Cupertino City Council
July 21, 2026

City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 1 EXHIBIT A - Scope of Work

Project Name GL NWS CIP#
McClellan Road Bridge Replacement 420 -99 -273 900 -905 ST 066 2025 -03

Biggs Cardosa (“Consultant” or “Biggs Cardosa”) shall perform professional services which include but are not limited to tasks detailed in Section 2 related to the McClellan Road Bridge Replacement Project (“Project”) located on McClellan Road in Cupertino.

For each phase of the Project, Consultant will submit a written proposal that includes a specific Scope of Services, Schedule of Performance, and Compensation for the City’s review, Consultant shall not proceed with any phase until it receives written authorization from the Director of Public Works or Designee.

SECTION 1 - GENERAL

A. General Performance Requirements:

1. The performance of all services by Consultant sh all be to the satisfaction of the City, in accordance with the express terms hereof, including but not limited to the terms set out in detail in this scope of services, Service Order and the standard of care provisions contained in this Agreement.

2. The City’s Department of Public Works shall manage the Project and this Agreement. Consultant shall receive final direction from the City’s Director of Public Works or his/her authorized designee (hereinafter collectively “City”) only.

3. Consultant shall coordinate this scope of services with the City as well as with other City consultants and contractors, as needed or as directed by the City.

Consultant shall schedule meeting and prepare meeting agendas and minutes for all Project meetings during the design phase under the scope of work. All minutes of meetings are due to the City within five (5) working days after the meeting. Consultant shall provide copies of such documentation to the City, and as directed by the City, to other appropriate agencies and entities. Consultant shall coordinate all responses to comments through the City.

4. Consultant shall designate and provide to the City the names of their team members for the Project. The team members shall be satisfactory to the City.

Consultant shall not substitute any team members without the prior approval of the City.

5. Consultant’s services shall be performed as expeditiously as is consistent with professional skill and care as set forth in the agreement and the orderly process of the work. The schedule for the performance included in Exhibit B, may be adjusted by mutual agreement.

City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 2

6. Consultant shall manage its Subconsultants, and administer the Project.

Consultant shall consult with the City, research applicable design criteria, and communicate with members of the Project team.

SECTION 2 - TASKS
**Consultant must receive written authorization from the City prior to beginning a new phase**

PHASE 1: ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS, TECHNICAL STUDIES, AND

PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING

TASK 1.1 - PROJECT MANAGEMENT
In general, project management will include the supervision and scheduling of project staff, review of work prepared by staff and subconsultants, project coordination, project organization, quality assurance and control, acting as the client liaison, monitoring the project schedule and budget, preparation of project reports and attendance at meetings with the City and other agencies to receive input and discuss and review the project during its critical design periods.

More specific responsibilities include the following subtasks.

Task 1.1.1 - Project Development Meetings
Biggs Cardosa will schedule bi-monthly project development virtual meetings to discuss the status of the project, upcoming efforts, issues, and other relevant information. An agenda and invitation will be sent out two (2) days prior to the meeting, including minutes from the previous meeting. Minutes of each meeting will be distributed to attendees within five (5) workdays of the meeting. At the meeting, we will distribute an Outstanding Issues list. Items on the list are discussed at the meeting, new issues are added and assigned, and tasks completed are noted as “closed”. A total of 8 meetings are assumed.

Task 1.1.2 - Progress Reports and Invoices
On a monthly basis, we will issue invoices and progress reports to the City detailing major items worked on during the billing period and anticipated work for the following month. We will establish and apply internal accounting methods and procedures acceptable to the City for documenting and monitoring contract costs.

Task 1.1.3 - Kick-Off Meeting
Biggs Cardosa will attend a project kick-off meeting, at which we will invite key personnel from the City, as well as other parties that, in concurrence with the City, we feel are important stakeholders in the success of the project. The goal of the kick-off meeting is to introduce staff, discuss project background and scope, establish communication and procedure guidelines, and discuss the project schedule.

Task 1.1.4 - Project Schedule
We will prepare a Project Master Schedule in Microsoft Project format. The schedule will be updated regularly and discussed at the monthly PDT meetings. The schedule will have all City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 3 relationships defined and the critical path and activity floats shown. It is assumed that both bridges will follow the same design schedule.

The Preliminary Project Schedule is included at the end of this section and is based on the anticipated contract execution date that includes all the major design tasks and defined relationships.

Task 1.1.5 – Initial Field Review Meeting
Biggs Cardosa will attend a initial field review meeting with the City’s Project Manager and other stakeholders to review the proposed project and to highlight and record significant project features. The design team will conduct a site visit to identify exisitng conditions and establish preliminary design assumptions and parameters.

Phase 1 Task 1.1 Deliverables:
• Meeting agendas and minutes
• Outstanding Issues List (and updates)
• Invoices with progress reports
• Project Schedule

TASK 1.2 - PLANNING AND SURVEYING

Task 1.2.1 - Research and Data Gathering
The Biggs Cardosa design team will review available data, including previous studies, provided by the City. Key information to review will be the available photos, record drawings and inspection reports, and maintenance history.

We will collect utility information using USA database. Utility record data will be drafted on a utility base map.

We will research and summarize bridge maintenance records for existing bridges upstream and downstream of the proposed bridge to determine if any maintenance challenges have historically occurred. This helps to determine the ideal freeboard and span lengths.

Task 1.2.2 – Project Survey Control
We will establish survey control for use throughout design and construction. Project control will reference City and SCVWD Benchmarks as available.

Task 1.2.3 – Topographic Survey
We will perform field topographic survey for use in design and modeling.

We will collect creek cross-sections, extending 10’ beyond top of bank on each side of the creek.

Creek cross sections will collect visible grade breaks perpendicular to the primary direction of flow. Cross sections will be collected at approximately the following locations:
• 200’ upstream of McClellan Road
City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 4 • 150’ upstream McClellan Road
• 100’ upstream of McClellan Road
• 50’ upstream of McClellan Road
• At south side of McClellan Road Bridge
• At north side of McClellan Road Bridge
• 50’ downstream of McClellan Road
• 100’ downstream of McClellan Road
• 150’ downstream of McClellan Road
• 200’ downstream of McClellan Road
Creek cross sections at McClellan Road will include structure abutments, visible foundations, soffit, superstructure and wingwalls.

Perform field topographic surveys to obtain existing pavement elevations, roadway & creek features, surface visible utilities, trees and other obstructions within the work area. We will obtain location and invert at accessible storm drain manholes, inlets and sanitary sewer manholes.

We will draft Base Map features in AutoCAD for use in project backgrounds.

Task 1.2.3 – Right of Way Record Boundary
We will prepare a base map of right of way record data including site boundary, easements and other encumbrances of record based upon available record data from City/County. Property boundaries will be drafted in AutoCAD for use in project documents.

Task 1.2.4 – Arborist Report
We will perform a tree survey of the trees within the designated project area to determine the sizes, species and condition of the trees and prepare the arborist report. The arborist report will include recommendations for tree protection and removal based upon the maturity, condition and locations of the trees. Consideration will be given to monetary values of the trees being removed and replacement requirements.

Phase 1 Task 1.2 Deliverables:
• Right of Way Record Map
• Topographic Base Map
• Arborist Report

TASK 1.3 - GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS

Task 1.3.1 – Research and Data Collection:

The design team will review readily available geologic and soil literature in the vicinity of the site and the as-built drawings.

City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 5

Task 1.3.2 – Permit and Utility Clearance:

It is assumed that the explorations will be performed within the City’s right-of-way (ROW), and the encroachment permit will be provided by the design team or the City at no cost. The permit application fee is not included in the cost estimate. Traffic control will be required during field explorations, which will be performed by a vendor following California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD).

The design team will apply for drilling permits from Valley Water as the borings are greater than 45 feet.

The design team’s field engineer will mark the boring location and contact the Underground Service Alert (USA) for utility clearance. A private utility locator and removing the USA marking are not included in the scope.

Task 1.3.3 – Field Exploration:

A total of two soil borings, each up to 80 feet deep, are planned with one at each abutment. It is assumed that a truck rig would be used for the field explorations for the 80-foot borings. Lane closures are expected during the field explorations. Traffic control is included in the cost estimate and will be performed by an outside vendor. The drilling cost was estimated assuming 8-hour work shifts. Additional two or three grab samples will also be collected from the creek bed for scour analysis purposes.

The design team’s field engineer will classify and log the subsurface soil and rock conditions encountered in the test boring at the time of drilling. Samples will be collected for laboratory testing.

It is assumed that the borings will be grouted by using neat cement according to the Valley Water permit requirement. The pavement will be restored by hot asphalt (2’x2’x3” minimum patch), which will be performed by a paving contractor.

Please note that the actual locations of the explorations will be determined based on the site conditions due to access or utility conflicts.

Task 1.3.4 – Laboratory Testing:

Laboratory tests will be performed on representative soil samples, such as moisture contents, densities, plasticity index (basic soil characteristics), corrosion tests (pH, sulfate, chloride, and resistivity), consolidation tests, and strength tests as deemed necessary.

One R-value test was included in the cost estimate for pavement design. It is assumed that three particle size analyses will be performed in order to provide gradation information to the hydraulic engineer for scour analyses.

City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 6

Task 1.3.5 – Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Analyses:

The following engineering analyses will be performed based on the boring data as part of the Phase 1 preliminary engineering analyses.
• Seismic design criteria, i.e., ARS curve per Caltrans ARS Online website. (site-specific ARS curve is not included.)
• Seismic hazards (liquefaction potential)
• Foundation evaluation (axial capacity vs. length curve for deep foundations) • Development of geotechnical parameters for LPILE analyses (LPILE to be performed by the structural engineer)
• Slope stability evaluation at the abutments
• Lateral earth pressures
• Corrosion potential evaluation

The site is located within a seismically active area of northern California and lies in close proximity to the Monte Vista-Shannon Fault, considered an active thrust fault. However, since the project site is located more than 1,000 feet from the Monte Vista-Shannon Fault and outside the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, the potential impact from surface fault rupture is considered insignificant, and a fault rupture analysis is not included in the scope of work.

Task 1.3.6 – Report Preparation:

A preliminary Geotechnical Report will be prepared, which will discuss the overall geotechnical/geologic conditions, including geology, subsurface conditions, groundwater, as- built data, etc. The preliminary foundation recommendations will be presented.

The boring log will be edited based on the field logs and the laboratory test results and will be prepared based on Caltrans standards. The laboratory data will also be included as part of the report.

Phase 1 Task 1.3 Deliverables:
• Preliminary Foundation Report

TASK 1.4: FEASIBILITY MEMO
Task 1.4.1 – Feasibility Study Report
The Biggs Cardosa design team will develop a feasibility study for McClellan Road Bridge to determine the recommended structure option as well as roadway alignment and profile for McClellan Road Bridge prior to proceeding with the plan design. We will evaluate up to two (2) structure options for the concepts including bridge rehabilitation/retrofit and bridge replacement. Since the existing bridge was constructed in 1920 and has a sufficiency rating of

47.5, we will not evaluate a bridge rehabilitation/retrofit option. We will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each structure option. We will document hydraulic considerations of the bridge replacement feasibility based on a review of available information. This phase of work City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 7 focuses on identifying project challenges, developing and screening improvement alternatives, and defining the project.

The design team will evaluate additional funding types to help reduce the funding gap and will include in the Feasibility Study Report.

Bridge Preliminary Estimates: We will prepare preliminary cost estimates using a cost per square foot basis for each of the structure concepts which will include the appropriate contingencies (typically 25%) in accordance with Caltrans guidelines. It is important that we get the most accurate cost estimate possible for planning and budgeting purposes at this early stage of design.

The Feasibility Study Report will be prepared during the preliminary design phase to document the basis of design and reasoning made to arrive at the selected reconstruction. Design considerations will include bridge structure evaluation, environmental impacts, hydraulic constraints, geotechnical constraints, constructability, construction staging and access, structure cost, and civil costs.

Our experience and expertise provides Biggs Cardosa the ability to review the existing conditions and quickly assess the most cost-effective structure concepts. We will use this experience and expertise to evaluate structure replacement and bridge configurations to meet the requirements of the project constraints. We will work closely with the City to evaluate what impacts to cost, schedule, constructability, and environmental considerations are created by each of the feasible structure concepts.

The Feasibility Study Report will include the following primary elements:
• Discussion of the two structure concepts including discussion on construction and maintenance costs, permitting constraints, environmental impacts, right-of-way impacts, and initial geotechnical and hydraulic results to highlight how the preferred alternative was determined.
• Estimated construction costs.

