Orange City Council
November 28, 2023

FIRST AMENDMENT
TO

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
[Environmental, Hydraulics, Geotechnical and Survey Services]

THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (the “First Amendment”) is made and entered into as of _______________, 20__, by and between the CITY OF ORANGE, a municipal corporation (“City”), and AECOM Technical Services, Inc., a California corporation (“Contractor”), with reference to the following:

A. City and Contractor entered into a Professional Services Agreement (Agreement No. 7033) dated as of February 12, 2021, which is incorporated herein by this reference (the “Original Agreement”); and

B. City and Contractor desire to amend the Original Agreement to modify, amend and supplement certain portions of the Original Agreement by appropriating more funds for additional scope to revise project environmental documents and related technical studies.

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereby agree as follows:

Section 1. Defined Terms. Except as otherwise defined herein, all capitalized terms used herein shall have the meanings set forth for such terms in the Original Agreement.

Section 2. Cross-References. City and Contractor agree that all references in this First Amendment are deemed and construed to refer to the Original Agreement, as implemented by this First Amendment.

Section 3 Revised Scope of Services . The Scope of Services, Section 1, Exhibit A of the Original Agreement, is hereby amended, modified and supplemented to include the services described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

Section 4 Compensation. The total not-to-exceed compensation for the services to be rendered as set forth in Section 2.a of the Original Agreement is increased by FORTY-THREE THOUSAND DOLLARS and 00/100 ($ 43,000.00) and Section 2.a is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:

“Contractor's total compensation for all services performed under this Agreement, shall not exceed FOUR HUNDRED TWENTY -FOUR THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED DOLLARS and 35/100 ($ 424,800.35) without the prior written authorization of City.”

Section 5. Integration. This First Amendment amends, as set forth herein, the Original Agreement and, except as specifically amended hereby, the Original Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. To the extent that there is any conflict or inconsistency between

2 the terms and provisions of this First Amendment and the terms and provisions of the Original Agreement, the terms and provisions of this First Amendment shall control and govern the rights and obligations of the parties.

IN WITNESS of this First Amendment, the parties enter into this First Amendment on the year and day first above written.

“CONTRACTOR” “CITY”

AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. CITY OF ORANGE, a municipal corporation a California corporation

*By: By:

Printed Name: Daniel R. Slater, Mayor
Title:

*By: ATTEST:

Printed Name:

Title:

Pamela Coleman, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Melissa M. Crosthwaite
Senior Assistant City Attorney

*NOTE: If Contractor is a corporation, the City requires the following signature(s):
-- (1) the Chairman of the Board, the President or a Vice-President, AND (2) the Secretary, the Chief Financial Officer, the Treasurer, an Assistant Secretary or an Assistant Treasurer. If only one corporate officer exists or one corporate officer holds more than one corporate office, please so indicate. OR -- The corporate officer named in a corporate resolution as authorized to enter into this Agreement. A copy of the corporate resolution, certified by the Secretary close in time to the execution of the Agreement, must be provided to the City.

√

EXHIBIT “A”

SUPPLEMENTAL SCOPE OF SERVICES

[Behind this page.]

AECOM
999 Town & Country Road
4th Floor
Orange, CA 92868
www.aecom.com
714.567.2400 tel
714.953.6989 fax

October 27, 2023

Mr. Youichi Nakagawa, P.E.

Public Works Department - Engineering Division
300 East Chapman Avenue
Orange, California 92866-1591

Subject: Proposed Amendment for the Santiago Creek Multipurpose Trail Extension Project

Dear Mr. Nakagawa,

AECOM Technical Services, Inc. (AECOM) has supported the City of Orange (City) with the Santiago Creek Multipurpose Trail Extension Project (project) for several years. In 2021/2022 we prepared technical studies and initial environmental documents, but they were placed on hold while the design was modified. The purpose of this amendment is to obtain more funds for the additional effort that will be required to reevaluate the project because of those design changes. This additional effort will involve updating the environmental documents (Preliminary Environmental Study and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration), related technical studies, prepare the Categorical Exclusion Determination Form, and the Categorical Exclusion Checklist for Caltrans’ review/approval (NEPA compliance).

This letter outlines the additional scope associated with this proposed amendment (Phase 2). A Revised Work Plan for Phase 2 is provided in Attachment A. Our requested fee amendment reflects the additional hours needed to complete Phase 2 at bill rates authorized in the current contract which will need to be extended for the period of performance.

