Agenda packet — Pleasanton City Council, April 16, 2024 (part 3 of 5)

MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE REPORT 2023

Equipment Name: Penn Arms 37mm Launcher
Quan/ty Owned/Sought: 2 owned Lifespan: Approximately 15 years Equipment Capabili/es: Launches 37mm projec'les, can be loaded with six round and with various types of projec'les.

Manufacturer Product Descrip/on: The Model L637-1 Launcher is a mul'-shot, spring-advance magazine drum launcher with a six-shot capacity, 6-inch cylinder and smooth barrel. It is designed to deliver less lethal muni'ons.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: The 37mm launchers can be used as a less-than-lethal impact device but are most commonly used as a chemical agent delivery system. They can deliver chemical agents from a safe distance. The launchers may only be deployed by oﬃcers who have been trained on their use.

Use for chemical agent deployment must comply with Department Policy. The devices are currently restricted to use by members of the SWAT Team.

Fiscal Impacts: The ini'al purchases of the launchers were in 2000 and purchase records are not available.

Annual Maintenance: None
Personnel Cost: N/A. The SWAT team no longer u'lizes the 37mm launchers Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All use of force applica'ons are governed by state law (including Penal Code sec'on 13652) and Pleasanton PD Policy Sec'ons 300 and 308.

Training Required: Oﬃcers must be trained on use of the launchers by a cer'ﬁed instructor.

Other Notes: None.
29

Page 277 of 559 ends

MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE REPORT 2023

Distrac>on Devices
Equipment Name: Combined Tac'cal Systems Model 7290 Single Flash Bang Quan/ty Owned/Sought: Up to 50 owned Lifespan: Approximately 5 years Equipment Capabili/es: Causes a noise and ﬂash distrac'on.

Manufacturer Product Descrip/on: The CTS 7290 is the standard for diversionary devices. It produces a 165-180db and 6-8 million candelas of light output. The patented design of the 7290, incorporates a por'ng system that eliminates movement of the body at detona'on even if the top or boiom of the device should be in contact with a hard surface, in addi'on, internal adjustments have greatly reduced smoke output
Purpose/Authorized Uses: To provide a distrac'on during high-risk events such as forcibly entering a structure during a high-risk apprehension.

Fiscal Impacts: The cost of the devices is $51 plus tax and shipping and are ordered in cases of 12.

Annual Maintenance: $1,224, general fund
Personnel Cost: Approximately $7,000. This cost reﬂects a year of required training for personnel assigned to the SWAT Team.

Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: ATF regula'ons govern the use and storage of the devices.

Their use is currently limited to trained members of the SWAT Team or former members who have been trained on their use. Following best prac'ces, these are deployed to exterior loca'ons where the deployment area is visible by the oﬃcer. Only under extremely exigent circumstances would they be used in an interior sepng.

Training Required: Only oﬃcers who have received training from a cer'ﬁed instructor may use the devices. SWAT Team members receive refresher training at least annually.

Other Notes: None.
30

Page 278 of 559 ends

MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE REPORT 2023
Distrac>on Devices
Equipment Name: Combined Tac'cal Systems Model 7290M Single Flash Bang Quan/ty Owned/Sought: Up to 50 owned Lifespan: Approximately 5 years Equipment Capabili/es: Causes a noise and ﬂash distrac'on.

Manufacturer Product Descrip/on: The CTS 7290M is a smaller and lighter version of the 7290 CTS flash-bang. It is 30% lighter but still has the 180db output and produces 6-8 million candela of light.

The patented design of the 7290M, incorporates a porting system that eliminates movement of the body at detonation even if the top or bottom of the device should be in contact with a hard surface.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: To provide a distrac'on during high-risk events such as forcibly entering a structure during a high-risk apprehension.

Fiscal Impacts: The cost of the devices is $51 plus tax and shipping and are ordered in cases of 12.

Annual Maintenance: $1,224, general fund
Personnel Cost: Approximately $7,000. This cost reﬂects a year of required training for personnel assigned to the SWAT Team.

Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: ATF regula'ons govern the use and storage of the devices.

Training Required: Only oﬃcers who have received training from a cer'ﬁed instructor may use the devices. SWAT Team members receive refresher training at least annually.

Other Notes: None.
31

Page 279 of 559 ends

MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE REPORT 2023

Equipment Name: Combined Tac'cal Systems Model 7290-9 Nine Count Distrac'onary Device Quan/ty Owned/Sought: Up to 50 owned Lifespan: Approximately 5 years Equipment Capabili/es: Hand thrown devices deploy a series of nine consecu've distrac'ons of sound and light.

Manufacturer Product Descrip/on: The CTS 7290-9 is a patented mul'-bang featuring top and boiom non-fragmen'ng, minimal movement devices that perform with high reliability incorpora'ng CTS superior fuze components with the patented ad US Army adopted Conﬁdence Clip and pin shroud.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: To provide a distrac'on during high-risk events such as forcibly entering a structure during a high-risk apprehension when a sustained distrac'on is necessary.

Fiscal Impacts: The devices cost $174 each and are sold in quan''es of 12.

Annual Maintenance: $2,088, general fund
Personnel Cost: Approximately $7,000. This cost reﬂects a year of required training for personnel assigned to the
SWAT Team.

Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: ATF regula'ons govern the use and storage of the devices.

Training Required: Only oﬃcers who have received training from a cer'ﬁed instructor may use the devices. SWAT Team members receive refresher training at least annually.

Other Notes: None.
32

Page 280 of 559 ends

MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE REPORT 2023

Chemical Agent and Smoke Cannisters
Equipment Name: Defense Technology CS Spede-Heat Grenade (Model 1072) Quan/ty Owned/Sought: Up to 50 owned Lifespan: Approximately 5 years Equipment Capabili/es: Discharges 2.9 ounces of CS gas for 20-40 seconds.

Manufacturer Product Descrip/on: The Spede-Heat Con'nuous Discharge Chemical Grenade is a high volume, con'nuous burn and expels its payload in approximately 20-40 seconds. The payload is discharged through four gas ports on top of the canister, three on the side and one on the boiom.

The launchable grenade is 6.12” by 2.62” and holds approximately 2.9 oz. of ac've agent.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: To deploy chemical agents to encourage a suspect to surrender or disperse.

Fiscal Impacts: The devices cost $37 each and are sold in quan''es of 12.

Annual Maintenance: $888, general fund
Personnel Cost: Approximately $7,000. This cost reﬂects a year of required training for personnel assigned to the SWAT Team.

Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All use of force applica'ons are governed by state law (including Penal Code sec'on 13652) and Pleasanton PD Policy Sec'ons 300 and 308. All chemical agent deployments except handheld pepper spray and FN 303 deployments require a chemical agents plan approved by a commander. Only trained members of the SWAT Team may deploy chemical agents.

Training Required: Only oﬃcers who have received training on this device from a cer'ﬁed chemical agents instructor are authorized to use it.

Other Notes: None.
33

Page 281 of 559 ends

MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE REPORT 2023

Equipment Name: Defense Technology Flameless Expulsion CS Grenade (Model 2042) Quan/ty Owned/Sought: Up to 50 owned Lifespan: Approximately 5 years Equipment Capabili/es: Deploys CS gas without outpupng excessive heat.

Manufacturer Product Descrip/on: The CS Flameless Expulsion Grenade is a compact, non- pyrotechnic, chemical agent device that provides safe expulsion without risk of ﬁre. It is safe to use inside of a residence. Unlike pyrotechnic grenades, this device’s contents are expelled upon actua'on of a CO2 cartridge that will aﬀect a conﬁned area of approximately 1500 square feet. This grenade is

7.5” by 1.65” and delivers approximately .16 oz. of ac've agent during its 3-second discharge 'me.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: To deploy chemical agents to encourage a suspect to surrender or disperse.

Fiscal Impacts: The devices cost $51 each and are sold in quan''es of 12.

Annual Maintenance: $1,224, general fund
Personnel Cost: Approximately $7,000. This cost reﬂects a year of required training for personnel assigned to the
SWAT Team.

Training Required: Only oﬃcers who have received training on this device from a cer'ﬁed chemical agents instructor are authorized to use it.

Other Notes: None.
34

Page 282 of 559 ends

MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE REPORT 2023

Equipment Name: Defense Technology Aerosol OC Vapor Grenade (Model 1056) Quan/ty Owned/Sought: Up to 50 owned Lifespan: Approximately 5 years Equipment Capabili/es: Deploys OC (pepper spray) vapor in a mist Manufacturer Product Descrip/on: The OC Vapor Aerosol Grenade is for law enforcement and correc'ons use to deliver a high concentra'on of Oleoresin Capsicum (OC) in a powerful mist. The grenade is designed for indoor use in conﬁned areas and once deployed, inﬂames the mucous membranes and exposed skin resul'ng in an intense burning situa'on. The incapacita'ng eﬀect of the OC Vapor on the subject is drama'c yet requires minimal decontamina'on. Removing the subject from the aﬀected area to fresh air will resolve respiratory eﬀects within minutes. The OC Vapor Aerosol Grenade is ideal for cell extrac'ons or barricaded situa'ons where use of a pyrotechnic, powder or liquid device is not prac'cal or desired.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: To deploy chemical agents to encourage a suspect to surrender or disperse.

Fiscal Impacts: The devices cost $55 each and are sold in quan''es of 12.

Annual Maintenance: $660, general fund
Personnel Cost: N/A. None in inventory.

Training Required: Only oﬃcers who have received training on this device from a cer'ﬁed chemical agents instructor are authorized to use it.

Other Notes: None.
35

Page 283 of 559 ends

MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE REPORT 2023

Equipment Name: Defense technology CS Pocket Tac'cal (Model 1016) Quan/ty Owned/Sought: Up to 50 owned Lifespan: Approximately 5 years Equipment Capabili/es: Deploys .9 ounces of CS gas for 20-40 seconds Manufacturer Product Descrip/on: The CS Pocket Tac'cal Grenade is small and lightweight. The 0.9 oz. of ac've agent will burn approximately 20-40 seconds. At 4.75” by 1.4” in size, it easily ﬁts in most tac'cal pouches. This is a launchable grenade; however, it is normally used as a signaling or covering device. Though this device is slightly over four inches in length, it produces a smoke cloud so fast it appears to be an enveloping screen produced by a full-size tac'cal grenade.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: To deploy chemical agents to encourage a suspect to surrender or disperse.

Fiscal Impacts: The devices cost $30 each and are sold in quan''es of 12.

Annual Maintenance: $360, general fund
Personnel Cost: N/A. None in inventory.

Training Required: Only oﬃcers who have received training on this device from a cer'ﬁed chemical agents instructor are authorized to use it.

Other Notes: None.
36

Page 284 of 559 ends

MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE REPORT 2023

Equipment Name: Defense Technology 40mm CS Liquid Barricade Penetra'ng Ferret (Model 2262) Quan/ty Owned/Sought: Up to 300 owned Lifespan: Approximately 5 years Equipment Capabili/es: Delivers 27 grams of CS gas and can be launched from 50 yards away.

Manufacturer Product Descrip/on: The Ferret 40mm round is non-burning and suitable for indoor use. Used primarily by tac'cal teams, it is designed to penetrate barriers, such as windows, hollow core doors, wallboard, and thin plywood. Upon impac'ng the barrier, the nose cone ruptures and instantaneously delivers a small chemical payload inside of a structure or vehicle.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: To deploy chemical agents to encourage a suspect to surrender or disperse.

Fiscal Impacts: The devices were included in the purchase of the 40mm launchers in 2018. They cost $25 each.

Annual Maintenance: $1,000, general fund
Personnel Cost: Approximately $7,000. This cost reﬂects a year of required training for personnel assigned to the SWAT Team.

Training Required: Only oﬃcers who have received training on this device from a cer'ﬁed chemical agents instructor are authorized to use it.

Other Notes: None.
37

Page 285 of 559 ends

MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE REPORT 2023

Equipment Name: Defense Technology 37mm CS Liquid Barricade Penetra'ng Ferret (Model 1162) Quan/ty Owned/Sought: Up to 300 owned Lifespan: Approximately 5 years Equipment Capabili/es: Delivers 8 grams of CS gas and can be launched from 50 yards away.

Manufacturer Product Descrip/on: The Ferret 37mm CS round is a frangible projec'le ﬁlled with chemical agent. Upon impac'ng the barrier, the nose cone ruptures and instantaneously delivers the .16 oz. agent payload inside a structure. These muni'ons are 4.8” by 1.5” and travels at 650fps within an eﬀec've range of 50 yards.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: To deploy chemical agents to encourage a suspect to surrender or disperse.

Fiscal Impacts: The devices cost $25 each.

Annual Maintenance: $600, general fund
Personnel Cost: N/A. The SWAT team no longer u'lizes 37mm muni'ons.

Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All use of force applica'ons are governed by state law(including Penal Code sec'on 13652) and Pleasanton PD Policy Sec'ons 300 and 308. All chemical agent deployments except handheld pepper spray and FN 303 deployments require a chemical agents plan approved by a commander. Only trained members of the SWAT Team may deploy chemical agents.

Training Required: Only oﬃcers who have received training on this device from a cer'ﬁed chemical agents instructor are authorized to use it.

Other Notes: None.
38

Page 286 of 559 ends

MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE REPORT 2023

Additional Military Equipment Requested:

Equipment Name: Daniel Defense model MK18 RIII Riﬂes (Delayed to acquire in early 2024) Sought: The SWAT Team is seeking 13 riﬂes to
replace the PWS MK111 riﬂes.

Lifespan: Approximately 7 Years
Equipment Capabili/es: Capable of ﬁring .223 caliber ammuni'on Manufacturer Product Descrip/on: The MK18 AR15 style ﬁrearm is unmatched in size, weight, and performance, and features the pica'nny quad rail Daniel Defense provides to USSOCOM. The RIS II pica'nny quad rail features a Bolt-Up System that has been rigorously tested prior to ﬁelding by USSOCOM. The 10.3 inch Cold Hammer Forged barrel is the same length in use for the MK18 upper most commonly used for CQB opera'ons. The independently ambi GRIP-N-RIP Charging Handle accommodates le`- and right-handed shooters. This riﬂe also comes with the ergonomic Daniel Defense Buistock and Pistol Grip.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: The DD MK18 riﬂes serve the same func'on as patrol riﬂes. They allow oﬃcers to address lethal threats with precision from a distance. Compared to handguns, they are more accurate at greater distances and can penetrate most body armor. The DD MK18 riﬂes will be issued to members of the SWAT team.

Fiscal Impacts: The ini'al purchase price for the DD MK18 riﬂes will be $21,108.62 for thirteen riﬂes in 2024. Annual maintenance costs are approximately $150 for baieries, parts and cleaning supplies.

Annual Maintenance: An'cipated to be $500
Personnel Cost: An'cipated to be approximately $80,500. This cost reﬂects a year of required training for personnel assigned to the SWAT Team
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: PPD Policy 312.4.4 covers deployment, use, care, and maintenance of riﬂes. In addi'on, there are a mul'tude of California Penal Code sec'ons that also apply to the transporta'on, care, and maintenance of assault riﬂes. Only oﬃcers who have completed a P .O.S.T. cer'ﬁed patrol riﬂe course may be issued a riﬂe. A qualiﬁca'on course must be completed by each oﬃcer at least annually.

Other Notes: Will replace current SWAT riﬂe inventory 39

Page 287 of 559 ends

MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE REPORT 2023
Equipment Name: Daniel Defense model DDM4 V4S (NEW EQUIPMENT) Sought: The PD is seeking 6 new riﬂes. Lifespan: Approximately 7 Years Equipment Capabili/es: Capable of ﬁring .223 caliber ammuni'on Manufacturer Product Descrip/on: The DDM4 V4S AR15 style firearm is based on a configuration Purpose/Authorized Uses: These rifles are intended to be deployed when officers are on foot in large crowd situations. As these rifles are short barreled and collapsible, they can be concealed for the officer to carry while patrolling on foot. These can help officers combat active threats instead of having to rely on a pistol or slinging a full sized rifle for public view.

Fiscal Impacts: The ini'al purchase price for the DDM4V4S riﬂes will be approximately $15,000 for 6 riﬂes in 2024.

Annual Maintenance: An'cipated to be $150
Personnel Cost: Unknown at this time. Training officers will be required and will incur some cost.

Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: PPD Policy 312.4.4 covers deployment, use, care, and maintenance of riﬂes. In addi'on, there are a mul'tude of California Penal Code sec'ons that also apply to the transporta'on, care, and maintenance of assault riﬂes. Only oﬃcers who have completed a P .O.S.T. cer'ﬁed patrol riﬂe course may be issued a riﬂe. A qualiﬁca'on course must be completed by each oﬃcer at least annually.

Training Required: Oﬃcers must complete a P.O.S.T. cer'ﬁed course to be issued a riﬂe. These courses are a minimum of 16 hours of instruc'on on use, deployment and maintenance of the riﬂes. P.O.S.T. also requires four hours of tac'cal ﬁrearm instruc'on every two years for oﬃcers and this training is facilitated by P.O.S.T. cer'ﬁed riﬂe instructors.
that we've been providing to law enforcement as well as civilian users who demand a lightweight, durable, and dependable SBR. Built around a free-floating, Cold Hammer Forged 11.5 inch barrel, the V4 S del
ivers optimal maneuverability, reliability, accuracy, and terminal ballistics using a wide vari
ety of ammunition. The 10.0 inch picatinny quad rail shields the rifle's barrel and carbine length, low profile gas block. Pairing an 11.5 inch barrel and a DDM4 Rail also ensures compatibility with a wide variety of muzzle devices and sound suppressors. 40

Page 288 of 559 ends

MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE REPORT 2023

Equipment Name: Penn Arms 40mm Launcher anticipated to arrive in 2024.

Sought: 2, Approved to purchase in 2023 Lifespan: Approximately 15 years Equipment Capabili/es: Launches 40mm projec'les, can be loaded with six round and with various types of projec'les.

Manufacturer Product Descrip/on: The Model P540-1CER Launcher is a mul'-shot, PUMP launcher with a six-shot capacity. It is designed to deliver less lethal muni'ons.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: The 40mm launchers can be used as a less-than-lethal impact device. This is the intended use for patrol purposes by trained personnel. They can also deliver chemical agents.

Use for chemical agent deployment must comply with Department Policy and are currently restricted to use by members of the SWAT Team.

Fiscal Impacts: The ini'al purchases of the launchers will be approximately $6,500.

Annual Maintenance: None
Personnel Cost: Unknown currently.

Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All use of force applica'ons is governed by state law (including Penal Code sec'on 13652) and Pleasanton PD Policy Sec'ons 300 and 308.

Training Required: Oﬃcers must be trained on use of the launchers by a cer'ﬁed instructor.

Other Notes: PPD will be acquiring two mul/-pump launchers. The launchers will be u/lized as a less lethal device and stored in the patrol supervisor vehicles. They will only be loaded with impact less lethal rounds. Launchers will be painted orange to iden/fy them as less lethal devices.

Page 289 of 559 ends

MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE REPORT 2023
Internal Audit

The police department is committed to providing information to our community in compliance with Assembly Bill 481. Police department personnel conduct various military equipment audits to determine functionality, inventory, and verify proper personnel has assigned equipment. All military equipment, including firearms, less lethal launchers, diversionary devices/chemical agents, and specialty ammunition, were accounted for during this period.

Training Costs
The use of certain items of military equipment and related special tac^cs are perishable skills that require ongoing training to maintain proﬁciency. While the Department conducts constant training within its Personnel and Training Unit and speciﬁc specialized units (i.e., Crisis Nego^a^on Team, SWAT, etc.), there is signiﬁcant tac^cal insight and an enhanced skillset to be gained by par^cipa^ng in external training courses. These courses provide oﬃcers with a curriculum and exercises designed to impart knowledge, skills, and enhanced capability. The courses ajended by oﬃcers can vary from year to year, depending on opera^onal needs.

Funding sources for training are funded from the exis^ng police training budget.

Storage Costs
Our current military equipment listed in this report is stored at the police department or city facilities. There are no third-party storage costs.

Conclusion
As outlined in this report, the Pleasanton Police Department u^lizes various types of military equipment to protect life, prevent crime, and enhance the quality of life for all our community members. In accordance with Assembly Bill 481 the police department will be transparent regarding funding, acquisi^on, or use of military equipment by your police department’s oﬃcials.

The police department has a strong desire to have our community members par^cipate in their local government’s decision to fund, acquire, or use of this type of equipment. Moreover, when making decisions regarding how military equipment is funded, acquired, or used, the Pleasanton Police Department considers the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties.

Any member of the public can submit a complaint to the Pleasanton Police Department in person, telephone, email, etc.). Once the complaint is received, it will be routed for review to the Internal Aﬀairs Unit in accordance with the Pleasanton Police Department’s policy and procedures.

Page 290 of 559 ends

Page 1 of 3 ends

Item #12

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

April 16, 2024
Public Works - Engineering Division

TITLE: ACCEPT PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS PERFORMED BY ELLA FOR THE KEN MERCER CRICKET FIELD PROJECT, CIP NO. 22795 AND A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO THE PARK CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FUND.

SUMMARY
The City identified the need for a cricket field in the 2014 Parks and Recreation Master Plan.

Staff researched cricket and potential field locations before ultimately funding the design and construction of a field at Ken Mercer Sports Park for the youth cricket field.

The project consisted of replacing Hardball Field B at Ken Mercer Sports Park with a 90-by-10- foot synthetic turf cricket pitch, renovated natural turf field including irrigation, sidewalk repairs and bleachers. Construction of the project took place from September to December 2023, followed by an additional three months to allow the turf to establish. The project is now complete to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. The total cost of the project was $477,049. Staff recommends the City Council accept the project as complete.

RECOMMENDATION
Accept public improvements performed by ELLA for the Ken Mercer Cricket Field Project, CIP No. 22795 and a budget amendment to the Park Capital Improvement Program Fund..

1. Accept the project as complete and authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion.

2. Authorize release of the retention in the amount of $22,381.14 to ELLA 30 days after the recordation of the Notice of Completion if no claims are filed.

3. Amend the Ken Mercer Cricket Field Project budget from $72,951 to $0 in the Park CIP – General Fund (Fund 221).

BACKGROUND
The 2014 Parks and Recreation Master Plan referenced cricket as one of the programs that the City should pursue to provide safe and accessible sports programs for youth. After the plan was adopted, the popularity of cricket in the Tri-Valley continued to grow. In 2017, staff began work with Cricket for Cubs, a youth cricket organization, to determine what was needed for a successful cricket field and where a field could be accommodated in Pleasanton.

After pursuing several locations and funding sources, the Parks and Recreation Commission prioritized cricket at its meeting on January 14, 2021. A significant number of Pleasanton residents attended the meeting in support. It was clear at the commission meeting that cricket was growing in popularity and that there was a local need for cricket. The City Council budgeted an initial $250,000 for the research, design, and construction of a cricket field as CIP No. 22795 in the FY 2021/22 CIP Work Plan.

Page 291 of 559 ends

Page 2 of 3 ends

Staff researched cricket, spoke with city staff in surrounding communities and visited their cricket fields, and reviewed locations within Pleasanton that could accommodate a cricket field.

On April 12, 2022, the City Council selected Ken Mercer Sports Park as the location for the City’s first cricket field. Three potential locations were identified in the sports park that could accommodate the cricket field, and after discussions with the sports user groups and further public input, the City chose to replace Hardball Field B with a new cricket field.

Staff and its consultant coordinated the design of the cricket field with Cricket for Cubs and completed the construction documents in May 2023.

The City Council awarded a construction contract for the cricket field, CIP No. 22795, to ELLA for $414,430 on July 18, 2023. The City Council also authorized the then Director of Engineering to approve and execute change orders up to the not-to-exceed amount of $42,000.

DISCUSSION
The construction of the cricket field required significant demolition, including the removal of the backstop, infield, and amenities associated with Hardball Field B, and required substantial modification of the existing irrigation system to irrigate the natural grass that replaced the infield. Additionally, as part of the cricket field project, the City relocated the existing soccer goal storage pads closer to the soccer fields and replaced a significant amount of the concrete walking path on the south side of the park, which was cracked and in need of replacement.

Construction of the cricket field project began on September 11, 2023, and was substantially completed on December 5, 2023. The establishment period for the natural turf ended on March 4, 2024, and the cricket field ribbon-cutting ceremony took place on March 7.

Two change orders were approved for the project. The first in the amount of $2,997 expanded the size of the relocated soccer goal storage area, and the second in the amount of $30,196 was for additional concrete pavement removal and replacement, fencing, and sod replacement.

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
The cricket field was constructed to address an unmet demand for the sport in Pleasanton and to provide residents with another recreational opportunity. The project is the City’s first cricket field.

OUTREACH
Staff conducted public outreach starting in 2021 to determine the preferred cricket field location before the City ultimately decided to locate the field within Ken Mercer Sports Park. Outreach included meetings at parks and discussions with the sports user groups; staff also posted project boards at the park and solicited feedback via an informal survey asking residents their preferred cricket field location. Additionally, staff presented the cricket field project to the Parks and Recreation Commission on March 9, 2023.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Approval of this action advances the Citywide ONE Pleasanton strategic plan goal of Investing

Page 292 of 559 ends

Page 3 of 3 ends

in Our Environment, Strategy 1 – Implement the four-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to complete design and construction of budgeted capital projects and Strategy 7 – Continue to invest in parks, bicycle, and pedestrian infrastructure, and public art to improve traffic safety, promote climate resilience, and increase equitable access to cultural and recreational opportunities.

FISCAL IMPACT
The construction cost was $447,049, including the original construction contract award of $414,430, Change Order No.1 for $2,997 and Change Order No. 2 for $30,196. Design services provided by Gates + Associates totaled $25,011. The total available funding for this project was $550,000. The project expenditures, including design, construction, furnishings, and other miscellaneous expenses, totaled $477,049, leaving a balance of $72,951. Staff recommends a budget amendment to reduce the remaining budget of $72,951 to $0, returning the remaining balance to the funding source, Park CIP – General Fund (Fund 221), as outlined in Attachment 1.

Maintenance Costs
The cricket field replaced a baseball field, Hardball Field B, in Ken Mercer Sports Park. As a “like-for-like” improvement, the field should have a limited impact on maintenance requirements. However, staff time will be required to coordinate cricket programming and provide maintenance assistance as necessary.

All work and project close-out documentation has been completed to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. Staff recommends the City Council accept the project as complete.

Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

Matthew Gruber, Landscape
Architect
Siew-Chin Yeong, Director of Public
Works

Gerry Beaudin, City
Manager

Attachments:

1. Funding and Expenditure Summary

Page 293 of 559 ends

ATTACHMENT 1
CIP NO. 22795
04/16/24
Project Funding to Date Amount Totals
2021-2022 CIP Allocation (Fund 221 - Park CIP) $250,000 2022-2023 CIP Allocation (Fund 201 - Misc. CIP General Fund) 250,000 2023-2024 CIP Allocation (Fund 201 - Misc. CIP General Fund) 50,000

SUBTOTAL FUNDING TO DATE
Project Expenditures to Date
Advertising $409
Gates + Associates - Design Contract $25,011
ELLA - Construction Contract $414,430
ELLA - Change Orders No. 1-2 $33,193
Miscellaneous Expenses $4,006

TOTAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES
Funding Balance/ (Shortfall)
Current Balance - Return to Fund Balance in Park CIP (Fund 221) $72,951

KEN MERCER CRICKET FIELD
$477,049
$550,000

Page 294 of 559 ends

Page 1 of 5 ends

Item #13

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

April 16, 2024
Public Works - Engineering Division

TITLE: AWARD A DESIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT TO ENGEO INCORPORATED IN THE AMOUNT OF $782,407 WITH AN APPROXIMATELY 5 PERCENT CONTINGENCY OF $39,593, FOR A TOTAL COST UP TO $822,000 FOR VARIOUS CITY SITES DAMAGED IN THE 2023 STORM EVENT, AND

APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENTS IN THE STORM DRAIN REPLACEMENT FUND

SUMMARY
The City requires engineering design services for various city sites damaged in the 2023 storm event. A Request for Proposal (RFP) was advertised in January 2024 for permanently repairing the designated damaged sites. City staff received and reviewed two proposals from responsive firms. Based on the proposal review and responses to inquiries of provided references, staff recommends the City Council award a design professional services agreement to ENGEO Incorporated in the amount of $782,407. This contract will include the design of three projects partially funded by FEMA and two City-funded storm infrastructure improvement projects.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Approve design professional services agreement with ENGEO Incorporated in the amount of $782,407, with an approximately 5 percent contingency of $39,593, for a total cost up to $822,000.

2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the attached design professional services agreement.

3. Authorize the Director of Public Works, or authorized staff, to approve and execute project amendments for the various storm CIPs to not exceed project funding with an aggregate design contingency of $39,593 (approximately 5 percent of design contract).

4. Approve amendments to the FY 2023/24 budget in the Storm Drain Replacement Fund as follows:
- Transfer $159,000 from the Design and Construct Storm Drain, CIP No. 22484, to East Vineyard Detention Pond Outfall Repairs, CIP No. 24676. - Transfer $168,000 from the Design and Construct Storm Drain, CIP No. 22484, to Oak Tree Farm Outfall Repairs and Channel Stabilization, CIP No. 24677. - Transfer $308,000 from the Design and Construct Storm Drain, CIP No. 22484, to Augustin Bernal Trail Creek Crossing Culverts and Retaining Wall, CIP No. 24678.

BACKGROUND
Severe winter storms from December 2022 to March 2023 caused damage throughout the city.

These weather events resulted in risks to the health, safety, and welfare of persons and property due to flooding, downed trees, loss of power and property damage. On January 11, 2023, the City Council adopted a resolution to ratify and confirm the Proclamation of the Existence of a Local Emergency, issued by the Director of Emergency Services / City Manager

Page 295 of 559 ends

Page 2 of 5 ends

on January 9, 2023.

City staff and on-call vendors performed work to clear debris and sediment from various damaged sites to restore a majority of the areas to pre-disaster or better conditions prior to the start of the 2024 rainy season. However, nine of the more severely damaged sites require permanent repair and mitigation. Temporary measures were put in place until permanent repairs could be designed and constructed.