Phase 1 Task 1.4 Deliverables:
• Two (2) Cost Estimates (PDF)
• Draft and Final Feasibility Study Report (PDF)

Task 1.5: PRELIMINARY/CONCEPT PLANS

Task 1.5.1 – Preliminary Roadway Design
We will evaluate the roadway horizontal and vertical alignments and provide conceptual plans to provide for bike lanes and sidewalks in both directions as well as the required freeboard per City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 8 the hydraulic analysis. We will also take into account safety and visibility requirements for vehicles and at the Stevens Creek Trail crossing.

Task 1.5.2 – Preliminary Hydraulic Design
Develop Hydrographs
The design team will construct a point precipitation model to determine the 50, and 100-year, and 200-year hydrographs and peak discharges. Peak discharges will be consistent with the FEMA discharges as applicable.

Existing Conditions Modeling
The design team will create a 2D hydraulic model of the existing condition based on topographic information (LiDAR), creek surveys, and detailed survey information (if needed) or as-built plans of the existing bridges provided by others using HEC-RAS version 6.5. Avila will model the 50-year, 100-year, and 200-year discharges.

Proposed Conditions Modeling
The design team will update the existing conditions model for up to 2 proposed bridge replacement configurations, including any proposed changes to the roadway approach elevations and grading provided by others. Avila will require a surface in .dwg format of proposed grading to be prepared by others.

Update Hydraulic Modeling for Preferred Alternative
The design team will update the hydraulic modeling to reflect the final preferred alternative design. Avila will update the proposed configurations, including any proposed changes to the roadway approaches and grading for final design. Hydraulic model results will be provided via electronic mail.

Task 1.5.3 - Scour Analysis and Bank Protection
Degradation
The design team shall review maintenance records and cross sections for the existing and adjacent bridges to determine if the stream has degraded over time, and assess debris capture history at the existing structure.

Local Bridge Scour Calculations
Pier, contraction, abutment, and pressure flow scour will be estimated for up to two alternatives modeled using the methods described in the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Publication HEC-18, Evaluating Scour at Bridges .

Chapter 3 of the California Amendments to AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications LRFD Code were updated in March of 2025 and now mandate designing foundations to the check flood (200-year) event.

Contraction and abutment scour shall be estimated using the methods described in the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Publication HEC-18, Evaluating Scour at Bridges. The Colorado State University (CSU) Equation shall be used for estimating local scour as City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 9 recommended in the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Publication HEC-18, Evaluating Scour at Bridges.

Bank Protection
The design team will assess stability of the existing slopes, determine if bank protection at the bridge is needed, and size RSP for the preferred alternative. If bank protection is required, parameters will be provided according to FHWA publication HEC-23, Bridge Scour and Stream Instability Countermeasures Experience, Selection, and Design Guidance for rock riprap for the one chosen proposed bridge alternative.

Update Scour for Bridge Scour Data Table for Preferred Alternative The design team will update scour for final design alternative, check bank protection for final grading and provide scour data table. Scour estimates and sketches showing plan, profile and layer thickness for RSP will be incorporated into the project plans. Scour and RSP calculations will be incorporated into the Preliminary and Final Hydraulic Report.

Task 1.5.4 - Draft Preliminary Hydraulic Report
The design team will complete a draft PHR documenting the hydrology and hydraulic results for the existing conditions and up to 3 proposed bridge alternatives for use in the Type Selection Report.

The design team will document the design storm criteria section in the Preliminary Hydraulic Report (PHR) including guidance from Chapter 800 of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual (HDM) which delineates the hydraulic design criteria for bridges. The basic rule for hydraulic design is that bridges should be designed to pass the Q 50 with sufficient freeboard and convey
the Q 100 without freeboard, though exceptions may be granted if sufficient evidence is provided.

The HDM notes that 2 feet of freeboard is often assumed for preliminary bridge designs but leaves the recommendation for freeboard to the judgment of the hydraulic engineer based primarily upon the debris anticipated at the bridge.

Chapter 3 of the California Amendments to AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications LRFD Code were updated in March of 2025 and now mandate designing foundations to the check flood (200-year) event.

Task 1.5.5 - Final Preliminary Hydraulic Report
The design team will respond to comments on the Draft PHR and finalize the PHR.

Task 1.5.6 – Preliminary Bridge Design
We will develop up to two structure concepts on the preferred roadway alignment and recommended structure reconstruction option and will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative.

Bridge Preliminary General Plans: We will prepare preliminary one General Plan sheet for each of the preferred structure concept from the feasibility study that includes the plan, elevation, and typical section.

City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 10 Bridge General Plan Estimates: We will prepare preliminary Engineer’s Estimates for each of the structure concepts which will include the appropriate contingencies in accordance with Caltrans guidelines. Since funding and HBP eligibility will be discussed in detail with Caltrans during the preliminary design phase, it is important that we get the most accurate cost estimate possible. Therefore, instead of using cost per square foot basis, we will quantify the major bid items and determine the unit costs based on similar recent project bid summaries, the most current Caltrans Contract Cost Data book, the California highway Construction Cost Index information, and the Caltrans Engineering Service Center site.

Task 1.5.7 – Bridge Type Selection Report
The Structure Type Selection Report will be prepared during the preliminary design phase to document the basis of design and reasoning made to arrive at the selected alignment and bridge type. Design considerations will include alignment and profile design, right of way constraints, utility relocation, environmental impacts, hydraulic constraints, geotechnical constraints, constructability, structure cost, and approach roadway costs. Accelerated Bridge Construction (ABC) methods will also be evaluated as required by Caltrans. ABC methods include the incorporation of prefabricated elements and value analysis of replacement strategies.

Our experience and expertise provide Biggs Cardosa the ability to review the proposed structure, geometrics, and existing conditions and quickly assess the most cost-effective structure concepts. We will use this experience and expertise to evaluate alternative frame, pier, column, and abutment configurations and alignments to meet the requirements of the project constraints. We will work closely with the County to evaluate what impacts to cost, schedule, constructability, and environmental considerations are created by each of the feasible structure concepts.

Per the recently updated Caltrans Local Assistance Program Guidelines, it is mandatory for all HBP projects to submit the type selection report to Structures Local Assistance and HBP Managers for review and concurrence. This process is to ensure that the chosen structure type and associated details are the most cost-effective solution.

In order to streamline the Type Selection approval process with Caltrans, we will follow the Type Selection Procedure Guidelines for HBP Projects and ensure that all materials identified in the District Type Selection Report Submittal Checklist and Structure Type Selection Report Requirements are submitted with the type selection report.

The Bridge Type Selection process involves the following primary elements:

Preparation and Submittal of Type Selection Documents: The Type Selection documents will include the Bridge Site Data Submittal Package, Draft Foundation Plan, and the Type Selection Report including the Type Selection Memo, Vicinity Map, General Plan, General Plan Estimate, and Project Seismic Design Criteria.

Roadway/Civil Considerations: We will prepare and include discussions on each alternative’s permitting constraints, right of way requirements, utility impacts, and construction staging and City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 11 access. It will also include the preliminary roadwayplans and construction costs. The Basis of Design will be highlighted in the report as well as identifying any design exceptions that may be necessary.

Type Selection Meeting and Approval: The Biggs Cardosa design team will attend the Type Selection Meeting and will present the proposed structures and discuss issues pertinent to the structure such as foundations, construction, seismic design, aesthetics, and traffic handling. We will prepare the Type Selection meeting summary/minutes and address the comments raised at the meeting.

Updated General Plan Submittal and Distribution: After approval of the structure type, we will update and submit the General Plan and General Plan Estimate if needed. We will also prepare a list of design decisions needed from the City as well as a list of issues to be resolved during the final design.

Phase 1 Task 1.5 Deliverables:
• Preliminary Bridge General Plans, Preliminary Roadway Plans, and Preliminary Cost Estimates (PDF)
• Draft and Final Bridge Type Selection Report (PDF)

TASK 1.6: ENVIRONMENTAL APPROVAL
The design team will prepare the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) environmental documents and supporting technical studies for the project.

Task 1.6.1 - NEPA Environmental Clearance
We will work with the project team to develop a project description for submittal to Caltrans.

We will prepare the Caltrans’ Preliminary Environmental Study (PES) form and attend one formal Caltrans Field Review for the proposed project. The PES form will include a visual impact questionnaire, United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) list of federally listed species, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) list of federally listed species, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) floodplain maps, and hazardous materials database mapping.

Upon completion of the PES process, Caltrans will issue a letter to the City identifying the NEPA environmental document (i.e., Categorical Exclusion) and technical memos and studies to be completed to support the NEPA document. Based on recent experience working on similar Caltrans Local Assistance Projects in the greater Bay Area, we believe Caltrans will determine the project qualifies for a Categorical Exclusion and require preparation of the following technical memos for the project:
• Natural Environment Study (NES) and Biological Assessment (BA) • Section 106 Report
City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 12 • Section 4(f) De Minimis Determination
• Water Quality Memo (Construction BMPs)
• Location Hydraulic Study and Summary Floodplain Encroachment Report (LHS and SFER)
• Initial Site Assessment (Hazardous Materials)
• Traffic Control Plan (traffic control during construction, construction hours) • Equipment Staging Memo (staging location details)
• Construction Noise Memo (adherence to local ordinance) • Air Quality PM2.5 Exemption Email from MTC

We will be responsible for preparing all the above memos/reports. It is assumed that coordination with MTC for the Air Quality PM2.5 Exemption email will be completed by the City, and the design team will assist the City with this coordination. The memos and reports will be prepared based on the Caltrans’ SER and submitted to the City for review. We will revise the memos and reports once and submit them back to the City for submittal to Caltrans.

After the memos are deemed complete by Caltrans, Caltrans will issue the NEPA Categorical Exclusion for use by the City in obtaining federal funding.

Task 1.6.2 – CEQA Environmental Clearance
We believe the project would qualify for a Class 2 Categorical Exemption (CE) under CEQA.

Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Class 2 activities consist of the “Replacement or reconstruction of existing utility systems and/or facilities involving negligible or no expansion of capacity.” The above-described technical memos and reports to be prepared under NEPA will serve as the technical reports to be used to support the CEQA CE. No additional technical memos or reports will be completed to support the CEQA CE. We will prepare the Notice of Exemption (NOE) and a CE justification memo explaining why none of the exceptions to applying a CE and listed under Section 15300.2 Exceptions of the CEQA Guidelines are applicable to the project. The memo and NOE will be submitted to the City for review and approval. This scope of work assumes the City will file the NOE with the Santa Clara County Clerk and State Clearinghouse.

Task 1.6.3 – Natural Environment Study and Biological Assessment The design team will prepare a Natural Environment Study (NES) report providing information on use of the site (known and potential) by sensitive species identified during the desktop review and a field survey that follows the Caltrans Standard Environmental Reference template format. Potential use of the project area by special-status wildlife and plant species will be ranked qualitatively depending upon the suitability of the habitat and/or proximity of any known records found during the database search. Species observed on-site will be reported in the findings. Based on the findings and likelihood of occurrences of special-status species, the design team will include a discussion of potential constraints that may be required during project activities to further inform project design and implementation.

City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 13 The report will provide an analysis of special-status species and habitats within the project area, and will include an impact analyses and provide mitigation measures. In addition, the design team will develop a detailed set of maps representing habitat types as well as observed and historic locations of special-status species on and in the vicinity of the project site.

The design team will perform research and compile online database lists of special-status species from the following sources:

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), and California Native Plant Society (CNPS), and existing peer-reviewed literature, environmental documents, etc.

NMFS Biological Assessment
The steelhead-central California coast are known to be present in Stevens Creek. Therefore, the design team will prepare a Biological Assessment (BA) to support consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for steelhead-central California coast. The BA will identify potential temporary and permanent impacts to suitable habitat for federally listed species, determine if the project has the potential to affect these species, and recommend appropriate avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures, as necessary. Methods to assess the potential for listed species to be affected by the proposed project will include both site- specific habitat assessments as well as review of the existing documentation for biological resources in the project area.

The design team will assess the potential effects of the proposed project to Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) as defined under the Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. The analysis will focus on impacts to the habitat for all life stages of species with designated EFH.

The design team will attend meetings with regulatory agencies, as requested, during the permit process to facilitate information requests or other needs.

Task 1.6.4 – Section 106 Reports
The design team will complete the following tasks and studies to support the project National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 review process by Caltrans:

Record Search. A record search for previous studies and recorded cultural resources will be requested from the Northwest Information Center (CHRIS), Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, to include the project area and a ½-mile radius around it. We will also request a Sacred Lands File search and tribal contact list for Santa Clara County from the California Native American Heritage Commission in Sacramento.

Prepare Area of Potential Effect Map. In consultation with the City ,we will prepare an Area of Potential Effects (APE) map for review by Caltrans. The map will use the most recent format guidance from the Office of Historic Preservation and Caltrans.