SCOPE OF WORK

Background

AECOM and the City initiated work on the project in early 2021. By summer 2022 AECOM had completed most Phase 1 through Phase 3 tasks of the project Work Plan, which included completion and submittal of the Draft Preliminary Environmental Study (PES) to Caltrans, completion of all technical studies, and drafting of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) Screencheck. However, results of the Floodplain Study found the post-project 100-year water surface to be higher in some locations (particularly in the vicinity of Bridge 2) and that (1) a “no-rise” case could not be certified by FEMA for the project as designed and (2) the freeboard associated with the design of Bridge 2 would be insufficient to meet FEMA freeboard design requirements. At that time the City considered various options to proceed, ultimately deciding to raise the profile of Bridge 2 to address the issue of insufficient freeboard. Additionally, the City determined that construction of Bridge 2 would require use of a large crane that must be placed on the south side of the bridge due to space requirements. Building up the crane (i.e., adding counterweights) will require the use of flat bed trailer trucks to carry and deliver the counter-weights to the south side of the bridge via Windes Drive.

An additional staging area (the Windes Drive round-about/dirt island area) at the entrance to Santiago Oaks Regional Park would be needed/used for construction access and staging (and large truck u- turning). This would potentially require the removal of trees and temporary removal and relocation of the wooden fence, pilasters, street signs, and streetlights at that location. Access to Santiago Oaks Regional Park would be maintained during construction. Conceptual plans/documents were shared

Mr. Nakagawa
October 27, 2023
with Orange County (OC) Parks who provided a series of comments, including some design change requests. As a result, the proposed trail alignment was shortened (resulting in a steeper fill slope) at its eastern-most end in order to protect in place mature oak trees and a decorative stone wall and park entrance sign. Shortening the trail end also required modification to its proposed connection to an existing trail at the entrance of Santiago Oaks Regional Park, resulting in the trail (and fill material) being pushed closer to the creek. Additionally, a slight realignment of an existing foot path/trail would be positioned between Windes Drive and the proposed retaining wall of the fill slope. Furthermore, to avoid encroachment onto private property for the purpose of trail-related water quality treatment/best management practices the City is opting to instead treat runoff of the Mabury Tract to offset the runoff from new impervious areas created by the trail. This would require installation of up to eight Filterra bioretention systems within the City right-of-way for Mabury Avenue, which could locate construction activities closer to some residences.

These changes to the project result in new limits of disturbance (LOD) and construction-related considerations that were not previously considered in the environmental documents and technical studies. Below is a generalized bullet-point list of the updates required to reevaluate the project as a result of the design changes. A more detailed description of the required revisions per task is provided in a Revised Work Plan (Attachment A).

Phase 1 - Completed, No Change

Phase 2 - Required Revisions

 The Project Description (including figures ) will be updated to reflect the new bridge design/trail alignment and construction-related details. AECOM will work with the City to develop the revised project description that will be used to update environmental documents and technical studies.

 The PES will be updated to reflect the revi sed project description and figures, and environmental topic responses within the PES will need to be updated as appropriate.

AECOM will also update the Visual Impact Assessment Questionnaire. Based on Caltrans’ previous review of the PES, it is anticipated that Caltrans is close to approving the PES and will not require major additional technical analyses (such as preparation of a Visual Impact Assessment ) VIA Tech Memo. We also assume they concur with the recommended Categorical Exclusion Determination.

 The Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan and Floodplains Study will be revised to reflect the updated project description, to reflect changes associated with water quality best management practices and to address the new bridge/trail design and LOD-related changes.

Note, the revisions to the Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan will be done at no cost to the City.

 The Air Quality, GHG Emissions, and Energy technical studies will be revised to reflect the updated project description and new LOD.

 The Biological Study (NES-MI) will be revised to reflect the updated project description and new LOD (e.g., updating vegetation mapping, impact acreages, re-evaluation of biological resource databases for occurrences, etc.); additional reconnaissance survey of the changes at the eastern-most end of the proposed trail alignment, especially the new construction staging area requiring tree removal, would be required.

 The Noise/Vibration Analysis will be revised to reflect the updated project description, new LOD, and other construction-related considerations (e.g., transport and building up of and use of crane at south side of Bridge 2, location of water quality best management practices, etc.) for noise-sensitive receptors.

Mr. Nakagawa
October 27, 2023
 The Section 106 Technical Study will be revised to reflect the updated project description and new LOD; supplemental pedestrian survey of the changes at the eastern-most end of the proposed trail alignment would be required. As discussed in our call on September, the rock wall and park sign located within the APE will require recordation on appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 forms.

