Updated: 12/21 Page 1
CITY OF SAN PABLO
AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTING SERVICES
Project No._0202__/ Agreement No. __2__
THIS AGREEMENT (“Agreement”), dated and effective this _7th_ day of March_ , 2022 (“Effective Date”), is by and between the City of San Pablo, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, (“City”), and _Mark Thomas ___, a California corporation__, (“Consultant”) (individually, a “Party,” and collectively, the “Parties”).
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the City desires to engage a consultant to provide _bridge engineering, environmental documentation, and technical services to the City (“Services”) as further set forth in this Agreement;
WHEREAS, the City desires to engage a consultant who will act at all times in the City’s best interest and will respect the trust and confidence placed in that consultant by the City; and
WHEREAS, Consultant has represented to City that Consultant has the special training, skill, competence and expertise necessary to provide the Services needed by the City; desires to enter into this Agreement with the City as an independent contractor; and is willing to provide the Services on the following terms and conditions.
NOW, THEREFORE, Consultant and the City agree as follows:
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
(1) Scope of Services .
A. Scope of Services. Consultant agrees to provide the Services to the City as specified in, collectively, the scope of services set forth in the City’s Request for Proposals, dated _June 25, 2021_ and any addenda thereto (“ RFP”), attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein, and the scope of services set forth in Consultant’s proposal dated _August 13, 2021_ (“Proposal”), attached as Exhibit B and incorporated herein. In the event of any conflict or inconsistency between any of the terms of the RFP, the Proposal, and this Agreement, the terms most favorable to the City will prevail. Any services not encompassed in this Section (1) are additional services (“ Additional Services”) subject to prior written authorization by the City, as further specified below in Section (3), “Additional Services.”
B. Quality of Performance. Consultant will provide the Services and any authorized Additional Services in accordance with the standards of its profession; in accordance with the terms, conditions, and objectives of this Agreem ent; and in a manner satisfactory to the City Manager or his or her authorized delegee (“ City Manager ”). Consultant represents that it possesses the necessary skills, background, and licenses to perform the Services or Additional Services. Consultant is solely responsible for the quality and suitability of the Services it provides pursuant to this Agreement. If, during the course of this Agreement, the City Manager notifies Consultant that the Services are not satisfactory, in whole or in part, Consultant will promptly take the corrective action required by the City Manager, at no extra cost to the City. Failure to promptly take such corrective action constitutes a material breach of this Agreement and cause for termination in the City’s discretion. This standard of care will not be construed to impose a mandatory duty on the City within the meaning of Government Code section 815.6. The City’s Updated: 12/21 Page 2
acceptance of Services performed under this Agreement will not operate to waive or release Consultant’s obligation under this paragraph.
C. COVID-19 Pandemic. All City of San Pablo programs and services must be in compliance with current health orders issued by Contra Costa County Health Services at: https://www.coronavirus.cchealth.org/health-orders; including but not limited to social distancing requirements: https://cchealth.org/coronavirus/pdf/2020-0331-Appendix-A-Social- Distancing-Protocol.pdf. Consultant shall comply with these requirements and contact City staff immediately if there is any issue with compliance. In addition, the City requires all contractors/consultants providing services at City facilities or City worksites to provide proof of COVID-19 vaccination, as well as comply with the City’s COVID policies on-site.
D. Time is of the Essence . In the performance of this Agreement, time is of the essence. Consultant must be available to begin providing the Services upon the Effective Date of this Agreement, and must complete the Services within the time specified in Section (4), “Effective Date and Term.”
E. Primary Service Provider. The City has approved of _Shawn O’Keefe and Julie Passalacqua_ as Consultant’s primary provider of the Services under this Agreement, and no other person will be accepted as the primary provi der of the Services without the City’s prior written consent.
F. Labor Code Compliance. If the Services are “public works” services as defined in Labor Code section 1720 et seq. and the Agreement is for an amount greater than $1,000, the Agreement is subject to all applicable requirements of Chapter 1 of Part 7 of Division 2 of the Labor Code, beginning at section 1720, and the related regulations, including but not limited to requirements pertaining to wages, working hours and workers’ compensation insurance.
Consultant must also post all job site notices required by laws or regulations pursuant to Labor Code section 1771.4.
1. Prevailing Wages: Each worker performing Services under this Agreement that is covered under Labor Code section 1720 or 1720.9, must be paid at a rate not less than the prevailing wage as defined in sections 1771 and 1774 of the Labor Code. The prevailing wage rates are on file with the City and are available online at http://www.dir.ca.gov/DLSR. Pursuant to Labor Code section 1775, Consultant and any subconsultant will forfeit to City as a penalty up to $200 for each calendar day, or portion of a day, for each worker paid less than the applicable prevailing wage rate, in addition to paying each worker the difference between the applicable wage rate and the amount actually paid.
2. Working Day: Pursuant to Labor Code section 1810, eight hours of labor consists of a legal day’s work. Pursuant to Labor Code section 1813, Consultant will forfeit to City as a penalty the sum of $25 for each day during which a worker employed by Consultant or any subconsultant is required or permitted to work more than eight hours during any one calendar day, or more than 40 hours per calendar week, unless such workers are paid overtime wages under Labor Code section 1815. All Services must be carried out during regular City working days and hours unless otherwise specified in the scope of services or authorized in writing by City.
3. Payroll Records: Consultant and its subconsultants must maintain certified payroll records in compliance with Labor Code sections 1776 and 1812, and all Updated: 12/21 Page 3
implementing regulations promulgated by the Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”). For each payroll record, Consultant and its subconsultants must certify under penalty of perjury that the information in the record is true and correct, and that it has complied with the requirements of Labor Code sections 1771, 1811, and 1815. Unless the Agreement is for an amount under $25,000, Consultant must electronically submit certified payroll records to the Labor Commissioner as required under California law and regulations.
4. Apprentices: If the amount of the Agreement is $30,000 or more, Consultant must comply with the apprenticeship requirements in Labor Code section 1777.5.
5. DIR Monitoring, Enforcement, and Registration: The Services are subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the DIR pursuant to Labor Code section 1725.5, and, subject to the exception set forth below, Consultant and any subconsultants must be registered with the DIR to perform public works projects.
The registration requirements of Labor Code section 1725.5 do not apply if the Agreement is for an amount under $25,000.
(2) Compensation . As full compensation for the satisfactory and timely performance of the Services as specified in Section (1), “Scope of Services,” and the attached exhibits, City hereby agrees to pay Consultant a sum not to exceed _ One Million Two Hundred Twenty Seven Thousand Four Hundred Seventy Three Dollars ($1,227,473) as follows:
Consultant will be paid all undisputed amounts within th irty (30) days of City’s receipt of detailed invoices for Services provided to the City Manager’s satisfaction during the preceding calendar month. Invoices must include all of the information contained in Section (7), “Billings,” below. Each invoice must be signed by an authorized representative of Consultant, verifying that the invoiced Services have been performed. Consultant will not be entitled to compensation for Additional Services, as defined below in Section (3), unles s authorized by City in writing in advance, and memorialized in an amendment to this Agreement executed by the authorized representatives of each Party. This Section (2) supersedes any conflicting or inconsistent provisions in the Proposal.
(3) Additional Services . In addition to the Services included in Section (1), “Scope of Services,” the Parties may from time to time agree that Consultant will provide Additional Services for additional compensation, as authorized by the City Manager. The nature and scope of the Additional Services, including the time for performance and terms for mutually agreeable additional compensation must be memorialized in a writing, executed by both Parties, as further specified in Section (25), “Amendments,” before Consultant may begin providing the Additional Services. Consultant will not be entitled to co mpensation for any Additional Services performed without a written amendment to include the Additional Services in this Agreement. If Consultant believes that services that it is directed to perform by City are not included in Section (1), “Scope of Services,” Consultant will promptly notify the City in writing of the basis for this belief. If the City agrees that the subject services are not included in Section (1), “Scope of Services,” the Parties will promptly execute a writing to authorize the se rvices as Additional Services for mutually agreed-upon additional compensation. Except as otherwise specified in the written authorization, all Additional Services are subject to the same terms and conditions as all Services under this Agreement, including, billing, record-keeping, reporting, insurance, indemnity, and compliance with all applicable laws and standards.
(4) Effective Date and Term . The term of this Agreement (“Term”) begins on the Effective Date set forth above, and expires on _December 31, 2026_. If the Term expires later than the Updated: 12/21 Page 4
end of the City’s fiscal year, the continuation of the Term into the next fiscal year will be contingent upon the City’s lawful encumbrance or appropriation of new funds for the Agreement.
(5) Assignment and Subcontracting . A substantial inducement to City for entering into this Agreement was, and is, the reputation and competence of Consultant. The assignment or subcontracting of this Agreement by Consultant, or any interest therein, is prohibited without the prior written approval of the City Manager. The City has authorized Consultant to use the following Subconsultants/Subcontractors as specified:
Subconsultant/Subcontractor Name Subconsultant/Subcontractor Services
Kimley – Horn________________ transportation engineering Environmental Science Associates environmental mngmt., public outreach Crawford & Associates, Inc. geotechnical study
Monument ROW utility coordination
WRECO hydrology
(6) Independent Contractor Status . It is expressly understood and agreed by the Parties that Consultant, while providing Services pursuant to this Agreement, is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. Consultant is solely responsible for the means and methods by which it provides the Services. Consultant is solely responsible for all matters relating to the payment of its employees, including compliance with social security, withholding tax and all other laws and regulations governing such matters. Consultant is solely responsible for its own acts and those of its agents and employees during the Term of this Agreement. Consultant will not represent, at any time or in any manner, that Consultant is an employee of the City. Consultant will exercise its judgment in recommending to Ci ty the methods by which to accomplish City’s objectives and needs. Consultant acknowledges that the City will provide no training. Consultant will provide whatever tools and materials that are necessary to complete a client engagement.
Consultant is free to accept, and has accepted in the past, other client engagements. Consultant is responsible for purchasing, bringing, providing, and controlling any and all equipment, tools, instruments, etc. needed for completion of the Services set forth herein, as well as for maintenance and use of such equipment. It is understood that Consultant is hired on a temporary basis only, and that if the City and/or Consultant desires to continue Consultant’s services after expiration of the Term or termination of this Agreement, Consultant must enter into a new agreement.
(7) Billings . Consultant's invoices must include the following information: (a) a brief description of Services performed, including an y Additional Services; (b) the date the Services were performed; (c) the number of hours spent and by whom; (d) the current Agreement not-to- exceed amount; (e) the amount previously billed; (f) the total paid to date; (g) the outstanding balance due, if any; (h) the current invoice amount; (i) total amount billed against the Agreement to date; (j) the remaining balance of the not-to-exceed amount; and (k) the Consultant’s signature.
Except as specifically authorized by City, Consul tant will not bill City for duplicate Services performed by more than one person. Consultant may not submit any billing for an amount in excess of the maximum amount of compensation authorized in Sections (2) and (3), above.
Consultant is solely responsible for its office and overhead costs, including furniture and equipment rental, supplies, salaries of employee s, telephone calls, postage, advertising, and all other expenses incurred by Consultant in the performance of this Agreement.
(8) Advice and Status Reporting . Consultant will provide the City with timely reports, orally or in writing, of all significant developments arising during performance of its Services, and provide Updated: 12/21 Page 5
the City with information as is necessary to enable City to monitor the performance of this Agreement, including statements and data demonstrating the effectiveness of the Services provided in achieving the City’s express goals and objectives. The City may withhold payments otherwise due to Consultant pending timely delivery of all such reports and information.
Consultant will promptly notify the City Manager of any matters that could adversely affect Consultant’s ability or eligibility to continue to provide Services under this Agreement.
(9) Retention of Records . Consultant’s complete files, including all records, employee time sheets, and correspondence pertaining to the Services will be available for review by the City upon request, and copies of pertinent reports and correspondence will be furnished for the City’s files upon request by the City. Consultant will maintain adequate documentation to substantiate all charges for hours and materials charged to City under this Agreement. Consultant will maintain the records and any other records related to the Services or this Agreement and will allow City access to such records for a period of four years after the expiration of the Term or termination of the Agreement. At City’s request, or upon expiration or termination of this Agreement, Consultant will return to City all plans, maps, cost estimates, project financial records, reports, and related documents. All research information, plans, diagrams, financial records, reports, cost estimates or other documents prepared or obtained under the te rms of this Agreement will be delivered to and become the property of the City and all data prepared or obtained under this Agreement will be made available, upon request, to the City without restrictions or limitations on their use. This Section (8) will survive expiration of the Term or termination of the Agreement.
(10) Written Reports and Documents . In accordance with Government Code section 7550, if the total compensation paid to Consultant under this Agreement exceeds $5,000, any document or written report prepared by Consultant for or under the direction of City will contain the numbers and dollar amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the preparation of such document or written report. The contract and subcontract numbers and dollar amounts shall be contained in a separate section of such document or written report. When multiple documents or reports are the subject or product of this Agreement, the disclosure section may also contain a statement indicating that the total contract amount represents compensation for multiple documents or reports.
(11) Record and Fiscal Control System . Consultant will maintain its financial records and fiscal control systems in a commercially reasona ble manner. Consultant will maintain personnel and payroll records to adequately identify the source and application of all received funds; withhold income taxes; pay employment taxes (including Social Security), unemployment compensation, worker's compensation and other taxes as may be due. Consultant will maintain an effective system of internal control to assure that funds provided through the City are used solely for authorized purposes.
(12) Access to Records; Audits. The City will have access at any time during normal business hours and as often as necessary to any bank account and books, records, documents, accounts, files, reports, and other property and papers of Consultant relating to the Services to be provided under this Agreement for the purpose of making an audit, review, survey, examination, excerpt or transcript.
(13) Consultant’s Testimony . Unless the Services include serving as an expert witness, Consultant agrees to consult with City and testify at City’s request at no additional cost other than normal witness fees if litigation is brought against City in connection with Consultant’s Services.
This Section (12) will survive expiration of the Term or termination of the Agreement.
Updated: 12/21 Page 6
(14) Assignment of Personnel . Consultant will only assign competent and qualified personnel to perform the Services. If City asks Consultant to remove a person assigned to the Services, Consultant agrees to do so immediately regardless of the reason, or the lack of a reason, for City's request.
(15) Insurance. Before it may begin performing Services under this Agreement, Consultant must procure and provide proof of the insurance coverage and endorsements required by this Section in the form of certificates and endorse ments acceptable to City. The required insurance must cover the activities of Consultant and its subconsultants or subcontractors relating to or arising from the performance of the Services, and must remain in full force and effect at all times during the Term of the Agreement. All required insurance must be issued by a company licensed to do business in the State of California, and each such insurer must have an A.M. Best’s financial strength rating of “A” or better and a financial size ra ting of “VII” or better. If Consultant fails to provide any of the required coverage in full compliance with the requirements of this Agreement, City may, at its sole discretion and in addition to any other remedies, purchase such coverage at Consultant’s expense and deduct the cost from payments due to Consultant, suspend performance of the Services under the Agreement, or terminate Consultant for default. The procurement of the required insurance will not be construed to limit Consultant’s liability under this Agreement or to fulfill Consultant’s indemnification obligations under this Agreement. If coverage limits carried by Consultant exceed the minimum limits specified below, the higher limits will be deemed to be required by this Agreement.
A. Policies and Limits . Consultant must procure and maintain the following insurance policies and limits at all times during the Term of this Agreement:
1. Commercial General Liability Insurance (“CGL”): The CGL policy must be issued on an occurrence basis, written on a comprehensive general liability form (CG 00 01), and must include coverage for liability arising from the operations of Consultant or its subconsultants or subcontractors in the performance of the Services, including products and completed operations, property damage, bodily injury and personal and advertising injury with limits of at least $2,000,000.00 per occurrence. The CGL coverage may be arranged under a single policy for the full limits required or by a combination of underlying policies with the balance provided by excess or umbrella policies, provided each such policy complies with the requirements set forth herein.
2. Automobile Liability: The automobile liability policy must provide coverage of at least $1,000,000.00 combined single-limit per accident for bodily injury, death or property damage.
3. Workers’ Compensation Insurance and Employer’s Liability: If the Consultant has employees, the policy must comply with the requirements of the California Workers’ Compensation Insurance and Safety Act, providing coverage of at least $1,000,000.00, or as otherwise required by law.
4. Professional Liability: The professional liability insurance policy must insure against the Consultant’s errors and omissions in the provision of Services under this Agreement, in an amount not less than $1,000,000.00 combined single limit.
Any deductible or self-insured retention may not exceed $50,000. The professional liability policy must include prior acts coverage sufficient to cover all Services provided by the Consultant for this Agreement, and the coverage must continue in Updated: 12/21 Page 7
effect for five years following final payment to Consultant. The following provisions apply if the professional liability policy is written on a claims-made form:
a. The retroactive date of the policy must be shown and must be on or before the Effective Date of the Agreement.
b. The insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for a continuous period of at least five years following expiration of the Term or termination of the Agreement, whichever occurs first.
c. If the coverage is canceled or not renewed and is not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a retroactive date that is on or before the Effective Date of this Agreement, Consultant must provide extended reporting coverage for a minimum of five years following expiration of the Term or termination of the Agreement, whichever occurs first. The City has the right to procure, at Consultant’s cost, any extended reporting provisions of the policy if the Consultant cancels or fails to renew the coverage.
d. A copy of the claim reporting requirements must be submitted to the City before Consultant may begin performing Services under this Agreement.
B. Required Endorsements. The insurance provided by Consultant must include the following endorsements as specified below. The endorsements must be executed by a person authorized to bind the issuing insurer. The endorsements are to be provided on forms provided, specified, or approved by the City. As an alternative to the City’s forms, the Consultant’s insurer(s) may provide complete copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements.
1. Additional Insured Endorsements: The General Liability and Automobile Liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
a. The City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers (“ Additional Insureds”) will be covered as additional insureds with respect to all covered liability. This must be provided in the form of an additional insured endorsement to the Consultant’s insurance policy, using form CG 20 10 11 85, forms CG 20 10 10 01 and GC 20 37 10 01, or equivalent approved by the City. For design professionals form CG 20 07 may be used.
Alternatively, the additional insured endorsement may be provided as a separate owner’s policy that complies with all of the requirements set forth in this Section 15.
b. The inclusion of more than one insured will not operate to impair the rights of one insured against another, and the policies will apply as though separate policies have been issued to each of the Additional Insureds. c. The insurance provided by the Consultant is primary and no insurance or self-insurance held or owned by any of the Additional Insureds may be called upon to contribute to a loss or defense.
d. Any failure by Consultant to comply with the reporting requirements for a policy will not affect nor abridge the coverage provided for any Additional Insureds.
Updated: 12/21 Page 8
e. The coverage or endorsement will not contain any limitations on the scope of protection available to the Additional Insureds.
2. Notice: Each insurance policy required by this clause must provide or be endorsed to state that coverage will not be reduced, canceled, or allowed to expire without at least 30 days written notice to the City, unless due to non-payment of premiums, in which case 10 days written notice is required.
3. Waiver of Subrogation: Each required policy must include an endorsement providing that the insurer will waive any right of subrogation it may have against the City. Consultant hereby agrees to waive subrogation which any insurer of Consultant may acquire from Consultant by virtue of the payment of any loss.
C. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions for the required insurance policies are subject to prior approval by the City Manager.
Before beginning performance of the Services, Consultant must disclose the amounts of the deductibles and self-insured retentions that apply to the required policies. If the City Manager determines that the deductible or self-insured retention for any required policy is unacceptably high, at the option of City, (1) the insurer must reduce or eliminate the deductible or self-insured retention with respect to the Additional Insureds, or (2) the Consultant must provide a bond or financial guarantee satisfactory to the City guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses. During the Term of this Agreement, Consultant may not increase any deductibles or self-insured retentions with respect to the Additional Insureds, without the prior written consent of the City Manager. The City Manager may condition such consent upon the Consultant procuring a bond or financial guarantee that is satisfactory in form to the City, guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses.
D. Subconsultants or Subcontractors. Consultant must ensure that each subconsultant or subcontractor is required to maintain the same insurance coverage required for Consultant under this Section (15), with respect to its performance of Services, including the required endorsements. Consultant must confirm that each subconsultant or subcontractor has complied with these insurance requirements bef ore the subconsultant or subcontractor is permitted to begin Services under this Agreement. Upon request by the City, Consultant must provide certificates and endorsements submitted by each subconsultant or subcontractor to prove compliance with this requirement. The insurance requirements for subconsultants or subcontractors do not replace or limit the Consultant insurance obligations.
(16) Indemnification . The terms and conditions set forth in subsection 16(A), below, are applicable to this Agreement if the Services to be provided by Consultant are not “design professional” services as used and defined in Civil Code section 2782.8 (architect, landscape architect, engineering, or land surveyor services). The terms and conditions set forth in subsection 16(B), below, are applicable to this Agreement if the Services to be provided by Consultant are “design professional” services as used and defined in Civil Code section 2782.8 (architect, landscape architect, engineering, or land surveyor services).
A. Indemnification by Non-Design Professionals. Consultant shall, to the fullest extent permitted by law, indemnify, defend (with counsel acceptable to the City) and hold harmless City, and its employees, officials, volunteers and agents ("Indemnified Parties") from and against any and all losses, claims, damages, costs and liability of every nature arising out of or resulting from the performance of this Agreement by Consultant, its officers, employees, Updated: 12/21 Page 9
agents, volunteers, subcontractors or sub-consultants, excepting only liability arising from the sole negligence, active negligence or willful misconduct of City. Liabilities subject to the duties to defend and indemnify include, without limitation, all claims, losses, damages, penalties, fines, and judgments; associated investigation and administrative expenses; defense costs, including but not limited to reasonable attorneys’ fees; court costs; and costs of alternative dispute resolution.
1. The duty to defend is a separate and distinct obligation from the Consultant’s duty to indemnify. The Consultant shall be obligated to defend, in all legal, equitable, administrative, or special proceedings, with counsel approved by the City, the City and its directors, officers, and employees, immediately upon tender to the Consultant of the claim in any form or at any stage of an action or proceeding, whether or not liability is established. An allegation or determination of comparative active negligence or willful misconduct by an Indemnified Party does not relieve the Consultant from its separate and distinct obligation to defend City. The obligation to defend extends through final judgment, including exhaustion of any appeals. The defense obligation includes an obligation to provide independent defense counsel if the Consultant asserts that liability is caused in whole or in part by the negligence or willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party. If it is finally adjudicated that liability was caused by the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party, Cons ultant may submit a claim to the City for reimbursement of reasonable attorneys’ fees and defense costs.
2. In the event that Consultant or any employee, agent, subconsultant or subcontractor of Consultant providing services under this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees Retirement System (“ PERS”) to be eligible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of City, Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for the payment of any em ployee and/or employer contributions for PERS benefits on behalf of Consultant or its employees, agents, subconsultants or subcontractors, as well as for the payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise be the responsibility of City.
3. The review, acceptance or approval of the Consultant’s Services or work product by any Indemnified Party shall not affect, relieve or reduce the Consultant’s indemnification or defense obligations. The provisions of this Section are not limited by and do not affect the provisions of this Agreement relating to insurance.