Archaeological Survey Report. A qualified archaeologist will complete a pedestrian field survey, background research, and geoarchaeological assessment of the project corridor. This City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 14 data will be used to complete an Archaeological Survey Report that conforms to the guidance in the Caltrans Standard Environmental Reference (SER) Volume 2.

Historic Properties Survey Report. The Historic Properties Survey Report is a summary report that includes the final draft of the APE map, discusses documentation efforts, presents the findings of the ASR, and summarizes the National Register eligibility conclusions for cultural resources. The document also provides evidence of coordination with Native American groups, local government, and other interested persons and organizations, and requests the concurrence of the State Office of Historic Preservation (if necessary).

Phase 1 Task 1.6 Deliverables:
• Natural Environment Study
• Biological Assessment
• Section 106 Report
• Technical Memos
• CEQA CE
• NEPA CE

PHASE 2: ENGINEERING DESIGN (PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND ESTIMATES (PS&E), AND BID AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT

Task 2.0.1 - Project Development Meetings
Biggs Cardosa will schedule bi-monthly project development virtual meetings to discuss the status of the project, upcoming efforts, issues, and other relevant information. An agenda and invitation will be sent out two (2) days prior to the meeting, including minutes from the previous meeting. Minutes of each meeting will be distributed to attendees within five (5) workdays of the meeting. At the meeting, we will distribute an Outstanding Issues list. Items on the list are discussed at the meeting, new issues are added and assigned, and tasks completed are noted as “closed”. A total of 10 meetings are assumed.

Task 2.0.2 - Progress Reports and Invoices
On a monthly basis, we will issue invoices and progress reports to the City detailing major items worked on during the billing period and anticipated work for the following month. We will establish and apply internal accounting methods and procedures acceptable to the City for documenting and monitoring contract costs.

Task 2.0.3 - Project Schedule
We will prepare a Project Master Schedule in Microsoft Project format. The schedule will be updated regularly and discussed at the monthly PDT meetings. The schedule will have all relationships defined and the critical path and activity floats shown. It is assumed that both bridges will follow the same design schedule.

City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 15 The Preliminary Project Schedule is included at the end of this section and is based on the anticipated contract execution date that includes all the major design tasks and defined relationships.

Phase 2 Task 2.0 Deliverables:
• Meeting agendas and minutes
• Outstanding Issues List (and updates)
• Project Master Schedule (and updates)
• Invoices with progress reports

TASK 2.1 - FINAL DESIGN REPORTS AND STUDIES
Task 2.1.1 - Final Geotechnical Report
Based on the structure and foundation type determined based on the Phase 1 study, the Geotechnical Report will be updated based on the selected foundation type and the demands provided by the structural engineer. The foundation design and recommendations will be developed based on Caltrans standards. Log of test boring sheets will be updated to be included as part of the plan set.

Task 2.1.2 - Draft Final Bridge Design Hydraulic Study Report (Final Hydraulic Report (FHR))
The design team will complete an FHR documenting hydrology, hydraulic, and scour results for the preferred alternative.

Task 2.1.3 - Final Hydraulic Report (FHR)
The design team will respond to comments on the Draft FHR and finalize the FHR.

Task 2.1.4 - Flood of Record and Overtopping Flood
The design team will analyze the impact of the proposed bridge on the floodplain including completing the hydrology and hydraulic analyses required to determine the Overtopping Flood and Flood of Record at the bridge.

Task 2.1.5 - Location Hydraulic Study/Summary Floodplain Encroachment Report (LHS/SFER)
The design team will complete a Location Hydraulic Study/ Summary Floodplain Encroachment Report (LHS/SFER) in accordance with 23 CFR 650.113. This document is generally included in the environmental document for the bridge.

Task 2.1.7 - Utility Relocation
Utility relocation exhibits will be prepared showing the anticipated utility conflicts and potential relocations or adjustments that will be required. Utility verification letters and these exhibits will be sent to the utility owners to confirm the locations of their facilities have been delineated completely and accurately. Once any conflicts and adjustments required have been confirmed, another letter determining the relocation/adjustments, timing, and cost City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 16 responsibilities, we will begin coordination of the required utility agreements and notices to owner’s to perform their design.

Potholing will be performed to determine locations of critical utilities. An allowance for 6 potholes is included in this scope of work.

TASK 2.2 - PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND ESTIMATES (PS&E)
Task 2.2.1 – 60% PS&E Preparation
Upon approval of the 30% preliminary design and the selection of the preferred alternative, the Biggs Cardosa design team will advance the project to the 60% level. The 60% design will address the preliminary design review comments and resolve further design issues in the PS&E package. This submittal will include the 60% plans, technical specifications, and detailed construction cost estimate. The focus of the design team is to finalize the reports and supplemental project information which form the basis of design for the project. All project sheets, which will be represented in the bid documents, will be identified and developed in varying degrees of detail during this phase.

Bridge Design
Layout sheets, elevations, and details will be provided for the bridge replacement design.

Caltrans Standard Plans may be referenced from the bridge plans.

The 60% plan set is anticipated to include the following drawings:

Title Sheet 1 Sheet
Survey Control & Existing Conditions 3 Sheets
Demolition Plan 3 Sheets
Plan and Profile 3 Sheets
Typical Cross Sections 1 Sheet
Construction Details 2 Sheets
Grading and Drainage Plan 3 Sheets
Utility Plan 6 Sheets
Temporary Water Pollution Control Plan 3 Sheets
Storm Water Treatment Plan 3 Sheets
Traffic Handling Plans 6 Sheets
Bridge Replacement Sheets 16 Sheets
Log of Test Borings 1 Sheet
Subtotal Plans 51 Sheets
Engineer’s Estimate of Probable Construction Cost
Detailed project quantity estimates and cost estimates will be provided for review and approval. The cost estimate will identify construction work items, quantities, and unit costs, and summarize the estimated total project cost, including allowances for supplemental work, owner-furnished materials, expenses, mobilization, and contingencies. The unit costs shall be determined by reviewing similar recent project bid summaries, the City’s cost data, the most City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 17 current Caltrans Contract Cost Data book, the California highway Construction Cost Index information, and the Caltrans Engineering Service Center site.

Technical Specifications
Draft technical specifications (Special Provisions) will be completed based on current Caltrans Standard Special Provisions and Standard Specifications, and City construction contract standards.

Right-of-Way Needs
A resolved boundary will be prepared as well as an exhibit illustrating the right-of-way and easement requirements for the project.

Phase 2 Task 2.2.1 Deliverables:
• 60% Plans (11x17 PDFs)
• 60% Technical Special Provisions
• 60% Engineer’s Construction Cost Estimate
• 60% Quantity Calculations

Tasks 2.2.2 – 90% PS&E Preparation
This task includes the preparation of the 90% construction documents and will include addressing the 60% Submittal Review Comments, preparing the 90% PS&E, and submitting 90% PS&E.

During the 90% submittal, Biggs Cardosa will perform an independent check (red, green, and yellow) of the structural plans, calculations, and quantity calculations. We will perform detailed take-offs of rebar quantities including an independent check (red, green, and yellow) of these quantities. We will also perform an independent check of the specifications.

The Biggs Cardosa design team will respond to the City review comments on the 60% submittal and incorporate the necessary changes in the 90% PS&E submittal.

We will prepare the technical special provisions. The City will prepare the “boilerplate” and combine the City’s “boilerplate” with the technical special provisions to create the final specification document.

We will prepare the final plans, technical specifications, and construction cost estimate. All design activities will be completed. The PS&E package will be prepared for a final City review.

Task 2.2.3 – 100% PS&E
This task includes the preparation of the 100% construction documents and will include addressing the 90% Submittal Review Comments, preparing the 100% PS&E, and submitting 100% PS&E.

City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 18 The Biggs Cardosa design team will respond to the City and review comments on the 90% submittal and incorporate the necessary changes in the 100% PS&E submittal.

Phase 2 Task 2.2.3 Deliverables:
• 100% Plans (11x17 PDFs)
• 100% Technical Specifications
• 100% Engineer’s Construction Cost Estimate
• 100% Quantity Calculations
• Updated Comment Response Matrix

TASK 2.3 - ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING
Task 2.3.1 – Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
If vegetated wetlands subject to USACE jurisdiction are present in project impact areas, a formal delineation of these habitats would be completed, as such a delineation would be necessary for USACE permitting. An Aquatic Resources Delineation Report summarizing the methods and results of the field survey for jurisdictional wetlands and other waters, including waters of the U.S. regulated by the USACE under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, waters of the state regulated by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and waters regulated by the CDFW. The report will be prepared to specifications developed by the San Francisco District of the USACE and will be of sufficient detail for agency review and a jurisdictional determination.

Task 2.3.2
- CDFW Streambed Alteration Agreement Application
The CDFW requires notification of any activity that threatens to substantially modify any lake, river, or stream (CFGC Section 1602). The design team will prepare notification materials for a Standard Agreement to upload to CDFW’s electronic portal (EPIMS). The application materials prepared will include project information, CEQA documentation as provided by the Owner, aquatic resources information and biological resources information from the NES, impact descriptions, figures, and a description of stabilization and reseeding.

Task 2.3.3 - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Permit Application The design team understands that this project will likely require permitting from the USACE via use of the CWA Section 404 Nationwide Permit (NWP) Program. The design team proposes preparation of a Pre-Construction Notice to seek verification from USACE that the project meets conditions necessary to use NWPs. The design team will determine whether water will be discharged to USACE jurisdiction, as well as the total area and volume of dredge/fill. The design team will modify the supplied the project description for applicability in the Pre- Construction Notification, and to develop appropriate impact minimization measures. The design team will work USACE to propose an appropriate NWP for the planned activity, complete the USACE Pre-Construction Notification checklist, and compile supporting City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 19 documents. If loss is expected to exceed 0.5 acre, an Individual Permit would be required, which is not included in this task.

Task 2.3.4 - Regional Water Quality Control Board Permit Application Section 401 of the CWA requires that any person applying for a federal permit or license which results in discharge of pollutants into waters of the U.S. must obtain a state water quality certification (WQC). We propose to prepare and submit a CWA Section 401 WQC application.

The Individual WQC will contain standard project information, applicable form, current impact fee calculator worksheet, impact information, figures, stabilization and reseeding details, and other pertinent project details that are standard to the WQC. If required, the design team will initiate a Pre-Filing Meeting request and administer a virtual Pre-Filing Meeting as required under the 2023 CWA Section 401 WQC Improvement Rule.

Task 2.3.5 - Permitting Coordination and Facilitation
After regulatory application submittal, the design team will attend internal meetings with the Project Team and the Owner to facilitate permitting strategy/approach and project kickoff. In addition, the design team will attend meetings with regulatory agencies, as requested, during the permit process to facilitate information requests or other needs. There are up to 20 hours of support included in this task.

Phase 2 Task 2.3 Deliverables:
• Streambed Alteration Notification package for submittal to CDFW • Pre-Construction Notification package for submittal to USACE • WQC package for submittal to the SWRCB/RWQCB

TASK 2.4 - BID AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT
Task 2.4.1 – Bid Support
The Biggs Cardosa design team will provide support to the City during construction bidding.

The City will administer and coordinate the bidding procedures for the project. The City will advertise the project for bidding and distribute the plans to prospective bidders. The City's project manager will be the designated person to receive contractor inquiries. We will assist the City as requested during the bidding process. The work may include responding to contractor bid inquiries, and providing consultation and interpretation of the construction documents during the advertisement period. We have budgeted the bidding support effort to respond to 4 inquiries.

Task 2.4.2 - Construction Support
We will assist the City during construction by providing construction support, as requested. It is assumed that the City will hire/provide a Resident Engineer/Construction Manager to provide construction inspection services, and to act as a liaison to the City regarding construction related matters. A brief discussion of the anticipated scope of work is included below.

City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 20 Preconstruction Meeting
We will attend the preconstruction meeting and one construction progress meeting, as required.

We will answer clarification questions pertaining to the plans and special provisions, if needed.

Respond to RFI’s
We will review up to ten (10) contractor RFI’s (Request for Information) and provide written responses.

Review Submittals
We will review up to ten (10) contractor submittals and provide written responses.

Field Observations
We will perform the following field observations:
• It is assumed that the construction management team and the resident engineer will oversee the foundation construction. A placeholder of 16 hours is included for site visits as necessary. If the Geotechnical Engineer is required to conduct full-time construction inspections, additional budget approval will be needed.

Phase 2 Task 2.4 Deliverables:
• RFI responses
• Submittal review

ASSUMPTIONS

The following assumptions were made in generating this scope of work:

1. The bridge design effort in Task 2 assumes that the proposed bridge is a single-span precast concrete voided slab bridge supported on a single row of CIDH piles.