 The Section 4(f) Evaluation will be revised to reflect the updated project description, new LOD, and construction-related considerations.

 The Wetlands Study (Aquatic Resource Delineation Report) will be revised to reflect the updated project description and new LOD; additional reconnaissance survey of the changes at the eastern-most end of the proposed trail alignment would be required.

 The IS/MND will be updated to reflect the revised project description and figures, and environmental topic responses within the IS/MND will be updated as appropriate.

 Additional coordination time is included herei n for project management of the increased scope of work associated with this proposed amendment. AECOM’s Project Manager Jerry Flores will continue to serve as the main contact with City staff and will also interface with City and AECOM staff on the preparation of deliverables.

Phase 3

Work in this Phase included geotechnical and engineering support for the LOMR and right-of-way engineering (completed), plus submittal of the PES for Caltrans review (2 rounds) and print-check of the IS/MND for 30-day public review (not yet completed). No additional scope required as part of the project redesign. Please note that the PES will be submitted to Caltrans under Phase 2.

Phase 4

This Phase provides for the final IS/MND, final PES, the administrative record, and meetings/PM coordination. No additional scope required as part of the project redesign for the CEQA elements.

However, as requested by the City, AECOM will prepare the Categorical Exclusion Determination Form and Categorical Exclusion Checklist for Caltrans’ review/approval (NEPA compliance). If it is determined by Caltrans that a Categorical Exclusion is not appropriate to satisfy NEPA, then AECOM will need to revisit the scope and budget and revise accordingly. Similar to the current scope related to the Notice of Determination (CEQA requirement), we assume the City will prepare and file the Notice of Exemption(NEPA requirement) for the Categorical Exclusion Determination.

SCHEDULE

AECOM is ready to begin immediately upon execution of the amendment. A revised schedule will be finalized once the project is authorized.

FEE ESTIMATE

AECOM’s estimate to complete the proposed amendment is $47,646.81 as detailed in Attachment B.

It is our understanding that the City can only allocate $43,000.00 for this amendment, which results in a difference of $4,646.81. In the spirit of collaboration and creative solutions, AECOM and the City evaluated the full budget for areas of potential reallocation and agreed that AECOM would be allowed to shift some of the Other Direct Costs (ODCs) such as printing and distribution to offset the difference.

The current fee is $381,800.35 and with this amendment/reallocation ($43,000.00) , the new contract total will be $424,800.35 (summary table below). This fee estimate reflects billing rates unchanged

Mr. Nakagawa
October 27, 2023
from the initial contract authorization, although some staff have been reclassified to more accurately reflect their role/compensation in the intervening years since contract execution.

Current
Authoriza tion
Amendment
Request
Amendment
Approved
Reallocation of
ODCs to Labor
New Contract
Total
AECOM Labor $260,183.05 $46, 146.81 $41,500.00 $4,646.81 $306,329.86 AECOM ODCs $22,467.00 -$4,646.81 $17,820.19
Subconsultant $99,150.30 $1,500. 00 $1,500.00 $100,650.30 $381,800.35 $47,646.81 $43,0 00.00 $424,800.35
Note: Amendment Request of $47,146.81,achieved by additional fee of $43,000 and reallocation of $4,646.81 from ODCs to labor.

CLOSING
We ap
preciate the opportunity to provide our services to the City. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Jerry Flores at 714-648-2030 or [email protected].

Re
spectfully submitted,
Jerry
Flores Teri
Fenner
Associate Principal Vice President/Authorized Signatory Attachment A – Revised Work Plan
Attachment B – Cost Estimate

Attachment A

Revised Work Plan to Address Project Design Changes
To obtain environmental clearance in accordance with CEQA and Caltrans while achieving the City’s goals for this project, AECOM will need to revise some of the technical studies and environmental documents to reflect the new project footprint changes and construction-related considerations. The following discussion outlines our revised technical scope for preparation of all the deliverables by phase.