DISCUSSION
City staff worked with FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency), the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) and the City’s on-call consultants to complete site damage assessments and identify the scope of work for locations requiring permanent repairs. The FEMA-approved permanent projects are anticipated to be reimbursed to the City at approximately 75 percent of the total project costs. The costs for the FEMA approved work completed within the first 60 days is anticipated to be fully recovered through FEMA and state grants, and the City is in the process of completing several of the necessary applications. It is unknown when the reimbursements from FEMA and the state will be received. Notably, the City is still collecting reimbursements for the 2017 storm events.

The following locations need permanent repairs and/or improvements to prevent future damages:

FEMA Funded Projects
East Vineyard Detention Pond Outfall Repairs, CIP No. 24676 Design and construct the replacement of the outfall and banks for the East Vineyard Detention Pond, including approximately 24 linear feet of damaged/lost 24-inch reinforced concrete pipe.

The work will take place at the outfall located off of Vineyard Avenue between Manoir Lane and Safreno Way. The outfall channel bank will be stabilized to prevent further erosion and is anticipated to require mitigation work due to the work within the channel. The estimated total cost of this project is $610,00 including the permitting, design and construction. ENGEO will perform the design and permitting support services.

Oak Tree Farm Outfall Repairs and Channel Stabilization, CIP No. 24677 The project will reconstruct the channel bank at the Oak Tree Farm storm drain outfall and includes stabilization of the banks, installation of heavy rip rap and modifications to the existing outfall structure to dissipate energy. The Oak Tree Manor storm drain collects and discharges stormwater to a nearby channel. Intense rain, surface runoff, and flow from outfall caused damage to the heavy rip rap and erosion of the channel, causing incising and bank loss. The project is near Verona Bridge, between Foothill Road and Pleasanton Sunol Road. The estimated total cost of this project is $630,000 including the permitting, design and construction. ENGEO will perform the design and permitting support services.

Augustin Bernal Trail Creek Crossing Culverts and Retaining Wall, CIP No. 24678 The project will upgrade culvert crossings at three separate locations within Augustin Bernal Park and install a retaining wall to mitigate further loss of the Valley View trail from a landslide.

The existing trail culvert crossings are undersized and heavy rain and surface water damaged and clogged the culvert headwalls and outfalls. The estimated total cost of this project is $1.3 million including the design and construction. ENGEO will perform the design and permitting support services.

Page 296 of 559 ends

Page 3 of 5 ends

Sewer Station S-14 Electrical Improvements, CIP No. 24265 The existing sanitary sewer Lift Station S-14 was flooded during the January 2023 storm. The storm damaged the below-grade electrical gear and control panel. Under a separate on-call agreement, staff authorized Frisch Engineering, Inc. for the not-to-exceed amount of $53,480 to provide design services to install a new above-ground grade MCC (Machine Control Center), conduit and wiring, concrete pad, and SCADA integration. The City applied for a FEMA grant for the mitigation effort to bring the lift station’s MCC above ground. If approved by FEMA, up to 75 percent of the construction cost is anticipated to be reimbursed by FEMA. The estimated total cost of this project is $700,000 including the design and construction. The funding is included in the Sewer Station S-14 Electrical Improvements Project, CIP No. 24265.

Park Pathway Restoration (Alviso Adobe and Tawny Parks), CIP No. 24679 Heavy rainfall and surface water flooding eroded the pedestrian trail at Alviso Adobe Park, and during debris removal activities, the adjacent sidewalk was cracked by heavy equipment at Tawny Park. The City applied for a mitigation effort to repair both parks’ pathways. The estimated cost to repair the damaged parks’ pathways is $150,000. The City’s Engineering Division will design the work.

City Funded Projects
Puri Court Storm Drain Improvements (formerly Annual Storm Repair/Replacement), CIP No. 24415
Under a separate on-call agreement, staff authorized Pakpour Consulting Group, Inc. for the amount of $60,630 to provide design services to replace approximately 500 linear feet of existing storm drain pipe with 48-inch reinforced concrete pipe for the Puri Court storm drain improvements. The existing storm drain pipe in Puri Court varies between 24 and 30 inches.

The estimated total cost of this project is $1.75 million including the design and construction.

Sassafras Court Storm Drain Interceptor (formerly Design and Construct Storm Drain), CIP No. 22484
The project will install a vault to capture and remove debris prior to entering the Oak Tree Manor storm drain. The sizing of the vault will be based on the operational parameters of a standard excavator used to remove debris from the vault. The estimated total cost of this project is $600,000 including the design and construction. ENGEO will perform the design support services.

Sycamore Creek Storm Improvements (Sunol Boulevard), CIP No. 24662 The project will perform a hydraulic analysis and a feasibility study to determine the extent of necessary storm drain improvements to mitigate future flooding associated with Sycamore Creek. Sycamore Road at Sunol Boulevard experienced localized flooding in 2017 and in 2023. The estimated cost for the feasibility study is $96,000. The anticipated project will install approximately 775 to 850 feet of a new parallel 60- or 72-inch diameter storm drain line in Sunol Boulevard from Sycamore Road to Sycamore Creek and develop a new outfall. The anticipated cost, excluding easements, is $4 to $5 million. ENGEO will perform the hydraulic modeling and feasibility study.

Sycamore Creek Storm Improvements (Sycamore Road), CIP No. 24680 Based on the hydraulic analysis and feasibility study, the storm drain line in Sycamore Road

Page 297 of 559 ends

Page 4 of 5 ends

may need to be replaced or a secondary line added. The project would install approximately 1,500 feet of 36- to 48-inch diameter storm drain to provide additional capacity if analysis warrants. The estimated costs to install a secondary storm drain of similar size as the existing is anticipated to cost approximately $5 million. The design will be awarded at a later date.

Consultant Selection
The existing on-call design contracts did not meet the FEMA procurement guidelines and new a solicitation for consultants was developed. City staff developed the RFP based on the FEMA and City-funded project needs. Two firms submitted proposals in response to the request.

Discussions with the consulting community identified that due to the extensive damage throughout the region, most firms do not have the availability to complete the project until 2025. A panel of three City staff members familiar with the project reviewed and ranked the submitted proposals.

Based on ratings of the received RFPs, reference inquiries, and a cost proposal review, staff recommends awarding a design professional services agreement to ENGEO Incorporated.

Staff worked with ENGEO to develop a comprehensive scope with the information known as this time. Due to the sensitivity of working within streams and protected habitat, the projects will require environmental clearance and regulatory approval for construction. The overall design cost is higher than for a typical project of this size and scope due to the level of effort needed to secure regulatory agency permits. The full scope of mitigation to receive the permits is unknown and could increase the estimated costs of the projects.

ENGEO will develop biddable construction documents, environmental permitting and CEQA and NEPA clearances for the East Vineyard Detention Pond Outfall Repairs, the Oak Tree Farm Outfall and Channel Stabilization, the Augustin Bernal Trail Creek Crossing Culverts and Retaining Wall, and the Sassafras Court Storm Drain Interceptor. ENGEO's scope also includes the hydraulic analysis and feasibility study to address the Sycamore Creek storm drain system. Future work will be required for the design of the identified Sycamore Creek Improvements.

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
Approval of this action advances the City's Climate Action Plan 2.0 - Community Resilience and Wellbeing by improving public services to ensure all communities are prepared for climate- related impacts.

OUTREACH
No outreach was conducted, as this item is a routine matter of City business.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Approval of this action advances the Citywide ONE Pleasanton Strategic Plan goal of Safeguarding Our City: Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Strategy 4 – Identify funding sources and implement the hazard mitigation plan to address response to natural disasters.

FISCAL IMPACT
The design of these projects will be funded from the Sassafras Court Drain Interceptor (formerly Design and Construct Storm Drain), CIP No. 22484, and the Sycamore Creek Storm

Page 298 of 559 ends

Page 5 of 5 ends

Drain Improvements (Sunol Boulevard), CIP No. 24662, which have a combined current balance of $985,457. FEMA requires each project’s expenditures to be tracked separately, so three new CIP projects, East Vineyard Detention Pond Outfall Repairs (CIP No. 24676), Oak Tree Farm Outfall Repairs and Channel Stabilization (CIP No. 24677) and Augustin Bernal Trail Creek Crossing Culverts and Retaining Wall (CIP No. 24678), were created for those purposes for a total of five projects. The ENGEO contract was broken up into separate tasks based on the new projects and will be billed to the individual projects. Total expenditures of $822,000 include ENGEO’s contract for $782,407 and the project design contingency of $39,593.

Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

SM Saklaen, Associate Civil
Engineer
Siew-Chin Yeong, Director of Public
Works

Gerry Beaudin, City
Manager

Attachments:

1. Design Professional Services Agreement with ENGEO Incorporated

2. Funding and Expenditure Summary

Page 299 of 559 ends

Page 1 of 7 ends

DESIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS DESIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is entered into April 16, 2024, between the City of Pleasanton, a municipal corporation ("City"), and ENGEO Incorporated. whose address is 2010 Crow Canyon Place, Suite 250, San Ramon, CA 94583, and telephone number is (925) 270-7980, ("Consultant").

RECITALS
A. Consultant is qualified and experienced in providing engineering design services for the purposes specified in this Agreement.

B. City finds it necessary and advisable to use the services of Consultant for the purposes provided in this Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions in this Agreement, City and Consultant agree as follows:

1. Consultant's Services.

Consultant shall diligently perform the services described in Exhibit A, Scope of Work, attached and incorporated to the extent consistent with this Agreement.

2. City Assistance. In order to assist Consultant in this work, City shall provide, if necessary, archive drawings and reports, related to existing City’s facilities, aerial photography, City’s standard specifications and design guides, answering non-technical questions during bid period, reviewing all consultant’s deliverables and providing comments in a timely manner, AutoCAD files for City’s title block and standards and record drawings related to the City’s existing utilities.

3. Staff. Consultant shall assign Jon Buck to serve as Project Managers, who may not be replaced without written consent of City.

4. Term. The work as described in Exhibit A, Scope of Work, shall be completed by December 31, 2025, or unless an extension is approved by the city.

5. Compensation. For the services to be rendered, City shall pay Consultant on a time and material cost basis with not to exceed limits as defined in Exhibit B and shall be in accordance with the Rate Schedule contained in Exhibit B, which is attached and incorporated to the extent consistent with this Agreement. Payment shall be made on a monthly basis upon receipt and approval of Consultant's invoice. Payment shall be made within forty-five (45) days of receipt of consultant’s invoice and approval by City. Total compensation for services and reimbursement for costs shall not exceed $782,407 unless the parties agree pursuant to Section 8, below.
❑ Exhibit A
❑ Certificate(s) of Insurance
❑ Professional Liability Insurance
❑ W-9

Page 300 of 559 ends

Page 2 of 7 ends

a. Invoices submitted to City must contain a brief description of work performed, percentage of work completed, percentage of Agreement time used, percentage of Agreement amount expended and City’s contract reference number _____________.

b. Upon completion of work and acceptance by City, Consultant shall have sixty (60) days in which to submit final invoicing for payment. An extension may be granted by City upon receiving a written request thirty (30) days in advance of said time limitation. The City shall have no obligation or liability to pay any invoice for work performed which the Consultant fails or neglects to submit within sixty (60) days, or any extension thereof granted by the City, after the work is accepted by the City.

6. Sufficiency of Consultant's Work.

a. Services shall be performed by Consultant in accordance with generally accepted high professional practices and principles and in a manner consistent with a high level of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar conditions by members of Consultant’s profession currently practicing in California. By delivery of completed work, Consultant certifies that the work conforms to the requirements of this Agreement and all applicable federal, state and local laws and a high professional standard of care in California.

b. Consultant is responsible for making an independent evaluation and judgment of all conditions affecting performance of the work, including without limitation site conditions, existing facilities, seismic, geologic, soils, hydrologic, geographic, climatic conditions, applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations, and all other contingencies or design considerations. Data, calculations, opinions, reports, investigations, and other similar information provided by the City relating to site, local, or other conditions is not warranted or guaranteed, either expressly or implied, by the City.

c. Consultant’s responsibilities under this section shall not be delegated. Consultant shall be responsible to the City for acts, errors, or omissions of Consultant’s subconsultants.

d. Whenever the scope of work requires or permits review, approval, conditional approval or disapproval by the City, it is understood that such review, approval, conditional approval or disapproval is solely for the purposes of administering this Agreement and determining whether the Consultant is entitled to payment for such work, and not be construed as a waiver of any breach or acceptance by the City of any responsibility, professional or otherwise, for the work, and does not relieve the Consultant of responsibility for complying with the standard of performance or laws, regulations, industry standards, or from liability for damages caused by negligent acts, errors, omissions, noncompliance with high industry standards, or the willful misconduct of Consultant.

7. Ownership of Work. All reports, work data, plans, drawings, specifications, designs, photographs, images, works of authorship and all other documents completed or partially completed by Consultant in the performance of this Agreement (“materials”) shall become the property of City. Consultant agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the work pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested in the City, and Consultant waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other intellectual property rights in favor of the City. All materials

Page 301 of 559 ends

Page 3 of 7 ends

shall be delivered to the City upon completion or termination of the work under this Agreement.

If any materials are lost, damaged or destroyed before final delivery to the City, the Consultant shall replace them at its own expense. Any and all copyrightable subject matter in all materials is hereby assigned to the City and the Consultant agrees to execute any additional documents that may be necessary to evidence such assignment. Consultant shall keep materials confidential and the materials shall not be used for purposes other than performance of services under this Agreement and shall not be disclosed to anyone not connected with these services, unless the City provides prior written consent.

8. Changes. City may request changes in the scope of services to be provided by Consultant.

Any changes and related fees shall be mutually agreed upon between the parties and subject to a written amendment to this Agreement.

9. Consultant's Status. In performing the obligations set forth in this Agreement, Consultant shall have the status of an independent contractor and Consultant shall not be considered to be an employee of the City for any purpose. All persons working for or under the direction of Consultant are its agents and employees and are not agents or employees of City.

10. Labor Code/Prevailing Wages. To the extent applicable, Consultant shall comply with the requirements of the California Labor Code including but not limited to hours of labor, nondiscrimination, payroll records, apprentices, workers' compensation and payment of prevailing wages as determined by Director of the California Department of Industrial Relations. Consultant shall post, at each job site, a copy of the prevailing rate of per diem wages. Consultant shall forfeit fifty dollars ($50.00) for each calendar day or portion thereof for each worker paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any public work done under the Agreement by it or by any subconsultant.

11. Termination of Convenience of City. The City may terminate this Agreement at any time by mailing a notice in writing to Consultant. The Agreement shall then be deemed terminated, and no further work shall be performed by Consultant. If the Agreement is so terminated, the Consultant shall be paid for that percentage of the work actually completed at the time the notice of termination is received.

12. Non-Assignability. The Consultant shall not assign, sublet, or transfer this Agreement or any interest or obligation in the Agreement without the prior written consent of the City, and then only upon such terms and conditions as City may set forth in writing. Consultant shall be solely responsible for reimbursing subconsultants.

13. Indemnity and Hold Harmless. To the fullest extent permitted by law (including, without limitation, California Civil Code §§ 2782, 2782.6 and 2782.8), Consultant shall defend (with legal counsel reasonably acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless, the City and its officers, agents and employees (collectively “Indemnitees”) from and against any and all claims, loss, cost, damage, injury (including, without limitation, injury to or death of an employee of Consultant or its Subconsultants), expense, and liability of every kind, nature and description (including, without limitation, incidental and consequential damages, court costs, attorneys’ fees, litigation expenses and fees of expert consultants or expert witnesses incurred in connection therewith and costs of investigation) arising from, or alleged to have arisen from, pertain to, or relate to, directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, the negligence, reckless, or willful misconduct of the Consultant, any Subconsultant, anyone directly or indirectly employed by them, or anyone

Page 302 of 559 ends

Page 4 of 7 ends

that they control (collectively “Liabilities”) in the performance of its services under this Agreement, regardless of whether the City has reviewed or approved the work or services which has given rise to the claim, loss, cost, damage, injury or liability for damages. This indemnification shall extend for a reasonable period of time after completion of the project as well as during the period of actual performance of services under this Agreement. The City's acceptance of the insurance certificates required under this Agreement does not relieve the Consultant from its obligation under this paragraph. To the extent that there is an obligation to indemnify under this Section 13, Consultant shall be responsible for incidental and consequential damages resulting directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, from Consultant’s negligence, reckless or willful misconduct.

Such obligations to defend, hold harmless and indemnify any Indemnitee shall not apply to the extent such Liabilities are caused by the sole negligence, active negligence or willful misconduct of such Indemnitee. Obligation to defend shall be proportionate as to Consultant’s percentage of fault as provided in California Civil Code § 2782.8.

14. Insurance. During the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall maintain in full force and effect, at its own cost and expense, insurance coverages with insurers with an A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A:VII. Contractor shall have the obligation to furnish City, as additional insured, the minimum coverages identified below, or such greater or broader coverage for City, if available in the Contractor’s policies:

a. General Liability and Bodily Injury Insurance. Commercial general liability insurance with limits of at least $2,000,000 combined limit for bodily injury and property damage that provides that the City, its officers, employees and agents are named additional insureds under the policy. The policy shall state in writing either on the Certificate of Insurance or attached rider that this insurance will operate as primary insurance for work performed by Consultant and its subconsultants, and that no other insurance effected by City or other named insured will be called on to cover a loss.

b. Automobile Liability Insurance. Automobile liability insurance with limits not less than $2,000,000 per person/per occurrence.

c. Workers' Compensation Insurance. Workers' Compensation Insurance for all of Consultant's employees, in strict compliance with State laws, including a waiver of subrogation and Employer’s Liability Insurance with limits of at least $1,000,000.

d. Professional Liability Insurance. Professional liability insurance in the amount of $2,000,000.

Page 303 of 559 ends

Page 5 of 7 ends

for nonpayment of premiums or for fraud, the notice shall be given no less than 10 days prior to the effective date of the cancellation. Notice shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested. In addition, the insured shall provide thirty (30) days prior written notice to the City of any cancellation, suspension, reduction of coverage or in limits, or voiding of the insurance coverage required by this agreement. The City reserves the right to require complete certified copies of policies.

f. Waiver of Subrogation. The insurer agrees to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its officers, employees and agents.

g. Defense Costs. Coverage shall be provided on a “pay on behalf" of basis, with defense costs payable in addition to policy limits. There shall be no cross liability exclusions.

h. Subconsultants. Consultant shall include all subconsultants as insured under its polices or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subconsultant. All coverages for subconsultants shall be subject to all of the requirements stated in this Agreement, including but not limited naming additional insureds.

To Consultant: Jon Buck To City: City Manager
ENGEO Incorporated City of Pleasanton
2010 Crow Canyon Place, Suite 250 P.O. Box 520
San Ramon, CA 94583 Pleasanton, CA 94566

16. Conformance to Applicable Laws. Consultant shall comply with all applicable Federal, State, and Municipal laws, rules, and ordinances. Consultant shall not discriminate in the employment of persons or in the provision of services under this Agreement on the basis of any legally protected classification, including race, color, national origin, ancestry, sex or religion of such person.

17. Licenses, Certifications, Copyrights and Permits. Prior to the City's execution of this Agreement and prior to the Consultant's engaging in any operation or activity set forth in this Agreement, Consultant shall obtain a City of Pleasanton business license, which must be kept in effect during the term of this Agreement. Consultant represents that its work will not unlawfully infringe any other copyrighted work. Consultant covenants that it has obtained all certificates, licenses, permits and the like required to perform the services under this Agreement.

18. Records and Audits. Consultant shall maintain all records regarding this Agreement and the services performed for a period of three years from the date that final payment is made. At any time during normal business hours, the records shall be made available to the City to inspect and audit.

19. Confidentiality. Consultant shall exercise reasonable precautions to prevent the unauthorized disclosure and use of City reports, information or conclusions.

20. Conflicts of Interest. Consultant covenants that other than this Agreement, Consultant has no financial interest with any official, employee or other representative of the City. Consultant and its principals do not have any financial interest in real property, sources of income or investment that would be affected in any manner by the performance of Consultant’s services under this Agreement. If such an interest occurs, Consultant will immediately notify the City.

Page 304 of 559 ends

Page 6 of 7 ends

21. Waiver. In the event either City or Consultant at any time waive any breach of this Agreement by the other, such waiver shall not constitute a waiver of any other or succeeding breach of this Agreement, whether of the same or of any other covenant, condition or obligation.

22. Governing Law. California law shall govern any legal action pursuant to this Agreement with venue in the applicable court or forum for Alameda County.

23. Attorney's Fees. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce or construe the terms of this Agreement may recover from the other party its reasonable costs and attorney's fees expended in connection with such an action.

24. No Personal Liability. No official or employee of City shall be personally liable to Consultant in the event of any default or breach by the City or for any amount due Consultant.

25. Counterparts and Electronic Signatures. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one agreement. Counterparts may be delivered via facsimile, electronic mail (including pdf or any electronic signature complying with U.S. federal E-Sign Act of 2000 (15 U.S. Code §7001 et seq.), California Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (Cal. Civil Code §1633.1 et seq.), or other applicable law) or other transmission method, and any counterpart so delivered shall be deemed to have been duly and validly delivered and be valid and effective for all purposes.

26. Federal and State Requirements. Task authorizations issued with Federal and/or State funding shall comply with all Federal and State Requirements outlined in Exhibit C, which is attached and incorporated to the extent consistent with this Agreement.

27. Scope of Agreement. This writing constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties.

Any modification to the Agreement shall be in writing and signed by both parties.

THIS AGREEMENT is executed the date first above written.

CITY OF PLEASANTON CONSULTANT

_____________________________ By: __________________________ Gerry Beaudin, City Manager Signature

__________________________
Print name
ATTEST:

_____________________________
Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk Title: __________________________

Approved as to form:

_____________________________ By: __________________________ Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney Signature

Page 305 of 559 ends

Page 7 of 7 ends

__________________________
Print name

Title: __________________________

[If Consultant is a corporation, signatures must comply with California Corporations Code §313]

Rev. 8/20

Page 306 of 559 ends

GEOTECHNICAL

ENVIRONMENTAL

WATER RESOURCES

CONSTRUCTION SERVICES

COASTAL/MARINE GEOTECHNICS

2010 Crow Canyon Place, Suite 250  San Ramon, CA 94583  (925) 866-9000  Fax (888) 279-2698 www.engeo.com

Project No.

P6621.002.000

March 7, 2024
Latest Revision March 25, 2024

Mr. SM Saklaen, PE
Associate Civil Engineer
Public Works Department, Engineering Division
City of Pleasanton
PO Box 520
Pleasanton, CA 94566

Subject: Storm Damaged Repair Sites
Pleasanton, California

PROPOSAL FOR ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES

Dear Mr. Saklaen:

The team of ENGEO Incorporated (ENGEO), WRA Incorporated (WRA), MacKay and Somps, and Evans & DeShazo Incorporated (EDS), is pleased to present this revised proposal in regard to various storm damage d sites located in the City of Pleasanton , as summarized in the City’s Request For Proposal dated January 13, 2024. Based on further clarification of the City’s intent at each repair area, during a meeting on February 26, 2024, we have revised our cost proposal and scope of services for the projects as presented in this revised proposal.

For the purposes of the environmental review, permitting, and 100 percent plans, specifications and estimate packages for these repair efforts, the storm repair project sites will be grouped as follows.

• Bernal Project (Bernal Trails) and;.
• Combined Sites Project (Oak Tree Farm, Sassafras, and Vineyard)

One set of documents will be prepared for both the Combined Sites (CS) Project and for the Bernal Project. We believe combining the projects into these two separate packages will help streamline resource agency permitting and project bidding.

We are also providing a separate scope of services to provide preliminary engineering studies for a realignment of a portion of a City of Pleasanton storm drain located near the intersection of Sunol Boulevard and Sycamore Road where recent flooding has occurred.

SCOPE OF SERVICES

Phase 001 – Land Surveying

MacKay and Somps will provide a land survey of each of the four repair areas. The surveys will contain existing storm drain information, limits of approximate property lines , and topographic information that will be used as a basis of design for each repair area.

Exhibit A

Page 307 of 559 ends

City of Pleasanton P6621.002.000
Storm Damaged Repair Sites March 7, 2024
PROPOSAL FOR ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES Latest Revision March 25, 2024

Page 2 ends

Phase 002 – Basis of Design Reports

ENGEO will complete geological, geomorphic, and hydrologic concept designs of each area in a Basis of Design report. The reports will describe the proposed repairs and describe how impacts to jurisdictional waterways will be minimized. We recommend for each project that a 30 percent-to 65 percent engineering improvement plan be generated with the submittals to the resource agencies and turned in with the Basis of Design reports so that a preliminary impact assessment and mitigation plan be generated. Basis of Design reports can be turned into FEMA engineering reports for repairs seeking FEMA funding after regulatory agency approvals have been granted.

These reports will discuss approximate limit of impacts to jur isdictional waterways, approximate construction methods to be used, and preliminary volumetric and linear impact quantities of cut and fill materials that can be used for environmental permitting purposes. We expect to produce two reports, one for the CS Project and one for the Bernal Project. For the Vineyard Outfall repair project, MacKay and Somps will provide a portion of the hydraulic analysis.

For the Bernal Project, the trail repair will require a geotechnical investigation and a soldier pile wall design. We will plan to drill three borings to a depth of 30 feet, which we believe is the approximate extent to which the foundations of the soldier pile wall will extend. Geotechnical recommendations will be included in our Basis of Design Report.

Phase 003 – Cultural Resources Evaluation

EDS will prepare a cultural resource evaluation for each site, with the exception of the Sassafras repair which appears to not have a nexus with Waters of the United States. The cultural resources evaluation will be required for each project for conformance with CEQA guidelines and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). EDS will prepare maps for the studies, including location maps that depict the Project sites on USGS 7.5 -minute quadrangles, Area of Potential Effect (APE) maps, survey coverage maps, an d any other maps necessary for research or documentation purposes. GPS data processing includes post -processing any GPS-collected field data and incorporating GPS -collected field data into ArcGIS for mapping purposes. EDS will complete a record search at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) located in Rohnert Park, California, to obtain and review information about previously recorded cultural resources within the Project Areas and within 0.25 mile of the Project Areas, or a greater distance if warranted by the paucity of cultural resource information within 0.25 mile. The research will consist of reviewing historical maps, aerial photographs, and other information to assist in assessing the potential/sensitivity of the Project Areas to contain buried archaeological resources that could be encountered during ground-disturbing activities associated with the Projects. A final report will be submitted for each project to the USACE as part of their Federal Review of the project.

Phase 004 – Biological Resources Technical Report

WRA will prepare two biological resources technical reports (BRTR) to support regulatory permit applications and the CEQA document. The BRTRs will be completed at a level of detail necessary to provide sufficient information to enable preparation of a CEQA document and regulatory permit applications. The BRTRs will discuss the results of the literature search and site visits and will provide information on the known or potential habitat at the site for any special -status plant and wildlife species. If any special-status species are observed, they will be reported in the findings.

Page 308 of 559 ends

City of Pleasanton P6621.002.000
Storm Damaged Repair Sites March 7, 2024
PROPOSAL FOR ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES Latest Revision March 25, 2024

Page 3 ends

If wetlands, streams, or ponds are observed, they will also be reported at the assessment level in the BRTR; detailed jurisdictional status information will be included in separate Wetland Delineation Reports. Any riparian areas or other sensitive habitat areas will also be described and mapped. Based on the Appendix G CEQA Checklist questions regarding biological resources and the findings described above, an analysis of potential impacts and mitigation measures will be prepared to address those issues. As such, a high-level Project Description will be required for each BRTR. The BRTR analysis will be in sufficient detail to provide information suitable for CEQA and will be supported by mapping exhibits to facilitate clarity among the disparate sites.

Furthermore, the BRTR will outline additional biological survey needs by site, including recommendations.

Phase 005 – Aquatic Resources Evaluation

Based on our review of the RFP materials, personal familiarity with many of the identified storm damage repair locations, and that the nature of the repairs are typically associated with streams or drainages, regulatory agencies will require a jurisdictional wetland delineation of each Project site. In some cases, features may be determined to be non -jurisdictional based on their status, use, and maintenance as stormwater control features. In addition, the 2023 Conforming rule may affect the Corps -jurisdictional nature of wetlands and/or waterways. Documentation for each project site will need to be provided to show that a thorough analysis has been completed. WRA biologists will visit the sites to assess and document the presence of wetlands, jurisdictional boundaries of streams and drainages, and other aquatic resources potentially subject to state and/or federal jurisdiction. The fieldwork will be conducted in conformance with the routine methods described in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and 2008 Arid West Regional Supplement

Fieldwork will consist of site inspections to each of the project sites determine the presence of hydrologic, soil, and vegetation indicators. For non-wetland aquatic features (i.e., streams), WRA will determine the location of the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). All wetland and non-wetland aquatic feature boundaries will be mapped using handheld GPS equipment with sub -meter accuracy. Should wetlands be present within the analysis area, sample points will be taken; the number of sample points will be deter mined by the extent and number of wetland areas. Paired sample points (one wetland and one upland) will be taken at the selected locations sufficient to document the extent of the wetlands on the site. Soil inspections will consist of digging shallow (12- to 16 -inch-deep) pits at a number of locations at the site to inspect for hydric soil characteristics. Vegetation and hydrology indicators will be observed on the surface of the soil.

WRA will prepare a report for the CS Project and for the Bernal Project describing the methods and results of the fieldwork, as well as the associated regulatory context. WRA will provide the GIS ShapeFiles associated with the delineation.

