4866-2656-6648 v1 - 1 -
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANT SERVICES
This Agreement for Consultant Services (the "Agreement") is made and entered into this 27th day of April, 2026, by and between THE CITY OF PACIFICA, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CITY") and GHD, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT"). CITY and CONSULTANT may be referred to individually as “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.”
RECITALS
WHEREAS, CITY requires Coastal & Marine Engineering Services in connection with the Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project;
WHEREAS, CONSULTANT is qualified to perform such services; and WHEREAS, CONSULTANT has agreed to provide CITY with such services on the terms and conditions set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, for the considerations hereinafter set forth, CONSULTANT and CITY agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1 - SCOPE OF SERVICES
1.1. Scope of Work. CONSULTANT agrees to furnish the services set forth in Exhibit A, Scope of Work, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein (the "Services").
1.2. Compliance with Law. The Services shall be performed in accordance with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations and orders.
1.3. Time is of the Essence. CONSULTANT agrees to diligently prosecute the Services. In the performance of this Agreement, time is of the essence.
1.4. Professional Competence. CONSULTANT represents that it has the professional skills necessary to perform the Services and that it will perform the Services in a skillful and professional manner. CONSULTANT represents that it has all the necessary licenses to perform the Services and shall maintain them throughout the term of this Agreement.
CONSULTANT agrees that the Services shall be performed consistent with the professional skill and care ordinarily provided by practicing in the same or similar locality under the same or similar circumstances. CITY and CONSULTANT agree that CONSULTANT is in responsible charge of the Services. Acceptance by CITY of the Services does not operate as a release of CONSULTANT from professional responsibility for the Services performed.
1.5. Independent Contractor. CONSULTANT is an independent contractor and not an employee of CITY. CONSULTANT expressly warrants that it will not represent that it is an employee of CITY.
4866-2656-6648 v1 - 2 -
1.6. Confidentiality. CONSULTANT agrees to maintain in confidence and not disclose to any person, firm, governmental entity, or corporation, without CITY's prior written consent, any trade secret or confidential information, knowledge or data relating to the products, process, or operation of CITY. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain in confidence and not to disclose to any person, firm, governmental entity, or corporation any data, information, technology, or material developed or obtained by CONSULTANT during the performance of the Services. The covenants contained in this Section 1.6 shall survive the termination of this Agreement for whatever cause.
1.7. Ownership of Material. Any reports and other material prepared by or on behalf of CONSULTANT under this Agreement (collectively, the "Documents") and provided to the CITY shall be and remain the property of CITY. All Documents not already provided to CITY shall be delivered to CITY on the date of termination of this Agreement for any reason. The Documents may be used by CITY and its agents, employees, representatives, and assigns, in whole or in part, or in modified form, for all purposes CITY may deem appropriate without further employment of or payment of any compensation to CONSULTANT.
1.8. Documentation. CONSULTANT shall keep and maintain full and complete documentation and accounting records, employee time sheets, and correspondence pertaining to the performance of the Services, and CONSULTANT shall make such documents available for review and/or audit by CITY and CITY's representatives at all reasonable times for at least four years after the termination of this Agreement or completion of the Services.
1.9. Testimony. CONSULTANT agrees to testify at CITY's request if litigation is brought against CITY in connection with the Services. Unless the action is brought by CONSULTANT or is based upon CONSULTANT's negligence, CITY will compensate CONSULTANT for the preparation and the testimony at CONSULTANT's standard hourly rates.
ARTICLE 2 - COMPENSATION
2.1. Compensation. Compensation for the Services shall be in accordance with Exhibit B, Compensation, attached hereto and incorporated herein. It is agreed that the compensation for the Services shall not exceed $ ("Cost Ceiling").
2.2. Invoices. CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices in a form satisfactory to CITY on or before the tenth day of each month for Services provided during the preceding month. CONSULTANT shall submit time and cost records as necessary to substantiate performance of the Services. Within 35 days after receipt of each such invoice, CITY shall verify the accuracy of the invoice, correct the charges where appropriate and as discussed and mutually agreed with CONSULTANT, and make payment to CONSULTANT in an amount equal to the amount of such invoice, as verified or corrected by CITY. No payment hereunder shall be construed as evidence of acceptance of any of CONSULTANT's work. CITY reserves the right to withhold payment from CONSULTANT on account of Services not performed satisfactorily, delays in 4866-2656-6648 v1 - 3 -
CONSULTANT's performance of Services, or other defaults hereunder. CONSULTANT shall not stop or delay performance of the Services under this Agreement on account of payment disputes with CITY.
2.3. Status Reports. Together with each monthly invoice, CONSULTANT shall submit a status report detailing the amount expended on the Services to that date and the remaining amount to be expended before the Cost Ceiling is reached. CONSULTANT shall notify CITY in writing when payments have reached 90 percent of the Cost Ceiling.
2.4. Withholding. In lieu of holding retention, CITY shall withhold CONSULTANT's final payment until the Services are complete and CITY has received all Documents.
CONSULTANT shall diligently continue and complete performance of the Services if the Services are not complete at the time CONSULTANT has performed services up to the Cost Ceiling.
ARTICLE 3 - TIME OF PERFORMANCE
3.1. Effective Date. This Agreement shall become effective upon execution of the second signature and shall remain in full force and effect until the Services are completed (the "Term"). CONSULTANT agrees to complete all services by December 27th , 2027.
3.2. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated at any time by CITY upon written notice to CONSULTANT.
3.3. Final Payment. CONSULTANT shall be entitled to compensation for Services performed up to the time of such termination, it being understood that any payments are full compensation for the Services rendered under this Agreement.
3.4. Other Remedies. Nothing in this Article 3 shall be deemed to limit the respective rights of the parties to terminate this Agreement for cause or otherwise to exercise any rights or pursue any remedies which may accrue to them.
ARTICLE 4 - DESIGNATED CONTACTS
4.1. CITY Contact. CITY designates Melissa Tigbao, Public Works Director, as its contact who shall be responsible for administering and interpreting the terms and conditions of this Agreement, for matters relating to CONSULTANT's performance under this Agreement, and for liaison and coordination between CITY and CONSULTANT. In the event CITY wishes to make a change in CITY 's representative, CITY will notify CONSULTANT of the change in writing.
4.2. CONSULTANT Contact. CONSULTANT designates Craig Lewis, PE, Principal in Charge as its contact, who shall have immediate responsibility for the performance of the Services and for all matters relating to performance under this Agreement. Any change in CONSULTANT's designated contact shall be subject to written approval by CITY. 4866-2656-6648 v1 - 4 -
ARTICLE 5 - INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE
5.1. Indemnification. To the fullest extent allowed by law, CONSULTANT hereby agrees to defend, indemnify, and save harmless CITY, its Council, boards, commissions, officers, employees, directors, volunteers and agents, from and against any and all claims, suits, actions liability, loss, damage, expense, injury (including, without limitation, economic harm, injury to or death of any person, including an employee of CONSULTANT or its Subconsultants), cost (including, without limitation, costs and fees of litigation) of every nature, kind or description, at law or equity, which may be brought against, or suffered or sustained by, City of Pacifica, its Council, boards, commissions, officers, employees, directors, volunteers or agents that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to any negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of CONSULTANT, any Subconsultant, anyone directly or indirectly employed or retained by them, or anyone that they control. In the event one or more defendants is unable to pay its share of defense costs due to bankruptcy or dissolution of the business, the CONSULTANT shall meet and confer with other parties regarding unpaid defense costs.
The duty of CONSULTANT to indemnify and save harmless, as set forth herein, shall include the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code; provided, however, that nothing herein contained shall be construed to require CONSULTANT to indemnify City of Pacifica, its Council, boards, commissions, officers, employees and agents against any responsibility or liability in contravention of Section 2782 of the California Civil Code.
CONSULTANT’s responsibility for such defense and indemnity obligations shall survive the termination or completion of this Agreement for the full period of time allowed by law.
The defense and indemnification obligations of this agreement are undertaken in addition to, and shall not in any way be limited by, the insurance obligations contained within this Agreement.
If CONSULTANT is a “design professional,” as defined in California Civil Code Section 2782.8(c), CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend, and hold the Indemnitees harmless against Liability only to the extent such Liability arises out of, pertains to, or relates to CONSULTANT’s negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct. In such an event, the cost to defend charged to CONSULTANT shall not exceed CONSULTANT’s proportionate percentage of fault.
5.2. Health and Safety. CONSULTANT may perform part of the Services at sites which contain unknown working conditions and contaminated materials. CONSULTANT shall be solely responsible for the health and safety of CONSULTANT's employees during the performance of the Services.
5.3. Insurance. CONSULTANT and all of CONSULTANTS employees, subcontractors, consultants and other agency shall procure, provide and maintain at all times during the performance of this Agreement, and for such additional periods as described herein, the 4866-2656-6648 v1 - 5 -
insurance listed below with insurers licensed to do business in the State of California and with a Best's rating of no less than A:VII.
A. Commercial Automobile Liability Insurance. Commercial Automobile Liability Insurance providing bodily injury liability and property damage, to protect against all liability arising out of the use of any owned, leased, passenger or commercial automobile at a minimum amount of $1,000,000 combined single limit and $2,000,000 aggregate. Coverage shall apply to hired and non-owned autos.
B. Commercial General Liability Insurance. Commercial General Liability Insurance, with limits providing a minimum amount of $1,000,000 combined single limit coverage for each occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate and $2,000,000 products/completed operations aggregate. The insurance shall cover all operations including but not limited to the following: (1) premises, operations and mobile equipment liability; (2) completed operations and products liability; (3) contractual liability insuring the obligations assumed by CONSULTANT in this Agreement; (4) broad form property damage liability; (5) personal injury liability endorsement, including death; and (6) automobile bodily injury and property damage insurance, including all owned, hired and non-owned equipment.
C. Workers Compensation Insurance. Workers Compensation insurance, occupational disease insurance and employer’s liability insurance shall be required with minimum limits as required by law, covering all workplaces involved in this Agreement.
D. Policy Terms. Concurrently with execution of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall provide CITY with Certificates of Insurance evidencing that CONSULTANT has obtained or maintains the insurance required by this Section
5.3. The Certificates shall be on forms acceptable to CITY. CONSULTANT shall also furnish CITY with original endorsements with the following documentation:
• Precluding cancellation or reduction in coverage before the expiration of thirty (30) days after CITY shall have received written notification thereof from CONSULTANT by United States mail;
• Providing that CONSULTANT's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, and include a “separation of insureds” or “severability” clause which treats each insured separately, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability (crossliability endorsement); • Excepting CONSULTANT’S professional liability insurance, naming CITY, its City Council, boards, commissions, committees, officers, employees and agents as additional insureds (“Additional Insureds”); and • Providing that for any claims relating to CONSULTANT's services hereunder, CONSULTANT's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance with respect to CITY, its City Council, boards, commissions, committees, officers, employees and agents, and that any insurance or self-insurance maintained by CITY for itself, its City Council, boards, commissions, committees, officers, 4866-2656-6648 v1 - 6 -
employees and agents shall be in excess of CONSULTANT's insurance and shall not be contributory with it.
• It shall be a requirement under this Agreement that any available insurance proceeds broader than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverages requirements and/or limits shall be available to the Additional Insured, including but not limited to any umbrella or excess insurance.
Furthermore, the requirements for coverage and limits shall be the greater of:
(a) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this Agreement; or (b) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named insured.
E. Material Breach. If CONSULTANT fails to maintain insurance coverage or provided insurance documentation which is required pursuant to this Agreement, it shall be deemed a material breach of this Agreement. CITY, at its sole option, may terminate this Agreement and obtain damages from CONSULTANT resulting from said breach. Alternatively, CITY may purchase the required insurance coverage, and without further notice to CONSULTANT, may deduct from sums due to CONSULTANT any premium costs advanced by CITY for such insurance. These remedies shall be in addition to any other remedies available to CITY.
ARTICLE 6 - NOTICES
All notices or other communications required or permitted hereunder shall be in writing, and shall be personally delivered or sent by facsimile or reputable overnight courier and shall be deemed received upon the earlier of: (1) if personally delivered, the date of delivery to the address of the person to receive such notice; (2) if delivered by Federal Express or other overnight courier for next business day delivery, the next business day; (3) if sent by facsimile, with the original sent on the same day by overnight courier, the date on which the facsimile is received, provided it is before 5:00 P.M. Pacific Time; or (4) if sent electronically, the date of delivery on the confirmed read receipt. Notice of change of address shall be given by written notice in the manner described in this Article 6. Rejection or other refusal to accept or the inability to deliver because of a change in address of which no notice was given shall be deemed to constitute receipt of the notice or communication sent. Unless changed in accordance herewith, the addresses for notices given pursuant to this Agreement shall be as follows:
If to CITY: City Manager
170 Santa Maria Avenue
Pacifica, CA 94404
Phone: (650) 738-7409
Facsimile: (650) 359-6038
Email: [email protected]
If to CONSULTANT:Craig Lewis, PE, Principal in Charge
GHD, Inc.
655 Montgomery Street
Suite 1010
4866-2656-6648 v1 - 7 -
San Francisco, CA 94111
Phone: 415-350-8337
[email protected]
ARTICLE 7 - MISCELLANEOUS
7.1. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire understanding of CITY and CONSULTANT as to those matters contained herein. No prior oral or written understanding shall be of any force or effect with respect to those matters covered hereunder. This Agreement may only be modified by an amendment in writing signed by each party.
7.2. No Assignment. The Services are deemed unique and neither party shall assign, transfer, subcontract or otherwise substitute its interest in this Agreement or any of its obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the other party. As limited by this Section
7.2, this Agreement is to be binding on the successors and assigns of the parties hereto.
7.3. Severability. If any part of this Agreement is determined to be unconstitutional, invalid or beyond the authority of either party, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement, which shall continue in full force and effect, provided that the remainder of this Agreement can be interpreted to give effect to the intentions of the parties.
7.4. Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts and, when fully signed, such counterparts shall have the same effect as if signed in one document.
7.5. Choice of Law. This Agreement and all matters relating to it shall be governed by the laws of the State of California without reference to its choice of laws principles and venue shall be in the appropriate court in San Mateo County, California.
7.6. Waiver. No failure on the part of either Party to exercise any right or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any other right or remedy that party may have hereunder. A waiver by either CITY or CONSULTANT of any breach of this Agreement shall not be binding upon the waiving party unless such waiver is in writing. In the event of a written waiver, such a waiver shall not affect the waiving party's rights with respect to any other further breach.
7.7. Mediation. In the event the parties are unable to resolve a dispute arising under this Agreement through good faith negotiations, the parties agree to submit the matter to mediation with a mutually agreeable mediator. Prior to the mediation, the parties shall exchange any documents reasonably necessary to resolve the matter to be mediated.
7.8. Interpretation. In the event this Agreement is ever construed in any dispute between the parties, it and each of its provisions shall be construed without regard to the party or parties responsible for its preparation and shall be deemed to have been prepared jointly by the parties. The rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in interpreting this Agreement. 4866-2656-6648 v1 - 8 -
7.9. Authority. Each individual executing this Agreement on behalf of one of the parties represents that he or she is duly authorized to sign and deliver the Agreement on behalf of such party and that this Agreement is binding on such party in accordance with its terms.
7.10. Third Parties. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall create a contractual relationship with, or cause of action in favor of, a third party against either the CITY or CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT’s Services hereunder are being performed solely for the benefit of CITY.
[Signature on Next Page]
4866-2656-6648 v1 - 9 -
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date set forth above.
CITY OF PACIFICA
By:_________________________________________
Yulia Carter, Interim City Manager
Date:________________________________________
Approved As To Form
By:_________________________________________
Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney
Date:________________________________________
CONSULTANT
GHD, Inc.
By:_________________________________________
Craig Lewis, P.E., Principal in Charge
Date:___4/7/2026_____________________________
4866-2656-6648 v1
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF WORK
Pacifica Pier
Rehabilitation
Project
Proposal
City of Pacifica March 6, 2026
GHD Reference: 12690772
City of Pacifica
Public Works – Engineering Department
Attn: Rey Gian Soriano, Assistant Civil Engineer
151 Milagra Drive
Pacifica, CA 94044
March 6, 2026
Re: Proposal for Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project
Dear Mr. Soriano,
The City of Pacifica (City) needs an experienced partner who can act decisively to protect public safety while stabilizing a pier that is deteriorating under relentless storm exposure. The Pacifica Municipal Pier is facing accelerated structural damage, repeated storm impacts, and increasing limitations on public access—conditions that demand immediate, practical action. With longstanding hands-on experience with the pier and deep coastal and marine expertise, GHD Inc. (GHD) can rapidly transition from condition assessment to a safety‑focused, constructible rehabilitation design. Our approach prioritizes risk reduction, funding protection, and implementable solutions, delivering real improvements that allow the City to keep the pier safely open and serve the Pacifica community.
The City is best served by a team that already understands what the risks are, which repairs matter most, and how the pier actually behaves in Pacifica’s high‑energy marine environment. GHD brings the City that advantage. Having completed the City’s 2023 condition assessment, 2024 and 2025 post‑storm assessments, seawall evaluations, and the ongoing Beach Boulevard Infrastructure Resiliency Project, our team has first‑hand knowledge of the pier’s most vulnerable elements, deterioration mechanisms, and constructability constraints. This continuity allows GHD to immediately prioritize safety‑critical repairs, avoid redundant investigation, and translate existing data directly into defensible Plans, Specifications & Estimates (PS&E), saving the City time, cost, and risk.
GHD’s approach is deliberately aligned with the City’s realities: limited funding, urgent safety needs, and the need to phase construction without losing momentum. We focus on developing stand‑alone, construction‑ready PS&E packages that can be bid and built as funding becomes available—each phase independently improving safety, durability, and service life while fitting into a coherent long‑term rehabilitation strategy. Our designs emphasize durability, corrosion resistance, and constructability in rough marine conditions, helping slow future deterioration rather than simply reacting to it.
Equally important, GHD understands that this project must be delivered without jeopardizing federal funding or schedule. Our team integrates National Oceanic and Atmosphere Administration (NOAA) grant conditions, National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) readiness, and Build America, Buy America (BABA) considerations into design from the outset, reducing the risk of late‑stage redesign, permitting delays, or compliance issues. These considerations benefit the City by giving you clear, defensible documents that support bidding, construction, and grant reporting with confidence.
Responsiveness and availability are critical for a pier that is routinely impacted by storms. GHD’s San Francisco–based team, located approximately 14 miles from Pacifica, provides rapid site access for meetings, inspections, and post‑event coordination.
Key personnel led by Satish Chilka, Stephanie Gould, and Craig Lewis will remain continuously engaged throughout the project, ensuring leadership continuity and direct access to decision‑makers. We also leverage Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) and advanced inspection technologies to safely and efficiently assess hard‑to‑reach areas and support informed design decisions.
By selecting GHD, the City gains more than a designer, you gain a partner who already understands the pier’s risks, has helped the City manage them through multiple storm seasons, and is prepared to deliver practical, fundable, safety‑driven rehabilitation solutions. Our focus is on helping the City reduce risk now, extend service life, protect public access, and move confidently from planning into construction.