Project Design Changes
AECOM and the City initiated work on the project in April/May 2021. By Summer 2022 AECOM had completed most Phase 1 through Phase 3 tasks of the project Work Plan, which included completion and submittal of the Draft Preliminary Environmental Study (PES) to Caltrans, completion of all technical studies, and drafting of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) Screencheck. However, results of the Floodplain Study found the post-project 100-year water surface to be higher in some locations (particularly in the vicinity of Bridge 2) and that (1) a “no-rise” case could not be certified by FEMA for the project as designed and (2) the freeboard associated with the design of Bridge 2 would be insufficient to meet FEMA freeboard design requirements. At that time the City considered various options to proceed, ultimately deciding to raise the profile of Bridge 2 to address the issue of insufficient freeboard. Additionally, the City determined that construction of Bridge 2 would require use of a large crane that must be placed on the south side of the bridge due to space requirements. Building up the crane (i.e., adding counter-weights) will require the use of flatbed trailer trucks to carry and deliver the counter- weights to the south side of the bridge via Windes Drive. An additional staging area (the Windes Drive round- about/dirt island area) at the entrance to Santiago Oaks Regional Park would be needed/used for construction access and staging (and large truck u-turning). This would potentially require the removal of trees and temporary removal and relocation of the wooden fence, pilasters, street signs, and streetlights at that location. Access to Santiago Oaks Regional Park would be maintained during construction. Conceptual plans/documents were shared with Orange County (OC) Parks who provided a series of comments, including some design change requests. As a result, the proposed trail alignment was shortened (resulting in a steeper fill slope) at its eastern- most end in order to protect in place mature oak trees and a decorative stone wall and park entrance sign.

Shortening the trail end also required modification to its proposed connection to an existing trail at the entrance of Santiago Oaks Regional Park, resulting in the trail (and fill material) being pushed closer to the creek. Additionally, a slight realignment of an existing foot path/trail would be positioned between Windes Drive and the proposed retaining wall of the fill slope. Furthermore, in order to avoid encroachment onto private property for the purpose of trail-related water quality treatment/best management practices the City is opting to instead treat runoff of the Mabury Tract to offset the runoff from new impervious areas created by the trail. This would require installation of up to eight Filterra bioretention systems within the City right-of-way for Mabury Avenue, which could locate construction activities closer to some residences.

Phase 1
Hydraulic Analysis (No Revisions -Task Complete)
The latest FEMA effective Flood Insurance Study (FIS) for the City of Orange is dated March 21, 2019. This contains results of a study of Santiago Creek by USACE in 1978, which was based on a peak discharge rate of 12,000 cfs. USACE subsequently prepared another hydrology study of Santiago Creek in 1990 that shows a discharge rate of 6,000 cfs. The 2019 update of the FIS and Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) do not reflect the revised discharge rate (i.e., 6,000 cfs) in all areas. FEMA issued a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) in 2003 from Cannon Street (previously Loma Street) to approximately 4,200 feet upstream based on the updated 6,000

cfs discharge. Subsequent LOMRs were issued February 22, and March 12, 2021 extending from a point 3,800 feet downstream of Cannon Street Road (near Villa Park Road) to 4,200 feet upstream of Cannon Street (near Yellowstone Boulevard) using 6,000 cfs. The 100-year water surface associated with the subsequent LOMRs was used as a base for determining the hydraulic impact of reducing the 100-year discharge from 12,000 cfs to 6,000 in the remaining upstream portion of Santiago Creek below Villa Park Dam as described in AECOM’s Hydraulic Analysis dated September 20, 2021. The Hydraulic Analysis (2021) did not evaluate the hydraulic impacts of the proposed trail project but was used as a basis of design for the trail for which a “no-rise” certification was originally anticipated.

AECOM submitted an electronic copy of the hydraulic analysis report to the City. This Phase 1 task is considered complete as a base model; updates to the project design will be modeled separately in the Floodplain Study (see further below).

Phase 2
Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan
In accordance with the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and the City of Orange Local Implementation Plan (LIP), AECOM prepared a Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) dated May 31, 2022. Subsequently, on August 1, 2022, the City provided comments on the WQMP.

The May 31, 2022 Preliminary WQMP attempted to treat project-related runoff and proposed a number of BMPs along the trail alignment; however, due to the linear nature of the trail spanning multiple properties the City noted that most BMPs proposed along the trail would require additional right of way, which would also create operational maintenance access-related issues. As a result, the City has opted to treat runoff of the Mabury Tract by adding Filterra bioretention systems at multiple locations along Maybury Avenue to offset the new impervious areas created by the trail. The May 31, 2022 Preliminary WQMP had proposed Filterra bioretention systems on the southside of Mabury (near Orange Park Blvd), and now the City is proposing to add systems on the northside of Mabury (opposite the previously proposed location) and then at existing catch basins on the west side of Mabury Ave (south and north sides) near Mountain Avenue. It is believed that treating the entire area of the Maybury tract will be sufficient to offset the trail area; additionally, since the proposed BMPs along Mabury would be treating vehicles rather than recreational trail traffic, the case can be made that the City is improving a more severe condition (vehicle-related pollutants).

