as necessary. It is anticipated several meetings with these agencies will be required to gain project approval for the locally preferred alternative. A schedule will be developed, maintained and updated for tracking the project. Deliverables: Required Copies of Meeting Minutes Updated Project Schedule Public Meeting Exhibits Task 1.2 Research and Data Collection Existing reports, studies, proposed and "as-built" plans, mapping or other information will be obtained from the City, utility companies and other agencies as applicable and reviewed by the design team. Data to be obtained and reviewed includes: Clly of S-1, A- 25G-154 • Mapping and design information from the City for improvement projects; • Hazardous material/waste information; - Preliminary materials (geotechnical) information; • Traffic data (existing and forecasted traffic, level of service, capacity adequacy, operational analysis, accidents, etc.); and • Right-of-way and utility plans. Task 1.3 Topo/Base/Field Work/Design Surveys Control Surveys Horizontal and vertical corridor control will be established along the corridor to support the aerial photogrammetry, land net surveys, engineering surveys and future design and construction activities along the corridor. The survey control will be set in accordance with Caltrans survey standards and will be tied into the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83 NSRS 2007) and the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88 Riverside County) or as specified by the client. Land Net Surveys and Mapping This task entails cadastral research within Caltrans District 12 and the County of Orange for existing centerline and right-of-way files and/or available cadastral records in support of the centerline and right-of-way of 1-5, Santa Ana Boulevard, and Lincoln Street. Field surveys will be performed to locate the centerline. In addition, key monuments will be located in order to calculate the centerline of the corridor and adjacent intersecting routes. The right-of-way will be based upon record calculations only and will not be surveyed. A land net base map will be prepared at a scale comparable to the aerial mapping and will include said record centerlines and rights-of-way as well as underlying cadastral information, ownership information as recorded with the Riverside County assessor's office. All these data will be incorporated with the aerial mapping and delivered in a Microstation v8 format. Photogrammetric Mapping The aerial mapping will be prepared in conformance with Caltrans CAD mapping standards and photogrammetric specifications. Horizontal and vertical aerial control panels will be set to meet aerial triangulation requirements. The mapping will be prepared to 1" = 50' scale with 1-foot contours and will be delivered in a Microstation v8 format. Survey crews will field verify the aerial mapping to delineate planimetrics obstructed by tree coverage or shadows and to verify the contours and spot elevations generated from the aerial mapping. A color digital orthophoto with 3" pixel resolution will be prepared from the 50-scale imagery. The digital orthophoto will cover the same mapping limits described above. Task 1.4 Traffic Operations Analysis We will prepare a traffic operations analysis for the Santa Ana Boulevard grade separation project. The traffic operations analysis will examine existing and forecast future year conditions in the vicinity of the OCTA/SCRRA at- grade crossing with Santa Ana Boulevard. The future year conditions examined will be the project opening year and the project design year (20 years after opening, assumed to be 2035). Conditions examined will include the No Project Alternative and up to three build alternatives. City of Son/P A- 25G-155 The analysis will include examination of the following intersections: • Santa Ana Bld./1-5 On and Off-ramp. • Santa Ana Bld./Fuller St.. • Santa Ana Bld_/Lincoln Ave. • Santa Ana Bld./Santiago Street. We will coordinate with City staff and the PDT to develop an appropriate methodology for forecasting year 2035 volumes at the study locations, relying on the SCAG RTP (regional) traffic model (or as the City requires) data to forecast year 2035 volumes. Specific tasks to be performed for the traffic operations analysis include the following: 1. Peak period traffic counts will be collected at up to three study intersections, for two (a.m. and p.m.) three-hour peak periods. The peak periods to be evaluated will be determined in conjunction with the PDT. 2. Future year traffic volumes for the locations identified for examination will be developed using growth rates calculated from the RTP model SED, as described above. 3. Future year traffic volumes will be developed for the four build alternatives described above. 4. Opening year traffic volumes will be developed using growth rates calculated from the RTP model SED for an intermediate year, to be determined by the PDT. 5. The resulting intersection levels of service will be calculated using Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000 analysis methodologies. 6. Based on the future levels of service, intersection lane geometries will be identified to maintain minimum level of service standards. 7. Weaving operations will be analyzed for traffic movements on the westbound segment of Avenue P between the Avenue P Westbound Connector Road and Third Street for Alternatives 1 and 2 using Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000 analysis methodologies 8. The results of the traffic operations analysis will be presented in a technical study. This study will document the level of service analysis methodologies employed, existing traffic conditions, forecast future (opening year and design year) traffic conditions for each alternative, and improvements needed to maintain satisfactory operations in each analysis year. 9. Our traffic subconsultant will attend up to eight meetings related to the proposed project. Engineering Studies of Various Feasible Plan Alternatives Roadway Task 1.5 Prepare Alternatives Concepts/Geometric Preferred Alternative Development Preliminary engineering will focus on the physical characteristics of the project area and the engineering features and standards required to develop the project. The alternatives we will develop will need to address cost effective ways to resolve access issues, for both vehicle traffic and rail traffic, to the local businesses. They will also address the potential expansion/changing needs of the SCRRA/OCTA. Deliverables: Preliminary Roadway Plans, Profile (1"=20' Scale), and Typical Sections City Sank, Ana 25G-156 Railroad Track Design Provide track design plans, draft shoofly layout plans, to include shoofly track geometry plans, mainline track geometry plans, shoofly typical sections, mainline typical sections, track grading plans, and special trackwork plans. Railroad Coordination We will coordinate with the SCRRA/OCTA regarding alternative grade separation study alternatives, including additional trackage, construction activity constraints due to train operations, both freight and passenger trains, clearances, modifications to and reconstruction of a temporary at-grade crossing to facilitate construction of the grade separation. Railroad Permitting We will be responsible for assisting the SCRRA/OCTA in obtaining the Agreement with the SCRRA/OCTA. This will be done by: • Coordinate with the SCRRA/OCTA during the development of the preliminary plan for the grade separation and solicit their input and separation requirements. • Request the SCRRA/OCTA to prepare the Construction and Maintenance Agreement. • Meet and confer with the SCRRA/OCTA regarding the terms and conditions of the Agreement. • Furnish plans and cost estimates to the SCRRA/OCTA for said agreement. • Coordinate with the Project Surveyor for the legal descriptions for the permanent bridge crossing of the SCRRA/OCTA right of way and the temporary construction easement. • Monitor and coordinate the development of the Agreement with the SCRRA/OCTA and the City. • Keep City updated with regards to the progress of the Agreement development. • Make recommendations to the City regarding the terms of project specific conditions addressed in the Agreement. • With City concurrence, negotiate with the SCRRA/OCTA the terms of project specific conditions. • Coordinate with and provide assistance to the City staff and City attorney regarding the terms of the agreement. • Coordinate the development and approval by the SCRRA/OCTA of shoofly plans. Shoofly plans prepared by AECOM. • Coordinate the development and approval by the SCRRA/OCTA of temporary at grade crossing for the shoofly. Deliverables: City/Railroad Construction and Maintenance Agreement City of Sonta Ana 25G-157 Public Utilities Commission Commission's Order Authorizing Construction of the Grade Separation This work is not part of the Phase 1 Scope of Services, rather it shall be done during Phase 2. Commission's Order Authorizing Alteration of the Existing At-grade Crossing This work is not part of the Phase I Scope of Services, rather it shall be done during Phase 2. Task 1.6 Structural Analyses/APS Structures Development of the PSRE and PSR will require the preparation of a bridge Advance Planning Study (APS) for Santa Ana Boulevard Underpass. The purpose of the APS is to evaluate feasible structure types, understand City requirements, identify constraints, and develop associated cost estimate summary for the structure work involved. The APS General Plan (GP) clearly delineates all the structural elements identified in the PSRE and the PRE typically using the minimum detailing necessary and basic dimensions, which will help develop a reasonable cost estimate. As a minimum, the APS GP will show Plan, Elevation, and Typical Section views and will make note of all critical assumptions. Additional APS's will be prepared as appropriate to consider alternative structure types. The APS General Plan and APS Report will be prepared on the most current Caltrans APS formatted plan sheet, and templates respectively. Structure Preliminary Geotechnical Reports (SPGR) are required as part of APS to identify basic site parameters, which may have a significant impact on the structure scope and cost. In addition, a comprehensive design memo must be prepared to summarize and document the following key items: # important or unusual design assumptions or structure features. .6 Discussions with City/OCTA/SCRRA personnel concerning any key assumptions. .l. Modifications from Structure Maintenance Records recommendations. .L1 Seismic retrofit modifications. 