We appreciate the opportunity to continue our partnership with the City on this critical project. Please do not hesitate to contact proposed Project Manager and Lead Consultant Satish Chilka should you have any questions or require additional information during your review.
Regards,
Satish Chilka, PE
Project Manager
925.849.1019
[email protected]
Jeremy Svehla, PE
Business Group Leader
707.267.2246
[email protected]
Authorized to bind the firm
655 Montgomery Street
San Francisco, CA 94111
415.283.4970
www.ghd.com
1 Contents
1. Executive Summary and Understanding of Required
Services 2
Executive Summary 2
Project Understanding & Approach 3
Project Implementation 6
2. Description of Proposer 10
Company Information, Background, Size, and Relevant History 10 Office Location and Project Delivery Office 11
Experience with Public Agencies and Relevant Projects 12 Referenced Work 18
3. Proposer's Team 19
Project Team Organization and Roles 19
Meet your Project Manager, Lead Consultant, and Primary Contact 22
4. Exceptions to the RFP 23
5. Project Cost, Fees, and Charges 23
6. Project Timeline and Initial Draft Results 24
Appendix
Professional Biographies and Key Personnel Resumes
© GHD 2026: This document is and shall remain the property of GHD. The document may only be used for the purpose for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the Terms of Engagement for the commission. Unauthorized use of this document in any form whatsoever is prohibited.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project II Executive Summary and
Understanding of Required Services
→ Executive Summary
The Pacifica Municipal Pier is a high‑visibility coastal asset that has sustained progressive structural deterioration from decades of wave exposure and repeated storm events.
Advancing this project successfully requires a consultant who not only understands coastal rehabilitation in theory, but who already understands this pier—its deterioration mechanisms, constructability constraints, regulatory context, and the City of Pacifica's (City’s) need to act decisively to protect public safety while preserving funding flexibility. GHD is uniquely positioned to deliver that outcome.
GHD Inc. (GHD) brings unmatched continuity and first‑hand knowledge to the Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project (Project), having served as the City’s consultant for the 2023 baseline condition assessment, the 2024 and 2025 post‑storm
assessments, handrail repairs, and related coastal infrastructure efforts. This direct involvement provides immediate
understanding of priority deficiencies, safety‑critical elements, and realistic repair strategies, allowing the project to transition efficiently from assessment into rehabilitation design without redundant investigation, schedule delays, or avoidable risk.
GHD’s approach is centered on safety‑driven, phased
rehabilitation that aligns with the City’s funding realities, permitting requirements, and operational constraints. We will deliver three independent, construction‑ready PS&E packages, each capable of standing alone for bidding and construction as funding becomes available. This strategy enables the City to address life‑safety and liability‑driven repairs immediately while preserving flexibility for future phases. Phasing is informed by observed deterioration patterns, constructability in a high‑energy marine environment, and the need to maintain public access where feasible.
Public safety is the primary driver of our technical approach.
GHD prioritizes repairs to safety‑critical elements—including deteriorated piles, deck components, and handrails—based on direct field observations and documented failure mechanisms.
Our designs emphasize durability, corrosion resistance, and constructability to slow future deterioration rather than simply reacting to it, extending the pier’s service life while reducing long‑term maintenance risk.
Equally important, GHD integrates funding, environmental, and regulatory requirements from the outset. Our team is experienced with federally funded coastal projects and will incorporate National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Community Project Award conditions, National
Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) readiness, and Build America, Buy America (BABA) considerations directly into design decisions. This proactive approach reduces the risk of late‑stage redesign, permitting delays, or compliance issues and supports defensible documentation for bidding, construction, and grant reporting.
The project will be led by Satish Chilka, PE, who will serve as the City’s dedicated Project Manager and primary point of contact. Mr. Chilka and the identified key personnel will remain actively engaged throughout the project duration, ensuring staffing continuity, institutional knowledge retention, and responsive communication. GHD commits to consistent accessibility for meetings, coordination, site visits, and urgent needs—including post‑storm response—supported by structured project management practices, clear communication protocols, and reliable documentation tools that provide the City with continuous visibility into project status and decisions.
By selecting GHD, the City gains more than a designer—it gains a trusted partner who already understands the pier’s risks, has helped the City manage them through multiple storm seasons, and is prepared to deliver practical, fundable, and constructible rehabilitation solutions. Our focus is on helping the City reduce risk now, protect public safety, preserve funding flexibility, and move confidently from planning into phased implementation.
2.5 GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.5. Executive Summary and Understanding of Required Services | 2 → Project Understanding &
Approach
GHD brings to the City unmatched continuity, first‑hand knowledge, and technical judgment to the Pacifica Pier
Rehabilitation Project (Project). Our team has been directly involved in evaluating the pier’s condition following multiple storm events and over several assessment cycles, providing a detailed understanding of deterioration mechanisms,
risk progression, and repair priorities that directly inform rehabilitation design.
Following damage to a section of the handrail during winter storms in December 2020 and January 2021, GHD evaluated the handrail system along the entire length of the pier and rated damage levels to support the City’s near‑term safety decisions and longer‑term repair planning. This work was followed by a comprehensive structural condition assessment in 2023 and annual post‑storm assessments in 2024 and 2025. This continuous involvement provides GHD with first‑hand, current knowledge of the pier’s condition and uniquely positions our team to transition efficiently from assessment to
rehabilitation design with continuity, accuracy, and reduced interpretation risk.
GHD’s project team is structured to provide continuity, senior leadership, and focused depth without diluting accountability.
Satish Chilka, PE, who led the prior condition and post‑storm assessments of the Pacifica Municipal Pier, will serve as Project Manager and the City’s primary point of contact, providing day‑to‑day leadership, technical decision‑making, and
coordination. Craig Lewis, PE, SE, Project Director, will remain actively engaged to support executive‑level coordination, risk resolution, and continuity with prior City engagements.
Stephanie Gould, PE, Senior Engineer, will support the team as Deputy Project Manager, providing schedule coordination and continuity of delivery. Andrew Cronin, PE, Senior Structural Engineer and experienced diver, will support condition
verification and constructible repair design, bridging assessment findings with rehabilitation detailing. Environmental review and permitting will be led by Kristine Gaspar, Technical Director – Environmental Planning, providing California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documentation, NEPA coordination,
and regulatory consistency aligned with NOAA funding
requirements. This team structure provides the City with direct access to senior staff, planned technical backup, and efficient project management throughout design, permitting, and bid support.
GHD’s Project Management Plan (PMP) will establish clear communication protocols, coordination pathways, and response expectations for the duration of the project. During early project phases—when scope definition, repair prioritization, phasing, and funding decisions are being established—GHD will conduct regular weekly coordination calls with City staff to maintain regular communication and resolve issues efficiently.
As design progresses and decision frameworks are established, coordination will transition to monthly meetings, supplemented by ad hoc calls as needed to address time‑sensitive technical, regulatory, or funding‑related issues. This structured approach drives consistent accessibility, responsive communication, and alignment with the City’s decision‑making needs throughout the project.
Phased Rehabilitation Strategy
The PS&E packages will be developed to implement a phased rehabilitation strategy that directly addresses public safety, structural reliability, constructability, and funding flexibility. Each phase will be prepared as a standalone, construction‑ready bid package suitable for separate advertisement and bidding.
Standalone bid packages provide the City with flexibility to time advertisement to favorable market conditions, reduce contractor risk pricing, and avoid delaying high‑priority repairs while later phases are refined, permitted, or funded.
GHD’s three‑phase PS&E strategy is intentionally structured to enable the City to act immediately on life‑safety‑ and liability‑driven deficiencies while preserving flexibility to align subsequent phases with funding availability, permitting timelines, and seasonal marine constraints associated with the pier’s high‑energy coastal environment. This approach allows near‑term risk reduction without committing the City to a single, all‑at‑once rehabilitation pathway.
The recommended phasing is informed by deterioration
patterns and repair priorities documented in GHD’s prior condition assessment reports, which identified both
localized critical deficiencies requiring near‑term action and widespread age‑related degradation of reinforced concrete elements typical of coastal pier structures.
Public Safety as the Primary Driver
Public safety is the primary driver of the rehabilitation strategy, consistent with the City’s evaluation emphasis on project understanding, risk management, and constructible technical solutions. Structural conditions directly influence public access and risk exposure along the Pacifica Municipal Pier. In a high‑energy marine environment, deterioration of reinforced concrete piles typically progresses gradually; however, repeated wave loading can breach damaged concrete cover, expose reinforcing steel, and accelerate deterioration, increasing the potential for localized structural failure if not addressed in a timely manner. Based on this understanding, critical pile deficiencies are prioritized for early repair.
Another element with direct public safety implications is the deteriorated handrail system, which represents the most frequent point of public interaction. The existing cast‑in‑place handrails are structurally integrated with the pier deck, and prior assessments have shown that corrosion at the deck‑to‑handrail interface is often concealed. This condition can result in failures without advance warning, including documented
handrail collapses in 2020–2021. These findings highlight the importance of addressing handrails as safety‑critical components rather than isolated architectural features.
Based on this understanding of deterioration mechanisms, constructability, and life‑safety risk, GHD’s phased PS&E approach prioritizes repairs that deliver the greatest immediate public safety benefit while maintaining cost efficiency.
Handrail repair or replacement is most effective when
coordinated with localized deck repairs, allowing corrosion to be addressed comprehensively rather than in isolation.
Accordingly, early project phases strategically combine deck and handrail repairs where feasible to reduce public safety risk, manage City risk exposure, and maximize return on investment—while preserving flexibility to align subsequent rehabilitation phases with available funding, permitting pathways, and marine construction constraints.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.5. Executive Summary and Understanding of Required Services | 3 Phase 1 – Immediate Risk Mitigation
and Load Management
Phase 1 focuses on addressing near‑term life‑safety risks identified during the condition assessments. This phase targets structural elements exhibiting advanced concrete deterioration, reinforcement exposure, and limited remaining service life, particularly at the pier abutment, selected deck and girder locations, and deteriorated handrail segments. Phase 1 is structured to reduce public safety exposure and City liability while longer‑term rehabilitation planning proceeds.
Planned measures include implementation of recommended
load restrictions, targeted access controls where required, and removal, stabilization, or replacement of elements assessed to have insufficient residual service life. Although handrails are non‑primary structural elements, they are safety‑critical components necessary to maintain continued public use of the pier. Prior assessments documented widespread handrail deterioration and storm‑related failures, with recommendations for replacement using durable precast components to reduce construction duration and marine exposure.
Phase 1 improvements are intended to immediately reduce public safety risk, limit further deterioration, and manage City liability, while allowing the City to sequence work around operational, funding, or permitting constraints. This phase may be implemented independently of full rehabilitation construction and is specifically designed to maintain safe public access while longer‑term repairs are designed and permitted. Where feasible, interim measures are selected to avoid precluding permanent repair solutions in subsequent phases.
Phase 2 – Priority Structural Repairs to
Arrest Deterioration
Phase 2 addresses structural components exhibiting moderate to major deterioration where continued exposure would
accelerate damage if left unaddressed. Based on assessment findings, this phase prioritizes reinforced concrete deck soffits, girders, pile caps, and localized pile zones where cracking, spalling, delamination, and corrosion were observed. Targeted handrail repairs and replacements are included where they improve public safety and construction efficiency.
Repairs in this phase are intended to arrest active
corrosion, restore structural capacity, and improve
long‑term durability through selective concrete removal and replacement, patch repairs, and protective treatments consistent with assessment recommendations. Work
sequencing will be planned to minimize impacts to public access and to account for tidal, wave, and seasonal constraints at the site.
Phase 3 – Abutment and Shore
Interface Rehabilitation
The pier abutment and landward interface are addressed as a distinct phase due to their critical role in both structural performance and shoreline resilience. Condition assessments identified deterioration of concrete facing and localized backfill loss at the abutment, contributing to seawater intrusion and periodic flooding of Beach Boulevard during high tides and storm events.
This phase includes abutment fascia repairs, backfill restoration, and associated drainage or protective measures needed
to improve performance at the pier‑to‑shoreline interface.
Coordination with adjacent seawall and roadway infrastructure is incorporated to confirm compatibility with future shoreline protection or adaptation projects and to avoid conflicts with planned City improvements.
The final phase supports the City’s long‑term asset
management objectives by incorporating provisions for future inspections, condition monitoring, and adaptive repairs.
This approach recognizes the pier’s continued exposure to extreme coastal conditions and future storm events and allows resilient‑focused improvements to be incorporated where feasible, without delaying critical structural repairs in earlier phases.
Grant Funding Awareness and Support
GHD recognizes that the Project is supported in part by federal grant funding administered by NOAA, and that
future phases of the Project may rely on additional state or federal funding opportunities. GHD has extensive experience delivering projects funded by state and federal agencies and understands the added complexity associated with
grant‑driven project delivery. While grant administration and compliance responsibilities remain with the City, GHD works closely with clients to understand funding mechanisms early, identify potential opportunities and constraints, and align technical decisions with applicable eligibility, documentation, and compliance requirements to protect funding eligibility, schedules, and long‑term implementation flexibility.
GHD’s approach is to proactively integrate grant awareness into project delivery, confirming that design, environmental documentation, and technical analyses are prepared in a manner that supports both current and future funding needs without expanding the City’s administrative burden. This funding‑aware approach supports informed decision‑making and helps position projects to meet—and where appropriate, exceed—funding criteria, while reducing the risk of redesign or compliance challenges later in the project lifecycle. As applicable to the consultant’s scope of work, this includes maintaining consistency with relevant federal requirements such as 2 CFR Part 200, NOAA special award conditions, and Buy America / Build America (BABA) considerations.
On recent work for the California State University Maritime Academy (CSU Maritime Academy), GHD aligned design
deliverables with anticipated federal funding requirements.
Our role included preparing and coordinating technical
studies and design criteria required for federal review, GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.5. Executive Summary and Understanding of Required Services | 4 including ship‑mooring analyses, seismic design criteria, and sea‑level‑rise evaluations. GHD also advised on procurement considerations influenced by BABA requirements, confirming that design‑phase decisions accounted for material sourcing, availability, and schedule implications. This experience directly informs our approach to integrating NOAA Community Project Award requirements into the Project.
By embedding funding considerations into early planning and design, GHD helps clients preserve funding flexibility, support realistic delivery schedules, and reduce downstream risk. This integrated approach keeps grant requirements, documentation needs, and regulatory expectations at the forefront of technical decision‑making, supporting efficient, defensible, and resilient project delivery.
Grant-Informed Technical Support
GHD will support the City and incorporate measures to meet the binding requirements for the NOAA Community Project Award identified in the Request for Proposers, including the following:
– Support the City and NOAA by preparing technical materials, clarifications, and environmental studies in NEPA‑ready format, and by providing federal environmental compliance inputs coordinated with CEQA documentation, as requested by the City.
– Coordinate and sequence fieldwork consistent with NOAA’s restriction on federal fund expenditure prior to written NEPA clearance, ensuring activities are planned in close coordination with NOAA and implemented in accordance
with NOAA Best Management Practices.
– Support BABA compliance by documenting repair material types and anticipated sourcing, preparing a detailed materials inventory prior to bidding and procurement, and identifying items that may require waivers for NOAA consideration.
– Coordinate with the City and NOAA to incorporate required federal funding acknowledgment signage into project design and PS&E documents.
– Prepare grant‑ready technical documentation—including PS&E packages, cost estimates, technical memoranda, and phasing strategies—that can be used to support current and future funding applications.
– Structure phased PS&E packages to align with incremental funding availability, allowing discrete construction phases to advance independently as funds are secured.
– Maintain clear and organized project records, cost data, calculations, and technical documentation to support
NOAA record‑retention, audit, and reporting requirements, and incorporate these same requirements consistently into subconsultant agreements.
Funding Coordination and Future
Readiness
Where requested by the City, GHD can also provide limited, tasks specific support to inform future funding pursuits, such as:
– Identifying how project phasing, scope definition, and cost estimates may align with common eligibility criteria for state or federal infrastructure and resilience funding programs. – Providing technical descriptions, figures, or cost information suitable for inclusion in grant applications prepared and submitted by the City.
– Coordinating with City staff to confirm that engineering decisions do not inadvertently constrain future funding opportunities or compliance pathways.
GHD’s role is intended to support, not replace, the City’s grant administration responsibilities, while helping confirm that technical decisions made during design protect funding flexibility, minimize rework, and support efficient advancement from planning through construction when funding becomes available.
Stakeholder & Public Engagement
Capability
GHD brings direct experience supporting stakeholder
engagement for high-visibility waterfront infrastructure, including work for the City of Berkeley Municipal Fishing Pier Structural Assessment. For Berkeley, GHD supported cityled public and agency engagement by developing technical analyses, graphics, and presentation materials used in public meetings to communicate pier condition findings, ferry terminal feasibility concepts, constructability considerations, and public access implications. This work required translating complex marine engineering topics—such as vessel maneuvering, pier modifications, dredging needs, and structural rehabilitation options—into clear, decision-focused materials suitable for community members, city leadership, and regulatory
stakeholders.
In addition, GHD provided technical input supporting
environmental review efforts for the Berkeley ferry terminal, coordinating with regulatory agencies and ensuring that engineering assumptions presented to stakeholders were
consistent with CEQA documentation and permitting materials prepared by the City and its environmental consultants.
This coordination reduced the risk of conflicting technical information during public review and agency engagement, which is an important consideration for federally and state-funded waterfront projects.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.5. Executive Summary and Understanding of Required Services | 5 Stakeholder & Community
Engagement
GHD will support the City’s stakeholder and public engagement efforts for this high‑visibility coastal infrastructure project.
Services include preparation of presentation materials, participation in community or City Council meetings as
requested, and coordination support with regulatory agencies.
As appropriate, GHD can also coordinate with and integrate support from external specialty firms at the City’s direction where additional expertise or value would benefit the Project.
Deliverables
– Public engagement outline or strategy memo
– City Council and community meeting presentation materials – Regulatory agency coordination materials
– Summary memo documenting comments and responses
Technical Studies
GHD will prepare or update the following technical studies to support CEQA, NEPA, and resource agency permitting.
Studies will include the figures necessary to meet permitting requirements, as noted under each study below. Design exhibits and footprint diagrams will be provided under the Permitting Support Task. All studies will be concise, defensible, and suitable for multi‑agency review.
Existing Conditions Technical Memorandum
GHD will perform a condition assessment to supplement the available information and prepare a technical memorandum describing the current conditions of the pier. The condition assessment will include in-person field work to check the handrails, pier deck and other appurtenances on deck. A drone equipped with a camera will be utilized, similar to the post-storm assessments, to document the condition of areas that are not accessible or visible from the deck. The data will be integrated with the previously collected images to determine the progression of concrete deterioration and prioritize various repairs.
Biological Resources Technical Memorandum
GHD will prepare a comprehensive Biological Resources Report (BRR) to support CEQA and NEPA review of the proposed
project. The BRR will be prepared with the expectation that the project will be at a minimum of 30% design, allowing for a clearer understanding of potential permanent and temporary project impacts and more precise evaluation of direct, indirect, and cumulative biological impacts. The report will be developed in a manner adequate for CEQA and NEPA review and will
GHD recognizes that the Pacifica Municipal Pier, coastal setting, funding context, and community priorities are
unique. Accordingly, stakeholder support for the Project will be tailored in close coordination with the City. GHD will align technical messaging, phasing rationale, public access considerations, and construction impacts with City direction, regulatory requirements, and project-specific risks. Our role will focus on supporting the City by preparing clear technical exhibits, figures, and presentation materials for City Council, community meetings, and agency coordination—explaining
repair priorities, phased implementation, public safety considerations, and anticipated construction impacts—while maintaining consistency between engineering decisions,
permitting, funding requirements, and public communication throughout the rehabilitation effort. This approach aligns with the City’s expectations for consultant-supported, City-led engagement on high-profile coastal infrastructure projects.