2. All drafting will be done in AutoCAD. Electronic submittals will be in PDF format.

3. All reports will be submitted as draft and final. One round of reviews of the draft reports is assumed.

4. The Feasibility Study Report will be reviewed and approved by the City only. Caltrans will not need to review the feasibility study. One round of agency review is assumed.

5. The City and any other commenting entity will provide full comments at each submittal.

6. Technical specifications will be developed per the latest Caltrans standards at the start of the 60% PS&E phase. The scope excludes any updates to the technical specifications to meet new standards released by Caltrans during the life of the project.

7. Retaining walls are not anticipated for the project. If retaining walls are required for the selected alternative, an updated scope of services will be required and coordinated with the City.

8. All permit fees will be paid by the City.

9. Addenda documents and construction contract change orders are not needed.

City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 21

10. Attendance at the pre-bid meeting and analysis of bids is not needed.

11. One resubmittal of each construction submittal is assumed.

12. One field review meeting with the City and Caltrans is included in this scope of services which will occur after Caltrans review of the PES form.

13. Caltrans will not be involved during the 60% and 90% PS&E phases and will not review the 60% and 90% PS&E submittals.

14. Focus meetings with Caltrans are not needed.

Hydraulic/Hydrology

15. Feasibility memo will be completed after the preliminary hydraulic modeling is complete.

16. Historical bridge cross sections are available in the bridge inspection reports for the bridges.

17. Degradation estimates will be straight-line extrapolation using best available data, no numeric sediment transport models will be completed.

18. Hydraulic and scour analysis will be consistent with Memos to Designers 16-1 and LRFD section 3.7.5.

19. The draft FHR will be provided following the completion of the existing conditions modeling and proposed alternatives hydraulic modeling.

20. The FHR will be provided after completion of the environmental document once a preferred alternative is chosen.

21. One round of comments is assumed on the draft FHR.

22. It is assumed that the bridge replacement will not cause a significant encroachment into the floodplain or a change in the water surface elevation; if a significant encroachment into the floodplain or change in water surface elevation is found, a separate task order may be necessary.

23. No insurable structures will be adversely impacted by the structure replacement.

24. We will complete and sign the forms for items 3, 4, 5, 7 and 9 of the Location Hydraulic Summary.

25. It is assumed that there will be no coordination with FEMA. No formal no-rise, Conditional Letter of Map Revision or Letter of Map Revision is included in this scope of work.

26. Technical memos to be submitted electronically (no hard copies). Diversion strategies will rely on gravity flow and will not include pump systems.

27. A low flow analysis is not included in not needed.

Environmental

28. Responding to two (2) rounds of comments from Caltrans for the NES is included in this scope of services.

29. No additional site visit will be required, all impact analysis and mapping will be based on the field effort for the NES.

30. One species will be evaluated for the BA, steelhead- central California coast.

31. One (1) round of Owner edits will be required for the NMFS Biological Assessment.

City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 22

32. No site visit will be performed for the CDFW Streambed Alteration Agreement Application.

33. All valid and pertinent CEQA documents will be made available for submission and will be satisfactory to CDFW.

34. The Biggs Cardosa team will submit the completed Streambed Alteration Agreement Application package through CDFW’s EPIMS if provided access information.

35. CDFW will not require a formal mitigation plan and a description of stabilization and reseeding approach will be sufficient to address mitigation requirements.

36. One (1) round of Owner edits will be required for the CDFW Streambed Alteration Agreement Application.

37. A Section 404 Nationwide Permit will be appropriate for the project and additional permit documentation will not be required.
a. If impact quantities exceed NWP thresholds and an Individual Permit (or Letter of Permission) are required, the design team will provide a revised scope and cost estimate for this subtask.

38. The Biggs Cardosa team will be responsible for coordinating the early application process with agencies.

39. USACE will accept stabilization and reseeding as sufficient mitigation for unavoidable permanent impacts and USACE will not require a formal mitigation plan.

40. The Biological Assessment will be sufficient to meet the USACE’s Section 7 obligations and no further documentation will be included in the Pre-Construction Notification.

41. An evaluation of project alternatives will not be required and will not be prepared.

42. One (1) round of Owner edits will be required for the USACE Permit Application.

43. If the project and impacts qualify for a General Order from the SWRCB, the RWQCB permit application task will be modified to prepare a Notice of Intent (NOI) for coverage in lieu of the abovementioned Individual WQC. If no USACE permit is determined to be required, an Individual Waste Discharge Requirement Application will be prepared instead.

44. All valid and pertinent CEQA documents will be made available for submission and will be satisfactory to the SWRCB/RWQCB.

45. The SWRCB/RWQCB will accept stabilization and reseeding as sufficient mitigation to offset unavoidable permanent impacts and RWQCB will not require a formal mitigation plan.

46. One (1) round of Owner edits will be required for the RWQCB permit application.

47. Section 106 Report assumes that project design will not affect older buildings present on the adjacent McClellan Ranch Park or Deep Cliff Golf Course. If the design does affect these properties, a Historic Resources Evaluation Report may be required, under a separate task order.

48. XP1 field testing is not needed.

49. A visual impact analysis including preparation of visual simulations is not needed.

City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 23 Civil

50. Trail design including connecting the Linda Vista Trail to the Stevens Creek Trail with a grade separated crossing is not included in the Task 2 services. The trail connection will be evaluated on a conceptual basis in Task 1 only. No modifications to the existing trails are included in this scope of services.

51. No landscaping or irrigation plans will be prepared. Only hydroseeding is assumed.

52. No stage construction plans will be prepared. It is assumed that bridge construction will occur during short roadway closures to vehicles. The existing horizontal roadway alignment will be maintained. Traffic handling plans will be prepared to accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians through the project site during construction, and for any short duration detours required for vehicles.

53. All required Title Reports will be provided by the City.

54. It is anticipated that no new outfalls into the creek will be required.

55. The SWPPP will be prepared by the contractor.

56. It is assumed that the grade separated trail evaluation is only developed to a feasibility level.

57. No traffic operations analysis will be prepared.

58. No electrical work is needed.

59. Replacement irrigation in the creek may be my means of hand watering.

60. Pavement sections will match existing.

Public Outreach

61. Public outreach will be handled by the City. Public outreach including design support of public outreach meetings is not needed.

Right-of-Way

62. All project improvements and construction of the project will be within existing City right-of-way. No TCE or permanent right-of-way take will be required.

ADDITIONAL SERVICES
Below is a list of additional services that can be added after execution of this contract at the City’s discretion:

1. Public outreach support.

2. Right-of-way services including development of plats and legals, appraisal services and acquisition services.

3. Traffic engineering services.

4. Electrical engineering services.

5. Geomorphology services.

6. Trail design services.

7. Retaining wall design services.

8. Visual impact analysis services.

9. Low flow hydraulic analysis services.

City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 24

10. Hydraulic services including Conditional Letter of Map Revision or Letter of Map Revision support.

11. Focus meetings with Caltrans.

12. Landscaping services.

13. Landscape architecture and aesthetic enhancement services.

14. Pre-bid meeting attendance and bid analysis support.

15. Preparation of addenda documents and construction related change orders.

16. Historic Resources Evaluation Report services.

17. XPI field testing services.

Fee Proposal - McClellan Road Bridge Restoration Project Senior Principal Associate Senior Engineer Project
Engineer Staff Engineer Senior CAD /
BIM Specialist
Project
Administrator Principal Senior Civil
Engineer/Surveyor Engineer Assistant Engineer Field Survey Manager
Senior Field
Engineer Survey Crew Chief Survey Crew Chain
Landscape
Architecture
Manager
Landscape Architect Assistant
Landscape Designer
Certfied Project
Arborist Project Manager Senior Engineer Assistant Engineer Ass istant Engineer Principal Project Manager
Project
Manager
Senior Principal
Project
Manager
Project
Manager
Sr. Project
Engineer/QA
QC Manager
Senior Engineer
- II
Sr. Project
Engineer/Geolo
gist
Project
Geologist/CEG Staff Engineer
Field
Engineer/Geolo
gist
Lab Technician Drafting/Cadd
Tech Project Control Technical Editor Managing Principal Se nior PM Senior Associate Assistant/Coordinator Art Dir ector Senior Web/Graphics Appraiser III Appraiser II Ap praiser I Administrative Support Right of Way Technic ian Design Tasks
PHASE 1 - ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS, TECHNICAL STUDIES, AND PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING Task 1.1 Project Management: 92 $25,432
Task 1.1.1 Coordination / PDT Meetings 8 12 20 $5,502
Task 1.1.2 Progress Reports and Invoices 16 12 28 $7,491 Task 1.1.3 Kick-Off Meeting 2 4 6 12 $3,678
Task 1.1.4 Project Schedule 8 16 24 $6,515
Task 1.1.5 Initial Field Review Meeting 4 4 8 $2,245
Task 1.1.6 Field Review Meeting (Optional) 0 0 0 $0
Task 1.1.7 Public Outreach 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0
Task 1.2 Planning and Surveying 445 $84,884
Task 1.2.1 Research and Data Gathering 1 8 8 8 1 2 4 24 4 8 68 $13,248 Task 1.2.2 Project Survey Control 5 15 15 35 $6,562
Task 1.2.3 Topographic Survey 2 4 5 16 105 105 2 4 243 $43,916 Task 1.2.4 Right of Way Record Boundary 2 2 32 4 8 8 56 $13,698 Task 1.2.5 Aroborist Report 1 2 40 43 $7,460
Task 1.3 Geotechnical Investigations 195 $39,866
Task 1.3.1 Research and Data Collection 4 6 2 4 2 18 $4,519 Task 1.3.2 Permit and Utility Clearance 1 2 2 4 12 1 22 $4,666 Task 1.3.3 Field Exploration 1 2 2 2 20 2 29 $6,213
Task 1.3.4 Laboratory Testing 2 2 24 1 29 $4,325
Task 1.3.5 Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Analyses 2 4 4 24 34 $6,554 Task 1.3.6 Report Preparation 1 2 4 4 12 10 20 8 2 63 $13,588 Task 1.4 Feasibility Memo 195 $42,867
Task 1.4.1.1 Prepare Draft Feasibility Study Report 2 20 32 16 8 24 16 2 4 20 5 15 2 166 $35,754 Task 1.4.1.2 Respond to City Comments 2 4 4 10 $2,422
Task 1.4.1.3 Prepare Final Feasibility Study Report 1 2 8 8 19 $4,691 Task 1.5 Preliminary/Concept Plans 476 $103,044
Task 1.5.1 Preliminary Roadway Design 4 8 4 32 48 96 $21,233 Task 1.5.1.1 Landscape Architecture Photo Simulations 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Task 1.5.2 Preliminary Hydraulic Design 2 4 22 88 14 130 $25,581 Task 1.5.3 Scour Analysis and Bank Protection 2 10 12 26 6 56 $9,272 Task 1.5.4 Draft Preliminary Hydraulic Report 2 2 2 24 4 34 $6,676 Task 1.5.5 Final Preliminary Hydraulic Report 2 2 2 12 4 22 $4,400 Task 1.5.6 Preliminary Bridge Design 2 8 32 24 16 82 $19,765 Task 1.5.7 Bridge Type Selection Report 4 20 32 56 $16,117 Task 1.6 Environmental Approvals 235 $58,558
Task 1.6.1 NEPA Environmental Clearance 4 6 30 80 5 125 $30,692 Task 1.6.2 CEQA Environmental Clearance 1 2 5 10 5 23 $6,248 Task 1.6.3 Natural Enviornment Study and Biological Assessment 2 4 15 30 51 $12,645 Task 1.6.4 Section 106 Reports 2 4 10 20 36 $8,973
Task 1.6.5 Visual Impact Analysis 0 0 0 0 0 $0
PHASE 2 - ENGINEERING DESIGN (PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND ESTIMATES (PS&E), AND BID AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT Task 2.0 Project Management: 110 $29,690
Task 2.0.1 Coordination / PDT Meetings 12 18 30 $8,254
Task 2.0.1a Optional Coordination / PDT Meetings 0 0 0 $0 Task 2.0.2 Project Schedule 12 24 36 $9,773
Task 2.0.3 Progress Reports and Invoices 24 20 44 $11,664 Task 2.0.4 Public Outreach 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0
Task 2.1 Final Design Reports and Studies 256 $52,527
Task 2.1.1 Final Geotechnical Report 2 4 4 4 18 36 6 2 76 $16,123 Task 2.1.2 Final Hydraulic Design 2 2 4 16 2 26 $5,409
Task 2.1.2 Draft Final Hydraulic Report 2 4 2 12 2 2 24 $4,863 Task 2.1.3 Final Hydraulic Report 1 2 2 8 2 15 $3,083
Task 2.1.4 Flood of Record and Overtopping Flood 1 2 2 4 2 11 $2,281 Task 2.1.5 LHS/SFER 1 2 2 8 13 $2,833
Task 2.1.6 Low Flow Estimate and Hydraulic Modeling (Optional) 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Task 2.1.7 Utility Relocation 1 2 4 24 40 20 91 $17,935 Task 2.2 Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E) 2101 $440,392 Task 2.2.1.1 60% Bridge Design 5 60 150 190 200 605 $140,368 Task 2.2.1.2 Survey Control and Existing Conditions (3) 1 2 2 24 29 $5,305 Task 2.2.1.3 Demolition Plan (3) 1 2 4 32 39 $7,163
Task 2.2.1.4 Plan and Profile (3) 1 2 2 16 40 40 101 $17,688 Task 2.2.1.5 Typical Cross Sections (1) 1 2 1 4 10 18 $3,897 Task 2.2.1.6 Construction Details (2) 1 2 1 4 12 20 $4,226 Task 2.2.1.7 Grading and Drainage Plan (3) 1 2 2 4 40 24 73 $12,340 Task 2.2.1.8 Utility Plan (4) 1 2 2 4 24 40 73 $11,808
Task 2.2.1.9 Temporary Water Pollution Control Plan (3) 1 2 4 16 20 43 $7,156 Task 2.2.1.10 Storm Water Treatment Plan (3) 1 2 2 4 40 40 89 $14,441 Task 2.2.1.11 Landscape and Irrigation Plans 1 2 0 0 0 3 $814 Task 2.2.1.12 Traffic Handling Plans (6) 1 2 6 36 36 81 $13,090 Task 2.2.1.13 60% Engineer's Estimate of Probable Construction Cost 4 16 48 1 4 8 4 0 0 85 $18,078 Task 2.2.1.14 60% Technical Specifications 8 40 1 8 40 0 0 97 $21,693 Task 2.2.2.1 Respond to 65% City Comments 4 12 6 4 4 0 0 30 $7,200 Task 2.2.2.2 90% Plans 1 8 60 60 80 1 12 40 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 302 $63,020 Task 2.2.2.3 Independent Check 2 16 60 80 158 $36,907
Task 2.2.2.4 90% Cost Estimate 2 12 16 2 8 4 0 0 44 $9,209 Task 2.2.2.5 90% Technical Specifications 2 20 1 6 20 0 0 49 $10,949 Task 2.2.2.6 Plat and Legal Descriptions 0 0 0 0 0 $0
Task 2.2.3.1 Respond to 90% City Comments 4 10 4 4 4 0 26 $6,298 Task 2.2.3.2 100% Plans 1 2 24 16 1 4 24 16 0 0 88 $18,157 Task 2.2.3.3 100% Cost Estimate 2 8 8 2 8 28 $6,085
Task 2.2.3.4 100% Technical Specifications 2 8 2 8 20 $4,499 Task 2.3 Environmental Permitting 57 $14,876
Task 2.3.1 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report 2 2 $616 Task 2.3.2 CDFW Streambed Alteration Agreement Application 2 2 $616 Task 2.3.3 U.S. Army Corp of Engineers Permit Application 2 2 $616 Task 2.3.4 Regional Water Quality Control Board Permit 2 2 $616 Task 2.3.5 Permit Coordination and Facilitation 4 10 30 5 49 $12,412 Task 2.4 Bid and Construction Support 284 $72,857
Task 2.4.1 Bid Support 8 12 4 4 4 32 $8,827
Task 2.4.2.1 Preconstruction Meeting 2 2 2 6 $1,664
Task 2.4.2.2 Respond to RFI's 2 16 40 8 12 78 $20,122
Task 2.4.2.3 Review Submittals 24 80 4 8 8 124 $31,096
Task 2.4.2.4 Field Observations 2 12 8 8 30 $7,695
Task 2.4.2.5 Record Drawings 2 6 6 14 $3,453
0 $0
0 $0
0 $0
0 $0
0 $0
0 $0
0 $0
Phase 1: Subtotal Hours (Base Services) 12 135 210 0 60 16 12 5 79 76 40 9 16 128 128 0 0 0 40 44 144 76 6 65 155 12 4 4 24 2 14 52 32 24 8 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1638 Phase 1: Subtotal Hours (Optional Services) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Phase 2: Subtotal Hours (Base Services) 11 249 654 0 412 302 20 19 142 498 292 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 48 6 4 10 30 5 4 8 30 8 0 36 0 0 6 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2808 Phase 2: Subtotal Hours (Optional Services) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Direct Rate $152.00 $101.00 $83.00 $72.00 $65.00 $72.00 $70.00 $112.00 $85.50 $52.00 $41.50 $90.00 $62.05 $58.10 $51.63 $82.50 $67.00 $41.00 $52.50 $97.00 $73.50 $48.50 $40.14 $95.25 $61.80 $105.00 $113.88 $87.56 $90.00 $70.00 $70.00 $50.00 $62.50 $40.00 $47.50 $90.00 $40.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Overhead Rate 161.25% 161.25% 161.25% 161.25% 161.25% 161.25% 161.25% 178.64% 178.64% 178.64% 178.64% 178.64% 178.64% 178.64% 178.64% 178.64% 178.64% 178.64% 178.64% 121.18% 121.18% 121.18% 121.18% 197.62% 197.62% 197.62% 177.25% 177.25% 177.25% 177.25% 177.25% 177.25% 177.25% 177.25% 177.25% 177.25% 177.25% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Profit 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10% 10.00% 10.00% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Salary Increases 6.14% 6.14% 6.14% 6.14% 6.14% 6.14% 6.14% 3.25% 3.25% 3.25% 3.25% 3.25% 3.25% 3.25% 3.25% 3.25% 3.25% 3.25% 3.25% 6.07% 6.07% 6.07% 6.07% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 3.53% 3.53% 3.53% 3.53% 3.53% 3.53% 3.53% 3.53% 3.53% 3.53% 3.53% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Hourly Rate 463.62 308.07 253.16 219.61 198.26 219.61 213.51 $354.44 $270.58 $164.56 $131.33 $284.82 $196.37 $183.87 $163.39 $261.08 $212.03 $129.75 $166.14 $250.34 $189.69 $125.17 $103.59 $319.63 $207.38 $352.34 $359.55 $276.45 $284.15 $221.01 $221.01 $157.86 $197.33 $126.29 $149.97 $284.15 $126.29 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Phase 1: Subtotal Budget (Base Services) $5,563 $41,589 $53,164 $0 $11,896 $3,514 $2,562 $1,772 $21,376 $12,507 $5,253 $2,563 $3,142 $23,535 $20,914 $0 $0 $0 $6,646 $11,015 $27,315 $9,513 $622 $20,776 $32,144 $4,228 $1,438 $1,106 $6,820 $442 $3,094 $8,209 $6,315 $3,031 $1,200 $1,137 $253 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $354,651 Phase 1: Subtotal Budget (Optional Services) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Phase 2: Subtotal Budget (Base Services) $5,100 $76,709 $165,569 $0 $81,683 $66,323 $4,270 $6,734 $38,422 $81,952 $38,349 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,004 $9,105 $751 $414 $3,196 $6,221 $1,762 $1,438 $2,212 $8,525 $1,768 $0 $5,683 $0 $0 $900 $0 $253 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $610,343 Phase 2: Subtotal Budget (Optional Services) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Subtotal Budget (Base Services) $10,663 $118,297 $218,733 $0 $93,579 $69,837 $6,832 $8,507 $59,798 $94,459 $43,603 $2,563 $3,142 $23,535 $20,914 $0 $0 $0 $6,646 $14,019 $36,420 $10,264 $1,036 $23,972 $38,365 $5,990 $2,876 $3,317 $15,344 $2,210 $3,094 $13,892 $6,315 $3,031 $2,100 $1,137 $505 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $964,994 Subtotal Budget (Optional Services) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Subtotal Budget (All Services) $10,663 $118,297 $218,733 $0 $93,579 $69,837 $6,832 $8,507 $59,798 $94,459 $43,603 $2,563 $3,142 $23,535 $20,914 $0 $0 $0 $6,646 $14,019 $36,420 $10,264 $1,036 $23,972 $38,365 $5,990 $2,876 $3,317 $15,344 $2,210 $3,094 $13,892 $6,315 $3,031 $2,100 $1,137 $505 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $964,994 Other Direct Costs (ODC)
Phase 1 ODC $119,308
$28,775 $28,775
Potholing $25,000 $25,000
Visual Impact Analysis $0 $0
Section 106 Report $9,353 $9,353
NES $30,784 $30,784
BA $25,396 $25,396
Phase 2 ODC $78,154
Aquatic Resource Delineation and Report $20,714 $20,714 CDFW Streambed Alteration Agreement Application $16,697 $16,697 U.S. Army Corp of Engineers Permit Application $16,740 $16,740 Regional Water Quality Board Permit Application $16,757 $16,757 Permitting Coordination and Facilitation $7,246 $7,246
Phase 1: (Base Services) $473,959
Phase 1 (Optional Services) $0
Phase 2: (Base Services) $688,497
Phase 2: (Optional Services) $0
TOTAL DESIGN TASKS (BASE SERVICES) $1,162,456
TOTAL DESIGN TASKS (OPTIONAL SERVICES) $0
TOTAL DESIGN TASKS (ALL SERVICES) $1,162,456
Encroachment Permits, Drilling Permits, Traffic Control Plans and Traffic Control, Drilling, Outside Laboratory Testing, Pavement Restoration
$0 $0 $517,942 $288,165 $61,739 $212,014 $82,596
$0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$212,014 $0 $82,596
$0
ARWS
$0
$0
$0
$0 $0

CIRCLEPOINT
$61,818
$0
PARIKH David J Powers
$122,680
$0 $0
$399,654 $165,458 $13,274 $89,333 $20,778
$0
$0
$0
BIGGS CARDOSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
$118,288
$0
$517,942
Avila
$288,165
$0
$61,739
$122,708
$0
HMH
$48,464
$0 $0 $0
Summary by Consultant
McClellan Road Bridge Restoration Project
Phase 1 Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 2 Grand Total %
Consultant Fee Fee Fee Fee Fee Fee
Preliminary Engineering Preliminary Engineering Final Design Final Design (Base Services) (Optional Services) (Base Services) (Optional Services) (All Services) (All Services) BIGGS CARDOSA ASSOCIATES, INC. $118,288 $0 $399,654 $0 $517,942 44.56% HMH $122,708 $0 $165,458 $0 $288,165 24.79%
AVILA $48,464 $0 $13,274 $0 $61,739 5.31%
DAVID J POWERS $122,680 $0 $89,333 $0 $212,014 18.24%
PARIKH $61,818 $0 $20,778 $0 $82,596 7.11%
CIRCLEPOINT $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%
ARWS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%
TOTAL $473,959 $0 $688,497 $0 $1,162,456
Summary by Consultant
McClellan Road Bridge Restoration Project

EXHIBIT C
Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 10-H1
Cost Proposal
Prime Consultant Subconsultant 2nd Tier Subconsultant Consultant: Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc.

Project No. Contract No. Date 6/29/2026
Hours Actual Hourly
Rate Total
Senior Principal 23.00 152.00 3,496.00 $
Associate 384.00 101.00 38,784.00 $
Senior Engineer 864.00 83.00 71,712.00 $
Project Engineer 0.00 72.00 - $
Staff Engineer 472.00 65.00 30,680.00 $
Senior CAD / BIM Specialist 318.00 72.00 22,896.00 $
Project Administrator 32.00 70.00 2,240.00 $
Senior Principal 0.00 152.00 - $
Principal 0.00 125.00 - $
Associate 0.00 110.00 - $
Engineering Manager 95.00
Assistant Engineer 55.00
Junior Engineer 45.00
Intern 45.00
CAD Drafter II 62.00
CAD Drafter I 55.00
Administrative Director 110.00
Senior Project Administrator 90.00
Project Coordinator 55.00
Administrative Assistant 45.00

LABOR COSTS
169,808.00$
10,424.09$
c) TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS [(a) + (b)] 180,232.09$

INDIRECT COSTS

58.40% ) e) Total Fringe Benefits [(c) x (d)] 105255.5397 102.85% ) g) Overhead [(c) x (f)] 185368.7031
) i) Gen & Admin [(c) x (h)] 0
j) TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS [(e) + (g) + (i)] 290,624.24$

FIXED FEE
k) TOTAL FIXED FEE [(c) + (j)] x fixed fee: 10% 47,085.63$ b) Anticipated Salary Increases (see page 2 for calculation) d) Fringe Benefits (Rate:
f) Overhead & G&A (Rate:
h) General & Admin (Rate:
a) Subtotal Direct Labor Costs
Note: Mark-ups are Not Allowed

DIRECT LABOR
Classification/Title Name
M. Harms
J. Alciati

EXHIBIT C - BIGGS CARDOSA ASSOCIATES, INC - HOURLY RATES l) CONSULTANT'S OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODC) - ITEMIZE (Add additional pages if necessary) Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
l) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS -$
m) SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS (Add additional pages if necessary) HMH Engineers $288,165
Avila $61,739
David J. Powers $212,014
Parikh $82,596
CIRCLEPOINT $0
ARWS $0
m) TOTAL SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS $644,514
n) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS INCLUDING SUBCONSULTANTS [(l) + (m)] 644,513.66$ TOTAL COST [(c) + (j) + (k) + (n)] 1,162,455.63$
NOTES:

1. 2.