Thus, the Preliminary WQMP will be revised and re-calculated to reflect BMPs (Filterra bioretention systems) along Mabury only; updated calculations for the alignment changes at the northeast end of the trail will also be needed. AECOM will discuss the updated calculations with the City prior to finalization to determine if the Filterra bioretention systems would be needed at all eight (8) locations (i.e,. 2 systems per side of the street per both catch basin sites on Mabury) or if bioretention could be limited to just the south side of Mabury (further from existing homes), based on the amount and type of pollutant being addressed and how such a case could be presented as part of the WQMP.

Draft Environmental Technical Studies
AECOM will revise the following technical studies for the environmental documents and will submit electronic copies of the draft technical studies to the City for review. We assume one (1) round of review for each technical study. An electronic copy will be submitted.

Air Quality, GHG Emissions, and Energy
Terry A. Hayes Associates Inc. (TAHA) will assist AECOM with the revision of the Air Quality, GHG, and Energy Technical Memoranda. These studies will need to be revised to reflect the updated project description and new limits of disturbance(LOD) and may require some updates to discussions and calculations related to sensitive receptor distances and construction equipment.

Biological Study (NES-MI)
In support of the PES and the IS/MND, AECOM will need to update the Natural Environment Study-Minimal Impacts (NES_MI) due to the proposed changes in the impact footprint and temporary work areas. The updated NES-MI will satisfy Caltrans requirements and will be included in the IS/MND. In support of the updated NES-MI for the project, AECOM will reevaluate the California Natural Diversity Database, the California Native Plant Society’s inventory of rare and endangered plants of California, and the USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation online environmental review process to update the list of potentially occurring special-status plant and animal species and other protected natural resources for the new project area. A reconnaissance field survey of the new project footprint will be conducted to document existing biological resources in the vicinity of Bridge 2, including a 300-foot buffer. The previous vegetation communities and wildlife habitats will be re-mapped and a representative plant species list and GIS layers will be recreated for each distinct habitat type. Any avian nests or nesting activity observed will also be documented. This scope does not include formal protocol surveys or permitting for listed federal and/or state plant or wildlife species.

Upon completion of the database review and reconnaissance survey, AECOM will update the NES-MI (update project description, vegetation map, impact tables, potential to occur tables for plants and wildlife, lists of observed plant and wildlife species, and all figures showing project and biological features) using the latest Caltrans format. The NES-MI will describe existing biological resources within the Biological Study Area (BSA) and detail how the project may affect them. We assume two (2) rounds of review from Caltrans.

Noise/Vibration Analysis
TAHA will assist AECOM with the revision of the noise/vibration analysis, which will need to be revised to reflect the updated project description, new LOD, and other construction-related considerations (e.g., transport and building up of and use of crane at south side of Bridge 2, location of water quality best management practices, etc.) for noise-sensitive receptors.

Section 106
AECOM will conduct a supplemental pedestrian survey of the newly added areas of the APE to identify any cultural resources. It is assumed that the rock wall and park sign located within the APE will require recordation on appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 forms as well as formal evaluation for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources and the National Register of Historic Properties.

We will update the technical memorandum to summarize the results of the current effort as well as the 2021-2022 investigation that included a records search, NAHC Sacred Lands File Search and Native American Contact Program, and pedestrian survey of the original APE. The effects analysis that conformed to the requirements of Section 106 will also be updated, as necessary.

Assumptions:
- No new SCCIC record search, NAHC SLF search, nor additional correspondence for the NA Contact

Program will be required
- Survey will be performed by one archaeologist, taking one (1) day to complete - Up to two (2) resources will be recorded on appropriate DPR forms - No significant res ources will be identified within the APE - No Section 106 consultation support is included in this scope and cost - Preparation of Caltrans cultural documents (HPSR, ASR HRER) is not included in this scope and cost - If Caltrans requests and HPSR, ASR, and HRER, a new scope and cost will be required - Up to one (1) virtual meeting is included
Section 4(f) Evaluation
AECOM will update the Section 4(f) Evaluation Memorandum with De Minimis Determination to address the project design changes, including the additional staging area at the entrance to Santiago Oaks Regional and trail alignment changes. This memorandum will also be updated to reflect any relevant updates from the applicable technical analyses (e.g., air quality, noise and vibration, NES-MI, cultural and tribal cultural resources, and wetlands study) related to the indirect effects/constructive use impacts discussion. The updated memorandum will be submitted to the City and Caltrans for review. We assume one (1) round of review from the City and Caltrans.