Phase 006 – Biological Assessment

Based on previous work WRA completed for the City SMP, we anticipate storm repair project sites may have potential to support federally -protected species such as California red -legged frog (CRLF), California tiger salamander (CTS), and Alameda whipsnake (A WS). A Section 7 Biological Assessments may be required to enable Corps Section 404 permitting. The subsequent consultations would be required for Section 7 consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Survey (USFWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service ( NMFS) under the ESA. The process requires

Page 309 of 559 ends

City of Pleasanton P6621.002.000
Storm Damaged Repair Sites March 7, 2024
PROPOSAL FOR ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES Latest Revision March 25, 2024

Page 4 ends

the applicant to provide a description of the Project (specifically any actions that may have an effect on federally -listed species), a description of the specific areas that may be affected, the manner in which impacts may occur, an analysis of cumulative impacts, and a description of the listed species or critical habitats that may be affected. This document is called a Section 7 Biological Assessment (BA).

WRA will utilize available data from the BRTR to the maximum extent possible, and may need to generate additional field survey data to compile all data necessary to prepare BA reports for submittal to the Corps. The BAs will describe the suitability of on -site habitat conditions for the federal-listed species known to occur in the vicinity. The reports will discuss any potential impacts (including direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts) that may occur to these species as a result of the Project, and any m itigation measures recommended to offset potential impacts. WRA will produce a round of draft BAs for City review prior to submittal.

Phase 007 – Resource Agency Permits

As noted above, the storm repair locations are grouped into two ‘Projects.’ The CS Project and the Bernal Project will have a separate suite of regulatory agency permit applications, described below. The permit applications described below will be prepared for each of the four storm repair project sites.

Section 404 Permit -Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)

In the interest of planning, WRA will operate under the assumption that features within each project site are subject to the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). Once the wetland delineation has been completed, this assumption will be revisited, and the permitting strategy adjusted as needed. Given the size of the storm repair project sites and the nature of the repairs, project activities may qualify for coverage under Nationwide Permit (NWP) 3 – Maintenance or NWP 18 – Minor Discharges. An Individual Permit is not anticipated for any of the projects at this time. WRA will prepare permit application packages for submission to the Corps based on information available from the site plan. The permit application packages will address potential i mpacts to Corps and RWQCB jurisdiction and the necessary permit requirements, including:

• Basic notification requirements as to site location; project description; and type and amount of fill in potentially jurisdictional areas;
• Appropriate plan and cross-sectional view figures that show proposed impacts to jurisdictional areas;
• Information to support a determination that the project will not affect cultural resources, based on the cultural resources report prepared for project approval under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA);
• Information to support an informal consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, or if supported by substantial evidence, determination that the project will have no effect on endangered species;
• Section 404 delineation map based on a site visit conducted by WRA staff; • Proposed compensatory mitigation for any loss of jurisdictional areas;

Page 310 of 559 ends

City of Pleasanton P6621.002.000
Storm Damaged Repair Sites March 7, 2024
PROPOSAL FOR ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES Latest Revision March 25, 2024

Page 5 ends

• Anticipated schedule for project construction; and
• Information regarding post -construction stormwater management based on the project’s stormwater management plan.

WRA will act as the agent during the permitting process. Typically, the Corps may request a site visit to discuss the proposed project and potential impacts on areas within their jurisdiction.

Section 401 Water Quality Certification/ Waste Discharge Requirements – Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)

Based on a preliminary review of project site aerials, streams and drainages which may be RWQCB-jurisdictional are present with the storm repair project sites. Should the features meet the criteria for Corps-jurisdiction, then a Section 401 Water Quality Certification will be required.

If site features are not Corps-jurisdictional, then the RWQCB regulates fill placed in wetlands and other waters via Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR). The contents of a WDR application are similar to those required by a Sec tion 401 Water Quality Certification, with some processing modifications: the absence of federal permit requirements means that the permit must be taken to the Water Board for approval, a process which typically requires additional attention and scrutiny on the application by RWQCB staff. WRA will act as the agent for the City to the RWQCB.

Information required for both the 401 Certification and the WDR Application includes:

• Basic notification requirements as to site location; project description; and type and amount of fill in potentially jurisdictional areas;
• Appropriate plan and cross-sectional view figures that show proposed impacts to jurisdictional areas;
• Delineation map based on a site visit conducted by WRA staff; • A watershed profile describing the current status and trends of aquatic resources within the watershed;
• Proposed compensatory mitigation for any loss of jurisdictional areas; • Alternatives analysis documenting rationale for why impacts to the wetland cannot be avoided; • Anticipated schedule for project construction;
• Information regarding post -construction stormwater management based on the project’s stormwater management plan; and
• Certified Environmental Quality Act documentation (Mitigated Negative Declaration/EIR/ Categorical Exclusion).

CDFW Streambed Alteration Agreement

CDFW requires any person who may affect the bed or bank of a perennial, intermittent, or ephemeral river, stream, or lake to provide notification via a California Fish and Game Code Section 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSAA). The LSAA notification requires completion of an application form and project environmental questionnaire, and inclusion of supplemental data regarding issues covered in the project environmental questionnaire. WRA will

Page 311 of 559 ends

City of Pleasanton P6621.002.000
Storm Damaged Repair Sites March 7, 2024
PROPOSAL FOR ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES Latest Revision March 25, 2024

Page 6 ends

prepare the applications using the City SMP LSAA permit as a reference, using the current CDFW standard forms and attachments, and providing additional supporting information, such as site plans, maps, and the BRTR, all of which are needed to support application processing. WRA will prepare a draft LSAA for each project for City review and comment before submitting a final package upon the City’s approval. Once CDFW issues a draft agreement, WRA will review the draft agreement and make recommendations to Cl ient to accept the agreement or request modifications.

Phase 008 – Mitigation Strategy

Using the City SMP mitigation requirements as a foundation, WRA will work with the City to determine suitable mitigation opportunities to off-set project impacts, if needed. This task includes meeting with the City to review mitigation opportunities and two site visits to conduct a preliminary reconnaissance of potential mitigation opportunities within the City limits. Should the storm repair projects be determined to be self -mitigating by resource agencies, then mitigation may not be required.

Phase 009 – CEQA exemptions

WRA will assist the City in determining if any of the four projects qualify for a CEQA Statutory Exemption, such as Section 15269 (Emergency Projects) of the CEQA Guidelines, or if each project qualifies for a CEQA Categorical Exemption. If the project des ign and avoidance and minimization measures support the application of a CEQA Categorical Exemption, WRA will prepare a separate CEQA Notice of Exemption (NOE) for the CS Project and for the Bernal Project which describes each project and its CEQA exemptio n status as well as supporting information for the application of the exemption. It is anticipated each project may qualify for at least one Categorical Exemption, such as CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 – Existing Facilities; 15302 – Replacement or Reconstruction; and 15303 – New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. Each Categorical Exemption will be supported by the Biological Resources Assessment and Cultural Resources Assessment. Each NOE will also include a memo attachment that explains why each project does not meet any applicable exceptions to Categorical Exemptions per CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2. Upon review and approval by the City, each NOE will be filed with the County Clerk and the State Clearinghouse CEQANet portal. However, if either project is found to trigger an exception to a Categorical Exemption, WRA will prepare a separate proposal for a CEQA Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND). WRA will tier from existing documents to the extent feasible, including the City’s General Plan EIR, project geotechnical and hydraulic analyses, and other available reports prepared for the City such as the Mountain Bike Trail Environmental Impact Report.

Phase 010 – FEMA Environmental Planning and Historic Checklist

The CEQA documentation and supporting technical studies will also be used to complete two separate FEMA Environmental Planning and Historic (EHP) Checklists for each of the federally-funded projects pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The Checklists will address the following for each federally-funded project.

• CWA Section 404/RHA Section 10
• Clean Water Act Section 401/402
• EO 11988 Floodplains eight-step Process

Page 312 of 559 ends

City of Pleasanton P6621.002.000
Storm Damaged Repair Sites March 7, 2024
PROPOSAL FOR ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES Latest Revision March 25, 2024

Page 7 ends

• EO 11990 Wetlands 8-step Process
• CZMA CC/Negative Determination
• Section 7 ESA
• NHPA Section 106
• FLPA Farmland Conversion Form AD-1006
• CAA General Conformity Determination
• Migratory Bird Treaty Act
• Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
• Magnuson-Stevens Fishery & Management Act

It is assumed the Checklists will be sufficient to facilitate the preparation of a NEPA Categorical Exclusion for each federally -funded project by FEMA and Cal -OES. If a NEPA Environmental Assessment is required for either of the federally -approved projects then WRA will prepare a separate proposal for that increased level of NEPA analysis.

Phase 11 – Engineering Plans, Specifications and Estimates

We estimate that the plans for the projects will consist of the following.

• Improvement plans
• Drainage infrastructure and details
• Wall profiles (Augustin Bernal trail repair)
• Tree replacements and mitigation areas
• Erosion Control Measures and Temporary Access routes
• Notes and Cover Sheet
• Fencing replacement plans (if applicable)

We will submit two packages of 65 percent of the plans to the City and the resource agencies for review. We will subsequently submit 90 percent and 100 percent plans based on the 65 percent review. We will provide specifications and estimates based on the 100 percent design for bidding purposes. We assume these projects will not require a formal Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan and will disturb less than an acre. We will provide erosion control plans for each project.

Phase 12 – Project Bidding Phase.

We have provided a modest budget to answer questions during the bidding process. We can provide a separate proposal for construction and post -construction related services after regulatory permits have been issued.

Phase 13 – Sunol Boulevard / Sycamore Road Typical Intersection Storm Drain Realignment Feasibility Study

We understand that the City of Pleasanton is also requesting a study to potentially realign a portion of City-owned storm drain near the intersection of Sycamore Road and Sunol Boulevard.

The storm drain transmits a portion of Sycamore Creek from the North Sycamore Planning Area to an outfall on the north ern side of Sunol Boulevard near the Thermo Fisher Scientific Building complex. We understand that this storm drain is prone to clogging given the amount of debris flow

Page 313 of 559 ends

City of Pleasanton P6621.002.000
Storm Damaged Repair Sites March 7, 2024
PROPOSAL FOR ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES Latest Revision March 25, 2024

Page 8 ends

entering the system upstream from the Sycamore Creek watershed. Moreover, there are several sharp bends between the inlet and outlet of the system where debris is clogging flows during larger storm events. We propose the following services.

1. Bring a hydrology report prepared by RJA Inc . for Sycamore Creek in 1997 up to 2018 Alameda County Standards

2. Survey existing storm drain to verify location of existing manholes, pipe sizes , and adjacent utilities.

3. Provide a hydraulic model with alternatives to reduce clogging potential of the system.

4. Provide a cost estimate and 65 percent drawings of the preferred alternative.

ENGEO will perform Task 1. MacKay and Somps will generally perform Tasks 2 through 4 with oversight from ENGEO.

FEE

We propose to perform the above-described scope of services for an estimated fee of $782,407.

We have included a cost spreadsheet for ENGEO and our subconsultant team in the attachments.

We have broken down the cost for each project as follows. Agreed hourly rates are valid for entire duration of the contract.

PROJECT ESTIMATED FEE*
Bernal Trails
• Culvert Replacement
• Wall Design and Landslide
$293,609
Combined Sites Project
• Sassafras Court
• Oak Tree Manor Outfall
• Vineyards Outfall Replacement

$86,979
$159,492
$151,109
Sunol Boulevard / Sycamore Road Feasibility Study $91,218 *Includes 15% markup of subconsultants per RFP

REQUEST FOR CONTRACT

ENGEO's liability for damage due to professional negligence, acts, errors, omissions, breach of contract and consequential damages will be limited by Client to an amount not to exceed an aggregate limit of one million dollars or ENGEO’s fee, whichever is greater, regardless of the legal theory under which such liability is imposed.

If the above scope of services and fee are acceptable, please issue a contract as our authorization to proceed. Our services are unable to commence without prior receipt of an executed agreement.

Page 314 of 559 ends

City of Pleasanton P6621.002.000
Storm Damaged Repair Sites March 7, 2024
PROPOSAL FOR ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES Latest Revision March 25, 2024

Page 9 ends

We look forward to serving you on this project. If you have any questions or comments regarding this proposal, please call and we will be glad to discuss them with you.

Sincerely,

ENGEO Incorporated

Jonathan Buck Robert H. Boeche
Associate Principal

jb/rhb/ca

Attachment A: Bernal Trails and Combined Sites Projects ENGEO Estimated Cost Spreadsheet and Total Cost Summary WRA Estimated Cost Spreadsheet
MacKay and Somps Estimated Cost Spreadsheet

Attachment B: Sunol Boulevard / Sycamore Road Feasibility Study ENGEO Estimated Cost Spreadsheet and Total Cost Summary MacKay and Somps Estimated Cost Spreadsheet

Page 315 of 559 ends

6621.300.026
Latest Revision March 25, 2024

ATTACHMENT A

BERNAL TRAILS AND COMBINED SITES PROJECTS

ENGEO Estimated Cost Spreadsheet and Total Cost Summary WRA Estimated Cost Spreadsheet
MacKay and Somps Estimated Cost Spreadsheet
Exhibit B

Page 316 of 559 ends

Principal
Associate
Senior
Engineer
Project
Engineer
Cultural
Resources
(EDS)*

CAD/GIS
Specialist
(includes
AutoCAD Unit
Project
Assistant
$365.00 $305.00 $295.00 $235.00 $203.00 $195.00 $145.00 Cultural Resources Evaluation (EDS) 20 0 20 4,060.00$
Topographic Survey and Biological Assessment Coord. 3 3 915.00$ 4,975.00$ 4,975.00$
Engineer/Geologist Fieldwork 1 3 4 1,010.00$
Hydraulic Analysis (Existing Stream Channel) 3 10 13 3,265.00$ Report for Resource Agency Approval 1 8 3 3 4 1 20 5,320.00$ 9,595.00$ 9,595.00$
Alternatives Analysis 4 4 2,160.00$
Meeting with City 4 1,220.00$
60% Plan Development 10 4 5 2 21 5,255.00$
8,635.00$ 8,635.00$
Cooridantion with WRA 1 2 2 5 1,445.00$
Response to Comments 1 4 5 10 2,760.00$
Final Basis of Design Report 3 3 8 6 2 22 5,350.00$
8,110.00$ 8,110.00$
100% Plan, Specifications and Engineers Estimate 2 2 1 2 7 1,565.00$ 1,565.00$ 1,565.00$
Final Engineer's Report 1 10 5 16 4,590.00$
4,590.00$ 4,590.00$
141
*Includes 15 markup Total 37,470.00$ 37,470.00$
Cultural Resources Evaluation (EDS) 20 0 20 4,060.00$
Topographic Survey and Biological Assessment Coord. 3 3 915.00$ 4,975.00$ 4,975.00$
Engineer/Geologist Fieldwork 1 3 4 1,010.00$
Hydraulic Analysis (Trib Channel) 3 15 18 4,440.00$
Preliminary Basis of Design Report 1 10 5 5 4 1 26 6,990.00$ 12,440.00$ 12,440.00$
Alternatives Analysis 1 1 2 540.00$
Meeting with City 2 2 610.00$
Combine with Basis of Design Report 2 2 1 5 1,145.00$
2,295.00$ 2,295.00$
Cooridantion with WRA 1 2 6 9 2,385.00$
Response to Comments 1 10 4 15 4,355.00$
Final Basis of Design Report 2 5 5 4 6 2 24 6,130.00$
10,485.00$ 10,485.00$
100% Plan, Specifications and Engineers Estimate 2 5 7 2,085.00$ 2,085.00$ 2,085.00$
Final Engineer's Report 1 7 6 5 1 20 5,030.00$
5,030.00$ 5,030.00$
155
*Includes 15% markup Total 37,310.00$ 37,310.00$
Cultural Resources Evaluation (EDS) 20 0 20 4,060.00$
Topographic Survey and Biological Assessment Coord. 3 3 915.00$ 4,975.00$ 4,975.00$
Engineer/Geologist Fieldwork 1 3 4 1,010.00$
Hydraulic Analysis (Existing Stream Channel) 3 20 23 5,615.00$ Report for Resource Agency Approval 1 15 3 5 4 2 30 8,070.00$ 14,695.00$ 14,695.00$
Alternatives Analysis 4 4 2,160.00$
Meeting with City 4 1,220.00$
60% Plan Development 10 20 25 2 57 12,915.00$
16,295.00$ 16,295.00$

ENGEO PROPOSED FEES
City of Pleasanton
Engineering Design Services for Various City Sites Damaged in the 2023 Storm Event Task 1 - Preliminary Studies
Task 2 – Basis of Design Report
Task 3 – 60% Plans for Resource Agency Submittal
Professional Services Rates
Proposal Budget
Unit Subtotal
Cost Subtotal
Cost Totals
Task 5 – 100% Plan Set (Coordination with M&S)
Task 3 – Review Plans from M&S
Task 6 – FEMA Engineer's Report
Task
Task 4 – Resource Agency Coordination
Task 1 - Preliminary Studies
Task 2 – Basis of Design Report
E. Vineyard Detention Pond Outfall Pipe
Task 1 - Preliminary Studies
Task 2 – Basis of Design Report
Task 3 – 30% Review Plans from M&S
Task 4 – Resource Agency Coordination
Task 5 – 100% Plan Set (Coordination with M&S)
Task 6 – FEMA Engineer's Report
Oak Tree Farm Outfall and Channel Stabilization
Augustin Bernal Trail Creek Crossing Culverts

Page 317 of 559 ends

Principal
Associate
Senior
Engineer
Project
Engineer
Cultural
Resources
(EDS)*

CAD/GIS
Specialist
(includes
AutoCAD Unit
Project
Assistant
$365.00 $305.00 $295.00 $235.00 $203.00 $195.00 $145.00 Professional Services Rates
Proposal Budget
Unit Subtotal
Cost Subtotal
Cost Totals
Task
Cooridantion with WRA 2 2 4 1,080.00$
Response to Comments 1 4 5 10 2,760.00$
Final Basis of Design Report 3 3 8 6 2 22 5,350.00$
8,110.00$ 8,110.00$
100% Plan, Specifications and Engineers Estimate 1 10 40 30 2 83 18,955.00$ 18,955.00$ 18,955.00$
Final Engineer's Report 1 10 15 26 6,940.00$
6,940.00$ 6,940.00$
282
*Includes 15 markup Total 69,970.00$ 69,970.00$
Cullural Resources Evaluation 5 0 2 7 1,305.00$
Cooridnate Topographic Survey 2 610.00$
1,915.00$ 1,915.00$
Scheduling, Coordination & Project Setup 1 2 4 2 9 2,185.00$ Permiting 1 2 3 765.00$
USA 1 4 1,235.00$
OC ACPWA Permit 800.00$
OC Limited Access Borings (2 day) 15,000.00$
Engineer/Geologist Fieldwork 16 16 3,760.00$
Lab Program Development 1 1 2 600.00$
OC Geotechnical Laboratory Testing 3,000.00$
27,345.00$ 27,345.00$
Alternatives Analysis 1 2 10 3,325.00$
Meeting with City 1 4 1,585.00$
65% Plan Development 1 10 20 20 2 53 12,305.00$
17,215.00$ 17,215.00$
Boring Logs 1 2 6 9 2,385.00$
Geological and Engineering Analysis 1 4 7 12 3,230.00$
Final Report 3 3 8 6 2 22 5,350.00$
8,580.00$ 8,580.00$
100% Plan, Specifications and Engineers Estimate
Development 4 8 15 20 2 49 11,615.00$
11,615.00$ 11,615.00$
FEMA Engineer's Report 3 1 5 9 2,575.00$
2,575.00$ 2,575.00$
191
*Includes 15 markup Total 69,245.00$ 69,245.00$
Cultural Resources Evaluation (EDS) 0 -$
Topographic Survey and Biological Assessment Coord. 3 3 915.00$ 915.00$ 915.00$
Engineer/Geologist Fieldwork 1 3 4 1,010.00$
Hydraulic Analysis (Existing Stream Channel) 3 10 13 3,265.00$ Report for RWQCB 1 4 3 5 4 2 19 4,715.00$
8,990.00$ 8,990.00$
Task 3 – 60% Plans for Resource Agency Submittal
Alternatives Analysis 1 1 540.00$
Meeting with City 1 305.00$
60% Plan Development 1 1 1 1 4 880.00$
1,725.00$ 1,725.00$
Task 4 – Resource Agency Coordination
Cooridantion with WRA 1 1 305.00$
Response to RWQCB Comments 1 4 5 10 2,760.00$
Final Basis of Design Report 1 2 5 6 2 16 3,610.00$
6,370.00$ 6,370.00$
Task 5 – 100% Plan Set
100% Plan, Specifications and Engineers Estimate
Development (Coorrdinate with M&S) 1 1 1 1 1 5 1,245.00$ 1,245.00$ 1,245.00$
Task 6 – FEMA Engineer's Report
Final Engineer's Report 1 2 2 5 1,445.00$
1,445.00$ 1,445.00$
80 *Includes 15 markup Total 20,690.00$ 20,690.00$
*Includes EDS and drilling subconsultant. ENGEO TOTAL* 234,685.00$ **Includes 15% markup per RFP WRA Fee** (Spreadsheet Attached) 335,032.95$ MacKay & Somps Fee (Spreadsheet Attached) 121,471.05$
TOTAL (Includes EDS and drilling subconsultant) 691,189.00$ Task 4 – Resource Agency Coordination
Task 1 - Preliminary Studies
Task 5 – 100% Plan Set
Task 6 – FEMA Engineer's Report
Task 1 - Preliminary Studies
Task 2 – Geotechnical Exploration
Task 3 – Alternatives Analysis and 65% Plans
Task 4 – Geotechnical Report
Task 5 – 100% Plans, Specifications and Estimates
Task 2 – Basis of Design Report
Sassafras Court Storm Improvements
Task 7 – FEMA Engineer's Report
Augustin Bernal Park (Slide)

Page 318 of 559 ends

Project Name: Pleasanton Stream Repair
Project Number: 340017
Date: 2/9/2024
Rate Schedule: Standard
Personnel Hours by Task*
Task # Task Description
Leslie Lazarotti
Principal Ecologist
Geoff Reilly
Senior Environmental Planner
Bernhard Warzecha
Senior Associate
Scott Batiuk
Associate
Renata Robles
Associate Environmental
Planner
Scientist
(staff TBD)
Scientist
(staff TBD)
Senior Technician
(staff TBD)
GIS Professional
(staff TBD)
Rob Schell
Director
Olivia Niederer
Assistant Environmental Planner
WRA Cost
by Task
WRA Direct
Expenses
Sub-
Contractor Total Cost
VINEYARD -$ -$ -$ -$ 1 BRTR: prep, site visit, report 10,848$ -$ -$ 10,848$ 2 Delineation, prep, site visit, report 6,719$ -$ -$ 6,719$ 3 Biological Assessment & USFWS Coordination
6,222$ -$ -$ 6,222$ 4 Section 404 CWA Permit Application 7,870$ -$ -$ 7,870$ 5 Section 401 WQ Cert Application 8,130$ -$ -$ 8,130$ 6 Section 1602 LSAA Application 7,394$ -$ -$ 7,394$ 7 Mitigation Strategy 2,559$ -$ -$ 2,559$ 8 CEQA NOE and Exceptions Memo 7,053$ -$ -$ 7,053$ 9 NEPA FEMA Checklist 7,609$ -$ -$ 7,609$ 10 -$ -$ -$ -$ Vinyeard/Oak Tree Farm -$ -$ -$ 64,404$ Sassafras -$ -$ -$ -$ 1 BRTR: prep, site visit, report 5,838$ -$ -$ 5,838$ 2 Delineation, prep, site visit, report 3,114$ -$ -$ 3,114$ 3 Biological Assessment & USFWS Coordination 4,304$ -$ -$ 4,304$ 4 Section 404 CWA Permit Application 3,546$ -$ -$ 3,546$ 5 Section 401 WQ Cert Application 5,018$ -$ -$ 5,018$ 6 Section 1602 LSAA Application 3,914$ -$ -$ 3,914$ 7 Mitigation Strategy 1,193$ -$ -$ 1,193$ 8 CEQA NOE and Exceptions Memo 2,258$ -$ -$ 2,258$ 9 NEPA FEMA Checklist 2,258$ -$ -$ 2,258$ Sassafras -$ -$ -$ 31,443$ BERNAL TRAILS -$ -$ -$ -$ 1 BRTR: prep, site visit, report 19,760$ -$ -$ 19,760$ 2 Delineation, prep, site visit, report 12,546$ -$ -$ 12,546$ 3 Biological Assessment & USFWS Coordination
15,243$ -$ -$ 15,243$ 4 Section 404 CWA Permit Application 12,498$ -$ -$ 12,498$ 5 Section 401 WQ Cert Application 15,600$ -$ -$ 15,600$ 6 Section 1602 LSAA Application 29,426$ -$ -$ 29,426$ 7 Mitigation Strategy 6,244$ -$ -$ 6,244$ 8 CEQA NOE and Exceptions Memo 8,064$ -$ -$ 8,064$ 9 NEPA FEMA Checklist 9,310$ -$ -$ 9,310$ 10 -$ -$ -$ -$ BERNAL TRAILS TOTAL -$ -$ -$ 128,691$ OAK TREE FARM -$ -$ -$ -$ 1 BRTR: prep, site visit, report 10,848$ -$ -$ 10,848$ 2 Delineation, prep, site visit, report 6,719$ -$ -$ 6,719$ 3 Biological Assessment & USFWS Coordination
6,222$ -$ -$ 6,222$ 4 Section 404 CWA Permit Application 8,392$ -$ -$ 8,392$ 5 Section 401 WQ Cert Application 8,652$ -$ -$ 8,652$ 6 Section 1602 LSAA Application 7,916$ -$ -$ 7,916$ 7 Mitigation Strategy 2,860$ -$ -$ 2,860$ 8 CEQA NOE and Exceptions Memo 7,315$ -$ -$ 7,315$ 9 NEPA FEMA Checklist 7,871$ -$ -$ 7,871$ 10 -$ -$ -$ -$ OAK TREE FARM -$ -$ -$ 66,795$ -$ -$ -$ -$

TOTAL LABOR HOURS
TOTAL COST $291,333 $0 $0 $291,333
2 6 32
1 2 2 6 32
6 2
2 7 2 16 6 6
3 2 7 2 16 10 5
51418
2 1
5 3
4 12 4 101632
1 8 48 12
2 12 4 24 12 8
1 1 8 16 32 32 8
2 4 16 32 8
4 4 1 4
8 12 4 16 12 1082
1 8 4 4
1 2 1 16 4 2
4 1 2 2
1 2
1 2 1 8 4 2
2 2 12 2
2 2 8 12 4
2 2 4 4 2
16 6 6
1 3 6 2
1 2 1 6
*Please note: WRA may substitute similarly qualified individuals as necessary. 184.00$ 301.00$ 144.00$ 221.00$ 184.00$ 184.00$ 165.00$ 278.00$ 262.00$ 221.00$ 1 3
1 7 1 16 10 5
1 1
6 1 3 8 18 3
18 7 1 20 6 6
1 8
8 7 1
14,448$
3348
1 9,174$
1 2
2 1 4
108 46
39,824$
152
3 3
23,868$
12 8
10,166$
3 7 2
3 69,920$ 29,440$
380 160
15,840$
96 18 5
20 6 6
32 32
204
29,376$
17 5,117$
240
44,160$
3 40
36 18
88 18
114 5
301.00$
6 1
1 3 12
1 4
4 1 4 1 6

Page 319 of 559 ends

Project: Augustin Bernal Trail Creek Crossing Culverts
Job No.: 29225.000
Description: Summary
Principal
Engineering
Manager
(Chris
Guenther)
Senior
Engineer /
Surveyor
(Travis
Pashon-Silva)
Associate
Engineer /
Surveyor
Assistant
Engineer /
Surveyor
Junior
Engineer
Principal
Technician
Senior
Technician
Field Crew
Supervisor
1-Man Survey
Crew
2-Man Survey
Crew M&S Subtotal

1.1 Project Management/Meetings/Coordination 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 776.00 $ 776.00 $

2.1 Records Research and Investigation 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -$

2.2 Site Visit / Damage Assessment 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -$

2.3 Topographical Survey / Base Mapping 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 1.5 0.0 12.0 4,789.00 $ 4,789.00 $

3.1 Sample Plans / Details (35% Plans) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -$

3.2 65% Plans and Specifications 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -$

3.3 95% Plans, Specifications and Estimates 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -$

3.4 100% IFC Construction Documents 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -$ -$

4.1 Bid Support 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -$ -$
Total Hours 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 2 1.5 0 12
Hourly Rate $314 $284 $246 $216 $180 $154 $188 $158 $194 $200 $328 Amount -$ 284 $ 738 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 316 $ 291 $ - $ 3,936 $ 5,565.00 $
Fee Estimate
Task Description
MacKay & Somps Labor Classification
M&S Fee Summary - Augustin Bernal Trail Creek Crossing Culverts.xls\Fee Summary - M&S Page 1 of 4 Printed 3/5/2024

Page 320 of 559 ends

Project: E. Vineyard Detention Pond Outfall Pipe
Job No.: 29225.000
Description: Summary
Principal
Engineering
Manager
(Chris
Guenther)
Senior
Engineer /
Surveyor
(Travis
Pashon-Silva)
Associate
Engineer /
Surveyor
Assistant
Engineer /
Surveyor
Junior
Engineer
Principal
Technician
Senior
Technician
Field Crew
Supervisor
1-Man Survey
Crew
2-Man Survey
Crew M&S Subtotal

1.1 Project Management/Meetings/Coordination 0.0 4.0 8.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3,824.00 $ 3,824.00 $

2.1 Records Research and Investigation 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 852.00 $

2.2 Site Visit / Damage Assessment 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,420.00 $

2.3 Topographical Survey / Base Mapping 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 2.0 0.0 8.0 3,732.00 $ 6,004.00 $

3.1 Sample Plans / Details (35% Plans) 0.0 4.0 8.0 0.0 16.0 16.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8,448.00 $

3.2 65% Plans and Specifications 0.0 4.0 8.0 0.0 12.0 12.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7,112.00 $

3.3 95% Plans, Specifications and Estimates 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 8.0 8.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4,224.00 $

3.4 100% IFC Construction Documents 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,888.00 $ 22,672.00 $