GHD’s approach emphasizes informed decision‑making
grounded in direct familiarity with the structure, disciplined prioritization of needs, and practical implementation. Building on prior evaluations, the team focuses on addressing the most consequential deficiencies first while sequencing work to remain adaptable to external constraints and City direction.
Integrated technical, environmental, and coordination support enables clear communication, efficient design development, and steady progress toward extending the pier’s useful service and supporting long‑term stewardship objectives.
→ Project Implementation
Our scope of work is aligned with the City’s proposed outline to adequately cover the design and engineering support services required to implement the Project.
Project Management
GHD will provide overall project management and coordination services throughout design, environmental review, permitting support, and bid/construction support. Services include coordination with City staff, regulatory agencies, NOAA representatives, and subconsultants; schedule and budget management; and quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC).
A Project Management Plan (PMP) will be prepared to
define roles, responsibilities, communication protocols, QA/QC procedures, and key milestones. GHD will maintain documentation required to support NOAA Community Project Award compliance, including NEPA coordination tracking.
Deliverables
– Project Management Plan (PMP)
– Project schedule with monthly updates
– Meeting agendas and meeting minutes
– Monthly progress reports (schedule, budget, risks)
– Project file management system
– Comment/response tracking logs
– NOAA coordination log
– NEPA technical support inputs and responses
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.5. Executive Summary and Understanding of Required Services | 6 Permit Requirements Summary Matrix
GHD will prepare a Permit Matrix identifying the agency with jurisdiction over the project, type of permit to be issued, material requirements for each permit, and anticipated
application fee. The draft matrix will be provided to the City for their use in assembling the permit application packages. This will be a living document, updated as new information becomes available or as the design evolves.
Deliverables
– Existing Conditions Technical Memorandum
– Biological Resources Technical Memo
– Historic Resources Screening Letter
– Geotechnical Review Memorandum
– Water Quality & Construction Impact Memorandum
– CEQA‑ready technical appendices
– NEPA‑ready summaries (if requested)
– Permit support exhibits and figures
– Permit requirements summary matrix
Field Assessment & Data Verification
Having served as Engineer of Record and led the previous assessments, GHD is positioned to build upon the completed work and conduct supplemental field verification as necessary to confirm the current state of deterioration extents to prepare the bid items. All field activities will comply with NOAA restrictions, BMPs, and NEPA funding limitations.
Due to the pier’s height above open water and limited access to sidewalls and soffits, full hands-on inspection of all structural elements is not feasible without water-based operations or using crange assisted lift basket. Deck-based access is therefore prioritized to minimize marine impacts, reduce permitting complexity, and control construction costs. Past experience indicates that dive-based inspections and repairs require specialized crane mobilization and lift basket, materially increasing project cost, schedule, and risk.
Drone inspections, conducted in accordance with NOAA
best practices, will be used to verify current conditions in areas not accessible from the deck without extensive staging.
However, internal concrete deterioration may not be fully visible, resulting in unavoidable uncertainty in repair quantities.
To protect funding adequacy and minimize mid-construction cost exposure, the repair quantities will include conservative contingencies consistent with marine engineering practice.
GHD will work closely with the City to implement a costeffective, risk-managed assessment strategy that balances fiscal stewardship with structural reliability. Where beneficial, targeted optional hands-on inspections at selected locations can be performed to better define deterioration extents, reduce uncertainty, and support informed funding and construction decisions.
identify applicable regulatory and permitting considerations from relevant agencies, including but not limited to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), NOAA Fisheries/National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and the California Coastal Commission (CCC), as well as recommend appropriate avoidance and minimization measures to reduce potential impacts to biological resources.
In addition, a map will be prepared indicating jurisdictional aquatic boundaries in relation to the pier and proposed project footprint. This will be required in support of the City’s permit application process.
Historic Resource Screening Letter
GHD, in partnership with Treanor, will develop a historic resource screening letter in support of the proposed project.
The pier will be assessed for eligibility to be listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historical Resources, and as a local landmark. Constructed in 1973, the pedestrian bridge is located at Sharp Park Beach. The pier is not currently listed on any national, state, or local historic inventory. The screening letter will determine eligibility of the pier to be listed as a resource in compliance with both CEQA and NEPA. If the pier is determined to be an historical resource, then additional analysis of potential impacts of the proposed project would be required. Treanor will conduct a site visit, undertake historic research, and prepare the screening letter.
Geotechnical Review Memorandum
As the rehabilitation are in-kind repairs to restore the structural capacity of the pier, geotechnical exploration is not required for the project. GHD will review the data available from the Pacifica Beach Boulevard Infrastructure Resiliency Project to document the conditions on site.
Water Quality and Construction Impact
Memorandum
The repairs are unlikely to include new piles. The existing piles will be repaired from the soffit of the deck girder and extend to portions of the pile within the water. It is also anticipated that the repairs to the exterior sides of the deck girder will be performed from a temporary staging platform built above the high water levels. GHD will provide a technical memorandum describing the repair method, encroachments in the water and potential impacts and mitigations for in-water work.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.5. Executive Summary and Understanding of Required Services | 7 Deliverables
– Field Investigation Plan
– Supplemental structural assessment memorandum
– Photo documentation
– Updated repair quantity tables (as needed)
Rehabilitation Design Development
GHD will develop rehabilitation design concepts informed by validated condition data, deterioration mechanisms,
constructability constraints, and durability objectives for a high‑energy marine environment. Field assessment constraints identified during prior evaluations also directly inform construction approach and risk. Repair alternatives will be evaluated for constructability to identify critical challenges and considerations that reduce uncertainty for prospective bidders, thereby minimizing impacts to construction cost and schedule.
The rehabilitation designs will support phased implementation and independent construction packages aligned with funding availability and access requirements.
Deliverables
– Design criteria memorandum
– Repair detail concepts
Permitting Support
GHD will provide technical support for regulatory approvals, including U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Section 10/404), San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
(401 Certification), California Coastal Commission (Coastal Development Permit), and California State Lands Commission (CSLC) (Lease Amendment). The City will prepare and submit the permit applications; GHD’s role is limited to design content and developing impact avoidance measures during construction. The City will provide any legal exhibits that may be required by CSLC. This task is limited to attendance by 2 GHD staff at 1 meeting with each of the 4 regulatory agencies listed above.
Deliverables
– Figures, plans, and footprint diagrams
– Impact quantities and areas (based on design)
– Responses to agency comments related to design
– Agency Meeting Notes (4 meetings)
Environmental Clearance (CEQA)
The following scope assumes that the appropriate CEQA
documentation would be a Notice of Exemption with supporting documentation, and that none of the exceptions listed in CEQA Guidelines 15300.2 apply.
Based on our current understanding of the project, and in review of the CEQA exemptions, the project could qualify under multiple exemptions including: Class 1 Existing Facilities (repair of existing public facilities) and Class 2 Replacement or Reconstruction (replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will have the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced). GHD will prepare the necessary Categorical Exemption documentation for the project to satisfy the requirements set forth by CEQA.
This will include completion of a Notice of Exemption form, as well as a supporting memorandum describing the project, the qualifying exemption(s), and the evaluation of the project against the list of exceptions outlined in Section 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines. The Notice of Exemption form and
supporting memorandum will be submitted to the City for review, and upon receipt of comments, will be revised and resubmitted, if necessary.
Analysis of the project will include the following in accordance with CEQA Guidelines 15300.2:
– Analysis of the project location relative to sensitive environments;
– Identification and analysis of cumulative impacts;
– Analysis of potential impacts on the environment due to unusual circumstances;
– Analysis of the project location relative to scenic highways; – Analysis of the project location relative to lists compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5; and
– Analysis of potential impacts on historical resources.
If the project is found not to qualify for an exemption based on any one of the above exceptions, GHD can prepare an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Deliverables
– Draft Notice of Exemption and supporting memorandum.
– Final Notice of Exemption and supporting memorandum.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.5. Executive Summary and Understanding of Required Services | 8 Plans, Specification & Estimates (PS&E)
GHD will prepare three (3) independent, bid‑ready PS&E
packages, each representing a distinct construction
phase. Phasing will prioritize life safety, structural reliability, constructability, permitting constraints, and funding flexibility.
Each phase will be developed to the 30%, 60%, 90%, and 100% levels.
Deliverables (per phase)
– Construction drawings and repair details
– Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
– Technical specifications
– Construction sequencing and access notes
– Staging and access concepts
– Environmental BMP notes
– NOAA signage details
– BABA‑compliant material inventory
Bid & Construction Phase Support
GHD will provide technical support during bidding and
construction, subject to authorization and funding availability.
Deliverables
– Responses to bidder RFIs
– Addenda
– Pre‑bid and pre‑construction meeting support
– Submittal and RFI reviews
– Technical clarification memoranda
– Record drawings (PDF and CAD)
– Construction closeout memorandum
Optional: Grant Funding Opportunities
Research
GHD can provide targeted technical support to help the City position the Project for successful construction funding and implementation. This optional task is designed to support the City’s ability to secure, retain, and efficiently deploy federal and state grant funds, including the NOAA Community Project Award and potential future funding sources, by directly aligning technical decisions, permitting strategies, and phased PS&E development with grant eligibility and compliance requirements.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.5. Executive Summary and Understanding of Required Services | 9 Description of Proposer
→ Company Information,
Background, Size, and Relevant
History
GHD Inc. (GHD) is a global professional services firm providing engineering, environmental, and construction advisory services to public‑ and private‑sector clients. Founded in 1928, GHD is wholly employee‑owned and employs more than 12,000
professionals worldwide, with over 450 staff in California supporting municipal, regional, state, and federal agencies.
GHD has maintained a strong presence in Northern California for more than 70 years, with a local San Francisco office established in 1982.
Our firm is widely recognized for its leadership in coastal and marine engineering, including the planning, assessment, design, rehabilitation, and construction support of piers, wharves, seawalls, shoreline protection systems, and other over‑water and coastal infrastructure. GHD’s multidisciplinary teams integrate engineering, environmental, permitting, and implementation services to support the full project lifecycle while maintaining continuity, accountability, and quality control.
Marine and Waterfront Structure Design: GHD has
specialized expertise in the assessment, design, and
rehabilitation of marine and waterfront structures
exposed to aggressive coastal environments. Our services include structural condition assessments, structural and seismic analysis, rehabilitation design, and preparation of construction‑ready PS&E packages. Designs are informed by site‑specific performance data, constructability considerations, and long‑term durability, with a focus on extending service life, improving public safety, and supporting phased implementation.
GHD has an established and trusted working relationship with the City, having successfully delivered multiple high‑profile and technically complex projects that support the City’s coastal resilience, public safety, and capital improvement goals. These include the Beach Boulevard Infrastructure Resiliency
Project, condition assessments of the City’s seawall, and the 2023 and 2024 structural condition assessments of the Pacifica Municipal Pier. Through this work, GHD has developed a deep understanding of the City's coastal environment, regulatory context, infrastructure priorities, and community values.
This direct, first‑hand experience with the Pacifica Municipal Pier uniquely positions GHD to advance seamlessly from
assessment into rehabilitation design, minimizing risk, avoiding duplication of effort, and ensuring that design decisions are informed by site‑specific performance data and observed deterioration mechanisms.
Environmental Review (CEQA/NEPA): GHD provides
comprehensive CEQA and NEPA services for public
infrastructure projects throughout California. Our environmental professionals support agencies from early project definition through document preparation and approval, helping identify the appropriate level of environmental review, anticipate potential impacts, and prepare defensible documentation that withstands regulatory and public scrutiny.
Our team has prepared Environmental Impact Reports,
addenda, and supporting technical studies for municipalities across California, enabling projects to advance under tight schedules and evolving project scopes. By closely coordinating environmental review with engineering design, GHD helps reduce the risk of late‑stage revisions, permitting conflicts, or schedule delays.
2.6 Legal Company Name: GHD, Inc.
Type of Business: C Corporation
Contact Person: Satish Chilka, PE, Project Manager;
925.849.1019; [email protected]
Affirmative Statement: GHD affirms that it is independent of the City as required by generally accepted auditing
standards and specifically defined by the U.S. General
Accounting Office's Government Auditing Standards (1994).
Disclosure: GHD Inc. has reviewed its records and confirms that it has no known past or current personal relationships with any current Pacifica elected official, appointed official, City employee, or family member of any current Pacifica elected official, appointed official, or City employee.
Bankruptcy: GHD does not have any bankruptcy history to disclose.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.6. Description of Proposer | 10 Environmental Permitting and Agency Coordination:
GHD regularly leads environmental permitting and regulatory coordination for infrastructure projects in sensitive coastal and marine environments. Our services include permit
strategy development, preparation of permit applications, and coordination with applicable federal, state, and regional agencies. We emphasize early agency engagement, clear
documentation, and proactive issue resolution to support efficient approvals and regulatory compliance.
For coastal projects, GHD integrates permitting
considerations into design development from the outset, ensuring that engineering solutions are compatible with environmental constraints, construction sequencing, and long‑term operational requirements.
Project Management, Phasing, and Implementation Support:
GHD’s project management approach is centered on clarity, accountability, and risk management. We support public
agencies with project planning, schedule and budget control, quality assurance, and coordination among technical disciplines and stakeholders. Our teams are experienced in developing phased implementation strategies that allow projects to advance incrementally as funding becomes available while maintaining alignment with long‑term program goals.
For city projects with operational, funding, or schedule constraints, GHD focuses on delivering clear, defensible documents that support bidding, construction, and grant or funding compliance. This disciplined approach enables informed decision‑making and predictable project delivery.
Integrated Services Supporting Project Success: Across
all services, GHD emphasizes responsiveness, transparency, and collaboration. We understand that city projects must balance technical rigor with public accountability, regulatory compliance, and community expectations. By combining
specialized coastal engineering and stakeholder engagement expertise with integrated environmental and permitting services, GHD offers the City a partner uniquely qualified to support successful project outcomes from planning through
implementation.
Litigation, Mediation, and Arbitration for the past Five Years: Due to the commercial sensitivity and confidentiality of any litigation in which GHD may have been involved, GHD is not at liberty to disclose the information sought. However, we point out that as a component of its prudent risk management practices, GHD obtains high quality professional liability insurance in the world market, and domestically in the U.S., to provide cover in the industries in which it operates.
As a consequence of engaging in business, there are sometimes claims asserted that may or may not give rise to litigation.
The details and progress of any such claims are by necessity commercially sensitive and remain in confidence. We are able to inform you that there have been claims notified in the normal course of business, none of which we believe are material to the services which are the subject of your RFP. There are however presently no significant ongoing contract failures, no criminal matters, and there have been no judgments against GHD Inc. within the last 10 years.
Litigation Claims:
Bay Cities Paving & Grading v. City of Santa Rosa v. GHD Inc. (2022)
This matter arose from a contract with the City of Santa Rosa for design and construction support services. The City sought indemnity related to alleged excess construction costs.
Status/Outcome: Settled. GHD was dismissed from the matter.
City of Healdsburg v. GHD Inc. (2022)
This matter involved a contract for design and construction management services, under which the City of Healdsburg sought damages related to additional construction costs.
Status/Outcome: Settled. GHD was dismissed from the matter.
Government of Guam v. Black Construction Corporation, et al. (2024)
This matter relates to issues arising from the closure of the ORDOT landfill in Guam. GHD disputes the assertions made against it in the lawsuit.
Status/Outcome: Pending.
→ Office Location and Project
Delivery Office
The proposed services for the Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project (the Project) will be provided primarily by GHD’s San Francisco office, located at:
655 Montgomery Street
San Francisco, CA 94111
This office is located approximately 14 miles from the City of Pacifica, allowing GHD to respond quickly to City needs, attend meetings and site visits efficiently, and provide timely support during post-storm events or urgent coordination efforts.
Additional technical support will be provided, as needed, from other Northern California offices, including Oakland, Santa Rosa, and Concord, ensuring depth of expertise and staffing flexibility throughout the project duration.
GHD California
450+
GHD Americas
5,000+
GHD Global
12,000+
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.6. Description of Proposer | 11 Pacifica Beach Blvd Infrastructure Resiliency and Pacifica Pier Repairs Pacifica, California
GHD has partnered with the City of Pacifica since May 2020 to advance the Beach Boulevard Infrastructure Resiliency Project, a complex coastal protection effort for a 2,600‑foot seawall along a highly erosive, high‑energy shoreline. Beach Boulevard is a critical transportation and utility corridor serving the Sharp Park community, carrying water, wastewater, gas, and electric infrastructure that is increasingly vulnerable to wave overtopping, scour, and undermining. Existing seawalls constructed in 1984 have experienced multiple failures, demonstrating that shallow foundation systems are not performing under current coastal conditions and may become increasingly unreliable within the coming decade. GHD’s work has focused on helping the City make defensible, risk‑based decisions that protect essential infrastructure, maintain public use and access, and strengthen long‑term coastal resilience in the face of erosion and sea level rise.
GHD led Phase 1 through a detailed feasibility study that integrated existing conditions, a multi‑hazard risk assessment, alternatives development, economic assessment, and robust public outreach. A broad set of strategies—including beach nourishment, sand retention structures (groins/reefs/breakwaters), revetments, and seawall concepts—were evaluated and scored using a multi‑criteria framework balancing technical performance, environmental resources, and lifecycle considerations. This process culminated in selection of a preferred, hybrid coastal protection system combining seawall improvements, rock scour protection, and beach nourishment. GHD is now supporting Phase 2 with preliminary engineering, environmental documentation, permitting, and final design development, including preparation of 35% drawings, an updated cost estimate, and a basis of design package suitable for environmental scoping. In parallel, GHD has also supported the City on other time‑sensitive coastal efforts, including emergency repairs to the Pacifica Municipal Pier and emergency bluff protection work— projects funded in part through CalOES using federal disaster relief funding from FEMA—demonstrating GHD’s ability to deliver under urgent conditions while navigating funding and implementation constraints.
California State Universitiy Maritime Academy, Boat Basin and Pier Extension Vallejo, California
California State University (CSU) Maritime Academy is undertaking a collaborative design‑build program to upgrade its waterfront facilities to berth a new, larger National Security Multi‑Mission Vessel (NSMV), replacing the long‑serving Training Ship Golden Bear. The effort is schedule‑critical and must be completed by October 2026, requiring coordinated engineering decisions that balance constructability, durability, and environmental constraints in an active marine setting. As part of this work, the team is delivering a comprehensive package of improvements—including marine structural upgrades and offshore elements—to confirm the campus can safely and reliably support the next generation of training operations.