AECOM will then prepare draft coordination letters to the agencies with jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) resources that may be potentially affected by the project (i.e., City of Orange Community Services Department and OC Parks) for the City’s review and approval. Per Section 4(f) requirements pursuant to Caltrans’ Standard Environmental Reference (SER), Volume 1, Chapter 20 (Section 4[f]), consultation and coordination with the agencies with jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) resources is required, which entails obtaining the agencies’ concurrence with the Section 4(f) resources identified as significant Section 4(f) resources and concurrence with the de minimis impact finding. Written concurrence is required from the agencies with jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) resources in order for the memorandum to be approved by Caltrans (note that Caltrans can still review the memorandum in the meantime while coordination is ongoing). The coordination effort and letters will be summarized and compiled into an appendix of the memorandum. SHPO concurrence on Section 106 consultation will also be provided in an appendix of the memorandum. We assume one (1) round of review from the City regarding the coordination letters. We assume up to 8 hours for coordination and follow-up with the agencies with jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) resources.

Please note that public review of the memorandum is required per Caltrans SER Volume 1, Chapter 20. AECOM assumes the memorandum will be provided as an appendix to the IS/MND and included with the public review of the IS/MND.

Once the agency coordination and public review are completed, the memorandum will be revised, as needed, and provided to the City and Caltrans for review and approval. We assume one (1) round of review.

Assumptions:
- Access to Santiago Oaks Regional Park would be maintained during construction Wetlands Study (Aquatic Resource Delineation Report)
AECOM will update the wetlands study report (Aquatic Resources Technical Report, ARDR) with current regulatory text (per updated Federal regulations). AECOM will conduct a site visit to re-evaluate waters, wetlands, and riparian habitat under and around the vicinity of Bridge 2, including a 300-foot buffer. The previous jurisdictional delineation map will be re-evaluated to make sure there have been no significant

changes since the last survey. AECOM does not anticipate the need to do any official wetland delineation soil pits in the area around Bridge 2.

Upon completion of the regulatory setting and site visit, AECOM will update the wetlands study report (update project description, vegetation map, impact tables, lists of observed plant species, and all figures showing project and wetlands features). The wetland study report will include conceptual discussions of wetland functions and values, as well as a conceptual approach to any required mitigation. It should be noted that this scope does not include performing a CRAM evaluation or Mitigation Plan. We assume two (2) rounds of review from Caltrans.

Floodplains Study
The Phase 1 Hydraulic Analysis Report dated September 20, 2021, described above was to form the basis for the floodplain study that would evaluate the trail project impacts. As reflected in the budget for the original Floodplain Study, the analytical steps were anticipated to be straightforward, and the water surface was expected to be significantly lower in the upstream portion as a result of the reduction in discharge from 12,000 to 6,000 cfs.

However, as AECOM and the City became aware throughout the hydraulic and floodplain studies process, this was not the case. For example, AECOM had to adjust cross-sections in FEMA’s model in order to sufficiently define the constricted portion of the canyon in the vicinity of the sharp 90-degree bend, add additional cross- sections to the model, make corrections to the Cannon Street Bridge skew in FEMA’s Effective model, develop a new Pre-Project Condition model, etc.

The 2022 Floodplain Study ultimately concluded that the project would adversely impact base flood elevations associated with the reduced 100-year discharge and a “No-Rise” certification was not possible, therefore a CLOMR rather than LOMR would be necessary. It also indicated that freeboard at the Trail Bridge 2 (the east bridge) was inadequate, and the bridge would have to be raised, but it was thought that this could be accomplished without decreasing the span length or further encroachment into the flood plain. On August 11, 2022, the City indicated the original 100-foot bridge span would be kept rather than increasing to 120 feet, but that an update to the bridge profile would be made to provide the recommended freeboard. A new trail profile was provided by the City on September 8, 2022 and on April 26, 2023, a new trail alignment and profile was provided by the City. The City indicated that this change included shifting the trail north towards the creek and that updating the hydraulic model and BFE due to the trail moving closer into the floodplain would be necessary.

Thus, for this revised scope of work the Floodplain Study will be revised to address impacts associated with the proposed modifications to Trail Bridge 2 at the N. Windes Drive entrance to Santiago Oaks Regional Park, which includes raising the proposed bridge 2.44 feet to provide adequate freeboard above the 100-year flood and moving the bridge approach ramps further into the existing Pre-Project and Post-Project floodplains.