4. Acceptance by City of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not relieve Consultant from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This indemnification and hold harmless clause shall apply to any damages or claims for damages whether or not such insurance policies shall have been determined to apply.
5. By execution of this Agreement, Consultant acknowledges and agrees to the provisions of this Section and that it is a material element of consideration, and that these provisions survive the termination of this Agreement.
B. Indemnification by Design Professionals. Consistent with California Civil Code section 2782.8 (“section 2782.8”), when the Services to be provided under this Agreement are to be performed by a “design professional,” as that term is defined under section 2782.8, Consultant shall, to the fullest extent permitted by law, indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, and its employees, officials, volunteers and agents (“Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all losses, claims, damages, costs and liability of every nature, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, to the extent caused in whole or in part by any negligence, Updated: 12/21 Page 10
recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant, its officers, employees, agents, subconsultants or subcontractors in performance of the Services under this Agreement, but excluding the sole or active negligence or willful misconduct of one or more of the Indemnified Parties. Defense costs shall not exceed Consultant’s proportionate percentage of fault, except as set forth in section 2782.8.
1. In the event that Consultant or any employee, agent, subconsultant or subcontractor of Consultant providing services under this Ag reement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees Retirement System (“ PERS”) to be eligible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of City, Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for the payment of any employee and/or employer contributions for PERS benefits on behalf of Consultant or its employees, agents, subconsultants or subcontractors, as well as for the payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise be the responsibility of City.
2. The review, acceptance or approval of the Consultant’s Services or work product by any Indemnified Party shall not affect, relieve or reduce the Consultant’s indemnification or defense obligations. The provisions of this Se ction are not limited by and do not affect the provisions of this Agreement relating to insurance.
3. Acceptance by City of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not relieve Consultant from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This indemnification and hold harmless clause shall apply to any damages or claims for damages whether or not such insurance policies shall have been determined to apply.
4. By execution of this Agreement, Consultant acknowledges and agrees to the provisions of this Section and that it is a material element of consideration, and that these provisions survive the termination of this Agreement.
(17) Licenses . If a license of any kind, which te rm is intended to include evidence of registration, is required of Consultant, its employees, agents, or subcontractors by federal or state law, Consultant warrants that such license has been obtained, is valid and in good standing, and Consultant shall keep it in effect at all times during the Term of this Agreement, and that any applicable bond has been posted in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations.
Consultant, its subconsultants, and subcontractors, will obtain and maintain a City of San Pablo Business License at all times during the Term of this Agreement.
(18) Employment Practices.
A. Employment of Local Residents. Pursuant to the San Pablo Economic Opportunity Policy, the Consultant and any subcontractors shall contact the San Pablo Economic Development Corporation (“EDC”) at [email protected] or 510-215-3200, at least ten business days prior to hiring or staffing for fulfillment of the Agreement, describing number, duties and qualifications needed for available positions, and shall fairly consider for employment any workers referred by the EDC within three business days. “Local Resident” means an individual having an adjusted household income of less than the Area Median Income for Contra Costa County, and domiciled in the City of San Pablo as of the relevant hiring date, with “domiciled” as defined by Section 349(b) of the California Election Code. Discrimination against Local Residents on the basis of their local status is prohibited.
Updated: 12/21 Page 11
B. Compliance With Law . Consultant represents that it is an Equal Opportunity Employer and shall comply with applicabl e regulations governing equal opportunity employment. Consultant shall not discrim inate in the employment of any person because of race, color, national origin, ancestry, physical or mental disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, age, unless based upon a bona fide occupational qualification pursuant to the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. Consultant shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”) in performing its obligations under this Agreement. Failure to comply with the provisions of the ADA shall be a material breach of, and grounds for the immediate termination of, this Agreement . In performing Services and providing services under this Agreement, Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, comply with all applicable laws of the United States and the State of California; the Ordinances of the City of San Pablo; and the rules, regulations, orders, and directions of their respective administrative agencies and the officers thereof.
(19) Local Subcontracting – Outreach . Consultant shall contact the EDC at [email protected] or 510-215-3200) at least two weeks prior to any subcontract award, providing notice and details regarding subcontracting opportunity. The EDC shall notify qualified local businesses of subcontracting opportunities , and provide technical assistance to qualified local businesses during the subcontracting bidding process.
(20) Termination .
A. Termination for Convenience. City may terminate this Agreement at its sole discretion at any time prior to expiration of the Term or completion by the Consultant of the Services required hereunder. Notice of termination of this Agreement shall be given in writing to the Consultant, and shall be sufficient and complete when same is deposited in the United States Mail, postage prepaid and certified, address as set forth below in Section (21), “Notices.” The Agreement shall be terminated upon the date set forth in the City’s Notice of Termination. If the City terminates this Agreement, the Consultant shall be compensated for all Services satisfactorily performed prior to the time of receipt of cancellation notice, and shall be compensated for materials ordered by the Consultant or its em ployees, or services of others ordered by the Consultant or its employees, prior to receipt of notice of cancellation whether or not such materials or final instruments of service of others have actually been delivered, provided that the Consultant or its employees are not able to cancel such orders for materials or services of others.
Compensation for the Consultant in the event of cancellation shall be determined by City in accordance with the percentage of Services completed and agreed to by the Consultant. In the event of cancellation, all notes, sketches, computations, drawings, and specifications or other data, whether complete or not, remain the property of the City. The City may make copies or extract information from any such notes, sket ches, computations, drawings, and specifications, or other data whether complete or not.
B. Termination for Cause. City may terminate this Agreement for cause by providing Consultant with one day’s written notice of such termination if Consultant violates any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. In City’s discretion and at City’s option, such termination for cause may alternatively be accomplished, where Consultant fails to perform any of the obligations required of Consultant within the time and in the manner provided for under the terms of this Agreement, within seven days after receipt of the notice of such default. Upon City's termination of this Agreement for cause, City reserves the right to complete the Services by whatever means City deems expedient and the expense of completi ng such Services, as well as any and all Updated: 12/21 Page 12
damages to the extent caused by the negligent acts, intentional acts or errors or omissions of the Consultant, shall be charged to the Consultant.
C. Immediate Termination. City may term inate this Agreement immediately in any case where the Consultant engages in fraudulent or criminal activities while performing the Services, or is otherwise determined to lack the necessary skills to accomplish the desired objectives.
(21) Ownership of Materials . Any and all documents, including draft documents where completed documents are unavailable, or materials prepared or caused to be prepared by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement shall be the property of the City at the moment of their completed preparation. All materials and records of a preliminary nature such as survey notes, sketches, preliminary plans, computations and other data, prepared or obtained in the performance of this Agreement, shall be made available, upon request, to City at no additional charge and without restriction or limitation on their use consistent with the intent of the original design.
(22) Amendments . This Agreement may be modified or amended only by a written document executed by both Consultant and City's City Manager and approved as to form by the City Attorney. Such document shall expressly state that it is intended by the Parties to amend the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
(23) Abandonment by Consultant . In the event the Consultant ceases performing Services under this Agreement or otherwise abandons the Agreement prior to completing all of the Services, Consultant shall, without delay, deliver to City all materials and records prepared or obtained in the performance of this Agreement, and shall be paid for the reasonable value of the Services performed up to the time of cessation or abandonment, less a deduction for any damages or additional expenses which City incurs as a result of such cessation or abandonment.
Consultant agrees to be financially responsible and to compensate City for any costs incurred by City in retaining the services of another to replace Consultant, but only to the extent that the costs of retaining the replacement exceed what remaining amounts would have been paid to Consultant under the Agreement had Consultant completed the Services.
(24) Waiver . The waiver by either Party of a breac h by the other of any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of either the same or a different provision of this Agreement.
(25) No Third-Party Rights . The Parties do not intend to create rights in, or to grant remedies to, any third party as a beneficiary of this Agreement or of any duty, covenant, obligation, or undertaking established herein.
(26) Severability . Should any part of this Agreement be declared by a final decision by a court or tribunal of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional, invalid, or beyond the authority of either Party to enter into or carry out, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement, which shall continue in full force and effect, provided that the remainder of this Agreement, absent the unexcised portion, can be reasonably interpreted to give effect to the intentions of the Parties.
(27) Compliance with Laws . In the performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall abide by and conform to any and all applicable laws of the United States, the State of California, and City ordinances. Consultant warrants that al l Services done under this Agreement will be in Updated: 12/21 Page 13
compliance with all applicable safety rules, laws, statutes and practices, including but not limited to Cal/OSHA regulations.
(28) Controlling Law and Venue . This Agreement and all matters relating to it shall be governed by the laws of the State of California, and venue for any legal action arising from or relating to this Agreement will be in the Superior Court of Contra Costa County, and no other place. Consultant hereby waives the removal provisions of Code of Civil Procedure section 394.
(29) Breach . In the event that Consultant fails to perform any of the Services described in this Agreement or otherwise breaches the Agreement, City shall have the right to pursue all remedies provided by law and equity. Neither payment by the City nor performance by Consultant shall be construed as a waiver of either Party's rights or remedies against the other. Failure to require full and timely performance of any provisi on, at any time, shall not waive or reduce the right to insist upon complete and timely performance of such provision thereafter. In the event of any suit, action or proceeding brought by either Party for breach of any term hereof or to enforce any provision hereof, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its reasonable attorney’s fees.
(30) Inspection by Other Agencies . Authorized representatives of the Federal Government, the California Department of Tran sportation, or other government agencies which provide grant funding (if any) for this Agreement and the City have the right to inspect Consultant’s performance of the Services, files, and work product.
(31) Conflict of Interest . Consultant warrants and covenants that Consultant presently has no interest in, nor shall any interest be acquired in, any matter which will render the services required under the provisions of this Agreement a violation of any applicable state, local, or federal law. In the event that any conflict of interest should nevertheless arise, Consultant shall promptly notify City of the existence of such conflict of interest so that the City may determine whether to terminate this Agreement. Consultant further warrants its compliance with the Political Reform Act (Gov. Code section 81000 et seq.) respecti ng this Agreement. Where City Manager determines, based on facts provided by City staff, t hat Consultant meets the criteria of section 18701 of the FPPC regulations, the individual providing services under this Agreement shall be considered a “designated employee” under the City’s conflict of interest code, and shall be required to complete FPPC Form 700 regarding his or her economic interests in a timely manner.
(32) Copyright . Upon City's request, Consultant shall execute appropriate documents to assign to the City the copyright to work created pursuant to this Agreement. The issuance of a patent or copyright to Consultant or any other person shall not affect City's rights to the materials and records prepared or obtained in the performance of this Agreement. City reserves a license to use such materials and records without restriction or limitation consistent with the intent of the original design, and City shall not be required to pay any additional fee or royalty for such materials or records. The license reserved by City shall continue for a period of fifty years from the Effective Date unless extended by operation of law or otherwise.
(33) Whole Agreement . This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and agreement of the parties. This Agreement integrates all of the terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental hereto and supersedes all negotiations or previous agreements between the Parties with respect to all or any part of the subject matter hereof.
(34) Multiple Copies of Agreement . Multiple copies of this Agreement may be executed but the parties agree that the Agreement on file in the office of the City Clerk is the version of the Updated: 12/21 Page 14
Agreement that shall take precedence should any differences exist among counterparts of the document.
(35) Notices . Notices required by this Agreement shall be personally delivered or mailed, postage prepaid, as follows:
To Consultant: Shawn O’Keefe, Vice President
Mark Thomas
3000 Oak Road, Suite 650
Walnut Creek, 94597
To the City: City Manager, City of San Pablo
San Pablo City Hall
1000 Gateway Avenue
San Pablo, CA 94806
Each Party shall provide the other Party with telephone and written notice of any change in address as soon as practicable. Notices given by personal delivery shall be effective immediately.
Notices given by mail shall be deemed to have been delivered forty-eight hours after having been deposited in the United States mail.
(36) Federal Funding Requirements (if applicable) . If this Agreement is subject to federal funding, in whole or in part, it must comply with the uniform federal award procurement requirements set forth in 2 CFR §§ 200.318 – 200.327, as may be amended from time to time, and contain the applicable provisions described in Appendix II to Part 200 – Contract Provisions for non-Federal Entity Contracts Under Federal Awards, which are attached to this Agreement as Exhibit C. In the event of a conflict or inconsistency between Exhibit C, Exhibit D, if applicable, and this Agreement, Exhibit C will control.
_ _ This Agreement is subject to federal funding. See Exhibit C. ___ This Agreement is not subject to federal funding.
(37) Caltrans Funding Requirements (if applicable) . If this Agreement is for architectural and/or engineering services subject to reimbursement or funding, in whole or in part, by Caltrans and administered under the Local Assistance Procedures Manual (“LAPM”), it must include the provisions set forth in Exhibit D, Mandatory Fiscal and Federal Provisions for Architectural and Engineering Consultant Contracts Subject to Caltrans Funding. In the event of any conflict or inconsistency between Exhibit D and this Agreement, Exhibit D will control.
_ This Agreement is subject to funding by Caltrans. See Exhibit D. __ This Agreement is not subject to funding by Caltrans.
Updated: 12/21 Page 15
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Consultant has execut ed this Agreement, and the City, by its City Manager, who is authorized to do so, has executed this Agreement.
APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY OF SAN PABLO
A Municipal Corporation
By _______________________________ By ___________________________________ Lynn Tracy Nerland, City Attorney Matt Rodriguez, City Manager
MARK THOMAS
By ___________________________________
Shawn O’Keefe, Vice President
ATTEST:
By _______________________________ Dated _________________________ Dorothy Gantt, City Clerk
Attachments: Exhibit A: Request for Proposals, dated _June 25, 2021_________ Exhibit B: Consultant’s Proposal, dated _August 13, 2021 _______ Exhibit C : Federal Contract Provisions
Exhibit D : Mandatory Fiscal and Federal Provisions for Architectural and Engineering Consultant Contracts Subject to Caltrans Funding
Updated: 12/21 Page Exhibit A-1
Exhibit A
Request for Proposal (RFP)
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
Bridge Engineering, Environmental
Documentation, and Technical
Services for the San Pablo Avenue
Bridge Replacement Project
June 25, 2021
Proposals Due:
July 30, 2021 by 5:00 p.m.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. INTRODUCTION
1. About San Pablo
2. Purpose for Request for Proposals
B. SCOPE OF WORK
1. Project Description
2. Project Background
3. Key Project Elements
4. Consultant Services
5. RFP Inquiries / Pre-Proposal Meeting
C. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS
1. Letter of Interest / Cover Letter
2. Organization Chart / Personnel
3. Firm(s) Statement of Qualifications
4. Staff Statement of Qualifications or Resumes
5. Staff Availability
6. Project Approach
7. Schedule of Work
8. Consultant Contract Statement
9. Cost Proposal
10. Method of Payment
11. References
12. 13. 12. Special Requirements
D. PROPOSAL CONDITIONS
1. Local Employment and Contracting Opportunities
2. Questions
3. General Terms and Conditions
4. Agreement
E. PROPOSAL PROCEDURE
1. Submission of Proposals
2. Consultant Selection Process
3. Evaluation Criteria
4. Tentative Proposal Schedule
F. ATTACHMENTS
1 City of San Pablo
Request for Proposals
San Pablo Ave. Bridge Replacement, over San Pablo Creek – BR No. 28C0057
A. INTRODUCTION
1. About San Pablo
San Pablo is located in West Contra Costa County off Interstate 80, minutes away from the Bay Area cultural centers of Berkeley, Oakland and San Francisco. Interstate 80 is the principal arterial route between the Bay Area and Sacramento. The City of San Pablo is nestled between the cities of Pinole and Richmond and by the neighboring cities of El Cerrito and Hercules. Historically one of the oldest Spanish settlements in the region, San Pablo has become a thriving residential and business community with a population of approximately 32,000 in an area of approximately two and one-half square miles.
San Pablo is located one half hour away from international airports in Oakland and San Francisco. Because of its location, its residents are afforded beautiful views of San Pablo Bay. Beyond the views and ease of intercontinental transportation, the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) system and Amtrak passenger train service are located in neighboring cities providing access to the entirety of the region in conjunction with an AC Transit bus line service. Express AC Transit Bus service exists on San Pablo Avenue to provide convenient and faster commuter bus service along San Pablo Avenue to the Richmond and El Cerrito BART stations, and important stops for employees using this form of transit.
The City’s character was largely shaped during the Second World War when shipyards in Richmond began building ships at breakneck speed. A large portion of the City’s housing stock was also constructed during this time, in support of the population in flux that took the population from 2,000 people prior to the war to 25,000 people during the war era. The City incorporated shortly after the war on April 27, 1948 and continued to transform. The City currently has one of the highest densities in Californi a, with over 30 dwelling units per acre.
Additional information about the City can be obtained from the City of San Pablo website:
www.sanpabloca.gov.
2. Purpose for Request for Proposals
The City of San Pablo (“City”) invites proposals for Bridge Engineering, Environmental Documentation, and Technical Services (Consultant) during the design and construction of the San Pablo Avenue Bridge Replacement Project (“Project”), a public works project funded by the Federal Highway Bridge Program (HBP) and local funds. The purpose of this Request for Proposals (“RFP”) is to select a Bridge-Engineering Consultant (“Consultant”) that can design the bridge replacement and associated improvements required to conform to current bridge and approach roadway standards for Bridge No. 28C0057, carrying San Pablo Avenue and Road 20 over San Pablo Creek. Professional disciplines expected to be involved with the project include, but are not limited to, civil & traffic engineering tasks, right -of-way, stormwater management, hydrology, structural design, environmental documentation and associated technical studies, utility coordination, public outreach, advanced project renderings of project solutions and 2 City of San Pablo
Request for Proposals
San Pablo Ave. Bridge Replacement, over San Pablo Creek – BR No. 28C0057
surrounding impact areas, landscape architect and open -space design (based on proposed approach alignments and impacts). Please see Consultant Services (Section B, Item #4) for full description of services required.
B. SCOPE OF WORK
1. Project Description
The San Pablo Avenue Bridge Replacement Project (Project) will replace the existing T- girders structure, which was built in 1926, and has been noted to be “Structurally Deficient”, and has been given a sufficiency rating of 49.4 (Rating in 2013). The bridge soffit is exhibiting transverse cracking and one of the girders has exposed rebar resulting from concrete spalling at span 2. The roadway clear width is inadequate and does not meet the minimum lane widths recommended by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). The bridge has been iden tified as "Functionally Obsolete" as it is not wide enough to accommodate the existing average daily trips (ADT). Scour and silt deposition as well as construction impacts to San Pablo Creek should be addressed with the project.
A realignment of the skewed 5 -legged intersection at 23rd Street and Road 20 will be included as part of the project in order to enhance pedestrian, bicycle and transit services and in accordance with California’s Complete Streets Program. The existing bridge also does not have designated bike lanes although it is identified as a Class II bikeway in the City’s Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan. Other bike lane improvements are identified for the roads adjoining the intersection. The proposed widening will meet City and AASHTO geometry standards as well as provide approved bridge railing and approach guard railing.
The Contra Costa Transportation Authority has developed a Bus Rapid Transit Plan from Oakland and Richmond and has identified continuing the route through the Project. The Plan would create dedicated bus
lanes in both directions through this
corridor along San Pablo Avenue. An
elementary school is also located
nearby. As such, the high pedestrian
use is a key factor in the design and
construction of this improvement
project. Any intersection
improvements identified during the
design process which are beyond
the scope of the bridge replacement
will be provided using local funds
and has been included within West
Contra Costa Transportation
3 City of San Pablo
Request for Proposals
San Pablo Ave. Bridge Replacement, over San Pablo Creek – BR No. 28C0057
Mitigation Program. Additional funding will be needed to address all of the foreseen issues.
An aerial view of the bridge and intersection site is shown below on the left.
2. Project Background
San Pablo Avenue is a principal arterial that runs north and south through the heart of the City of San Pablo and is approximately parallel to Interstate 80. At times of emergency or heavy traffic, motorists use San Pablo Avenue as a bypass to Interstate 80.
The primary project objective is to replace the “Structurally Deficient” and “Functionally Obsolete” structure to improve public safety. The proposed bridge will be able to carry design live loads, provide adequate roadway width to meet current standards and address any other deficiencies with the existing structure. A Highway Bridge Program (HBP) application and Project Study Report Equivalent was submitted to Caltrans in 2016 (Attachment 1). The Bridge Replacement is an identified project within the FTIP and has been approved for $9.45M in funding. There is $940K programmed in Federal FY 19/20 for Preliminary Engineering . A Field Review was conducted on February 5, 2020. The City has secured a contract with Willdan Engineering to provide project management services, as an extension of City staff.
This project is located just north of a corridor improvement project by Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC). The ACTC Corridor project will include signal modernization and coordination, adding a bus lane, updating bus stops or stations, pedestrian safety improvements, bicycle safety improvements, etc. This project will prepare the city for the coming updates from the ACTC.
3. Key Project Elements
This project includes several complexities which must be addressed throughout each phase of the project, these complexities also create opportunities that will contribute to the success of this milestone City project. Consideration for these project opportunities in the proposed Project Approach, and Scope of Services will be considered during proposal ranking. Addressing these items is not a separate section of the proposal, this description is to highlight ke y project items for consideration in the Project Approach and Scope of Services section of the proposal.
a) Utility Coordination: The project area is home to a significant number of utilities. A gas main travels through the project area, and a fiber backbone is attached to the existing bridge structure. These are in addition to an array of typical utility interactions that must be managed when designing improvements in a dense urban environment. The City has sent initial map and utility identification request letters to East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD), AT&T, Comcast, and the West County Waste Water District 4 City of San Pablo
Request for Proposals
San Pablo Ave. Bridge Replacement, over San Pablo Creek – BR No. 28C0057
(WCWD) as part of advancing key project understanding. This is not a complete list of area utilities. Received responses are included in Attachment
8. Managing utility design and relocation requirements will be a key factor in design schedule management and contribute toward efficient construction administration.
b) Right-of-Way and Easements: The replacement bridge structure will incorporate wider shoulders and associated geometric improvements which will impact approach radius and require transition into the existing approach roadway geometry. The City owns adjacent land, with existing structures historically occupied by tenants, there is also a local park adjacent to the structure and approach roadway. Constraints also exist to the south-west with existing development and an associated sound wall. Utility relocation and associated navigation of existing and future rights and easements will require close attention and early communication to minimize required acquisitions, notifications, and creation of required easements in a timely manner. c) Bicycle and Pedestrian Circulation: As noted in the Project Description, the existing bridge does not incorporate bicycle lanes although it is identified as a Class II bikeway in the City’s Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan. The City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan link is:
https://www.sanpabloca.gov/1491/Bicycle-and-Pedestrian-Master-Plan. Bicycle & Pedestrian improvements are identified for adjoining roadway segments. The City’s alternative transportation planning, as well as commuter travel destinations require circulation through this key intersection in the downtown area.
d) Approach-roadway segment alignments and intersection improvement:
As discussed in the Project Description, the primary-project objective is bridge replacement. The intersection that is carried by this bridge also has circulation and safety challenges, in part associated with approach roadway alignments.