As the Engineer-of-Record on the design‑build team, GHD is managing the design process and providing integrated coastal and marine structural/seismic engineering, corrosion protection, and permitting support—along with civil and building systems disciplines—so the owner receives a complete, constructible solution without fragmented interfaces. The program includes six major components: expansion and strengthening (or replacement) of the existing causeway and pier; upgrades to the small vessel boat basin; new mooring dolphins and dredging; expansion of the marine logistics yard; utility upgrades; and demolition/ replacement of the breakwater and associated site elements. Throughout design, GHD’s focus is on minimizing in‑water work duration and disturbance, applying value engineering to reduce avoidable cost, and delivering a high‑performance, resilient berthing facility on a fast‑paced schedule—capabilities directly transferable to any high‑visibility waterfront rehabilitation requiring phased constructability planning, tight permitting coordination, and durable marine detailing. → Experience with Public Agencies and Relevant Projects GHD has extensive experience providing professional engineering and environmental services to California cities, counties, special districts, ports, and state agencies, as well as supporting federally-funded infrastructure projects subject to complex regulatory and grant compliance requirements.
The following pages include relevant projects and success stories that highlight the GHD team's ability and experience completing projects with similar scopes of work as this Project.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.6. Description of Proposer | 12 Waterfront Restoration Engineering and Construction Management Services Crockett, California
GHD has supported C&H Sugar (ASR Group) since 2012 with comprehensive waterfront restoration engineering, environmental services, and construction management for a historic bulk unloading terminal and associated over‑water infrastructure originally constructed in 1906. Work began with detailed condition assessments and structural evaluations of the existing concrete wharf and timber waterfront systems along the Carquinez Strait, including above‑water surveys and Level I/II underwater diving inspections of precast concrete piles. Using field data and record drawings, GHD performed capacity evaluations and advanced structural analyses—including 3D finite element modeling and code‑based load combinations—to quantify vertical and lateral load capacity and to define prioritized, performance‑based repair recommendations that supported continued safe operations and long‑term serviceability.
Building on the assessment findings, GHD developed repair and restoration designs for both concrete and timber elements and delivered phased construction plans that addressed marine constructability, sequencing, and durability under harsh exposure conditions. In parallel, GHD led resource agency permitting and environmental compliance, including a biological assessment for a fender repair effort and negotiation of a 5‑year permitting program that provided flexibility to implement repairs annually based on need and available funding. That program included coverage through USACE (Nationwide Permit), SF Bay RWQCB (Water Quality Certification), and BCDC (permit), along with Section 106 coordination due to historic resources, eelgrass survey coordination, and pre‑construction nesting bird surveys. GHD continues to provide construction management and construction‑phase services—coordinating special inspections and environmental monitoring, managing submittals/RFIs, supporting QA/QC and safety, and administering contract compliance—helping the owner execute repairs efficiently while adapting to evolving priorities over multiple phases.
Oceanside Harbor Fishing Pier & Non-Motorized Launch
Oceanside, California
The Oceanside Harbor Pier and Launch Dock program restored and enhanced a heavily used waterfront recreation asset after the existing public fishing pier was closed in 2021 due to extensive corrosion of steel connections in the wood pier framing. Working for the City of Oceanside from August 2021 through December 2024, GHD helped secure a California Wildlife Conservation Board (WCB) grant to replace the deteriorated pier with a new, larger reinforced concrete pier, sized to meet regional demand and improve long-term durability. In addition to restoring fishing access, the City expanded community benefit by including a new ADAaccessible kayak launch dock and additional ADA parking under the same funding package—ensuring the improvements served a broader range of users.
GHD provided end-to-end support spanning grant assistance, design, permitting, stakeholder engagement, and construction documents, and then won the public bid to continue into delivery. Stakeholder coordination was central to shaping the preferred concept, with GHD presenting alternatives to the Oceanside Harbor & Beaches Advisory Committee (HBAC) and incorporating public input, while also performing targeted value engineering (including restroom and ADA access considerations) to refine scope and improve cost effectiveness. The project advanced through schematic design into construction document development while CEQA documentation was prepared (initial studies and an Administrative Draft IS/MND) in coordination with City planning staff to support agency permitting. For added flexibility and cost efficiency, the work also incorporated design-build elements for the kayak launch dock and ADA gangway within the bid package approach.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.6. Description of Proposer | 13 Port of San Francisco Pier 50 Structural Condition Assessment and Repair Design
San Francisco, California
The Port of San Francisco Pier 50 Structural Condition and Seismic Risk Assessment was delivered under an as‑needed engineering services task order to evaluate and prioritize rehabilitation for a major, historic waterfront facility originally constructed in the 1920s. GHD performed comprehensive above‑ and below‑water structural condition surveys of Pier 50’s substructure framing and piling, including topside deck observations and inspections from a boat beneath the pier, supported by a complete underwater pile inspection. Findings were documented in a condition survey report with photographic records and tables identifying damage locations and severity, along with prioritized recommendations for immediate, short‑range, medium‑range, and long‑range actions to support safe, reliable ongoing operations.
Building on the inspection data and material testing, GHD developed conceptual structural repair alternatives and evaluated the need for seismic upgrades in accordance with applicable building code requirements, reflecting the Port’s need for post‑event operability. Three conceptual repair/rehabilitation and seismic retrofit alternatives were prepared with budgetary probable construction cost estimates to support decision‑making and capital planning. In 2023, GHD was retained again to update the assessment—confirming prior findings and expanding the technical basis through a geotechnical site investigation and topographic survey, followed by a geotechnical seismic hazard assessment and a pier substructure seismic evaluation at four earthquake ground‑motion levels to quantify vulnerability and refine retrofit concepts for the facility’s operational requirements.
Huntington Beach Channel and Talbert Channel Repair
Orange County, California
The Huntington Beach Channel and Talbert Channel Repair project is a high‑stakes flood protection effort delivered for the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) to restore long‑term performance of deteriorated steel sheet pile channel walls that were constructed around 1990 and have corroded faster than anticipated.
The reduced service life and diminished structural capacity of the existing walls created an urgent need to restore levee stability and channel reliability to meet FEMA levee certification requirements and achieve a minimum 50‑year design life, while working in a constrained urban corridor bordered by fully developed residential neighborhoods. GHD served as the designer for approximately 16,955 LF of repairs (design fee $1.8M, construction cost approximately $65M), supporting a program that required careful sequencing, rigorous engineering, and sustained stakeholder coordination.
GHD developed an innovative, constructible repair strategy to accelerate delivery and reduce impacts by installing new AZ44‑700/ AZ52‑700 steel sheet piles directly behind the existing walls—as close as 4 inches—thereby avoiding extensive in‑channel demolition and minimizing in‑water work. The repair package also included stormwater improvements behind the new walls, temporary removal of an approximately 150‑foot pedestrian bridge to enable installation, and soil improvements to the levee system to meet USACE standards. Because construction access was limited to 15–18‑foot‑wide maintenance roads atop the levees, GHD coordinated design and construction considerations with the contractor and supported public outreach measures, including use of a silent piler press‑in system to reduce noise and vibration impacts to adjacent residents. This combination of constrained-access constructability planning, durability‑focused design, and delivery under schedule pressure demonstrates GHD’s ability to execute complex, safety‑critical infrastructure improvements while maintaining community and stakeholder confidence.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.6. Description of Proposer | 14 San Francisco Municipal Pier at Aquatic Park
San Francisco, California
The Municipal Pier at Aquatic Park is a highly visible, historically significant public waterfront structure serving both recreational users and a critical functional role in protecting the Aquatic Park shoreline, Fisherman’s Wharf, and adjacent waterfront facilities from wave and tidal current effects. GHD was engaged by the City and County of San Francisco Public Works and the National Park Service to perform a comprehensive structural condition assessment and to develop rehabilitation and retrofit concepts to support long‑term planning for this aging marine asset. GHD completed detailed above‑ and below‑water inspections of the pier structure, including Level I, II, and III underwater inspections of piles and fixed breakwater elements, performed in accordance with MOTEMS and ASCE standards. The assessment documented widespread marine deterioration—such as spalled concrete and exposed reinforcing steel at piles, pile caps, beams, and deck elements—damage mechanisms typical of long‑term exposure to harsh coastal conditions.
Using the inspection findings, GHD developed conceptual repair and strengthening alternatives supported by a robust structural and seismic evaluation program. This included linear elastic dynamic analysis, three‑dimensional nonlinear static pushover analysis, and demand‑capacity assessments to estimate structural performance during seismic events, as well as evaluation of environmental loads from waves and currents to confirm marine exposure conditions were appropriately reflected. GHD prepared budgetary‑level construction cost estimates for corrosion repair, rehabilitation, and seismic retrofit options, while carefully balancing structural needs with the pier’s historic preservation requirements. Recommendations were developed to allow continued safe public access to portions of the pier during rehabilitation planning, maintain the structure’s original appearance, and support phased implementation.
GHD also assisted the owner with researching grant funding opportunities to advance rehabilitation of this landmark waterfront structure.
East Bay Point Pinole Fishing Pier Structural Inspection and Repair Project Richmond, California
The Point Pinole Fishing Pier is a long, pile‑supported concrete pier serving as a heavily used public recreational fishing facility, making it programmatically and operationally comparable to municipal fishing piers along California’s coastline. The East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) retained GHD to perform a comprehensive structural inspection and evaluation to support rehabilitation planning and extend the pier’s service life while maintaining safe public access. GHD conducted a full above‑ and below‑water condition survey, including deck‑level inspections on foot, below‑deck inspections from a boat, and underwater diving inspections performed at high tide. All field investigations were completed in accordance with MOTEMS (CBC Chapter 31F) and the ASCE Underwater Investigations Standard Practice Manual, ensuring a rigorous, defensible assessment of structural condition in a marine environment.
Using record information and as‑built drawings provided by EBRPD, GHD performed a detailed structural evaluation of the deck and substructure, assessing load‑carrying capacity under dead, live, and seismic demands. The evaluation identified concrete piles, deck beams, deck panels, and above‑deck elements requiring repair or replacement. GHD developed conceptual repair alternatives to address observed deficiencies, improve structural performance, and extend the pier’s usable life, while recognizing the importance of keeping the facility open and safe for recreational use. The final condition assessment report included Condition Assessment Ratings (CARs) for individual pier components, a service‑life evaluation, and recommended repair strategies, along with quantified damage and repair quantities. These deliverables were subsequently used by the District to prepare construction bid documents, demonstrating GHD’s ability to translate inspection data directly into implementable, construction‑ready rehabilitation actions.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.6. Description of Proposer | 15 NAB Repair Bulkheads 1, 2, and 3, Naval Amphibious Base Coronado, California
The Repair Bulkheads 1, 2, and 3 project at Naval Amphibious Base (NAB) Coronado addressed urgent shoreline infrastructure needs for an active waterfront facility where failing structural elements and subsurface voids posed escalating operational and asset‑protection risk. Retained by NAVFAC Southwest, GHD in a Joint Venture prepared a complete design‑build procurement package to replace failing steel sheet piles along Bulkhead 3 (originally constructed in 1953) and to prevent continued deterioration of the existing concrete bulkheads. The effort began with a comprehensive site investigation and structural assessment, including inspection of 5,600 linear feet of quay wall, followed by a condition assessment report documenting spalls, cracks, and voids in both plan/table formats to clearly define repair limits and priorities.
To translate assessment findings into executable repairs, the JV coordinated ground‑penetrating radar to locate pavement voids caused by soil migration through failed wall segments and completed topographic survey support for design development. The team then delivered integrated structural, civil, and geotechnical design for 285 linear feet of new steel sheet pile wall, a new concrete cap, and pavement repairs, supported by soil parameter review for LPILE analysis and seismic design to UFC 4‑152‑01, plus coastal engineering analysis for wave loading and scour protection requirements. In addition, the JV developed repair details for approximately 4,000 linear feet of Bulkheads 1 and 2, including concrete spall repairs, epoxy crack injection, reinforcement replacement, and sinkhole infill, and prepared the Basis of Design, construction schedule recommendations, and a detailed cost estimate (including DD Form 1391). By applying waterfront constructability expertise and value discipline, the team corrected inefficiencies in earlier concepts and produced a solution that reduced the projected cost from over $10M to under $4M, which ultimately aligned with the final construction cost. Design was also refined to minimize environmental impacts (including avoiding eelgrass and limiting bay fill), and construction was successfully completed in May 2016 after award in Fall 2015.
City of Berkeley Municipal Fishing Pier Structural Assessment Berkeley, California
In July 2015, the Berkeley Municipal Fishing Pier was closed for public safety after significant concrete deck spalling and severe corrosion of reinforcing steel raised concerns that the structure could no longer safely support pedestrian loading.
GHD was retained by the City of Berkeley to rapidly establish a clear, defensible understanding of condition and risk and to develop practical paths forward.
Our team completed a comprehensive above‑ and below‑water visual survey, documenting damage type, extent, and location through photographs and annotated drawings, and collected core samples through existing pile jackets to confirm the integrity of underlying timber piles. To confirm findings were communicated clearly and could be acted upon quickly, we applied ASCE Manual of Practice 130 and MOTEMS inspection/assessment guidance and used the ASCE 130 rating system to present results in tabular summaries and color‑coded exhibits that highlighted priority areas and the overall extent of deterioration.
Using inspection data and design‑basis loads consistent with California Building Code/ASCE 7, GHD performed a structural evaluation of both vertical (gravity) and lateral (seismic and wave) load‑resisting systems, tabulating demand‑to‑capacity results for key pier components and identifying deficiencies that drove decisions on retrofit versus replacement. The assessment confirmed that damaged deck panels were not providing required live‑load resistance for a public recreational pier and that the structure did not meet current seismic performance expectations, leading to recommendations for either retrofit or replacement. To support implementable planning, GHD also evaluated utilities beneath the pier and topside assets (restrooms, railings, lighting, and appurtenances), reviewed CEQA/permitting pathways, and assessed deck elevation relative to projected water levels, incorporating concepts to accommodate higher deck elevations while maintaining ADA‑accessible connections from landside. We developed comparative cost estimates for rehabilitation and replacement alternatives—including contingencies, escalation, City costs, and allowances for design/permitting/environmental requirements—and supported informed decision‑making and community engagement by preparing project materials for public meetings.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.6. Description of Proposer | 16 Port of Alaska Cargo Terminal 1 (T1) Replacement
Anchorage, Alaska
The Cargo Terminal 1 (T1) Replacement program at the Port of Alaska replaced the existing terminal with a new seismically capable wharf constructed approximately 140 feet seaward of the current dock to reduce sedimentation impacts, improve berthing safety, and enable construction while existing terminal operations remained active. The new terminal supports lift‑on/lift‑off and general cargo operations and includes access trestles, ship‑to‑shore gantry crane accommodations, mooring appurtenances, servicing utilities, landside deep soil mixing ground improvements, and adjacent site development such as paved areas, a stevedores building, and supporting utilities. GHD and a joint venture partner prepared preliminary and final design documents, supported by subsurface investigations, soil strengthening, and new electrical infrastructure required for modern crane and cargo operations in an extreme seismic environment with challenging soil conditions.
Because the Port serves as a critical logistics hub, construction phasing and sequencing were central to delivery: T1 and adjacent terminals were planned to remain fully operational throughout the multi‑year construction period, requiring carefully staged construction during each summer work season to maintain continuous vessel berthing and cargo throughput. Design also accounted for severe marine and environmental demands—waves, winds, currents, tidal range, ice, accelerated corrosion, and marine mammal considerations that can affect pile installation and in‑water work. To support practical implementation, phasing figures were developed using a 3D model to clearly illustrate construction stages for the new terminal wharf and access trestles and to coordinate operations, safety, and constructability in a constrained, active marine facility.
What clients say
GHD has been a pleasure to work with. In my position, I provide oversight and guidance to numerous contractors. GHD has consistently been professional, pleasant and self-managing...I have had contact with many of their employees and each individual has demonstrated competence, courtesy and professionalism. I strongly support and recommend GHD as an excellent service provider. – Michael Bell, NPS, San Francisco Maritime NHP
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.6. Description of Proposer | 17 → Referenced Work
GHD is proud of our reputation for providing quality
design, planning, and construction management expertise in all facets of Maritime and Coastal Engineering. We
encourage you to talk with some of our clients about our performance on recent similar projects.
There is no better proof of our work than direct
testimonials from our clients. A full 90 percent of our clients are municipal agencies or government entities,
and approximately 75 percent of our work comes
from repeat clients. This track record illustrates our indepth knowledge of specialized engineering services and speaks to our clients’ confidence in our ability to deliver a project from planning and implementation, through to
completion.
97%
Overall Performance
GHD’s success at exceeding our clients’ needs is
evidenced by the high percentage of repeat business
that GHD has experienced and the results of more than
7,000 client responses received since February 1999
under our ISO 9001:2015
Excellent or Good
Responsiveness
Excellent or Good
Client Expectations
Meets or Exceeds
97% 98%
Project Name Project Dates Client Reference
Pacifica Beach Blvd Infrastructure Resiliency
and Pacifica Pier Repairs
(see page 12 for project information)
2020–Present
Ronald Yip, PE, Deputy Director; City of Pacifica; 155
Milagra Dr, Pacifica, CA 94044; 650.738.7300;
[email protected]
CSU Maritime Academy, Boat Basin and Pier
Extension
(see page 12 for project information)
2023–Present
Gavin McAleese, DBIA, Senior Project Manager; Otto
Construction; 1717 2nd St, Sacramento, CA 95811;
916.805.4961; [email protected]
Waterfront Restoration Engineering and
Construction Management Services
(see page 13 for project information)
2012–Present
Emma Darlington, Project Engineering Manager;
American Sugar Refining, Inc.; 2075 East 65th St,
Crockett, CA 94525; 510.210.8863;
[email protected]
City of Oceanside Harbor Fishing Pier & NonMotorized Launch (see page 13 for project information)
2022–2025
Joseph Ravitch, Harbor Division Manager; City of
Oceanside; 300 N. Coast Hwy, Oceanside, CA 92054;
760.435.4029; [email protected]
City of Berkeley Municipal Fishing Pier
Structural Assessment
(see page 16 for project information)
2016–2022
Nelson Lam, Supervising Civil Engineer; City of
Berkeley; 2180 Milvia St, Berkeley, CA 94704;
510.981.635; [email protected]
Port of Alaska Cargo Terminal 1 (T1)
Replacement
(see page 17 for project information)
2023–Present
John Daley, PAMP Engineering Manager; Port of
Alaska; 1871 Anchorage Port Road, Anchorage, AK
99501; 907.643.6203; [email protected]
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.6. Description of Proposer | 18 GHD’s senior‑led project team combines marine
rehabilitation, permitting, cost estimating, stakeholder engagement, and QA/QC expertise with direct
familiarity with Pacifica’s coastal infrastructure.
Structured for accountability, continuity, and
accessibility, the team supports efficient delivery
from condition validation through PS&E, permitting,
and construction support—reducing risk, improving
constructability, and protecting schedule, funding, and public safety.
→ Project Team Organization and
Roles
The proposed project team is structured to support efficient decision‑making, technical excellence, and responsive
communication. The organization chart for the Project outlines reporting relationships, key personnel, team responsibilities, and coordination among team members.
Project Director Craig Lewis, PE, SE, will provide executive oversight, strategic guidance, and quality leadership to drive consistency with GHD standards and alignment with the City’s objectives. Day‑to‑day execution will be led by Project Manager Satish Chilka, PE, who will serve as the City’s primary point of contact and manage scope, schedule, budget, and coordination with City staff and regulatory agencies.