There are unique hydrologic conditions in the vicinity of Bridge 2 such as complex flow [superelevation] around the 90-degree bend in the channel, a drop structure in the channel located just upstream of Bridge 2, the additional encroachment of Bridge 2 itself with the current design, the presence of the decorative stone wall and sign at the entrance to Santiago Oaks Regional Park (that will now remain within the floodplain). It is AECOM’s professional opinion and recommendation that 2D model capabilities of HEC-RAS be used as a check to assure the orientation and location of cross sections in the Effective, Duplicate Effective, Corrected Effective, Pre-Project, and Post Project 1D models accurately account for superelevation, and eddies (or whirlpools) that may form in the overbank areas around the bridge encroachment. This revised work plan and associated cost budget does not include the 2-D modeling but if the City would like to add the 2-D modeling at a later date, we could perform via a budget amendment.

PES Draft
AECOM will update the PES to reflect the project description and figure-related changes and to incorporate necessary/applicable revisions to the technical studies discussed herein. AECOM will also update the Visual Impact Assessment Questionnaire. AECOM will provide the City with an electronic copy of the PES Draft for review. We assume one (1) round of review for this task. Following the City’s review and comment on the PES Draft, AECOM will revise and incorporate comments, as appropriate. AECOM will submit the PES for Caltrans’ review. It is anticipated that City staff will assist in obtaining Caltrans’ approval and in resolving comments and questions to streamline this effort. We assume two (2) rounds of review from Caltrans. Please note that this scope assumes that a Visual Impact Assessment (VIA)Technical Memo will not be necessary. If it is determined by Caltrans that a VIA Tech Memo will be needed, AECOM will need to revisit the scope and budget and revise accordingly.

IS/MND Screencheck Draft
AECOM will update the IS/MND Screencheck Draft (in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines and City requirements) to reflect the project description and figure-related changes, to revise environmental topic responses within the IS/MND as appropriate, including incorporation of all necessary revisions to the technical studies discussed herein. Upon completion, AECOM will provide an electronic copy (Microsoft Word) of the IS/MND Screencheck Draft to the City for review. Following review and comment on the IS/MND Screencheck Draft by the City, AECOM will revise and incorporate comments, as appropriate. We assume one (1) round of review for this task.

AB 52 Support
AECOM will assist the City in the preparation of updated Assembly Bill (AB) 52 letters describing Project changes.

The letters will be addressed to individual tribal members but must be submitted by the City. We assume City staff will be sending out letters to tribal members on City letterhead once AECOM prepares the letters. We assume one (1) round of review for this task.

Assumptions:
- City will send AB52 letters to tribes and provide AECOM with a summary of AB 52 consultation efforts for memo update
Phase 3
Submit LOMR for FEMA Review
As discussed under the Floodplain Study discussion above, while a LOMR was anticipated to be the appropriate document, it was not possible based on modelled conditions. Accordingly, AECOM prepared a CLOMR instead with annotated FIRMs and a draft Letter of Notification to Affected Property Owners in June 2022 per City request based on the design at that time. Because of changes to the project design, the application forms and supporting documents will have to be updated based on the currently proposed design revisions and the updated Floodplain Study. However, Construction Drawings should be submitted to FEMA with the CLOMR application on which the “conditions” associated with the CLOMR would be based. Thus, it is assumed that the CLOMR application package will not be submitted to FEMA until Construction Drawings are prepared, which are assumed to be prepared in sufficient detail for FEMA at a date that is later than for the CEQA documentation for this project. As such, this revised work plan assumes AECOM will not prepare or make any changes to CLOMR application forms at this time.

IS/MND Public Review Draft, 30-Day Public Review Period, and Review/Response to Comments and Any Resulting Revisions
AECOM will submit the revised Draft IS/MND (Printcheck Draft IS/MND) for a final review to the City prior to circulating the document for public review. AECOM will print ten (10) hard copies and prepare one electronic copy of the Draft IS/MND for distribution (including Appendices). Additionally, AECOM will prepare the required Notice of Completion (NOC) for review and approval by the City. AECOM will use a mailing list provided by the City to distribute the Draft IS/MND as part of the 30-day public review period. The City’s mailing list is anticipated to include other responsible public agencies. The City will prepare and file a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the County Clerk (including filing fees) and distribute the NOI to residents in the project notification radius. AECOM will then file the NOI, NOC, and the Draft IS/MND with the State Clearinghouse. Printing and mailing charges are included in the cost estimate. We assume one (1) round of review for the Printcheck Draft IS/MND. Please note that Other Direct Costs (ODCs) such as printing and distribution totals will be adjusted to help offset the cost difference between the requested amendment amount ($47,646.81) vs the allocated amendment amount ($43,000.00).