3. Subconsultant 2:

Subconsultant 3:

Subconsultant 4:

Subconsultant 5:

Subconsultant 6:

Subconsultant 1:

Key personnel must be marked with an asterisk (*) and employees that are subject to prevailing wage requirements must be marked with two asterisks (**). All costs must comply with the Federal cost principles. Subconsultants will provide their own cost proposals.

The cost proposal format shall not be amended. Indirect cost rates shall be updated on an annual basis in accordance with the consultant's annual accounting period and established by a cognizant agency or accepted by Caltrans.

Anticipated salary increases calculation (page 2) must accompany.

Description of Item
Consultant Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc.

Project No. Contract No. Date 6/29/2026

1. Calculate Average Hourly Rate for 1st year of the contract (Direct Labor Subtotal divided by total hours) Avg Hourly 5 Year Contract
Rate Duration
$ 169,808.00 = $ 81.13 Year 1 Avg Hourly Rate Avg Hourly Rate
Year 1 $ 81.13 + = $ 85.19 Year 2 Avg Hourly Rate Year 2 $ 85.19 + = $ 89.45 Year 3 Avg Hourly Rate Year 3 $ 89.45 + = $ 93.92 Year 4 Avg Hourly Rate Year 4 $ 93.92 + = $ 98.62 Year 5 Avg Hourly Rate Total Hours
per Year
Year 1 25.00% * = 523.3 Estimated Hours Year 1
Year 2 40.00% * = 837.2 Estimated Hours Year 2
Year 3 25.00% * = 523.3 Estimated Hours Year 3
Year 4 10.00% * = 209.3 Estimated Hours Year 4
Year 5 0.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours Year 5
Total 100% = 2093.0
Year 1 $ 81.13 * = 42452 Estimated Hours Year 1 Year 2 $ 85.19 * = $ 71,319.36 Estimated Hours Year 2 Year 3 $ 89.45 * = $ 46,803.33 Estimated Hours Year 3 Year 4 $ 93.92 * = $ 19,657.40 Estimated Hours Year 4 Year 5 $ - * = $ - Estimated Hours Year 5 = $ 180,232.09
= $ 169,808.00
= $ 10,424.09 Transfer to Page 1
NOTES:

1. 2.

3. 4.

Direct Labor Subtotal before Escalation
Estimated total of Direct Labor Salary Increase
This is not the only way to estimate salary increases. Other methods will be accepted if they clearly indicate the % increase, the # of years of the contract, and a breakdown of the labor to be performed each year.

An estimation that is based on direct labor multiplied by salary increase % multiplied by the # of years is not acceptable. (i.e. $250,000 x 2% x 5 yrs = $25,000 is not an acceptable methodology).

This assumes that one year will be worked at the rate on the cost proposal before salary increases are granted.

Calculations for anticipated salary escalation must be provided. 523
837
523
209
0 Total Direct Labor Cost with Escalation

4. Calculate Total Costs including Escalation (Multiply Average Hourly Rate by the number of hours) Avg Hourly Rate Estimated hours
Cost per Year
(calculated above) (calculated above)
2093.0
2093.0
2093.0
2093.0
2093.0
Total

3. Calculate estimated hours per year (Multiply estimate % each year by total hours) Estimated % Total Hours
Completed Each Year per Cost Proposal
Proposed Escalation
5%
5%
5%
5%
per Cost Proposal per Cost Proposal
2093

2. Calculate hourly rate for all years (Increase the Average Hourly Rate for a year by proposed escalation %)

CALCULATIONS FOR ANTICIPATED SALARY INCREASES
0 0
Direct Labor Subtotal Total Hours
I, the undersigned, certify to the best of my knowledge and belief that all direct costs identified on the cost proposal(s) in this contract are actual, reasonable, allowable, and allocable to the contract in accordance with the contract terms and the following requirements:

1. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)

2. Terms and conditions of the contract

3. Title 23 United States Code Section 112 - Letting of Contracts

4. 48 Code of Federal Regulations Part 31 - Contract Cost Principles and Procedures

5. 23 Code of Federal Regulations Part 172 - Procurement, Management and Administration of Engineering and Design Related Service

6. 48 Code of Federal Regulations Part 9904 - Cost Accounting Standards Board (when applicable) All costs must be applied consistently and fairly to all contracts. All documentation of compliance must be retained in the project files and be in compliance with applicable federal and state requirements. Costs that are noncompliant with the federal and state requirements are not eligible for reimbursement.

Local governments are responsible for applying only cognizant agency or Caltrans accepted Indirect Cost Rate(s).

Name: Mahvash Harms Title *: Vice President
Signature: Date of Certification: 6/29/2026
Email:
[email protected] Phone number: 408-296-5515
Address: 865 The Alameda, San Jose, CA 95126
List services the consultant is providing under the proposed contract:

Certification of Direct Costs:

Prime Consultant or Subconsultant Certifying:
* An individual executive or financial officer of the consultant's or subconsultant's organization at a level no lower than a Vice President or a Chief Financial Officer, or equivalent, who has authority to represent the financial information utilized to establish the cost proposal for the contract.

Project Management, Structural Engineering

Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 10-H1
Cost Proposal
Prime Consultant Subconsultant 2nd Tier Subconsultant2nd Tier Subconsultant Consultant: HMH
Project No. Contract No. Date 6/23/2026
Hours Actual Hourly
Rate Total
Principal 24.00 112.00 2,688.00 $
Senior Civil Engineer/Surveyor 221.00 85.50 18,895.50 $ Engineer 574.00 52.00 29,848.00 $
Assistant Engineer 332.00 41.50 13,778.00 $
Field Survey Manager 9.00 90.00 810.00 $
Senior Field Engineer 16.00 62.05 992.80 $
Survey Crew Chief 128.00 58.10 7,436.80 $
Survey Crew Chain 128.00 51.63 6,608.64 $
Landscape Architecture Manager 0.00 82.50 - $
Senior Landscape Architect 0.00 67.00 - $
Landscape Designer 0.00 41.00 - $
Certfied Project Arborist 40.00 52.50 2,100.00 $

0.00 94.24 - $
Senior Civil Engineering or Land Surveying or Landscape Architect Manager 0.00 93.00 - $ Land Development Manager 0.00 94.00 - $
Civil Engineering, Land Surveying or Landscape Architect Manager 0.00 104.00 - $ Senior Planner 0.00 52.00 - $
Senior Civil Engineer, Land Surveyor, or Landscape Architect 0.00 93.50 - $ Engineering Design Specialist 0.00 84.00 - $
Design Specialist 0.00 77.00 - $
Project Planner 0.00 58.00 - $
Project Civil Engineer, Land Surveyor, or Landscape Architect 0.00 69.00 - $ Project Arborist 0.00 52.50 - $
Senior Engineer, Surveyor, or Landscape Designer 0.00 53.00 - $ Engineer, Planner, Surveyor, or Landscape Designer 0.00 56.00 - $ Assistant Engineer, Surveyor, Planner, or Landscape Designer 0.00 43.50 - $ Junior Engineer, Surveyor, Planner, or Landscape Designer 0.00 37.50 - $ Senior Technician 0.00 65.50 - $
Project Technician 0.00 47.00 - $
Technician 0.00 42.00 - $
Assistant Technician 0.00 37.00 - $
Junior Technician 0.00 28.50 - $
Intern 0.00 27.00 - $
Project Support Staff 0.00 89.00
Field Survey Manager 0.00 90.00
Field Engineer 0.00 53.00

LABOR COSTS
83,157.74 $
2,702.63 $
c) TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS [(a) + (b)] 85,860.37 $

INDIRECT COSTS
) e) Total Fringe Benefits [(c) x (d)] 0
) g) Overhead [(c) x (f)] 0
178.64% ) i) Gen & Admin [(c) x (h)] 153380.9588
j) TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS [(e) + (g) + (i)] 153,380.96 $

FIXED FEE
k) TOTAL FIXED FEE [(c) + (j)] x fixed fee: 10% 23,924.13 $ Misc.

Misc.

Misc.

Linda Grevera
Carissa Norberg
Misc.

Misc.

Misc.

Misc.

Misc.

Misc.

Misc.

Misc.

Misc.
a) Subtotal Direct Labor Costs
b) Anticipated Salary Increases (see page 2 for calculation) d) Fringe Benefits (Rate:
f) Overhead & G&A (Rate:
h) General & Admin (Rate:

Note: Mark-ups are Not Allowed
McClellan Road Bridge

DIRECT LABOR
Classification/Title Name
Misc.

Misc.

Jon Cacciotti
Nelly Asican
Shane Steed
Misc.

Kayla Young
Senior Land Development Manager
Anne Carney
Calandra Monasterio
Tammy Chao
Misc.

Misc.

Misc.

Misc.

Misc.

Misc.

Misc.

Misc.

Misc.

Misc.

Misc.

Misc.

EXHIBIT C - HMH - HOURLY RATES
l) CONSULTANT'S OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODC) - ITEMIZE (Add additional pages if necessary) Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total
1 LS $25,000.00 25,000.00 $
- $
- $
- $
- $
- $
l) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS 25,000.00 $
m) SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS (Add additional pages if necessary) Subconsultant 1:

Subconsultant 2:

Subconsultant 3:

Subconsultant 4:

Subconsultant 5:

Subconsultant 6:

Description of Item
Potholing
m) TOTAL SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS $0
n) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS INCLUDING SUBCONSULTANTS [(l) + (m)] 25,000.00 $ TOTAL COST [(c) + (j) + (k) + (n)] 288,165.46 $
NOTES:

1. 2.

3. Consultant HMH
Project No. Contract No. Date 6/23/2026

1. Calculate Average Hourly Rate for 1st year of the contract (Direct Labor Subtotal divided by total hours) Avg Hourly 5 Year Contract
Rate Duration
$ 83,157.74 = $ 56.49 Year 1 Avg Hourly Rate
Avg Hourly Rate
Year 1 $ 56.49 + = $ 59.32 Year 2 Avg Hourly Rate
Year 2 $ 59.32 + = $ 62.28 Year 3 Avg Hourly Rate
Year 3 $ 62.28 + = $ 65.40 Year 4 Avg Hourly Rate
Year 4 $ 65.40 + = $ 68.67 Year 5 Avg Hourly Rate
Total Hours
per Year
Year 1 35.00% * = 515.2 Estimated Hours
Year 1
Year 2 65.00% * = 956.8 Estimated Hours
Year 2
Year 3 0.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours
Year 3
Year 4 0.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours
Year 4
Year 5 0.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours
Year 5
Total 100% = 1472.0
Year 1 $ 56.49 * = 29105.209 Estimated Hours Year 1
Year 2 $ 59.32 * = $ 56,755.16 Estimated Hours Year 2
Year 3 $ 62.28 * = $ - Estimated Hours Year 3
Year 4 $ 65.40 * = $ - Estimated Hours Year 4
Year 5 $ - * = $ - Estimated Hours Year 5
= $ 85,860.37
= $ 83,157.74
= $ 2,702.63 Transfer to Page 1
1472.0
1472.0
1472.0
Total
1472.0
5%
5%
5%
5%
1472.0
Proposed Escalation
Key personnel must be marked with an asterisk (*) and employees that are subject to prevailing wage requirements must be marked with two asterisks (**). All costs must comply with the Federal cost principles. Subconsultants will provide their own cost proposals.

The cost proposal format shall not be amended. Indirect cost rates shall be updated on an annual basis in accordance with the consultant's annual accounting period and established by a cognizant agency or accepted by Caltrans.

Anticipated salary increases calculation (page 2) must accompany.