6 City requirements such as aesthetics, improvements in vicinity of the structure, airspace usage, or other obstructions. .4 Special foundation requirements, special excavations such as Type A, Type D, and/or hazardous or contaminated material. .L Special construction requirements, including limited site accessibility. .L Stage Construction. The information identified in the APS, as listed above, and preliminary structure costs are used as a part of the evaluation to select the best project alternative. Santa Ana Boulevard Underpass It is proposed to construct a railroad bridge by lowering the Santa Ana Boulevard- A 2-Span Structure Alternative would work very well at this location. This proposed double track railroad bridge structure is approximately 126.7 feet long and 40.3 feet wide, with no skew to Santa Ana Boulevard. A Pier Bent is needed in the median of Santa Ana Boulevard, which will result in the maximum span length of 63.3 feet, and therefore a SCRRA Standard Precast/Prestressed (PC/PS) Double Cell Box Girder Structure can be used for the structure type. Precast units can expedite the construction schedule, helping to reduce impacts to both the rail and the road traffic. In addition, a precast, simply supported structure is the preferred railroad bridge type because of its flexibility for repair and replacement in the future. Significant shoring would be required around the construction area when constructing the bridge. Retaining walls would be required for both the roadway depression and the raise of the Crrv o/ Sawa A- 25G-158 rail profile. In order to facilitate the traffic staging/handling during the construction, the walls constructed parallel to Santa Ana Boulevard could be constructed using "top-down" construction; that is to build the wall first, and then excavate the roadway in front of the wall to final grade. We will perform Value Analysis to determine the most cost effective retaining wall type, top down approach vs. conventional cantilever retaining wall using temporary shoring. A Single Span Structure Alternative can also be considered. The span length required to span the Santa Ana Boulevard roadbed is approximately 134'. The typical span range for this type of construction extends to about 150-ft under Cooper E-80 loading. Therefore, even though the required span is nearing the upper limit of the typical structure span length, this structure type is suitable for construction of new underpass. The total structure depth for the replacement of the double track would be approximately 13'-6"_ Provisions can be made in the bridge design so that is capable of supporting a future third track, should this become a requirement of OCTA/SCRRA. To support a possible third track, the through girder, on the either left or right side of the underpass, will be required to have a structure depth approaching 15' in order to support the full weight of a Cooper E-80 live load. During the APS development, through a careful and deliberate process, we will study a number of different structure alternatives and configurations against various interchange alternatives, and develop associated costs. Deliverables: Draft and Final Structure Type Selection Report Task 1.7 Existing and Future Utilities Issues/Permitting Utility Impacts/Coordination We will identity and coordinate with the various utility companies for the location and descriptions of their facilities, including any potential for future utility improvements. Utility Meetings and Utility Coordination Coordinate and schedule meetings with Utility Owners and project stake holders as may be required. Existing Utility Research We will provide utility research services to include: • Notify Underground Service Alert and request a listing of member utility companies within the project area. - Make a field reconnaissance of the utilities within the project area. • Send a written notice to the identified utility companies in the proposed project area notifying them of the proposed project, and request copies of their existing utility maps and information regarding their plans for future improvements- • Prepare a preliminary Utility Conflict Maps from record information and field observations showing those utilities to be protected in place and those to be relocated to clear construction. • Overhead lines will be located and vertical clearance will be determined over the proposed improvements to assure that minimum vertical clearance is maintained. - Determination of prior rights as they relate to responsibility for the cost of relocations. Ci[y S-1-4- 25G-159 Deliverables: Preliminary Utility Conflict Maps Utility Data Summary; Including a matrix of: Utility Owners, Utility Representatives, Description of Utility Conflicts and Responsibility for the cost of relocation. Task 1.8 Right of Way Requirements ROW Identification/Impacts/Data Sheets Existing right-of-way information, including parcel boundaries will be shown on the alternative layout plans and used to determine the preliminary right-of-way requirements, which may be required for each alternative alignment. The cost of potential right-of-way acquisitions, if any, will be included in the cost estimate for each alternative. Legal descriptions will be prepared, and it is assumed up to 50 (this is excessive, but conservative) shall be required, and this shall be determined during the design. As the proposed alternative layout sheets are refined to include the information required for the PRE, the impacts to right-of-way will also be more thoroughly defined. This updated information will be shown on the right-of-way layout sheets and used to determine the preliminary right-of-way requirements for each alternative alignment. The cost of potential right-of-way acquisitions, including construction easements, will be included in the cost estimate for the PRE. A Right-Of-Way Data Sheet will be prepared and included in the PRE. During the design, right of way needs will be mapped for use in the right of way acquisition phase of the project. Deliverables: Right of Way Requirements Maps Task 1.9 Drainage Analyses/Report Hydrology Study/Report AECOM will prepare a hydrology study for the project area in order to recommend drainage systems adequate for the project improvements. These recommendations will be in the form of drainage plans, and associated cost estimates for these facilities, for inclusion into the PRE, and will ultimately form the basis of the Hydrology and Hydraulics Report prepared during the PS&E phase of the project- Deliverables: Storm Water Data Report Task 1.10 Quantities, Schedule and Estimate AECOM will calculate the preliminary level quantities, produce a preliminary level cost estimate, and produce a preliminary project schedule for inclusion into the PRE. Task 1.11 Project Report Equivalent (Draft and Final) AECOM will produce a Project Report, per the requirements previously mentioned in this document. Deliverables: Project Report Equivalent (Draft and Final) Task 1.12 Environmental Documentation As with all projects the environmental phase of the project controls the schedule. In order for us to have a firmer grasp on this critical part of the schedule, we have included on our team an Environmental Manager. Ms. Alicia Colburn will be serving in this capacity for the duration of the environmental clearance process. City of Santa A- 25G-160 It will be Ms. Colburn's responsibility to chair meetings, periodically (maybe even monthly beginning when the technical reports are close to submission to the District) with the District 8 Environmental Staff to address issues, comments, and to answer questions. Ms. Colburn will also be tasked to review each and every Technical Report written by our environmental subconsultant prior to submission to the District, and to perform this review with an eye towards commenting on what the Caltrans reviewer would comment on for the initial submittal of these reports- In this manner, Ms. Colburn will be able to perform a Caltrans-style review of the reports prior to submission to Ca/trans. This process should ensure the team only receives a limited set of comments once the reports are submitted to Caltrans, that can be easily addressed, and therefore the approval of the report should be expected by the CITY upon the second submission. Ms. Colburn is uniquely qualified for this role, having served in the District for a number of years providing these type of services while being employed by Caltrans. Our team, and this project, will greatly benefit from the experience Ms. Colburn will be able