We will organize written comments received during the public review period into five categories: Federal, State, Local, Organization, and Individuals. To assist the reader in referencing comments and responses, we will number each specific comment, referring to a statement or paragraph in the corresponding letter. AECOM will review comments received during the Draft IS/MND comment period and respond to those that raise an environmental issue. Based upon our understanding of this project, the level of controversy is considered to be low. The proposed schedule and budget assume receipt of no more than ten (10) comment letters of 1 to 3 pages each.

Phase 4
LOMR
As discussed under Phase 3, the LOMR that was originally intended for the proposed project was not possible and this scope assumes AECOM will not prepare or make any changes to CLOMR application forms at this time. Likewise, because a future LOMR cannot be prepared until the City has coordinated and finalized the CLOMR process with FEMA (throughout project construction), this scope does not include any effort at this time for the eventual LOMR.

Final IS/MND
An Administrative Final IS/MND, Responses to Comments, and MMRP will be prepared in a manner consistent with the City’s process and format requirements. It is assumed that the Administrative Final IS/MND will include an introductory chapter, enumerated list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the Draft IS/MND, copies of the written comments received on the Draft IS/MND, responses to environmental issues raised in the review process, MMRP, and Errata revisions to the Draft IS/MND based on the responses (as necessary).

An electronic copy of the Administrative Final IS/MND will be submitted to the City for review and approval. It should be noted that AECOM’s cost estimate does not include the receipt of detailed/extensive comments from attorneys or special interest groups. Upon receipt of comments on the Administrative Final IS/MND, AECOM will incorporate the requested revisions into the document and prepare the Final IS/MND. The City will prepare and file the Notice of Determination (including filing fees). AECOM will print thirty-five (35) hard copies and prepare one electronic copy of the Final IS/MND (including Appendices). We assume one (1) round of review for the Final IS/MND. Please note that ODCs such as printing and distribution totals will be adjusted to help offset the cost difference between the requested amendment amount ($47,646.81) vs the allocated amendment amount ($43,000.00).

PES
AECOM will submit the Final PES.

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
Based on the draft PES submittal to Caltrans, it is anticipated that Caltrans will conclude that a Categorical Exclusion would be appropriate to satisfy NEPA requirements. AECOM will prepare the Categorical Exclusion Determination Form and Categorical Exclusion Checklist for Caltrans’ review/approval. This will satisfy NEPA compliance. However, if Caltrans determines that a Categorical Exclusion is not appropriate to satisfy NEPA, and instead require an Environmental Assessment (EA), then AECOM will need to revisit the scope and budget and revise accordingly. AECOM assumes that the City will prepare and file the Notice of Exemption.

Attachment B
City of Orange
Santiago Creek Multipurpose Trail Extension ‐ Amendment

Hourly Labor Rates

Project Engineer
Principle in Charge
Senior Biologist Planner
Staff Biologist
Senior Archaeologist
Archaeologist
Environmental Planner
Staff Archaeologist
Technical Editor
GIS Specialist/Graphic Artist
Word Processor
Total Hours
Total Labor
Hourly Rate $180.01 $221.60 $167.97 $104.93 $175.04 $125.00 $130.00 $125.00 $105 $115.00 $85.01 - - Phase 2
Preliminary WQMP 0 $0.00
Air Quality, GHG, and Energy
(Sub Cost Shown Below) 1 2 3 $440.01
Biological Study (NES-MI) 2 10 22 1 8 1 44 $5,458.19 Noise/Vibration
(Sub Cost Shown Below) 1 1 2 $310.01
Section 106 2 28 14 1 4 1 50 $6,250.09
Section 4(f) Evaluation 1 12 13 $1,740.01
Wetlands Study 2 10 20 1 8 1 42 $5,248.33
Floodplains Study 2 75 77 $16,980.02
PES Draft 4 20 24 $3,320.04
IS/MND Screencheck Draft 10 2 4 34 $4,920.10 Categorical Exclusion 1 10 11 $1,480.01
Total 24 75 20 42 2 28 69 14 3 20 3 300 $46,146.81

Subconsultants
Terry A. Hayes Associates Inc. (DBE) $1,500.00
Total $1,500.00

Total Cost
Labor $46,146.81
Printing $0.00
Distribution $0.00
Other Direct Costs $0.00
Subconsultants $1,500.00
Total $47,646.81