HomeMy WebLinkAbout25B - SANTA ANA BLVD GRADE SEPARATIONREQUEST FOR
COUNCIL ACTION
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
JANUARY 4, 2011
TITLE:
AGREEMENT WITH AECOM FOR
ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE
SANTA ANA BOULEVARD GRADE
SEPARATION (PROJECT NO.
106727)
6AV CIT MANAGER
RECOMMENDED ACTION
CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY:
APPROVED
? As Recommended
? As Amended
? Ordinance on I" Reading
? Ordinance on 2ntl Reading
? Implementing Resolution
? Set Public Hearing For_
CONTINUED TO /'/I-,2®/,/
FILE NUMBER
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
25B-1
Agreement with AECOM for Engineering Services for the
Santa Ana Boulevard Grade Separation (Project No. 106727)
January 4, 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:
-Raul Go i z 11 Francisco Gutierrez
i y
Executive irector Executive Director
Public Wor s Agency Finance & Management Services Agency
RG/JG
Exhibit: 1. Agreement
25B-2
AGREEMENT FOR PROVISION OF
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 18'' 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-1 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; 11) 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
25B-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
25B-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
25B-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
25B-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
25B-7
e. 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 of the 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:
and
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
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
25B-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.
15. 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
25B-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 of the 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 of the 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 of this 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
25B-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 sec . 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
25B-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
25B-12
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the date and year first above
written.
ATTEST:
MARIA D. HUIZAR
Clerk of the Council
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
JOSEPH STRAKA
Interim City Attorney
By:
Laura Sheedy
Assistant City Attorney
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL:
RAUL GODINEZ II
Executive Director
Public Works Agency
CITY OF SANTA ANA
DAVID N. REAM
City Manager
AECOM
PATRICK L. SOMERVILLE, PE
Vice President
Tax ID#
II
25B-13
25B-14
EXHIBIT A
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
SANTA ANA GRADE SEPARATION
12
25B-15
25B-16
EXHIBIT A-I
CONSULTANTSPROPOSAL
APRIL 6, 2010
13
25B-17
25B-18
EXHIBIT A-2
REVISED SCOPE OF WORK
FEESCHEDULE
December 20, 2010
25419
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 I 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.
Cily of Santa Ana
25B-20
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
CALTRANS.
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.
Cit_v ofSanta Ana
25B-21
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 I -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:
Ci!_v gjSanta Ana
25B-22
• 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 I-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.
047 of Santa Ana
25B-23
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 SLAG 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 of sanla Ana
25B-24
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 Santa Ana
25B-25
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 1 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.
4. Discussions with City/OCTA/SCRRA personnel concerning any key assumptions.
,4 Modifications from Structure Maintenance Records recommendations.
-4? Seismic retrofit modifications.
,4? City requirements such as aesthetics, improvements in vicinity of the structure, airspace usage, or other
obstructions.
? Special foundation requirements, special excavations such as Type A, Type D, and/or hazardous or
contaminated material.
Special construction requirements, including limited site accessibility.
4- 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
01Y o/ Santa :1 nu
25B-26
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.
City of Santa Ana
25B-27
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 LS 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.
Crti- of Santa Ana
25B-28
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 Caltrans. 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. Colbum 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 & 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 & Stokes scope of work for quality control, progress reporting, schedules, and coordination/ meetings is
outlined below.
• Quality Control: ICF Jones & 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 & Stokes will prepare a comprehensive environmental process schedule in
consultation with City and Caltrans staff. As conditions change during the project, ICF Jones & 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: ICF Jones & 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: ICF Jones & 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 & Stokes Project Manager is assumed).
• Meetings: ICF Jones & Stokes Project Manger may be required to attend meetings in addition to the PDT
meetings previously identified. It is assumed that the ICF Jones & 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 & 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 Santo Ana
25B-29
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. ICF 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
Crtt' of Santa Ana
25B-30
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 oi'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
ICF 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
Otl' 0/ Santa /1 I?a
25B-31
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. ICE 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). ICE Jones & 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, WE Jones & 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
011` (?/ Santa Ana
25B-32
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 cast end of the project alignment was constructed in 1986 and would not
require evaluation (the original depot was demolished when 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 11 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
OtY qJ Santa Ana
25B-33
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 & 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 & 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 (CNPS);
• 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 assumed that access shall be provided by the City
City o/'Santa Ana
25B-34
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.
Cite of Santa Ana
25B-35
Community Impact Assessment
ICE Jones & Stokes will prepare a Community Impact Assessment. ICF 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, ICE 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, WE 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 (PIR/PER) 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.
011. of Santa .Ana
25B-36
Literature Search and Field Review
• Applicable Laws - ICF Jones & 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 & Stokes shall coordinate with appropriate agencies and
educational facilities to collect data regarding paleontological sensitivity.
• Library Search - ICF Jones & 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 - ICF Jones & Stokes shall examine unpublished specimen records in museums to obtain
information relating to resource distribution in the project area.
• Field Review - ICF Jones & Stokes shall visit the proposed project site to observe stratigraphic features, bedding
geometry and other relevant geologic features.
Data Compilation & 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 & 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/voll/sec3/physical/ChO8Paleo/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 & 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 & 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).
City of Santa A1711
25B-37
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 (CARB) 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 PM2.51PM10 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 Toxics. 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 Change/Greenhouse 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 GHG 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.