to apply towards a more efficient and streamlined environmental process. In this way, the CITY can benefit by expecting the environmental approval sooner, rather than later. The environmental subconsultant, ICF Jones &C Stokes, will perform the following specific scope of work required to complete the environmental documentation for the proposed project. Additional tasks or effort not specifically identified in this scope of work is not assumed or implied. Tasks associated with completion of the proposed work effort are as follows: Environmental Document Project Management/Coordination/Meetings ICF Jones &L Stokes scope of work for quality control, progress reporting, schedules, and coordination/ meetings is outlined below. • Quality Control: ICE Jones &L Stokes project manager will be responsible for directing and implementing the project's environmental quality control program. Senior technical reviewers in each discipline will review each work product, including field methods, data collection, analysis, report writing, and any subcontracted work studies. In addition, a technical editor will review all reports to ensure consistent use of terminology and style as well as general readability for the target readers. Finally, the project manager will review all documents before they are submitted to the City and Caltrans. • Environmental Schedule: ICF Jones &L Stokes will prepare a comprehensive environmental process schedule in consultation with City and Caltrans staff- As conditions change during the project, ICF Jones &L Stokes will update and fine-tune the schedule, with concurrence of AECOM and the City. It is assumed that the schedule will be refined up to four times. • Kick-off Meeting: ICE Jones &b Stokes Project Manger shall attend a kick-off meeting. Time reflected in the attached cost estimate includes meeting preparation time. It is assumed that AECOM will prepare the meeting minutes for this meeting. • Monthly PDT Meetings: ICE Jones &b Stokes Project Manager shall attend Project Development Team (PDT) meetings with the City, AECOM, and Caltrans staff (attendance at twenty-eight [28] PDT meetings by the ICF Jones &L Stokes Project Manager is assumed). • Meetings: ICF Jones &L Stokes Project Manger may be required to attend meetings in addition to the PDT meetings previously identified. It is assumed that the ICE Jones &L Stokes Project Manager will attend up to twelve (12) additional project meetings. • Project Management: This task includes the coordination and management efforts by the ICF Jones &b Stokes Project Manager. A duration of twenty-eight (28) months is assumed. Deliverables: Environmental schedule. Environmental PM Attendance at kick off meeting, twenty-eight (28) PDT meetings, and twelve (12) project related meetings. Project management. Cin, of S-t, A- 25G-161 Preliminary Environmental Study After receiving a notice to proceed and preliminary layout from AECOM for the build alternative, a Caltrans Preliminary Environmental Study (PES) form (November 20, 2007) will be prepared. for submittal to City and Caltrans for review. The purpose of the PES is to identify and receive concurrence from Caltrans regarding the technical studies that will need to be prepared for the proposed project and to receive concurrence regarding the environmental document to be prepared- The PES will be prepared using existing, available information and no new analyses or detailed evaluations are assumed or included. As directed in the PES, cultural information will be provided entirely by Caltrans. The PES will be revised twice following Caltrans review. Figures will include a vicinity map, a location map, and the layout provided by AECOM. No additional figures or graphics are assumed to be necessary. Deliverables: • Draft, revised Draft, and Final PES. Public Information Meetings Although not legally required for the level of environmental document that is proposed, it is assumed that two public information meetings will be conducted for the proposed project. One at the outset of the project after the build alternative has been developed, and one during the PA/ED process at times to be determined by the City and Caltrans. The meetings will utilize boards that present the project alternative. ICE Jones & Stokes will assist the City and Caltrans in organizing and holding the informational meetings. It is assumed that the City will secure the location for the public meeting. For each meeting a notice will be prepared by ICF Jones & Stokes for publication in a newspaper of local circulation (Orange County Register, etc.). This notice will be submitted to the City and Caltrans for review and approval. It is assumed that ICF Jones & Stokes will coordinate publication of the notice in the newspaper and that the City will be responsible for paying the newspaper directly for the publication cost. It is assumed that the notice will be published in one English and one Spanish language newspaper. ICF Jones & Stokes will prepare a sign-in sheet, comment cards, and up to three display boards using project layouts/graphics provided by AECOM. In addition, direct mailings to property owners and residents living within 500 feet of the proposed project will be distributed using a mailing list generated and provided by AECOM's right-of-way consultant or the City. No other direct mailings are assumed. It is assumed that ICF Jones & Stokes Project Manager along with one additional individual, if needed, will attend the meetings. Deliverables: • Meeting Materials (up to three 30x40 boards using primarily project layouts/graphics provided by AECOM, sign in sheet, and comment cards) • Attendance at informational meeting by the Environmental Task Manager and one additional ICF Jones & Stokes staff member, if needed • Direct mailing to property owners and residents located within 500 feet of the proposed project (assumed that AECOM's right-of-way consultant or the City will provide the list of owners and addresses) . Preparation and publication of meeting notice once for each meeting in one English and one Spanish language newspaper (assumed that City will pay the newspaper directly for the publication) Technical Studies All technical studies will be consistent with meeting the requirements of CEQA and NEPA, as well as those of related environmental statutes and regulations. The technical studies will be prepared to cover both related statutory documentation requirements and to support preparation of a joint NEPA/CEQA document required for project approval. Preparation of all technical analyses and reports will follow local, state, and federal environmental guidelines, primarily consisting of the Caltrans Standard Environmental Reference (SER) website, Caltrans Project Development Procedures Manual, local and state CEQA Guidelines, and FHWA Technical Advisory 6640.81 Guidance on Preparing and Processing Environmental and Section 4(f) Documents. The formats to be used for the technical studies will follow the guidance available on the Caltrans SER website as of the date that those studies are initiated. Please see scope of work for each technical study for details regarding studies to be prepared. Cily q/ Santa A.m 25G-162 Unless otherwise noted, the deliverables for the following technical studies will be a separate bound report including a standardized project description, a methodology relevant to each topic area, description of the affected environment, impact assessment, and mitigation measures. The screencheck technical study will be submitted to the City (two copies) and to Caltrans (four copies) for concurrent review. Following City and Caltrans review a Draft of each technical study will be submitted to the City (two copies) and to Caltrans (four copies) for concurrent review. Following Caltrans and City second review it is assumed that a revisions workshop will be held to address any outstanding comments, if any comments remain- Following the revisions workshop a final version of each report will be prepared. The final technical studies (two copies to the City and four copies to Caltrans) will be submitted following the workshop for final concurrence (no additional comments are assumed to be received associated with the final concurrence review). For this scope of work, the technical studies for which a specific scope of work has been included have been assumed based on a review of existing project information. If additional studies are identified during the environmental phase of the project a scope of work and cost will be submitted for approval prior to their initiation. Deliverables: Screencheck technical studies (6 copies each) Draft technical studies (6 copies each) Final technical studies for concurrence (6 copies each) Final approved technical studies (6 copies each) The following assumptions have been made with regard to the technical studies that are to be prepared: • Engineering plans, including limits of construction, staging areas, and borrow/disposal sites, if needed, will be provided by the engineering team at a level of detail sufficient for preparing the technical studies (roadway lanes, topographic information [including changes in topography resulting from the proposed project], state plane tick marks, station numbers, and existing structures within 500 feet of the proposed project). • Mapping showing existing conditions (roadway lanes, topographic information, state plane tick marks, station numbers, and existing structures within 500 feet of the proposed project) will be provided by the engineering team. • Cross sections along the alignment showing