Technical delivery will be led by Lead Design Engineer
Andrew Cronin, PE, supported by specialists in permitting, environmental compliance, marine biology, and cost estimating.
Independent QA/QC oversight will be provided by Adam
Bogage, PE, who will review key milestones to confirm
technical, regulatory, and constructability requirements are met prior to submittal. Senior staff will remain hands-on while junior engineers support analysis, design, material take-off and project deliverables under direct supervision.
This integrated structure enables GHD to maintain staffing continuity, respond efficiently to City needs, and effectively manage the phased PS&E development for the project. All key professional staff are properly licensed to practice in California.
Proposer's Team
Plans & Specifications
🔑 Andrew Cronin, PE
🔑 Satish Chilka, PE
Madeline Mueller
Russo Hernandez
Cost Estimating
🔑 Steve Ferrero, PE
Bill Cooke u
Surveying/Drones
Dave McCreary p
Stakeholder Engagement
Yosef Yip
Environmental Documentation
and Permitting
🔑 Kristine Gaspar
Miles Hartnett
Kimberly Butt, AIA, DBIA
🔑 Craig Lewis, PE, SE
Project Director
🔑Adam Bogage, PE
QA/QC
Technical Support
🔑 Satish Chilka, PE
Project Manager
🔑 Stephanie Gould, PE
Deputy Project Manager
City of Pacifica
🔑Key Team Member p New Age Aerials u Cooke Construction Services
Treanor
2.7 GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.7. Proposer's Team | 19 Responsibility Matrix
The table below includes brief descriptions of the role and responsibilities of each of the dedicated personnel of the GHD team who will see this project to completion. Junior design staff and technical support personnel are shown on the organization chart to demonstrate depth and delivery capacity. Responsibility and accountability for all deliverables remain with the core project team identified in the Responsibility Matrix. Professional biographies for core GHD team, including resumes for key personnel can be found in the Appendix.
Name/Role/Contact Number Responsibilities
Craig Lewis, PE, SE
Project Director
415.350.8337
Provides executive oversight, senior technical leadership, and strategic guidance throughout all phases of the project. Confirms overall alignment with City objectives, federal funding requirements, and GHD quality standards. Provides escalation support for technical, regulatory, and risk‑management issues; participates in key milestone reviews; and confirms continuity with prior Pacifica waterfront projects.
Satish Chilka, PE
Project Manager/
Plans & Specifications
925.849.1019
Serves as the City’s primary point of contact and is responsible for overall project execution.
Leads project management, scope control, schedule and budget management, and coordination with City staff, NOAA representatives, regulatory agencies, and subconsultants.
Oversees compliance with NOAA Community Project Award requirements, NEPA coordination, and BABA considerations. Leads development of the PMP, manages phased PS&E delivery, and supports bidding and construction‑phase services.
Stephanie Gould, PE
Deputy Project
Manager
707.267.2276
Supports day‑to‑day project coordination, task management, and deliverable tracking. Assists with internal team coordination, agency interactions, meeting facilitation, and preparation of schedules, progress reports, and comment‑response logs. Supports integration of engineering, environmental, and permitting tasks to confirm timely, well‑organized submittals at each design milestone.
Adam Bogage, PE
QA/QC
858.430.1506
Provides independent quality assurance and quality control oversight at the 30%, 60%, 90%, and final design milestones. Reviews design documents for technical accuracy, code compliance, constructability, and consistency with City standards, federal grant requirements, and permitting commitments. Supports risk reduction prior to bidding and construction.
Andrew Cronin, PE
Plans & Specifications
808.466.2419
Leads structural rehabilitation design and development of three (3) phased, construction‑ready PS&E packages. Responsible for validating existing condition data, coordinating supplemental field verification, developing repair details and design calculations, and ensuring constructability in a high‑energy marine environment. Coordinates integration of durability measures, BABA‑compliant material selections, NOAA signage requirements, and environmental construction constraints into plans and specifications.
Steve Ferrero, PE
Cost Estimating
415.296.2043
Prepares and updates Engineer’s Opinions of Probable Construction Cost (EOPC) at each design milestone for all phases. Supports phasing decisions, evaluates constructability and cost risk, and assists the City in aligning scope with available funding. Coordinates cost inputs for grant documentation and bid readiness.
Bill Cooke
Cost Estimating
Provides independent constructability review and supplemental cost estimating support.
Advises on marine access, staging, sequencing, temporary works, and bid packaging to improve constructability, reduce contractor risk, and enhance price certainty for phased construction.
David McReary
Surveying/Drones
Provides aerial drone inspections, photogrammetry, and survey support to safely document existing conditions, support supplemental field verification, and inform design development.
Supports post‑storm assessments and documentation of hard‑to‑access or hazardous areas in compliance with NOAA UAS requirements.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.7. Proposer's Team | 20 Subconsultants
Cooke Construction Services: Cooke Construction
Services is a California‑based general engineering contractor headquartered in San Carlos, California, providing
constructability review, cost estimating, value engineering, and construction support services for public‑sector and infrastructure projects. Founded in 1993 and owned by
William Camlin Cooke, the firm brings over three decades of construction experience and maintains an active
California General Engineering Contractor license. Cooke Construction Services supports design teams with practical, field‑informed insight that improves biddability, phasing, and overall constructability. GHD has partnered with Cooke
Construction Services for over five years including on the Pacifica Pier Condition Assessment & Post‑Storm Assessments (2023–2025) and the Pacifica Municipal Pier – 2023 Baseline Condition Assessment.
New Age Aerial: New Age Aerial is a
specialized unmanned aerial systems
(UAS) services firm providing aerial
imaging, inspection support, and data
capture for infrastructure, marine, and
coastal environments. The firm supports engineering and owner teams by delivering high‑resolution aerial photography, video, and site data that enhance condition assessments, safety, and access to hard‑to‑reach structures while minimizing field risk and disruption. New Age Aerial has supported GHD on recent pursuits and projects by providing aerial data collection to inform inspections, design development, and documentation, contributing efficient, technology‑enabled insight to support accurate and defensible engineering decisions.
GHD has partnered with New Age Aerial for over four
years including on the Pacifica Pier Condition Assessment & Post‑Storm Assessments (2023–2025) and the Pacifica
Municipal Pier – 2023 Baseline Condition Assessment.
Treanor: Treanor is a nationally
recognized architecture, planning,
and design firm providing integrated
architectural, interior design, and civil
engineering services for complex
public‑sector and institutional projects. Founded in 1981, Treanor operates through specialized design studios that focus on justice, higher education, healthcare, historic preservation, K‑12 education, housing and mixed‑use, and advanced
industries, allowing the firm to bring deep sector expertise to each assignment. With offices across the United States, Treanor delivers innovative, sustainable, and purpose‑driven design solutions that bridge gaps in access, quality, services, and resources while responding to regulatory, operational, and community‑focused project requirements. GHD has
an established working relationship with Treanor and has collaborated with the firm on multiple pursuits and proposal efforts, aligning GHD’s multidisciplinary engineering capabilities with Treanor’s studio‑based architectural expertise to support coordinated, constructible, and client‑focused project delivery.
GHD has been partnering with Treanor for over 25 years
including on projects like the City of Healdsburg PowellJohnson Pedestrian Crossing Enhancement Project and City of Petaluma Trestle Rehabilitation Project.
Name/Role/Contact Number Responsibilities
Yosef Yip
Stakeholder
Engagement
Supports City‑led stakeholder and public engagement by preparing outreach materials, facilitating meetings as requested, and assisting with regulatory and community coordination.
Confirms technical information is communicated clearly and consistently with engineering, environmental, and funding considerations.
Kristine Gasper
Environmental
Documentation and
Permitting
707.236.1539
Leads CEQA documentation and permitting support, including preparation of Categorical Exemption or IS/MND, coordination with resource agencies, and integration of permit conditions into design documents. Supports NOAA NEPA coordination by preparing NEPA‑ready technical inputs, tracking agency correspondence, and ensuring environmental compliance is aligned with phased design and construction sequencing.
Miles Hartnett
Environmental
Documentation and
Permitting
Supports biological resources assessments, focused field surveys (as needed), and preparation of technical memoranda to support CEQA, NEPA, and permitting. Coordinates with regulatory agencies to identify sensitive resources and develop avoidance, minimization, and construction compliance measures consistent with NOAA requirements and best management practices.
Kimberly Butt, AIA,
DBIA
Environmental
Documentation and
Permitting
Provides cultural and historic resources support, including records review, screening, and preparation of Historic Resource Evaluation documentation as needed to support CEQA, NEPA, and Section 106 consultation. Coordinates with the Project Manager and Environmental Lead to confirm findings are incorporated into environmental documentation and permitting materials.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.7. Proposer's Team | 21 → Meet your Project Manager, Lead Consultant, and Primary Contact Satish Chilka, PE, will serve as the Lead Consultant and Project Manager for this engagement and will be the City’s primary point of contact throughout the duration of the project. Mr. Chilka will be identified as a key person in the Agreement and will maintain consistent involvement from project initiation through completion.
Satish Chilka, PE – Project Manager
Phone Number: 925.849.1019
Location: 655 Montgomery Street, San Francisco, CA 94111 Satish Chilka, PE, will serve as Project Manager and Lead Consultant for the Project, providing day‑to‑day leadership for scope, schedule, budget, and coordination with City staff, subconsultants, and regulatory stakeholders.
Satish has 17 years of structural engineering, design, and project management experience with specialized expertise in waterfront structures—including piers and wharves, seawalls/bulkheads, structural assessments and rehabilitation, and construction document preparation and support. His technical strengths include structural engineering and seismic design (ASCE 61) and the assessment and rehabilitation of existing marine structures using industry standards such as ASCE Manual of Practice 130.
Satish brings direct, highly relevant experience with the Pacifica Municipal Pier, having served as Project Manager for the City’s 2023 condition assessment of the pier and shoreside abutment (including coordination of drilling to map potential voids, diving inspections of piles, and drone inspection of inaccessible deck areas) and 2024 post‑storm condition assessments using drone imagery to expedite safe, comprehensive evaluation. He also led the Pacifica Municipal Pier handrail repairs effort, recommending targeted replacement using precast concrete handrails to reduce on‑site construction time and minimize pier closures—an approach consistent with the RFP’s emphasis on constructability and maintaining access where feasible. Beyond Pacifica, Satish has managed and led design for complex marine infrastructure, including the WETA Alameda Main Street Ferry Terminal design‑build (seismically resilient “essential facility” components) and the C&H Sugar waterfront facility repairs (pier deck and pile repairs with coordinated environmental assessment and permit applications), reinforcing his ability to deliver phased, permit‑aware, construction‑ready PS&E supported through construction.
Why Satish is the PM for this Job?
Deep, direct Pacifica Pier experience + continuity: Satish has been the Project Manager for the Pacifica Municipal Pier across multiple efforts (2023 condition assessment of the pier and shoreside abutment; 2024 post‑storm assessment), giving him immediate familiarity with priority deterioration areas and City expectations—exactly what the RFP values under project understanding and staffing continuity.
Proven leader of complex marine rehabilitation design + phased delivery: He has led multidisciplinary design for major waterfront projects (e.g., CSU Maritime Academy upgrades including pier replacement and associated marine elements) and understands how to drive milestone deliverables—well aligned with Pacifica’s requirement to produce three standalone PS&E packages with 30/60/90/100% submittals.
Strong field verification + “right tools” mindset (safer, faster decisions): Satish routinely coordinates specialized investigations (ASCE MOP 130 for condition assessment of marine infrastructure, diver aided assessment, drone inspections) and proficient with rapid and hands-on condition assessments—directly supporting the RFP’s emphasis on data verification, supplemental field work, and safety in a coastal environment.
Marine structural specialist who designs for durability in harsh environments: With 17 years focused on waterfront structures—piers/wharves, seawalls/bulkheads, structural assessment and rehabilitation—Satish brings the technical grounding needed to deliver durable “restore in kind” repairs that address corrosion and storm exposure, aligning with the RFP’s objective to extend service life and maintain safe access.
Grant/agency coordination readiness and disciplined delivery: Satish’s PM background on public‑facing, multi‑stakeholder waterfront programs and design‑build delivery supports the RFP’s need for tight coordination, documentation, and responsiveness—key to managing NOAA/NEPA/BABA‑driven constraints, permitting interfaces, and construction‑phase support without avoidable schedule or scope risk.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.7. Proposer's Team | 22 Staffing Commitment and Continuity
GHD recognizes that the Project is a high‑visibility, time‑sensitive coastal asset and that successful delivery depends on consistent, reliable access to the Project Manager and key technical staff. Satish Chilka, PE, will serve as the City’s dedicated Project Manager and primary point of contact and will remain actively engaged and readily accessible throughout the duration of the project for meetings, coordination, site visits, and timely communication. GHD is committed to providing consistent staffing, with the key personnel identified remaining actively involved from project kickoff through PS&E and construction support to confirm continuity, institutional knowledge retention, and responsive communication.
To support the City’s accessibility requirements, Mr. Chilka and designated key staff will be available for urgent needs—including post‑storm coordination and time‑critical safety or schedule issues—with routine inquiries responded to promptly through established communication channels. Additional technical specialists from GHD’s coastal, structural, and environmental teams will be available as needed to support specific tasks while maintaining clear accountability through the core project team. Predictable responsiveness will be maintained through a structured project management approach, including a Project Management Plan defining roles, responsibilities, and QA/QC procedures; a detailed project schedule with monthly updates; and a consistent meeting cadence supported by advance agendas and action‑oriented meeting minutes. Clear and accessible communication tools—such as monthly progress reports with budget tracking, City and regulatory comment‑response logs, and coordination logs (including NOAA coordination, as applicable)—will drive continuous visibility into project status and reliable access to informed decision‑makers throughout the project lifecycle.
2.8 Exceptions to the RFP
Modification to Agreement/Acceptance: GHD Inc. has reviewed the City's Sample Professional Services Agreement and takes no exceptions. GHD accepts the Agreement in substantially the same form as provided, subject only to minor, non‑material modifications as may be mutually agreed upon with the City.
2.9 Project Cost, Fees, and Charges
As requested in the Q&A, please find our project cost, fees, and charges submitted separately. The cost proposal includes a not-toexceed fee, task-level breakdown, and fully burdened hourly rates in compliance with RFP requirements.
Regarding travel costs, GHD will not charge for travel for GHD staff. However, specialized subconsultants traveling more than 50 miles from the project site will charge in accordance with IRS rates. No markup will be added to expenses.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.9. Project Cost, Fees, and Charges | 23
2.10 Project Timeline and Initial Draft Results
# Activity ID Activity Name Current
Duration
Start Finish
1 Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation 432.0d 05-01-26 12-27-27 2 Project Management & Coordination 416.5d 05-01-26 12-06-27 3 A-1000 NTP 1.0d 05-01-26* 05-01-26
4 A-1010 Project Management & Coordination 583.5d 05-02-26 12-06-27 5 B-1000 Project Management Plan 14.0d 05-02-26 05-15-26 6 B-1020 Bi-weekly Meetings 16.3d 05-25-26 11-09-26
7 B-1030 Monthly Meetings 15.6d 12-07-26 12-06-27
8 Stakeholder & Public Engagement 192.0d 08-31-26 03-10-27 9 B-1500 Stakeholder & Public Engagement 192.0d 08-31-26 03-10-27 10 Technical Studies 311.0d 05-22-26 03-28-27
11 C-1000 Existing Conditions Tech Memo 27.0d 05-22-26 06-17-26 12 C-1010 Biological Resources Tech Memo 60.0d 05-31-26 07-29-26 13 C-1020 Cultural Resources Screening Letter 60.0d 05-31-26 07-29-26 14 C-1030 Geotechnical Review Memo 60.0d 07-01-26 08-29-26 15 C-1040 Water Quality & Construction Impact Memo 60.0d 07-01-26 08-29-26 16 C-1050 CEQA-ready Technical Appendices (Formatting) 30.0d 01-28-27 02-26-27 17 C-1060 NEPA-ready Summaries 30.0d 02-27-27 03-28-27
18 C-1070 Permit Support Exhibits 60.0d 08-29-26 10-27-26 19 C-1080 Permit Requirements Summary Matrix 30.0d 09-27-26 10-26-26 20 Field Assessment & Data Verification 47.0d 05-02-26 06-17-26 21 D-1000 Field Investigation Plan 21.0d 05-02-26 05-22-26 22 D-1020 Photo Documentation 14.0d 05-22-26 06-04-26
23 D-1030 Update Repair Quantity Table 14.0d 05-22-26 06-04-26 24 D-1040 Supplement Assessment Memo 14.0d 06-04-26 06-17-26 25 Rehabilitation Design Development 53.0d 06-04-26 07-26-26 26 E-1000 Draft Repair Alternatives 14.0d 06-04-26 06-17-26 27 E-1010 Coordination with City 14.0d 06-17-26 06-30-26 28 E-1020 Final Repair Alternatives 14.0d 06-30-26 07-13-26 29 E-1030 Repair Phasing Plan 14.0d 07-13-26 07-26-26
30 Permitting Support 119.0d 09-13-26 01-09-27
31 F-1000 Application technical sections 60.0d 09-13-26 11-11-26 32 F-1010 Supplemental data 40.0d 10-12-26 11-20-26
33 F-1020 Response to Agency Comments 21.0d 12-20-26 01-09-27 34 Environmental Clearance 48.0d 01-24-27 03-12-27
35 G-1000 Draft CEQA (CatEX or IS-MND) 35.0d 01-24-27 02-27-27 36 G-1010 Final CEQA (CatEX or IS-MND) after Review 7.0d 03-06-27 03-12-27 37 PS&E 221.0d 07-01-26 02-06-27
38 H-1000 30% Design 60.0d 07-01-26 08-29-26
39 H-1010 30% Design Review 14.0d 08-30-26 09-12-26
40 H-1020 60% Design 60.0d 09-13-26 11-11-26
41 H-1030 60% Design Review 14.0d 11-12-26 11-25-26
42 H-1040 90% Design 45.0d 11-26-26 01-09-27
43 H-1050 90% Design Review 14.0d 01-10-27 01-23-27
44 H-1060 100% Design 14.0d 01-24-27 02-06-27
45 Bid Support 21.0d 03-23-27 04-12-27
46 I-1000 Field Visit & RFI Response 7.0d 03-23-27 03-29-27 47 I-1010 IFC Drawings 14.0d 03-30-27 04-12-27
48 Contractor Selection by City 45.0d 04-12-27 05-26-27 49 J-1000 Contractor Selection by City 45.0d 04-12-27 05-26-27 50 Construction Support (7 months) 210.0d 06-01-27 12-27-27 51 K-1000 Construction Support (7 months) 210.0d 06-01-27 12-27-27 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 2026 2027 2028
12-27-27, Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation
12-06-27, Project Management & Coordination
05-01-26
12-06-27
05-15-26
11-09-26
12-06-27
03-10-27, Stakeholder & Public Engagement
03-10-27
03-28-27, Technical Studies
06-17-26
07-29-26
07-29-26
08-29-26
08-29-26
02-26-27
03-28-27
10-27-26
10-26-26
06-17-26, Field Assessment & Data Verification
05-22-26
06-04-26
06-04-26
06-17-26
07-26-26, Rehabilitation Design Development
06-17-26
06-30-26
07-13-26
07-26-26
01-09-27, Permitting Support
11-11-26
11-20-26
01-09-27
03-12-27, Environmental Clearance
02-27-27
03-12-27
02-06-27, PS&E
08-29-26
09-12-26
11-11-26
11-25-26
01-09-27
01-23-27
02-06-27
04-12-27, Bid Support
03-29-27
04-12-27
05-26-27, Contractor Selection by City
05-26-27
12-27-27, Construction Support (7 months)
12-27-27
Our proposed schedule
is structured to advance
critical path activities early—
such as environmental
clearance, permitting
support, and phased PS&E—
so individual construction
packages can proceed as
funding becomes available.