The City has considered that alternative approach alignments and intersection improvements, may significantly improve intersection operation, safety, and alternative-transportation circulation. The City has been awarded funding through the West County Subregional Transportation Mitigation Program (STMP), which is dedicated to the intersection improvement and roadway alignment element of this project. This will be a significant element of the design development, and the development of intersection and approach solutions will be fundamental in the bridge type selection process. e) Structural and Architectural Elements:
• The bridge structure location is an entry marker and monument to the downtown area, and adjacent to community elements, including a public park, school, shopping, businesses, and housing. There is currently an archway symbolizing this, on an approach segment to the structure, which may be either relocated or otherwise architecturally represented or incorporated into the replacement structure. 5 City of San Pablo
Request for Proposals
San Pablo Ave. Bridge Replacement, over San Pablo Creek – BR No. 28C0057
• The existing bridge structure’s architectural elements encourages the encampment of disadvantaged individuals seeking shelter from the elements within identified pedestrian circulation areas. This limits pedestrian circulation capacity, utility, and also impacts the safety of those accessing the space due to the difficulty to visually observe, and access this area for law enforcement and emergency response. • Access for channel maintenance and vegetation removal. Although not a structural or architectural element, consideration for access to the densely vegetated channel area should be a consideration through structure and approach design. This is a key consideration for flood prevention, requiring creek bed access for permitted channel maintenance.
f) Traffic Management During Construction: As noted in the Project Description, San Pablo Ave. serves as an alternative route to Interstate 80 during times of heavy traffic or emergency demand. The bridge also carries a major intersection in the downtown area. Traffic management during construction will be a key consideration beginning early in the design and alternatives evaluation process.
g) Stakeholder Coordination and Community Outreach: The community significance, and impacts to stakeholders including schools, businesses, residential communities, utility owners, commuters and other interested parties, as well as the impacts and planning required for the construction phase, make the community and stakeholder coordination element of this project critical to environmental documentation, design development, and construction administration. A robust community outreach and stakeholder coordination plan will be key to the success of this project. h) Funding and Phasing: It is typical to identify improvements as part of project development, which may include alternative transportation and circulation, intersection operation and safety, community development, environmental justice, and parks and recreation. Some improvements may be funded through other programs and incorporated into the project or considered as a future phase as funding becomes available. As cited earlier, the City has been awarded funding through the West County Subregional Transportation Mitigation Program (STMP), which is dedicated to the intersection improvement and roadway alignment element of this project. The PE phase of this project will incorporate both the intersection improvement and bridge design elements of this project.
4. Consultant Services: The City of San Pablo expects the selected Consultant to perform requested professional services necessary for the environmental documentation, design, bid documents, permitting, and construction engineering for the S an Pablo Avenue Bridge Replacement Project. We have included the below tasks which the consultant should incorporate into their proposed scope of 6 City of San Pablo
Request for Proposals
San Pablo Ave. Bridge Replacement, over San Pablo Creek – BR No. 28C0057
services. The below items do not comprise a complete list of the tasks required.
Consultants shall prepare a comprehensive and detailed Scope of Services for this project based on their knowledge of the required tasks and deliverables, and experience with similar projects. We anticipate that each of the identified tasks will be included with a much more detailed scope, as required for t his project, and contracting purposes, including amendments to the below described requirements as required to satisfy their Project Approach and Services package. Some of the below scope items are requested to be included as “optional” , and not as part of the base scope and fee. Optional scope items are denoted below. The consultant may also include additional “Optional” scope items which they would like the City to consider as part of their project approach. These optional items should not be required to complete the bridge replacement project according to established engineering standards and funding program procedures.
a. Project Administration
As stated in the Project Background, the City has contracted with Willdan Engineering to provide City Project Management Services for this project. Included in Attachment 7 is the Scope of Services awarded to Willdan Engineering for Project Management Services. The tasks identified under Project Administration should complement the scope awarded to Willdan Engineering, and not be redundant.
1) The Consultant shall organize, schedule, and chair Project Development Team (PDT) meetings, public outreach meetings, stakeholder coordination meetings, utility coordination meetings, right -of-way and easement coordination and acquisition meetings, field reviews, and other project related meetings. As applicable, the meetings will be setup and in advance, according to the project schedule. The Consultant shall be responsible for coordinating venues for public outreach meetings. The cost of renting meeting space (if required) will not be the responsibility of Consultant. 2) The Consultant shall prepare meeting agendas, meeting sign-in sheets, and meeting summaries for all meetings. Meeting summaries shall include discussion items, key points which direct work or otherwise influence project decisions or tasks, and action items with due da tes date and responsible parties.
3) The Consultant shall prepare a comprehensive, detailed, project schedule and be responsible for adhering to, implementing, and maintaining this project schedule throughout the project. The project schedule tasks will align with the tasks included within the Scope of Services, creating a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS). The proposed schedule shall include proposed meeting frequency for PDT meetings, stakeholder meetings, public outreach meetings, utility coordination meetings , and project management meetings with City Staff.
4) The consultant shall prepare monthly status reports and updated project schedules, which shall be submitted with invoices. The reports must outline the charges made by the consultant and sub-consultants. 7 City of San Pablo
Request for Proposals
San Pablo Ave. Bridge Replacement, over San Pablo Creek – BR No. 28C0057
5) The Consultant shall be responsible for communicating all communication and coordination with project stakeholders prior to stakeholder meetings. 6) The Consultant shall be responsible for adhering to the project budget for the Scope of Servi ces, and responsively manage sub -consultant budget requirements. The Cities expectation is that strict management of the budget will minimize the need for amendments to the agreement. 7) The Consultant shall prepare and implement a quality control process to ensure that all deliverables have been reviewed for completeness and accuracy, that the submittals conform to the applicable standards, as well as to check that the deliverable satisfies the purpose and need for the submittal. The Consultant Shall review sub-consultant submittals according to the same standards. Transmittals for all deliverables shall include the name and contact information for the person responsible for ensuring quality deliverables.
b. Engineering Studies:
1) Survey Control: The Consultant shall provide a Survey Control Data Sheet, Survey Control Point File, and a Project Control plan sheet to be included with the design drawing submittals. The horizontal datum shall be based on the North American Datum 1983 (NAD 83), Zone 3. The vertical datum shall be based on the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88), or otherwise approved by the City.
2) Topographic Surveys and Base Mapping: Consultant shall complete a detailed field survey to identify visible utilities, roadway geometri c characteristics and alignments, roadway cross sections, drainage infrastructure and features, physical improvements, landscape and lighting elements, existing bridge deck and structure characteristics, channel cross sections, trees, headwalls and fences, ground shots, and all other features and details required to serve as a basis of design , cost estimating, environmental documentation, and alternative evaluation throughout the project. Consultant shall notify Underground Service Alert (USA) of Northern California in advance of the survey to all for USA markings to be completed and included in the survey conducted by Consultant. Consultant survey deliverable shall include one PDF and electronic file of the survey, including the topographic survey and base map file. Consultant shall use the Cit y’s current aerial imagery to create digitally ortho -rectified aerial image layer with the electronic submittals. Details acquired through the right-of-way records research, monument and boundary data research and associated field observations will be included in the base map and survey files.
3) Right-of-Way Records, Monument, Boundary Research: The Consultant shall provide right-of-way engineering and services. Services shall include securing preliminary title reports ( PTR) for the project area parcels, complete required research, and identify monuments and property locations in the field. Right -of-way monuments and boundary locations will be included in the base mapping deliverables for this project. Based on preliminary engineering and project impact areas (including construction 8 City of San Pablo
Request for Proposals
San Pablo Ave. Bridge Replacement, over San Pablo Creek – BR No. 28C0057
impacts), right of way mapping and exhibits shall be prepared in support of meetings with land owners, and utility providers for the purpose of identifying and detailing right -way, and easement requirements (both temporary and permanent) as required. Field surveys shall be completed to tie existing land-net monuments to the completed survey and control. The Consultant shall prepare right-of-entry letters, if required. All work will be in compliance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act.
4) Consultant shall provide utility coordination for this project including review and completion (as required) of “A” Package submittals, and associated conflict identification, Utility “B” Package preparation on City letterhead, preparation of report of investigations (ROI), preparing utility agreements and authorizations for City review and circulation. A utility plan and cost estimates shall be prepared for review by the City, Caltrans Utility Coordinator, and in support of FH WA authorizations to proceed with relocation. Consultant shall prepare “C” packages, including final utility plans, summary correspondence on City letterhead regarding any final project details and schedule requirements, notice to owner (NTO), and necessary information for the City to process the RFA for Utility Relocation. 5) Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Report: Consultant shall complete the required geotechnical investigation, including obtaining a boring permit, and associated encroachment pe rmit, coordinating in advance with USA marking for bore locations. Bore locations, depth, site monitoring characteristics, traffic control details, backfill, and laboratory analysis details which shall be completed will be detailed by Consultant.
Consultant shall prepare a Type Selection and Foundation Technical Memorandum, as well as a Foundation Report in accordance to Caltrans Foundation Report Preparation for Bridges. Special provisions shall be prepared in accordance with the foundation report findings , to support the contractor’s knowledge of sub-grade conditions for construction and bidding purposes.
6) Hydrology and Hydraulics Analysis shall result in the Consultants deliverables including the Hydrology Technical Memorandum, Bridge Hydraulic Study, and Bridge Design Hydraulic Study Report. Each of these submittals are to be provided to the City as a draft for City Review, and Final submittal addressing comments.
c. Environmental Studies & Documentation:
1) Public Outreach: Consultant shall prepare a Public Outreach Plan which will detail the number of public meetings anticipated in concert with the project master schedule and associated alternative review, concept and design milestones, as well as the advertising method(s) and key community stakeholder organizations , community follow up approach method and stakeholder communication tracking and comment -response tracking.
Web-based solutions are encouraged. Focus group meetings shall be identified for sub-sets in the stakeholder groups, including property owners impacted by the project. Consultant shall include the preparation of project 9 City of San Pablo
Request for Proposals
San Pablo Ave. Bridge Replacement, over San Pablo Creek – BR No. 28C0057
alternative exhibits, project renderings, fliers, and presentation materials in support of this task.
2) Environmental Reviews and Technical St udies: Consultant shall identify and prepare required environmental documents and studies to satisfy required environmental documentation for this project. Studies and review shall include, but not be limited to the below studies, based on field review and required consultations. It is anticipated that the Consultant scope the studies, consultations, and required services to completely satisfy their approach to final and approved NEPA and CEQA environmental documentation for the project. Technical studies s hall include: Preliminary Environmental Study (PES), Historic Property Survey Archaeological Survey Report (HPSR), Hazardous Waste Initial Site Assessment (ISA); AB52 Consultations; Water Quality Assessment; Traffic Data Collection and required reporting ( ICE, as required), Noise Technical Memorandum, Natural Environmental Study (NES), Wetland Delineation, Air Quality Analysis; visual resources study and associated technical memorandum; Endangered Species Act Section 7 (scoped based on Consultant Approach), cultural resources evaluation (scoped based on Consultant Approach), historic resources (scoped based on Consultant Approach). 3) NEPA & CEQA Environmental Documentation: Consultant is to provide a detailed scope, consistent with their Project Approach, whic h details the level of anticipated environmental documentation to satisfy both NEPA and CEQA requirements for this project. Part of this scope shall include the preparation of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) and associated incorporation into the construction bid documents. Consultant is encouraged to consider combination of public outreach meetings and City Council meetings while building the project schedule, including public posting, review and comment periods, as well as consideration for internal review by the City Attorney and leadership team for scheduling requested action.
d. Permitting:
1) Consultant shall scope required permitting requirements and associated activities which must take place before Construction shall begin. Permitting scope shall be consistent with the Project Approach and based on assumptions regarding impact investigations. Scoping shall include required permitting activities with the Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), US Fish and Wildlife Services, California Regional Water Quality Control Board, municipal stormwater requirements (MS4), and other federal, state, regional, and local jurisdictional agencies requiring notification, or permitting action as required. Clean Water Act (CWA) 401, 404, and CDFG 1602 permitting tasks are anticipated.
e. Engineering:
Consultant shall identify through their Project Approach and Scope of Services, which level of design will include environmental delineation(s), and show in critical path the timing for environmental review. Each submittal 10 City of San Pablo
Request for Proposals
San Pablo Ave. Bridge Replacement, over San Pablo Creek – BR No. 28C0057
shall include an electronic copy, seven (7) sets of reduced plans (11x17), and response to comments from the previous submittal (as applicable). The Consultant shall perform a cross check between the plans, specifications, and estimate items as part of the QC process. Evidence of QC process for each element of the PS&E submittal must be provided with each submittal. 1) Consultant shall complete the Design Criteria and Constraints : Analysis Report, including geometric and hydraulic studies and reports according to Consultant Project Approach and Understanding.
2) Preliminary Design (35%) – Tasks shall include:
• The Consultant shall prepare a Type, Size, and Location Report. The Consultant shall also prepare a hydraulics report to show that the replacement bridge will create “no-rise” to the 1% annual event flood elevations. The design will be in accordance with AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (2020), including interim updates, and the Caltrans Bridge Deck Construction Manual (2015). Additionally, the current Caltrans Bridge Standard Details shall provide regional design standards.
• Preliminary Plans, Bridge: Provide detail to level of completeness, sheet type and count
• Roadway- Sheet count, sheet descriptions including sections, staged construction and traffic handling, typical sections and layout • Engineers Estimate.
• Initial drainage investigation details, and report framework 3) Final Design – Tasks shall include:
• Design permanent Best Management Practices ( BMP’s) to meet Commerce City’s MS -4 requirements for water quality for the proposed roadway improvements. Prepare a Drainage/Hydrology report in accordance with the requirements of the Contra Costa County Hydrology Standards.
• Consultant shall prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The prepared SW PPP will identify temporary sediment and erosion controls that are to be used during construction for different contaminants.
• 65% plans (bridge and roadway), as detailed, specifications, special provisions (initial draft), engineers estimate, and staging plan. • Prepare Opinion of Probable Construction Cost based on the Summary of Approximate Quantities. If utility agreements cost sharing is anticipated for v arious project elements, pay items and costs for these items shall be broken out in the project opinion of probable construction cost. Include for 65% and 95% submittals. • Drainage investigation and report.
• Prepare detailed recommended construction traffic control plans showing suggested construction phasing, work zone locations, temporary striping, construction signing and other construction traffic control devices following guidance from the most recent adopted 11 City of San Pablo
Request for Proposals
San Pablo Ave. Bridge Replacement, over San Pablo Creek – BR No. 28C0057
version of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).
Include for 65% and 95% submittals.
• 95% Plans, Specifications and Special Provisions , including Standard Special Provisions (e.g. technical specifications) , engineers estimate.
• Final Staging
• Consultant shall p repare a load rating complying with Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria (2019) and the Structure Technical Policies.
Hard copies of the load rating shall be provided to both the City and Caltrans Structure Maintenance and Investigations.
• Preparation of bid documents using City standard front -end document.
4) Right of Way – Based on Consultants research and understanding associated with the proposal, include required Right of Way services, if anticipated:
• Caltrans Data sheets
• Cost estimates
• Plats and Legal Descriptions
• Map showing right-of-way and easement requirements
• Appraisal and acquisition
• Certification
• Record of Survey
5) Bidding analysis and technical support services: Consultant shall include bidding support scope.
6) Construction Support Services (Optional Task)
• Construction engineering services
• Consultant shall prepare “as-built” drawings
• Project Close-Out
5. RFP Inquiries / Pre-Proposal Meeting
Inquiries on the contents and requirements of the RFP will be accepted in written form only. Inquiries can be emailed to [email protected]. The deadline for inquiries is 4:00 PM Pacific Time on July 20, 2021, after which time no further inquiries will be addressed.
Substantive requests for information received may be responded to in writing by the City in the form of an addendum to this RFP and sent to all recipients of the RFP.
A Pre-Proposal Meeting has been scheduled for July 7, 2021, at 2:00 p.m., via teleconference. Interested parties should contract Jonathan Mitchell via e -mail at [email protected] to receive further instructions. Proposers are encouraged to attend for review of the Project and Proposal requirements.
C. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS
12 City of San Pablo
Request for Proposals
San Pablo Ave. Bridge Replacement, over San Pablo Creek – BR No. 28C0057
Before preparing the proposal response package, the Consultant team shall carefully examine the entire Request for Proposals (RFP) and become familiar with its contents.
Submission of the RFP response shall be considered evidence that the Consultant has fully studied the RFP and is familiar with the general conditions to be encountered in performing any services.
Each Proposal must be submitted in compliance with the requirements of this RFP. The City may, acting in its sole discretion, elect to reject any Proposal that it determines to be nonresponsive. It reserves the right, but not the obligation, to waive any immaterial irregularities. Clarity and brevity are preferable to volume , submittals shall be limited to 30 pages, excluding proposal cover, cover letter, table of contents, dividers , project resumes, and the required Caltrans L ocal Assistance Procedures Manual (L APM) exhibits. Each Proposal must include the following, organized as Sections 1 through 12:
1. Letter of Interest / Cover Letter
A letter of interest/ cover letter must be provided transmitting the firm(s) submittal for consideration. The letter of interest/cover letter must be signed by the person authorized to negotiate a contract for proposed services with the City on behalf of the team.
2. Organization Chart / Personnel
Since managing the project will consist of several professional disciplines, submittals must provide an organization or personnel chart to delineate communication, coordination and hierarchical structure of the project team. The organization chart should identify DBE participation.
3. Firm(s) Statement of Qualifications
Provide the qualifications and experience of the firm(s) proposed for the project in the submittal. This should include information describing the team’s experience with:
a. Local Agency compliance with the provisions contained within the Caltrans LAPM
b. Designing complex bridge projects of similar size with Federal funding and Caltrans oversight.
c. Adhering to cost and schedule on projects of similar type, size and complexity.
d. Successfully meeting state and federal project requirements for design. e. Working collaboratively with an inter-disciplinary team of consultants.
4. Staff Statement of Qualifications or Resumes
Provide the qualifications or resumes of key personnel proposed for the project in the submittal. In this section, identify similar/related projects that key members of the submittal have worked on. Note: key team members identified in the submittal shall not change in the executed contract unless notified and approved by the City.
5. Staff Availability
13 City of San Pablo
Request for Proposals
San Pablo Ave. Bridge Replacement, over San Pablo Creek – BR No. 28C0057
The Consultant should have one individual who will function as the main coordinator and point of contact for all the other consultants and sub -consultants; he/she will oversee project updates under the direction of City staff. This person will monitor timelines, review and evaluate products, ensure quality control and assist in facilitating meetings in accordance with all tasks identified in Consultant Services (Section B, Item #4). Any substitutes of staff after submittal is received must be provided in writing and approved by the City if the contract is awarded.
6. Project Understanding, Challenges and Opportunities
Please describe the Consultant’s approach to designing the San Pablo Avenue Bridge Replacement Project including the following:
a. Describe how your team will proceed through environmental documentation and design.
b. Describe challenges and solutions, as well as innovations and enhancements to the design process, or envisioned design solutions. c. Describe how your design team will ensure quality of designs and constructability.
7. Project Approach
In three pages or less , please describe the Consultant’s approach to designing the San Pablo Avenue Bridge Replacement Project including the following:
d. Describe how your team would generally approach designing this project. e. Describe how your design team will ensure quality of de signs and constructability.
f. Describe your approach to design and ensuring the overall project delivery schedule.
g. Describe your team’s approach to partnering with the City.
8. Scope of Services
We request that the Scope of Services provide the detail required for contracting services and show that the project approach from the Section 7 is carried out based on the Scope of Services proposed. We anticipate that proposers may include innovations or enhancements within their Project Approach, which must be carried forward into the Scope of Services. We anticipate that this section includes a detailed description for each work item. We also anticipate that each task be matched to a scheduled task, cre ating a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)
9. Schedule of Work
The schedule of work must be included in the submittal in order to demonstrate Consultant’s ability to accomplish all Project deadlines. The schedule of work must include milestones for deliverables o f each required aspect. All tasks including deliverables of each sub-consultant must meet set individual deadlines and overall project schedule. Progress meetings with City staff shall be scheduled as needed during the 14 City of San Pablo
Request for Proposals
San Pablo Ave. Bridge Replacement, over San Pablo Creek – BR No. 28C0057
duration of the Project . These meetings may also be attended by other stakeholders as needed. The schedule should include critical path.
10. Consultant Contract Statement
The Consultant will include a statement that the firm(s) accepts the terms of the City’s Consultant Agreement sample ( Attachment 2) and/or the submittal will include a list of any proposed modifications to the Agreement by the consultant.
11. Cost Proposal
The cost proposal shall include a cost estimate for each work task ou tlined in the scope of services for this project. Prices quoted shall include key project team member(s) proposed for each task and the number of management, technical, drafting and support personnel hours, cost per hour for each project team member and total cost envisioned for each task. Identify any other costs to be billed to the project including project expenses and sub -consultant fees. Include any proposed mark -up for sub -consultant fe es.
Proposing Consultants will need to submit certified payroll records, if required. Include a copy of the proposed rate schedules(s) to be used throughout the duration of the project and any adjustments that are predicted to occur during the execution of the project.
A Cost proposal shall be submitted in a separate file from the proposal. The cost proposal is confidential and will be unsealed after all proposals have been reviewed, and most qualified consultant has been selected.
The Consultant shall prepare a cost proposal estimate that references the sample cost estimate in Attachment 3 (Caltrans LAPM Exhibit 10-H, Example # 1). Selected Consultant shall comply with Chapter 10. Consultant Selection of the Local Assistance Procedures Manual regarding the A&E Consultant Contract Audit and Review process.
Consistent with Federal, State and Local laws for the acquisition of professional services, price is NOT an evaluation criterion. Cost proposals submitted in separate sealed envelopes are not opened, nor considered during proposal evaluations. Upon selecti on of the most qualified firm, the associated Cost Proposal will be used as a basis for contract negotiations.
12. Method of Payment
The method of payment for this contract will be an Actual Cost-Plus-Fixed Fee agreement with the ability of progress payments. The Consultant performs the services stated in the contract for an agreed amount as compensation, including a net fee or profit.
13. References
Provide a summary (three-page maximum) of at least four projects, most similar to this project, in progress or completed, with the following information for each:
a. Reference name, with current contact information
b. Type of project/development
c. Client type (clarifying role of private sector client, if any) d. Size and scale of geographic area
15 City of San Pablo
Request for Proposals
San Pablo Ave. Bridge Replacement, over San Pablo Creek – BR No. 28C0057
e. Current status
14. Special Requirements
a. The successful consultant must have extensive experience in completing similar projects, as well as experience with multiple grants and specifically federal funding. The selection process and all work shall be completed in accordance with the applicable laws of the State of California, Caltrans and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), as administered by Caltrans Local Assistance. All aspects of the project must comply with Caltrans requirements and Federal Aid requirements.