CALCULATIONS FOR ANTICIPATED SALARY INCREASES
McClellan Road Bridge 0
Total Hours
per Cost Proposal

3. Calculate estimated hours per year (Multiply estimate % each year by total hours) Estimated % Total Hours
Completed Each Year per Cost Proposal

2. Calculate hourly rate for all years (Increase the Average Hourly Rate for a year by proposed escalation %) Direct Labor Subtotal
per Cost Proposal
1472

4. Calculate Total Costs including Escalation (Multiply Average Hourly Rate by the number of hours) Avg Hourly Rate Estimated hours
Cost per Year
(calculated above) (calculated above)
515
957
0 0
0 Total Direct Labor Cost with Escalation
Direct Labor Subtotal before Escalation
Estimated total of Direct Labor Salary Increase
NOTES:

1. 2.

3. 4.

I, the undersigned, certify to the best of my knowledge and belief that all direct costs identified on the cost proposal(s) in this contract are actual, reasonable, allowable, and allocable to the contract in accordance with the contract terms and the following requirements:

1. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)

2. Terms and conditions of the contract

3. Title 23 United States Code Section 112 - Letting of Contracts

4. 48 Code of Federal Regulations Part 31 - Contract Cost Principles and Procedures

5. 23 Code of Federal Regulations Part 172 - Procurement, Management and Administration of Engineering and Design Related Service

6. 48 Code of Federal Regulations Part 9904 - Cost Accounting Standards Board (when applicable) All costs must be applied consistently and fairly to all contracts. All documentation of compliance must be retained in the project files and be in compliance with applicable federal and state requirements. Costs that are noncompliant with the federal and state requirements are not eligible for reimbursement.

Local governments are responsible for applying only cognizant agency or Caltrans accepted Indirect Cost Rate(s).

Name: Jon Cacciotti Title *: President
Signature: Date of Certification: 6/29/2026
Email:

[email protected] Phone number: 3109685085
Address: 1570 Oakland Road, San Jose CA 95131
List services the consultant is providing under the proposed contract:

This assumes that one year will be worked at the rate on the cost proposal before salary increases are granted.

Calculations for anticipated salary escalation must be provided.

Certification of Direct Costs:

Prime Consultant or Subconsultant Certifying:
* An individual executive or financial officer of the consultant's or subconsultant's organization at a level no lower than a Vice President or a Chief Financial Officer, or equivalent, who has authority to represent the financial information utilized to establish the cost proposal for the contract.

Civil Engineering, Landscape Architecture, Survey
This is not the only way to estimate salary increases. Other methods will be accepted if they clearly indicate the % increase, the # of years of the contract, and a breakdown of the labor to be performed each year.

An estimation that is based on direct labor multiplied by salary increase % multiplied by the # of years is not acceptable. (i.e. $250,000 x 2% x 5 yrs = $25,000 is not an acceptable methodology).

Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 10-H1
Cost Proposal
Prime Consultant Subconsultant 2nd Tier Subconsultant2nd Tier Subconsultant Consultant:Avila and Associates
Project No. Contract No. Date 6/23/2026
Hours Actual Hourly
Rate Total
Project Manager 56.00 97.00 5,432.00 $
Senior Engineer 192.00 73.50 14,112.00 $
Assistant Engineer 82.00 48.50 3,977.00 $
Assistant Engineer 10.00 40.14 401.40 $
0 0.00 0.00 - $
0 0.00 0.00 - $
0 0.00 0.00 - $
0 0.00 0.00 - $
0 0.00 0.00 - $
0 0.00 0.00 - $

LABOR COSTS
23,922.40$
1,453.29$
c) TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS [(a) + (b)]25,375.69$

INDIRECT COSTS

39.79% ) e) Total Fringe Benefits [(c) x (d)] 10,096.99 $

21.53% ) g) Overhead [(c) x (f)] 5,463.39 $

59.86% ) i) Gen & Admin [(c) x (h)] 15,189.89 $
j) TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS [(e) + (g) + (i)] 30,750.26$
FIXED FEE k) TOTAL FIXED FEE [(c) + (j)] x fixed fee: 10% 5,612.59$ l) CONSULTANT'S OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODC) - ITEMIZE (Add additional pages if necessary) Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total
miles $0.70 - $
-$
-$
l) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS -$
m) SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS (Add additional pages if necessary) m) TOTAL SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS $0
n) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS INCLUDING SUBCONSULTANTS [(l) + (m)]-$ TOTAL COST [(c) + (j) + (k) + (n)] 61,738.54$
NOTES:

1. 2.

3. Anticipated salary increases calculation (page 2) must accompany.

Description of Item
Subconsultant 1:

Subconsultant 2:

The cost proposal format shall not be amended. Indirect cost rates shall be updated on an annual basis in accordance with the consultant's annual accounting period and established by a cognizant agency or accepted by Caltrans.

Key personnel must be marked with an asterisk (*) and employees that are subject to prevailing wage requirements must be marked with two asterisks (**). All costs must comply with the Federal cost principles. Subconsultants will provide their own cost proposals.

Subconsultant 4:

Subconsultant 5:

Subconsultant 6:

Travel/Mileage Costs (supported by Consultant actual cost Note: Mark-ups are Not Allowed

DIRECT LABOR
Classification/Title Name
Ernie Avila
Todd Remington
Katherine Gwynn
Dean Xerogeanes
a) Subtotal Direct Labor Costs
b) Anticipated Salary Increases (see page 2 for calculation) h) General & Admin (Rate:

Subconsultant 3:
d) Fringe Benefits (Rate:
f) Overhead & G&A (Rate:

EXHIBIT C - AVILA AND ASSOCIATES - HOURLY RATES
ConsultantAvila and Associates
Project No. Contract No. Date 6/23/2026

1. Calculate Average Hourly Rate for 1st year of the contract (Direct Labor Subtotal divided by total hours) Avg Hourly 5 Year Contract
Rate Duration
$ 23,922.40 = $ 70.36 Year 1 Avg Hourly Rate Avg Hourly Rate
Year 1 $ 70.36 + = $ 73.88 Year 2 Avg Hourly Rate Year 2 $ 73.88 + = $ 77.57 Year 3 Avg Hourly Rate Year 3 $ 77.57 + = $ 81.45 Year 4 Avg Hourly Rate Year 4 $ 81.45 + = $ 85.52 Year 5 Avg Hourly Rate Total Hours
per Year
Year 1 10.00% * = 34.0 Estimated Hours Year 1
Year 2 60.00% * = 204.0 Estimated Hours Year 2
Year 3 30.00% * = 102.0 Estimated Hours Year 3
Year 4 0.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours Year 4
Year 5 0.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours Year 5
Total 100% = 340.0
Year 1 $ 70.36 * = 2392.24 Estimated Hours Year 1 Year 2 $ 73.88 * = $ 15,071.11 Estimated Hours Year 2 Year 3 $ 77.57 * = $ 7,912.33 Estimated Hours Year 3 Year 4 $ 81.45 * = $ - Estimated Hours Year 4 Year 5 $ - * = $ - Estimated Hours Year 5 = $ 25,375.69
= $ 23,922.40
= $ 1,453.29 Transfer to Page 1
NOTES:

1. 2.

3. 4.

An estimation that is based on direct labor multiplied by salary increase % multiplied by the # of years is not acceptable. (i.e. $250,000 x 2% x 5 yrs = $25,000 is not an acceptable methodology).
102
0 0
340.0
340.0
340.0
340.0
Total
Estimated total of Direct Labor Salary Increase
34 204

4. Calculate Total Costs including Escalation (Multiply Average Hourly Rate by the number of hours) Avg Hourly Rate Estimated hours Cost per Year(calculated above) (calculated above) Total Direct Labor Cost with Escalation
Direct Labor Subtotal before Escalation

CALCULATIONS FOR ANTICIPATED SALARY INCREASES
0 0
340
5%
5%
5%
Completed Each Year per Cost Proposal
This is not the only way to estimate salary increases. Other methods will be accepted if they clearly indicate the % increase, the # of years of the contract, and a breakdown of the labor to be performed each year.

This assumes that one year will be worked at the rate on the cost proposal before salary increases are granted.

Calculations for anticipated salary escalation must be provided.

Direct Labor Subtotal Total Hours
per Cost Proposal per Cost Proposal

2. Calculate hourly rate for all years (Increase the Average Hourly Rate for a year by proposed escalation %) Proposed Escalation
5%
340.0

3. Calculate estimated hours per year (Multiply estimate % each year by total hours) Estimated % Total Hours
I, the undersigned, certify to the best of my knowledge and belief that all direct costs identified on the cost proposal(s) in this contract are actual, reasonable, allowable, and allocable to the contract in accordance with the contract terms and the following requirements:

1. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)

2. Terms and conditions of the contract

3. Title 23 United States Code Section 112 - Letting of Contracts

4. 48 Code of Federal Regulations Part 31 - Contract Cost Principles and Procedures

5. 23 Code of Federal Regulations Part 172 - Procurement, Management and Administration of Engineering and Design Related Service

6. 48 Code of Federal Regulations Part 9904 - Cost Accounting Standards Board (when applicable) All costs must be applied consistently and fairly to all contracts. All documentation of compliance must be retained in the project files and be in compliance with applicable federal and state requirements. Costs that are noncompliant with the federal and state requirements are not eligible for reimbursement.

Local governments are responsible for applying only cognizant agency or Caltrans accepted Indirect Cost Rate(s).

Name: Ernesto Avila Title *: President
Signature: Date of Certification: 6/25/2026
Email: [email protected] Phone number: 415-576-1230 Address: 1300 Galaxy Way, Ste 12, Concord, CA 94520
List services the consultant is providing under the proposed contract:

Certification of Direct Costs:

Prime Consultant or Subconsultant Certifying:
* An individual executive or financial officer of the consultant's or subconsultant's organization at a level no lower than a Vice President or a Chief Financial Officer, or equivalent, who has authority to represent the financial information utilized to establish the cost proposal for the contract.

Hydraulic Analysis
Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 10-H1
Cost Proposal
Prime Consultant Subconsultant 2nd Tier Subconsultant2nd Tier Subconsultant Consultant: David J. Powers
Project No. Contract No. Date 6/29/2026
Hours Actual Hourly
Rate Total
Principal Project Manager 75.00 95.25 7,143.75 $
Project Manager 185.00 61.80 11,433.00 $
Senior Principal Project Manager 17.00 105.00 1,785.00 $

0.00 88.23 - $

0.00 63.86 - $
Graphic Artist 0.00 39.14 - $
0 0.00 0.00 - $
0 0.00 0.00 - $
0 0.00 0.00 - $
0 0.00 0.00 - $

LABOR COSTS
20,361.75$
509.04$
c) TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS [(a) + (b)] 20,870.79$

INDIRECT COSTS

48.41% ) e) Total Fringe Benefits [(c) x (d)] 10103.55125 149.21% ) g) Overhead [(c) x (f)] 31141.31135
) i) Gen & Admin [(c) x (h)] 0
j) TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS [(e) + (g) + (i)] 41,244.86$
FIXED FEE k) TOTAL FIXED FEE [(c) + (j)] x fixed fee: 10% 6,211.57$ l) CONSULTANT'S OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODC) - ITEMIZE (Add additional pages if necessary) Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total
1 1.00 $0.00 - $
1 1.00 $9,352.50 9,352.50 $
1 1.00 $30,784.00 30,784.00 $
1 1.00 $25,396.00 25,396.00 $
1 1.00 $20,714.00 20,714.00 $
1 1.00 $16,697.00 16,697.00 $
1 1.00 $16,740.00 16,740.00 $
1 1.00 $16,757.00 16,757.00 $
1 1.00 $7,246.00 7,246.00 $
l) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS 143,686.50$
m) SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS (Add additional pages if necessary) m) TOTAL SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS $0
n) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS INCLUDING SUBCONSULTANTS [(l) + (m)] 143,686.50$ TOTAL COST [(c) + (j) + (k) + (n)] 212,013.72$
NOTES:

1. 2.

3. Key personnel must be marked with an asterisk (*) and employees that are subject to prevailing wage requirements must be marked with two asterisks (**). All costs must comply with the Federal cost principles. Subconsultants will provide their own cost proposals.

The cost proposal format shall not be amended. Indirect cost rates shall be updated on an annual basis in accordance with the consultant's annual accounting period and established by a cognizant agency or accepted by Caltrans.

Anticipated salary increases calculation (page 2) must accompany.