This approach maximizes the
value of the proposed cost
by supporting grant‑aligned
implementation, minimizing
idle time between phases,
and enabling the City to
move efficiently from design
into construction without
unnecessary redesign or
schedule extensions.
The proposed schedule is
subject to change pending
coordination with the City.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project 2.10. Project Timeline and Initial Draft Results | 24 → Professional Biographies
and Key Personnel
Resumes
Appendix
Team Biographies
Below we have included professional biographies highlighting our proposed core team's qualifications. Resumes for key staff follow.
Additional resumes for our team can be provided upon request.
Craig Lewis, PE, SE, Project Director
Craig will provide executive oversight, senior technical guidance, and quality leadership throughout the project.
He has more than 33 years of experience in the inspection, assessment, rehabilitation, and design of waterfront and marine infrastructure, including public piers, wharves, seawalls, and ferry terminals in complex coastal and seismic environments. His expertise includes performance‑based seismic design (ASCE 61), marine structural assessment, and constructability.
Craig has led major public pier and waterfront rehabilitation projects, including the Berkeley Municipal Pier, Aquatic Park Municipal Pier, and numerous efforts for the Port of San Francisco, U.S. Navy, and California coastal cities. His experience includes above‑ and below‑water inspections, repair and retrofit strategies, phased PS&E delivery, cost estimating, and regulatory coordination. As Project Director, he will provide technical rigor, QA/QC compliance, and alignment with the City’s goals for safety, durability, and long‑term serviceability.
Satish Chilka, PE, Project Manager/Plans & Specifications Satish will lead the day‑to‑day execution of scope, schedule, budget, and coordination with the City, subconsultants, and regulators. He has 17 years of experience in structural engineering and waterfront project delivery, with expertise in piers and wharves, seawalls, marine structural assessment and rehabilitation, and seismic design (ASCE 61; ASCE MOP 130).
Satish brings direct experience with the Pacifica Municipal Pier, having managed the City’s 2023 condition assessment and 2024 post‑storm evaluations, as well as the pier handrail repair effort using precast elements to reduce construction duration and closures. His broader experience includes managing complex marine infrastructure such as the WETA Alameda Main Street Ferry Terminal and C&H Sugar waterfront repairs, supporting phased, permit‑aware, construction‑ready PS&E through construction.
Stephanie Gould, PE, Deputy Project Manager
Stephanie will support the day‑to‑day coordination, schedule and deliverable tracking, and development of construction‑ready documents. She has 15 years of experience delivering structural and civil infrastructure projects for public agencies, with a strong background in project management and PS&E development. Her technical experience includes reinforced concrete, retaining walls, bridges and culverts, hydraulics, and civil site design, supported by strong AutoCAD/Civil 3D production skills.
Stephanie has managed projects such as the Trinity Street Rehabilitation (City of Trinidad) and City accessibility improvements (City of Fortuna), supporting scope, budget, schedule, and PS&E delivery. She also brings experience coordinating designs with environmental and permitting requirements, including stormwater compliance and multi‑agency coordination. In this role, she will strengthen team responsiveness and document quality across all PS&E phases.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project Appendix | I Adam Bogage, PE, QA/QC
Adam will provide independent technical review and quality oversight at key milestones to confirm compliance with applicable codes, standards, constructability requirements, and City expectations. He has more than 26 years of experience in marine and waterfront structural engineering, specializing in the inspection, assessment, seismic evaluation, rehabilitation, and design of piers, wharves, bulkheads, and marinas.
Adam’s experience includes leading and reviewing condition assessments and rehabilitation designs for public piers and waterfront facilities, including the Ocean Beach Pier (City of San Diego), CSU Maritime, and numerous U.S. Navy and port facilities. His background spans structural inspections, repair design, construction documents, and construction‑phase support, with a strong focus on seismic performance and durability. As QA/QC Lead, he will provide focused reviews at the 30%, 60%, 90%, and final design stages, supporting delivery of consistent, bid‑ready PS&E for phased rehabilitation of the Pacifica Pier.
Andrew Cronin, PE, Plans & Specifications
Andrew will provide technical leadership for development of phased, construction‑ready PS&E packages.
He has 15 years of experience in structural and marine engineering, specializing in the design, inspection, and rehabilitation of waterfront infrastructure, including piers, wharves, bulkheads, seawalls, and pile‑supported marine structures in challenging coastal environments. He is a California‑registered Civil Engineer and an ADCI‑certified diver, allowing direct support of underwater inspections and interpretation of findings.
Andrew has led structural design and rehabilitation for complex marine projects involving aging concrete and timber structures, demolition and replacement planning, constructability sequencing, and coordination of drawings, specifications, and cost estimates. His background in underwater inspection, structural evaluation, and rehabilitation design supports validation of existing conditions, refinement of repair details, and coordination with permitting, environmental, and cost disciplines. In this role, Andrew will deliver durable, constructible, and code‑compliant designs supporting the City of Pacifica’s goals for safety, long‑term serviceability, and efficient phased implementation.
Steve Ferrero, PE, Cost Estimating
Steve will be responsible for developing and updating the Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (EOPC) at each design milestone and supporting the City’s three‑phase PS&E strategy with cost, risk, and constructability insight. Steve has 30 years of experience in construction planning and management and specializes in cost engineering, estimation, cost management, and scheduling for major infrastructure programs.
Steve’s recent experience includes cost leadership for coastal resilience and waterfront infrastructure such as the Port of Hueneme coastal/hydrologic improvements ($40M), the SFPUC Ocean Beach climate adaptation/seawall program ($130M), and large port wharf and terminal efforts including Port of San Francisco Pier 50 retrofit/ replacement ($100M) and the Port of Alaska Terminal 1 replacement ($530M). For Pacifica, Steve will provide phase‑specific estimating that aligns scope to bid packages, identifies key cost drivers (marine access, staging, temporary works, and repair quantities), and supports value/constructability reviews to reduce bid risk and improve price certainty—helping the City confidently advance each phase as a standalone, bid‑ready package.
William (Bill) Cooke, PE, Cost Estimating
Bill will support cost estimating for the Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project, providing independent estimating insight to inform phasing, budgeting, and bid‑ready PS&E development. Bill is a Professional Civil Engineer with more than five decades of experience in construction cost estimating, project planning, and construction support for complex waterfront and marine infrastructure, including piers, wharves, seawalls, bulkheads, ferry terminals, floating structures, and offshore facilities.
Bill has prepared engineer’s cost estimates for major marine and waterfront projects throughout California, including work for the Port of San Francisco, multiple Bay Area ferry terminals, and the Pacifica Municipal Pier. His experience includes visual condition assessments, development of repair quantities, constructability analysis, and preparation of detailed cost estimates to support rehabilitation planning and funding decisions.
For Pacifica, Bill will bring deep familiarity with marine construction methods to help identify key cost drivers, validate quantities, and support constructability and phasing reviews—providing the City with added confidence in cost reliability and bid responsiveness for each standalone rehabilitation phase.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project Appendix | II David McCreary, Surveying and Drone Services Lead
Dave will serve as Surveying and Drone Services Lead, providing aerial data collection, drone‑based inspections, and advanced surveying to support condition verification and design development for hard‑to‑access areas. He is a nationally recognized UAS specialist with more than 30 years of experience in aerial imaging and infrastructure inspection, and is Founder and Director of UAS Operations for New Age Aerial.
Dave has led drone‑based inspections, photogrammetry, and 3D modeling for piers, dams, coastal infrastructure, and utilities for clients including GHD and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. He is FAA Part 107 certified with over 4,000 flight hours and a perfect safety record. For Pacifica, he will deliver safe, efficient aerial inspection and survey data that improves documentation quality, accuracy, and rehabilitation planning while reducing the need for risky access methods.
Yosef Yip, Stakeholder Engagement
Yosef Yip will lead stakeholder engagement for the Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project, supporting City‑led outreach and coordination with residents, businesses, and other affected stakeholders during design and construction. Yosef is a Senior Strategic Communications Advisor with GHD’s Engagement and Communication practice and brings extensive experience supporting public agencies on high‑visibility infrastructure projects that require clear, timely, and coordinated communication to manage public access, construction impacts, and community expectations.
Yosef’s experience includes developing construction outreach strategies, preparing public notification materials, facilitating issue escalation and resolution, and maintaining outreach records. For Pacifica, he will work closely with the City to align technical information, construction phasing, and schedule updates with stakeholder communications—helping minimize disruption, maintain transparency, and support informed public understanding as the Pier rehabilitation advances through phased implementation.
Kristine Gaspar, Environmental Documentation and Permitting Kristine Gaspar will lead environmental documentation and permitting for the Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project, overseeing CEQA documentation, NEPA coordination support, and regulatory consistency throughout design and phased implementation. Kristine is a Technical Director – Environmental Planning with nearly 30 years of experience in environmental planning, CEQA compliance, and resource agency permitting for public infrastructure projects across California.
Kristine brings extensive experience coordinating with federal, state, and regional agencies and preparing defensible environmental documentation for complex, permit‑constrained projects. For Pacifica, she will confirm environmental documentation and permitting support are tightly integrated with phased PS&E development—supporting grant requirements, minimizing schedule risk, and enabling the City to advance rehabilitation work efficiently while maintaining regulatory compliance.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project Appendix | III Miles Hartnett, Environmental Documentation and Permitting Miles will lead biological assessments, support CEQA and NEPA documentation, and coordinate with regulatory agencies throughout design and construction. He has approximately 10 years of experience in biological resources assessment, environmental permitting, and construction compliance for public infrastructure projects across California, with expertise in aquatic biology, wetlands, restoration ecology, and sensitive species.
Miles has prepared Biological Resources Reports and Assessments, wetland delineations, and mitigation and monitoring plans, and has supported permitting under ESA Section 7, Clean Water Act Sections 401/404, CDFW Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements, and Coastal Development Permits. For Pacifica, he will provide early, design‑integrated biological support to identify sensitive resources, define avoidance and minimization measures, and support phased permitting and construction sequencing to reduce environmental risk.
Kimberly Butt, AIA, DBIA, Environmental Documentation and Permitting Kimberly J. Butt, AIA, DBIA will lead architectural history and historic resources support for the Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project, working under the direction of Kristine Gaspar to support CEQA, NEPA, and Section 106 compliance as applicable. Kimberly is a preservation architect and architectural historian with more than 25 years of experience evaluating, documenting, and rehabilitating historic and cultural resources for public infrastructure and civic projects throughout California and the Pacific Northwest.
Kimberly brings extensive experience preparing historic resource evaluations, determinations of eligibility, and Section 106 consultation materials for complex, permit‑driven projects involving federal, state, and local agencies. Her background includes work on waterfront, transportation, and public facilities subject to USACE, SHPO, and CEQA/NEPA review. For Pacifica, Kimberly will provide focused historic resources expertise to support regulatory coordination and confirm that rehabilitation design and construction activities are informed by defensible architectural history analysis—helping the City advance the project efficiently while meeting applicable preservation and compliance requirements.
GHD | Proposal | Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project Appendix | IV Craig Lewis | Project Director
www.ghd.com
Craig Lewis PE, SE
Project Director
Location
San Francisco, CA
Experience
33 years
Qualifications/Accreditations
– BS, Civil Engineering, University of California, Davis, CA – Civil Engineer, CA #58706, WA #42655, AK #197742
– Structural Engineer, CA #4765, WA #42655
Key technical skills
– Seismic Evaluation and Design of Transportation
Facilities and Waterfront Structures
– Structural Inspection and Assessment of Facilities
– Design of Facilities with Liquefiable Soils Subject to Lateral Spreading
Memberships
– American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
– American Concrete Institute (ACI)
Relevant experience summary
Craig Lewis has more than 33 years of experience with the inspection, assessment, design and analysis of structural elements for waterfront infrastructure, coastal and utility systems. He has extensive experience leading large, multi-discipline teams and past projects have included inspection and rehabilitation of existing waterfront facilities in addition to design of new transportation infrastructure. He has broad knowledge of waterfront and heavy civil construction and environmental regulatory permitting requirements. Craig’s experience includes planning and design of berthing piers and wharves and vessel mooring and berthing facilities, all in a wide variety of loading conditions including ice, wave and seismic, large tidal and water level variations, vessel wake and strong current conditions. He combines his 30 years of complex structural engineering experience with a site-based knowledge of constructability and seismic adaptability. He has conducted many extensive inspections and assessments to determine the above and below water condition and service life of port and maritime structures, in addition to condition assessments and seismic retrofit of non-building structures using performance-based methods. He has performed static analysis for load capacity studies and vertical loading of waterfront facilities, dynamic analyses with seismic analysis/design using non-linear pushover methods per ASCE 61 and non-linear soil-structure interaction analysis. Craig is very experienced with waterfront design codes and standards, including Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC), American Institute of Steel Construction, ACI, ASCE, Application Programming Interface, and California Building Code. In addition to being an experienced contract manager, Craig specializes in seismic evaluation, retrofit and design of marine terminals and facilities. He has conducted several extensive site inspections and field surveys to determine the above and below water condition of marine structures. He is an excellent communicator with an ability to present technical information in a manner that the public and non-technical listeners can understand. He has also managed local government projects that have required extensive public meetings and presentations to local commissions, councils and boards. Chris’ success on these projects stems from an organized and comprehensive startup of the projects including project controls that includes thorough concept development and communicating project information to the team in a timely manner as design progresses to construction bid documents.
California State University Maritime Academy –
Pier Replacement & Boat Basin Expansion
Design Manager
Dutra Construction | Vallejo, CA | 2023 - Ongoing
T 415.350.8337 | E [email protected]
California State University Maritime Academy is
replacing its 37-year-old campus centerpiece, the
Golden Bear Training Ship, with a new National Security Multi-Mission Vessel. This project will enable mooring of the larger National Security Multi-Mission Vessel at the Craig Lewis | Project Director
T 415.350.8337 | E [email protected] www.ghd.com
campus pier and must be completed by October 2026,
when the new vessel is delivered. The project has six
main components: expansion of the facility,
strengthening of the existing causeway trestle, complete replacement of the pier, addition of new mooring
dolphins, upgrades to the small vessel boat basin,
dredging, expansion of the marine logistics yard; utility upgrades; demolition and replacement of the existing
breakwater; and demolition of two modular buildings.
Serving as Design Manager along with leading the multidisciplinary design team through schematic and detailed design phase of the project.
Port of San Francisco As-Needed Engineering
Services Contract
Marine Structural Engineer
Port of San Francisco | San Francisco, CA | 2006 -
Ongoing
Served as Marine Structural Engineer for several asneeded task orders, including Structural Assessment of Port Mooring Bollards, Pier 50 Valley Substructure
Repair, and Pier 43.5 Promenade Conceptual Design.
Repair Bulkheads 1, 2, and 3
Project Manager, Structural Lead
Naval Amphibious Base Coronado | San Diego, CA
Served as Project Manager and Structural Engineer for
investigation and design of replacement of the failing
Bulkhead 1 and repairs to existing concrete Bulkheads 2 and 3 to prevent additional deterioration. As Structural Lead, developed designs for the new steel sheet pile
bulkhead and concrete cap including solution for portion of Bulkhead 1 that passes under existing travel lift piers.
Provided input for cost estimating and construction
phasing.
Structural Condition Assessment, Municipal
Pier at Aquatic Park
Project Manager
San Francisco Department of Public Works | San
Francisco, CA
Served as Project Manager for the work which consisted
of a visual above and below water observations, material testing, structural condition assessment and preparation of conceptual repair and seismic retrofit designs as part of a conditional evaluation of historical Municipal Pier in San Francisco. The existing deteriorating condition of
the pier structure was addressed along with an
investigation of the potential cause of the damage.
Conceptual damage repairs were developed, and a
seismic assessment was performed. Directed the
production of the budgetary-level estimates of the
construction cost for the damage repairs required were
developed along with the seismic retrofit alternatives.
Berkeley Municipal Pier and Ferry Terminal
Feasibility Study
Project Manager
City of Berkeley | Berkeley, CA | 2016-2022
Served as Project Manager for inspection, condition
assessment and structural evaluation of a 3,000 LF
public pier located at the Berkeley shoreline. The work included seismic assessment and development of repair,
retrofit and replacement alternatives. A feasibility study was completed for a conceptual passenger ferry facility as part of the pier replacement project. Concept designs were developed using various pier alignment and ferry
float configurations in addition to a wave protection
structure.
Cargo Terminal 1 Replacement
Project Manager/Engineer of Record
Port of Alaska | Anchorage, AK | 2023 - Ongoing
Served as Project Manager for the design team of the
$650 million Cargo Terminal 1 Replacement at the Port
of Alaska. The terminal is located in an extreme seismic region with poor subsurface conditions and represents a critical infrastructure component for goods movement
into the state of Alaska. The Terminal 1 Replacement
project consists of an 850 LF pile-supported wharf with two access trestles. The project is extremely complex,
requiring coordination of multi-discipline teams. As
Project Manager, led the design team with all project
controls, staff and budget management, and client and
subconsultant management.
Brannan Street Wharf Project
Project Manager
Port of San Francisco | San Francisco, CA | 6/2012-
10/2015 | $1,830,000
As Project Manager, led the structural assessment and
visual condition surveys of existing Pier 36 and marginal wharf structures, along with conceptual engineering
design of structural alternatives for new and retrofitted wharf and seawall. Led development of seismic design
criteria for new structures and performance based
seismic analysis and design of new wharf pile and deck
structure. Project included structural analysis and
conceptual design of wharf structure components for
operational and code prescribed seismic loads, quantity take offs and cost estimates, and design drawings and
specifications.
Satish Chilka | Project Manager/Plans & Specifications
T 925.849.1019 | E [email protected] www.ghd.com
Satish Chilka PE
Project Manager/Plans & Specifications
Location
Concord, CA
Experience
17 years
Qualifications/Accreditations
– MS, Civil Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA – BS, Civil Engineering, University of Mumbai, India
– Civil Engineer, CA #80047
– Structural Engineer, TX #145120
Key technical skills
– Structural Engineering, Seismic Design (ASCE 61),
Piers & Wharves, Floating Structures, Structural
Assessment (ASCE Manual of Practice 130)
Memberships
– American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
Relevant experience summary
With 17 years of structural engineering, design and project management experience, Satish Chilka has specialized knowledge in planning, design, analysis, construction document preparation, quality control review, and construction support services for waterfront structures. His experience includes design and analysis of piers & wharves, seawalls, bulkheads, assessment and rehabilitating existing structures, design of floating access ramps and. gangways. Other project experience includes multiple ferry terminals including the landing float and ferry vessels, mooring and berthing analyses, design of floating steel gates for dry docks, and offshore wind energy projects.