4.1 Bid Support 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,912.00 $ 1,912.00 $
Total Hours 0 20 41 0 50 40 0 3 2 0 8
Hourly Rate $314 $284 $246 $216 $180 $154 $188 $158 $194 $200 $328 Amount -$ 5,680 $ 10,086 $ - $ 9,000 $ 6,160 $ - $ 474 $ 388 $ - $ 2,624 $ 34,412.00 $
Fee Estimate
Task Description
MacKay & Somps Labor Classification
M&S Fee Summary - E Vineyard Detention Pond Outfall Pipe.xls\Fee Summary - M&S Page 2 of 4 Printed 3/5/2024

Page 321 of 559 ends

Project: Oak Tree Farm Outfall and Channel Stabilization Job No.: 29225.000
Description: Summary
Principal
Engineering
Manager
(Chris
Guenther)
Senior
Engineer /
Surveyor
(Travis
Pashon-Silva)
Associate
Engineer /
Surveyor
Assistant
Engineer /
Surveyor
Junior
Engineer
Principal
Technician
Senior
Technician
Field Crew
Supervisor
1-Man Survey
Crew
2-Man Survey
Crew M&S Subtotal

1.1 Project Management/Meetings/Coordination 0.0 4.0 8.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3,824.00 $ 3,824.00 $

2.1 Records Research and Investigation 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 852.00 $

2.2 Site Visit / Damage Assessment 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,420.00 $

2.3 Topographical Survey / Base Mapping 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 12.0 5,306.00 $ 7,578.00 $

3.1 Sample Plans / Details (35% Plans) 0.0 4.0 12.0 0.0 16.0 16.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9,432.00 $

3.2 65% Plans and Specifications 0.0 4.0 8.0 0.0 12.0 12.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7,112.00 $

3.3 95% Plans, Specifications and Estimates 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 8.0 8.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4,792.00 $

3.4 100% IFC Construction Documents 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,888.00 $ 24,224.00 $

4.1 Bid Support 0.0 4.0 8.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3,824.00 $ 3,824.00 $
Total Hours 0 24 49 0 54 40 2 0 2 0 12
Hourly Rate $314 $284 $246 $216 $180 $154 $188 $158 $194 $200 $328 Amount -$ 6,816 $ 12,054 $ - $ 9,720 $ 6,160 $ 376 $ - $ 388 $ - $ 3,936 $ 39,450.00 $
Fee Estimate
Task Description
MacKay & Somps Labor Classification
M&S Fee Summary - Oak Tree Farm Outfall and Channel Stabilization.xls\Fee Summary - M&S Page 3 of 4 Printed 3/5/2024

Page 322 of 559 ends

Project: Sassafras Court Storm Improvements
Job No.: 29225.000
Description: Summary
Principal
Engineering
Manager
(Chris
Guenther)
Senior
Engineer /
Surveyor
(Travis
Pashon-Silva)
Associate
Engineer /
Surveyor
Assistant
Engineer /
Surveyor
Junior
Engineer
Principal
Technician
Senior
Technician
Field Crew
Supervisor
1-Man Survey
Crew
2-Man Survey
Crew M&S Subtotal

1.1 Project Management/Meetings/Coordination 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,120.00 $ 2,120.00 $

2.1 Records Research and Investigation 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -$

2.2 Site Visit / Damage Assessment 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,368.00 $

2.3 Topographical Survey / Base Mapping 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 8.0 3,800.00 $ 5,168.00 $

3.1 Sample Plans / Details (35% Plans) 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 12.0 0.0 12.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5,968.00 $

3.2 65% Plans and Specifications 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4,496.00 $

3.3 95% Plans, Specifications and Estimates 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4,004.00 $

3.4 100% IFC Construction Documents 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,532.00 $ 17,000.00 $

4.1 Bid Support 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,912.00 $ 1,912.00 $
Total Hours 0 16 23 0 36 2 34 0 1 0 8
Hourly Rate $314 $284 $246 $216 $180 $154 $188 $158 $194 $200 $328 Amount -$ 4,544 $ 5,658 $ - $ 6,480 $ 308 $ 6,392 $ - $ 194 $ - $ 2,624 $ 26,200.00 $
Fee Estimate
Task Description
MacKay & Somps Labor Classification
M&S Fee Summary - Sassafras Court Storm Improvements.xls\Fee Summary - M&S Page 4 of 4 Printed 3/5/2024

Page 323 of 559 ends

6621.300.026
Latest Revision March 25, 2024

ATTACHMENT B

SUNOL BOULEVARD / SYCAMORE ROAD FEASIBILITY STUDY

ENGEO Estimated Cost Spreadsheet and Total Cost Summary MacKay and Somps Estimated Cost Spreadsheet

Page 324 of 559 ends

Principal
Associate
Senior
Engineer
Project
Engineer
Cultural
Resources
(EDS)*

CAD/GIS
Specialist
(includes
AutoCAD Unit
Project
Assistant
$365.00 $305.00 $295.00 $235.00 $203.00 $195.00 $145.00 Review Existing Data 2 1 1 4 990.00$
Update Hydrology to 2018 Standards 1 10 35 45 5 1 97 25,435.00$ 26,425.00$ 26,425.00$
Coordination of Final Report 1 5 2 1 1 10 2,700.00$ 2,700.00$ 2,700.00$ 111
*Includes 15 markup ENGEO Total 29,125.00$ 29,125.00$ Mackay and Somps* 62,093.10$

ENGEO PROPOSED FEES
City of Pleasanton
Engineering Design Services for Various City Sites Damaged in the 2023 Storm Event Professional Services Rates
Proposal Budget
Unit Subtotal
Cost Subtotal
Cost Totals
Task 1 - Update Hydrological Analysis
Task 2- Coordination with MacKay and Somps
Sunol Blvd Study
$91,218.10
Task

Page 325 of 559 ends

Project: Sycamore Creek Storm Improvements
Job No.: 29225.000
Description: Summary
Principal
Engineering
Manager
(Chris
Guenther)
Senior
Engineer /
Surveyor
(Travis
Pashon-Silva)
Associate
Engineer /
Surveyor
Assistant
Engineer /
Surveyor
Junior
Engineer
Principal
Technician
Senior
Technician
Field Crew
Supervisor
1-Man Survey
Crew
2-Man Survey
Crew M&S Subtotal

1.1 Project Management/Meetings/Coordination 0.0 6.0 12.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5,736.00 $ 5,736.00 $

2.1 Records Research and Investigation 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,704.00 $

2.2 Site Visit / Damage Assessment 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,840.00 $

2.3 Topographical Survey / Base Mapping 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 20.0 9,106.00 $ 13,650.00 $

3.1 Hydraulic Analysis 0.0 16.0 24.0 0.0 36.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16,928.00 $ 16,928.00 $

4.1 Sample Plans / Details (35% Plans) 0.0 6.0 12.0 0.0 16.0 16.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10,000.00 $

4.2 65% Plans and Specifications 0.0 6.0 8.0 0.0 12.0 12.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7,680.00 $ 17,680.00 $
Total Hours 0 38 66 0 82 28 4 0 3 0 20
Hourly Rate $314 $284 $246 $216 $180 $154 $188 $158 $194 $200 $328 Amount -$ 10,792 $ 16,236 $ - $ 14,760 $ 4,312 $ 752 $ - $ 582 $ - $ 6,560 $ 53,994.00 $
Fee Estimate
Task Description
MacKay & Somps Labor Classification
M&S Fee Summary - Sycamore Creek Storm Improvements.xls\Fee Summary - M&S Page 1 of 1 Printed 3/18/2024

Page 326 of 559 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
04/16/24
Project Funding to Date Amount Totals
Sassafras Court Drain Incerceptor (formerly Design and Construct Storm Drain), CIP No. 22484 $785,457
Sycamore Creek Storm Drain Improvements, CIP No. 24662 200,000

TOTAL PROJECT FUNDING TO DATE
Anticipated Project Expenditures
Design for Various Strom Improvements (ENGEO Inc. Contract, $782,407)
East Vineyard Detention Pond Outfall Repairs*, CIP No. 24676 $159,000 Oak Tree Farm Outfall Repairs and Channel Stabilization*, CIP No. 24677 168,000 Augustin Bernal Trail Creek Crossing Culverts and Retaining Wall*, CIP No. 24678 308,000 Sassafras Court Storm Drain Interceptor*, CIP No. 22484 91,000 Sycamore Creek Storm Drain Improvements (Feasibility Study)*, CIP No. 24662 96,000 * Includes Project Design Contingency (Approx. 5%, $39,593)

TOTAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES
Funding Balance/ (Shortfall)
Sassafras Court Strom Drain Interceptor, CIP No. 22484 $59,457 Sycamore Creek Storm Drain Improvements, CIP No. 24662 104,000 $163,457
VARIOUS CITY SITES DAMAGED IN THE 2023 STORM EVENT
$985,457
$822,000
CIP No. 22484, 24676, 24677, 24678, and 24662

Page 327 of 559 ends

Page 1 of 7 ends

Item #14

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

April 16, 2024
Public Works - Engineering Division

TITLE: APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO O’GRADY PAVING, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,861,681, WITH AN APPROXIMATELY 15 PERCENT CONTINGENCY OF $1,029,252, FOR THE TOTAL COST UP TO $7,890,933, FOR THE ANNUAL STREET RESURFACING & PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE PROJECT, CIP NO. 24503 AND APPROVE

BUDGET AMENDMENTS IN THE GAS TAX FUND, MEASURE BB - BIKE &

PEDESTRIAN FUND, MEASURE BB STREETS FUND, MEASURE F FUND, THE

GENERAL FUND, AND THE STREETS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND

SUMMARY
This project combines the 2023 and 2024 Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction (also known as the Annual Street Resurfacing and Preventative Maintenance) projects, following postponement of the project in 2023 due to unusually high bids. The project consists of repaving 1.65 million square feet of existing pavement including Hopyard Road from Valley Avenue to Gibraltar Road and preparing another 0.55 million square feet of pavement for the upcoming slurry seal project. The preparation work for the slurry seal project includes isolated areas of pavement restoration and the cleaning and sealing of cracks on the streets that will then be slurry sealed from curb to curb. The objective of the project is to prolong the useful life of the existing street infrastructure while providing safe and smooth riding conditions. In addition, the project will construct an access road for a storage building to house the new police command and support vehicles at the public works corporation yard. Bids were received on March 18, 2024; staff recommends awarding the project to the lowest responsible bidder, O’Grady Paving, Inc. in the amount of $6,861,680.85 for the Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction Project, CIP No. 24503.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Approve plans and specifications, and award the construction contract to O’Grady Paving, Inc, of Mountain View, CA, for the low bid amount of $6,861,681, with an approximately 15 percent contingency of $1,029,252, for the total cost up to $7,890,933.

2. Authorize the City Manager to enter into the project contract.

3. Authorize the Director of Public Works, or authorized staff, to approve and execute contract change orders for a contingency amount of up to $1,029,252 (approximately 15 percent of the contract) for unforeseen yet necessary related work.

4. Approve amendments to the FY 2023/24 budget as follows:
• Transfer $986,606 in the Gas Tax Fund (Fund 160), from the Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction Project, CIP No. 23503, to the Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction Project, CIP No. 24503.
• Transfer $168,487 in the Measure BB – Bike & Pedestrian Fund (Fund 165), from the Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction Project, CIP No. 23503, to the Annual

Page 328 of 559 ends

Page 2 of 7 ends

Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction Project, CIP No. 24503. • Transfer $1,529,638 in the Measure BB Streets Fund (Fund 170), from the Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction Project, CIP No. 23503, to the Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction Project, CIP No. 24503.
• Transfer $349,822 in the Measure F Fund (Fund 166), from the Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction Project, CIP No. 23503, to the Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction Project, CIP No. 24503.
• Transfer $324,865 in the Streets CIP Fund (Fund 211), from the Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction Project, CIP No. 23503, to the Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction Project, CIP No. 24503.
• Transfer $327,011 in the Gas Tax Fund (Fund 160) from the Annual Slurry Seal of Various Streets Project, CIP No. 24504, to the Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction Project, CIP No. 24503.
• Transfer $83,527 from the Police Department's budget (00122100-440104) in the General Fund to the Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction Project, CIP No. 24503 in the Streets CIP Fund (Fund 211).

BACKGROUND
The City has two annual projects designed to maintain roadway infrastructure: the Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction Project and the Annual Slurry Seal of Various Streets Project. The first project resurfaces various roadways by overlaying the existing pavement with a new layer of asphalt concrete, while the other project slurry seals a different set of roadways.

The resurfacing project is considered a street rehabilitation project, while the slurry project is a preventative maintenance project. Together, these projects are designed to maintain the condition of the city’s roadway pavement.

In May 2023, bids for both the Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction Project and the Annual Slurry Seal of Various Streets Project were opened. While the Annual Slurry Seal of Various Streets Project, CIP No. 23504, received seven bids and met the City’s expectations, the Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction Project CIP No. 23503 only received two valid bids with the lowest bid at $4,988,888 (41 percent higher than the Engineer’s Estimate of $3.53 million). As the bids received for the Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction project exceeded the Engineer’s Estimate and exceeded the project’s available funding, bids for CIP No. 23503 were rejected, and the work was postponed.

To perform the necessary preparatory work for the Annual Slurry Seal of Various Streets Project, CIP No. 23504, a new capital improvement project - the 2023 Streets Preventative Maintenance Project, CIP No. 23570 - was created and completed.

As a result of the rejected bids in 2023, the remaining work under last year’s Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction Project, CIP No. 23503, is included under this Annual Street Resurfacing and & Reconstruction Project, CIP No. 24503.

DISCUSSION
There are three components to this project: street resurfacing, preventative maintenance associated with preparation for the slurry seal work, and the access road for the vehicle storage building adjacent to the City’s police department training facility.

Page 329 of 559 ends

Page 3 of 7 ends

Street Resurfacing
Approximately 1.65 million square feet of pavement on the streets listed in Table 1 below (and shown on the map provided as Attachment 1) will be resurfaced/reconstructed including Hopyard Road from Valley Avenue to Gibraltor Road. A map of the streets which will be reconstructed is also shown in Attachment 1. The roadway reconstruction method utilized is dependent on the condition of the existing street section. The street resurfacing includes installing a new layer of asphalt concrete over the existing pavement or over the rehabilitated/recycled existing pavement, repairing pavement areas, adjusting manholes and water valve boxes to grade, installing pavement markers, striping, and installing traffic detector loops. The different reconstruction methods are described below.

1. Overlay (OL): This reconstruction method involves milling the edges of the existing pavement and placing a new surface course of 1.5-1.75 inches of new asphalt concrete over the top of the existing pavement. Milling the edges is necessary to conform the new overlay with the existing curb and gutter.

2. Overlay with Fabric (OL/F): This reconstruction method involves milling the edges of the existing pavement and placing a layer of paving fabric on the surface of the existing pavement prior to applying a new surface course of 1.75 inches of new asphalt concrete/HMA (Hot Mix Asphalt) over the top of the fabric. Paving fabric is needed when the existing pavement has cracking caused by swelling and shrinking associated with heat and cool cycles. The paving fabric “bridges” these cracks that are only in the surface layer. Without the fabric, the cracks would quickly propagate to the surface of the new pavement. This is known as “reflective” cracking.

3. Pavement Milling and Overlay (Mill/OL): This reconstruction method involves the removal of the existing asphalt concrete surface layer of the entire street surface by milling, then applying 1.75 inches of asphalt concrete over the entire street surface. The milling of the entire street surface is necessary on streets upon which performing an OL would raise the crown and increase the cross slopes, particularly along the parking lane, to an unsatisfactory level.

4. Pavement Milling and HMA Filling (Mill/Fill): This construction method involves the removal of existing pavement sections to the depth of 3-4 inches and replacement with a new layer of asphalt concrete over the entire street. This construction method is basically the same as Mill/OL method above but at greater depth. The Mill/Fill operation requires the work to be completed on the same day to provide safety and to protect the subgrade while the Mill/OL allows the asphalt concrete overlay to be completed at a later date.

5. Cold In-Place Recycled and Overlay (CIR/OL): The CIR process includes pulverizing (milling) the top 4 inches of the existing pavement, mixing the pavement with asphalt binder/cement agents, grading and compacting by paving machine, and applying a fog seal. After completion of the CIR process, 1.75 inches of HMA layer are applied on top of the newly recycled pavement surface. This treatment is normally utilized on streets that are in poor condition and require total reconstruction, including a complete removal and replacement of the asphalt concrete layer along with stabilization of the existing base material. Total reconstruction is a very costly and lengthy process, which creates a major impact on traffic and residents. The City has successfully completed the CIR process on three other projects in the past.

Page 330 of 559 ends

Page 4 of 7 ends

Table 1: 2024 Streets Resurfacing Locations

The street resurfacing project will utilize CIR on Hopyard Road and Dorman Road to reconstruct the roadway prior to being overlayed. As part of the process, the finished roadway surface will be lowered back to the original roadway grades, reducing the steep cross slopes and buildup of asphalt from previous overlay work, restarting the life cycle of the pavement.

The CIR process will be performed at night on Hopyard Road as it requires a long train of equipment, takes up two lanes of traffic, and has major impacts to traffic. CIR work on Dorman Road will be done during the day and be scheduled for completion prior to the start of school.

The remaining activities on Dorman Road will be done during the week or in between the school bell schedules to reduce the impacts on traffic in the area.

Preventative Maintenance
The roadway preventative maintenance component includes preparatory work for the upcoming Annual Street Slurry Seal of Various Streets Project, CIP No. 24504. The preventative work will include sealing pavement cracks and repairing pavement in isolated distressed areas. This preparatory work is required prior to the slurry sealing operation but is included as part of the paving project for both cost savings and optimal results. The slurry seal project is scheduled to begin construction shortly after the completion of this project’s preventative maintenance component.

This work consists of pavement repair and crack sealing preparatory work for approximately

0.55 million square feet of roadway scheduled for slurry seal. Pavement repair involves removing 4-6 inches of the existing pavement section down to the roadway aggregate base material and replacing it with new asphalt concrete with the same thickness as removed. This is done when the pavement has failed in isolated areas and before the entire street surface is slurry sealed. This is the same repair method performed on the reconstructed streets. Crack sealing involves cleaning the pavement cracks to prepare them for a sealant, which is then smoothed so that the material is flush with the existing asphalt concrete surface.

Page 331 of 559 ends

Page 5 of 7 ends

The streets listed in Table 2 below (and shown on the map provided as Attachment 1) are included in the second component of work and will be slurry sealed later this year under a separate project.

Table 2: Streets Preventative Maintenance Locations

Police Command Center and Support Vehicle Storage Building Access Road The police department will store a new command center and support vehicle at the public works corporation yard adjacent to the police training facility. An existing access gate will be re-purposed and a new all-weather access road to a future building will be constructed as part of the upcoming police training facility renovation. The project will repurpose the stabilized millings from the paving project. To attract interested bidders, save costs, and promote timely construction, the access road to the City’s facility is included under the subject project. The work includes the removal and disposal of approximately 10,000 square feet of existing dirt, sub-grading, placement of 9 inches of recycled base material and installation of storm drain pipeline and inlets. Funding for the work is included in the police department’s operating budget.

Bids

Page 332 of 559 ends

Page 6 of 7 ends

Sealed bids for this project were opened on March 18, 2024. There were six bids received, ranging from the low bid amount of $6,861,680.85 to the high bid amount of $8,407,645.50.

The low bid amount, submitted by O’Grady Paving, Inc., is approximately 0.4 percent lower than the Engineer's Estimate of $6,892,118 (see Attachment 2). Past work performed by O’Grady Paving, Inc. was verified to be satisfactory. Staff recommends awarding the construction contract to the lowest responsible bidder, O’Grady Paving, Inc.

Consultant Services
Survey services will be provided by Sandis under the City’s existing on-call professional services agreement for an estimated cost of $43,750. Existing survey monuments, by law, must be protected during construction, and this project has the potential to disturb or damage a large number of monuments. To ensure monuments can be replaced if damaged, they must be surveyed prior to construction.

Consulting testing services will be provided under the City’s existing on-call professional services agreement for an estimated $30,000. The testing services are required to provide specialty testing of the materials and density checks in conformance with the City’s Quality Assurance Program for paving.

Schedule
The proposed schedule for the project:

Approval of Plans and Specifications and Award of Contract April 16, 2024 Start of Construction May 20, 2024 End of Construction Nov 20, 2024

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
Approval of this action advances the Climate Action Plan (CAP 2.0) in greenhouse gas reduction as approximately 22,000 tons of existing asphalt concrete pavement on Hopyard Road and on Dorman Road will be recycled and reused as part of the Cold In- Place Recycling process. In addition, approximately 5,000 cubic yards of ground asphalt concrete “millings” will be generated and stockpiled at the Bernal Avenue property for use in future City projects instead of disposal.

OUTREACH
Construction notices, social media posts and information will be posted on the City’s website prior to the start of construction. Construction message boards will be installed two weeks in advance of work on major roadways.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Approval of this action advances the Citywide ONE Pleasanton strategic plan goal of Investing in Our Environment, Strategy 1 – Implement the four-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to complete design and construction of budgeted capital projects.

FISCAL IMPACT
This project combines the remaining funding from Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction CIP No. 23503 and 24503 for a total funding of $7,559,418. The total estimated project expenditure, including the construction contract ($6,861,681), contingency ($1,029,252), on- call contract costs ($73,750), and miscellaneous expenses ($5,272) is $7,969,955, leaving a

Page 333 of 559 ends

Page 7 of 7 ends

shortfall of $410,538. Staff recommends the transfer of $327,011 from the Annual Slurry Seal of Various Streets Project, CIP No. 24504, and $83,527 from the Police Admin – General Fund, as outlined in the recommendations, to complete funding for this project as shown in Attachment 3.

The segment of Case Avenue from Bernal Avenue to Valley Avenue was removed from the project due to funding concerns prior to the bid. The street is anticipated to be added back to the project, utilizing the project contingency, if unforeseen conditions don’t arise from the base repair process and CIR work.

Funding for this project includes Gas Tax, SB-1, Measure B/BB, and Measure F funds from local and state transportation measures to improve the condition of the local, county and state road systems.

Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

Huy Ho, Associate Engineer Siew-Chin Yeong, Director of Public Works

Gerry Beaudin, City
Manager

Attachments:

1. Location Map

2. Bid Summary

3. Financial Expenditure Summary

Page 334 of 559 ends

INTERSTATE

CALIFORNIA
680

W LAS POSITAS BLVD

SANTA RITA RD

STANLEY BLVD

VINEYARD AVE

VALLEY AVE
AMADOR
VALLEY
HIGH
SCHOOL

BLACK AVE
DONLON

ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL

BERNAL AVE

VAL VISTA
PARK
AVE

SUNOL BLVD

FOOTHILL
HIGH
SCHOOL

VINTAGE
HILLS
PARK

CASE AVE

MIRADOR DR

CONCORD ST

CRELLIN RD

TOURIGA DR

FOOTHILL RD

STONERIDGE DR

INGLEWOOD
DR

MUIRWOOD

COMMUNITY
PARK
HEARST

ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL

PLEASANTON

MIDDLESCHOOL
BERNAL

COMMUNITY
PARK

STONERIDGE
MALL

BERNAL AVE

HOPYARD RD

FIRST ST

W LAGOON RD

VALLEY VIEWELEMENTARY
SCHOOL

DEL SOL AVE

KOTTINGER DR
VALLEY

HACIENDA DR

OWENS DR

INTERSTATE

CALIFORNIA
580

ALAMEDA COUNTRY

FAIRGROUNDS
AREA 8
AREA 9
AREA 10
3333 BUSCH RD.

AREA 4
AREA 5
AREA 6
AREA 7
AREA 2
AREA 1

CITY OF PLEASANTON

ANNUAL STREETS RESURFACING AND PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE PROJECT CIP NO. 24503

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

LOCATION MAP
STREETS RESURFACING 2024
(DRAWINGS ARE NOTED AS SHOWN)
PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE 2024
(BASE REPAIR & CRACK SEAL)
Attachment 1

Page 335 of 559 ends

ANNUAL STREETS RESURFACING-24503
Owner: City of Pleasanton
Item #IItem Description Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Price Item Total Unit Price Item Total Unit Price Item Total 1 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LS $500,000.00 $500,000.00 $485,000.00 $485,000.00 $320,000.00 $320,000.00 2 TYPE A HMA 20,000 TN $121.00 $2,420,000.00 $127.00 $2,540,000.00 $123.25 $2,465,000.00 3 AC LEVELING 100 TN $160.00 $16,000.00 $200.00 $20,000.00 $200.00 $20,000.00 4 4" THICK PAVEMENT REPAIR 192,000 SF $4.75 $912,000.00 $5.30 $1,017,600.00 $6.35 $1,219,200.00 5 COLD-IN-PLACE RECYCLE PAVEMENT (CIR), t=4" 893,045 SF $1.70 $1,518,176.50 $1.45 $1,294,915.25 $1.60 $1,428,872.00 6 COLD PLANE MILLING, d<3 350,435 SF $0.52 $182,226.20 $0.80 $280,348.00 $0.50 $175,217.50 7 COLD PLANE MILLING, d>3 4,650 SF $0.65 $3,022.50 $2.00 $9,300.00 $2.85 $13,252.50 8 PAVING MAT 9,260 SQ. YD $4.35 $40,281.00 $3.75 $34,725.00 $2.90 $26,854.00 9 CRACK SEAL 8,000 LBS $6.75 $54,000.00 $3.50 $28,000.00 $5.00 $40,000.00 10 6' AC WEDGE CUT AT LIP OF GUTTER PAN 25,617 LF $2.15 $55,076.55 $2.00 $51,234.00 $2.35 $60,199.95 11 15' AC WEDGE CUT AT STREET CONFORM 487 LF $10.00 $4,870.00 $5.00 $2,435.00 $20.25 $9,861.75 12 LOWER EXISTING MANHOLE PRIOR TO CIR
TREATMENT & COLD-PLANE 113 EA $620.00 $70,060.00 $400.00 $45,200.00 $350.00 $39,550.00 13 LOWER EXISTING WATER VALVE/MON PRIOR TO CIR
TREATMENT & COLD-PLANE 184 EA $500.00 $92,000.00 $300.00 $55,200.00 $250.00 $46,000.00 14 RAISE EXISTING MANHOLE FRAME AND COVER TO
GRADE 200 EA $1,000.00 $200,000.00 $800.00 $160,000.00 $950.00 $190,000.00 15 RAISE EXISTING WATER VALVE, CLEANOUT, AND
DETECTOR HANDHOLE TO GRADE 239 EA $750.00 $179,250.00 $500.00 $119,500.00 $725.00 $173,275.00 16 RAISE EXISTING MONUMENT TO GRADE 131 EA $750.00 $98,250.00 $500.00 $65,500.00 $725.00 $94,975.00 17 INSTALL BLUE REFLECTORIZED RAISED PAVEMENT
MARKERS 55 EA $35.00 $1,925.00 $27.50 $1,512.50 $25.00 $1,375.00 18 INSTALL DETAIL 9 480 LF $1.50 $720.00 $1.10 $528.00 $1.00 $480.00 19 INSTALL DETAIL 12 27,275 LF $1.35 $36,821.25 $1.10 $30,002.50 $1.00 $27,275.00 20 INSTALL DETAIL 22 6,290 LF $3.75 $23,587.50 $3.10 $19,499.00 $2.75 $17,297.50 21 INSTALL DETAIL 25 8,615 LF $1.85 $15,937.75 $1.70 $14,645.50 $1.50 $12,922.50 22 INSTALL DETAIL 29 1,499 LF $5.50 $8,244.50 $6.10 $9,143.90 $5.50 $8,244.50 23 INSTALL DETAIL 37B 5,445 LF $2.25 $12,251.25 $1.70 $9,256.50 $1.50 $8,167.50 24 INSTALL DETAIL 38 5,478 LF $2.10 $11,503.80 $2.00 $10,956.00 $1.75 $9,586.50 25 INSTALL DETAIL 38A 2,275 LF $1.35 $3,071.25 $1.70 $3,867.50 $1.50 $3,412.50 26 INSTALL DETAIL 39 25,816 LF $1.45 $37,433.20 $1.40 $36,142.40 $1.25 $32,270.00 27 INSTALL DETAIL 39A 5,497 LF $1.40 $7,695.80 $1.40 $7,695.80 $1.25 $6,871.25 Bid Opening: 3/18/2024 2:00pm
Engineer's Estimate #1 #2
O'Grady Paving MCK Services Inc.

Mountain View, CA 94043 Martinez, CA 94553
2513 Wyancotte Street 865 Howe Road, Ste B
Bid Items
Attachment 2

Page 336 of 559 ends

ANNUAL STREETS RESURFACING-24503
Owner: City of Pleasanton
Bid Opening: 3/18/2024 2:00pm
Engineer's Estimate #1 #2
O'Grady Paving MCK Services Inc.