A successful submittal will include all items cited in Sections 1 through 9, plus the following statements/documents:
Exhibit 10-H1
Attachment 3
Sample Cost Proposal Included in Sealed
Cost Proposal
Exhibit 10-K
Attachment 4
Consultant Annual Certification of Indirect
Costs and Financial Management System
Included in Sealed
Cost Proposal
Exhibit 10-Q
Attachment 5
Disclosure of Lobbying Activities Included in Work
Proposal
Exhibit 10-U
Attachment 6
Consultant in Management Support Role
Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality
Statement
Included in Work
Proposal
The most current Exhibits 10 -H through 10 -U can be found i n the Caltrans Local Assistance website:
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/local-assistance/forms/local-assistance-procedures-manual-forms
b. Small and Minority Businesses. This Project is funded in whole or in part by the federal government. This project has a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) goal established of 5.6%. The City encourages qualified DBE firms to submit proposals.
DBE’s which are included in the project team must comply with all applicable federal requirements as further specified in the Contract Documents, and when procuring Subcontractors, DBE must take all necessary affirmative steps pursuant to 2 CFR § 200.321(b), subject to the limitations of law, to ensure that minority businesses, women’s business enterprises, and labor surplus area firms are used if possible.
D. PROPOSAL CONDITIONS
1. Local Employment and Contracting Opportunities
a. Employment of Local Residents.
16 City of San Pablo
Request for Proposals
San Pablo Ave. Bridge Replacement, over San Pablo Creek – BR No. 28C0057
Pursuant to the San Pablo Economic Opportunity Policy, the DBE and any subcontractors shall contact the San Pablo Economic Development Corporation (“EDC” at [email protected] or 510 -215-3200) at least ten busi ness days prior to hiring or staffing for fulfillment of the Contract, describing number, duties and qualifications needed for available positions, and shall fairly consider for employment any workers referred by the EDC within three business days.
“Local Resident” means an individual having an adjusted household income of less than the Area Median Income for Contra Costa County, and domiciled in the City of San Pablo as of the relevant hiring date, with “domiciled” as defined by Section 349(b) of the California Election Code. Discrimination against Local Residents on the basis of their local status is prohibited.
b. Outreach to Local Businesses.
At least seven days prior to: (i ) DBE’s submission of a Proposal that includes specified subcontractors and (ii) DBE’s award of any subcontract to a subcontractor not included in DBE’s Proposal, DBE will contact the San Pablo Economic Development Corporation (“EDC” at [email protected] or 510 -215-3200) and provide notice and details regarding subcontracting opportunities. The EDC will notify local businesses of subcontracting opportunities and provide technical assistance to local businesses during the subcontracting bidding process.
2. Questions. Questions regarding this RFP, the Project, or site access may be submitted in writing only and directed to Jonathan Mitchell , email:
[email protected] Written responses will be distributed by email to all recipients of the RFP. Written questions must be submitted no later than July 20, 2021 at 4:00 p.m.
3. General Terms and Conditions
a. All proposals, whether selected or rejected, shall become the property of the City.
b. The cost of RFP preparation shall be that of the consulting firm and shall not be paid by the City.
c. Proposals shall be signed by an authorized employee in order to receive consideration.
d. City will not be responsible for proposals delivered to a person or location other than that specified herein.
e. The successful proposer will be asked to enter into an agreement with the City reflecting the terms and conditions of the proposal based on the City's Professional Services Agreement (Agreement) requirements. A copy of the Agreement and Insurance requirements is included as Attachment 2 to this RFP. Proposals should include a list of any proposed modifications to the Agreement by the consultant. Award of an agreement is subject to approval by the City Council of the City of San Pablo.
17 City of San Pablo
Request for Proposals
San Pablo Ave. Bridge Replacement, over San Pablo Creek – BR No. 28C0057
f. Neither the City of San Pablo, it’s City Council, officers, employees, agents, representatives, nor any of its consultants will be liable for any claim or damages resulting from the RFP process.
g. By submitting a proposal in response to this RFP, the proposer accepts the evaluation process and acknowledges and accepts that determination will require subjective judgments by the City. All information, documentation, and other materials sub mitted in response to this solicitation are considered non - confidential and/or non-proprietary and are subject to public disclosure after the solicitation is completed.
4. Agreement
The anticipated duration of the agreement will be for 68 months, with the term tentatively to begin in September 2021 and end in May 2027.
A sample agreement is attached (Attachment 2) that includes terms regarding conflict of interest, insurance, indemnification and assignment. The consultant selected to perform the work will be required to comply with these terms.
E. PROPOSAL PROCEDURE
1. Submission of Proposals
Each Proposer must submit one electronic copy (PDF or comparable) via e-mail to Allan Panganiban, e -mail: [email protected] with the subject: “ Bridge Engineering, Environmental Documentation, and Technical Services for the San Pablo Avenue Bridge Replacement Project”. Within the same work proposal e -mail, the Cost Proposal shall also be included. The cost proposal file shall be password protected; this will safeguard the file from b eing opened. The password shall be requested from the best qualified consultant after proposal evaluation and interviews.
All Proposals, in electronic format, must be received by the July 30, 2021 no later than 5:00 p.m. (“Proposal Deadline”).
Proposals may not be modified after the Proposal Deadline.
2. Consultant Selection Process
The first step in the evaluation process will be to determine that each submittal contains all forms and other information required by this RFP. Any submittals missing the required information may be considered nonresponsive and rejected without evaluation. Late submittals, submittals to the wrong location, and submittals with inadequate copies are considered nonresponsive and shall be rejected. Submittal of additional information after the due date shall not be allowed.
All proposals will be evaluated by a City of San Pablo Selection Committee. The Selection Committee, made up of key City staff and other parties that may have expertise or experience in the services described herein , will review all submittals deemed complete 18 City of San Pablo
Request for Proposals
San Pablo Ave. Bridge Replacement, over San Pablo Creek – BR No. 28C0057
according to the evaluation criteria and weighting factors below. The Selection Committee will make independent random checks of one or more of the consultant’s references. This reference check applies to major sub-consultants as well.
The Selection Committee will establish a shortlist of consultants that are considered to be best qualified to perform the contract work . The selection process wi ll include oral interviews. The Consultant will be notified of the time and place of oral interviews and if any additional information that may be required to be submitted.
Upon completion of the evaluation and selection process, only the cost proposal from the most qualified consultant will be opened to begin cost negotiations. All unopened costs proposals will be returned at the conclusion of the procurement process. Upon acceptance of the cost proposal and successful contract negotiations, staff will recommend a contract be awarded.
3. Evaluation Criteria
Proposals will be evaluated according to each Criteria below. The scores for all the Criteria will be added for each pro posal. The proposal with the highest score will be deemed as the best proposal. The total maximum score for any project is 100 points.
Criteria Maximum
Points
A Completeness of Response Pass/Fail
B Understanding of the Work/Project 25
C Experience with Similar Work 20
D Quality and Availability of Staff 15
E Innovation and Advanced Techniques 10
F Knowledge of State and Federal Procedures 10
G Financial Responsibility 10
H Project Delivery 10
Total 100
A. Completeness of Response (Pass/Fail)
Responses to this RFP must be complete. Responses that do not include the proposal content requirements identified within this RFP and subsequent addenda and do not address each of the items listed below will be considered incomplete, be rated a Fail in the Evaluation Criteria and will receive no further consideration.
Responses that are rated a Fail and are not considered may be picked up at the delivery location within 14 calendar days of contract award and/or the completion of the competitive process.
B. Understanding of the Work/Project (25 points)
19 City of San Pablo
Request for Proposals
San Pablo Ave. Bridge Replacement, over San Pablo Creek – BR No. 28C0057
Demonstrated understanding of the Project including Project needs, identification of potential issues and overall approach to complete streets design.
C. Experience with Similar Work (20 points)
Experience of the firm(s) with similar projects, including local knowledge, expedited timelines, working with multiple grants and prior experience with bicycle and pedestrian projects.
D. Quality and Availability of Staff (15 points)
Quality and availability/current workload of proposed staff.
E. Innovation and Advanced Techniques (10 points)
Capability of developing and identification of innovative approaches and solutions to key project issues.
F. Knowledge of State and Federal Procedures (10 points) Experience and familiarity with state and federal procedures.
G. Financial Responsibility (10 points)
The firm’s(s) ability to meet project budget, financial and schedule requirements.
H. Project Delivery (10 points)
Demonstrated technical ability of staff and if relevant, experience of consultant teams working together.
4. Tentative Schedule
Below is a tentative schedule for the selection and procurement process. Dates are subject to change by City staff and/or unforeseen circumstances.
Item Date
RFP Release Date June 25, 2021
Pre-Proposal Meeting Date July 7, 2021
Last day to submit any questions July 20, 2021
RFP Proposal submittal Date July 30, 2021
Panel Review August 2 - 13, 2021
Interview period August 16 – 20, 2021
Selection and negotiation period August 23 - 31, 2021
Contract to be awarded at City Council September 2021
20 City of San Pablo
Request for Proposals
San Pablo Ave. Bridge Replacement, over San Pablo Creek – BR No. 28C0057
F. ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 - HBP Application
Attachment 2 - Sample Consultant Agreement with Federal Provisions (Exhibit C and Exhibit D)
Attachment 3 - Exhibit 10-H1- Sample Cost Proposal
Attachment 4 - Exhibit K- Consultant Annual Certification of Indirect Costs and Financial Management System
Attachment 5 - Exhibit 10-Q- Disclosure of Lobbying Activities Attachment 7 – Willdan Engineering – Project Management Scope of Services Attachment 8 – Initial Utility Mapping and Identification Information
Updated: 12/21 Page Exhibit B-1
Exhibit B
Consultant’s Proposal
SUBMISSION DATEPROJECT
PREPARED FOR
PROPOSAL
City of San Pablo
AUGUST 13, 2021SAN PABLO AVENUE
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
(925) 938-0383
3000 OAK ROAD, SUITE 650
WALNUT CREEK, CA 94597 MARKTHOMAS.COM
August 13, 2021
Jonathan Mitchell, PE
Project Manager
City of San Pablo Public Works Department
1000 Gateway Avenue
San Pablo, CA 94806
Dear Mr. Mitchell,
The City of San Pablo (City) is seeking a well-rounded consultant team to deliver the San Pablo Avenue Bridge Replacement Project (Project), including design of the complex, five-legged intersection, bridge replacement over San Pablo Creek, and the associated improvements required to conform to current creek and approach roadway sections. The City needs a multi-discipline team that has expertise in designing intersection improvements, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, transit accommodations, urban design/landscape architecture for placemaking elements, Highway Bridge Program (HBP) funded bridge replacements, environmental clearance/permitting, and public engagement. The Mark Thomas team has extensive experience in each of these key project elements and has a proven track record of project delivery. We have done our homework on this challenging project, developed a thorough project understanding, and prepared a proposal that includes a
focused discussion of our proposed approach. We have tailored our team to provide expertise to efficiently address each critical element and deliver your project on schedule and within budget.
For the past 94 years, Mark Thomas has been providing civil and structural engineering solutions that meet agency and community needs. We have earned the reputation as award-winning industry leaders in the planning and design of complex projects including bridges and structures, intersection modifications, local roadway and corridor improvements, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and projects that improve connectivity and safety for all modes of travel. Our team is excited about this opportunity and the prospect of working with the City to deliver a project worthy of civic pride. We offer the City the following key benefits:
Experienced Project Team. I will personally lead our team as Project Manager and will oversee the successful delivery of the Project as I have designed and managed multi-discipline projects and teams for local cities, counties, and transportation agencies. I bring expertise in complex intersections, roundabouts, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, bridges, transit facilities, and stakeholder engagement. Our Structures Division Manager, Julie Passalacqua, PE will serve as Deputy Project Manager. Julie brings nearly 20 years of experience delivering transportation design projects within Northern California. She has managed more than 30 federally funded and HBP bridge projects, including projects for the cities of San Rafael and Vacaville, and for Contra Costa, Marin, and Solano Counties. The majority of these projects required Caltrans Local Assistance coordination, CEQA/ NEPA clearance, and federal processing. Julie has developed strong relationships with Caltrans District 4 Local Assistance and Structures Local Assistance staff. We believe the project will benefit from having this dual project management
focus. Our team is strengthened by our key teaming partners who include Kimley Horn (Transportation planning, signals and lighting, and public outreach), and ESA (Environmental). As an optional service, we have included Restoration Design Group on our team for restoration of San Pablo Creek, as they recently completed the restoration of Wildcat Creek for the City.
HBP and Federal Funding Epertise. Mark Thomas has worked closely with local agencies on implementing transportation projects on local roadway and state highway systems. Many of these projects have been federally funded through programs such as the HBP, Active Transportation Program (ATP), Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program. (925) 938-0383
3000 OAK ROAD, SUITE 650
WALNUT CREEK, CA 94597 MARKTHOMAS.COM
In the last 10 years, Mark Thomas has delivered more than 50 HBP-funded projects in Caltrans Districts 1, 3, 4, 5, 10, and 12. These projects involve bridge and roadway design, careful construction sequencing, public outreach, environmental clearance, utility coordination, right of way acquisition, and close coordination with client staff, Caltrans and regulatory agencies. We offer the City an in-depth understanding of the processes, requirements, and issues specific to HBP funded projects.
Multimodal Design Experience. Our team has unmatched expertise in the planning and design of intersection modifications and improvements, transit facilities, and bicycle and pedestrian mobility, safety and connectivity projects. Our project experience includes protected intersections, transit and bus facilities, Class II bike lanes, Class IV protected bikeways, sidewalks and ADA compliant curb ramps. Our projects provide safe access and connectivity for major bicycle, pedestrian and transit corridors to key destinations, improving traffic, mobility and safety, while taking into account user preferences and the needs of each community.
Client Satisfaction. Customer service is at the core of who Mark Thomas is. We understand the City requires a well-rounded experienced team of professionals who will be available and responsive for the duration of this project. Our team is invested in the success of your community and we are committed to providing you with exceptional client service; the best value; and professionals who are ready and available to respond promptly to your requests.
By submitting our proposal, we confirm that our team has ample resources to staff this project and our key staff have the expertise and availability to meet the project’s schedule. Each of our key staff members will remain committed to this project for the duration of the contract; we affirm that no key staff member will be changed or removed without prior written approval by the City. We acknwoledge receipt of the addenda and Q&A that have been release by the City as part of this procurement.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit our proposal. We are excited about this Project and look forward to the opportunity to work with the City. As Principal and Vice President of Mark Thomas, I am authorized to negotiate and enter into a contract with the City. Please contact me with any questions about our proposal. I can be reached directly at the number below, or via email at [email protected].
Sincerely,
MARK THOMAS
Shawn O’Keefe, PE, QSD
Project Manager/Principal in Charge
PROPOSAL SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
1 Key Staff
PROJECT TEAM
Our Project Team
The Mark Thomas team is ideally suited to deliver the San Pablo Avenue Bridge Replacement project. Our team has extensive experience in the planning and design of local roadway improvements, HBP bridge reconstruction and replacement projects, intersection modifications and improvements, and bicycle and pedestrian facility improvement projects. We have accumulated the knowledge and experience to work efficiently with public agencies and key stakeholders to gain timely approvals and keep our clients’ projects on schedule and within budget.
We commit to the City that all of our assigned key staff will not be replaced or removed during the course of the project without direct written approval from the City.
Key Team Members
ROLE AND AVAILABILITY WHY WE SELECTED THEM FOR THIS ROLE
PROJECT MANAGER
/PRINCIPAL IN CHARGE
Shawn O’Keefe, PE, QSD
Availability: 65%
17 years of relevant experience in transportation and bridge projects:
• Extensive experience effectively managing multi-disciplined teams and delivering projects with local agency and Caltrans design oversight. • Expertise in management and design of intersection modifications, complete streets, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and transit improvements.
DEPUTY PROJECT MANAGER
/STRUCTURES LEAD
Julie Passalacqua, PE
Availability: 55%
18 years of relevant experience in transportation and bridge projects:
• Expertise in delivering local bridge projects under Caltrans Local Assistance and the HBP and structures within the state system that require Caltrans design oversight.
• Successfully delivered over 30 HBP projects in Northern California. • Extensive experience as structures lead for similar projects and effectively working with a multi-disciplined team.
TRANSPORTATION LEAD
Adam Dankburg, PE
Availability: 50%
16 years of relevant experience in transportation and bridge projects:
• Expertise in multimodal transportation planning, transit facility planning and design, transit operations, active transportation planning and design, and traffic operations.
• Leading Kimley-Horn’s efforts for the City of San Pablo on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Corridor Study, including developing alternatives for the San Pablo Avenue/Road 20/23rd Street intersection
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE/
URBAN DESIGN LEAD
Erik Smith, PLA
Availability: 65%
26 years of relevant experience in transportation and bridge projects:
• Expertise in developing community-specific urban design concepts for public agencies throughout the State.
• Extensive experience in community master planning, complete streets and streetscape design, and public outreach for roadway and corridors, bridge replacements, intersection improvements, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
ENVIRONMENTAL LEAD
Melissa Logue
Availability: 55%
19 years of relevant experience in transportation and bridge projects:
• Expertise in NEPA/CEQA compliance, environmental approvals and permitting from federal, state, and local regulatory agencies related to biological, cultural, and other environmental resources. • Expert in compliance with Caltrans’ Standard Environmental Reference (SER) and Local Assistance Procedures Manual (LAPM) requirements.
PUBLIC OUTREACH LEAD
Joe clayton
Availability: 55%
10 years of relevant experience in public outreach for transportation and bridge projects:
• Expertise in infrastructure planning and project delivery and the nexus of agencies, elected officials, stakeholders, and the community. • Key experience with communications, public affairs, equity planning and stakeholder relations for transportation.
CIVIL/ROADWAY
Bobby Lin, PE
Alex Lee, PE
TRANSPORTATION
PLANNING
Adam Dankburg,
PE Kimley-Horn
HYDROLOGY/HYDRAULICS
Han-Bin Liang, PE, QSD
Kazuya Tsurushita, PE
WRECO
PROJECT MANAGER
/PRINCIPAL IN CHARGE
Shawn O’Keefe, PE, QSD
GEOTECHNICAL
Ben Crawford, PE, GE
Eric Nichols, PG, CEG, PE
CAInc.
QA/QC
David Williams, PE, QSD
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
/URBAN DESIGN
Erik Smith, PLA
Christine Anderson, PLA
2. ORGANIZATIONAL CHART AND PERSONNEL
DEPUTY PROJECT MANAGER
/STRUCTURES LEAD
Julie Passalacqua, PE
ENVIRONMENTAL
Melissa Logue
Steve Smith
ESA
PUBLIC OUTREACH
Joe Clayton
Kimley-Horn
Erik Smith, PLA
CREEK RESTORATION
Erik Stromberg, PLA
Matt Thomas, PE
RDG
We are committed to
exceeding the City’s DBE
requirement for this project.
Our DBE subconsultant,
Monument Right of Way,
will provide key services
including comprehensive
right of way services and
utility coordination.
BIKE/PED FACILITIES
Ryan Dole, PE, TE
Kimley-Horn
STRUCTURES
Jason Hickey, PE, SE
Victor Sherby, PE
SIGNALS/LIGHTING
Gina Nguyen
Kimley-Horn
RIGHT OF WAY
Bob Morrison, PE, MBA
Jeremy Nied, SR/WA
Monument *DBE
UTILITY
COORDINATION
Ricky Rodriguez
Monument *DBE
Andy Lee, PE
GRAPHICS/VISUALIZATION
Deanna Gibson
Ryan Doran
SURVEY
Travis Bohan, PLS
Dana Baumann, PLS
CONSTRUCTABILITY/STAGING
John Collins, PE
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
2 3. FIRM STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
FIRM OVERVIEW
Mark Thomas is an award-winning engineering firm providing civil and structural engineering, urban design and landscape architecture, right of way, surveying and construction management services to clients throughout California. Our solutions have benefited all types of transportation and infrastructure improvement projects. We specialize in the delivery of HBP bridges and structures, local roadways and corridors, bicycle and pedestrian connectivity improvements, traffic operations and congestion relief, and multimodal safety and connectivity.
Our team brings expertise in projects involving Caltrans oversight and approvals and have completed projects in Districts throughout the State.
We have extensive knowledge in bridge and seismic design, an intimate familiarity with Caltrans District 4 Local Assistance, and recent project experience working in Contra Costa County and throughout the Bay Area.
MARK THOMAS
AT A GLANCE
• Founded in 1927
• California Corporation
• 94 years in business
• 270+ employees
• 12 offices in California
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• HBP bridges and structures
• Complex bridge design
with Federal funding and
Caltrans oversight
• Intersection modifications
and reconfigurations
• Roadway widenings,
reconstructions and
rehabilitation
• Bicycle and pedestrian
facilities
• Connectivity and safety
improvements
• Caltrans design and
geometric expertise
• Utility relocation and
agency coordination
• Drainage, hydraulics and
hydrology analysis
• Traffic handling
• Construction staging
• Right of way engineering
• Grant funding
• Public outreach
• Innovative design with a
focus on adhering to cost
and schedule on projects
of similar type, size and
complexity.
• Successful history of
working ollaboratively with
an inter-disciplinary team of
consultants.
Mark Thomas Office
City of San Pablo
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
3 Landscape Architecture and Urban Design
Our landscape architecture, urban design, and irrigation design expertise provides site-responsive design that is focused on community- and project-specific needs. Our planners and designers have the depth of experience and flexibility to deliver a range of projects, such as detailed bicycle/pedestrian facilities, intersection modifications, median and gateway enhancements, community landscape master plans, complete street planning, and streetscape designs. We have extensive experience developing corridor themes and monumentation that leverage the local community to create a unique sense of place. The focus on public infrastructure projects allows our team to understand the regulatory environment and
local preferences for landscape and aesthetic design and to implement these improvements while meeting limited capital budgets.
Roadway Planning and Design
Mark Thomas brings expertise in the planning, design, and project management of local roadway improvements including bicycle and pedestrian facilities, intersection modifications and transit and mobility improvements. Our projects have involved intersection modifications, highway/railway at- grade crossing improvements, active transportation facilities, highway and interchange improvements, and vehicle/bicycle separation projects throughout the State. We have extensive working knowledge of design manuals and guidelines for the implementation of roadway, active transportation, and drainage improvement projects. This experience includes innovative designs to improve safety and connectivity for all travel modes.
Bridges and Structures
Our team brings a wealth of experience in the design of new bridges, bridge replacements and rehabilitations. We are also particularly well qualified in delivering bridge seismic retrofit projects, including seismic analysis, development of retrofit strategy, and advancement of retrofit plans, specifications and estimates. Our recent design experience includes several seismic retrofit projects as well as several bridge replacement projects subject to strong ground motion and soil liquefaction.
The most relevant of these is our recently completed retrofit design and construction package for the Eureka Hill Road Bridge in Mendocino County. This project involved designing the retrofit of a four-span concrete bridge for high ground motion, fault rupture, liquefaction and lateral spreading.
KEY AREAS OF EXPERTISE
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
4 SUBCONSULTANTS
To support our internal team, we have included subconsultants who bring extensive experience in their respective areas of expertise. We have successfully partnered with each firm on previous similar projects throughout the Bay Area. We have included Monument Right of Way, a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) on our team to ensure the DBE goals for this project are met. Mark Thomas is committed to the successful delivery of your project; we affirm that we will meet or exceed the City’s DBE goal for this project.