existing and proposed conditions at an interval sufficient for preparing the noise analyses will be provided by the engineering team. • Aerial photograph at a scale suitable for preparation of project mapping, figures, and analyses will be provided by the engineering team (1 inch=200 feet scale minimum, with a minimum of 500 feet to the east and west of Pine Avenue shown and any other areas of improvement). Pixel size shall be no more than 2.5 square feet and image shall be orthorectified. • Focused protocol surveys for any species are not included in this scope and cost, other those specified under the Natural Environment Study scope. If additional focused surveys are identified during the biological field reconnaissance then this will be communicated to AECOM and the City and a scope and cost for this work will be provided. • Geotechnical, traffic assessments, Storm Water Data Report (SWDR) and/or Water Quality Report, and any floodplain analyses/technical reports (Location Hydraulic Study and Summary Floodplain Encroachment Report or Floodplain Evaluation Report), if required, will be provided by AECOM and these analyses will be provided to ICE Jones & Stokes for incorporation into the environmental document and for use in the technical analyses. • Traffic information shall contain 24-hour and hourly traffic counts separated by direction and vehicle classification (autos, medium trucks, heavy trucks) over at least three weekdays, along with peak hour and average daily traffic (ADT) forecast traffic volumes for existing conditions, opening year, and design year with and without the project for roads in the project area, and posted speeds. In addition, subregional/regional traffic information will be provided that includes vehicle miles travelled (VMT) data for existing year, opening year (build and no-build) and horizon year (build and no-build) broken down into five mph speed bins. This data is needed in order to evaluate Cirt, o/ Sanra An, 25G-163 GHG emissions consistent with the latest guidance from Caltrans Headquarters. This stems from the fact that GHG emission factors vary depending on travel speed. • NEPA/404 integration process will not be required. • It is assumed that all rights of entry and access for field work and surveys, if required, shall be obtained and provided by the City or AECOM. • Public meetings and/or hearings are not assumed or included. • Section 4(f) Evaluation will not be required. • A Community Impact Assessment will not be required • Relocations would not occur and a relocation document will not be required. • Cadd files shall be provided in a known coordinate system or projection and attributes shall be provided on discrete layers so that this information can be utilized in GIS. Historic Property Survey Report The proposed project improvements will be subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. This requires consideration of potential project effects to historic properties including archaeological and historical resources listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places according to criteria listed in 36 CFR800. Caltrans administers Section 106 compliance on behalf of FHWA and requires that documentation conform to specifications contained in Caltrans Standard Environmental Reference. As of January 1, 2004, cultural resource studies must be prepared and processed in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement among the Federal Highway Administration, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the California State Historic Preservation Officer, and the California Department of Transportation Regarding Compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as it Pertains to the Administration of the Federal-Aid Highway Program In California. ICF Jones & Stokes shall conduct a records search at the Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System and through the Sacred Lands File at the Native American Heritage Commission. This records search will consult California's database of previous studies and previously recorded sites within the proposed project area and within a 0.5-mile radius, per Caltrans guidelines. Historic maps and photographs shall also be reviewed, if available- ICF Jones & Stokes shall establish an Area of Potential Effect (APE) map in consultation with the City and Caltrans for obtaining Caltrans approval. The map shall provide the survey boundaries for cultural resources to be evaluated during project studies. The APE map shall be based on the total anticipated disturbance footprint associated with project activities (e.g., road widening/interchange construction, staging areas, detours, drainage facilities, and parcels containing impacted structures, if any). ICF Jones &4 Stokes will also contact the Native American Heritage Commission and consult with Native American groups and other interested parties to request information regarding the types of potential cultural resources in the study area. Consultation will be conducted in accordance with appropriate and current state and federal regulations. Following completion of the record search/review, ICF Jones cob Stokes shall conduct a field survey of the APE for archaeological resources. It is assumed that the City or AECOM will be responsible for obtaining access for conducting the surveys. This scope of work assumes that no archaeological sites will be identified in the APE and that no testing and/or evaluation will be required. It is anticipated that an Archaeological Survey Report (Finding of No Archaeological Resources Present) will be prepared. Following completion of the record search/review, an ICF Jones & Stokes qualified architectural historian will conduct a field survey of the proposed project area to record buildings, structures, and historic features through photography and written descriptions. If buildings are substantially altered or are less than 50 years old, a qualified architectural historian can exempt them from further evaluation in accordance with the Section 106 PA. It is anticipated that up to four (4) buildings and structures will not be exempt under the PA and will require evaluation on California historic resource inventory forms (series DPR 523). Any buildings beyond this number would be considered out of scope. ICF Ci/V of S-lu A- 25G-164 Jones & Stokes will send out letters requesting information on historic properties to local governments, historical societies, and historic preservation organizations. The evaluation of properties within the APE will be reported in the Historical Resource Evaluation Report (HRER), which will include a historic context statement. In addition, ICF Jones & Stokes will review the Caltrans historic bridge inventory, and identify previously evaluated state and local bridges within the APE. As part of the Centerline project an evaluation of several portions of what is anticipated would comprise the APE were evaluated- The depot that is located at the east end of the project alignment was constructed in 1986 and would not require evaluation (the original depot was demolished wheq the new depot was constructed). The Juvenile Detention Home (located at 1207 Fruit Street) was also evaluated as part of the Centerline project and it was concluded that the property does not appear to meet the criteria for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), and has not been designated as historic by the City of Santa Ana. No other resources were identified that required evaluation within what would be the anticipated APE for the proposed project. It was noted that the area along Santiago Street to the south of Santa Ana Boulevard has a high potential for buried archaeological resources, however, no resources or sites were identified during the field work that was performed for the Centerline project along the portion of Santiago Street where it intersects Santa Ana Boulevard. Following completion and approval of the APE and detailed reports discussed above, a summary document (the HPSR) shall be generated in accordance with Caltrans/FHWA standards for Section 106 compliance with the NHPA. It is anticipated that the proposed project shall result in an HPSR with a finding that only properties previously determined not eligible for inclusion in the NRHP or that are determined to be not eligible for inclusion in the NRHP are present within the Project APE. No further cultural work, including Phase II analyses/investigations and/or a Finding of Effect, are assumed or included in this scope of work. Visual Impact Assessment In accordance with FHWA and the U.S. Department of the Interior guidelines, the visual analysis will be prepared under the direction of a licensed Landscape Architect and based on FHWA's Visual Impact Assessment for Highway Projects. The existing visual environment and viewshed will be analyzed using available mapping, aerial photos, GIS, and site reconnaissance. Project plans and profiles will be analyzed to identify proposed physical changes to the study area and to aid in the identification of key observer viewpoints. Key viewpoints (visual quality "sensitive receptors") will be identified for the proposed project. Visual quality of proposed conditions will be evaluated OF and FROM the key viewpoints. That is, visual quality will be evaluated "OF" the proposed improvements and "FROM" the improved facility toward the viewpoint. It is assumed that up to three key viewpoints will be identified and assessed. These viewpoints will be submitted to Caltrans for approval prior to starting the analysis. FHWA methodology, including