Mountain View, CA 94043 Martinez, CA 94553
2513 Wyancotte Street 865 Howe Road, Ste B
28 INSTALL DETAIL 40 1,661 LF $2.50 $4,152.50 $3.30 $5,481.30 $3.00 $4,983.00 29 INSTALL TYPE IV ARROW 106 EA $135.00 $14,310.00 $132.00 $13,992.00 $120.00 $12,720.00 30 INSTALL TYPE VI ARROW 4 EA $300.00 $1,200.00 $374.00 $1,496.00 $340.00 $1,360.00 31 INSTALL 12” YELLOW/WHITE X-WALK 2,086 LF $8.00 $16,688.00 $11.00 $22,946.00 $10.00 $20,860.00 32 INSTALL 12” YELLOW/WHITE STRIPING 7,403 LF $7.50 $55,522.50 $11.00 $81,433.00 $10.00 $74,030.00 33 INSTALL 4” WHITE STRIPING 1,064 LF $2.00 $2,128.00 $3.30 $3,511.20 $3.00 $3,192.00 34 INSTALL 6” WHITE STRIPING 60 LF $2.65 $159.00 $4.40 $264.00 $4.00 $240.00 35 INSTALL 8” WHITE STRIPING 100 LF $3.75 $375.00 $6.10 $610.00 $5.50 $550.00 36 INSTALL "STOP" OR "YIELD" LEGEND 14 EA $175.00 $2,450.00 $242.00 $3,388.00 $220.00 $3,080.00 37 INSTALL "STOP AHEAD","PED XING" OR "KEEP
CLEAR"LEGEND 10 EA $380.00 $3,800.00 $583.00 $5,830.00 $530.00 $5,300.00 38 INSTALL "SCHOOL SLOW XING" LEGEND 4 EA $650.00 $2,600.00 $858.00 $3,432.00 $780.00 $3,120.00 39 INSTALL "25" "40" OR "45" SPEED LEGEND 20 EA $110.00 $2,200.00 $220.00 $4,400.00 $200.00 $4,000.00 40 INSTALL "YIELD" MARKING SYMBOL 90 LF $12.00 $1,080.00 $16.50 $1,485.00 $15.00 $1,350.00 41 INSTALL BIKE LANE SYMBOL & ARROW/SHARROW
LEGEND 40 EA $110.00 $4,400.00 $242.00 $9,680.00 $220.00 $8,800.00 42 INSTALL GREEN COLOR BIKE LANE 12,483 SF $8.25 $102,984.75 $7.70 $96,119.10 $7.00 $87,381.00 43 PAINT MEDIAN CURB (NOSE) WHITE/YELLOW 453 LF $5.00 $2,265.00 $8.80 $3,986.40 $8.00 $3,624.00 44 INSTALL TRAFFIC DETECTOR LOOPS (TYPE A) 84 EA $600.00 $50,400.00 $630.00 $52,920.00 $410.00 $34,440.00 45 INSTALL TRAFFIC DETECTOR LOOPS (TYPE D) 70 EA $600.00 $42,000.00 $650.00 $45,500.00 $410.00 $28,700.00 46 REMOVE & REPLACE EXISTING SPEED LUMP 4 EA $4,500.00 $18,000.00 $10,000.00 $40,000.00 $10,000.00 $40,000.00 47 3333 BUSCH ROAD-Access Road Improvements 1 LS $35,000.00 $35,000.00 $85,000.00 $85,000.00 $88,000.00 $88,000.00 48 CHANGEABLE MESSAGE SIGN (CMS) 8 EA $2,750.00 $22,000.00 $3,000.00 $24,000.00 $5,000.00 $40,000.00 49 INSTALL CITY'S PROJECT IDENTIFICATION SIGNS
(DWG#603) 4 EA $1,000.00 $4,000.00 $1,000.00 $4,000.00 $3,500.00 $14,000.00 TOTAL: $6,892,118.80 $6,861,680.85 $6,929,889.95
:Corrected Value

Page 337 of 559 ends

ANNUAL STREETS RESURFACING-24503
Owner: City of Pleasanton
Item #I Item Description Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Price Item Total Unit Price Item Total Unit Price Item Total 1 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LS $500,000.00 $500,000.00 $518,813.20 $518,813.20 $659,606.25 $659,606.25 2 TYPE A HMA 20,000 TN $121.00 $2,420,000.00 $125.00 $2,500,000.00 $140.00 $2,800,000.00 3 AC LEVELING 100 TN $160.00 $16,000.00 $215.00 $21,500.00 $140.00 $14,000.00 4 4" THICK PAVEMENT REPAIR 192,000 SF $4.75 $912,000.00 $6.25 $1,200,000.00 $5.50 $1,056,000.00 5 COLD-IN-PLACE RECYCLE PAVEMENT (CIR), t=4" 893,045 SF $1.70 $1,518,176.50 $1.90 $1,696,785.50 $1.80 $1,607,481.00 6 COLD PLANE MILLING, d<3 350,435 SF $0.52 $182,226.20 $0.45 $157,695.75 $0.40 $140,174.00 7 COLD PLANE MILLING, d>3 4,650 SF $0.65 $3,022.50 $0.93 $4,324.50 $1.20 $5,580.00 8 PAVING MAT 9,260 SQ. YD $4.35 $40,281.00 $3.50 $32,410.00 $5.00 $46,300.00 9 CRACK SEAL 8,000 LBS $6.75 $54,000.00 $3.10 $24,800.00 $3.00 $24,000.00 10 6' AC WEDGE CUT AT LIP OF GUTTER PAN 25,617 LF $2.15 $55,076.55 $2.15 $55,076.55 $2.50 $64,042.50 11 15' AC WEDGE CUT AT STREET CONFORM 487 LF $10.00 $4,870.00 $12.15 $5,917.05 $5.00 $2,435.00 12 LOWER EXISTING MANHOLE PRIOR TO CIR
TREATMENT & COLD-PLANE 113 EA $620.00 $70,060.00 $370.00 $41,810.00 $350.00 $39,550.00 13 LOWER EXISTING WATER VALVE/MON PRIOR TO CIR
TREATMENT & COLD-PLANE 184 EA $500.00 $92,000.00 $265.00 $48,760.00 $250.00 $46,000.00 14 RAISE EXISTING MANHOLE FRAME AND COVER TO
GRADE 200 EA $1,000.00 $200,000.00 $1,003.00 $200,600.00 $950.00 $190,000.00 15 RAISE EXISTING WATER VALVE, CLEANOUT, AND
DETECTOR HANDHOLE TO GRADE 239 EA $750.00 $179,250.00 $765.00 $182,835.00 $725.00 $173,275.00 16 RAISE EXISTING MONUMENT TO GRADE 131 EA $750.00 $98,250.00 $765.00 $100,215.00 $725.00 $94,975.00 17 INSTALL BLUE REFLECTORIZED RAISED PAVEMENT
MARKERS 55 EA $35.00 $1,925.00 $26.00 $1,430.00 $25.00 $1,375.00 18 INSTALL DETAIL 9 480 LF $1.50 $720.00 $1.00 $480.00 $1.00 $480.00 19 INSTALL DETAIL 12 27,275 LF $1.35 $36,821.25 $1.05 $28,638.75 $1.00 $27,275.00 20 INSTALL DETAIL 22 6,290 LF $3.75 $23,587.50 $2.90 $18,241.00 $2.75 $17,297.50 21 INSTALL DETAIL 25 8,615 LF $1.85 $15,937.75 $1.55 $13,353.25 $1.50 $12,922.50 22 INSTALL DETAIL 29 1,499 LF $5.50 $8,244.50 $5.75 $8,619.25 $5.50 $8,244.50 23 INSTALL DETAIL 37B 5,445 LF $2.25 $12,251.25 $1.50 $8,167.50 $1.50 $8,167.50 24 INSTALL DETAIL 38 5,478 LF $2.10 $11,503.80 $1.80 $9,860.40 $1.75 $9,586.50 25 INSTALL DETAIL 38A 2,275 LF $1.35 $3,071.25 $1.55 $3,526.25 $1.50 $3,412.50 26 INSTALL DETAIL 39 25,816 LF $1.45 $37,433.20 $1.30 $33,560.80 $1.25 $32,270.00 27 INSTALL DETAIL 39A 5,497 LF $1.40 $7,695.80 $1.30 $7,146.10 $1.25 $6,871.25 Bid Items
McGuire Hester Granite Construction Co
Alameda, CA 94502 Santa Clara, CA 95054
2810 Harbor Bay Parkway 715 Comstock StreetBid Opening: 3/18/2024 2:00pm Engineer's Estimate #3 #4

Page 338 of 559 ends

ANNUAL STREETS RESURFACING-24503
Owner: City of Pleasanton
McGuire Hester Granite Construction Co
Alameda, CA 94502 Santa Clara, CA 95054
2810 Harbor Bay Parkway 715 Comstock StreetBid Opening: 3/18/2024 2:00pm Engineer's Estimate #3 #4
28 INSTALL DETAIL 40 1,661 LF $2.50 $4,152.50 $3.00 $4,983.00 $3.00 $4,983.00 29 INSTALL TYPE IV ARROW 106 EA $135.00 $14,310.00 $125.00 $13,250.00 $120.00 $12,720.00 30 INSTALL TYPE VI ARROW 4 EA $300.00 $1,200.00 $350.00 $1,400.00 $340.00 $1,360.00 31 INSTALL 12” YELLOW/WHITE X-WALK 2,086 LF $8.00 $16,688.00 $10.50 $21,903.00 $10.00 $20,860.00 32 INSTALL 12” YELLOW/WHITE STRIPING 7,403 LF $7.50 $55,522.50 $10.50 $77,731.50 $10.00 $74,030.00 33 INSTALL 4” WHITE STRIPING 1,064 LF $2.00 $2,128.00 $3.00 $3,192.00 $3.00 $3,192.00 34 INSTALL 6” WHITE STRIPING 60 LF $2.65 $159.00 $4.00 $240.00 $4.00 $240.00 35 INSTALL 8” WHITE STRIPING 100 LF $3.75 $375.00 $5.70 $570.00 $5.50 $550.00 36 INSTALL "STOP" OR "YIELD" LEGEND 14 EA $175.00 $2,450.00 $225.00 $3,150.00 $220.00 $3,080.00 37 INSTALL "STOP AHEAD","PED XING" OR "KEEP
CLEAR"LEGEND 10 EA $380.00 $3,800.00 $540.00 $5,400.00 $530.00 $5,300.00 38 INSTALL "SCHOOL SLOW XING" LEGEND 4 EA $650.00 $2,600.00 $810.00 $3,240.00 $780.00 $3,120.00 39 INSTALL "25" "40" OR "45" SPEED LEGEND 20 EA $110.00 $2,200.00 $200.00 $4,000.00 $200.00 $4,000.00 40 INSTALL "YIELD" MARKING SYMBOL 90 LF $12.00 $1,080.00 $15.00 $1,350.00 $15.00 $1,350.00 41 INSTALL BIKE LANE SYMBOL & ARROW/SHARROW
LEGEND 40 EA $110.00 $4,400.00 $220.00 $8,800.00 $220.00 $8,800.00 42 INSTALL GREEN COLOR BIKE LANE 12,483 SF $8.25 $102,984.75 $7.35 $91,750.05 $7.00 $87,381.00 43 PAINT MEDIAN CURB (NOSE) WHITE/YELLOW 453 LF $5.00 $2,265.00 $8.20 $3,714.60 $8.00 $3,624.00 44 INSTALL TRAFFIC DETECTOR LOOPS (TYPE A) 84 EA $600.00 $50,400.00 $500.00 $42,000.00 $410.00 $34,440.00 45 INSTALL TRAFFIC DETECTOR LOOPS (TYPE D) 70 EA $600.00 $42,000.00 $500.00 $35,000.00 $410.00 $28,700.00 46 REMOVE & REPLACE EXISTING SPEED LUMP 4 EA $4,500.00 $18,000.00 $8,100.00 $32,400.00 $5,500.00 $22,000.00 47 3333 BUSCH ROAD-Access Road Improvements 1 LS $35,000.00 $35,000.00 $62,000.00 $62,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 48 CHANGEABLE MESSAGE SIGN (CMS) 8 EA $2,750.00 $22,000.00 $3,740.00 $29,920.00 $1,500.00 $12,000.00 49 INSTALL CITY'S PROJECT IDENTIFICATION SIGNS
(DWG#603) 4 EA $1,000.00 $4,000.00 $1,160.00 $4,640.00 $1,200.00 $4,800.00 TOTAL: $6,892,118.80 $7,375,200.00 $7,487,851.00
:Corrected Value

Page 339 of 559 ends

ANNUAL STREETS RESURFACING-24503
Owner: City of Pleasanton
Item #I Item Description Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Price Item Total Unit Price Item Total Unit Price Item Total 1 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LS $500,000.00 $500,000.00 $1,345,832.00 $1,345,832.00 $285,000.00 $285,000.00 2 TYPE A HMA 20,000 TN $121.00 $2,420,000.00 $110.00 $2,200,000.00 $145.00 $2,900,000.00 3 AC LEVELING 100 TN $160.00 $16,000.00 $110.00 $11,000.00 $300.00 $30,000.00 4 4" THICK PAVEMENT REPAIR 192,000 SF $4.75 $912,000.00 $5.50 $1,056,000.00 $9.00 $1,728,000.00 5 COLD-IN-PLACE RECYCLE PAVEMENT (CIR), t=4" 893,045 SF $1.70 $1,518,176.50 $2.00 $1,786,090.00 $2.15 $1,920,046.75 6 COLD PLANE MILLING, d<3 350,435 SF $0.52 $182,226.20 $0.60 $210,261.00 $0.50 $175,217.50 7 COLD PLANE MILLING, d>3 4,650 SF $0.65 $3,022.50 $1.50 $6,975.00 $1.50 $6,975.00 8 PAVING MAT 9,260 SQ. YD $4.35 $40,281.00 $5.00 $46,300.00 $3.35 $31,021.00 9 CRACK SEAL 8,000 LBS $6.75 $54,000.00 $3.00 $24,000.00 $5.91 $47,280.00 10 6' AC WEDGE CUT AT LIP OF GUTTER PAN 25,617 LF $2.15 $55,076.55 $3.00 $76,851.00 $4.00 $102,468.00 11 15' AC WEDGE CUT AT STREET CONFORM 487 LF $10.00 $4,870.00 $3.00 $1,461.00 $35.00 $17,045.00 12 LOWER EXISTING MANHOLE PRIOR TO CIR
TREATMENT & COLD-PLANE 113 EA $620.00 $70,060.00 $350.00 $39,550.00 $350.00 $39,550.00 13 LOWER EXISTING WATER VALVE/MON PRIOR TO CIR
TREATMENT & COLD-PLANE 184 EA $500.00 $92,000.00 $250.00 $46,000.00 $250.00 $46,000.00 14 RAISE EXISTING MANHOLE FRAME AND COVER TO
GRADE 200 EA $1,000.00 $200,000.00 $950.00 $190,000.00 $950.00 $190,000.00 15 RAISE EXISTING WATER VALVE, CLEANOUT, AND
DETECTOR HANDHOLE TO GRADE 239 EA $750.00 $179,250.00 $725.00 $173,275.00 $725.00 $173,275.00 16 RAISE EXISTING MONUMENT TO GRADE 131 EA $750.00 $98,250.00 $725.00 $94,975.00 $725.00 $94,975.00 17 INSTALL BLUE REFLECTORIZED RAISED PAVEMENT
MARKERS 55 EA $35.00 $1,925.00 $25.00 $1,375.00 $25.00 $1,375.00 18 INSTALL DETAIL 9 480 LF $1.50 $720.00 $1.00 $480.00 $1.00 $480.00 19 INSTALL DETAIL 12 27,275 LF $1.35 $36,821.25 $1.00 $27,275.00 $1.00 $27,275.00 20 INSTALL DETAIL 22 6,290 LF $3.75 $23,587.50 $3.00 $18,870.00 $2.75 $17,297.50 21 INSTALL DETAIL 25 8,615 LF $1.85 $15,937.75 $1.00 $8,615.00 $1.50 $12,922.50 22 INSTALL DETAIL 29 1,499 LF $5.50 $8,244.50 $5.00 $7,495.00 $5.50 $8,244.50 23 INSTALL DETAIL 37B 5,445 LF $2.25 $12,251.25 $1.00 $5,445.00 $1.50 $8,167.50 24 INSTALL DETAIL 38 5,478 LF $2.10 $11,503.80 $2.00 $10,956.00 $1.75 $9,586.50 25 INSTALL DETAIL 38A 2,275 LF $1.35 $3,071.25 $1.00 $2,275.00 $1.50 $3,412.50 26 INSTALL DETAIL 39 25,816 LF $1.45 $37,433.20 $1.00 $25,816.00 $1.25 $32,270.00 27 INSTALL DETAIL 39A 5,497 LF $1.40 $7,695.80 $1.00 $5,497.00 $1.25 $6,871.25 Bid Opening: 3/18/2024 2:00pm
#6
Ghilotti
246 Ghilotti Ave
Santa Rosa, CA95407
Engineer's Estimate #5
DeSilva Gates
Dublin, CA 94568
11555 Dublin Blvd
Bid Items

Page 340 of 559 ends

ANNUAL STREETS RESURFACING-24503
Owner: City of Pleasanton
Bid Opening: 3/18/2024 2:00pm
#6
Ghilotti
246 Ghilotti Ave
Santa Rosa, CA95407
Engineer's Estimate #5
DeSilva Gates
Dublin, CA 94568
11555 Dublin Blvd
28 INSTALL DETAIL 40 1,661 LF $2.50 $4,152.50 $3.00 $4,983.00 $3.00 $4,983.00 29 INSTALL TYPE IV ARROW 106 EA $135.00 $14,310.00 $120.00 $12,720.00 $120.00 $12,720.00 30 INSTALL TYPE VI ARROW 4 EA $300.00 $1,200.00 $300.00 $1,200.00 $340.00 $1,360.00 31 INSTALL 12” YELLOW/WHITE X-WALK 2,086 LF $8.00 $16,688.00 $10.00 $20,860.00 $10.00 $20,860.00 32 INSTALL 12” YELLOW/WHITE STRIPING 7,403 LF $7.50 $55,522.50 $10.00 $74,030.00 $10.00 $74,030.00 33 INSTALL 4” WHITE STRIPING 1,064 LF $2.00 $2,128.00 $3.00 $3,192.00 $3.00 $3,192.00 34 INSTALL 6” WHITE STRIPING 60 LF $2.65 $159.00 $4.00 $240.00 $4.00 $240.00 35 INSTALL 8” WHITE STRIPING 100 LF $3.75 $375.00 $6.00 $600.00 $5.50 $550.00 36 INSTALL "STOP" OR "YIELD" LEGEND 14 EA $175.00 $2,450.00 $200.00 $2,800.00 $220.00 $3,080.00 37 INSTALL "STOP AHEAD","PED XING" OR "KEEP
CLEAR"LEGEND 10 EA $380.00 $3,800.00 $500.00 $5,000.00 $530.00 $5,300.00 38 INSTALL "SCHOOL SLOW XING" LEGEND 4 EA $650.00 $2,600.00 $700.00 $2,800.00 $780.00 $3,120.00 39 INSTALL "25" "40" OR "45" SPEED LEGEND 20 EA $110.00 $2,200.00 $200.00 $4,000.00 $200.00 $4,000.00 40 INSTALL "YIELD" MARKING SYMBOL 90 LF $12.00 $1,080.00 $15.00 $1,350.00 $15.00 $1,350.00 41 INSTALL BIKE LANE SYMBOL & ARROW/SHARROW
LEGEND 40 EA $110.00 $4,400.00 $200.00 $8,000.00 $220.00 $8,800.00 42 INSTALL GREEN COLOR BIKE LANE 12,483 SF $8.25 $102,984.75 $7.00 $87,381.00 $7.00 $87,381.00 43 PAINT MEDIAN CURB (NOSE) WHITE/YELLOW 453 LF $5.00 $2,265.00 $8.00 $3,624.00 $8.00 $3,624.00 44 INSTALL TRAFFIC DETECTOR LOOPS (TYPE A) 84 EA $600.00 $50,400.00 $400.00 $33,600.00 $750.00 $63,000.00 45 INSTALL TRAFFIC DETECTOR LOOPS (TYPE D) 70 EA $600.00 $42,000.00 $400.00 $28,000.00 $750.00 $52,500.00 46 REMOVE & REPLACE EXISTING SPEED LUMP 4 EA $4,500.00 $18,000.00 $3,000.00 $12,000.00 $5,500.00 $22,000.00 47 3333 BUSCH ROAD-Access Road Improvements 1 LS $35,000.00 $35,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $68,000.00 $68,000.00 48 CHANGEABLE MESSAGE SIGN (CMS) 8 EA $2,750.00 $22,000.00 $7,000.00 $56,000.00 $6,000.00 $48,000.00 49 INSTALL CITY'S PROJECT IDENTIFICATION SIGNS
(DWG#603) 4 EA $1,000.00 $4,000.00 $1,200.00 $4,800.00 $1,200.00 $4,800.00 TOTAL: $6,892,118.80 $7,849,849.00 $8,407,645.50
:Corrected Value

Page 341 of 559 ends

ATTACHMENT 3
Project Funding to Date Amount Totals
Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruciton, CIP No. 23503 Gas Tax (Fund 160) $986,606
Measure BB - Bike & Pedestrian (Fund 165/163) 168,487
Measure BB - Streets (Fund 170/164) 1,529,638
Measure F (Fund 166) 349,822
Streets CIP (Fund 211) 324,865
CIP No. 23503 Sub-Total $3,359,418
Annual Street Resurfacing & Reconstruciton, CIP No. 24503 2023-24 CIP Allocation (Gas Tax - Fund 160) $1,450,000
2023-24 CIP Allocation (Measure F - Fund 166) 450,000
2023-24 CIP Allocation (MBB Streets - Fund 170) 2,300,000 CIP No. 24503 Sub-Total $4,200,000

TOTAL PROJECT FUNDING TO DATE
Project Expenditures to Date
Miscellaenous Expenses $272
Total Project Expenditures to Date $272
Anticipated Project Expenditures
O'Grady Paving, Inc. - Construction Contract $6,861,681 O'Grady Paving, Inc. - Contingency (approximately 15%) 1,029,252 Suverying Services (On-Call Contractor) 43,750
Material Testing Services (On-Call Contractor) 30,000
Miscellaenous Expenses 5,000
Total Anticipated Project Expenditures $7,969,683

TOTAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES
Funding Balance/ (Shortfall)
Current (Shortfall) (410,538)
Transfer from Annual Slurry Seal, CIP No. 24504 - Gas Tax (Fund 160) $327,011 Transfer from Police Admin - General Fund (00122100-440104) 83,527 $410,538
$7,969,955
$7,559,418

ANNUAL STREET RESURFACING & RECONSTRUCTION
CIP NO. 23503 & 24503
04/16/24

Page 342 of 559 ends

Page 1 of 5 ends

Item #15

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

April 16, 2024
Public Works - Engineering Division

TITLE: AWARD A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT TO KAYUGA SOLUTION IN THE NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $688,270 FOR THE ASSET
MANAGEMENT PLAN PROJECT, CIP NO. 24460, AND AUTHORIZE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH GHD, INC., IN THE NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $61,730 FOR THE INTEGRATION OF MAINTSTAR WITH THE

ASSET MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

SUMMARY
The Asset Management Plan (AMP) will be an integrative planning document, incorporating the City’s various master plans and inventories for the overall management of the City’s infrastructure. It will aid in updating the long-term and 10-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) plans and the repair and replacement plans. The entire multi-year AMP project will include three phases: Phase 1 will develop a strategy and framework; Phase 2 will implement software, asset inventories, and communication; and Phase 3 will expand the program for life cycle and long-range planning. City staff advertised a Request for Qualifications and received Statements of Qualifications (SOQs) with sealed cost proposals. Based on staff ratings of the SOQs, consultants' presentations, and responses during interviews, staff identified Kayuga Solution as the top qualified consultant. Kayuga Solution proposes using cloud-based software, which it developed and is in use in other cities. Staff recommends awarding the professional services agreement to the most qualified responding consultant, Kayuga Solution, for a not-to-exceed amount of $688,270 for the first two phases of the Asset Management Plan Project, CIP No. 24460. Following the completion of Phase 2, the City will have developed the framework for the AMP, combined the City’s various inventories into a centralized database and completed a high-level condition assessment for most large-value assets. In addition, the information will be entered into a new asset management software, providing a single location to review and analyze the budgetary needs of most of the City’s critical assets.

Concurrently, the City is nearing completion of an update to the MaintStar computerized maintenance management system and will continue to use this system as the main portal for data entry. This system will also populate the AMP that Kayuga Solution will develop. During Phases 1 and 2 of the AMP project, Kayuga will work with the MaintStar consultant, GHD, Inc., to integrate the asset data. Staff recommends entering into a third amendment to the professional services agreement with GHD, Inc., for consulting services for an additional not- to-exceed amount of $61,730 during the first two phases of the Asset Management Plan Project, CIP No. 24460.

RECOMMENDATION
Award a professional services agreement to Kayuga Solution in the not-to-exceed amount of $688,270 for the Asset Management Plan Project, CIP No. 24460, and authorize an amendment to the agreement with GHD, Inc., in the not-to-exceed amount of $61,730 for the integration of MaintStar with the Asset Management Program.

Page 343 of 559 ends

Page 2 of 5 ends

1. Approve a professional services agreement with Kayuga Solution in the not-to-exceed amount of $688,270.

2. Authorize a third amendment to the agreement with GHD, Inc., for the not-to-exceed amount of $61,730 and to extend the term of the agreement to December 31, 2025, for the integration of MaintStar with the Asset Management Program.

3. Authorize the City Manager or designee to enter into the project agreements.

BACKGROUND
The City's ONE Pleasanton five-year strategic plan includes a City Council strategy to develop an asset management plan and address comprehensive long-term planning for maintenance, renovation, repair, and replacement of infrastructure and public facilities to meet current and future needs. The City has identified a need to integrate the existing separate asset tracking programs utilized by various departments and add any future applications into a single reporting and planning system platform. The Asset Management Plan, CIP No. 24460, was created to oversee the integration.

The integrated asset management system will serve all City departments and City-owned property and infrastructure. In some instances, there is complete asset data in software such as StreetSaver, MaintStar, and ArcGIS, while other data is collected in spreadsheets. Overall, the City is not fully leveraging the asset data to develop life cycle master planning, capital projects for renewal or replacement, and maintenance risk prioritization. The City has initiated an update to the MaintStar system, which is expected to have completed workflow improvements this year. The Public Works Department will continue to use MaintStar as its main point of entry for asset data and work orders and will expand the system for additional facility assets as part of the AMP project. The new integrated asset management system will capture that data along with data in other software for a single planning tool.

In November 2023, staff met to initiate and clarify the asset data within the City. The information gathered over the following months highlighted the variety of software currently in use and the need for an integrated reporting platform, by either expanding current software or implementing new software. Staff reached out to other cities with similar experiences in asset management planning; from the responses it was determined that hiring a consultant with expertise in City asset management planning using a qualifications-based process would be the best strategy. With funding provided over multiple fiscal years, staff identified the three following phases (with the most significant amount of work in Phase 2):

1. Assess the current asset data, develop a new citywide asset framework, and define objectives and performance measures;

2. Implement integrative software, complete asset inventories and condition assessments, and prioritize maintenance risk; and

3. Identify replacement costs and inform life cycle planning.

The Request for Qualifications was developed to identify the best consultant with broad knowledge of city services to oversee all three phases. Sealed cost proposals were also requested, with the RFQ to be opened after selecting the best-qualified consultant. The scope of work for each phase outlined in the cost proposal would be selected based on the fee

Page 344 of 559 ends

Page 3 of 5 ends

meeting the programmed budget.

DISCUSSION
A successful asset management program needs to define what an asset is. At its core, an asset lasts more than a year and requires investment, maintenance, and, eventually, replacement. In business, capital assets generally are valued at greater than $5,000, provide a return on investment, and are depreciated. In a public realm where cities maintain assets to serve the residents, access to and quality of City-provided services are important to determine which assets are in the program. Assets support City services rather than investments, and many have a higher risk classification and need to be managed for redundancy, quicker repair with stockpiled parts, or a shorter replacement life cycle. Assets may look the same in the program but may not have the same importance or risk. Every individual City asset needs to balance the risk, level of service, cost of service, and resident expectations within the asset management program.

The AMP project will capture several key infrastructure components, including facilities, parks, streets, water, sewer, storm, streetlights, street signals, sidewalks and ADA (Americans with Disabilities) ramps, urban forest, fencing, trails, fleet, fire, police, recreation and more. The program will identify gaps in available information and fill the gaps by performing high-level inventory and condition assessments that can be used for high-level budgeting.

The AMP software is set up to pull information from existing programs to keep data entry limited to the primary source of information. It will add the necessary conditions and budget information if this data is not available through the existing programs.

The framework will develop standardized naming criteria to create unique asset IDs, requiring updates to existing databases and software. With the recent implementation of Maintstar updates, additional work will be required to complete the build-out of the asset list and train staff on how to capture asset conditions and insert maintenance costs that can be used for better financial forecasting. It is recommended the City partner with the existing Maintstar integrator, GHD, Inc., to make the necessary updates so the database can be used to house all the assets maintained within the MaintStar system. There will be an additional need to work with other existing database software vendors, such as GIS, that will be identified in the future as the AMP project progresses. The Asset Management Plan Project, CIP No. 24460, can begin Phase 1 in May 2024 and be completed in five to six months, depending on staff’s availability to provide background data to the consultant. Phase 2 can overlap with the end of Phase 1 and is estimated to be completed in an additional 12 to 13 months.

To expand the use of the tool to the highest and best use for life cycle planning, Phase 3 would be initiated and be completed in seven to eight months. The outcome will allow the tool to identify replacement costs, guide capital projects for renewal or replacement, and project budget needs. We are also looking for expanded tool software to provide input on asset planning impacted by code requirements, emergency resilience, technology obsolescence, and sustainability strategies.

Throughout the Asset Management Plan Project, providing education and guidance for staff is critical for successful change management. Part of a communication strategy is defining public information to communicate better the need for life cycle planning of public assets and the need for capital funds to support aging infrastructure. Kayuga Solution has successfully

Page 345 of 559 ends

Page 4 of 5 ends

worked with the City of Livermore on an online presence to inform the city’s residents.

With a start in May 2024, phases 1 and 2 are expected to be completed by the end of 2025 with the entire three-phase project expected to be completed by end of 2026. This is a year shorter than the original project funding proposal and includes project costs less than the funding.

Staff recommends awarding the professional services agreement to Kayuga Solution for a not- to-exceed amount of $688,270 (Attachment 1) and entering into a third amendment to the professional services agreement with GHD, Inc., for consulting services for an additional amount of $61,730 for a total new agreement amount of $678,352 (Attachment 2) for the first two phases of the Asset Management Plan Project, CIP No. 24460.