FIRM NAME & ROLE WHY WE SELECTED THEM FOR OUR TEAM
Kimley Horn
Associates (KHA)
Transportation Planning
and Design, Bike/
Ped Facilities, Signals/
Lighting, Public Outreach
KHA specializes in developing innovative and cost-effective transportation engineering and planning solutions for clients throughout Contra Costa County and the Bay Area. They combine cutting-edge engineering and planning solutions with in-depth knowledge of traffic and travel forecasting solutions. Kimley Horn has been a long-time teaming partner of ours; they have successfully worked to deliver hundreds of projects throughout the Bay area, supporting us in key areas of transportation planning, bike/ped facilities, signals/lighting and public outreach.
Environmental
Science Associates
(ESA)
Environmental
ESA brings more than 50 years of experience providing solutions to clients for projects related to planning, environmental analysis and assessment, natural resource management, and regulatory compliance. ESA’s staff have provided the full complement of CEQA/NEPA, permitting, and environmental compliance services for bridge replacements, roadway improvements, intersection modifications and other related transportation and Caltrans Local Assistance oversight projects throughout Northern California and Contra Costa County.
Crawford &
Associates, Inc.
(Crawford)
Geotechnical
Crawford is a geotechnical engineering firm that specializes in large-scale public works projects. Crawford has completed many transportation projects within Contra Costa County and throughout Northern California that have included bridges, roadways, interchanges, and pavement design and rehabilitation. These projects have commonly been funded directly by FHWA and also through Caltrans (HBP, HBRR, Safe Routes to Schools, etc.).
WRECO
Hydrology & Hydraulics
WRECO provides communities throughout California with innovative solutions for hydrology & hydraulics, drainage and related water resource services. WRECO has been involved in more than 1,400 transportation infrastructure and water resources projects and more than 600 hydrologic and hydraulic studies on bridge/culvert crossings in California. Some of their clients include City of San Pablo, Contra Costa County, Caltrans District 4, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Monument Right of
Way (Monument)
Right of Way Engineering
and Utility Coordination
*DBE
Monument is a full-service real estate and right-of-way company providing exceptional service, strategic planning, innovation and timely delivery, serving local, state and federal agencies, transportation authorities and engineering partners with public infrastructure projects throughout California. Their team is known in the industry for successfully completing projects on an accelerated schedule and accomplish this with early project planning, a clear scope of work, defined project tasks and deliverables, quality control, exceptional performance, and communication with each client, project partners and key stakeholders.
Restoration Design
Group (RDG)
Creek Restoration
RDG is a full-service landscape architecture and environmental planning firm, specializing in creek restoration. They are best known to the City of San Pablo as the designers of the Wildcat Creek Restoration and Greenway Trail and the Wildcat Creek Daylighting at Davis Park projects.
RDG has designed many stream and bridge projects for public entities including the Brook Road Creek Restoration on Wildcat Creek in Tilden Park, Sausal Creek Daylighting in Oakland, Marsh Creek Restoration at Creekside Park in Oakley, Fernandez Ranch Restoration for the John Muir Land Trust, and others throughout Contra Costa County.
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
5 4. STAFF STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
MEET OUR KEY STAFF
Below we have highlighted the qualifications of our key staff, all of whom were specifically chosen for their expertise in their respective key disciplines. Detailed resumes for key staff members are on the following pages.
TEAM MEMBER & ROLE EXPERIENCE PROJECT RESPONSIBILITIES
Erik Smith, PLA
Landscape Architect/
Urban Design Lead
Mark Thomas
25 Years
Responsible for leading our urban planning and landscape architecture team. He will be focused on establishing elements to convey “Welcome to the heart of San Pablo”.
Adam Dankburg, PE
Transportation Lead
Kimley-Horn
17 Years
Responsible for leading our transportation team tasked with understanding the vehicular traffic patterns in the intersection, as well as, accommodating transit, bicycle and pedestrian users.
Melissa Logue
Environmental Lead
ESA
19 Years Responsible for leading the environmental clearance and permitting for the project.
Joe Clayton
Public Outreach
Kimley-Horn
10 Years Responsible for leading the public outreach efforts and stakeholder coordination.
SHAWN O’KEEFE, PE, QSD
Shawn will serve as our Project
Manager and Principal in Charge
and will oversee the design team
for the San Pablo Avenue Bridge
Replacement Project.
Shawn brings nearly 20 years of experience
in transportation engineering, with an
emphasis in complete streets design. He
has a strong familiarity with the region and
has designed and managed a multitude
of complete streets and bridge projects,
including the Charleston-Arastradero
Corridor Improvements in Palo Alto, Atlas
Road Bridge in Richmond, Decoto Road
Complete Street Improvements in Fremont
and the Iron Horse Bridge in Dublin.
PROJECT MANAGER/
PRINCIPAL IN CHARGE
JULIE PASSALACQUA, PE
Julie will serve as Deputy Project
Manager, primarily responsible
for the structures team, critical
structural design elements, and
HBP requirements. Julie has more
than 18 years of experience focused on
delivering local bridge projects under
Caltrans Local Assistance and the HBP and
structures within the state system that
require Caltrans design oversight.
Having led more than 30 HBP projects,
Julie has developed strong relationships
with Caltrans Structures District Liaison
and Local Assistance Engineers. In Contra
Costa County, Julie served as structures
manager for the design of the APWA
Award-winning HBP-funded Marsh Creek
Road Bridge, which spans Marsh Creek.
DEPUTY PROJECT MANAGER/
STRUCTURES LEAD
Shawn and Julie have succesfully partnered in this same capacity on several projects, including the Iron Horse Trail Bridge, the Stevens Creek Bridge, and the I-680/Stoneridge Drive Interchange Improvements.
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS
KEY STAFF RESUMES
SHAWN O’KEEFE, PE, QSD
PROJECT MANAGER/PRINCIPAL IN CHARGE
EDUCATION
BS in Civil Engineering, Colorado School of Mines, 2003
REGISTRATIONS
CA PE C71792
CA QSD 25799
Shawn O’Keefe has nearly 20 years of experience in municipal, transportation engineering and land development. He has designed and managed a range of projects, including local roadways, bridge projects, bike and pedestrian facility improvements, intersection modifications, freeway interchanges and managed lanes, transit centers, park and ride lots, utility relocations, residential subdivisions, and industrial and commercial developments. Shawn brings a thorough understanding of a project from inception to completion and key expertise in delivering multi-faceted transportation improvement projects.
CHARLESTON-ARASTADERO CORRIDOR
IMPROVEMENTS, PALO ALTO
Project manager responsible for development of the
project concept, obtaining environmental clearance,
preparation of an implementation phasing plan, and
final design documents. The 4-lane, 2.3-mile corridor
is a major east-west arterial that serves the southern
portion of Palo Alto and experiences heavy demand
from a large variety of users, including commuter
vehicles, commuter and recreational bicyclists, school
children on foot and bicycles, and buses. This project
will transform this automobile-dominated facility into
a vibrant Complete Streets facility that equally serves all modes of travel, and will improve pedestrian and
bicyclist safety, reduce vehicle speeds, and enhance
the visual environment through the corridor.
ATLAS ROAD BRIDGE, RICHMOND
Project manager responsible for environmental
clearance, permitting and the preparation of PS&E
for the extension of Atlas Road from the City of
Richmond over the UPRR right of way and into Point
Pinole Regional Shoreline. The two-lane bridge will
become the new entrance to the park and will serve as
a future visitors centers and other park amenities. The project includes US Army Corps of Engineers wetland
delineation, coordination with UPRR, the CPUC, City
of Richmond, WCWD and EBMUD, and the extension
of existing wet and dry utilities into the park for future development.
CHARLESTON CORRIDOR, MOUNTAIN VIEW
Project manager for the Charleston Corridor
Improvements. Phases II and III of the project will
continue the transformation of the Corridor to a
multimodal complete street. The project entails the
design and construction of one and two-way cycle
tracks along the north and south sides which will be
separated from the road by landscaped medians. The
project will also reconfigure the existing roadway,
medians, traffic signals, underground utilities and
sidewalks to accommodate the proposed cycle tracks
and converts the outside lane in each direction to
transit only use. Mark Thomas is leading a multi-
disciplinary team to develop the project concept,
obtain environmental clearance, and prepare final
design documents.
IRON HORSE BRIDGE, DUBLIN
Project manager leading the environmental clearance
and preparing the PS&E for the new Iron Horse
Trail Overcrossing. The new overcrossing will be
constructed to reduce the need for trail users to
cross at the at-grade Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive
intersection which will improve safety and accessibility at the intersection. It will efficiently and safely connect the natural alignment of the Iron Horse Trail and allow for easier passage to the Dublin/Pleasanton BART
station as well as other nearby land uses adjacent to
the Trail and Dublin Boulevard.
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
JULIE PASSALACQUA, PE
DEPUTY PROJECT MANAGER/STRUCTURES LEAD
EDUCATION
MS in Civil Engineering, University of California, Davis, 2007 BS in Civil Engineering, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, 2002
REGISTRATION
CA PE C68407
Julie Passalacqua has more than 17 years of experience serving as a project manager or project engineer on bridge projects. She has spent nine years focused on the delivery of structure projects within the state highway system, requiring Caltrans design oversight, and more recently on local agencies bridge projects requiring coordination with Caltrans Local Assistance. Julie has developed strong relationships with Caltrans Structures District Liaison and Local Assistance Engineers. Recently her focus has been bridge projects funded through the HBP, and has been the project manager or structures design lead on the last 11 HBP projects.
MARSH CREEK ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
(HBP), CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Structures manager responsible for preparation of
the Bridge Type Selection Report and oversight of
the design for the replacement of the Bridge which
spans the environmentally sensitive Marsh Creek. Mark
Thomas designed a single-span, precast concrete
girder bridge that was stage constructed to maintain
traffic through the project site. A Soldier pile retaining wall was also designed along a steep hillside on the
approach roadway.
SOUTHERN HEIGHTS BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
(HBP), SAN RAFAEL
Project manager responsible for providing preliminary
engineering, environmental clearance, and final
design. The existing bridge is a 162-foot long, timber
structure, built in 1981 to connect two roadway
segments separated by the hillside. The bridge
provides neighborhood access for both vehicles and
pedestrians. The bridge was exhibiting splits and decay on the deck and the rail and the substructure showing
signs of dry rot. The bridge was classified by Caltrans as structurally deficient with a sufficiency rating of
32.0, making it eligible for replacement under HBP
guidelines. The replacement of the bridge was needed
to maintain access to nearby homes and ensure
emergency response.
MOUNT LASSEN DRIVE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
(HBP), MARIN COUNTY
Project manager responsible for the Mount Lassen
Drive Bridge replacement. The project is located over
Miller Creek Project and is part of the Marin County
BPMP. Mount Lassen Drive Bridge was constructed in
1965 and is located near the intersection with Lucas
Valley Road. It is a 31-foot long, three-span, reinforced concrete slab structure. Bridge repairs include erosion repair and prevention, protection of the exposed pile
at the northern abutment, and deck rehabilitation to
prevent water intrusion, corrosion and efflorescence.
MULTIPLE BRIDGE REPLACEMENTS (HBP), MARIN
COUNTY
Project manager responsible for design, coordination,
project development, and Caltrans Grant Management
for four bridge replacement projects and one bridge
preventive maintenance project. The five project
sites are located in distinctly different areas of Marin County are require design approaches tailored to site
specific constraints. Project includes coordination with Caltrans Local Assistance on the funding applications,
preliminary engineering and environmental approvals.
LINCOLN AVENUE BRIDGE REPAIR (HBP), SAN
RAFAEL
Project manager responsible for the design of repairs
to the Lincoln Avenue Bridge, located near central San
Rafael. Lincoln Avenue is a two-lane arterial running
north-south along the west side of US 101. The road
carries substantial traffic from the US 101 Interchange on the north to its southern terminus at the Irwin
Street/Du Bois Street intersection. The existing bridge was constructed in 1959 and consists of a three-span,
reinforced concrete slab on concrete diaphragm
abutments and five-column bents. We are designing
concrete spall repairs on the bent caps.
REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
ERIK SMITH, PLA
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE/URBAN DESIGN LEAD
EDUCATION
BS in Landscape Architecture, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, 1997
REGISTRATION
CA PLA 4585
Erik Smith has more than 25 years of experience and is the leader of Mark Thomas’ landscape architecture and planning division. His experience has involved a full spectrum of professional services from feasibility studies, master planning, streetscape design and community outreach to construction management. His knowledge of various safety, traffic calming and streetscape issues has been essential to public agency clients in achieving workable solutions. Recent projects include conceptual design and construction documents for streetscape, trail and traffic calming projects. Erik also leads our team in the development of grant applications. This includes ATP, HSIP, and other regional grant applications.
SOUTHERN HEIGHTS BRIDGE REPLACEMENT,
SAN RAFAEL
Landscape architect responsible for landscape
planning and design for this bridge replacement.
Southern Heights Bridge provides the only connection
for the residents of the local neighborhoods to the
surrounding area. Additionally, the existing bridge
held a significant emotional attachment to residents
due to it’s construction and charm. Erik’s role as
the lead landscape architect was to work with the
neighbors, City staff, and structural engineers to
develop a bridge aesthetic that crystallized the vision of stakeholders and met the needs to maintain the
charm of a “neighborhood bridge”. Additionally, the
project included revegetation of surrounding hillside
that required a naturalized planting design with a water efficient temporary irrigation system.
DOWNTOWN BRIDGES AND ROADWAY
IMPROVEMENTS, ROSEVILLE
Landscape design project manager responsible for
providing design services for improvements in the City
of Roseville that were identified in the City’s specific plan. These improvements include the replacement
of the previous Library Bridge that was removed
in June 2011 due to storm damage, relocation of
the Ice House Bridge to better serve as a Class I
bicycle bridge for the Harding to Royer Class I Trail
Extension, construction of a new downtown bridge
to provide pedestrian connectivity to the downtown
area, and construction of a new Fire Station #1 at the
intersection of Oak Street and Lincoln Street.
FOLSOM BOULEVARD IMPROVEMENTS/
RAMONA AVENUE EXTENSION, SACRAMENTO
Landscape architect lead for the roadway
extension project which included improvements
to Folsom Blvd. and extention of Ramona Ave.
Project elements included a new roundabout, new
signalized intersection, stakeholder coordination,
environmental document circulation, and grant
writing. This challenging design project required
extensive coordination with Union Pacific Railroad to
gain approvals for a new at-grade crossing of their
industrial lead and concurrence with the CPUC. Also
includes coordination with Caltrans, Regional Transit,
developers and property owners, and will traverse
a significant pedestrian and bicycling barrier in the
greater Sacramento region.
SHORELINE BOULEVARD INTERIM BUS LANE
AND MULTIMODAL IMPROVEMENTS, MOUNTAIN
VIEW
Landscape architect design project manager
responsible for design of road improvements along the
proposed bus lane corridor. The project improvements
will run along Shoreline Boulevard from Middlefield
Road to Space Park Way. These improvements
included replacing the median with a reversible
bus lane, modifying signals, providing safe bicycle/
pedestrian facilities along Shoreline and at the US 101 ramp intersections, and Dutch-inspired protected
intersections such as a protected intersection at
Shoreline and Middlefield Avenue.
REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
Adam Dankberg, P.E.
Project Manager
Adam has more than 16 years of successful experience with multimodal transportation planning, transit facility planning and design, transit operations, active transportation planning and design, and traffic operations experience. He has worked on a wide variety of multimodal projects around the country, corridor studies, master plans, and transit operations analyses, including leading major corridor studies such as the San Pablo Avenue Complete Streets Project. He is also leading Kimley-Horn’s efforts for the City of San Pablo on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Corridor Study, including developing alternatives for the San Pablo Avenue/Road 20/23rd Street intersection. Adam is particularly adept at projects involving the integration of multiple modes in constrained environments and communicating technical transportation analyses to a wide variety of audiences. Adam’s diverse project management experience encompassing multimodal circulation, active transportation, and transit operations will be particularly beneficial for this project.
Relevant Experience
• City of San Pablo, Bicycle and Pedestrian Corridor Study, San Pablo, CA — Kimley-Horn Project Manager • Alameda CTC, San Pablo Avenue Multimodal Corridor Study, Oakland, CA — Project Manager • City of Fremont, Decoto Road Multimodal Corridor Complete Streets Concept Plan, Fremont, CA — Concept Plan Lead
• WCCTAC, High Capacity Transit Investment Study, Contra Costa County, CA — Project Engineer • WCCTAC, Express Bus Implementation Plan, Contra Costa County, CA — Project Manager • AC Transit, Line 51 Corridor Delay Reduction and Sustainability Project, Alameda/Berkeley/Oakland, CA — Project Engineer
• City of Oakland, Broadway Transit and Pedestrian Safety Improvements, Oakland, CA — Task Lead
• AC Transit, Short-Range Transit Plan (SRTP), Oakland, CA — Project Manager • AC Transit, East Bay BRT FEIS/FEIR, Oakland, CA — Project Engineer • VTA, Tasman Corridor Complete Streets Study, San José, CA — Project Manager • City of San José, East San Jose Multimodal Transportation Improvement Plan (ESJ MTIP), San José, CA — Project Manager
• City of San Rafael, Third and Hetherton Traffic Study, San Rafael, CA — Project Manager • MTC, SR 29 and Silverado Trail Intersection Improvements, Napa County, CA — Project Manager • City of Pleasant Hill, Contra Costa Boulevard and Taylor Boulevard Improvements Study, Pleasant Hill, CA – Project Engineer
• CCTA, Innovate 680 Mobility Hubs, Contra Costa County, CA — Project Manager • County of San Mateo, Santa Cruz Avenue/Alameda de las Pulgas Road Safety Improvements, San Mateo County, CA — Project Manager
• Town of Los Gatos, Winchester Boulevard Complete Streets Improvements, Los Gatos, CA — Project Manager
• County of San Mateo, Alpine Road Corridor Study, San Mateo County, CA — Project Manager • City of Hayward, Hayward Boulevard Corridor Study, Hayward, CA – Project Manager Professional Credentials
• Master of Science,
Transportation
Engineering, University of
California, Berkeley
• Bachelor of Arts,
Economics, Rice
University, Texas
• Bachelor of Science, Civil
Engineering, Rice
University, Texas
• Professional Engineer in
California #70598
• American Society of Civil
Engineers, Member
• Institute of Transportation
Engineers, Member
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
Melissa Logue
Transportation Director, Northern
California Region
Melissa Logue is an environmental planning professional with over 19 years of experience delivering bridge and other transportation infrastructure projects throughout California. Melissa focuses her work on delivering environmental documentation pursuant to both NEPA and CEQA and is an expert in compliance with Caltrans’ Standard Environmental Reference (SER) and Local Assistance Procedures Manual (LAPM) requirements. Melissa also works with clients to acquire and ensure compliance with environmental approvals and permits from a wide range of federal, state, and local regulatory agencies related to biological, cultural, and other environmental resources.
Relevant Experience
Sonoma County, Bohemian Highway Bridge over Russian River Replacement, Monte Rio, Sonoma County, CA. Project Manager. Sonoma County, in cooperation with Caltrans, proposes to replace the Bohemian Highway Bridge over the Russian River in the town of Monte Rio. The $70 million project would construct a steel tied arch bridge structure that is rarely constructed in the state of California. Melissa led several focused environmental technical studies to support preparation of an EIR under CEQA and a CE under NEPA.
City of Oakland, Leimert Boulevard Bridge Seismic Retrofit, Oakland, Alameda County, CA. Project Manager. The City of Oakland, in cooperation with Caltrans, proposed to retrofit and rehabilitate the historic concrete arch Leimert Boulevard Bridge over Sausal Creek. utilizing an innovative retrofit design to meet seismic standards while maintaining the structure’s historic integrity. Melissa directed preparation of multiple supplemental technical reports to support a NEPA CE, prepared a CEQA CE report, acquired permits, completed a NEPA revalidation, and oversaw PS&E review and utility relocation for environmental commitment compliance.
Other Bridge Experience, Northern California.
Throughout her career, Melissa has led completion of CEQA/NEPA documentation and regulatory permit acquisition for over a dozen bridge replacement projects throughout Northern California, including:
• Dry Creek Road Bridge Replacement over Dry Creek, Napa County • Chiles-Pope Road Bridge Replacement over Chiles Creek, Napa County • Greenwood Ave. Bridge Replacement over Garnett Creek, Napa County • Bunker Road Bridge Replacement over Quinto Creek, Merced County • Kibby Road Bridge Replacement over Bear Creek, Merced County • Peltier Rd Bridge Replacement at Mokelumne River, San Joaquin County • Port of Stockton, Navy Drive Bridge Replacement, Port of Stockton • West Stockton Boulevard Bridge Replacement, Elk Grove
EEDDUUCCAATTIIOONN
B.A., History, California State
University, Sacramento
1199 YYEEAARRSS’’ EEXXPPEERRIIEENNCCEE
PPRROOFFEESSSSIIOONNAALL
AAFFFFIILLIIAATTIIOONNSS
American Public Works
Association
Association of
Environmental
Professionals
WTS International (Board
Member-at-Large,
Sacramento Chapter)
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
Joe Clayton
Public Outreach
Joe brings a strong foundation in the nuances of infrastructure planning and project delivery and the nexus of agencies, elected officials, stakeholders, and the community. His diverse project background includes communications, public affairs, equity planning and stakeholder relations for transportation, planning, environmental and sustainability, disaster response and construction projects for projects across California, Midwest and Australia.
Joe is experienced at leading teams throughout the project lifecycle, helping take projects from concept to planning, construction and operations. He is skilled in managing projects through streamlined, metrics-driven external relations efforts and engendering consensus among stakeholders.
Relevant Experience
BART Silicon Valley (BSV) Phase II On-Call Planning Services, San Jose, CA – Kimley-Horn Community and Stakeholder Relations Manager. Joe leads the following program elements for Kimley-Horn:
Communications: Joe manages Kimley-Horn’s team that is providing full-service communications and collateral management services for VTA. For most public-facing activities and platforms, Kimley-Horn staff create copy and graphics. We also lead or support the dissemination of these materials.
Community and Stakeholder Relations: For the project’s multiple external facets, Joe oversees Kimley- Horn’s work managing stakeholder engagement and community relations. This includes the project’s Community Working Groups, Small Business Taskforce and other ancillary groups.
Other Support: Joe coordinates Kimley-Horn’s efforts to provide VTA with communications, external relations and content development assistance for agency relations, and other project implementation efforts such as environmental compliance efforts, historic building surveys, real estate acquisition, pre- construction surveys, and more.
San Diego County Regional Airport Authority, Taxi Transition Program, San Diego, CA – Digital Involvement Strategist. Joe developed and implemented the project’s COVID-19 community and stakeholder relations approach.
City of Monterey, Transportation Adaptation Plan, Monterey, CA – Digital Involvement Strategist. Joe developed and implemented the project’s COVID-19 public participation strategy and facilitated community interactions.