the evaluation of unity, intactness, and vividness, will be applied. Mitigation measures, such as finish treatment of structures and sound barriers and plantings, will be recommended, if necessary. Noise mitigation, including walls and/or berms will be included in the analysis if identified in the noise report. It is assumed that up to two visual simulations will be included. Noise Study Report ICF Jones & Stokes will prepare a noise study report evaluating the noise impacts and potential noise abatement/mitigation measures, if any, associated with the proposed project. Because federal and Caltrans oversight is involved, the report will be prepared in accordance with procedures specified by FHWA in Title 23, Section 772 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) (23 CFR 772) and the Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol (Protocol). ICF Jones & Stokes will conduct a site visit to identify noise sensitive land uses and other features of the project area relevant to the noise study. Noise sensitive receptors have been identified, including those homes located to the east of the rail line along the north side of Santa Ana Boulevard. ICF Jones & Stokes will consult with the Caltrans District 12 noise specialist assigned to this project to ensure that all requirements are addressed. A field noise study will be performed to quantify and assess existing noise conditions at the potential noise-sensitive areas. It is estimated that short-term ( 10 to 15 minutes duration) sound-level data will be collected at up to four (4) representative noise-sensitive locations throughout the area. In addition continuous 24-hour noise monitoring will Cif, q/ Santa Ana 25G-165 be conducted at up to one location if a secure measurement location can be identified. ICF Jones & Stokes will conduct traffic noise modeling related to the proposed project using the FHWA Traffic Noise Model (TNM) Version 2.5 and traffic data to be provided by the project traffic engineer. TNM will be used to model worst-noise-hour noise conditions at representative modeled receiver locations under existing conditions and design- year conditions with and without the proposed project. Traffic noise impacts of the proposed project under 23CFR772 will be assessed by determining if implementation of the project is projected to result in traffic noise levels under design-year conditions that approach or exceed the FHWA noise abatement criteria or if implementation of the project is predicted to result in a substantial increase in noise at noise-sensitive uses. If traffic noise impacts are projected to occur, information on the preliminary feasibility and reasonableness of noise abatement as defined in the Protocol will be evaluated and presented for use by decision makers in considering noise abatement. ICF Jones & Stokes will also evaluate potential construction noise impacts using methods recommended by the U_S. Department of Transportation. ICF Jones 8c Stokes will prepare a noise study report addressing the requirements of 23CFR772 in accordance with guidance in the Protocol and following the noise analysis report format outlined in the Caltrans Technical Noise Supplement (TeNS). If warranted the noise study report will include a preliminary noise abatement design to schematically identify the location, height, and extent of noise walls needed to abate noise impacts. It is assumed that any noise abatement design and or Noise Abatement Data Report (NADR) would be prepared and provided by AECOM. In accordance with Protocol guidance, the description of noise walls will be sufficient for environmental review of the proposed project, but not for final design of the walls- Abatement allowances will be provided for each wall evaluated. It is assumed that any final noise wall designs would be prepared by AECOM due to the detailed engineering that is required for the design of any such noise walls. Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) ICF Jones 8c Stokes will conduct a literature search, perform field surveys, and prepare a Natural Environmental Study Minimal Impacts (NES/MI) report analyzing potential impacts to biological resources. An NES/MI has been identified due to the limited amount of habitat located within the identified project area. The report will be prepared in accordance with Caltrans SER guidance and will conform to the Caltrans NES/MI annotated outline that is available at the time that the NES/MI is initiated. The following tasks will be performed during the preparation of the reports: Review of Project Information and Applicable Literature A literature review will be conducted to identify special-status species known or reported from the project area. The literature review will include: • Special status species lists from the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and U.S_ Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS); - Database searches of current versions of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and the Online Inventory of the California Native Plant Society (CLAPS); • The most recent applicable Federal Register listing package and critical habitat determination for each federally listed Endangered or Threatened species potentially occurring within the project site; • The most recent CDFG Annual Report on the status of California's listed Threatened and Endangered plants and animals; and - Other available biological studies conducted in the vicinity of the project site. Field Evaluation for Biological Resource Constraints After reviewing relevant information, the project area will be evaluated, with a thorough walkover covering all portions relevant to potential biological resource constraints. Detailed field notes will be compiled including conditions, visible disturbance factors, species, habitats, and more general biological resource issues observed or detected. The site will be evaluated regarding the presence, absence, or likelihood of occurrence for all special status species, habitats, or more general biological resource issues potentially posing a constraint to the project through applicable laws and regulations. Adjacent areas will also be briefly examined to provide context. It is assurned that access shall be provided by the City City of S-1, Ana 25G-166 or AECOM for the field surveys. If focused habitat evaluations for any species other than those included in this scope of work or focused surveys are required for any species then this will be communicated to the City and AECOM immediately and a separate scope and cost for this work will be provided. The study area is assumed to be the proposed project footprint plus 100 feet (where access is permissible). This task includes evaluations/determinations for the following potential resource issues: • Habitat Evaluation for Burrowing Owl - A qualified biologist will perform an evaluation of the potential for Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia) to occur. All areas to be evaluated will be examined carefully for habitat characteristics and disturbance factors. The study area for this work is assumed to be the proposed project footprint and a 100-foot buffer, as accessible to ICF Jones & Stokes. An additional 400-foot buffer beyond the 100-foot buffer will be visually assessed only. This scope and cost assume that the City or AECOM will be responsible for providing access. Potentially suitable habitat will be mapped. No permits are required to perform a habitat evaluation, but the biologist must be experienced with the species' biology, identification of direct and indirect sign, and physical characteristics of potentially suitable habitat. Habitat evaluations for this species can be performed any time of year. The results will be directly incorporated into the NES/MI. This scope of work assumes that a focused survey for burrowing owl will not be required. - Jurisdictional Waters Delineation - A qualified biologist will examine all relevant portions of the site and perform a routine-level delineation of the extent of potentially jurisdictional waters under both state and federal regulations. The following field evaluations will be performed, however, it is assumed that no jurisdictional resources will be identified. Evaluation for federal wetlands will follow the applicable methods in the 1987 manual from the Corps of Engineers, the 2006 Arid West supplement from the Corps of Engineers, and the Rapanos Guidance (2007), along with subsequent supporting materials and applicable regulations, policy, and case law. The study area for this work will include the proposed project footprint along with a 50-foot buffer. This scope and cost assume that the City or AECOM will be responsible for providing access. The work will be at a routine (rather than comprehensive) level of detail, that is, point sampling and standard criteria (hydrology, soils, and vegetation) will be used to identify, map and calculate total area for federal and state jurisdiction, but no laboratory testing of soils or water, no hydrological or hydrogeomorphic analysis or modeling, no formal statistical analysis, and no extensive records searching, will be provided. Evaluation of existing functions and values for jurisdictional areas will be addressed at a qualitative level. Mapping will be performed at a scale of 1 inch equals 200 feet (1:2400) or better, with a minimum mapping unit of no more than 0.05 acres, and will reflect the delineated boundaries of any jurisdictional waters and wetlands present. Photographs representative of relevant site conditions will be taken. As