Pacifica Municipal Pier Condition Assessment
Project Manager
City of Pacifica | Pacifica, CA | 2023
The Municipal Pier is a widely popular landmark in the
City of Pacifica. The pier is a pile supported prestressed concrete box girder structure originally designed to
support an outfall extending from Beach Boulevard to
the ocean. Currently the pier is used as a fishing pier by the local community and visitors. In the past, the
concrete facing and backfill in the abutment were
undermined, allowing seawater on Beach Boulevard
during high tides and storm conditions.
Assisting the City with condition assessment of the pier and the shoreside abutment which includes engaging
drilling contractors to strategically drill through the abutment to map potential voids, diving subcontractor to perform a Level 1 inspection of all the piles and a drone inspection of the pier deck that is not accessible from top-side.
Port of San Francisco Multiple Task Orders
Project Manager
Port of San Francisco | San Francisco, CA | 2022-
2025
GHD as the leading consultant on a Joint Venture (JV)
team holds one of the multi-disciplinary As-Needing
Engineering Service On-call contract with Port of San
Francisco. Serving as Project Manager overseeing
multiple task orders issued by the Port covering a range of work from condition assessment of dry docks,
foundation of shed buildings, retrofit of roof structures, construction management etc. Leading regular
coordination with the Port Project Manager, coordination with various disciplines. Subconsultants and providing
oversight of the deliverables.
Pacifica Municipal Pier Condition Assessment
Project Manager
City of Pacifica | Pacifica, CA | 2024
The Municipal Pier is a widely popular landmark in the
City of Pacifica. The pier is a pile supported prestressed Satish Chilka | Project Manager/Plans & Specifications
T 925.849.1019 | E [email protected] www.ghd.com
concrete box girder structure originally designed to
support an outfall extending from Beach Boulevard to
the ocean. Currently the pier is used as a fishing pier by the local community and visitors. In the past, the
concrete facing and backfill in the abutment were
undermined, allowing seawater on Beach Boulevard
during high tides and storm conditions. Assisting the City with post-storm event condition assessment of the pier
which includes visual observation of the pier deck,
handrails, and piles. Images were captured using a
drone for the entire structure to expedite the condition assessment and ensure safety of the personnel.
California State University Maritime Academy –
Design-Build
Project Manager, Lead Design Engineer
Dutra Construction | Vallejo, CA | 2024-2025
California State University Maritime Academy is
replacing it’s 37-year-old campus centerpiece, the
Golden Bear Training Ship, with a new National Security Multi-Mission Vessel (NSMV). This project will enable
mooring of the larger NSMV vessel at the campus pier
and must be completed by October 2026, when the new
vessel is delivered. The project has six main
components: expansion of the facility, strengthening of the existing causeway trestle, complete replacement of
the pier, addition of new mooring dolphins, upgrades to the small vessel boat basin, dredging, expansion of the marine logistics yard; utility upgrades; demolition and replacement of the existing breakwater; and demolition
of two modular buildings. Serving as Project Manager
and leading the multi-disciplinary design team through
schematic and detailed design phase of the project.
C&H Waterfront Facility Repairs
Project Manager, Lead Structural Engineer
C&H Sugar Refinery | Crockett, CA | 2020-2023
The C&H Sugar facility is a historically significant wharf structure near San Francisco that has continued
operations since 1906. Under current ownership, the
facility processes around 700,000 tons of sugar
annually. The facility consists of a mixed-use dock that allows for berthing of large vessels, hopper system for loading/unloading products and several buildings that
are part of the processing operations. The site structural assessment performed in 2018 determined that several
piles and under-deck improvements were needed.
The scope of work includes design of in-place repairs for the pier structure – deck, steel/concrete/timber piles, mooring bollard connections to deck, and coordinated
the environmental assessment, and permit applications
in-house. Several piles were repaired using grouted
fiberglass reinforced plastic jackets in lieu of
replacement to avoid interruption of operations and
impacting the sugar supply chain. Also leading
construction management & support services for the
ongoing repairs at the facility.
Port of Alaska Modernization Program
Lead Structural Engineer
Municipality of Anchorage
| Anchorage, AK | 2023-2024
As part of the Port Modernization Program, Port of
Alaska contracted GHD-WSP JV to develop the detailed
design and phasing plans to replace the existing pier.
The new pier will be located further offshore than the
existing pier to take advantage of the deeper water. Led GHD's structural team in designing a complex fender
and large diameter monopile mooring dolphin.
Implemented strategies to ensure structures could
withstand the energy from large vessel berthing,
extreme weather conditions, including ice floes and
account for appropriate construction tolerances to build in narrow work windows.
Rapid Structural Assessments
Project Manager, Lead Engineer
Port of San Francisco | San Francisco, CA | 2023-
2024
The scope of a typical Rapid Structural Assessment is a limited visual assessment of a pier and/or wharf
substructure, performed to observe general structural
conditions and identify major structural damage that
could lead to collapse or another threat to safety.
Generally, no destructive investigation, structural
analysis, or calculations to be performed. Served as
Lead Engineer for a group of four engineers to perform
condition assessment from a work boat to review the
condition and damages on several piers assigned to
GHD-Structus JV team as part of the As-Needed
Engineering Services Contract.
Pier 22.5 North Apron Strengthening and
Repairs
Lead Structural Engineer
San Francisco Department of Public Works | San
Francisco, CA | 2019-2020
Pier 22.5 is being strengthened and repaired as part of the larger project that will house the first floating Fire Station building in San Francisco. As Lead Structural
Engineer, evaluated the existing condition of the pier
structure – timber deck frame supported by concrete
piles and provided design improvements to strengthen
the deck to be utilized for parking fire trucks. Also
responsible for engineering support during construction – reviewing shop drawings, responding to RFIs.
Stephanie Gould | Deputy Project Manager
T 707.267.2276 | E [email protected] www.ghd.com
Stephanie Gould PE
Deputy Project Manager
Location
Eureka, CA
Experience
17 years
Qualifications/Accreditations
– BS, Civil Engineering, California State University, Chico, CA – Civil Engineer, CA #86103
Key technical skills
– Project Management, Bridge/Culvert Design, Fish
Passage Structures, Retaining Walls, Reinforced
Concrete Structures, and Transportation Infrastructure
Relevant experience summary
Stephanie Gould is a structural engineer and project manager with 17 years of experience in structural design, transportation infrastructure, and water resources engineering. She specializes in bridges, retaining walls, culverts, and fish passage structures, serving as Engineer of Record and Project Manager on complex transportation and site development projects. Stephanie also brings experience in ports and marine infrastructure. Her work integrates geotechnical, grading, and hydraulic design to support resilient infrastructure. She has led multidisciplinary teams through design, budgeting, and coordination while ensuring regulatory compliance. Stephanie collaborates with municipalities, agencies, and private stakeholders to deliver sustainable, long-lasting solutions. Her ability to manage large-scale bridge and wall projects, navigate permitting, and coordinate diverse teams makes her a trusted leader in civil infrastructure delivery.
Butte Creek Fish Barrier Removal Project
Project Manager
Wiyot Tribe | Dinsmore, CA
Project Manager for a new vehicular bridge crossing
over Butte Creek, replacing undersized culverts to
restore natural fish passage and improve ecological
connectivity. Led a multidisciplinary team of bridge, civil, environmental, and hydraulic engineers through all
phases. Oversaw technical deliverables, stakeholder
engagement, and regulatory compliance. Ongoing.
Repair of Basilone Road
Lead Structural Engineer
NAVFAC | Oceanside, CA
EOR for the structural design of a 2,500-foot-long, 35- foot-tall anchored secant pile retaining wall and
associated drainage headwalls. Delivered structural
calculations, drawings, a basis of design report, and
specifications. Led a multidisciplinary team to produce high-quality deliverables aligned with client expectations.
Port of Alaska Terminal 1 Improvements
Structural Engineer
Port of Alaska | Anchorage, AK
Led the engineering design of two abutments and
approach slabs for a port vehicular trestle system.
Worked closely with Joint Venture partners and other
disciplines to develop plans/specs for this large-scale project.
Port of Palau and Port of Yap
Design Manager
NAVAFC | Palau and Yap Islands
Coordinated large-scale port improvement projects for
NAVFAC. Worked closely with the Project Manager,
joint-venture partner COWI, and discipline leads to
deliver complete plans and specifications. Tracked
budgets, schedules, deliverables, and client
communications to keep a large, multidisciplinary project team aligned and on track.
Stephanie Gould | Deputy Project Manager
T 707.267.2276 | E [email protected] www.ghd.com
Willits Rail-to-Trail
Lead Structural Engineer
City of Willits | Willits, CA
Served as EOR for the structural design of three
pedestrian bridge abutments supported on precast
concrete piles, along with wingwalls and several earth
retaining structures. Managed a team of engineers led
drafting plans, writing specifications, and performing
structural calculations.
River Oaks Regional Stormwater Project
Lead Structural Engineer
City of San Jose Department of Public Works | San
Jose, CA
Served as EOR for the structural design of a cast-inplace concrete forebay, retaining walls, an elevated boardwalk supported on precast piles, and concrete well retrofits. Responsibilities included performing structural calculations, drafting plans, and preparing related
specifications.
College of the Redwoods PE Complex
Lead Structural Engineer
College of the Redwoods | Eureka, CA
Provided structural design for a 26-foot-tall soldier pile retaining wall with ground anchors and a CMU cantilever wall. Performed structural calculations using Shoring
Suite and Enercalc, drafted in AutoCAD/Civil 3D, and
wrote specs.
30th Street Commons Improvement Plan
Project Engineer
City of Arcata | Arcata, CA
Provided structural design for cast-in-place reinforced concrete abutments and wingwalls for a new pedestrian
bridge over Janes Creek in Arcata, CA. Specified the
bridge superstructure type and coordinated with
suppliers to design appropriate footings. Drafted plans in AutoCAD/Civil 3D, calculated, and prepared technical
specifications.
Storm Damage Repairs Briceland Thorne Road
at PM 3.08
Project Engineer
County of Humboldt Department of Public Works |
Eureka, CA
Provided structural design of 22-foot-tall soldier pile retaining wall with ground anchors. Performed structural calculations using Shoring Suite and Enercalc software, drafted using AutoCAD/Civil 3D, and wrote
specifications.
Storm Damage Repairs Mattole Road at PM
13.67 Project Engineer
County of Humboldt Department of Public Works |
Eureka, CA
Provided structural design for a soldier pile retaining wall with anchor piles and precast concrete lagging.
Performed structural calculations using Shoring Suite
and Enercalc, drafted in AutoCAD/Civil 3D, and
prepared specifications.
Storm Damage Repairs Mattole Road at PM
42.76 Project Engineer
County of Humboldt Department of Public Works |
Eureka, CA
Provided structural design for a 20-foot-tall welded wire MSE retaining wall used as a permanent, trafficsupporting structure for a county road. Performed external stability, internal pullout, and rupture
calculations using MSEW software. Drafted plans in
AutoCAD/Civil 3D and prepared technical specifications.
Kernen Construction Bridges
Project Engineer/Manager
County of Humboldt | Humboldt County, CA
Provided structural design and construction observation for several single-lane bridges using steel wide-flange girders and precast concrete decks fabricated by Kernen Construction. Several projects included stream
crossings with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s
Natural Resources Conservation Service.
Eureka Waterfront Trail Project, Phases A and C
Project Engineer
City of Eureka | Eureka, CA
Designed premanufactured aluminium bridge abutments
and wingwalls for several bridges and boardwalks
spanning 20 to 120 feet. The boardwalk was supported
on helical piles. Designed reinforced concrete footings, wingwalls, and steel pile caps. Developed structural
plans, specifications, and cost estimates.
Adam Bogage | QA/QC
www.ghd.com
Adam Bogage PE
QA/QC
Location
San Diego, CA
Experience
26 years
Qualifications/Accreditations
– MS, Structural Engineering, University of California, San Diego, CA – BS, Structural Engineering, University of California, San Diego, CA – Civil Engineer, CA #76760
– ADCI Commercial Diver, SSA Air Diver #58723
Key technical skills
– Project Management, Waterfront Structural
Engineering
– Seismic Design, Structural Inspections
Memberships
– American Society of Civil Engineers
– Structural Engineers Association of California
Relevant experience summary
Adam Bogage is a project manager specializing in seismic and marine engineering. He is experienced in inspection and rehabilitation of waterfront structures, including piers, wharves, bulkheads, and marinas. He also holds experience with structural analysis, new design, design of repairs; field investigations; report preparation; and development of construction documents, as well as follow-on construction support services for various structural systems and projects.
Ocean Beach Pier Investigation
Project Manager
City of San Diego | San Diego, CA | 2018
Served as Project Manager responsible for the condition assessment and report of the cast-in-place and
prestressed concrete pier. Responsible for inspection,
condition assessment reports, development of design
alternatives for repair versus replacement, report writing, cost estimates, public outreach, and coordinating with
subconsultants.
Cal Poly Pier Inspection and Structural
Assessment
Engineer/Diver
Cal Poly State University | San Luis Obispo, CA |
2023
Built in 1984 by Unocal Corporation to facilitate oil
transport on the US West Coast, the Cal Poly Pier now
operates as a marine research facility. Since 2001, Cal Poly has been converting the pier from a former
industrial facility into a functioning research station.
Services included above and below water inspections,
structural analysis, and repair design.
T 619.888.3871 | E [email protected]
Replace Pier 12
Project Engineer/Diver
NAVFAC | Naval Base San Diego, CA | 2015
Construction of a new 1,500-foot concrete pile supported concrete berthing/maintenance pier after demolition of
existing pier, including the removal of 567 concrete piles and fender system. Served as Project Engineer/Diver
conducting underwater and above water construction
inspections.
Berth Lima Conversion
Engineer
NAVFAC | Naval Base Coronado, San Diego, CA |
2008
Served as an engineer involved in the design of a
structural steel guard tower and concrete foundation for Berth Lima. Prepared the Engineering Assessment
Report for the conversion of Berth Lima at the quay wall at North Island to a homeport for a nuclear-powered
aircraft carrier. In addition to preparing the concept
design for the fendering and structural modifications, the firm had several support buildings in the project scope.
Adam Bogage | QA/QC
T 619.888.3871 | E [email protected] www.ghd.com
Military Ocean Terminal (Motco Pier 2)
Project Engineer
US Army Corps of Engineers | Concord, CA | 2012
Performed seismic analysis for a new concrete pile
supported pier structure. The munitions loading pier is designed to carry container transport vehicles as well as munitions vehicles. Responsible for analysis using SAP
for kinematic and inertia forces and design of piles, pile hinges, and pile connections. The pier is located in a
high seismic region with poor soils and conforms to
Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) 4-152-01 and Marine Oil Terminal Engineering and Maintenance Standards
(MOTEMS) Chapter 31F.
B Street Pier Bulkhead Alternatives
Project Manager
Port of San Diego | San Diego, CA | 2020
Served as Project Manager for bulkhead alternative
study for the installation of a bulkhead in front of existing marginal wharf, followed by demolition and removal of
the wharf piling and deck. Three configurations of the
bulkhead alternative were identified and investigated for the Port of San Diego.
Emergency Wharf Repair at North Embarcadero
Engineer/Diver
Port of San Diego | San Diego, CA | 2016
After a cruise ship impacted the bulkhead, the project
retained a repair construction contractor, performed
rapid above/below water inspection, developed repair
plans/specifications, and provided construction services.
The inspection and repair plans/specifications were
done in conjunction with demolition of the structure
damage.
Port Pavilion and Broadway Pier
Marine Engineer
Port of San Diego | San Diego, CA | 2012
Participated in a variety of projects ranging from
underwater inspection and testing; structural load
capacity studies; pier rehabilitation; reconfiguration of mooring hardware for cold iron berthing; and structural design of the terminal building. As a marine engineer,
participated in the structural engineering services related to the project including an above-water inspection for the purpose of documenting the existing structure prior to
seismic retrofit. The Broadway Pier is a reinforced
concrete pile-supported structure built in 1913. The
seismic retrofit consists of isolation bearings at four separate locations.
MOTEMS Audit for Chevron Richmond Long
Wharf
Engineer Diver
Chevron | Richmond, CA
Performed above and below water inspection to assist
with MOTEMS audit. The work involved inspecting
concrete and steel piles, and concrete deck.
Pier 5 at Commander, Fleet Activities Yokosuka
Deputy Project Manager
NAVFAC | Yokosuka, Japan | 2020
Design of a fixed, single-deck pile-supported pier to
replace an existing floating pier which could no longer support crane operations or ship repair functions. The
design of the 672-foot pier included a concrete deck,
utility trenches, steel pile foundations, fender system, mooring hardware, access ramp, utility support crossing, cathodic protection system, and grounding system.
Fuel Pier Replacement
Lead Structural Designer
NAVFAC | Naval Base Point Loma | 2010
Served as Lead Structural Designer for the double deck
T-shaped fuel pier with cast-in-place decks and steel
pipe piles. Responsible for structural analysis,
development of details, plans and specifications. Project (P-151) included coordinating plans, specifications,
inspections, and construction services. Coordinated dive team quality assurance underwater inspections for the
new pier.
– Structural Testing and Analysis of a Non-Traditional
Pier
– Seismic Improvements and Upgrade of Uniform and
Tango Wharves Located on US Naval Base Guam
– Double-Decked Piers: A New Reality for West Coast
Marine Oil Terminals
Andrew Cronin | Plans & Specifications
www.ghd.com
Andrew Cronin PE, SSAD
Plans & Specifications
Location
Honolulu, HI
Experience
15 years
Qualifications/Accreditations
– MS, Civil Engineering, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY – BS, Civil Engineering, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY – Civil Engineer, CA #97104, NY #089647, TX #139493, OR #99151, SC #38095 – Certified Surface-Supplied Air Diver #46510, Association of Diving Contractors International Key technical skills
– Project Management
– Structural Engineering
– Underwater Inspection
Relevant experience summary
Andrew Cronin is a seasoned engineering professional with over 15 years of experience in structural engineering, project management, and underwater inspection. He excels in delivering comprehensive solutions for waterfront facilities, including design, inspection, and rehabilitation. His expertise encompasses a wide range of structures, such as piers, wharves, bulkheads, seawalls, jetties, dolphins, bridges, and other marine infrastructures. As an Association of Diving Contractors International-Certified Surface-Supplied Air Diver, he possesses the technical proficiency and physical fitness to conduct rigorous underwater inspections.
Pier 1 Routine Inspection
Team Leader, Structural Engineer
NYCEDC | Staten Island, NY
Conducted a condition assessment for the New York
Economic Development Commission, performing
underwater, deck underside, and topside inspections.
Performed load limit verification for the entire pier.
Produced a thorough report detailing identified
deficiencies, repair priorities, and structural load
capacity. Inspected over 748 timber piles, pile caps,
concrete deck, and a granite block wall.
Condition Survey of Howland Hook Wharf
Assistant Project Manager, Team Leader
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey | New
York
Routine-level condition survey of a 3,000-ft-long wharf including all piles, underdeck, and topside inspections.