OCTA, OC Streetcar, Rail Capital Improvements, Santa Ana, CA – Project Manager. Joe planned and managed pre-construction outreach and communications activities for multiple OCTA projects.
Professional
Credentials
Master, International
Business and Law,
University of Sydney
Bachelor, Economics
and Social Sciences,
University of Sydney
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
6 Mark Thomas is committed to providing the City with a team of experienced professionals who will be dedicated to the City’s project for the duration of the contract. Our key personnel bring extensive experience in their respective areas of expertise and possess strong leadership, management and coordination skills to successfully deliver your project on schedule and within budget. The table below outlines the availability, experience, education and licenses/registrations for each of our key personnel.
Our key personnel are committed to providing the City with exceptional client service and will be dedicated to serving the City on this project for the duration of this contract. We ensure the City that no key team members identified in our submittal will be changed or removed in the executed contract unless notified and approved by the City.
NAME, ROLE AND FIRM AVAILABILITY YEARS OF
EXPERIENCE
EDUCATION
LICENSE(S) AND REGISTRATION(S)
Shawn O’Keefe, PE, QSD
Project Manager
/Principal in Charge
Mark Thomas
65% 17 BS in Civil Engineering
Colorado School of Mines, 2003
CA C71792
QSD 25799
Julie Passalacqua, PE
Deputy Project Manager,
Structures Lead
Mark Thomas
55% 18 BS in Civil Engineering, California Polytechnic
State University, San Luis Obispo, 2002
MS in Civil Engineering, University of
California, Davis, 2007
CA C68407
Erik Smith, PLA
Landscape Architecture and
Urban Planning Lead
Mark Thomas
55% 25 BS in Landscape Architecture, California
Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo,
CA PLA 4585
Adam Dankburg, PE
Transportation Lead
Kimley-Horn
50% 16 MS in Transportation Engineering, University
of California, Berkeley
BS in Civil Engineering, Rice University, Texas
BA in Economics, Rice University, Texas
CA 70598
Melissa Logue
Environmental Lead
ESA
50% 19 BA in History, California State University,
Sacramento
Joe Clayton
Public Outreach and
Communications Lead
Kimley-Horn
50% 10 Master, International Business and Law,
University of Sydney
Bachelor, Economics and Social Sciences,
University of Sydney
5. STAFF AVAILABILITY
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
7 Connections
The intersection connects many key destinations in the City, including downtown San Pablo, Helms Middle School, Contra Costa Community College, Dover Elementary, and the San Pablo Police Department. The intersection is surrounded by high density housing, shopping, grocery stores, restaurants, and other commercial uses. There is also a small park, Kennedy Plaza, at San Pablo Creek just along the intersection, bordered by 23rd Street, Brookside Drive, and San Pablo Avenue. The passage of San Pablo Creek beneath the intersection generates the need for the bridge and disrupts the street network, limiting north-south movements through the City.
This increases the importance of providing high-quality pedestrian and bicycle connections through the intersection.
Our teaming partner, Kimley-Horn, is currently assisting the City in identifying near-term bicycle and pedestrian improvements for the intersection as part of the City’s ongoing Bicycle and Pedestrian Corridors project.
Traffic
The intersection forms the confluence of highly trafficked SPA and 23rd Street, as well as providing access to Road 20. SPA and 23rd Street have similar vehicle volumes, making signal phasing and timing particularly challenging, compounded by the severe intersection skew and long pedestrian crossings. SPA is designated as a Class II bicycle facility and the primary north-south spine for transit. As a result, there are competing priorities for safety and connectivity. During COVID, intersection operations improved somewhat with Level of Service (LOS) C/D in the AM/PM peak (2021 counts) but pre-COVID the intersection operated deficiently, with an LOS of E in the PM peak (2017 data). We can expect intersection operations to decline as COVID recedes. The deficient LOS is primarily caused by the need to split-phase the eastbound (23rd Street) and westbound (Road 20) movements due to the intersection skew.
6. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING,
CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES
The San Pablo Avenue (SPA) Bridge Replacement Project is an opportunity for the City to improve a key intersection to accommodate vehicular traffic, bus rapid transit, enhance bicycle and pedestrian safety and comfort, and create elements that welcome visitors and residents to the heart of the City. We understand that the Project is also an opportunity to engage San Pablo’s diverse community in a process that values input and enhances placemaking, while recognizing the Project’s constraints.
The Project poses a number of challenges that require thoughtful consideration and integration. These include traffic, right of way, environmental constraints over San Pablo Creek, safety considerations, utilities and right of way, construction funding, and maintaining operations during construction. Our approach to these challenges and to completing the project is detailed in the next section.
Over the past year, we have studied the complex 5-legged intersection that the bridge supports and met with the City to develop a thorough understanding of the project. The bridge carries the intersection of SPA, a major north-south arterial connecting adjacent cities and serving as a reliever route for Interstate
80. SPA bends at the intersection moving from north-west to slightly north-east where 23rd Streets ends.
Historically, this segment of SPA was once designated as SR 123 and was a portion of Lincoln Highway and US 40. North of Cutting Blvd, SPA is no longer a Caltrans facility. It is a four lane boulevard in the intersection with a median strip north and south of the intersection. To better understand the project, our team reviewed the City’s San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan, the 23rd Street Specific Plan, The City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, Alameda CTC’s San Pablo Multimodal Corridor Study, and AC Transit’s Major Corridors Report. Additionally, we have reviewed the City’s Master Landscape Plan and flood hazard documents; we understand that the entire site is within a 100-year flood zone.
PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
8 Bridge Structure
The original structure was built in 1929 as a three-span, 102-foot long, cast-in-place, reinforced concrete T-beam bridge founded on bent style supports on spread footings. The structure was widened in 1970 to add a cantilevered pedestrian sidewalk, bulb-out overlooks for the creek, architectural concrete pilasters, and decorative sidewalk lighting. The top of sidewalk was set below the bridge deck and separated from traffic by a solid concrete barrier. The sidewalk grade and barrier provide an enclosed space where disadvantaged individuals seek shelter. Spans 2 and 3 were widened in 1986 to allow for Road 20 to connect to SPA, giving the bridge an irregular footprint. The bridge has experienced scour and debris buildup over its lifetime. Gabion baskets were installed at the bents to mitigate scour in 1993 but have started to deteriorate. It will be important to improve creek hydraulics and limit access to the public while providing maintenance access and pedestrian circulation.
Staging reconstruction of the bridge while maintaining traffic operations will require careful consideration due to the irregular bridge shape and the need to provide adequate traffic width and structural support. The bridge carries many utilities including fiberoptic and gas lines which will require careful management and likely relocation.
Historical Importance
SPA is one of the oldest existing roads in the
East Bay, originating in the Spanish colonial
era as the Camino de la Contra Costa. When
Contra Costa County improved the road along
the same route between Rancho San Pablo
and Oakland in 1852, it became known as San
Pablo Road. In 1927 the road was designated as
part of the Lincoln Highway, the nation’s first
transcontinental road upon the opening of the
new highway bridge across the Carquinez Strait.
In the early part of the 20th century, a streetcar
line ran on San Pablo between Richmond and
Oakland.
Part of the Oakland segment of these tracks up
to Grayson Street in Berkeley were used during
World War II for the Shipyard Railway of the Key
System which transported workers from the
Key System’s hub in Emeryville to the Kaiser
Shipyards in Richmond.
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
We understand that this is an important project for the community and one that will significantly impact residents, students, businesses, and other stakeholders. The San Pablo community is wonderfully diverse, and residents are quite active in community affairs. The community wants an opportunity to provide meaningful input and it will also be important to engage them in the many languages spoken in San Pablo. Community engagement practices have changed over the COVID crisis, and hybrid programs of in-person and digital engagement have resulted in the broadest participation.
San Pablo Avenue, 23rd Street, and San Pablo Creek c. 1939
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
9 CHALLENGES & O PPORTUNITIES
Intersection Approach
Roadway Alternatives
The SPA Bridge Replacement Project gives the City a once in a generation opportunity to reconfigure the intersection at San Pablo Avenue and 23rd Street to a more modern complete street that safely and efficiently accommodates all modes of travel. In our review of the existing conditions and our understanding of the local traffic patterns we have developed three potential geometric alternatives to be studied ahead of the final design.
These alternatives include generally keeping the same geometry with San Pablo Avenue as the through street (Alternative 1), converting the intersection to a three-legged roundabout (Alternative 2) or making the through movements
from San Pablo Avenue to 23rd Street (Alternative 3). Exhibit 1 details each of these intersection alternatives and identifies potential issues and elements with each. Project features shown are our first take on possible configurations but there are several design elements that can be swapped out between alternatives which will be determined through collaboration with the City on how the space should be allocated. One of our first deliverables will be to prepare an Alternatives Analysis that will evaluate multiple intersection alternatives and consider traffic operations, multimodal opportunities, safety, structural considerations, and utility and right of way impacts. We recently completed a similar analysis with partner Kimley-Horn on Fremont’s Decoto Road Multimodal Corridor Plan project before moving into final design.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations
Safe bicycle and pedestrian accommodations within and through the intersection is important to enhancing the City’s walkability and bicycle network connectivity as well as other VMT and mode shift goals. As the nearest north-south crossings of San Pablo Creek are ½ mile to the west and east, it’s important to create a high- quality and safe connection along SPA. There are several challenges through the intersection. The width of the existing bridge does not allow for continuous bicycle lanes through the intersections and results in narrow and uncomfortable sidewalks. Due to the intersection skew, crosswalks are very long, and north leg lacks a crossing.
For example, the east leg crossing of Road 20 is over 110 feet long, despite its being just a two-lane roadway.
Other challenges that will need to evaluate are highspeed right-turn movements and limited pedestrian visibility.
These combine to make the existing crosswalks uncomfortable.
As part of the ongoing City of San Pablo Bike and Pedestrian Corridor Study project, Kimley-Horn is assessing how the existing infrastructure can be better assigned to provide higher quality bicycle and pedestrian accommodations. Solutions proposed include eliminating one of the southbound lanes and instead re-allocating space to provide protected Class IV cycle tracks along SPA or narrowing lane widths and shifting the median to provide Class II bike lanes. To increase the comfort of this facility we will need to address the weave movement between the southbound bike movement
from SPA to SPA, and the southbound right-turn to 23rd Street.
Transit Lanes Considerations
Kimley-Horn is working with West County Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC) and the City on the San Pablo Avenue Corridor Project Phase 2 project to identify the ultimate geometry for SPA, including the potential for dedicated transit and bicycle lanes. Alternatives under consideration include center running and side-running bus transit lanes. The existing Rapid service extends to Contra Costa College just to the north, necessitating high-frequency transit service through this intersection. The Phase 1 effort of the study identified this particular intersection as a primary contributor to bus delay and bus reliability challenges along the Rapid route. The WCCTAC High-Capacity Transit Study identified both SPA and 23rd Street at future BRT corridors.
The southbound SPA movement is particularly challenging for side-running buses because they must merge from the outside lane (all buses have a stop at Stone Street to the north) to the middle or inside lane in order to continue on SPA. Queuing and delay within the intersection further complicates this weave movement. Our team will study effective ways for southbound buses to travel through the intersection.
PROPOSAL SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
10 EXHIBIT 1: ALTERNATIVES 1, 2 AND 3
ALTERNATIVE 3
1 New geometrics creates potential for right of way impacts. During the preliminary design phase we will work to minimize or avoid these impacts altogether.
2 New geometrics allow for a reuse of space for enhanced landscaping. 3 Squaring up Brookside Drive, 23rd Street and Road 20 provides additional space to expand the park of create a new plaza space.
4 Reconstruction of the bridge and approach roadways should allow for a more standard cross-section between the northbound and southbound lanes allowing for enhanced landscape opportunities.
5 Numerous utilities live within San Pablo Avenue and are either within or strapped to the side of the existing structure. The will need early coordination and special consideration to minimize service disruptions.
6 Squaring up Road 20 and Brookside Drive allows for shorter crossing distances that will increase bicycle and pedestrian safety.
3 3
3 4
5 2
1 CLASS IV
BIKEWAY
CLASS IV
BIKEWAY
CLASS IV
BIKEWAY
TRANSIT ONLY
ZONE
7 6
6 ALTERNATIVE 2
1 New geometrics creates potential for right of way impacts. During the preliminary design phase we will work to minimize or avoid these impacts altogether. 2 New sidewalk alignment will may potentially create right of way impacts and require minor sound wall reconstruction accommodate new roadway cross-section that includes a shared use path.
3 Reconstruction of the bridge and approach roadways should allow for a more standard cross-section between the northbound and southbound lanes allowing for enhanced landscape opportunities.
4 Shared use path allows for grade separated bicycle and pedestrian facilities which will increase safety through the intersection.
5 Roundabout design allows for additional enhanced landscaping or public art opportunities.
6 Roundabout inscribed circle may impact the existing park so 4(f) and the California Park Preservation Act requirements will need to be met. 7 Numerous utilities live within San Pablo Avenue and are either within or strapped to the side of the existing structure. The will need early coordination and special consideration to minimize service disruptions.
2 1
3 4
6 5
1 7
SHARED
USE PATH
CLASS IV
BIKEWAY
CLASS IV
BIKEWAY
FLOATING
TRANSIT ISLAND
SHARED
USE PATH
ALTERNATIVE 1 (Maintains SPA as the through road) (Changes through road to SPA to 23rd)(Roundabout) 1 New geometrics creates potential for right of way impacts. During the preliminary design phase we will work to minimize or avoid these impacts altogether.
2 New sidewalk alignment may potentially create right of way impacts and require minor sound wall reconstruction to accommodate new roadway cross-section that includes a Class IV Separated Bikeway. 3 Squaring up Brookside Drive, 23rd Street and Road 20 provides additional space to expand the park and create a new plaza space.
4 Reconstruction of the bridge and approach roadways should allow for a more standard cross-section between the northbound and southbound lanes allowing for enhanced landscape opportunities.
5 Numerous utilities live within San Pablo Avenue and are either within or strapped to the side of the existing structure. They will need early coordination and special consideration to minimize service disruptions.
6 Squaring up Road 20 and Brookside Drive allows for shorter crossing distances that will increase bicycle and pedestrian safety.
Identified Sanitary Sewer & Water Facilities from EBMUD crosses San Pablo Creek with existing bridge.
1 2
1 4
3 3
5 6
6 CLASS IV
BIKEWAYRight of
Way
CLASS IV
BIKEWAY
CLASS II
BIKEWAY
CLASS II
BIKEWAY
TRANSIT ONLY
ZONE23RD STREET23RD STREET
SAN PABLO AVESAN PABLO AVE
RD 20RD 20
BROOKSIDE DRBROOKSIDE DR
SAN PABLO
AVE
23RD STREET23RD STREET
SAN PABLO AVESAN PABLO AVE
RD 20RD 20
BROOKSIDE DRBROOKSIDE DR
SAN PABLO
AVE
23RD STREET23RD STREET
SAN PABLO AVESAN PABLO AVE
RD 20RD 20
BROOKSIDE DRBROOKSIDE DR
SAN PABLO
AVE
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
11 Utilities and Right of Way Impacts
Numerous utilities run though and around the San Pablo Creek Bridge which is to be expected within a major arterial in an urban setting. These utilities include the usual collection of providers in the area like PG&E, Comcast, AT&T, East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) and the West County Wastewater District (WCWD) among others. Of particular interest are the gas main and fiber optic lines as these specific utilities require special considerations and handling as a part of their relocation or protection in place during construction.
Depending on the utility size, they can be relocated inside the replacement structure, through the bridge barrier and sidewalk, or be attached to the edge of deck. Access panels and pull boxes can be placed in the barrier and sidewalk for future maintenance and upgrades.
We will coordinate with and meet regularly (monthly) with utility providers in order to gain their approval on the utility handling/relocation approach so we can minimize disruption to existing services and eliminate delays associated with last minute re-designs. We effectively used this approach on the Atlas Road Bridge Project in Richmond where we relocated and extended EBMUD, WCWD, PG&E, AT&T and Comcast facilities through the superstructure and into the new visitor area of Point Pinole Regional Shoreline. PG&E is currently estimating 12- 18 months for relocation projects due to wildfire related requirements in their service area so early and accurate communication with them is critical.
It is likely that with a fresh look at the intersection geometrics the project will expand the roadway cross-section to meet modern multimodal needs. As the corridor does not currently have bike lanes we will need to encroach into existing adjacent parcels to make everything fit. Once a preferred alternative layout has been selected by the City, we will need to start coordinating right of way acquisitions immediately. As with utility relocations, right of way acquisition can be a lengthy process that we will need to manage closely for it to stay off of the critical path. One of the major hurdles for Caltrans approval for the project will be completion of the Right of Way Certification package which includes both the utility and right of way agreements to be completed ahead of funding allocations.
Replacement Structure
The existing structure is an irregularly shaped, three-span, 102-foot long concrete bridge. The bridge has been widened over time to, first to accommodate pedestrians and later to accommodate intersection modifications.
The layout of the replacement structure will be largely dictated by the preferred intersection geometrics.
This may result in a relatively straight, constant width structure like what is shown in Intersection Alternative 1, or it could result in a bridge with variable
width and curved geometry like what is shown
in Intersection Alternatives 2 and 3. Other
considerations for the replacement bridge
include traffic staging, superstructure depth
(to reduce hydraulic impacts), speed of
construction, aesthetics, cost and construction
access.
The replacement bridge is anticipated to be
similar in length to the existing structure. The
table below highlights the structure types we
consider most feasible given the site constraints.
Once the preferred intersection alignment
is selected, we will further evaluate these
structure alternatives through the Structure
Type Selection process to ultimately carry
forward the best suited structure.
Existing fencing below Southern span of San Pablo Creek Bridge
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
12 Hydraulics
WRECO, our hydraulics subconsultant,
modeled the hydraulics of San Pablo Creek
as part of the San Pablo Creek and Wildcat
Creek FEMA Mapping Studies that was
completed for the City. The model shows
that while the existing SPA bridge does not
clear the 100-year water surface elevation,
the water is generally contained within
the banks of the creek. While widespread
flooding isn’t an issue, the bridge does act as
a pinch point within the waterway and high
velocities have resulted in scour damage to
the existing foundations.
To avoid triggering a Letter of Map Revsion
(LOMR), the replacement structure will
be designed to result in no increase to the
existing 100-year water surface elevation.
WRECO has performed preliminary analyses
on the proposed bridge replacement
alternatives discussed above and each were
found to avoid a rise to the 100-year flood
water surface elevation. Excerpt from FEMA FIRM (2015)
STRUCTURE TYPE CIP REINFORCED
CONCRETE SLAB
CIP POST-
TENSIONED
CONCRETE SLAB
PRECAST
PRESTRESSED
WIDE FLANGE
GIRDERS
PREFABRICATED
CONCRETE ARCH
Spans 3 @ 31’, 40’, 31’ 2 @ 51’ 1 @ 102’ 1 @ 102’
Structure Depth 1’-8” 1’-8” 4’-8” arch shape with
varying depth
Cost $ $ $$ $$$
Construction Time Slower Slower Faster Fastest
Can structure type
accommodate
irregular deck
geometry?
Yes Yes Difficult Difficult
Construction
Considerations
Falsework required
within creek
Falsework required
within creek
Crane required for
girder erection.
No staging;
construction would
require weekend
roadway closure to
erect arch segments
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
13 Activation Of Public Spaces
A successful, high visibility public improvement project often requires an approach that looks beyond the obvious confines of the project, whether they be physical and/or programmatic, to look beyond what is “good enough” to what would “make it signature.” The areas around the SPA bridge present the City and design team with a unique opportunity to provide a critical link between north and south San Pablo and create a vibrant, active heart of the City. New spaces will be designed to encourage walking and biking by fostering a sense of place and reinforcing comfort and safety.
Creating well-lit urban plazas and pocket parks in currently underutilized spaces, abandoned parcels, parking lots, at corner intersections, and even within the span of the new bridge itself should be considered. These spaces can be enhanced with the use of special concrete treatments, ornamental iron work, and other materials to match the architecture of the corridor, as well as the application of ample lighting that is both functional and creative.
Placemaking And Community Identity
Celebrating and recognizing a community’s personality is a goal for our park, streetscape and transportation projects. We develop design solutions that are grounded in the built environment, embrace neighborhood context and history, and are driven by community input. Exploration and communication of architectural character and historical context through photographs and images (aka “inspiration images”) in our proposed process lets stakeholders guide the design team to what best represents their community. We will use our time with the community to uncover their thoughts on the positive cultural elements that make San Pablo special.
From there, we can develop responsive designs that can be integrated into the community fabric. We have prepared two conceptual landscape and urban design concepts shown on Exhibit 2 that create an enhanced entry into downtown as well as thoughtful plaza and park spaces.
Aesthetics and Character
The SPA bridge is an architectural milestone denoting the entrance into downtown San Pablo. The existing bridge has several aesthetic features including a concrete barrier separated sidewalk, pedestrian overlooks of the creek, and decorative lighting. Well designed structure architecture and character elements look to the environment and setting for inspiration, embrace those influences, and apply them in a manner that elevates the cultural profile of the bridge structure and the significance of the spaces it connects.
For example, overlooks can be constructed near the abutments to provide visitors and residents views of the bridge and creek while providing an integrated pedestrian space that showcases the best of the bridge, the creek, and the streetscape environments. Architectural treatments of the structure should reflect the history and character of the San Pablo community.
Space is limited but widening the pedestrian walkways within the bridge can separate walkers from vehicles to create a safe and comfortable experience for users. This added space provides the opportunity to integrate architectural enhancements like pilasters, banner poles, and lights into the bridge space.
Engaging lighting activates spaces and create safer
and more comfortable pedestrian areas.
Roseville Downtown Bridges
PROPOSAL SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
14 EXHIBIT 2: LANDSCAPE DESIGN ALTERNATIVES
CREATING A VIBRANT CITY HEART
ALTERNATIVE 3 - Landscape Treatment
ALTERNATIVE 2 - Landscape Treatment
1 2
3 5
9 8
2 7
5 4
5 6
10 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
Focal landmark in center of roundabout
Gateway plaza with pedestrian
furnishings, wayfinding, enhanced
paving, interpretive elements, and
pedestrian lighting
Potential future pocket park (identified
in City General Plan)
Creekside overlook
Planted roundabout with enhanced
concrete pavement accents
Planted median
Strong pedestrian zone with
comfortable scale at bridge
Conversion to one-way "living street"
with adjacent bridge gateway plaza and
accent paving
10 Linear gateway features in median to
compliment roundabout landmark
Ample queuing space at corners for
pedestrian and bicycle comfort
6 5
4 61
8 8
2 3
3 7
1 9
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 Creekside overlook
New gateway arch monument
Planted median
Potential future pocket park (identified
in City General Plan) with possible
memorial as a connection to City's
proud WWII history
Ample queuing space at corners for
pedestrian and bicycle comfort
Integrate bridge with adjacent plazas,
including Kennedy Plaza
Conversion to one-way 'living street'
integrated with adjacent bridge
gateway plaza
Gateway plaza with pedestrian
furnishings, wayfinding, enhanced
paving, interpretive elements, and
pedestrian lighting
Strong pedestrian zone with
comfortable scale at bridge and short
pilasters and pedestrian lights to
provide implied vertical separation
between pedestrians and vehicles
A
B
C
VIEW A
VIEW B
VIEW C
SAN PABLO AVESAN PABLO AVE
RD 20RD 20
23RD ST23RD ST
SAN PABLO AVESAN PABLO AVE
SAN PABLO AVESAN PABLO AVE
RD 20RD 20
23RD ST23RD ST
SAN PABLO AVESAN PABLO AVE
SAN PABLO AVESAN PABLO AVE
RD 20RD 20
23RD ST23RD ST
SAN PABLO AVE
SAN PABLO AVE
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
15 These zones connect across the bridge to pedestrian plazas and overlooks, such as the Elk Grove Creek Overlook, near the abutments and around the intersection and directly connect to nearby community amenities like Kennedy Plaza and a future pocket park along Road 20 identified in the City’s General Plan. We will explore the construction of a new gateway feature within the new plaza space directly to the north of San Pablo Creek. As with the bridge, this feature would take inspiration from San Pablo’s history, like the old Navy shipyards, and/ or the culture, like many of the Spanish style buildings, of San Pablo.