noted, it is assumed that no jurisdictional waters or wetlands will be identified and no Jurisdictional Delineation Report will be required. Technical Report Preparation A draft NES/MI will be developed based on results of the biological surveys and analysis and will conform to the current Caltrans NES/MI annotated outline, as previously described. The report will describe: • The study methods used in identifying and assessing the biological resources at the project site, the personnel who conducted the studies, contacts made with agencies, and any limitations associated with the study; • The environmental setting including both the biological and physical setting at the project site; • (The results, including special-status species present on the site, if any, and a discussion of impacts and mitigation, as necessary; and • The appropriate regulatory requirements and necessary permits, if any. At this time it is assumed that jurisdictional waters will not be impacted and permitting (i.e_, Section 401 Water Quality Certification, Section 404 permit, or Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement) would not be required. Therefore, the processing of permits are not included in this scope of work. If based on the field work performed it is determined that these permits would be required then a scope and cost for the preparation and processing of these permits can be provided by ICF Jones & Stokes if desired by the City and AECOM. City o/ Snnla Ana 25G-167 Community Impact Assessment ICF Jones & Stokes will prepare a Community Impact Assessment. ICE Jones & Stokes will identify the community impacts on neighborhoods, businesses, and minority and low-income populations, as well as the project's consistency/compatibility with the existing and future land uses and plans in the area. The community impact analysis will be prepared in accordance with Caltrans Environmental Handbook Volume 4: Community Impact Assessment. Topics to be addressed in the community impact analysis will include social impacts, economic impacts (change in employment and tax base changes), land use/growth (consistency with local plans, development opportunities), farmland, and public services impacts (accessibility and parking, utilities). The community impact assessment considers how the proposed project activity would affect the people, institutions, neighborhoods, communities, organizations, and larger social and economic systems. The community impact analysis will provide a clear description of the existing conditions, the potential impacts of the project on the community and how the project relates to other development (existing and proposed) in the area. The significance of the identified impacts, and mitigation measures to best avoid the adverse impacts resulting from the project will be identified and discussed, as appropriate. Potential impacts to minority and low-income populations, if any, will be addressed in compliance with Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority and Low-Income Populations. Data from the 2000 U.S. Census will be used to identify characteristics of populations within census block groups traversed by or adjacent to the proposed project. Community profiles will also be collected for the local project area, City, County, and the State of California to help identify regional and local trends in regards to demographics, local industry, occupations, and tax base. Potential impacts during the construction phase due to access limits will be analyzed and measures to address these impacts proposed, if required. Existing planning documents will be reviewed and potential beneficial and adverse land use impacts of the proposed project and mitigation measures, if required, will be identified. Relocation Impact Report It is anticipated that relocations and property acquisition would be required as part of the project, particularly to the west of the rail line. ICE Jones & Stokes will analyze the primary and secondary effects of potential acquisitions and displacements that would be caused by the proposed project. The relocation impact document is anticipated to be a Relocation Impact Report (Draft and Final) based on past experience within the District. A Draft Relocation Impact Report (DRIR) will be prepared pursuant to FHWA guidelines/policies to comply with the Uniform Relocation and Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended, the California Relocation Act, and as described in Chapter 10 of the Caltrans Right-of-Way Manual. The DRIR will provide the City, Caltrans, and the public with information on the impact this project will have on residential and non-residential occupants. It is assumed that adequate relocation resources would be available for displacees. Using aerial photography, 2000 U.S. Census data (supplemented with additional State, County, and City data, as available), windshield surveys, and interviews with local real estate agents, if needed, ICF Jones & Stokes will identify characteristics of potential relocations, including the number/type of residences, businesses, farms, and/or non-profit organizations. ICF Jones & Stokes will identify the characteristics of the residential displacements including lot size, improvements on parcel, age of structures, general condition, and the number of bedrooms/ bathrooms. For businesses characteristics to be documented include the number of employees, building size, parking areas, and owner/tenant mix. In addition, ICF Jones & Stokes will identify and evaluate potential relocation resource areas and any difficulties that may arise, relocation-related business issues, and the project's effects on the local tax base. Following public availability of the environmental document, a Final Relocation Impact Report (FRIR) will be prepared that identifies relocation resources, timing of acquisition, and more detailed displacee data. This scope of work does not include interviewing the affected owners and tenants of the displaced properties, if required. Paleontological Information Report/Paleontological Evaluation Report It is assumed that a combined Paleontological Information Report/Paleontological Evaluation Report (PUUPER) will be prepared that will identify and document the viability of paleontological resources existing with the project's study limits. The following identifies the tasks to be performed. City of SanMn i(nu 25G-168 Literature Search and Field Review • Applicable Laws - ICF Jones &C Stokes shall review relevant State and federal statutes, regulations, and guidelines to determine the requirements for protection of paleontological resources specific to this project. - Coordination with Agencies and Schools - ICF Jones &L Stokes shall coordinate with appropriate agencies and educational facilities to collect data regarding paleontological sensitivity. • Library Search - ICE Jones &L Stokes shall search relevant published information, including technical geologic and paleontological articles, discussions of fossil localities and their geologic context, geologic maps, and descriptions of sedimentary geologic units in the project area. • Museum Record Search - ICE Jones &6 Stokes shall examine unpublished specimen records in museums to obtain information relating to resource distribution in the project area- Field Review - ICF Jones &c Stokes shall visit the proposed project site to observe stratigraphic features, bedding geometry and other relevant geologic features. Data Compilation &L Sensitivity Assessment Data accumulated from the above sources will be integrated and summarized to provide a description of the known aspects of the resource, if relevant. These aspects include the probability that the affected geological units include paleontological resources, the probable/possible significance of any likely fossils, and the effects of any historic surface modifications. The goal of the PER portion of the report is to identify the potential for impacts to significant paleontological resources within the project's limits. The report prepared will identify and document anticipated impact to paleontological resources existing with the project's limits of disturbance (both vertical and horizontal), if potential impacts exist- ICF Jones &L Stokes shall prepare a PIR/PER that includes the following: • Summary of the proposed project • Delineation of the project limits - Delineation of the project excavation locations and depths • Document efforts to avoid or minimize effects on paleontological resources • Identify significance and/or sensitivity of paleontological resources and/or rock units following the guidance provided at: http://www_dot.ca.gov/ser/volI/see3/physical/Ch 08 Paleo/chapO8paleo.htm#pir - Identification of sources consulted and results of that consultation • Identification of any consultation related constraints • Identification of a course of action, including identification of specific geologic formations and paleontological resources • Identification of the persons preparing the PIR/PER and their qualifications • Identify whether a Paleontological Mitigation Plan (PMP) is recommended It is assumed that a PMP will not be recommended or required for the proposed project and one is not included in this scope and cost. It is further assumed that the findings of the PIR/PER will be negative and no additional paleontological tasks or effort will be required. Air Quality Report Based upon the last three road/rail grade separation projects that ICF Jones &G Stokes has performed in southern California an air quality report may not be required for the project. It