Request for Qualifications
City staff advertised the Request for Qualifications on February 6, 2024, and received five Statements of Qualifications (SOQs) with sealed Cost Proposals on February 29, 2024. Staff reviewed the SOQs and interviewed four consultant teams on March 14, 2024. Based on staff ratings of the SOQs, consultants' presentations, and interview responses, staff identified Kayuga Solution as the top qualified consultant. Staff then opened the sealed Cost Proposal only from Kayuga Solution and determined its cost proposal for Phases 1 and 2 were within the project budget. Staff recommends awarding the professional services agreement to the most qualified responding consultant, Kayuga Solution in the not-to-exceed amount of $688,270.

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
City Climate Action Plan (CAP 2.0) reduction in community greenhouse gas emissions and increasing buildings and energy resilience within the Buildings and Energy Strategy section is supported through an asset management program by helping to identify assets that are nearing end-of-life and an opportunity for implementing the supporting actions outlined in Strategy BE-1 and BE-2.

OUTREACH
No outreach was conducted, as this item is a routine matter of City business.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Approval of this action advances the ONE Pleasanton strategic plan goal of Investing in Our Environment, Strategy 1 – Implement the four-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Strategy 2 – Developing an Asset Management Plan. The Asset Management Plan will promote the effective use of existing facilities and infrastructure through maintenance and repair to benefit the community with a focus on environmental stewardship and to address comprehensive long-term planning to meet current and future needs.

FISCAL IMPACT
This project is funded by the Asset Management Plan project (CIP No. 24460). The project’s total programmed amount in the four-year Capital Improvement Program is $1.5 million, and $750,000 is budgeted in FY 2023/24. The AMP project expenditure with the recommended consultants, Kayuga Solution and GHD, Inc., for Phases 1 and 2 is $750,000. Phase 3 will be requested in future fiscal years and is estimated to be less than the total programmed funding.

Page 346 of 559 ends

Page 5 of 5 ends

Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

Tom Mucha, Associate Civil
Engineer/Architect
Siew-Chin Yeong, Director of Public
Works

Gerry Beaudin, City
Manager

Attachments:

1. Professional Services Agreement with Kayuga Solution

2. Amendment to Professional Services Agreement with GHD, Inc.

Page 347 of 559 ends

Page 1 of 6 ends

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

THIS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is entered into this 17th day of April 2024, between the CITY OF PLEASANTON, a municipal corporation (“City”), and Kayuga Solution, Inc, whose address is 28241 Crown Valley Parkway F-216, Laguna Niguel, California 92677, and telephone number is (949) 300-3903, (“Consultant”).

RECITALS

A. Consultant is qualified to and experienced in providing asset management services and software for the purposes specified in this Agreement.

B. City finds it necessary and advisable to use the services of the Consultant for the purposes provided in this Agreement.

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions in this Agreement, City and Consultant agree as follows:

1. Consultant’s Services. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Consultant shall provide to City the services described in Exhibit A. Consultant shall provide said services at that time, place and in the manner specified in Exhibit A.

2. City Assistance, Facilities, Equipment and Clerical Support. Except as set forth in Exhibit A, Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, furnish all facilities and equipment that may be required for furnishing services pursuant to this Agreement. City shall furnish to Consultant only the facilities and equipment listed in Exhibit A according to the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit A.

3. Term. This contract shall commence on the date written above and shall expire on December 31, 2025.

4. Compensation. City shall pay Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement as described more particularly in Exhibit A. The payments shall be made on a monthly time and material basis upon receipt and approval of Consultant’s invoice. Total compensation for services and reimbursement for costs shall not exceed the Total Professional Fees described in Exhibit A unless the parties agree pursuant to Section 7 below.

a. Invoices submitted to City must contain a brief description of work performed, time used and City reference number. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of Consultant’s invoice and approved by City.

Page 348 of 559 ends

Page 2 of 6 ends

or neglects to submit within sixty (60) days, or any extension thereof granted by the City, after the work is accepted by the City.

5. Sufficiency of Consultant’s Work.
a. All work product and all other documents prepared by Consultant shall be adequate and sufficient to meet the purposes for which they are prepared.

b. Data, calculations, opinions, reports, investigations, and other similar information provided by the City relating to site, local, or other conditions is not warranted or guaranteed, either expressly or implied, but the City.

c. Consultant’s responsibilities under this section shall not be delegated. Consultant shall be responsible to the City for acts, errors, or omissions of Consultant’s subconsultants.

6. Ownership of Work. All work product and all other documents completed or partially completed by Consultant in the performance of this Agreement shall become the property of the City. All materials shall be delivered to the City upon completion or termination of the work under this Agreement. If any materials are lost, damaged or destroyed before final delivery to the City, the Consultant shall replace them at its own expense. Any and all copyrightable subject matter in all materials is hereby assigned to the City and the Consultant agrees to execute any additional documents that may be necessary to evidence such assignment. Consultant shall keep materials confidential. Materials shall not be used for purposes other than performance of services under this Agreement and shall not be disclosed to anyone not connected with these services, unless the City provides prior written consent.

7. Changes. City may request changes in the scope of services to be provided by Consultant.

Any changes and related fees shall be mutually agreed upon between the parties and subject to a written amendment to this Agreement.

8. Consultant’s Status. In performing the obligations set forth in this Agreement, Consultant shall have the status of an independent contractor and Consultant shall not be considered to be an employee of the City for any purpose. All persons working for or under the direction of Consultant are its agents and employees and are not agents or employees of City.

9. Termination for Convenience of City. The City may terminate this Agreement at any time by mailing a notice in writing to Consultant. The Agreement shall then be deemed terminated, and no further work shall be performed by Consultant. If the Agreement is so terminated, the Consultant shall be paid for that percentage of the work actually completed at the time the notice of termination is received.

10. Non-Assignability. The Consultant shall not assign, sublet, or transfer this Agreement or any interest or obligation in the Agreement without the prior written consent of the City, and then only upon such terms and conditions as City may set forth in writing. Consultant shall be solely responsible for reimbursing subconsultants.

11. Indemnity and Hold Harmless. Consultant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless, the City and its officers, agents and employees from and against all claims, losses, damage, injury, and liability for damages arising from, or alleged to have arisen from, errors, omissions, negligent or wrongful acts of the Consultant in the performance of its services under this

Page 349 of 559 ends

Page 3 of 6 ends

Agreement, regardless of whether the City has reviewed or approved the work or services which has given rise to the claim, loss, damage, injury or liability for damages. This indemnification shall extend for a reasonable period of time after completion of the project as well as during the period of actual performance of services under this Agreement. The City’s acceptance of the insurance certificates required under this Agreement does not relieve the Consultant from its obligation under this paragraph.

12. Insurance. During the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall maintain in full force and effect, at its own cost and expense, insurance coverages with insurers with an A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A:VII. Contractor shall have the obligation to furnish City, as additional insured, the minimum coverages identified below, or such greater or broader coverage for City, if available in the Contractor’s policies:

The policy shall state in writing either on the Certificate of Insurance or attached rider that this insurance will operate as primary insurance for work performed by Consultant and its subconsultants, and that no other insurance effected by City or other named insured will be called on to cover a loss.

b. Automobile Liability Insurance. Automobile liability insurance with limits not less than $2,000,000 per person/per occurrence.

c. Workers’ Compensation Insurance. Workers’ Compensation Insurance for all of Consultant’s employees, in strict compliance with State laws, including a waiver of subrogation and Employer’s Liability Insurance with limits of at least $1,000,000.

d. Professional Liability Insurance. Professional liability insurance in the amount of $2,000,000.

e. Certificate of Insurance. Consultant shall file a certificate of insurance with the City prior to the City’s execution of this Agreement, and prior to engaging in any operation or activity set forth in this Agreement. The Certificate of Insurance shall provide in writing that the insurance afforded by this Certificate shall not be suspended, voided, canceled, reduced in coverage or in limits without providing notice to the City in accordance with California Insurance Code section 677.2 which requires the notice of cancellation to: 1) include the effective date of the cancellation; 2) include the reasons for the cancellation; and 3) be given at least 30 days prior to the effective date of the cancellation, except that in the case of cancellation for nonpayment of premiums or for fraud, the notice shall be given no less than 10 days prior to the effective date of the cancellation. Notice shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested. In addition, the insured shall provide thirty (30) days prior written notice to the City of any cancellation, suspension, reduction of coverage or in limits, or voiding of the insurance coverage required by this agreement. The City reserves the right to require complete certified copies of policies.

f. Waiver of Subrogation. The insurer agrees to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its officers, employees and agents.

Page 350 of 559 ends

Page 4 of 6 ends

g. Defense Costs. Coverage shall be provided on a “pay on behalf of” basis, with defense costs payable in addition to policy limits. There shall be no cross liability exclusions. These provisions do not apply to Professional Liability.

h. Subconsultants. Consultant shall include all subconsultants as insured under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subconsultant. All coverages for subconsultant shall be subject to all of the requirements stated in this Agreement, including but not limited naming additional insureds.

13. Notices. All notices herein required shall be in writing and shall be sent by certified or registered mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows:

To Consultant: Colin Chung To City: City Manager Kayuga Solution, Inc City of Pleasanton
28241 Crown Valley Parkway, F-216 P.O. Box 520
Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 Pleasanton, CA 94566

14. Conformance to Applicable Laws. Consultant shall comply with all applicable Federal, State, and Municipal laws, rules, and ordinances. Consultant shall not discriminate in the employment of persons or in the provision of services under this Agreement on the basis of any legally protected classification, including race, color, national origin, ancestry, sex or religion of such person.

15. Licenses, Certifications and Permits. Prior to the City’s execution of this Agreement and prior to the Consultant’s engaging in any operation or activity set forth in this Agreement, Consultant shall obtain a City of Pleasanton business license, which must be kept in effect during the term of this Agreement. Consultant covenants that it has obtained all certificates, licenses, permits and the like required to perform the services under this Agreement.

16. Records and Audits. Consultant shall maintain all records regarding this Agreement and the services performed for a period of three years from the date that final payment is made. At any time during normal business hours, the records shall be made available to the City to inspect and audit.

17. Confidentiality. Consultant shall exercise reasonable precautions to prevent the unauthorized disclosure and use of City reports, information or conclusions.

18. Conflicts of Interest. Consultant covenants that other than this Agreement, Consultant has no financial interest with any official, employee or other representative of the City. Consultant and its principals do not have any financial interest in real property, sources of income or investment that would be affected in any manner of degree by the performance of Consultant’s services under this Agreement. If such an interest arises, Consultant will immediately notify the City.

19. Waiver. In the event either City or Consultant at any time waive any breach of this Agreement by the other, such waiver shall not constitute a waiver of any other or succeeding breach of this Agreement, whether of the same or of any other covenant, condition or obligation.

Page 351 of 559 ends

Page 5 of 6 ends

20. Governing Law. California law shall govern any legal action pursuant to this Agreement with venue in the applicable court or forum for Alameda County.

21. No Personal Liability. No official or employee of City shall be personally liable to Consultant in the event of any default or breach by the City or for any amount due Consultant.

22. Exhibits. All exhibits referred to herein are attached hereto and are by this reference incorporated herein.

23. Counterparts and Electronic Signatures. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one agreement. Counterparts may be delivered via facsimile, electronic mail (including pdf or any electronic signature complying with U.S. federal E-Sign Act of 2000 (15 U.S. Code §7001 et seq.), California Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (Cal. Civil Code §1633.1 et seq.), or other applicable law) or other transmission method, and any counterpart so delivered shall be deemed to have been duly and validly delivered and be valid and effective for all purposes.

24. Scope of Agreement. This writing constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties.

Any modification to the Agreement shall be in writing and signed by both parties.

THIS AGREEMENT executed the date and year first above written.

CITY OF PLEASANTON CONSULTANT

__________________________ By: __________________________ Gerry Beaudin, City Manager Colin Chung, President

ATTEST:

__________________________ __________________________ Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk

Approved as to form:

_____________________________
Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney

[If Consultant is a corporation, signatures must comply with California Corporations Code §313] Rev. 11/23

Page 352 of 559 ends

28246 Crown Valley Parkway F- 216, Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 www.kayugasolution.com
Scope of Services
Kayuga will provide the following scope of services to achieve the goals and objectives of the project.

Phase 1

1. Task 1 - Asset Management Roadmap
Documenting the current state of asset management practices starts with review of the existing information systems and asset data. This exercise aims to establish the City’s asset management information system, a network of software and data sources used to support asset management decisions.

This task will identify and document existing software and data sources currently utilized (e.g., GIS, StreetSaver, MaintStar, Excel sheets, reports) to support asset management decisions. On the data side, all available asset data for each asset class (e.g., pavement, sidewalk, street signs) will be compiled from multiple data sources. As part of this process, a proposed asset hierarchy for all asset classes will be developed. The asset hierarchy will be established based on City’s need with regards to reporting requirements (e.g., by department), budget sources (e.g., general fund vs. enterprise fund), and other considerations.

The review will continue with the availability of data attributes required to support asset management decisions (e.g., unique ID, location, install year, size, asset class, asset type, material, condition, replacement cost, estimated useful life, asset condition). Data review findings (i.e., data gap analysis) for each of the asset classes will be summarized. With all the available data identified and reviewed, Kayuga will focus on developing a data gap mitigation strategy for each asset class. Based on available resources, budget, and timeframe, Kayuga will work with the City to develop strategies to close the data gap in the most efficient manner. Depending on the need, the proposed strategy may include digital map review, desktop inventory, field inventory and condition assessment, and/or data-mining workshops with staff. Considering the City’s constraints and internal prioritizations, an asset management roadmap with scope, schedule, and budget will be recommended for each of the asset classes.

Deliverables
• Asset Management Roadmap Memorandum
Phase 2

2. Task 2 - Asset Inventory and Condition Assessment
The asset inventory is the basis for all asset management and cost of ownership analyses. Before inventory starts, Kayuga will carefully review any existing data. Our goal is to supplement the data, not reinvent it. Where asset data does not exist, Kayuga will perform on-site asset inventory for facilities and assets listed in the RFP to create a Exhibit A

Page 353 of 559 ends

28246 Crown Valley Parkway F- 216, Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 www.kayugasolution.com
central database of assets owned and managed. For all visible or accessible assets, Kayuga will record asset attributes (e.g., size, type, material), assess current general condition, take note of any immediate and/or future maintenance needs, take pictures, and record the location of the asset using the GPS coordinates.

The asset register is a key component of the asset management program. It establishes the data foundation to support all asset management decisions and consolidates all data pertaining to the assets in the system. In addition, the asset register will help to develop the City’s system of records (i.e., GIS database). The development process will be comprised of the following steps:
• Gather existing data
• Define an asset
• Establish asset hierarchy
• Develop asset classes
• Develop an asset register
• Develop GIS layers
• Configure IRIS
The figure to the right shows the
example of IRIS window showing
asset hierarchy, asset attributes, and
photo.

The figure to the left shows an example of the IRIS map viewer window showing asset location within a park. Each point and polygon on the map viewer can be clicked to show asset details (i.e., attributes).

Deliverables
• Asset Inventory database (GIS layer, .csv files)
• Configuration and data upload for asset catalog, hierarchy, inventory, and attributes in IRIS

3. Task 3 - Estimate Replacement Cost
The goal of this task is to estimate the replacement cost of each asset. The estimated replacement cost can provide the City with an initial estimate to properly budget for the replacement of the asset. It should be noted that the estimated replacement cost does not represent a CIP project cost. Engineering, project management, permit, contingencies, and other direct and indirect costs are not typically factored in. For each asset, Kayuga will estimate the replacement cost. The estimated replacement cost will be based on our historical work on similar projects, manufacturer pricing, and/or review of the City’s financial and maintenance records. Kayuga will work with the City to ensure that the replacement costs are reasonable and representative.

Deliverables
• Cost database (.csv files)
• Configuration and data upload for cost database in IRIS

Page 354 of 559 ends

28246 Crown Valley Parkway F- 216, Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 www.kayugasolution.com

4. Task 4 - Perform Risk Assessment
Although assets may look the same in the asset register, not all assets are of equal importance. Based on location and functionality, the same type of asset may completely differ in importance to the City (e.g., an asset in a neighborhood park vs. community park). Kayuga will utilize the concept of risk to help differentiate and prioritize the City’s assets. Under limited resources and budget, the City will be able to utilize risk to help consistently and transparently prioritize the work to be performed and the budget required to mitigate the highest risk Risk will be based on the probability of failure (i.e., timing to failure) and consequence of failure (i.e., criticality, impact of failure). The probability of failure will be based on the condition score or age of the asset. Kayuga will work with the City to determine the appropriate
consequence of failure assessment methodology. Every asset in the asset register will receive a risk score. Each risk score will be plotted on a risk matrix to understand which assets are of the highest importance and how much budget it will require to mitigate the highest risk for the City.

After the risk assessment, Kayuga will provide the City with documentation of the risk methodology and tools (e.g.,
risk scoring criteria) used to produce the risk results. Assets presenting the highest risk will be highlighted and discussed with the City. The following figure shows an example of the IRIS risk matrix window showing the distribution of assets in different risk levels. Each cell in this matrix can be clicked to show the list of assets and their associated attributes and costs.

The figure to the right shows an example of the IRIS risk map viewer window showing asset locations within a park and their associated risk level represented in red (high), amber (medium), and green (low). An additional filtering mechanism enables selection of all high-risk assets for possible project bundling.

Deliverables
• Risk assessment methodology
• PoF, CoF, and Risk scores
• Risk assessment configuration and data upload in IRIS

Page 355 of 559 ends

28246 Crown Valley Parkway F- 216, Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 www.kayugasolution.com

5. Task 5 - Determine the Desired Level of Service
Levels of service are defined as the standard and quality of services to be provided. Defining and documenting the levels of service enables the City to establish balance between the levels of service and the cost of service. The key objective of asset management is to balance levels of service, cost of service, risk, and user expectation. Once the cost of service is better understood, the City can improve efficiency through better processes and risk mitigation.

Kayuga will work with the City to develop desired levels of service for the facilities and asset classes owned and managed by the City. The desired levels of service will be established considering the elements of safety, aesthetics, strategic goals of the City, social benefits, economic benefits, sustainability, and more. For buildings, desired levels of service may be related to Facility
Condition Index. For walkways, the levels of service may be related not only to condition but also to mitigating trip hazards (i.e., sidewalk uplifts).

Deliverables
• Level of Service template and memo

6. Task 6 - Perform Life Cycle Cost and Cost of Ownership Analyses A key aspect of asset management is to plan ahead and understand the cost required to sustain services. To address this aspect, Kayuga will perform life cycle cost assessment for each asset in the asset register. The life cycle cost assessment estimates the cost required to perform maintenance, refurbishment, and/or replacement for each asset. Life cycle cost assessment can be performed for any designated planning horizon (e.g., 5 years, 10 years, 20 years, 50 years) requested by the City.

An important element of the life cycle cost process is the concept of management strategy. Kayuga will develop management strategies to characterize the life cycle behavior of all assets. These management strategies will include useful life as well as the timing and cost of maintenance and refurbishment activities. These management strategies will be influenced by the City’s established levels of service. Kayuga will provide the City with a management strategy table and a renewal profile showing projected annual rehabilitation and replacement funding needs over the planning horizon. Kayuga will highlight the estimated budget required to maintain the assets.

Kayuga will utilize IRIS for life cycle cost calculation. IRIS will use the City’s asset register and management strategies to calculate a life cycle cost of ownership for each asset. IRIS will model financial requirements and average investment requirements for any planning horizon chosen by the City, and it will identify the following for each year:
• Assets requiring action
• Type of action required (maintenance, rehabilitation, or replacement) • Estimated cost for each asset action
• Estimated total budget required for each year
The long-range financial needs will be viewable at any level in the asset hierarchy (e.g., by facility, by park, by asset).

Where limited budget is a concern, IRIS will help the City prioritize the actions based on risk and provide a minimum life cycle cost. This ensures all investments are prioritized and provides a transparent and consistent way to communicate how effectively asset investments are being made.

Page 356 of 559 ends

28246 Crown Valley Parkway F- 216, Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 www.kayugasolution.com
The following figure shows an example of the Replacement and Rehabilitation (R&R) cost projection in IRIS. Each bar in this graph can be clicked to show the list of assets and their associated attributes, type of activity (replacement or rehabilitation), and the associated costs.

Deliverables
• Management strategy database (.csv files)
• Configuration and data upload for management strategy database in IRIS • Configure the lifecycle cost analysis in IRIS

7. Task 7 - Develop Asset Management Plan
With the completion of the risk, life-cycle cost, and cost of ownership analyses, Kayuga will document the project in an asset management plan. An asset management plan is a long-range planning document that provides a framework for understanding the assets an organization owns, services it provides, risks it assumes, and financial investments it requires. An asset management plan can help an organization move from reactive to proactive management of its physical and financial resources.

Deliverables
• Asset Management Plan report

8. Task 8 - Funding Scenario Analysis
Working together with City staff, Kayuga will develop a funding scenario analysis to show the level of work backlog at different funding levels. Through this exercise, the City will be able to answer the next asset management question: How much funding is necessary to sustain the delivery of services? The results of the funding scenario analysis will be documented as an additional section in the Asset Management Plan. The chosen funding scenario will be used to develop the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The CIP packages will be created based on the annual list of recommended replacement and rehabilitation projects, prioritized by their associated risk score, and bundled based on logical grouping (e.g., by park, by facility). The individual asset replacement and rehabilitation will be added to the CIP package until it reaches the maximum funding level for each year. The remaining unfunded activities will be rolled over to the following year.

Deliverables
• Funding scenario analysis configuration and analysis in IRIS • Inclusion of scenario analysis results in Asset Management Plan report

9. Task 9 - Communication and Program Building
It critical to communicate the infrastructure needs not only to the decision-makers, but also to the citizens and

Page 357 of 559 ends

28246 Crown Valley Parkway F- 216, Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 www.kayugasolution.com
stakeholders. The infrastructure problem is not only a City staff problem; it is a public problem that needs to be understood and addressed by all. With the completion of the risk, life-cycle cost, and cost of ownership analyses, Kayuga will document the project and provide presentations to City staff and the City Council.

Program Building focuses on establishing in-house asset management capabilities by bringing in asset management awareness, knowledge, and skills into the organization. Starting early and continuing to maintain staff engagement throughout the project duration can be achieved through workshops, on-the-job training (joining consultant in the field), general and targeted staff trainings, and creating customized dashboards to encourage the utilization of the asset management software.

Deliverables
• On-the-job training
• Trainings (business process, methodologies, software applications) • City Council Meetings/Presentations
• Internal and external dashboards
Staff and Subconsultant List
Kayuga Project Team
No Classification Classification
1 Principal Consultant Colin Chung
2 Principal Consultant Iday Syachrani
2 Senior Consultant Charisse Kimura
3 Asset Management Specialist Jeff Herr
Roger Kobata
Jason Tran
4 GIS Specialist Wayne Christian
5 Information System Specialist Adnan Lodhi
6 Civil Engineer Ludy Smeets
Subconsultant
• None proposed.

Rate Schedule
Following rate schedule is proposed for the Kayuga Team.

No Classification Hourly Rates
1 Principal Consultant $225
2 Senior Consultant $195

Page 358 of 559 ends

28246 Crown Valley Parkway F- 216, Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 www.kayugasolution.com
3 Civil Engineer $195
3 Asset Management Specialist $165
4 Information System Specialist $175
5 GIS Specialist $150
Compensation Total
Total Professional Fees
• Phase 1 (Task 1) - $33,270
• Phase 2 (Tasks 2 to 9) - $605,000
Software Costs (IRIS License and Maintenance)
Annual license and maintenance fee for IRIS asset management enterprise software is as follows:
• Year 1 (May 2024 to April 2025) - No Charge
• Year 2 (May 2025 to April 2026) - $25,000
• Year 3 (May 2026 to April 2027) - $25,000
Exclusions
The following exclusions apply to Kayuga’s scope of service:
• Condition assessment is based on visual assessment.
• Inspections are limited to assets that can be safely accessed. • No ADA assessment is included in the scope.
• No detailed structural assessment is included.
• No seismic assessment is included.
• No hazardous material testing is included.

City Assistance and Support
Kayuga requests the following support and assistance from the City:
• Facility access: The City to provide access to facilities and assets. • Data access: The City to provide data access.
• Material Review – The City to review and comment on Kayuga’s data collection, condition assessment, criticality assessment, replacement cost estimation, and other analytic outputs. • Meeting coordination – The City to assist in scheduling meetings with staff upon request.

Page 359 of 559 ends

Contract #2022213
2022213, Third Amendment Page 1

THIRD AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT

This Third Amendment to Agreement ("Third Amendment") is entered into this 17th day of April 2024, by the City of Pleasanton ("City") and GHD, Inc. ("Consultant”).

Whereas, on July 30, 2021, the City and Consultant entered into a Professional Services Agreement for workflow development and integration for a Computerized Maintenance Management System – CMMS;

Whereas, on July 1, 2023, the City and Consultant amended the Agreement by the First Amendment to extend the term through June 30, 2024;

Whereas, on December 6, 2023, the City and Consultant amended the Agreement by the Second Amendment to expand configuration and training and to add consulting and troubleshooting;

Whereas, the parties desire to add additional services, increase the total compensation, and extend the term;

Now, therefore, in exchange for valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

1. Section 1 of the Agreement “Consultant’s Services” is amended to continue as- needed services for consulting and troubleshooting; and to add as-needed services to integrate MaintStar with the asset management program.

2. Section 3 of the Agreement “Terms” is amended to expire on December 31, 2025.

3. Section 4 of the Agreement “Compensation” the total compensation has been increased to $678,352 for the additional services due to the continued work and expansion of the tasks.

4. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one agreement. Counterparts may be delivered via facsimile, electronic mail (including pdf or any electronic signature complying with U.S. federal E-Sign Act of 2000 (15 U.S. Code §7001 et seq.), California Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (Cal. Civil Code §1633.1 et seq.), or other applicable law) or other transmission method, and any counterpart so delivered shall be deemed to have been duly and validly delivered and be valid and effective for all purposes.

5. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

Page 360 of 559 ends

Contract #2022213
2022213, Third Amendment Page 2

In witness whereof, authorized representatives of the parties have executed this Second Amendment to the Agreement as of the date and year first above written.

CITY OF PLEASANTON CONSULTANT – GHD, Inc.

_____________________________ __________________________ Gerry Beaudin, City Manager Wayne Francisco

ATTEST: [If Consultant is a corporation, signatures must comply with California Corporations Code §313]:

_____________________________
Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk By: __________________________

Print: __________________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Title: __________________________

_____________________________
Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney

Page 361 of 559 ends

Page 1 of 4 ends

Item #16

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

April 16, 2024
Public Works - Engineering Division

TITLE: ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF SUMMARY VACATION FOR PUBLIC SERVICE AND

EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENTS AND ACCEPTANCE OF

REPLACEMENT EMERGENCY ACCESS EASEMENT AND PEDESTRIAN
ACCESS EASEMENT AT 4452 ROSEWOOD DRIVE

SUMMARY
Avalon Bay Communities purchased the property at 4452 Rosewood Drive to develop a high- density housing project originally contemplated by a Development Agreement executed in 2013. The Development Agreement followed the City’s rezoning of the southern 8.4-acre portion of the Rosewood Commons business campus consistent with the Housing Element Update of 2011. Avalon Bay Communities designed its housing project with the assumption that City-held easements that encumber the property would be vacated and replaced. The easements include 50-foot-wide public service easements (PSE) along the Rosewood Drive and Owens Drive property frontages, as well as an emergency vehicle access easement (EVAE) extending north to south through the project site.

The California Streets and Highways Code prescribes the process to be used by the City to vacate public easements. This process requires, among other requirements, that the City formally notify those who benefit from the easements. The beneficiaries of the EVAE are the Livermore-Pleasanton Fire Department and the Pleasanton Police Department. The beneficiaries of the PSE are those purveyors who operate utility networks in Pleasanton (PG&E, AT&T, Comcast, and others). If the easements will be replaced in a similar or equivalent configuration, then this is disclosed in the notice, and a simplified “summary” vacation process is allowed by state law. The easement beneficiaries have the right to protest the planned vacation.

The City sent formal notices to each potential easement beneficiary asking whether they would object to the vacation process. One objection was received from telecommunications company Lumen which operates buried fiber optic cables within the PSE to be vacated. Lumen’s existing cables were in direct conflict with buildings proposed by Avalon Bay. After much discussion, Avalon Bay and Lumen reached a consensus on a building and utility configuration that eliminated the conflict. The housing project is now ready to move forward, subject to the City’s processing of the easement vacation as prescribed by §8330 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution of summary vacation for public service and emergency vehicle access easements and acceptance of replacement emergency access easement and pedestrian access easement at 4452 Rosewood Drive.

The Resolution of Summary Vacation is based on the following staff recommendations:

Page 362 of 559 ends

Page 2 of 4 ends

1. The City Council summarily vacate the public service easement having found that the easement will be superseded by relocation or determined to be excess by the easement holder, and there are no other public facilities located within the easement (§8333(c)).

2. The City Council summarily vacate the emergency vehicle access easement having found that said easement area is an excess right-of-way of a street or highway not required for street or highway purposes (§8334(a)).

3. The City Council vacate the street, highway, or public service easement by adopting a Resolution of Summary Vacation (§8335(a)(1)). The Resolution of Summary Vacation states the following (§8335(b)):
a. That the vacation is made under this chapter.
b. That the vacation area is precisely described.
c. That the facts under which this summary vacation is made are as stated in this report.
d. That from and after the date this Resolution of Summary Vacation is recorded with the Alameda County Recorder’s Office, the street, highway, or public service easement vacated no longer constitutes a street, highway, or public service easement.
e. That notice of the Resolution of Summary Vacation has been provided to all entities having any right, title, or interest in the public service easement.

The City Manager is authorized by City Council Resolution No. 89-31 to accept on behalf of the City deeds or grants conveying any interest in or easement upon real estate to the City of Pleasanton, including the proposed replacement easements.

BACKGROUND
On May 22, 1986, Parcel Map 3863 (Book 161 of parcel maps at Pages 15 through 30) dedicated public easements within Hacienda Business Park Phase II, including easements that encumber the property identified as Lot 59, now known as the Rosewood Commons business campus at the northeast corner of Rosewood Drive at Owens Drive. The encumbrances included a 50-foot-wide public service easement (PSE) along the property frontages. The PSE was granted for the installation and operation of public utilities throughout Hacienda Business Park.