Generated a condition survey report upon completion
of the inspection which documented the type and
severity of deficiencies identified and prioritized the need for repairs. The inspection included over 800 prestressed T 808.466.2419 | E [email protected]
concrete piles, over 600 steel pipe piles, concrete caps, and concrete deck.
Brooklyn Navy Yard Pier J and Brooklyn 25th
Street Pier Technical Due Diligence Engineering
Assessment
Project Manager, Team Leader
(Confidential) | Brooklyn, NY
Tactile inspection of two waterfront facilities specializing in the storage and transfer of fine and coarse aggregate.
Inspection of Brooklyn Navy Yard Pier J included the
above water and underwater inspection of portions of
the 800-foot-long by 150-foot-wide pier constructed of
reinforced concrete deck and 4’-6”-diameter concretefilled steel caissons. Inspection of the 25th Street pier included the above water and underwater inspection of
portions of a 700-foot-long timber-pile-supported lowlevel relieving platform. Information gathered at each site included basic structural configuration and dimensions, the overall condition of the structures, any priority
deficiencies limiting the load rating or tenant operation and observed aggregate stockpile loading. Also assisted in compiling the Technical Due Diligence Assessment
Andrew Cronin | Plans & Specifications
T 808.466.2419 | E [email protected] www.ghd.com
Report, which included observed conditions, a structural condition assessment, quantifying aggregate storage
capacity, and repair cost estimates.
USCG Waterfront Facilities Inspection
Project Manager, Team Leader
USCG | Southeast, USA
Condition Assessment and Structural Analysis for USCG
CEU Miami including the performance of structural
above and underwater inspections and assessments at
19 USCG shore facilities across seven states, Puerto
Rico, and the USVI. Inspections included 111 separate
structures, including fixed and floating piers, wharves, bulkheads, seawalls, jetties, dolphins, travel lift piers, and tramways, consisting of steel, concrete, and timber elements. In addition to the inspections, a Basic
Structural Analysis (BSA) was performed on 18
structures for load limit verification or to establish load limits where load limits were previously unknown. An
assessment report was prepared for each waterfront
facility inspected, including a summary narrative of the inspection, that identified discrepancies and deficiencies of each asset and the recommended timetable for repair, remaining service life, and budgetary construction cost estimates.
Holland Tunnel Piers 9 and 204 Reconstruction
Structural Engineer
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey | Jersey
City, NJ
Structural engineering services were provided for the
planning and phasing of the demolition of an
approximately 160,000‑square‑foot, 80‑year‑old pier
constructed of concrete and timber. The scope included
development of construction documents consisting of
design drawings and technical specifications to support demolition activities. Cost estimates were prepared for the pier demolition, as well as for multiple replacement pier alternatives. Structural analyses were also
performed to evaluate potential vessel collision
scenarios for use in the future design of protective
systems for Pier 9. Existing pier conditions were verified through a comprehensive site investigation to confirm
structural configuration and material conditions.
Port Newark Berth 14 Wharf Reconstruction
Project Structural Engineer
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey | Port
Newark, NJ
Project structural engineer for the design and
construction of a new wharf structure that consisted of a 45-foot-wide, 600-foot-long steel-pipe-pile-supported,
concrete deck, high-level platform. Prepared
construction documents including design drawings and
specifications. Provided design of the foundation for an isolated 125-ton mooring bollard that facilitated shipping operations during the wharf’s demolition and
reconstruction. The mooring bollard was founded on a
5’-6” reinforced concrete pile cap supported by four (4) drilled-in steel pipe piles with rock sockets. Additional involvement with the project included construction
administration services such as submittal reviews and
responding to RFIs as well as attending construction
meetings and site visits.
30th Street Pier Recycling Facility
Project Structural Engineer
SIMS | Brooklyn, NY
Project structural engineer for design and analysis of
wharf structure involving evaluation of crane outrigger loads imposed on the concrete deck, mooring/berthing
loads from the construction barge, and environmental
forces (wind, wave, current, seismic, and ice). Primary resident engineer for construction support services
during development of the materials recovery facility at Sims Metal Management’s 30th Street Pier Facility.
Provided daily oversight of construction of this four-berth barge facility to determine compliance with contract
documents and that construction proceeded in a safe
manner. Oversaw activities such as pipe pile driving;
steel sheet pile driving; the use of vibratory hammers
and impact hammers; the performance of Static Load
Tests and Dynamic Load Tests (PDA); precast concrete
construction; and CIP concrete pours.
Port Newark Berth 14 Wharf Reconstruction
Project Structural Engineer
NYCEDC | Manhattan, NY
Project structural engineer and inspection team member
for the completion of an engineering investigation to
determine the stability of a dilapidated transfer bridge in Slip 5 of the Battery Maritime Building. The investigation included a document review, above and below water
inspection, and an engineering analysis. The objective
was to determine if the transfer bridge could be salvaged or if it had to be demolished before collapsing and
causing further facility damage. All findings, conclusions, and recommendations were compiled in a report which
documented site observations, analyses, and
photographs.
Kristine Gaspar | Environmental Documentation and Permitting T 707.236.1539 | E [email protected] www.ghd.com
Kristine Gaspar
Environmental Documentation and Permitting
Location
Santa Rosa, CA
Experience
30 years
Qualifications/Accreditations
– MPA, Public Administration, California State University, Sonoma, CA – BA, Environmental Studies and Planning, California State University, Sonoma, CA Key technical skills
– California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Compliance
– Resource Agency Permitting
Memberships
– California American Planning Association
– Association of Environmental Professionals
Relevant experience summary
Kristine Gaspar’s experience includes 30 years of environmental planning, CEQA compliance, resource agency permitting, data research and analysis, and grant writing. Kristine has been involved in environmental analysis on a wide variety of projects from private development to infrastructure projects, including residential, schools, recycled water, and park facilities. She is currently the project manager for the Kelly Farm Mitigation Bank Project, and the contract manager for the San Jose Department of Public Works On-Call Environmental Services. Kristine’s projects are often complex, requiring out-side-the-box problem solving, with multiple deadlines.
North Bay Ferry Maintenance Facility IS/MND
and Permitting
Project Planner
Water Emergency Transportation Authority | Vallejo,
CA
Oversaw preparation of the IS/MND and was
responsible for coordinating and securing the resource
agency permitting. The project included the construction of a new docking and maintenance facility within Mare
Island Strait for the WETA. The permitting agencies
involved include Bay Conservation Development
Commission (Major Permit), USACE (Section 10 Permit
and Waiver to build within Federal Channel), San
Francisco RWQCB (Water Quality Certification),
National Marine Fisheries Service (Formal Consultation), California Department of Fish & Game (Streambed
Alteration Agreement and Incidental Take Permit), and
US Coast Guard (approval to build within Federal
Channel). The project also involved coordination with
Navy Base Realignment and Closure.
Richmond Ferry Terminal Permitting
Project Planner
San Francisco Bay Ferry
Richmond, CA
Oversaw the resource agency permitting process and
supporting technical studies for this new Water
Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA) ferry
terminal located at the terminus of Harbour Way S, in
Richmond. Approvals included Dredged Material
Management Office (sediment quality sampling plan and
disposal plan), USACE (Nationwide Permit), San
Francisco RWQCB (401 Certification), and Bay
Conservation Development Commission (Administrative
Permit).
Petaluma Ellis Creek Water Recycling Facility
and River Access Improvements EIR, Addenda
and Permitting
Assistant Project Manager
City of Petaluma | Petaluma, CA
Served as Assistant Project Manager for preparation of
four EIR addenda, an individual USACE 404 permit,
Section 7 consultation for seven endangered species
including California clapper rail, California red-legged Kristine Gaspar | Environmental Documentation and Permitting T 707.236.1539 | E [email protected] www.ghd.com
frog, and salt marsh harvest mouse, State Historic
Preservation Officer (SHPO) submittal, SF RWQCB 401
Certification, State Lands Commission Lease, Fish &
Game Streambed Alteration Agreement, and Bay
Conservation and Development Commission
Regionwide 2 permit. An important part of the scope of
work included incorporation of EIR mitigation measures
and resource agency permit requirements into the
construction specifications to ensure compliance.
Ellis Creek WRF Outfall Demolition and
Relocation
CEQA and Permitting Lead
City of Petaluma | Petaluma, CA
The City’s existing wastewater pipeline and outfall
structure within the marsh and Petaluma River was
aging and in need of replacement. The City decided to
remove the existing outfall and relocate to an adjacent slough. Ms. Gaspar assisted the City with CEQA
coverage and resource agency permitting including US
Army Corps of Engineers, SF Bay RWQCB, CDFW, and
BCDC. Concerns included salinity changes in the slough
and marsh at the new outfall location, and potential
impacts to marsh habitat, salmonids, clapper rail, black rail, and salt marsh harvest mouse.
Multiple Subsea Fiber Optic Cable Projects
Project Manager
Private Client, Multiple Regions in the Pacific
Serving as Project Manager for four subsea cable
projects landing in a variety of geographic areas within the United States and its territories. Two have landed
and two are pending. To-date, all permits have been
obtained on time and within budget. Permits obtained
include US Army Corps of Engineers NWP 57; Section 7
and Essential Fish Habitat Consultations with US
National Marine Fisheries Service; Section 7
Consultation with US Fish & Wildlife Service; Section
401 Water Quality Certification or Pre-authorization from applicable local agencies implementing the US EPA
regulations; various local approvals; and coordination on behalf of Purchaser for submerged land leases, right of ways, and crossing US Department of Defense
regulated waters.
County of Marin Department of Public Works
Environmental On-Call
Project Manager, Contract Manager
County of Marin | Marin County, CA
GHD has had an environmental services on-call with
County of Marin since 2018. To-date we have executed
9 individual projects for environmental review of various road maintenance projects funded through Caltrans and
FEMA. Documentation has included preparation of
Minimal Impact NES Reports, and we are currently
assisting with cultural review in support of Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) funding for 9
emergency road-repair projects where damage resulted
from the 2023 storm events.
County of Marin Department of Public Works
On-Call Environmental Emergency Bio Review
Project Manager, Contract Manager
County of Marin | Marin County, CA
GHD assisted with permitting and biological review for 6 emergency road projects funded through FEMA, after
the 2022/2023 winter storms. Repairs consisted of
shoring slip outs, installation of pier walls and rip rap, and repair to stormwater facilities. Some project sites were adjacent to waterbodies, which required additional care through design and avoidance measures.
Mendocino Unified School District Water
System Reconstruction
Quality Control Reviewer
Mendocino Unified School District | Mendocino
County, CA
Served as the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
and CEQA Project Manager for the review for this water
system reconstruction project in unincorporated
Mendocino County. The project includes demolition of
existing District water storage tanks and construction of replacement tanks, new potable groundwater wells,
construction of new water treatment facilities, and
reconstruction of existing on-site utilities, access roads, and drainages. The GHD team prepared the NEPA and
CEQA documentation for the project, including biological and cultural resources studies, a CEQA IS/MND, and
State Water Resources Control Board State Revolving
Fund CEQA-plus documentation.
East D Street Improvements Permitting Memo
Project Planner
City of Petaluma | Petaluma, CA
Served as Project Planner responsible for preparing a
technical memorandum on the resource permitting
requirements for the project which included USACE
Section 404 Permit, San Francisco Bay RWQCB Section
401 Water Quality Certification, California Department of Fish & Game Section 1602 Lake and Streambed
Alteration Agreement, and California State Lands
Commission lease application. The project included
extending utilities beneath the Petaluma River.
Steve Ferrero | Cost Estimating
T 415.296.2043 | E [email protected] www.ghd.com
Steve Ferrero PE
Cost Estimating
Location
San Francisco, CA
Experience
30 years
Qualifications/Accreditations
– BS, Civil Engineering, California State University, Chico, CA – Certificate, Advanced Project Management, Stanford University (SCPM) – Civil Engineer, CA #52267
Key technical skills
– Construction Cost Engineering
– Team Leadership
– Constructability Reviews
– Project Management
Memberships
– Community Member, San Francisco Vision Zero Task
Force
Relevant experience summary
Steve Ferrero has more than 30 years of broad experience in all in construction planning and management, project management and design. He has considerable expertise in cost engineering, estimation and cost management, project delivery and scheduling of infrastructure projects. Project types include heavy civil, such as roads, airports and bridges and buildings including California hospitals, schools, and colleges. Steve also specializes in condition assessment or building and properties in the private sector.
Port Of San Francisco Pier 50 Retrofit &
Replacement Building
Senior Cost Consultant
Port of San Francisco | San Francisco, CA | $100
million
Served as Senior Cost Consultant responsible for cost
engineering. The retrofitted wharf will accommodate
both vessels and warehouses.
Port Of Oakland Wharves 24-26 Modernization
Senior Cost Consultant
Port of Oakland | Oakland, CA | $100 million
Lead Cost Engineer for substantial proposed
improvement alternatives including seismic upgrades.
Port of Alaska Terminal 1 Replacement
Senior Cost Consultant
Port of Alaska | Anchorage, AK | $530 million
Cost reviewer and drawing reviewer for replacement
Terminal 1 concrete wharf. The new wharf will
accommodate large commercial and military vessels.
NAVFAC Yap & Palau Wharf Modernizations
Senior Cost Consultant
NAVFAC | Yap & Palau Islands | $530 million
Served as a cost and design reviewer for schematic
stage designs of wharf replacements and additions,
dredging and roadwork. The new wharf will
accommodate large commercial and military vessels.
The project includes constructability planning for
substantial remote work.
San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
(SFPUC) Climate Change Adaptation-Seawall
Lead Cost Estimator
SFPUC | San Francisco, CA | $130 million
This project improves a 3,000-foot stretch of Ocean
Beach in San Francisco from erosion. The project
includes a substantial Seawall structure intended to
protect large adjacent wastewater infrastructure. The
Steve Ferrero | Cost Estimating
T 415.296.2043 | E [email protected] www.ghd.com
project includes new roadways, bikeway and sidewalks,
stormwater collection-retention, a new public plaza and replacement restrooms.
Port of Hueneme Coastal and Hydrologic
Infrastructure
Lead Cost Estimator
Port of Hueneme | Oxnard, CA | $40 million
This project improves a Coastal Resilience and
upgrades to stormwater infrastructure. The proposed
works include a 3,000-foot ocean-facing seawall, flood
barriers, building relocation, new pump station raising utilities, and raising port areas.
SFPUC West Side Pump Station
Cost Estimator
SFPUC | San Francisco, CA | $45 million
Civil and structural estimates for generational upgrade of San Francisco Westside Pump Station. Project includes
deep shaft and secant pile construction, new knife gate in deep shaft, new concrete electrical building, large and lengthy new duct banks, underground piping, new
structural concrete improvements in existing building,
replacement mechanical trash racks and replacement
pumps. Protection of existing large wastewater trunk line under the road and considerable street and sidewalk
work.
Shoreline Levee Upgrades, Storm Drain and
Pump Station Replacement
Lead Cost Estimator
City of Mountain View | Mountain View, CA | $25
million
Construction estimates for multiple projects including
levees, shoreline culverts, large diameter storm drains, bike trail and bio-basins.
Coyote Creek Flood Control Projects
Lead Cost Engineer
Valley Water | Santa Clara County, CA | $120 million
The projects include multiple stages of sheet pile and
concrete flood walls at Coyote Creek.
Shoreline Protection and Storm Drainage
Senior Cost Consultant
City of Mountain View | Mountain View, CA | $20
million
Cost engineering for schematic stage through
construction drawings for upgraded levees, large
culverts, shoreline trail upgrade and large diameter
drainage and pump station upgrades at Ponds A1 and
A2W.
San Francisco Oakland Bay Bridge East Span
Lead Cost Estimator
Bay Area Toll Authority | San Francisco, CA;
Oakland, CA | $7 billion
Managed multiple teams of cost engineers to prepare
detailed estimates and summaries of planned and
under-construction projects which together formed the
new east span. Designs ranged from conceptual phase
to 100% designed and under construction.
Prepared by:
Satish Chilka, PE
Project Manager
925.849.1019
[email protected]
Jeremy Svehla, PE
Business Group Leader
707.267.2246
[email protected]
EXHIBIT B
COMPENSATION
Pacifica Pier
Rehabilitation
Project
Price Proposal
City of Pacifica March 6, 2026
GHD Reference: 12690772
Pacifica Pier Rehabilitation Project
12690772
Using FAR rates for Federal Grant compliance
Description Project
Director QA/QC Project Manager
Deputy Project
Manager
Lead
Structural
Engineer
Lead Env /
Permits Env / Permit Wildlife Biologist
Project
Engineer CAD Stakeholder Engagement
Exhibits /
Rendering
Federal
Financial
Reporting
Scheduler Cost QC GIS Total Hours Labor Total
Cooke
Construction
Services
New Age
Aerial
Treanor Subs Markup
Total
Subcontractors
Estimated
Project Total
Craig
Lewis Adam Bogage Satish Chilka Stephanie Gould
Andrew
Cronin
Kristine
Gaspar
Sarah
Bender
Miles
Hartnett
Russo
Hernandez/
Madeline
Mueller
Amanda
Martinez Yosef Yip Kristopher Stith
Victoria
Landry
Chesbro
Doug
Guidry
Steve
Ferrero
Evan
Thompson
$366 $321 $308 $202 $301 $247 $201 $141 $137 $105 $258 $158 $161 $147 $264 $107 Task1 Project Management & Coordination 16 0 92 80 0 32 16 0 0 0 0 0 80 40 0 0 356 $80,293 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $80,293 Task2 Stakeholder & Public Engagement 0 0 4 32 8 16 12 0 0 16 40 40 0 0 0 0 168 $34,814 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $34,814 Task3 Technical Studies & Supporting Analyses 0 0 14 0 24 22 32 56 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 16 180 $34,742 $0 $0 $20,000 $2,000 $22,000 $56,742 Task4 Field Assessment & Data Verification 0 0 24 0 40 0 0 0 64 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 128 $28,221 $0 $63,000 $0 $6,300 $69,300 $97,521 Task5 Rehabilitation Design Development 0 0 6 0 56 0 0 0 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 122 $26,941 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $26,941 Task6 Permitting Support 0 0 2 0 0 24 28 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 78 $14,711 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $14,711 Task7 Environmental Clearance 0 0 0 0 0 32 72 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 130 $25,853 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,853 Task8 Plans, Specification, and Cost Estimate (PS&E) 0 88 80 0 156 16 0 0 320 336 0 0 0 0 72 0 1068 $202,111 $39,035 $0 $0 $3,904 $42,939 $245,049 Task9 Bid Phase Support 0 4 20 0 32 0 0 0 24 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 96 $22,066 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $22,066 Task10 Construction Phase Support 0 4 16 32 64 0 0 0 104 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 280 $52,543 0 0 0 $0 $0 $52,543 Total Labor Hours 16 96 258 144 380 142 160 76 572 468 40 40 80 40 72 22 2606 $522,295 $39,035 $63,000 $20,000 $12,204 $134,239 $656,533 x Estimated Project Total $5,853 $30,780 $79,580 $29,128 $114,479 $35,144 $32,136 $10,745 $78,358 $49,337 $10,329 $6,312 $12,850 $5,896 $19,005 $2,362 2606 $522,295 $39,035 $63,000 $20,000 $12,204 $134,239 $656,533