Regardless, the ultimate design would be developed with the input of residents through an outreach effort that will include engaging visualizations and graphics for the public to consider and provide feedback.
Creek Restoration and Maintenance
Mark Thomas’ teaming partner, Restoration Design Group (RDG), has been included on our team and is available should the City desire to restore San Pablo Creek following construction. As they did for Wildcat Creek, RDG offers the planning, coordination, design, and facilitation needed for successful rehabilitation.
Outreach Approach
Mark Thomas, along with our team member, Kimley-Horn will provide community outreach and engagement with the goal of providing the community a voice in their future. We suggest a strong promotion campaign tied to an engaging mix of outreach activities and channels to allow people to participate how, when and where they want.
Kimley-Horn’s team of native English, Spanish and Tagalog (or others) speakers will engage the community in the languages spoken in San Pablo and garner feedback with minimal language or digital barriers. To help in delivering a community supported vision, it will be critical to solicit underrepresented community voices, such as low- income and diverse communities, and incorporate their perspectives into project development.
Public Engagement Plan
Two of the biggest changes to outreach from 2020 are the expectation of being able to participate flexibly and a mass uplift in digital access, connectivity, and literacy. The old community meeting approach of agency and project staff available on a Tuesday evening or Saturday morning is no longer as effective. As a result, connecting with community and cultural leaders, local organizations and other trusted networks has become increasingly important, as has ensuring strategies are engaging, innovative, have a low barrier to entry and are ultimately rewarding. Kimley-Horn will develop a Public Engagement Plan that will outline who we will engage in this project, activities, and promotion, and how we will connect with the public and stakeholders.
Website and Survey
The plan will include a website and digital/phone survey. For this, we recommend Social Pinpoint, a tool we use on city and region-wide projects across the country. The tool allows easy access via computers or cell phones and instant translation to the multilingual project webpage, maps, idea walls, forums, prioritization tools, surveys, and one-click virtual Town Halls.
In-Person Engagement
While current public health orders allow for in-person community engagement, the situation continues to evolve.
We suggest a suite of highly flexible solutions that can be readily applied. We suggest one virtual meeting, one public meeting and one pop-up event.
Community Partnerships
We propose to facilitate one aesthetics design collaboration workshop with Contra Costa College Art Department students. We see this as an opportunity to promote the project and engage younger people in the process, while also embedding a community vision into the final design.
Elk Grove Creek Overlook
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
16 Environmental Document Development and Permitting
Mark Thomas teaming partner, ESA, will take a holistic and proactive approach to the environmental documentation during the project development phase.
CEQA and NEPA
The project will be required to comply with the requirements of both CEQA and NEPA. The City will be the Lead Agency under CEQA, and Caltrans will be the NEPA Lead Agency. ESA expects that an Initial Study to support a Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) will be the appropriate level of document to meet the requirements of CEQA. We assume that although the project may have potentially significant impacts under CEQA, all potentially significant impacts could be fully mitigated to below the level of significance. It is also anticipated that the project would qualify as Categorically Excluded (CE) from NEPA under 23 CFR 771.117(c) (28) for bridge replacement projects.
The completion of CEQA and NEPA documentation for the project will be supported by focused environmental technical studies to investigate and evaluate each required environmental topic. The IS/MND prepared for the
project will provide a concise summary of the detailed information provided in the environmental technical studies. The NEPA CE will rely on these technical studies to support the CE determination. ESA will continually look ahead to identify potential pitfalls and barriers to meeting project delivery goals and will address them as proactive contributors to the Project Development Team to avoid or mitigate each challenge.
Permitting
ESA expects to initiate acquisition of regulatory permits for the project at the 65% design phase. These are expected to be:
• Clean Water Act Section 404 Nationwide Permit Application • Clean Water Act Section 401 Permit Application and Prefiling Meeting Notification • 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement
Certain tasks completed to support NEPA during final design, including completion of Section 7 consultation with USFWS and NMFS and completion of Section 106 documentation and consultation, would also support U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers’ (USACE’s) compliance with these federal requirements for issuance of the Nationwide 404 permit. In support of completion of 95% PS&E, ESA will complete an Environmental Compliance Review to backcheck that all environmental commitments and regulatory permit conditions of approval are correctly included in the project design and specifications. ESA will also support the City to meet its regulatory permit mitigation obligations by identifying mitigation banks that would be meet the qualifications for purchase of mitigation bank credits or payment of in-lieu fees, as applicable and appropriate.
Biological Resources
Initial research has indicated that San Pablo Creek contains jurisdictional waters and wetlands and associated riparian habitat. Although the project area is highly urbanized, sufficient natural areas are present that may support special status plant and wildlife species, including the California red-legged frog, western pond turtle, several special status bird species, and bats. Although a concrete drop structure located immediately upstream of Giant Road prevents the upstream movement of special-status fish and other species associated with the downstream reach of San Pablo Creek, special status (federally listed) steelhead fish (central California coast Distinct Population Segment) may be resident in the upper reaches of the creek and in the project area.
Completion of a Natural Environment Study would be required to evaluate the potential for special status species to be in the project area and the project’s potential effects to identified special status species; a Biological Assessment to support Section 7 consultation with federal wildlife agencies (US Fish and Wildlife Service and/ or National Marine Fisheries Service/NOAA Fisheries) would be required if the Natural Environment Study identified that the project may affect federally listed species.
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
17 Section 4(f): Kennedy Plaza is a publicly owned and publicly accessible park area, which is considered a property subject to Section 4(f) of the National Transportation Act of 1966 (Section 4[f]). Section 4(f) prohibits the use of publicly owned and publicly accessible parks and recreational areas for federally funded transportation projects; as a result, the design of the project will need to avoid encroachment into Kennedy Plaza to the greatest extent feasible. During preliminary design, the Mark Thomas team will identify strategies to minimize encroachments into Kennedy Plaza, and coordinate with the park’s “Owner With Jurisdiction” to ensure that the project would have minimal effects to the Plaza. Through this strategy, it is expected that the project would result in either a de Minimis use or Temporary Occupancy of the Plaza under Section 4(f). We will also pay close attention to the California Parks Preservation Act requirements to develop solutions that will not cause CEQA issues Construction Noise: While the majority of the area surrounding the project area is non-residential, sensitive noise receptors are present in an apartment complex located immediately adjacent to the project area. To ensure less than significant impacts from construction noise, a Construction Noise Memo will be prepared to identify potential effects of construction noise from the project, and recommend strategies for reducing noise throughout construction.
Cultural Resources: Since the project is located on a creek, the project area may be sensitive for buried prehistoric resources. Special attention will be paid to consultation with Native American tribes during completion of cultural resources studies to ensure that potential buried resources area identified. It is also expected that the project will require acquisition of a Nationwide 404 Permit from the USACE, consultations with Native American tribes pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act will be completed to satisfy not only Caltrans as the Federal Lead Agency for NEPA, but also to satisfy USACE as a permitting agency with NEPA responsibilities; this strategy will ensure no delays in USACE being able to issue the 404.
Staging Areas: Special consideration will need to be given to construction staging areas to ensure avoidance of sensitive natural areas (San Pablo Creek and Kennedy Plaza) while maintaining access to residential and commercial uses surrounding the project area.
Visual Resources: Replacement of the existing bridge will alter the visual character of the project area. The Mark Thomas team will work to design a bridge that would be complimentary to the visual setting of the project area; changes to the visual setting of the project area that would result from the project will be discussed in a Visual Impact Assessment Memorandum to be prepared for the project.
Traffic: Due to the unique geometry of the project intersection and bridge approaches, traffic handling during construction will present special challenges. Our team will identify construction traffic handling and construction staging that will seek to minimize disruption to traffic during project construction to the greatest extent feasible.
Construction Staging and Traffic Handling
SPA is a principal arterial road carrying heavy traffic though the center of San Pablo. Managing traffic for all modes during construction will be crucial. The alternatives are to provide staged construction or a full road closure for a period of time with coordinated detour routes. While a closure is an option, a long road closure to replace the bridge would likely cause significant traffic impacts. One way to minimize the duration of the closure is to use Accelerated Bridge Construction (ABC) methods, which would ultimately decrease the overall construction duration for the project.
Night Work and Weekend Closure
Possible ABC methods for the road closure and detour option include night work foundation installation, precast bridge abutments, and precast or prefabricated bridge superstructures. Night work foundations may be challenging due to City construction noise ordinances so we would work closely with the City to understand tolerances around the noise levels. Constructing the foundations at night would involve drilling or driving deep foundations behind the existing bridge during nightly road closures and steel plates would be placed over the foundation excavations during the day.
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
18 Maintaining Bicycle and Pedestrian Access
The existing San Pablo Creek bridge conveys a
significant amount of pedestrian traffic to and from
downtown shopping, schools and residences. With
proper staging, access can be maintained by keeping
one side of the sidewalk open throughout the duration
of construction. Another option is a temporary
prefabricated steel pedestrian bridge, placed west
of the existing bridge. This option keeps pedestrians
out of the construction zone and provides a more
comfortable passage. Mark Thomas used this innovative
approach on the Berry Street Bridge replacement in
Calistoga (shown to the right), where pedestrian access to an elementary school was critical.
Staged construction and pedestrian access for Berry Street Bridge Replacement in Calistoga.
Staged construction with precast superstructures on
Marsh Creek Bridge in Contra Costa County.
After the foundations are installed, precast abutments can be placed onto the piles and post-tensioned together. Then, in a weekend road closure, the existing bridge can be removed, and a precast or prefabricated superstructure can be installed on the abutments. Mark Thomas is especially familiar with ABC construction and is currently working on a bridge replacement with Marin County where precast abutments and slab units will be utilized to accelerate the construction schedule and minimize traffic disruption.
Staged Construction
Stage construction involves reducing the number of lanes while portions of the existing bridge are demolished and reconstructed. Careful consideration of the stage construction lines are required to make sure the bridge maintains adequate support throughout construction. Typically, stage construction lines follow both the lane lines and edge of existing girders which allows for continuous support of the bridge deck. In this case, the existing traffic lanes for San Pablo do not match up with the existing girder lines. We have created preliminary staging concepts and were able to fit the traffic lanes while still providing ample support. Mark Thomas has utilized stage construction with precast superstructures on many bridge replacement projects such as Marsh Creek in Contra Costa County (shown below) with great success.
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
19 HBP Process
Caltrans and FHWA have taken a large focus on the delivery of HBP projects and ensuring the funding criteria are met. Securing HBP funds for the San Pablo Avenue Bridge was a great step by the City towards implementing this project to not only replace the bridge but also improve the multimodal transportation network and enhance quality of life. The HBP is restrictive on which project components it can fund during construction. It will be important for the City to identify and secure additional funding to the full suite of project improvements.
Outlined below are the keys areas we will focus on to ensure project funding approvals are secured.
Approach Roadway Limits
HBP funding limits for off-system bridge projects includes 400-feet of approach roadway beyond each abutment. Due to the complex geometry of the intersection, clear definition of where the logical endpoints are will be important to stay within the standard funding limits. It is in the City’s best interest to have early buy-off from Caltrans on the approach roadway limits, regardless of whether or not they fall within the standard funding limits, to avoid “surprises” down the line. During preliminary engineering, we will work with the City and Caltrans to document and receive approval on the design speed, roadway geometric criteria and preliminary profile needs for the project.
Key Milestones
The project will need to follow the Caltrans Local Assistance process which involves numerous submittals and milestone tasks requiring Caltrans review and approval. As outlined in the Local Assistance Procedures Manual (LAPM) the City must receive approval from Caltrans prior to commencing work on any project, or subsequent phases of the project that are funded through HBP. The approval process consists of preparing the required Request for Authorization (RFA) documentation, which is then submitted to Caltrans Local Assistance for review. After review and approval, Caltrans and FHWA will provide the City an Authorization to Proceed with the subsequent phase of the project by means of an approved E-76 form.
Additional Grant Funding Opportunities
Mark Thomas has extensive experience identifying and securing grant funds for a wide variety of transportation infrastructure. We have helped agencies bring in nearly $350 million in competitive funds over the past five years from regional and state programs including Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) programs, Active Transportation Program (ATP), and metropolitan planning organization (MPO) programs similar to One Bay Area Grant (OBAG). We have identified the following funding programs that could supplement existing HBP funds for this project.
Active Transportation Program: The project is a great fit for this program as it constructs Class IV and Class II bike lanes and pedestrian infrastructure that are eligible for ATP. The project provides connectivity to schools, parks, and shopping and is located within a disadvantaged community.
Local Partnership Program Competitive: Local Partnership Program (LPP) funds are available for agencies (and member agencies) that collect a dedicated transportation sales tax or have a development impact fee.
The project is eligible as CCTA administers Measure J. The project would score well for this program as its in a disadvantaged community, supports high density housing, and will reduce vehicle-miles traveled.
Local Partnership Program Formula: LPP Formula funds are available to agencies who have a dedicated transportation sales tax. CCTA receives approximately $2.2 million annually in LPP Formula funds and the CCTA determines how these funds are allocated for projects within Contra Costa County. The City could discuss with CCTA the possibility of receiving LPP Formula funds for the project.
One Bay Area Grant: The OBAG program provides another funding opportunity for the project. The program could be used to support the construction of active transportation improvements and pavement improvements.
The project is located within the San Pablo Avenue & 23rd Street Corridors Priority Development Area, which aligns with OBAG program requirements.
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
20 7. PROJECT APPROACH
Mark Thomas’ project management approach is based on proven management and administrative systems that have been developed over time to enhance communication between our clients, our team and other affected agencies and key stakeholders. Our team has the depth of resources and capabilities to fully support the City on this multi-faceted, complex project. To support the City, key stakeholders and the local community, our team will:
PROVIDE RESOURCES
AND EXPERIENCE
ACT AS AN EXTENSION
OF CITY STAFF
BE RESPONSIVE AND
COLLABORATIVE
We have extensive experience
working on projects in the Bay
Area from early planning though
to final design for a range of public
agencies. Our team is tailored to
provide the necessary resources
and experience in:
• Civil and Geometric Design
• Bridges and Structures Design
• Intersection Modifications and
Operational Improvements
• Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
• Landscape Architecture and Urban
Design
• Public Outreach and Stakeholder
Coordination
• Transportation Planning
• Environmental Planning and
Permitting
• Utility Coordination and Relocations
• Geotechnical Engineering
• Right of Way Engineering
• Surveys and Mapping
Our management philosophy is
to act as an extension of agency
staff. We do not impose our
“system” on our client, but rather
tailor our process to fit within
the client structure to provide
assistance where necessary. We
are flexible to changes in client
operations. This flexibility and
adaptability is key to delivering
services to project managers from
the spectrum of agencies using
this contract.
We commit to bringing you our
best staff to fit the specific needs
of this complex project. For the
duration on this contract, Shawn
O’Keefe, PE, will be dedicated
to the City as Project Manager
and Principal in Charge and Julie
Passalacqua, PE, will be dedicated
as our Deptuy Project Manager
and Structures lead. Shawn and
Julie will be fully supported by a
team of key staff and supporting
staff who are committed to
ensuring the success of this
project. Our team has earned the
reputation of being responsive in
working with our clients and the
key to our success has been our
understanding of clients’ policies
and procedures and working
with everyone in a collaborative
manner.
At Mark Thomas, we believe that
a successful project lies on the
project management approach. Our
approach focuses on communication,
project understanding, project
execution, quality management, risk
management, schedule control, and
administrative control.
What makes
a successful
project?
Communication Project Understanding
Project
Execution
Quality
M
anagement
Risk ManagementSchedule Control
Administrative
Control
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
21 Project Schedule Management
Maintaining an accurate project schedule is critical to the overall success of a project and has a direct correlation to maintaining project budgets. Shawn will be responsible for controlling project design and deliverables by developing a comprehensive critical path method (CPM) design schedule that identifies all necessary tasks and interrelationships required for the project.
The schedule will be developed to track critical path items closely and will be updated on a monthly basis to track progress on deliverables across multiple tasks.
Design Control Costs
Control of project costs and minimization of unnecessary design changes are important elements of any project. From our perspective, it is a requirement that the City be informed as soon as possible of any potential or proposed design revisions that will affect the established budget. Keeping all relevant parties informed of any potential issues or changes in timely manner is vital to managing and controlling cost and schedule. Additionally, engineering design costs will be controlled by weekly monitoring and early identification of any design issue affecting project costs via Mark Thomas’s comprehensive reporting and accounting structure.
Communication with Team Members
Through our previous and ongoing work, our clients can attest to the hands-on approach of our Project Manager Shawn and Deputy Project Manager Julie, and their reputation of being responsive and working well with agency staff. The keys to our project successes have been our understanding of our clients policies and procedures and working with staff in a collaborative and cooperative manner. A partnership interaction between City staff and Mark Thomas will help to enhance communication throughout the project. We will hold formal project development team (PDT) meetings during project development to monitor progress. These meetings will include Mark Thomas, key City staff, and other stakeholders. Progress and coordination meetings will follow a set agenda and feature review of action items.
Quality Assurance/Quality Control
Mark Thomas implements a proven quality management approach that encompasses quality assurance and control activities. On this project, David Williams, PE, QSD will serve as Quality Assurance Manager and principal author of the Design Quality Management Plan (DQMP), which confirms quality commitment, design criteria, guidelines, standard, constructability & biddability, quality control/quality assurance processes, document control, and implementation training. With over 32 years of industry experience specializing in transportation infrastructure, David has become a recognized leader of complex projects, and providing quality in the project deliverables that he oversees. Quality Management begins with planning for project success in the form of a clear plan that details each task, as well as the appropriate City standards, CADD standards, state and federal guidelines. The plan also stipulates and schedules the various levels of quality control reviews to be conducted throughout the project.
Project Management Approach
In addition to the technical approach, we have found that the cornerstone of a successful project is for Mark Thomas to operate as a true extension of the City’s staff to provide the services being requested of the project.
We have developed a proven and effective management approach to project delivery that will be utilized for the San Pablo Avenue Bridge Replacement. This approach is highlighted as follows:
$
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
22 David will coordinate with task leads so that ongoing reviews are performed as the project develops and deliverables are submitted. Quality Control Reviews/Accuracy Checks will be conducted for each completed work product. Before delivering to the City, fresh eyes will be provided by Independent Technical Reviews which are conducted by those who are experienced but not involved in the day-to-day project development.
Interdisciplinary reviews will be coordinated and conducted to bring together multiple disciplines to proof their integration, and we will also leverage our in-house Construction Management team to provide constructibility reviews at 65% and 95% design levels.
Finally, David will audit the reviews to confirm their proper conduct and documentation, and to confirm that all reviewer corrections and concerns were addressed before the deliverable can be sent to the City. At Mark Thomas, the quality of our deliverables is a top priority, along with meeting our clients’ schedule and staying within budget.
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
23 TASK 1.0. PROJECT
ADMINISTRATION
Mark Thomas will coordinate with the City and manage
the project team. This includes preparing contract
paperwork, memos, letters, and emails, and making
phone calls. Management activities also including
preparing monthly invoices and status reports, Mark
Thomas will adhere to the QA/QC manual to manage
quality control, the project budget, and will actively
manage sub-consultant budget requirements.
Task 1.1. Project Management
Task 1.2. Project Development Team Meetings
Task 1.3. Project Schedule
Task 1.4 Quality Control
TASK 2.0. SURVEYING AND
MAPPING
Mark Thomas will provide the City with all survey and
mapping requirements for the project. Work items
under this task will include Control Survey to survey to establish the control necessary to facilitate topographic surveys of each site, Topographic Field Surveys, and
Boundary Surveys.
Task 2.1 Control Survey
Task 2.2 Topographic Survey
Task 2.3 Boundary Survey
TASK 3.0. ENGINEERING STUDIES
Mark Thomas, along with our subconsultants, will
provide comprehensive services under this task,
including utility coordination, geotechnical services,
hydrology and hydraulics, intersection and traffic
Alternative Analyses, design criteria and contraints,
preliminary roadway geometrics, Structure Type
Slection Report, Urban Conceptual Design, and Traffic
Signal Design.
Task 3.1 Utility Coordination
Task 3.2 Geotechnical Investigation and
Foundation Report
Task 3.2.1 Geotechnical Management
Task 3.2.2 Preliminary Foundation Report
Task 3.2.3 Foundation Investigation
Task 3.2.4 Plan Review
Task 3.3 Hydrology and Hydraulics Analysis
Task 3.3.1 Hydraulics Management
Task
3.3.2 Data Review
Task 3.3.3 Field Reconnaissance
Task 3.3.4 Hydrologic Analysis
Task 3.3.5 Hydraulic Analysis
Task 3.3.6 Scour Analysis
Task 3.3.7 Dry Weather Flow and Bypass
Task 3.3.8 Bridge Design Hydraulic Study
Task 3.4 Intersection Alternatives
Task 3.5 Traffic Alternatives Analysis
Task 3.5.1 Data Collection and COVID Adjustment
Task 3.5.2 Develop VISSIM Baseline Model
Task 3.5.3 Deveop VISSIM Future Year No-Build/Build
Models
Task 3.5.4 Bike/Ped Evaluation and Safety Analysis
Task 3.5.5 Draft Alternatives Analysis Summary
Task 3.5.6 Revised Alternatives Analysis Summary
8. SCOPE OF WORK
Mark Thomas will follow the scope of work below for the San Pablo Avenue Bridge Replacement project for the City of San Pablo (City). Mark Thomas will diligently perform this scope of work and will be responsible for items of work under this contract to the extent that issues arising from the performance of these services are within our reasonable control, and the Mark Thomas’ obligation to indemnify and defend are limited to the extent actually caused by Mark Thomas.
Our scope outlined below has been abbreviated in order for us to comply with the City’s required page limit.
However, we have developed a comprehensive, detailed scope of services for this Project This is included in the appendix section of our proposal for the City’s review and consideration.