On January 10, 2012, the City adopted Ordinance No. 2034, which rezoned an 8.4-acre portion of Lot 59 to Planned Unit Development-High Density Residential (PUD-HDR) consistent with the City’s Housing Element update to meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation.

On May 7, 2013, the City adopted Ordinance No. 2067 approving a Planned Unit Development Major Modification and Development Plan (PUD-85-08-1D-4M) for the construction of 305 apartment units and two retail buildings at the 8.4-acre portion of Lot 59. The City also entered into a Development Agreement with Pleasant Partners LLC (Series No. 2013-208707) that memorialized the right to construct the project, subject to the City’s development review and permitting processes.

On July 13, 2015, Parcel Map 10287 (Book 330 of parcel maps at pages 1 through 8) subdivided Parcel 59. The site where the housing project was contemplated by Ordinance

Page 363 of 559 ends

Page 3 of 4 ends

Nos. 2034 and 2067 became Parcel 591. In addition, an emergency vehicle access easement (EVAE) was granted to the City across a network of drive aisles through the subdivided business campus, including across newly-created Parcel 591.

On August 25, 2021, Parcel Map 10172 (Book 352 of parcel maps at pages 89 through 92) further subdivided Parcel 591 to create Parcels 591 (revised), 59B, and 59C. Parcels 59B (two retail buildings site) and 59C (305 apartments site) represent the 8.4-acre project site. An overlapping but narrower PSE was granted to and accepted by the City across the frontage of Parcels 59B and 59C in an effort to eliminate conflicts between the PSE and future buildings. A separate document was expected to be recorded at the Alameda County Recorder’s Office to officially vacate the original 50-foot width in favor of the narrower 15-foot to 26-foot-wide PSE.

This separate document was never created nor recorded.

On November 10, 2022, the City approved PUD-85-08-1D-5M, a Planned Unit Development modification to the original approval from 2013. Avalon Bay Communities processed the modification having purchased the property from the prior owner.

DISCUSSION
The City Council, as a legislative body, has been granted the authority to summarily vacate public easements that are no longer needed or relevant, provided the regulatory procedure prescribed by the California Streets and Highways Code is followed. The public easements dedicated by Parcel Map 3863 across the property at 4452 Rosewood Drive require adjustment to address changes in development rights as well as the owner’s proposed use of the property. Adjustments to the easements were anticipated in 2012 when the City executed a Development Agreement with the previous developer.

Adoption of a Resolution of Summary Vacation for Public Service and Emergency Vehicle Access Easements and Acceptance of Replacement Emergency Vehicle Access Easements (Attachment 1) and approval of the Quitclaim Deed of Emergency Vehicle Access Easements (Attachment 3), the Quitclaim Deed of Public Service Easement across Parcel 59B (Attachment 4) and the Quitclaim Deed of Public Service Easement across Parcel 59C (Attachment 5) together with the City Manager’s acceptance of the Grant of Emergency Vehicle Access Easements across Parcel 59B (Attachment 6), the Grant of Emergency Vehicle Access Easement across Parcel 59C (Attachment 7), the Grant of Emergency Vehicle Access Easements across Parcel 591 Revised (Attachment 8), and the Grant of Pedestrian Access Easement across Parcel 59C (Attachment 9) would effectuate the easement adjustments without adverse impact to the City’s rights or obligations.

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
Not applicable, as this item is an administrative matter of City business.

OUTREACH
Prior to approval of the development project at 4452 Rosewood Drive, the application was subject to public hearings with both the Planning Commission and the City Council.

Notification letters were sent to easement beneficiaries as required by California Streets and Highways Code §8335(b)(5). Although Lumen initially objected to the vacation, it subsequently reached a consensus with Avalon Bay. No other easement beneficiaries submitted an

Page 364 of 559 ends

Page 4 of 4 ends

objection to the proposed vacation.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Not applicable, as this item is an administrative matter of City business.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.

Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

Michael Stella, Senior Civil
Engineer
Siew-Chin Yeong, Director of Public
Works

Gerry Beaudin, City
Manager

Attachments:

1. Resolution of Summary Vacation for Public Service Easement and Emergency Vehicle Easement Access and Acceptance of Replacement Easements

2. Email from Lumen

3. Quitclaim Deed of Emergency Vehicle Access Easement across Parcel 59B

4. Quitclaim Deed of Public Service Easement across Parcel 59B

5. Quitclaim Deed of Public Service Easement across Parcel 59C

6. Grant of Emergency Vehicle Access Easement across Parcel 59B

7. Grant of Emergency Vehicle Access Easement across Parcel 59C

8. Grant of Emergency Vehicle Access Easement across Parcel 591 Revised

9. Grant of Pedestrian Public Access Easement across Parcel 59C

10. Vicinity Map

Page 365 of 559 ends

Page 1 of 3 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON OF

SUMMARY VACATION FOR PUBLIC SERVICE AND EMERGENCY VEHICLE

ACCESS EASEMENTS AND ACCEPTANCE OF REPLACEMENT EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT AT 4452 ROSEWOOD DRIVE

WHEREAS, on May 22, 1986, Parcel Map 3863 (Book 161 of parcel maps at Pages 15 through 30) dedicated public easements within Hacienda Business Park Phase II, including easements that encumber the property identified as Lot 59, now known as the Rosewood Commons business campus at the northeast corner of Rosewood Drive at Owens Drive. The encumbrances included a 50-foot-wide public service easement (PSE) along the property frontages. The PSE was granted for the installation and operation of public utilities throughout Hacienda Business Park; and

WHEREAS, on January 10, 2012, the City adopted Ordinance No. 2034 which rezoned an 8.4-acre portion of Lot 59 to Planned Unit Development-High Density Residential (PUD- HDR) consistent with the City’s Housing Element update to meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation; and

WHEREAS, on May 7, 2013, the City adopted Ordinance No. 2067 approving a Planned Unit Development Major Modification and Development Plan (PUD-85-08-1D-4M) for the construction of 305 apartment units and two retail buildings at the 8.4-acre portion of Lot 59.

The City also entered into a Development Agreement with Pleasant Partners LLC (Series No. 2013-208707) that memorialized the right to construct the project, subject to the City’s development review and permitting processes; and

WHEREAS, on July 13, 2015, Parcel Map 10287 (Book 330 of parcel maps at Pages 1 through 8) subdivided Parcel 59. The site where the housing project was contemplated by Ordinance Nos. 2034 and 2067 became Parcel 591. In addition, an emergency vehicle access easement (EVAE) was granted to the City across a network of drive aisles through the subdivided business campus including across newly-created Parcel 591; and

WHEREAS, on August 25, 2021, Parcel Map 10172 (Book 352 of parcel maps at Pages 89 through 92) further subdivided Parcel 591 to create Parcels 591 (revised), 59B and 59C.

Parcels 59B (two retail building site) and 59C (305 apartments site) represent the 8.4-acre project site. An overlapping but narrower PSE was granted to and accepted by the City across the frontage of Parcels 59B and 59C in an effort to eliminate conflicts between the PSE and future buildings. A separate document was expected to be recorded at the Alameda County Recorder’s Office to officially vacate the original 50-foot width in favor of the narrower 15-foot to 26-foot wide PSE. This separate document was never created nor recorded; and

WHEREAS, on November 10, 2022, the City approved PUD-85-08-1D-5M, a Planned Unit Development modification to the original approval from 2013. Avalon Bay Communities processed the modification having purchased the property from the prior owner; and

WHEREAS, the City Council, as legislative body, has been granted the authority to summarily vacate public easements that are no longer needed or relevant according to the regulatory procedure prescribed by §8330 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code.

Page 366 of 559 ends

Page 2 of 3 ends

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER THE FOLLOWING:

SECTION 1. This Resolution of Summary Vacation for Public Service and Access Easements and Acceptance of Replacement Public Service and Emergency Vehicle Access Easements at 4452 Rosewood Drive is hereby adopted based on the following:

• The summary vacation of Public Service and Emergency Vehicle Access Easements is made under California Streets and Highways Code §8330 et seq. • The Public Service and Emergency Vehicle Access Easements to be summarily vacated were granted across Lot 59 of Parcel Map 3863 (Book 161 of parcel maps at Pages 15 through 30) as accepted by the City Clerk and as described in detail in the Quitclaim Deed of Emergency Vehicle Access Easement, Quitclaim Deed of Public Service Easement across Parcel 59B, and Quitclaim Deed of Public Service Easement across Parcel 59C to be recorded together with this Resolution.
• This Resolution is prima facie evidence that the Public Service and Emergency Vehicle Access Easements are superseded by relocation or determined to be excess.
• That from and after the date this Resolution is recorded, the vacated Public Service and Emergency Vehicle Access Easements no longer constitute a street, highway, or public service easement.
• That all entities having any right, title, or interest in the Public Service and Emergency Vehicle Access Easements being vacated have been notified of this action.

SECTION 2. The City Manager shall execute the Quitclaim Deed of Emergency Vehicle Access Easement, the Quitclaim Deed of Public Service Easement across Parcel 59B, and the Quitclaim Deed of Public Service Easement across Parcel 59C.

SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall cause a certified copy of this Resolution, as attested under seal, to be recorded without acknowledgment, certificate of acknowledgment, or further proof in the office of the Alameda County Recorder together with the fully executed Quitclaim Deed of Emergency Vehicle Access Easement, Quitclaim Deed of Public Service Easement across Parcel 59B, and Quitclaim Deed of Public Service Easement across Parcel 59C.

SECTION 4. The City Manager shall accept the Grant of Emergency Vehicle Access Easements across Parcel 59B, the Grant of Emergency Vehicle Access Easement across Parcel 59C, the Grant of Emergency Vehicle Access Easements across Parcel 591 Revised, and the Grant of Pedestrian Access Easement across Parcel 59C as authorized by City Council Resolution No. 89-31 adopted on January 17, 1989.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Pleasanton at a regular meeting held on April 16, 2024.

I, Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk of the City of Pleasanton, California, certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on the 16 th day
of April 2024 by the following vote:

Ayes:

Page 367 of 559 ends

Page 3 of 3 ends

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

__________________________
Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_________________________________
Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney

Page 368 of 559 ends

Attachment 2

Page 369 of 559 ends

RE
CORDING REQUESTED BY:

C
ity of Pleasanton
AN
D WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

C
ity of Pleasanton
Attention: City Clerk
P.O. Box 520
Pleasanton, CA 94566
S pace Above This Line For Recorder’s Use Only
Recording requested pursuant to
APN 941-2780-44 Government Code Sections §27383 & §6103 (No Fee)

QUITCLAIM DEED
F
OR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the CITY OF PLEASANTON, a municipal corporation (“City”), pursuant to Resolution No. 24-______ adopted by the Pleasanton City Council on April 16, 2024, hereby RELEASE, REMISE, AND QUITCLAIM to:

AVAL
ON PLEASANTON, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership
A
ny and all right, title, and interest City may have in and to the EM

ERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT
as
described in Exhibit A and as depicted on Exhibit B, attached hereto and made a part hereof.

E
xecuted as of this ___________ day of ______________________, 2024.

C
ity of Pleasanton
_________________________________
Gerry Beaudin, City Manager
Approved as to Form:
__________________________________
Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney
Attest:
____________________________________
Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk
N

OTARY ACKNOWLEDGMENT ATTACHED
Attachment 3

Page 370 of 559 ends

Notary Certificate Requirements
Effective January 1, 2015

California All-Purpose Acknowledgment

Pursuant to SB 1050 (Chapter 197, Statutes of 2014), Civil Code section 1189 has been amended to provide that any certificate of acknowledgment taken within the State of California shall be in the following form:

State of California )
)
County of )

On before me, , personally appeared who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

Witness my hand and official seal.

(Seal)
(Signature)

A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. (Insert name and title of officer)

Page 371 of 559 ends

Page 372 of 559 ends

Page 373 of 559 ends

RE
CORDING REQUESTED BY:

C
ity of Pleasanton
AN
D WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

AVAL
ON PLEASANTON, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership
A
ny and all right, title, and interest City may have in and to the PU

BLIC SERVICE EASEMENT
as
described in Exhibit A and as depicted on Exhibit B, attached hereto and made a part hereof.

E
xecuted as of this ___________ day of ______________________, 2024.

OTARY ACKNOWLEDGMENT ATTACHED
Attachment 4

Page 374 of 559 ends

Notary Certificate Requirements
Effective January 1, 2015

California All-Purpose Acknowledgment

State of California )
)
County of )

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

Witness my hand and official seal.

(Seal)
(Signature)

Page 375 of 559 ends

Page 376 of 559 ends

Page 377 of 559 ends

Page 378 of 559 ends

Page 379 of 559 ends

Page 380 of 559 ends

RE
CORDING REQUESTED BY:

C
ity of Pleasanton
AN
D WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

C
ity of Pleasanton
Attention: City Clerk
P.O. Box 520
Pleasanton, CA 94566
S pace Above This Line For Recorder’s Use Only
Recording requested pursuant to
APN 941-2780-45 Government Code Sections §27383 & §6103 (No Fee)

A
VALON PLEASANTON, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership
A
ny and all right, title, and interest City may have in and to PU

BLIC SERVICE EASEMENTS
as
described in Exhibit A and as depicted on Exhibit B, attached hereto and made a part hereof.

E
xecuted as of this ___________ day of ______________________, 2024.

OTARY ACKNOWLEDGMENT ATTACHED
Attachment 5

Page 381 of 559 ends

Notary Certificate Requirements
Effective January 1, 2015

California All-Purpose Acknowledgment

State of California )
)
County of )

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

Witness my hand and official seal.

(Seal)
(Signature)

Page 382 of 559 ends

Page 383 of 559 ends

Page 384 of 559 ends

Page 385 of 559 ends

Attachment 6

Page 386 of 559 ends

Page 387 of 559 ends

Page 388 of 559 ends

Page 389 of 559 ends

Page 390 of 559 ends

Page 391 of 559 ends

Page 392 of 559 ends

Page 393 of 559 ends

Page 394 of 559 ends

CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE

OF PUBLIC EASEMENT

This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by the EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENTS, dated ______________________, 2024 from AVALON PLEASANTON, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, to the CITY OF PLEASANTON, a municipal corporation, is hereby accepted by the undersigned officer or agent on behalf of the City Council pursuant to authority conferred by Resolution No. 89-31 of the City Council adopted on January 17, 1989 and the grantee consents to recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer.

Dated: ________________________, 2024 CITY OF PLEASANTON a municipal corporation

By: ____________________________
Gerry Beaudin, City Manager

Page 395 of 559 ends

Page 396 of 559 ends

Attachment 7

Page 397 of 559 ends

Page 398 of 559 ends

JANUARY 18, 2024
JOB NO. 3566-000

Page 1 of 2 ends

F:\3566-000\ACAD\SURVEY\PLC\EVAE_2023.07.17\3566-000 EVAE 59 C.DOCX

EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION

EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT

REAL PROPERTY SITUATE IN THE CITY OF PLEASANTON, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEING A PORTION OF PARCEL 59 C, AS SAID PARCEL IS SHOWN AND SO DESIGNATED ON PARCEL MAP 10172 RECORDED AUGUST 25, 2021, FILED IN BOOK 352 OF MAPS, AT PAGE 89, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ALAMEDA COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWESTERN CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 59 C, SAID CORNER

BEING A POINT ON THE SOUTHEASTERN RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF ROSEWOOD DRIVE AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP;

THENCE, FROM SAID POINT OF COMMENCEMENT, ALONG THE NORTHERN LINE OF SAID PARCEL 59 C, SOUTH 86°06'20" EAST 56.67 FEET;

THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERN LINE, NORTH 43°30'44" EAST

8.44, FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING ;

THENCE, FROM SAID POINT OF BEGINNING, FURTHER CONTINUING ALONG SAID LINE, NORTH 43°30'44" EAST 41.17 FEET;

THENCE, LEAVING SAID LINE, SOUTH 86°06'20" EAST 9.05 FEET;

THENCE, SOUTH 03°53'40" WEST 274.93 FEET;

THENCE, ALONG THE ARC OF A TANGENT 50.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 24°29'41", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 21.38 FEET;

THENCE, ALONG THE ARC OF A REVERSE 50.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 12°07'04", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 10.57 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHEASTERN LINE OF SAID PARCEL 59 C;

THENCE, ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERN LINE, ALONG THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT

33.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE RIGHT, FROM WHICH THE CENTER OF SAID CURVE BEARS NORTH 70°51'19" WEST, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 24°22'03", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 14.03 FEET;

THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERN LINE, SOUTH 43°30'44" WEST

19.48 FEET;

THENCE, LEAVING SAID SOUTHEASTERN LINE, NORTH 03°53'40" EAST 13.97 FEET;

THENCE, SOUTHERLY ALONG THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT 28.00 FOOT RADIUS

CURVE TO THE LEFT, FROM WHICH THE CENTER OF SAID CURVE BEARS SOUTH

Page 399 of 559 ends

Page 400 of 559 ends

Page 401 of 559 ends

Page 402 of 559 ends

CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE

OF PUBLIC EASEMENT

This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by the EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT , dated ______________________, 2024 from AVALON PLEASANTON, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, to the CITY OF PLEASANTON, a municipal corporation, is hereby accepted by the undersigned officer or agent on behalf of the City Council pursuant to authority conferred by Resolution No. 89-31 of the City Council adopted on January 17, 1989 and the grantee consents to recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer.

Dated: ________________________, 2024 CITY OF PLEASANTON a municipal corporation

By: ____________________________
Gerry Beaudin, City Manager

Page 403 of 559 ends

Page 404 of 559 ends

Attachment 8

Page 405 of 559 ends

Page 406 of 559 ends

Page 407 of 559 ends

Page 408 of 559 ends

Page 409 of 559 ends

Page 410 of 559 ends

Page 411 of 559 ends

Page 412 of 559 ends

Page 413 of 559 ends

Page 414 of 559 ends

Page 415 of 559 ends

Page 416 of 559 ends

Page 417 of 559 ends

Page 418 of 559 ends

Page 419 of 559 ends

Page 420 of 559 ends

Page 421 of 559 ends

Page 422 of 559 ends

CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE

OF PUBLIC EASEMENT

This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by the PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT, dated ______________________, 2024 from AVALON PLEASANTON, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, to the CITY OF PLEASANTON, a municipal corporation, is hereby accepted by t he undersigned officer or agent on behalf of the City Council pursuant to authority conferred by Resolution No. 89-31 of the City Council adopted on January 17, 1989 and the grantee consents to recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer.

Dated: ________________________, 2024 CITY OF PLEASANTON a municipal corporation

By: ____________________________
Gerry Beaudin, City Manager

Page 423 of 559 ends

Page 424 of 559 ends

VICINITY MAP – 4452 Rosewood Drive (Page 1 of 2)
Attachment 10

Page 425 of 559 ends

VICINITY MAP – 4452 Rosewood Drive (Page 2 of 2)

Page 426 of 559 ends

Page 1 of 3 ends

Item #22

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

April 16, 2024
Human Resources

TITLE: ADOPT A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING AN EXCEPTION TO THE 180-DAY

WAITING PERIOD TO APPOINT RETIRED ANNUITANT, GINA ANDERSON, TO

SERVE AS INTERIM POLICE CHIEF PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTIONS 7522.56 AND 21224

SUMMARY
The City has a critical need to appoint Gina Anderson, a retired annuitant, to the position of Interim Police Chief as of May 3, 2024, following the retirement of Police Chief David Swing.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution waiving the 180-day waiting period to appoint retired annuitant Gina Anderson to serve as Interim Police Chief during the recruitment and selection process for the permanent appointment of the City’s next Police Chief. This limited-duration assignment is recommended to be effective May 3, 2024, pursuant to Government Code Sections 7522.56 and 21224, at an hourly rate of $144.58, consistent with the salary schedule for the police chief.

BACKGROUND
Police Chief David Swing has announced his retirement effective May 2, 2024. The City is conducting a comprehensive recruitment process with an executive search firm for a permanent successor. During the recruitment process, it is crucial to appoint an interim police chief, as the position is critical to maintaining adequate staffing for public safety services, emergency response and recovery. The City Manager has appointed Gina Anderson to serve as Interim Police Chief, effective May 3, 2024. Chief Anderson has the experience and unique skills to serve the City's interim needs and ensure a smooth transition to the permanently appointed chief.

While the City Manager appoints all employees (see Municipal Code §2.08.100), this Interim Police Chief Agreement is presented to the City Council because of a requirement in state law.

Chief Anderson, a recent retiree from the City of Newark, is required to have her interim appointment approved by the City Council. (See Cal. Govt. Code §21221(h)). The governing body of a public agency can appoint a retiree to work in a vacant position during the recruitment to permanently fill the vacancy or during an emergency to prevent the stoppage of public business. The governing body’s appointment should explain the need for the retiree’s hire, and there must be documentation that the governing body made the appointment in the form of a resolution.

DISCUSSION
Retired annuitants are retirees who return to work with a California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) employer in a designated retired annuitant position.

Government Code (GC) Sections 7522.56 and 21224 permit extra help retired annuitants

Page 427 of 559 ends

Page 2 of 3 ends

under CalPERS to be employed upon appointment by a public agency to fill a critically needed position on an interim basis before 180 days have passed. Basic requirements include:
• Annuitants can be hired only as an interim or acting appointment during the recruitment period; retirees cannot work in a permanent capacity or for an indefinite period. • The salary must be no more than an hourly pay rate that falls within the regular salary schedule for that position. (A retired annuitant is not entitled to any benefits, vacation, or holidays).
• A maximum of 960 hours can be worked within a fiscal year (July 1 to June 30), including non-paid / volunteer hours.
• Annuitants must wait 180 days after their retirement date before returning to work.

Per GC 21224, “a retired person may serve without reinstatement from retirement or loss or interruption of benefits upon appointment by the appointing power of a public agency employer to prevent stoppage of public business or because the retired person has specialized skills needed in performing work of limited duration.” A resolution is required to authorize this interim appointment of a retired annuitant and for the waiver of the 180-day waiting period.

This same state law places strict limits on Chief Anderson’s compensation (can be no higher than the prior holder of the position), sets 960 as the maximum total hours that can be worked in a fiscal year, and does not allow for vacation leaves or other benefits (see Sections 6 and 7).

The agreement provides that Chief Anderson will fulfill the duties of a police chief as required by state law (see Section 4), attend night and community meetings, and therefore schedule office hours more flexibly (see Section 5). The agreement includes other typical terms: the City can terminate early (Section 8.a.), and Chief Anderson cannot have conflicts of interest (Section 10).

The City confirms that the temporary appointment of the retired annuitant Gina Anderson as Interim Police Chief for the City complies with Government Code Sections 7522.56 and 21224.

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
Not applicable, as this item is an administrative matter of City business.

OUTREACH
No outreach was conducted, as this item is an administrative matter of City business.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
This action is aligned with the ONE Pleasanton strategic plan goal of Safeguarding Our City in providing comprehensive public safety services and preparing the City for future emergencies to foster a safe and secure community.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is sufficient budget in FY 2023/24 to hire Chief Anderson as a retired annuitant Interim Police Chief. Government code does not allow retired annuitants to receive specialty pay and benefits associated with the police chief position, resulting in cost savings for the City.

Page 428 of 559 ends

Page 3 of 3 ends

Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

Xaviera Scoggins, Director
of Human Resources &
Labor Relations
Xaviera Scoggins, Director of Human
Resources & Labor Relations

Gerry Beaudin, City
Manager

Attachments:

1. Reso CC Interim Police Chief

Page 429 of 559 ends

ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON TO

APPROVE AN INTERIM POLICE CHIEF AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, Police Chief David Swing is leaving his service with the City effective May 2, 2024; and
WHEREAS, while the City undertakes a recruitment for a new chief of police, an interim police chief is needed for adequate staffing and public safety; and WHEREAS, Gina Anderson is the retired City of Newark Police Chief, and is qualified and available to serve as the City’s Interim Police Chief; and WHEREAS, while the appointment of the police chief is a duty of the City Manager (see Municipal Code §2.08.100), state law requires that in this circumstance when a position is vacant and a recruitment is being undertaken that if a retiree is assuming the interim position that the City Council must approve such interim appointment (see Cal. Government Code §21221(h)).

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER THE FOLLOWING:

SECTION 1. Approves the Interim Police Chief Agreement to have Gina Anderson serve at the City’s Interim Chief of Police beginning on May 3, 2024, during the recruitment for a permanent police chief, subject to the terms and conditions in the attached Exhibit A. Authorizes the City Manager to: (i) execute the agreement, with minor modifications approved by the City Manager, Human Resources and Labor Relations Director and City Attorney; and (ii) to exercise his discretion to terminate the agreement as provided in Section 8 of the agreement.

SECTION 2. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon its passage and adoption.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Pleasanton at a regular meeting held on April 16, 2024.

Page 430 of 559 ends

Resolution No.

Page 2 of 9 ends

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
_____________________________
Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________
Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney

Page 431 of 559 ends

Resolution No.

Page 3 of 9 ends

EXHIBIT A
Interim Police Chief Agreement

Page 432 of 559 ends

Resolution No.

Page 4 of 9 ends

INTERIM POLICE CHIEF AGREEMENT
THIS INTERIM POLICE CHIEF AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is entered into this 3rd day of May 2024, between the CITY OF PLEASANTON, a municipal corporation (“City”), and Gina Anderson (“Chief Anderson”).

RECITALS
WHEREAS, City desires to employ the services of Chief Anderson as its Interim Police Chief, temporarily, to carry out the duties and responsibilities of Police Chief, in consideration of and subject to the terms, conditions, and benefits set forth in this Agreement; and WHEREAS, Chief Anderson is currently a retired Police Chief and has over thirty years of law enforcement experience; and
WHEREAS, Chief Anderson agrees to accept employment as Interim Police Chief of the City of Pleasanton in consideration of and subject to the terms, conditions, and benefits set forth in this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, City has determined that it is necessary to hire Chief Anderson because the position of Interim Police Chief is required for adequate staffing and public safety; and WHEREAS, Chief Anderson wishes to serve as temporary, Interim Police Chief while the City recruits for a permanent Police Chief; and
WHEREAS, the parties wish to set forth the terms upon which the temporary employment will be based; and
WHEREAS, while Pleasanton Municipal Code §2.08.100 makes it the duty of the City Manager to appoint employees, California law (Government Code 1 §21221(h)) requires the City Council to make interim appointments of certain retirees to vacant positions while recruitment occurs, and Chief Anderson qualifies for such interim appointment following Chief Anderson’s retirement from her prior employer pursuant to §7522.56(f)(4).

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions in this Agreement, City and Chief Anderson agree as follows:

1. Interim Position . Chief Anderson accepts employment with the City as its Interim Police Chief and shall oversee the police department and perform all functions, duties and services set forth in this Agreement. Chief Anderson shall provide service at the direction and under the supervision of the City Manager. It is the intent of the parties that Chief Anderson, as the Interim Police Chief, shall keep the City Manager fully apprised of all significant ongoing operations of the City’s police department.

2. Term. This Agreement shall become effective when executed both by Chief 1 All references hereafter to the California Government Code unless otherwise noted.

Page 433 of 559 ends

Resolution No.

Page 5 of 9 ends

Anderson and the City Manager, which date shall be the date first referenced above. Chief Anderson shall commence the performance of her duties as the Interim Police Chief on May 3, 2024 or at such later date as the parties hereto shall agree in writing ("Commencement Date").

This Agreement shall expire as of the first of the following to occur: (i) upon the employment commencement date of a permanent Police Chief employed by t h e City; or (ii) upon termination of the Agreement by either Chief Anderson or the City as provided in this Agreement.

3. At-Will . Chief Anderson acknowledges that she is an at-will, temporary employee of the City who shall always serve at the pleasure of the City Manager during the period of her service hereunder. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to, or does, confer upon Chief Anderson any right to any property interest in continued employment except as is expressly provided in Section 2 Term or Section 8 Termination of this Agreement, or any due process right to a hearing before or after a decision by the City Manager to terminate her employment.

Nothing contained in this Agreement shall in any way prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with the right of the City to terminate the services of Chief Anderson as provided in Section 2 Term or Section 8 Termination. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with the right of Chief Anderson to resign at any time from this position with the City, subject only to the provisions set forth in Section 2 Term or Section 8 Termination of this Agreement.

4. Duties. Chief Anderson shall serve as the Interim Police Chief and perform the duties set forth in §§41601-41612. Chief Anderson shall provide service at the direction and under the supervision of the City Manager. The Interim Police Chief shall keep the City Manager informed of all significant ongoing operations of the City’s Police Department. Chief Anderson shall devote her best efforts and full-time attention to the performance of her duties.

5. Hours of Work. Chief Anderson shall devote the time necessary to adequately perform her duties as Interim Police Chief. The parties anticipate that Chief Anderson will work a sufficient number of hours per week allocated between regular business hours and hours outside of regular business hours including, without limitation, attendance at regular and special City Council meetings and such community meetings as the City Manager may direct. Toward that end, Chief Anderson shall be allowed reasonable flexibility in setting her own office hours, provided the schedule of such hours provides a significant presence at the Police Department, reasonable availability to the City Council, City Manager, City staff, and members of the community during regular City business hours and for the performance of her duties and of City business.

6. Rate of Pay. For all services performed by Chief Anderson as the Interim Police Chief under this Agreement, the City shall pay Chief Anderson compensation at the rate of $144.58 per hour according to the payroll schedule in place for Temporary City employees paid hourly subject to the limitations provided below.

7. Compliance with CalPERS requirements . It is the intent of the parties to compensate Chief Anderson only to the extent permitted under §21221(h) and corresponding CalPERS regulations and policy statements. The Rate of Pay is within the established salary range for Police Chief. Chief Anderson acknowledges that she will be compensated the rate of $144.58 and will not receive any benefits, incentives, compensation in-lieu of benefits, or any other form of compensation.