has been determined on these other three projects that as long as the project does not add additional capacity or include the installation of new stop signs or traffic signals that an Air Quality Report is not required- However, an Air Quality Report has been included in this scope and cost in case it is ultimately determined to be required by the District. This will be discussed early in the process with Caltrans and further document in the PES that is prepared. ICF Jones &L Stokes will prepare an air quality technical report that analyzes air pollutant emissions associated with changes in vehicle speed and traffic distribution patterns resulting from the proposed project. All impact analyses will be performed consistent with the technical requirements and methodologies outlined in the Caltrans' Standard Environmental Reference (air quality chapter). Ci/v of Santa Ana 25G-169 The air quality technical report will provide the following discussions and analyses: Regulatory Setting and Existing Conditions. Summarize the existing federal, state, and local air quality regulatory environment as it affects the proposed project, and describe the location of sensitive receptors in the project vicinity. Using data provided by the California Air Resources Board (CARS) and the SCAQMD, characterize existing air quality conditions in the project area and explain how those conditions are affected by local climate and topography. Evaluation of Construction Emissions. Based on current District 12 procedure, provide a qualitative discussion related to construction emissions. Evaluation of Operations-Period Mass Emissions. Evaluate whether the project meets transportation conformity requirements by determining whether it is included, as currently defined, in the most recent Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) prepared by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). It is assumed that the projects will be included in the RTIP and that a regional analysis will not be required. Localized Carbon Monoxide Hot Spot Analysis. Analyze the degree to which project-related traffic volumes have a potential to effect local carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations using the California Department of Transportation CO Hotspot Protocol. It is anticipated that the CO screening procedure will be appropriate. However, it is assumed, based on experience within the District that CALINE-4 dispersion modeling will also be performed. It is assumed that up to two intersections will be modeled. Localized PM2.51,PMI0 Hot Spot Analysis. Analyze the degree to which project-related traffic volumes have a potential to affect local PM2.5 and PM 10 concentrations, based on the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidance document entitled Transportation Conformity Guidance for Qualitative Hot-spot Analyses in PM2.5 and PM 10 Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas. This scope and cost assumes that a screening level analysis is appropriate, and that no modeling will be required by Caltrans or FHWA to address PM2.5 and PM 10. Mobile Source Air Taxies. Evaluate proposed project-related mobile source air toxics (MSATs) emissions in accordance with FHWA interim guidance on how MSATs should be addressed in NEPA documents. It is not assumed that extensive qualitative analyses would be required to address MSATs. If an extensive quantitative analysis is required for the project, then a scope and cost estimate would be provided for this additional effort, however, such an analysis is not anticipated. Climate Change1Greenhouse Gas Emissions. A quantification of operational-period greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with implementation of the proposed project will be conducted- Consistent with current Caltrans policy, construction-period GHG emissions will not be quantified. Operations-period GHG emissions will be quantified using regional daily peak-period and non-peak-period vehicle miles traveled (VMT) apportioned into 5 mph speed bins for speeds between 5 mph and 75 mph; and the CT-EMFAC emissions model. ICF Jones & Stokes will present a comparison of GHG emissions associated with the Build Alternative(s) to the No-build Alternative to characterize effects of the proposed project on OHO emissions. The analysis of climate change also will also incorporate the most recent guidance found on the Caltrans Standard Environmental Reference and Caltrans annotated outline. Air Quality Conformity Analysis Report and Checklist Under NEPA delegation, the federal air quality conformity determination has not been delegated to Caltrans and must be made by FHWA. We will prepare a separate Air Quality Conformity Analysis using the annotated outline for this report on the SER at the time that the report is initiated and will also prepare the Conformity Checklist based on the checklist that is available on the SER at the time that the Air Quality Conformity Analysis Report is prepared. SCAG Transportation Conformity Working Group. The required TCWG form will be completed and submitted for forwarding to SCAG for inclusion on the agenda for determining if the project is a project of air quality concern (POAQC). It is assumed the project will be found to not be a POAQC and that no specific analysis will be required related to the TCWG determination other than what is already included in this scope of work. Mitigation Measures. ICF Jones & Stokes will develop mitigation measures, where applicable, to address significant air quality impacts, if present. City of Santa A- 25G-170 Prepare Hazardous Materials Technical /Waste ISA ICF-Jones and Stokes will prepare the Hazards and Hazardous Materials Report. The investigation will evaluate evidence of potential site contamination, either from historical or current land usage. The study will address the Thresholds of Significance in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines and will include elements of ASTM E1527, Standard Practice for Environmental Project Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Property Assessment Process. We will conduct a review of available existing local, State, and Federal-maintained databases of hazardous materials sites and underground storage tank records. Readily available historical aerial photographs will be reviewed to help identify prior land uses and field reconnaissance will be performed to help assess current conditions. The deliverable will be the Hazards and Hazardous Materials Report. In addition, this work will include visits to properties to assess if a Phase 2 investigation of the site will be necessary, to be included in the recommendations section of the report, and to be conducted during the design phase of the project. Actual Phase 2 investigative work and subsequent report is not included in this scope of services; however, testing and reporting on Aerially Deposited Lead (ADL) is included in this scope. We will sample, test, and report on the existence of any ADL within the limits of project footprint. Environmental Document For the proposed project it is assumed that the NEPA document to be prepared will be a Categorical Exclusion with technical studies. Railroad grade separations are identified as NEPA Categorical Exclusions under 23 CFR 771.117(d). Railroad grade separations are statutorily exempt from CEQA, as identified in Section 21080.13 of the Public Resources Code and in Section 15282(g) of the CEQA Guidelines. Statutorily exempt projects are excused entirely from the environmental review process and the requirements of CEQA_ In addition, all activities performed to support these projects are also included in the exemption. It is assumed that all project components are associated with the railroad grade separation and would be covered under the exemption. Therefore, it is assumed that no CEQA document or documentation will be required for the proposed project. If components are added to the project that are not related to the grade separation then the statutory exemption may not apply and additional work not covered in this scope and cost, including a CEQA document, may be required. Statutory Exemption (CEQA)/Categorical Exclusion (NEPA) A Notice of Exemption (NOE) will be prepared and provided to the City for approval and submittal to the State Clearinghouse. This notice starts the statue of limitations under CEQA so it is recommended that the City file this notice. No additional CEQA documentation beyond the completion of the NOE form is assumed as part of this scope and cost- Based on the environmental technical studies previously discussed a Categorical Exclusion (CE) will be prepared pursuant to NEPA. ICF Jones Stokes will prepare the CE in compliance with the latest format identified on Caltrans Standard Environmental Reference website. In addition, the Categorical Exclusion Checklist will be prepared. As part of the CE a detailed project description will be included. The CE will also include a very brief (two to three sentence) summary of the findings of each of the technical studies. No separate environmental document is assumed to be prepared to support the CE and none is included in this scope and cost. It is assumed that LCF Jones cob Stokes will revise the CE twice based on comments from the City and Caltrans (to be reviewed concurrently). Environmental Commitments Record For the project an environmental commitments record (ECR) will be prepared in a matrix table format. The ECR will be submitted to the City and Caltrans in hard copy and electronic form. The matrix table will include a description of each mitigation measure organized by topic numbered to correspond with the impacts. For each mitigation measure, the Reporting Process, Timing of Measure, Responsible Party, and Verification of Compliance will be identified Cav of Snnta A- 25G-171 through coordination with resource agencies and experience on other similar projects. The ECR will be included with the CE and it is assumed that this document will be reviewed as part of the City and Caltrans review of the CE. Deliverables: Notice of Exemption Five (5) copies each of Draft and Final Categorical Exclusion and MMRP Optional Scope for Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact, if required If for some reason a NEPA CE were found to be not appropriate for the proposed project then an Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact (EA/FONSI) would be prepared. Under this scenario the previously identified Section 4.0 (Environmental Document) scope would be replaced with this Section 4.0 scope of work. In addition, the following modifications would be made to the meeting and project management tasks for the project. Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact Draft Environmental Assessment It is assumed that if a NEPA CE is not agreed upon by Caltrans then the appropriate document for the proposed project will be an Environmental Assessment (EA) followed by a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). If a higher-level document is required then a separate scope and fee will be provided for preparing the increased level of documentation. Utilizing the information contained in the technical reports, along with additional information and analyses that are performed, as necessary, a Screencheck Draft EA will be prepared based on the current version of the NEPA-only document annotated outline that is available at the time that the document is initiated- The Screencheck Draft EA will be submitted to the City and Caltrans for review- Along with the Screencheck Draft EA, the external QA/QC form and environmental document checklist will be prepared and submitted- The QA/QC form and checklist are assumed to be included with each submittal. Following the incorporation of comments from the City and Caltrans the Draft EA will be prepared and submitted for City and Caltrans review. Following this review the revised Draft EA will be prepared and submitted for City and Caltrans review. Following this review any comments will be addressed and a revision workshop will be conducted, if needed. Following the workshop the second revised Draft EA will be submitted to the City and Caltrans for concurrence and for the Caltrans NEPA QC review. Following the incorporation of comments from the Caltrans NEPA QC review the final Draft EA will be submitted for Caltrans review and approval/concurrence. It is assumed that the project will qualify as a regular and not a complex EA. It is assumed that 30 hard copies and one original of the Final Draft EA will be printed for circulation, including the 15 copies to be submitted to the State Clearinghouse. It is assumed that technical studies will be provided on CD only for inclusion with the documents that are made available at the City, Caltrans, and the local library. ICE Jones Stokes will utilize a distribution list developed with the City and Caltrans for distribution. It is assumed that distribution to agencies will consist of a CD and not hard copies of the document. All other recipients would receive the Notice of Availability (NOA) only. The NOA will be mailed to property owners and residents living within 500 feet of the proposed project using a mailing list generated and provided by AECOM's right-of-way consultant or the City. Deliverables: Screencheck EA (two copies City; eight copies Caltrans). Draft EA (two copies City; eight copies Caltrans). Revised Draft EA (two copies City; eight copies Caltrans). Second Revised Draft EA (two copies City; eight copies Caltrans). Final Draft EA for approval/concurrence (two copies City; eight copies Caltrans). Final Draft EA 30 hard copies and one electronic (pdf) Draft EA for availability (including the 15 copies for submittal to the State Clearinghouse) (Volume 1); 15 CDs with technical studies; 100 CDs with Final Draft ED It is assumed that up to 100 notices will be distributed. Notice of Availability/Notice of Opportunity for Public Hearing While the final Draft EA is being reviewed by the City and Caltrans a Notice of EA Availability and Notice of Opportunity for Public Hearing announcing the publication of the EA will be prepared for publication. The notice will C'itV of Suntu Ann 25G-172 also identify the date, time, and location for the public information meeting that is to be held. This notice will be submitted to the City and Caltrans for review and comment. A public hearing would be held for the project if a request for a public hearing were received in response to the Notice of Opportunity. It is not anticipated that a public hearing will be requested or required. ICF Jones & Stokes will coordinate the publication of the Notice in an English and Spanish language newspaper; however, it is assumed that the City will be responsible for paying the publications directly for the publications- The cost of advertisements is not included in this scope and cost. Deliverables: Draft and Final NOA/NOPH (assumed to be transmitted electronically with no hard copies) Response to Comments At the close of the public availability period for the Draft EA, ICE Jones & Stokes will review and respond to all comments received. In addition, ICF Jones & Stokes will attend a meeting with City and Caltrans staff to review any written comments on the Draft EA that were received and to discuss potential responses to these comments, if the comments received warrant such a meeting. The responses to comments will be forwarded to the City and Caltrans for review and approval prior to making any changes to the EA, if the comments received are substantial enough to warrant this process. It is assumed that no comments requiring new analyses or substantial revisions to existing analyses, or from lawyers, will be received. Deliverables: 5 copies of responses to comments to the City and Caltrans for review and concurrence Final Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact Upon approval of the responses to comments by the City and Caltrans, if warranted, ICF Jones & Stokes will revise the EA to respond to the comments, to document the circulation period and coordination, and if any changes to the project have occurred. Also, included will be a Draft Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). ICF Jones & Stokes will submit the Draft Final EA/FONSI to the City and Caltrans for review. Along with the Draft Final EA/FONSI, the external QA/QC form and environmental document checklist will be prepared and submitted. The QA/QC form and checklist are assumed to be included with each submittal. Following the incorporation of one set of comments from the City and Caltrans a revised Draft Final MND/FONSI will then be prepared and submitted to Caltrans along with a response to comments document for concurrence and for conducting the NEPA QC review. Following the Caltrans NEPA QC review the Final EA/FONSI will be prepared and submitted to the City and Caltrans for review. It is assumed that no additional comments will be received. Deliverables: Draft Final EA/FONSI (two copies City; eight copies Caltrans). Revised Draft Final EA/FONSI (two copies City; eight copies Caltrans). Final Draft Final EA/FONSI for approval/concurrence (two copies City; eight copies Caltrans). Final EA/FONSI (10 hard copies and 10 CDs with pdf version) Environmental Commitments Record For the project an environmental commitments record (ECR) will be prepared in a matrix table format and included as an appendix in the EA/FONSI. It is assumed that the ECR will be reviewed as part of the EA/FONSI. The matrix table will include a description of each mitigation measure organized by topic numbered to correspond with the impacts. For each mitigation measure, the Reporting Process, Timing of Measure, Responsible Party, and Verification of Compliance will be identified through coordination with resource agencies and experience on other similar projects. Deliverables: Included in Final EA/FONSI City q/ Sonta Ana 25G-173 Federal Register Notice ICF Jones & Stokes will prepare a notice for publication in the Federal Register by FHWA to start the NEPA statute of limitations. This notice will be prepared in compliance with the SER and it is assumed that a Draft and Final version of the notice will be prepared and that coordination and publication of the notice will be the responsibility of Caltrans and FHWA. Deliverables: Draft and Final Federal Register Notice (all transmittals assumed to be done electronically) Cilv gfS-la Ana 25G-174 H V m O ° H V M N w m U m ° rrm U m N O g a w ~ ~ ~ u4i ~ w o O w m O elm U V I I r rv- N - _ w w w w w w w w w w N w N w w__ - dw a ' r o n m N a N ~ N o ¢ y U L$ 3- v o o. P - m o c~ a ILI ~ J E a ag d8~ s8 Y °°o m m_ ~ Q Cq c ~ d LL ~ _ O ~ o y V 8 Q 8 ~ LL 8 Z O N F CO U O m y d w N Q- O V/ LL 8 N ° o o v z o_ Q m NN n m _ 3 gg F d~ v N8¢~, c n l ae ~ ~ d O W y to o - a N J n Co _ C9 o t CO)l Q U o v o N Q ~ N m 6 N O 6 » O~ da m _ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ W v 0 c~ o ~ V oo- IS v v c. v w w N V + m N H V L d O ua O~ C'i ~ o ~ - O s Z Oe ~ u 2 i,~ _ F Iz E ~ _ d 2 `J~',° `9c m N E E g-w ¢ E~ o d' a w ~ a~ N a ~r - ;ti L O a Y n a m ° 25 H 6 ~ 6 ~ . f f f H H~ F H a F 25G-175 25G-176