SLAG 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 Ana
25B-38
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 ICF Jones & 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
Ciro of Santa Ana
25B-39
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. ICF 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
011v of Santa Ana
25B-40
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, ICF 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/FONSL 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
Citt of San(a Ana
25B-41
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)
Cih of Santa Ana
25B-42
0
O 0 ml
O o ?p
ap o
o
m o,C
o:.
N o
d
N 0
m
M 0
m
N 0
m
m ,°.? o'.o
N?.M
01 ol
m!
d o
m
N o!
o
m .-
?
M m
a• o
o
d
v
m
rn
N ?n
m
r
u?
N d
o o
o
m `
- m
ao
M
d m;, N
O
V N m
m m'a0
dA3 O
m m
m
m m
L° N
p rn m
d
d l d ,
A
l(l T
M O °>
M
A AI
?(1'. M
N d
M m
d
N -"". O
c
° I I ?
rU I
I - rU I I I I
I
:
I
+
Vi:
_.i ..
_ _ - y va wo o o i wo I
ow o w w w
, w m
fA
fA
iH
fA
fA
I w
1 p' w w w
..
y ' i d
' UJ m
O N 0 0 0 0 N 8 0 8 O O m c9 C
2
M!
?
'..
Q
N U
? N
N 'I ?D
M
I '
I M
O O
d U O
? N d
? O O
r ? w N N N O
in _ II I I.
N1?
-t
O m I
I O ': I
O W w .,
- _- _- ? ?
m
m OOi M c
. O 00 ; 00 ? OI
p t°p ? W N N ro 0
m OI
? O .-
? ? N
p d
V M
M O
r m O)
Q O
°
b m
OI d
aG ?D
Of m
m
'
I N
m m
m M
d N
O d
m
N m
m i
°
O
M -c
N
m - d
A
O
m a
0
m O
N
M ?
O
G W d M i C m ? i
m m m m p d d i ?[J M ? M A d d M d N
U 1 I U ',. ', I ? I ?
w
w
w
w
w
p
fA
fA
p
p fA
fA
p
p
fA i
p
w
p
p
p
fA
p
I.
d m
W O __- _ __ O - m.N d m m N N m m m N d d y N d d m d d OI Cf
i
r i[f
N
d - d
ll d
d d N M
N m
m d
m M
d
^ m d
N M
M M d
M
d ..
?" A
M M
m m
M d
d A
N m
M m I M
r
m I `
O O O Q
} ? _ ._._ ? - _ -
? o II O m y I :ip fO m m l m m m - ?: o :' N CCi v ? e
w I
I W I `
OQ III _
I ?
I of
"' ? o m Ni Or N N d ? N M N ? G? I R N
U Of
w G
a ro
y Q ?' a ? a I
c
i I I
. _. II -
U d " 'y 0 o IC r
I
I O K ro N m y
W F U Q ° N
m
i N
-?
° ° _ - - - {
o {
_
Z J
?
n °
° v c
0
N
L ?a
Q
Q a o Y N
?
^
Q ? I?
O
V
2 to W
?V
N
N
I
R
i
m 4
Z I?i Y..1
I
a U Ca)
O 0
N
?
A
? In ? - I N v? ? U i , I I
V/ LL V
a. U) t __-_ -__. +? ,
_
_
_?_
O
F- Q
C N a C o
S w O ?O O y O
f N
o
m
/
-
C
m
0
'^
a
c
U
c ? o
O
C ^
e r`
? ! to
V
r
?r co Lu O U)
a 0 L m co
?J
N
O
I
I
0
V 0) ?
I
a
I
iO CL o (n T a _a ? 100 1 cp
I O O O l m m m O O .? '? v ICJ O
N m
O
N u N
i
a
2 2 2
O O. 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 O
U U L U
___ U
IQ LU
Q':U U
Q U
Q U U
QQ W U
Wa Q U
Q U
Q U
Q
Uil
V'
(n
'Vi
Uts U
Q
O £ U rn m
o' u w c - I
? __ I-
Iil
U ..' Q I I ' q
Q C
0 N V Y a
)
51.
U c 10 w m E = ° -
v O a+ i 'u E n aI
i? c u
a I,I Z an
m d
m
o `m
a i ? ? c m ! ! -J
u d c > a> m m E c c y - c -?
a c
O
io ?
c-
. °?
D w
r a
°
p c
a? r
?
m l
y
E N
N
T
C W
` LL
?
1°
m
0
a
cT:
U
'
2
C -
.v
y ?i
,l
m
E c
-
c
z c 1 v m u a a l '
E d m m ti a e of m bl
m
c a
o l. o o
? U 3 <
> a
m a
d l
o
y m
d 'v
m v
' m `
° m
a
v
I <
?
'
?' ml
!
- m
m rI
al
M c U i y m °- c m m ? m m w C v F = c n I ? c ?I
?p
_ w
a y
= Q Q ly LL?
3 c cp a
l o: B .? m `.
On c ??l o m m u ¢ o? ° m E ° u ° E ? wl E
I II 2 vvi
Q E y°
° t
° n o o =' t c j
m m f'r y '7 ,- P ¢ Q o
m
a` m
o a d o
v ?- L d
a o
c9
in m
c9 w
CE
0?
0
U a =
Y d n a ry
w a r m m o I `o ml
Q
L
m h h
Y
Y
Y
Y Y
Y
Y
Y C4
Y
r d Y d N N N A A A A
Al A b
es N ?'. K N
F I F H F F 1- i F H F I F
- f I ? I
25B-43
25B-44