Page 434 of 559 ends

Resolution No.

Page 6 of 9 ends

a. Recordation and Reporting of Hours Worked . Chief Anderson and the City will comply with all applicable CalPERS regulations governing employment after retirement, including the recordation and reporting of all hours worked for the City to CalPERS as required. The parties acknowledge that Chief Anderson is limiting to working 960 hours in the fiscal year by §21221(h). b. Indemnity for CalPERS Claimed Overpayments . The City agrees to defend and indemnify Chief Anderson for any fees, fines, penalties, contributions or other monetary damages claimed, asserted, or alleged against Chief Anderson by CalPERS as a result of h e r employment with the City upon a finding that the City failed to keep or report Chief Anderson’s accurate hours worked. c. Representations required by CalPERS. Chief Anderson represents that she is a retired annuitant of CalPERS within the meaning of §21221(h), represents that she has not received unemployment compensation from any CalPERS agencies during the twelve (12)-month period preceding the effective date of this Agreement, represents that she has not received a retirement incentive from her prior employer from which she retired, and acknowledges that her compensation is statutorily limited as provided in California Government Code Section 21221(h). d. No Benefits . Pursuant to §21221(h) and related CalPERS regulations and policy statements, Chief Anderson shall not receive from the City any benefits that the City commonly provides to its employees, including without limitation health, dental, or vision insurance coverage, life insurance, employee assistance programs, and similar benefits.
e. No Leave. Chief Anderson, in accordance with §21221(h) and related CalPERS regulations and policy statements, shall not be provided or accrue any personal time off, vacation, sick leave, administrative lease, paid holidays or similar leave benefits.

8. Termination .
a. By City. This Agreement may be terminated by the City for any reason thirty (30) days after providing written notice to Chief Anderson of such termination.

The City’s only obligation in the event of such termination will be payment to Chief Anderson of all compensation then due and owing up to and including the effective date of termination.
b. By Chief Anderson . This Agreement may be terminated by Chief Anderson for any reason thirty (30) days after providing written notice to the City of such termination. The City shall have the option, in its complete discretion, to make Chief Anderson’s termination effective at any time prior to the end of such period, provided the City pays Chief Anderson all compensation then due and owing her through the last day actually worked.
c. By Regulatory Requirements. This Agreement may be terminated immediately if necessitated by changes to CalPERS statutory or regulatory requirements.

Page 435 of 559 ends

Resolution No.

Page 7 of 9 ends

d. No Notice for Expiration. Nothing in this Section 8 Termination shall be construed to require either party to give advance written notice for the Agreement to expire as set forth in Section 2 Term.

9. Termination Obligations . Chief Anderson agrees that all property, including, without limitation, all equipment, documents, records, notes, contracts, and computer- generated materials furnished to or prepared by her incident to her employment belongs to the City and shall be returned promptly to the City upon termination of Chief Anderson’s employment. Chief Anderson’s obligations under this Section 9 shall survive the termination of her employment and the expiration of this Agreement.

10. Conflict of Interest. In accordance with § 1126, during the period of her employment, Chief Anderson shall not accept, without the express prior written consent of the City Manager, any other employment or engage, directly or indirectly, in any other business, commercial, or professional activity, whether or not to pecuniary advantage, that is or may be competitive with the City, that might cause a conflict of interest with the City, or that otherwise might interfere with the business or operation of the City or the satisfactory performance of Chief Anderson’s duties as Interim Police Chief. Chief Anderson covenants that other than this Agreement, Chief Anderson has no financial interest with any official, employee or other representative of the City. Chief Anderson does not have any financial interest in real property, sources of income or investments that would be affected in any manner of degree by the performance of Chief Anderson’s services under this Agreement. If such an interest arises, Chief Anderson will immediately notify the City.

11. Expenses. The City agrees to pay job related expenses incurred by Chief Anderson for any out of area business and travel expenses incurred in the course of her duties as approved by the City Manager in accordance with City policy.

12. Vehicle Operation . Chief Anderson shall comply with the City’s administrative policies regarding operation of a vehicle on official business. Chief Anderson shall have use of a city vehicle for City business in accordance with City policy.

13. Indemnification. Subject to, in accordance with, and to the extent provided by the California Government Claims Act [§§810 et seq.], the City will indemnify, defend, and hold Chief Anderson harmless from and against any action, demand, suit, monetary judgment or other legal or administrative proceeding, and any liability, injury, loss or other damages, arising out of any act or omission occurring during Chief Anderson’s tenure as Interim Police Chief.

14. Notices. All notices herein required shall be in writing and shall be sent by certified or registered mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows:

To Chief Anderson:

Address on file
in Human Resources Dept.

To City: City Manager
City of Pleasanton
P.O. Box 520
Pleasanton, CA 94566

15. Assignment. Chief Anderson shall not assign any rights or obligations under this

Page 436 of 559 ends

Resolution No.

Page 2 of 9 ends

agreement.

16. Waiver. Failure to exercise any right under this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of such right.

17. Scope of Agreement. This writing constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties.

This Agreement may not be amended except in a written document signed by Chief Anderson and the City Manager.

18. Acknowledgment. Chief Anderson acknowledges that she has had the opportunity to consult legal counsel regarding this Agreement, that she has read and understands this Agreement, that she is fully aware of its legal effect, and that she has entered into it freely and voluntarily and based on her own judgment and not on any representations or promises other than those contained in this Agreement.

19. Severability. If a court or arbitrator holds any provision of this Agreement to be invalid, unenforceable, or void, the remainder of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

20. Attorneys' Fees. In any legal action, arbitration, or other proceeding brought to enforce or interpret the terms of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and costs.

21. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, with venue proper only in Alameda County, State of California.

22. Counterparts and Electronic Signatures. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one agreement. Counterparts may be delivered via facsimile, electronic mail (including pdf or any electronic signature complying with U.S. federal E-Sign Act of 2000 (15 U.S. Code §7001 et seq.), California Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (Cal. Civil Code §1633.1 et seq.), or other applicable law) or other transmission method, and any counterpart so delivered shall be deemed to have been duly and validly delivered and be valid and effective for all purposes.

THIS AGREEMENT executed the date and year first above written.

CITY OF PLEASANTON INTERIM POLICE CHIEF
__________________________ __________________________
Gerry Beaudin, City Manager Gina Anderson
ATTEST:
__________________________
Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
_____________________________

Page 437 of 559 ends

Resolution No.

Page 3 of 9 ends

Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney

Page 438 of 559 ends

Page 1 of 9 ends

Item #23

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

April 16, 2024
Community Development

TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING - CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF A PROPOSED PROJECT AT 3200 HOPYARD ROAD FOR DESIGN REVIEW (P23-0177) AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 8672 FOR EITHER: (OPTION 1) 57 ATTACHED CONDOMINIUM UNITS IN NINE, THREE- STORY BUILDINGS (48 TOWNHOME-STYLE UNITS AND NINE APARTMENT UNITS); OR (OPTION 2) 55 ATTACHED CONDOMINIUM UNITS IN EIGHT, THREE-STORY BUILDINGS AND TWO, TWO-STORY DUET BUILDINGS (47 TOWNHOME-STYLE UNITS AND EIGHT APARTMENT UNITS); AND CITY

COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING AGREEMENT FOR EITHER OPTION 1 OR OPTION 2

SUMMARY
The project consists of the demolition of an existing church and daycare facility at 3200 Hopyard Road to allow for the development of a multi-family housing project. As summarized below, the original project design consists of the construction of 57 attached condominium units, comprised of 48 townhome-style units and nine one-bedroom apartment units, internal streets, and common open space. The applicant voluntarily proposed an alternative project design with modifications to address neighbors’ concerns that consists of the construction of 55 attached condominium units, comprised of 47 townhome-style units and eight one-bedroom apartment units, internal streets, and common open space. The Planning Commission approved both the original and alternative project designs at its March 13, 2024, public hearing, finding both to be consistent with applicable objective standards and the requirements of state housing density bonus law.

At the March 19, 2024, City Council meeting, the City Council requested review of the Planning Commission’s decision. At the March 21, 2024, Housing Commission meeting, the Housing Commission did not recommend approval of the proposed Affordable Housing Agreement (AHA) for the 57-unit alternative where the nine one-bedroom units are to be affordable to low- income (80% area median income (AMI)) households in compliance with the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance (IZO). The Housing Commission, however, did recommend approval of the proposed AHA for the 55-unit alternative where the applicant proposed that the eight one- bedroom units are to be affordable for-sale to moderate-income (120% AMI) households and housing providers, plus a $77,228 payment, with the Commission’s motion also asking staff to work with the applicant to consider options for increased affordability, to better meet the purpose of the IZO.

City staff has been in discussion with the applicant about the affordable housing for the 55-unit alternative, with the City’s interest in the eight units being priced for sale to low-income (80% AMI) households and housing providers. There have been discussions about the units being sold to low-income households and housing providers, with the goal for the applicant to receive $375,000 per unit, but the sales price and restrictions would be tied to a low-income household

Page 439 of 559 ends

Page 2 of 9 ends

level with the cost difference paid by the City using affordable housing funds to provide deeper affordability to the low-income (80% AMI) level.

Given the City Council’s request to review the project, the project review and the required approval of the AHA are being brought together for the City Council’s consideration.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Approve the Design Review (DR) application, filed as P23-0177, based on the required findings, and subject to the draft conditions of approval in Exhibit A (Attachment 1).

2. Approve the Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTM) 8672, based on the required findings, and subject to the draft conditions of approval in Exhibit A (Attachment 1).

3. Find the CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Consistency Checklist (Exhibit C, Attachment 5) for the project is adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for the project and satisfies all the requirements of CEQA.

4. Approve the general provisions of the Affordable Housing Agreement Alternative 2 for the 55-unit project with eight one-bedroom units for sale to low-income (80% AMI) households and housing providers by the applicant accepting $375,000 per-unit sales price and the City using approximately $800,000 in Affordable Housing Fees to provide deeper affordability to the low-income (80% AMI) level. (Exhibit A, Attachment 4). The City Council is also asked to delegate authority to the City Manager to approve up to an additional 25% contingency or $200,000 of Affordable Housing Fees, if needed should additional costs arise or subsidy is required.

BACKGROUND
In October 2022, the applicant submitted a Preliminary Review Application for the project pursuant to Senate Bill 330 (SB 330). The law provides an optional vesting opportunity for housing development projects, which freezes the policies, standards, and fees in effect when the Preliminary Review Application is submitted. The project is vested to the policies, standards, and fees at the time of submittal and therefore is not subject to the 2023 Objective Design Standards (ODS). Pursuant to State law, specifically the Housing Accountability Act (Cal. Government Code § 65589.5), the scope of the City’s review and basis for project approval or denial is limited to conformance with standards of the Pleasanton Municipal Code (PMC) and other relevant regulations to the extent that they are objective in nature.

In addition, under State Density Bonus Law (SDBL), the City is required (with extremely limited discretion) to provide for a number of “incentives,” “concessions,” or “waivers or reductions of development standards” based on the percentage of affordable units and qualification for State housing density bonuses. A concession or incentive is defined in State law as a reduction in site development standards, a modification of zoning code or architectural design requirements or other regulatory incentives or concessions which result in identifiable cost reductions. A project including at least 10 percent but less than 17 percent lower-income units, or at least 10 percent moderate-income units, is entitled to up to one incentive or concession. The original project provides nine lower-income units (15.7 percent of total units), and the alternative project provides eight moderate-income units (14.5 percent of total units); thus, either alternative is entitled to one incentive or concession.

State law separately defines “waivers or reductions of development standards” as a further

Page 440 of 559 ends

Page 3 of 9 ends

form of assistance available to developers with eligible density bonus projects. The City is not permitted to apply a development standard that would physically preclude the construction of the project at its permitted density; accordingly, a developer may request such standards to be modified or “waived” accordingly. For most projects, there is no limit on the number of waivers or reductions of development standards that may be requested. Under these provisions, the applicant has requested 11 waivers for the original 57-unit project, which are summarized in Table 2 of this report; and 11 waivers for the alternative 55-unit project. Note that SDBL does not require a project to propose density above the maximum allowed to be able to apply for concessions or waivers.

SITE AREA AND DESCRIPTION
The approximately 2.99-acre project site is currently occupied by the Harvest Valley Christian Church, which includes an affiliated daycare facility. Surrounding existing land uses include St.

Clare’s Episcopal Church and Preschool, and Chabad of the Tri-Valley to the northwest, across South Valley Trails Drive; an office building to the north, across the Hopyard Road/Parkside Drive intersection; the Ken Mercer Sports Park and commercial uses to the east, across Hopyard Road; the Pleasanton Canal Trail, Pleasanton Canal, and the Pleasanton Tennis and Community Park to the south; and single-family residences to the west (Valley Trails neighborhood).

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Original 57-Unit Project Design
The original project design proposes nine, three-story buildings with a total of 57 condominium units. This includes 48 three- and four-bedroom townhome-style units that would be provided in clusters of six or seven side-by-side units, each with an attached two-car garage. Nine of the townhome-style units would have an attached one-bedroom condominium apartment unit in a duplex configuration, with a one-car garage. The nine, one-bedroom units are proposed to be deed-restricted to lower-income households to meet the City’s inclusionary zoning requirements and to qualify for waivers and concessions pursuant to State Housing Density Bonus Law as described above. (See Attachment 5 – February 28, 2024, Planning Commission Agenda Packet)

Alternative 55-Unit Project Design
The alternative project design proposes eight, three-story buildings with a total of 55 condominium units. This includes 47 three- and four-bedroom townhome-style units that would be provided in clusters of five or six side-by-side units, each with an attached two-car garage, and two duet-style, two-story buildings. Eight of the townhome-style units would have an attached one-bedroom apartment unit in a duplex configuration, with a one-car garage. The eight, one-bedroom units were originally proposed to be deed-restricted to moderate-income households to qualify for waivers and concessions pursuant to State Housing Density Bonus Law as described above. However, the moderate-income level does not meet the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance (IZO), which requires units to be deed restricted to low- or very-low-income households. The applicant has also proposed the moderate income units, along with a $77,228 payment, as an alternative compliance approach as allowed by the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance. (See Attachment 7 – Applicant Proposed Alternative). Further discussion of the project’s affordability is provided, below, in the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance (IZO) and Affordable Housing Agreements (AHAs) section.

Page 441 of 559 ends

Page 4 of 9 ends

DISCUSSION
General Plan and Zoning Conformance
The project site has a General Plan designation of High Density Residential which assigns a density range of greater than eight dwelling units per acre (du/ac). The project proposes a density of 19 du/ac; thus, the project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation and prescribed density. The project site has a zoning designation of RM-1,500 District. The project, pursuant to SB 330 and SDBL, aligns with the zoning district’s permitted uses and site- prescribed development standards pursuant to the Pleasanton Municipal Code (PMC), as described below.

Conformance with Site Development Standards
The project is subject to the prescribed development standards for the RM-1,500 District. The site development standards for the zoning district are included in Table 1. Per SDBL, the project is eligible to request incentives and concessions, and waivers or reductions to development standards. The applicant has requested one incentive and 11 waivers for the 57-unit project and 11 waivers for the 55-unit project, which are summarized below in Table 1.

The applicant has requested the incentive and waivers from site development standards for the purpose of accommodating the proposed number of units at the allowed density (8+ du/ac) for the site and meet open space and circulation requirements. The majority of the waiver requests are related to spatial aspects of the project such as setbacks, lot area, floor area ratio (FAR), parking, etc. Additionally, the applicant requests a height waiver to exceed the maximum height allowed of 30 feet, proposing a maximum height of 34 feet to allow the project to fit onto the property as designed. Without the incentive and waivers, the applicant states that the objective development standards hinder the project that is within the allowed density. In addition, the applicant cites the requests to be cost-saving, which in turn would provide affordable housing as part of the project. Staff has assessed the incentive and waiver requests in conjunction with SDBL and believes the request for waivers are appropriate and needed to accommodate the site’s allowable density, and would reflect cost savings. None of the requests would meet the criteria established in State density bonus law for the City to reject or deny the requests, since none would have an adverse impact on written health and safety standards, the physical environment, or historic resources.

Table 1: Incentive and Waiver Request (Original and Alternative Design) Objective Standard Required Proposed Incentives/waivers Requested
Minimum Lot Area 10,500 sq. ft. As low as 7,235 sq. ft. Yes (Incentive) Minimum Lot Width 80 ft. 61 ft. Yes (Waiver)
Minimum Lot Depth 125 ft. 107 ft. Yes (Waiver)
Floor Area Ratio 50% maximum 85% Yes (Waiver)
Maximum Height of
Main Structure
30 ft. 34 ft. Yes (Waiver)
Front Setback 20 ft. minimum 15 ft. Yes (Waiver)

Page 442 of 559 ends

Page 5 of 9 ends

Side/Combined Side
Setbacks
8 ft./20 ft.
minimum
25 ft. / 30 ft. minimum No – Side and Combined
side yard setback for
Project complies
Street Side Setback 16 ft. 10 ft. Yes (Waiver)
Minimum Site Area
per Dwelling Unit
1,500 sq. ft. Plan 1: 1,691 sq. ft.

Plan 2: 1,849 sq. ft.

Plan 3: 2,378 sq. ft.

Plan 4: 2,631 sq. ft.

Plan 5: 565 sq. ft.

Yes (Waiver) for Plan 5
Rear Setback 30 ft. minimum 10 ft. Yes (Waiver)
Group Open Space
per Unit
300 sq. ft. 38,648 sq. ft. No – Project complies
Private Open Space
Per Unit
150 sq. ft.
minimum
Less than 150 sq. ft.
minimum
Yes (Waiver)
Public Service
Easement Along
Hopyard Road
10 ft. 5 ft. Yes (Waiver)
Parking 2 parking
spaces per unit.

One parking
space per studio or
one-bedroom unit.

Yes (Waiver)
Measured vertically from the average elevation of the natural grade or finished grade, whichever is lower, of the ground covered by the structure to the mean height between eaves and ridges for a hip, gable, or gambrel roof (Pleasanton Municipal Code §18.84.140)

Vehicle and Bicycle Parking
Per PMC Section 18.88.030.A.(2), condominiums are required to have at least two parking spaces per unit. The project proposes two parking spaces for each townhome unit within an EV-ready two-car garage and bicycle storage area. Per PMC 18.88.030.A.(3)(a), for apartments with two bedrooms or less, a minimum of two spaces shall be required for each of the first four units, and one and one-half spaces for each additional unit. The applicant has requested a SDBL waiver to reduce the parking requirement for the one-bedroom apartment units by providing one parking space per unit within a one-car garage. The PMC does not require guest parking spaces to be provided for condominiums and apartment projects; however, the project provides six guest parking spaces in the Original Project Design and eight guest parking spaces in the Alternative Project Design.

Traffic
A comprehensive traffic analysis was prepared by TJKM, a professional traffic engineering firm, and was peer-reviewed by the City’s Traffic Engineering Division staff. The City typically does not require a traffic study when there would be less than 100 new vehicle trips; however, the applicant elected to prepare a study in the interest of providing more comprehensive analysis to the City. The traffic analysis compared the existing uses (church and daycare) to the proposed use (multi-family housing) in terms of number of vehicle trips produced. The analysis concluded the existing uses generate more AM and PM peak hour trips than the proposed use. Under

Page 443 of 559 ends

Page 6 of 9 ends

existing and future conditions, intersections in the vicinity of the project would operate well above the minimum threshold stated in the General Plan, Level of Service (LOS) D. No hazardous conditions, unsafe ingress or egress, or impediment to emergency vehicle access to either the project site or the Valley Trails neighborhood would be generated by the project. For the full TJKM traffic analysis, and summary thereof, refer to the March 13, 2024, Planning Commission Agenda Packet (Attachment 6).

Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance (IZO) and Affordable Housing Agreements (AHAs) PMC Section 17.44.040(A) provides that for all new multiple-family residential (which includes condominiums) projects of 15 units or more, at least 15 percent of the project’s dwelling units shall be affordable to very low, and/or low-income households with such units provided on-site.

Original Project. The original 57-unit project design, reflected in AHA Alternative 1 (Exhibit A, Attachment 3), provides nine low-income affordable one-bedroom apartment units to conform to the IZO. Low-income is generally defined as a household that earns between 60% to 80% of Area Median Income (AMI). And, for a one-bedroom unit, household size is calculated based on two persons. The applicant originally proposed that these inclusionary units would be available for rent to low-income households (60% to 80% AMI). In discussions with staff, the applicant agreed to also provide the inclusionary units for-sale to qualified low-income households (80% AMI) or housing providers. The AHA for the original proposal therefore includes both rental and for-sale options for low-income households in compliance with the IZO.

Alternative 2 Project. For the alternative 55-unit project, reflected in AHA Alternative 2 (Exhibit A, Attachment 4), the applicant is proposing to fulfill the requirements of the IZO under the provisions of PMC 17.44.080. Alternatives to Constructing Inclusionary Units On-Site. That section discusses off-site projects, land dedication, credit transfers, alternative methods of compliance, and low-income housing fee option. For Alternative 2, there are evolving options for meeting the IZO requirements, as staff and the applicant have been in ongoing discussions since Alternative 2 was initially proposed last month.

A. Original Moderate-Income Proposal. The applicant’s original proposal for Alternative 2 utilized the “alternative methods of compliance” by offering eight one-bedroom units affordable for-sale to moderate-income households at 120% AMI, plus the payment of $77,228 in affordable housing fees.

B. $375,000 per unit Proposal. As the Housing and Planning Commissions (see below) and staff remain concerned about affordability, City staff has been engaged with the applicant regarding how to get the units to be for-sale to low-income (80% AMI) households or housing providers. Both commissions recommended the City Council consider use of affordable housing fees (also known as lower-income housing funds) to make the units affordable to lower-income households, which is permitted by PMC Section 17.40.090 which describes uses of the fund for supporting affordability.

Staff has most recently asked the applicant to accept less revenue for each affordable unit at the median (100% AMI) sales price, and staff recommends the City Council use affordable housing fees to create deeper affordability to price the units for low-income (80% AMI) households or housing providers. City staff does not support the applicant’s proposal to sell the affordable units at the 120% AMI sales price because it would be very challenging to sell the moderate-income 120% AMI units at a price that is very close to the market-rate price.

Page 444 of 559 ends

Page 7 of 9 ends

According to a market study conducted by the Bay Area Affordable Homeownership Alliance (BAAHA), the City’s homebuyer program administrator, the 120% AMI price does not provide the 25% discount that is the generally acceptable difference between an affordable, restricted unit compared to a market-rate unit (estimated to be $450,305 for a comparable 565 sq. ft., 1- bedroom condominium, non-deed restricted unit). Without this discount in price, the units are less attractive to buyers when also faced with the restrictive covenants that do not allow the buyer to fully benefit from the home equity available to market-rate units. The City and the applicant have agreed to a $375,000 per-unit sales price, with the City then contributing affordable housing funds to make the units affordable to low-income households or housing providers.

Planning Commission Recommendation for AHA. When the project was considered by the Planning Commission, while the IZO and alternative AHAs were not then within the Planning Commission’s purview, the Commission nevertheless adopted a motion to ask the City Council to consider use of the Lower-Income Housing Fund (LIHF) to make Alternative 2's 8 one- bedroom for-sale moderate-income units more affordable.

Housing Commission Recommendation for AHA. When the AHAs for the original project and alternative were considered by the Housing Commission, the Commission unanimously did not recommend approval of the AHA Alternative 1 for the original 57-unit project. The Commission acknowledged that the 9 one-bedroom units affordable for low-income households, which could be rented or sold to eligible households or housing providers, met the letter of the IZO, but they also acknowledged that the neighbors did not support AHA Alternative 1, and that the applicant stated its preference for AHA Alternative 2.

In discussing AHA Alternative 2's original proposal, the Housing Commission preferred the 55- unit alternative project, but had serious reservations that the moderate-income units do not meet the IZO requirements. While the Commission eventually recommended approval of the AHA Alternative 2 by a 3-1 vote, the Commission also "stipulated that staff should continue to work with the applicant to refine [the] alternative [55-unit project] to meet the original intention of the IZO and with a combination of options available to increase affordability of all units, but not necessarily at the same levels of affordability...”.

If the City Council approves the Alternative 2 (55-unit project), it is recommended the City Council adopt the resolution and general provisions of the draft agreement in Attachment 4 that formalizes a $375,000 per-unit sales price; allocate $800,000 in affordable housing fees (Account 12230700) to create deeper affordability to the low-income price level; and delegate authority to the City Manager to approve up to an additional 25% contingency (up to $200,000) of Affordable Housing Fees, if additional costs arise or subsidy is required.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
A Consistency Checklist has been prepared pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15183 (Projects Consistent with a Community Plan or Zoning) to determine whether the proposed project requires additional environmental review. The Consistency Checklist is attached to the February 28, 2024, Planning Commission agenda report (Exhibit C, Attachment 5). CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 mandates that projects consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which a Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) was certified (in this case the Pleasanton General Plan 2005-2025 FEIR) shall not require additional environmental

Page 445 of 559 ends

Page 8 of 9 ends

review, except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project-specific significant effects peculiar to the project or its site.

The Consistency Checklist concluded the proposed project qualifies for an exemption from additional environmental review under Section 15183 because it is consistent with the development density and land use characteristics established by the City, as analyzed by the Pleasanton General Plan 2005-2025 FEIR.

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
The action directly implements the Housing Element that serves as the City’s strategy for addressing its housing needs for all residents at all income levels. The site is identified as a housing opportunity site in the 6th Cycle Housing Element.

OUTREACH
Notice of the application was sent to the surrounding property owners and tenants within a 1,000-foot radius of the site. The applicant also posted an on-site project notification sign pursuant to the City’s on-site project notification policy. Noticed neighbors expressed concern to the project’s size and scale, privacy, traffic volumes, parking, noise (from traffic and new residents), green space, exclusion of bus stop for children, and building separations for the purpose of emergency vehicles; attachments 5 and 6 provide the public comment details.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Approval of this action advances the strategic goal of Building a Community Where Everyone Belongs from the ONE Pleasanton Strategic Plan, directly supporting Strategy 6 to implement the Housing Element, by implementing the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance and collecting fees that support a wide range of affordable housing programs and activities for all sectors of the community.

FISCAL IMPACT
Approval of either the 57-unit or 55-unit project will increase the assessed value of the site and result in greater property tax revenues, as well as payment of development impact fees to offset the needs created by the project’s new residents.

Should the City Council also direct staff to utilize Affordable Housing Fees to make the 8 low- income units in the 55-unit project more affordable, there is an adequate amount in Account 12230700, which has a current fund balance of more than $14 million. While the final amount of Affordable Housing Fees has not yet been finalized, it is estimated in the $800,000 - $1 million range for all 8 low-income units in Alternative 2.

1That fee amount represents the estimated fractional construction cost of 0.25 units, as the 55- unit proposal at 15% affordable units requires 8.25 units (when the IZO states that fractions less than 0.5 are rounded down and are not required).

Page 446 of 559 ends

Page 9 of 9 ends

Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

Diego Mora, Associate
Planner
Ellen Clark, Director of Community
Development

Gerry Beaudin, City
Manager

Attachments:

1. Attachment 1: Draft Resolution Option 1

2. Attachment 1, Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval Option 1

3. Attachment 2: Draft Resolution Option 2

4. Attachment 2, Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval Option 2

5. Attachment 3: Resolution - Affordable Housing Agreement - Original 57 unit project

6. Attachment 3, Exhibit A: Affordable Housing Agreement - Original 57 unit project

7. Attachment 4: Resolution - Affordable Housing Agreement 55 unit project

8. Attachment 4, Exhibit A: Affordable Housing Agreement 55 unit project

9. Attachment 5: February 28, 2024 Planning Commission Agenda Packet with Supplemental Material

10. Attachment 6: March 13, 2024 Planning Commission Agenda Packet with Supplemental Material

11. Attachment 7: Applicant Proposed Alternative

12. Attachment 8: PMC 17.44 Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance

13. Attachment 9: Location and Notification Map

Page 447 of 559 ends

ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO.

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING APPLICATIONS FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AT 3200 HOPYARD ROAD CONSISTING OF 48 THREE-STORY TOWNHOME-STYLE

CONDOMINIUMS AND NINE ONE-BEDROOM APARTMENTS AND A
VESTING TENTATIVE MAP, AS FILED UNDER CASE NO. P23-0177 AND VESTING TENTATIVE MAP 8672
WHEREAS, Catalyst Development Partners, LLC has applied for Design Review approval and a Vesting Tentative Map for an the approximately 2.99-acre site located at 3200 Hopyard Road (“Property”) into nine parcels for condominium purposes with 57 attached condominium units comprised of 48 townhome-style units ranging in size from approximately 1,692 to 2,738 square feet per unit, and nine one-bedroom apartment units and 12 common area parcels (“Project”); and
WHEREAS, zoning for the property RM-1,500 (Multi-Family Residential District) and the General Plan designation is High Density Residential (8+ dwelling units per acre); and
WHEREAS, a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15183 Consistency Checklist was performed for this Project; and WHEREAS, at its duly noticed public hearing of February 28, 2024, the Planning Commission voted 4-1 to continue the Public Hearing for the above-referenced item to March 13, 2024, with the direction for staff to provide further Project information; and WHEREAS, on March 13, 2024, the Planning Commission received more information about the Project, as well as an alternative with fewer units; and WHEREAS, at its duly noticed public hearing of March 13, 2024, the Planning Commission considered all public testimony, relevant exhibits, and recommendations of the City staff concerning the Project and the alternative, and approved the Project and alternative applications, subject to conditions of approval; and WHEREAS, on March 19, 2024, within the time specified by the Pleasanton Municipal Code Section 18.144.010, the City Council requested that the applications and approval of the Project and the alternative by the Planning Commission be reviewed by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, on April 16, 2024, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on this Project application and considered all public testimony, agenda reports, and related materials, and the Planning Commission approval; and

Page 448 of 559 ends

Resolution No.

Page 2 ends

Pleasanton City CouncilApril 16, 2024

Pleasanton City Council
April 16, 2024