U.S. Army Corp of Engineers Permit Application
NES (Sequoia)
BA (Sequoia)
b) Anticipated Salary Increases (see page 2 for calculation) d) Fringe Benefits (Rate:
f) Overhead & G&A (Rate:
h) General & Admin (Rate:

Description of Item
Visual Impact Analysis (Earthview Science)
Section 106 Report
Permitting Coordination and Facilitation
Subconsultant 1:

Aquatic Resource Delineation and Report
CDFW Streambed Alteration Agreement Application
Regional Water Quality Board Permit Application
a) Subtotal Direct Labor Costs
Demetri Loukas
Note: Mark-ups are Not Allowed

DIRECT LABOR
Classification/Title Name
Senior Project Manager
Project Manager
Tyler Rogers
John Hesler
EXHIBIT C - D.J. POWERS AND ASSOCIATES - HOURLY RATES
Consultant David J. Powers
Project No. Contract No. Date 6/29/2026

1. Calculate Average Hourly Rate for 1st year of the contract (Direct Labor Subtotal divided by total hours) Avg Hourly 5 Year Contract
Rate Duration
$ 20,361.75 = $ 73.51 Year 1 Avg Hourly Rate Avg Hourly Rate
Year 1 $ 73.51 + = $ 77.18 Year 2 Avg Hourly Rate Year 2 $ 77.18 + = $ 81.04 Year 3 Avg Hourly Rate Year 3 $ 81.04 + = $ 85.09 Year 4 Avg Hourly Rate Year 4 $ 85.09 + = $ 89.35 Year 5 Avg Hourly Rate Total Hours
per Year
Year 1 50.00% * = 138.5 Estimated Hours Year 1
Year 2 50.00% * = 138.5 Estimated Hours Year 2
Year 3 0.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours Year 3
Year 4 0.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours Year 4
Year 5 0.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours Year 5
Total 100% = 277.0
Year 1 $ 73.51 * = 10180.875 Estimated Hours Year 1 Year 2 $ 77.18 * = $ 10,689.92 Estimated Hours Year 2 Year 3 $ 81.04 * = $ - Estimated Hours Year 3 Year 4 $ 85.09 * = $ - Estimated Hours Year 4 Year 5 $ - * = $ - Estimated Hours Year 5 = $ 20,870.79
= $ 20,361.75
= $ 509.04 Transfer to Page 1
NOTES:

1. 2.

3. 4.

Direct Labor Subtotal before Escalation
Estimated total of Direct Labor Salary Increase
This is not the only way to estimate salary increases. Other methods will be accepted if they clearly indicate the % increase, the # of years of the contract, and a breakdown of the labor to be performed each year.

An estimation that is based on direct labor multiplied by salary increase % multiplied by the # of years is not acceptable. (i.e. $250,000 x 2% x 5 yrs = $25,000 is not an acceptable methodology).

This assumes that one year will be worked at the rate on the cost proposal before salary increases are granted.

Calculations for anticipated salary escalation must be provided. 139
139
0 0
0 Completed Each Year per Cost Proposal
277.0
277.0
277.0
277.0
277.0
Total
Total Direct Labor Cost with Escalation

4. Calculate Total Costs including Escalation (Multiply Average Hourly Rate by the number of hours) Avg Hourly Rate Estimated hours
Cost per Year
(calculated above) (calculated above)
Proposed Escalation
5%
5%
5%
5%

3. Calculate estimated hours per year (Multiply estimate % each year by total hours) Estimated % Total Hours
Direct Labor Subtotal Total Hours
per Cost Proposal per Cost Proposal
277

2. Calculate hourly rate for all years (Increase the Average Hourly Rate for a year by proposed escalation %)

CALCULATIONS FOR ANTICIPATED SALARY INCREASES
0 0
I, the undersigned, certify to the best of my knowledge and belief that all direct costs identified on the cost proposal(s) in this contract are actual, reasonable, allowable, and allocable to the contract in accordance with the contract terms and the following requirements:

1. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)

2. Terms and conditions of the contract

3. Title 23 United States Code Section 112 - Letting of Contracts

4. 48 Code of Federal Regulations Part 31 - Contract Cost Principles and Procedures

5. 23 Code of Federal Regulations Part 172 - Procurement, Management and Administration of Engineering and Design Related Service

6. 48 Code of Federal Regulations Part 9904 - Cost Accounting Standards Board (when applicable) All costs must be applied consistently and fairly to all contracts. All documentation of compliance must be retained in the project files and be in compliance with applicable federal and state requirements. Costs that are noncompliant with the federal and state requirements are not eligible for reimbursement.

Local governments are responsible for applying only cognizant agency or Caltrans accepted Indirect Cost Rate(s).

Name: Will Burns Title *: Vice President and Principal Project Manager Signature: Date of Certification: 6.29.2026
Email:
[email protected] Phone number: 510-902-5851
Address: 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200, San Jose, CA 95126 List services the consultant is providing under the proposed contract:

Certification of Direct Costs:

Prime Consultant or Subconsultant Certifying:
* An individual executive or financial officer of the consultant's or subconsultant's organization at a level no lower than a Vice President or a Chief Financial Officer, or equivalent, who has authority to represent the financial information utilized to establish the cost proposal for the contract.

CEQA and NEPA compliance and regulatory agency permiting.

Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 10-H1
Cost Proposal
Prime Consultant Subconsultant 2nd Tier Subconsultant2nd Tier Subconsultant Consultant: Parikh
Project No. Contract No. Date 6/25/2026
Hours Actual Hourly
Rate Total
Project Manager 8.00 113.88 911.04 $
Sr. Project Engineer/QA QC Manager 12.00 87.56 1,050.72 $ Senior Engineer - II 54.00 90.00 4,860.00 $
Sr. Project Engineer/Geologist 10.00 70.00 700.00 $
Project Geologist/CEG 14.00 70.00 980.00 $
Staff Engineer 88.00 50.00 4,400.00 $
Field Engineer/Geologist 32.00 62.50 2,000.00 $
Lab Technician 24.00 40.00 960.00 $
Drafting/Cadd Tech 14.00 47.50 665.00 $
Project Control 4.00 90.00 360.00 $
Technical Editor 4.00 40.00 160.00 $

LABOR COSTS
17,046.76 $
600.90 $
c) TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS [(a) + (b)] 17,647.66 $

INDIRECT COSTS

43.10% ) e) Total Fringe Benefits [(c) x (d)] 7606.140723 134.15% ) g) Overhead [(c) x (f)] 23674.3336
) i) Gen & Admin [(c) x (h)] 0
j) TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS [(e) + (g) + (i)] 31,280.47 $

FIXED FEE
k) TOTAL FIXED FEE [(c) + (j)] x fixed fee: 10% 4,892.81 $ l) CONSULTANT'S OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODC) - ITEMIZE (Add additional pages if necessary) Note: Mark-ups are Not Allowed

DIRECT LABOR
Classification/Title Name
D. Wang
G. Parikh
McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
a) Subtotal Direct Labor Costs
b) Anticipated Salary Increases (see page 2 for calculation) d) Fringe Benefits (Rate:
f) Overhead & G&A (Rate:
h) General & Admin (Rate:

EXHIBIT C - PARIKH CONSULTANTS, INC. - HOURLY RATES
Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total
0 per $0.00 - $
1 per $375.00 375.00 $
1 per $4,500.00 4,500.00 $
1 per $13,400.00 13,400.00 $
1 per $1,000.00 1,000.00 $
1 per $9,500.00 9,500.00 $
l) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS 28,775.00 $
m) SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS (Add additional pages if necessary) m) TOTAL SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS $0
n) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS INCLUDING SUBCONSULTANTS [(l) + (m)] 28,775.00 $ TOTAL COST [(c) + (j) + (k) + (n)] 82,595.95 $
NOTES:

1. 2.

3. Traffic Control Plans and Traffic Control
Drilling
Description of Item
Subconsultant 1:

Encroachment Permits
Drilling Permits
Key personnel must be marked with an asterisk (*) and employees that are subject to prevailing wage requirements must be marked with two asterisks (**). All costs must comply with the Federal cost principles. Subconsultants will provide their own cost proposals.

The cost proposal format shall not be amended. Indirect cost rates shall be updated on an annual basis in accordance with the consultant's annual accounting period and established by a cognizant agency or accepted by Caltrans.

Anticipated salary increases calculation (page 2) must accompany.

Pavement Restoration
Outside Laboratory Testing
Subconsultant 2:

Subconsultant 3:

Subconsultant 4:

Subconsultant 5:

Subconsultant 6:

Consultant Parikh
Project No. Contract No. Date 6/25/2026

1. Calculate Average Hourly Rate for 1st year of the contract (Direct Labor Subtotal divided by total hours) Avg Hourly 5 Year Contract
Rate Duration
$ 17,046.76 = $ 64.57 Year 1 Avg Hourly Rate Avg Hourly Rate
Year 1 $ 64.57 + = $ 67.80 Year 2 Avg Hourly Rate Year 2 $ 67.80 + = $ 71.19 Year 3 Avg Hourly Rate Year 3 $ 71.19 + = $ 74.75 Year 4 Avg Hourly Rate Year 4 $ 74.75 + = $ 78.49 Year 5 Avg Hourly Rate Total Hours
per Year
Year 1 40.00% * = 105.6 Estimated Hours Year 1
Year 2 50.00% * = 132.0 Estimated Hours Year 2
Year 3 10.00% * = 26.4 Estimated Hours Year 3
Year 4 0.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours Year 4
Year 5 0.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours Year 5
Total 100% = 264.0
Year 1 $ 64.57 * = 6818.704 Estimated Hours Year 1 Year 2 $ 67.80 * = $ 8,949.55 Estimated Hours Year 2 Year 3 $ 71.19 * = $ 1,879.41 Estimated Hours Year 3 Year 4 $ 74.75 * = $ - Estimated Hours Year 4 Year 5 $ - * = $ - Estimated Hours Year 5 = $ 17,647.66
= $ 17,046.76
= $ 600.90 Transfer to Page 1
NOTES:

1. 2.

3. 4.

CALCULATIONS FOR ANTICIPATED SALARY INCREASES
McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction 0
Direct Labor Subtotal Total Hours
per Cost Proposal per Cost Proposal
264

2. Calculate hourly rate for all years (Increase the Average Hourly Rate for a year by proposed escalation %) Proposed Escalation
5%
5%
5%
5%

3. Calculate estimated hours per year (Multiply estimate % each year by total hours) Estimated % Total Hours
264.0
264.0
264.0
Total
Total Direct Labor Cost with Escalation

4. Calculate Total Costs including Escalation (Multiply Average Hourly Rate by the number of hours) Avg Hourly Rate Estimated hours
Cost per Year
(calculated above) (calculated above)
Direct Labor Subtotal before Escalation
Estimated total of Direct Labor Salary Increase
This is not the only way to estimate salary increases. Other methods will be accepted if they clearly indicate the % increase, the # of years of the contract, and a breakdown of the labor to be performed each year.

An estimation that is based on direct labor multiplied by salary increase % multiplied by the # of years is not acceptable. (i.e. $250,000 x 2% x 5 yrs = $25,000 is not an acceptable methodology).

This assumes that one year will be worked at the rate on the cost proposal before salary increases are granted.

Calculations for anticipated salary escalation must be provided. 106
132
26 0
0 Completed Each Year per Cost Proposal
264.0
264.0
I, the undersigned, certify to the best of my knowledge and belief that all direct costs identified on the cost proposal(s) in this contract are actual, reasonable, allowable, and allocable to the contract in accordance with the contract terms and the following requirements:

1. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)

2. Terms and conditions of the contract

3. Title 23 United States Code Section 112 - Letting of Contracts

4. 48 Code of Federal Regulations Part 31 - Contract Cost Principles and Procedures

5. 23 Code of Federal Regulations Part 172 - Procurement, Management and Administration of Engineering and Design Related Service

6. 48 Code of Federal Regulations Part 9904 - Cost Accounting Standards Board (when applicable) All costs must be applied consistently and fairly to all contracts. All documentation of compliance must be retained in the project files and be in compliance with applicable federal and state requirements. Costs that are noncompliant with the federal and state requirements are not eligible for reimbursement.

Local governments are responsible for applying only cognizant agency or Caltrans accepted Indirect Cost Rate(s).

Name: Frank Y. Wang Title *: Principal
Signature: Date of Certification: 6/25/2026
Email:
[email protected] Phone number: (408) 452-9000
Address: 1497 N. Milpitas Blvd, Milpitas, CA 95035
List services the consultant is providing under the proposed contract:

Geotechnical Engineering Services
Certification of Direct Costs:

Prime Consultant or Subconsultant Certifying:
* An individual executive or financial officer of the consultant's or subconsultant's organization at a level no lower than a Vice President or a Chief Financial Officer, or equivalent, who has authority to represent the financial information utilized to establish the cost proposal for the contract.

City of Cupertino EXHIBITS A & B
ST 066 McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction – Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. Page 25 EXHIBIT B – Schedule of Performance

Consultant shall complete all work no later than June 30, 2030, unless extended by a contract amendment.

This Schedule of Performance establishes the milestones for commencement and completion of the Tasks as specified in Exhibit A, Scope of Services and will be specified in the written proposal and corresponding approval of each phase of the work.