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
24 Task 3.6 Design Criteria and Constraints
Memorandum
Task 3.7 Preliminary Roadway Geometrics
Task 3.8 Structure Type Selection Report
Task 3.9 Urban Conceptual Design
Task 3.10 Traffic Signal Design
TASK 4.0 ENVIRONMENT AL
STUDIES AND DOCUMENTATION
As part of this task, Kimley Horn will provide a
comprehensive public outreach plan. ESA will provide
envioronmental management, reviews and technical
studies.
Task 4.1 Public Outreach Plan
Task 4.1.1 Public Engagement Plan
Task 4.1.2 Develop Social Pinpoint Portal
Task 4.1.3 Meeting/Pop-Ups
Task 4.1.4 Design Collaboration Workshop
Task 4.2 Environmental Management
Task 4.3 Environmental Reviews and Technical
Studies
Task 4.3.1 Preliminary Environment Study Form (PES) and Field Review
Task 4.3.2 Cultural Resources Report
Task 4.3.3 Initial Site Assessment
Task 4.3.4 Water Quality Assessment Report
Task 4.3.5 Construction Noise Technical Memo
Task 4.3.6 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report (ARDR)
Task 4.3.7 Natural Environment Study (NES)
Task 4.3.8 Biological Assessment
Task 4.3.9 Minor Visual Impact Assessment
Task 4.3.10 Section 4(f) de Minimis Memorandum
Task 4.3.10 Community Impact Assessment Memorandum
Task 4.3.11 Floodplain Evaluation Report
4.4 NEPA & CEQA Environmental
Documentation
Task 4.4.1 CEQA Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration
Task 4.4.1 NEPA Categorical Exclusion
TASK 5.0. PERMITTING
Mark Thomas’ subconsultant, ESA, will provide and
manage all permitting requirements, including the
preparation and submittal of a Clean Water Act
(CWA) Section 404 Permit application, CWA Section
401 Permit application and Streambed Alternation
Agreement.
Task 5.1 Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit
Task 5.2 Clean Water Act Section 401 Permit
Task 5.3 Streambed Alternation Agreement
TASK 6.0. ENGINEERING
As part of this task, Mark Thomas will prepare
structural, roadway, and landscape/urban design plans
at the 65%, 95%, and final PS&E; structural calculations and bridge plans for the selected bridge alternative;
stormwater management plan and drainage report;
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan; and Bridge
Load Rating. Kimley-Horn will prepare 65%, 95%,
and final traffic control plans. ESA will provide PS&E
environmental compliance review of the 95% PS&E
package.
Task 6.1 65% Structure Plans
Task 6.2 65% Roadway Plans
Task 6.3 65% Landscape Plans and Urban Design
Plans
Task 6.4 65% Traffic Signal Plans
Task 6.5 Stormwater Management Plan
Task 6.6 Drainage Report
Task 6.7 95% Structure Plans
Task 6.8 95% Roadway Plans
Task 6.9 Landscape and Urban Design Plans
Task 6.10 95% Traffic Signal Plans
Task 6.11 Special Provisions
Task 6.12 Engineer’s Estimate
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
25 Task 6.13 PS&E Environmental Compliance Review
Task 6.14 Final PS&E Submittal
Task 6.15 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Task 6.16 Bridge Load Rating
TASK 7.0. RIGHT OF WAY SERVICES
Mark Thomas’ subconsultant, Monument will provide all right of way services, including overall right of way management, appraisal mapping, plat & legal descriptions, record of survey, fee and appraisal review, acquisition and negotiation and right of way certification.
Task 7.1 Appraisal Mapping
Task 7.2 Plat & Legal Descriptions
Task 7.3 Record of Survey
Task 7.4 Right of Way Management
Task 7.5 Fee Appraisal
Task 7.6 Appraisal Review
Task 7.7 Acquisition and Negotiation
Task 7.8 Right of Way Certification
TASK 8.0 BIDDING SUPPORT
Mark Thomas will assist the City during the bidding process. The work may include answering bid inquiries from prospective bidders, attending pre-bid meetings, and preparing addenda to the PS&E documents during the advertisement period.
Task 8.1 Bidding Support
TASK 9.0 CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT (OPTIONAL)
Mark Thomas will assist the City during construction of the project. The work may include responding to Requests for Information (RFIs) by the contractor, providing consultation and interpretation of the contract documents, preparing Contract Change Orders (CCOs), reviewing shop drawings, and attending construction meetings and filed visits.
Task 9.1 Construction Support
Task 9.2 As-Built Record Drawings
PROPOSAL SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
26 9. SCHEDULE OF WORK
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish
1 City Council Approves Contract/Notice to Proceed 0 days Mon 9/20/21 Mon 9/20/21 2 Kick-Off Meeting 0 days Wed 9/29/21 Wed 9/29/21
3 Surveying and Mapping 45 days Thu 9/30/21 Wed 12/1/21 4 Engineering Studies 525 days Thu 9/30/21 Wed 10/4/23
5 Utility Coordination 525 days Thu 9/30/21 Wed 10/4/23 12 Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Report 415 days Thu 9/30/21 Wed 5/3/23 22 Hydrology and Hydraulic Analysis 425 days Thu 9/30/21 Wed 5/17/23 30 Intersection and Traffic Alternatives Analysis 120 days Thu 12/2/21 Wed 5/18/22 31 Preliminary Roadway Geometrics 60 days Thu 5/19/22 Wed 8/10/22 32 Type Selection Report 80 days Thu 8/11/22 Wed 11/30/22 33 Urban Concept Design 140 days Thu 5/19/22 Wed 11/30/22 42 Environmental Studies and Documentation 720 days Thu 9/30/21 Wed 7/3/24 43 Public Outreach 315 days Thu 9/30/21 Wed 12/14/22
50 Environmental Reviews and Technical Studies 380 days Thu 12/1/22 Wed 5/15/24 51 PES Form and Field Review 60 days Thu 12/1/22 Wed 2/22/23 52 Biological Resources 320 days Thu 2/23/23 Wed 5/15/24 53 Cultural Resources 170 days Thu 2/23/23 Wed 10/18/23 60 Other Technical Studies 110 days Thu 2/23/23 Wed 7/26/23 96 Approved Technical Studies 0 days Wed 10/18/23 Wed 10/18/23 97 CEQA Environmental Documentation 140 days Thu 10/19/23 Wed 5/1/24 106 NEPA Categorical Exclusion 35 days Thu 5/16/24 Wed 7/3/24 107 Permitting 140 days Thu 7/4/24 Wed 1/15/25
113 Engineering 615 days Thu 8/11/22 Wed 12/18/24
114 65% Plans and Reports 170 days Thu 8/11/22 Wed 4/5/23 124 95% PS&E and Reports Submittal 90 days Thu 7/4/24 Wed 11/6/24 134 Final PS&E Submittal 30 days Thu 11/7/24 Wed 12/18/24 140 Right of Way Services 210 days Thu 7/4/24 Wed 4/23/25 141 Bidding and Construction 100 days Thu 4/24/25 Wed 9/10/25 142 E-76 for Construction Authorization (WILDAN) 12 wks Thu 4/24/25 Wed 7/16/25 143 City Council Authorizes Advertising 0 days Wed 8/13/25 Wed 8/13/25 144 Project Advertisement 4 wks Thu 8/14/25 Wed 9/10/25 145 Bid Opening 0 days Wed 9/10/25 Wed 9/10/25
9/20
9/29
9/30 12/1
12/2 5/18
5/19 8/10
8/11 11/30
12/1 2/22
2/23 5/15
10/18
5/16 7/3
7/4 4/23
4/24 7/16
8/13
8/14 9/10
9/10
Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Mark Thomas City of San Pablo
San Pablo Avenue Bridge Replacement
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
27 Mark Thomas has reviewed the City’s Consultant Agreement Sample (Attachment 2). We respectfully request the following contract language modifications:
Section (1B) - Recitals
WHEREAS, the City desires to engage a consultant who will act at all times in the City’s best interest and will respect the trust and confidence placed in that consultant by the City; and No warranty, express or implied, is made or intended by the Consultant’s undertaking herein or its performance of services, and it is agreed that the Consultant is not a fiduciary with respect to the Client. (1) Scope of Services
Consultant agrees to provide the Services to the City as specified in, collectively, the scope of services set forth in the City’s Request for Proposals, dated ___________ and any addenda thereto (“RFP”), attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein, and the scope of services set forth in Consultant’s proposal dated ___________ (“Proposal”), attached as Exhibit B and incorporated herein. In the event of any conflict or inconsistency between any of the terms of the RFP, the Proposal, and this Agreement, the terms most favorable to the City will prevail.
Any services not encompassed in this Section (1) are additional services (“Additional Services”) subject to prior written authorization by the City, as further specified below in Section (3), “Additional Services.” Section 16 – Indemnification (Section B – Indemnification by Design Professionals) Consistent with California Civil Code section 2782.8 (“section 2782.8”), when the Services to be provided under this Agreement are to be performed by a “design professional,” as that term is defined under section 2782.8, Consultant shall, to the fullest extent permitted by law, indemnify, defend and hold harmless, but not defend,
City, and its employees, and officials, volunteers and agents (“Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all losses, claims, damages, costs and liability of every nature, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, to the extent caused in whole or in part by any but only to the extent actually caused by negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant, its officers, employees, agents, subconsultants or subcontractors in performance of the Services under this Agreement, but excluding the sole or active negligence or willful misconduct of one or more of the Indemnified Parties. Defense costs shall not exceed Consultant’s proportionate percentage of fault, except as set forth in section 2782.8. Consultant has no obligation to pay for any of the Indemnified Parties’ defense related cost prior to a final determination of liability.
Section 20 – Termination
A. Termination for Convenience. City, or Consultant, may terminate this Agreement at its sole discretion at any time at least fourteen (14) days prior to expiration of the Term or completion by the Consultant of the Service … Section 29 – Breach
In the event that Consultant fails to perform any of the Services described in this Agreement or otherwise breaches the Agreement, City shall have the right to pursue all remedies provided by law and equity. Neither payment by the City nor performance by Consultant shall be construed as a waiver of either Party’s rights or remedies against the other. Failure to require full and timely performance of any provision, at any time, shall not waive or reduce the right to insist upon complete and timely performance of such provision thereafter. In the event of any suit, action or proceeding brought by either Party for breach of any term hereof or to enforce any provision hereof, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its reasonable attorney’s fees.
10. CONSULTANT CONTRACT STATEMENT
PROPOSAL SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
28 Mark Thomas has extensive experience delivering local roadway, bridges, intersection modifications and bicycle/pedestrian facility improvement projects for local municipalities and public agencies throughout California. Our projects have served to increase connectivity and greatly improve traffic, safety and infrastructure - benefiting our clients and communities throughout the state. Below are client references who will attest to our team’s exceptional performance and successful delivery of a range of transportation improvement projects.
12. REFERENCES
PROJECT DESCRIPTION/SCOPE OF WORK
Charleston-Arastradero Corridor
CLIENT REFERENCE
City of Palo Alto
Holly Boyd
(650) 329-2612
Holly.Boyd@CityofPaloAlto. org
CLIENT TYPE
Public Agency
TYPE OF PROJECT
Corridor, Intersection, Complete Street and
Multimodal Improvements
SIZE/SCALE OF GEOGRAPHIC AREA
Urban
ADT is estimated between 15,000 to 20,000
PROJECT STATUS
Project completed on schedule, within budget.
The Charleston-Arastradero Corridor is a major east-west arterial that serves the southern portion of Palo Alto. The 4-lane, 2.3-mile corridor experiences heavy demand from a large variety of users, including commuter vehicles, commuter and recreational bicyclists, school children on foot and bicycles, and buses. The primary purpose of the project is to transform this automobile-dominated facility into a vibrant Complete Streets facility that equally serves all modes of travel. The project will implement improvements to pedestrian and bicyclist safety, reduce vehicle speeds, and enhance the visual environment through the corridor.
We developed the project concept, obtained environmental clearance, prepared an implementation phasing plan, and final design documents. We developed multiple design alternatives making use of the state-of-the- art Complete Streets concepts. These alternatives utilize design features that enhance pedestrian and bicyclist safety including buffered bike lanes, bike boxes, multi-use trails, cycle tracks, raised medians and curb bulb- outs. We led the agency coordination effort including coordination and approvals from Caltrans, Caltrain and various resource agencies.
Southern Heights Bridge
Replacement
CLIENT REFERENCE
City of San Rafael
Theo Sanchez, PE
(415) 725-1003
[email protected]
CLIENT TYPE
Public Agency
TYPE OF PROJECT
HBP Bridge Replacement
SIZE/SCALE OF GEOGRAPHIC AREA
Urban
ADT less than 1,000. We developed interim plans
to maintain access to adjacent homes during the
construction.
PROJECT STATUS
Currently under construction.
Mark Thomas has provided preliminary engineering, outreach, environmental clearance, and final design for the Southern Heights Boulevard Bridge Replacement. The bridge has been a significant landmark for the neighborhood and offers iconic views of Mt. Tamalpais and the surrounding ridgeline. The public outreach efforts have been extensive, providing the residents the ability to express their concerns, many of which were to maintain the character of the existing narrow timber bridge while preserving access to properties on the existing and new structure. Providing access for emergency vehicles and accommodating pedestrians were other primary objectives for the design.
The existing bridge connects local roadways and provides neighborhood access for both vehicles and pedestrians. The bridge was classified by Caltrans as structurally deficient with a sufficiency rating of 32.0, making it eligible for replacement under HBP guidelines. Ultimately, the bridge is being replaced with a cast-in-place concrete structure and will have one vehicle lane with shoulders for emergency vehicle access and increased safety for bicyclists and pedestrians. The project includes custom lighting in the bridge rails to reduce light pollution. The State of California does not allow the construction of timber bridges, so conveying to the public that the design can incorporate aesthetic features which will give the bridge a similar look as the old structure was important. Public outreach has involved an onsite meeting with residents, public presentations, and maintaining a project website. This approach to public outreach has been positive and well received by the community.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION/SCOPE OF WORK
Downtown Bridges and Roadway
Improvements
CLIENT REFERENCE
City of Roseville
Michael Dour
(916) 774-5293
[email protected]
CLIENT TYPE
Public Agency
TYPE OF PROJECT
Bridges and Local Roadway Improvements
SIZE AND SCALE OF GEOGRAPHIC AREA
Urban
ADT is estimated between 1,000 to 5,000
PROJECT STATUS
Currently under cnstruction.
Mark Thomas provided design services for improvements in the City of Roseville that were identified in the City’s specific plan. The project closed the gap in the City’s longest Class-I multi-use trail, improving pedestrian and bicycle connectivity between businesses, homes, transit and civic uses. The trail extends along the north bank of Dry Creek, and crosses below the busy Lincoln Street to provide grade-separated pedestrian and bicycle access. Mark Thomas worked with the City to prepare an application for the construction of the trail and two bridges to the 2014 ATP Grant cycle, which was awarded State funding.
Mark Thomas has managed the process that is to be followed in delivering the project per the ATP and CTC guidelines. The project was preliminarily designed as a whole, but broken up and delivered in three phases to suit the funding available. Our projects include the Downtown Pedestrian Bridge, Taylor Street Bridge (Library Bridge) and Ice House Bridge Replacement.
Charleston Corridor Improvements
CLIENT REFERENCE
CBRE / Google
Kevin Tsoi, PE , Project Manager
(650) 314-8978
[email protected]
CLIENT TYPE
Private Client implementing a Public Project
with Public Client Oversight
TYPE OF PROJECT
Corridor, Intersection, Complete Street and
Multimodal Improvements with Transit Only
Lanes.
SIZE AND SCALE OF GEOGRAPHIC AREA
Urban
ADT is estimated between 10,000 to 15,000.
PROJECT STATUS
Phase 2 and 3 of the project are at the 95%
design stage. Project is currently on hold per
City request and within budget.
The Charleston Corridor Improvements, Phases II and III project will continue the transformation of Charleston Corridor within the City of Mountain View and become a true multimodal complete street as envisioned in the City’s North Bayshore Precise Plan. Mark Thomas is leading a multi-disciplinary team to develop the project concept, obtain environmental clearance, and prepare final design documents.
The project entails the design and construction for converting the outside travel lanes of the 4-lane roadway to transit-only lanes, adding one and two-way cycle tracks along the north and south sides of Charleston Road, improving intersections, and widening sidewalks. Each intersection will be modified with protected intersection elements to improve safety and access for bicycles and pedestrians while preserving operations for transit and personal vehicles. Additional vehicle turn lanes will be added at the Rengstorff Avenue and Landings Drive intersections to maintain traffic operations on the corridor. The cycle tracks will be separated from the road by landscaped medians.
The design reconfigures the existing roadway, medians, traffic signals, bus stops, underground utilities and landscaping to accommodate the cycle tracks, transit-only lanes, improved intersections, and sidewalks. The Phases II and III project spans approximately 3/4 of a mile, from just west of Huff Avenue to Salado Drive.
PROPOSAL SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
29 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/SCOPE OF WORK
Decoto Corridor
CLIENT REFERENCE
City of Fremont
Connie Wong
(510) 494-4782
[email protected]
CLIENT TYPE
Public Agency
TYPE OF PROJECT
Corridor/Complete Street and Multimodal
Improvements with Transit Only Lanes.
SIZE/SCALE OF GEOGRAPHIC AREA
Urban
ADT is estimated between 35,000 to 40,000
PROJECT STATUS
Project is currently at the 100% design stage and
on schedule, within budget.
Mark Thomas is working with the City of Fremont to deliver two critical phases for the Decoto Road Corridor Project. Phase A will develop a multimodal corridor concept plan from Mission Boulevard to I-880 and then complete final design documents for the segment from Paseo Padre Parkway to I-880. Key goals for this phase include improved safety and enhanced multimodal mobility and connectivity on Decoto Road.
Phase B proposes a Project Initiation Document (PSR-PDS) for the I-880/ Decoto Road Interchange. Key improvements include the realignment of ramps for safety, implementation of continuous bike facilities and ADA- compliant sidewalks with enhanced crossings through the interchange, upgrading traffic signals at multiple off-ramps and facilitating an efficient transition from Decoto Road to the east of I-880 to the SR 84 HOV lane.
Soquel Drive Multimodal
Improvements
CLIENT REFERENCE
Santa Cruz County
Russell Chen
Traffic Division
(831) 454-2160
[email protected]
CLIENT TYPE
Public Agency
TYPE OF PROJECT
Corridor/Complete Street and Multimodal
Improvements with TSP and Adaptive Signal
Technologies.
SIZE/SCALE OF GEOGRAPHIC AREA
Urban
ADT is estimated between 10,000 to 15,000.
PROJECT STATUS
Project is currently on schedule and within
budget.
Mark Thomas is designing active transportation, bus transit, and pedestrian improvements along a 5.5 mile stretch of Soquel Drive between La Fonda Drive and State Park Drive. The Soquel Drive Buffered Bike Lanes and Congestion Mitigation project spans along the most heavily traveled section of Soquel Avenue/Drive in the County through the unincorporated communities of Soquel and Aptos. Soquel Avenue/ Drive provides an alternative vehicular route to Highway 1 and experiences traffic congestion and higher vehicle speeds that are frequently associated with cut-through traffic. The corridor serves as the primary route for active transportation on the inland side of Highway 1 and transit buses provide access to residences, businesses, and schools. Working closely with the County and RTC, Mark Thomas assisted in preparation of the successful grant application for the project.
The project will maximize the efficiency of the existing transportation infrastructure while improving safety for all modes of travel. These improvements will also enhance multimodal options and connectivity to increase corridor throughput and reduce greenhouse gas emissions as well as promote sustainable development and livable communities.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION/SCOPE OF WORK
Marsh Creek Road Bridge
CLIENT REFERENCE
Contra Costa County
Jenna Caldwell
(925) 313-2278
[email protected]
CLIENT TYPE
Public Agency
TYPE OF PROJECT
HBP Bridges and Local Roadway Improvements
SIZE AND SCALE OF GEOGRAPHIC AREA
Urban
ADT of less than 1,000.
PROJECT STATUS
Project is currently on schedule and within
budget.
The Marsh Creek Road Bridge was programmed for replacement under the HBP. It was classified as functionally obsolete with a sufficiency rating of 68.0, according to the Caltrans Bridge Inspection Report. Marsh Creek Road carries significant traffic volume as a commuter reliever route to SR 4 and Kirker Pass Road, connecting East County and Central Valley residents to job centers in the Bay Area.
Mark Thomas prepared the final PS&E package for the replacement bridge, designing a single span, precast, concrete box girder, approach roadways, and retaining wall. The bridge crosses environmentally sensitive Marsh Creek where the new single span bridge was selected to avoid disturbing wide variety of federal, state and local protected species.
Engineering for the project involved the removal of the existing steel girder bridge, new rock slope protection under the new bridge, realigning approach roadways, designing a soldier pile retaining wall, relocating an 8” water main attached to the bridge, and accommodating new private driveways. The project required coordination with PG&E and Contra Costa Water District to relocate underground and overhead utilities.
Environmental restrictions provided a work window of May 15 to October
31. The County wanted the bridge to be constructed in one season, so several ABC techniques were utilized to meet the construction window and maintain operations on Marsh Creek. Four stages of construction and traffic handling were required. As a result, the project was successfully completed within the environmental work window.
I-80/Hiddenbrook Interchange
Improvements
CLIENT REFERENCE
City of Vallejo
David Yatabe
City Traffic Engineer
(707) 648-4300
[email protected]
CLIENT TYPE
Public Agency
TYPE OF PROJECT
Intersection and Interchange Improvements with
Roundabouts at Each End of the Interchange.
SIZE AND SCALE OF GEOGRAPHIC AREA
Urban
ADT is estimated between 5,000 to 10,000
PROJECT STATUS
Project is currently in the PA&ED phase and on
schedule and within budget.
Mark Thomas has performed conceptual design, preliminary engineering, topographic mapping and right of way delineation for improvements at the I-80/Hiddenbrooke Parkway Interchange in Vallejo. Development in the Hiddenbrooke community is driving the need for improvements to the existing interchange. Recent traffic studies, based on current traffic counts and 20-year forecasts, indicate that the intersections at the interchange currently operate at acceptable levels but will deteriorate over time and operate at Level of Service F conditions by 2035.
Prior to analyzing interchange alternatives Mark Thomas worked closely with the City and the residents of Hiddenbrooke to understand costs and impacts of potential near term projects that could improve existing safety and operations at the interchange. For the larger interchange, we developed three conceptual alternatives, focused on relieving congestion, providing safe and reliable operations at the intersections, and conforming to local planning documents. We participated in several community workshops and Hiddenbrooke HOA meetings to select a preferred alternative: a 6-Leg roundabout that incorporates Hiddenbrooke Parkway, the I-80 eastbound ramps, McGary Road, and Perkins Road. We are currently in the PA&ED phase with Caltrans as the roundabout option was selected as the preferred alternative by the community and the City.
PROPOSAL
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
City of San Pablo
30 ADDITIONAL HBP EXPERIENCE
Mark Thomas has delivered more than 60 HBP funded projects. Each project is personalized with an integrated approach, requiring close coordination with local agencies, Caltrans, utility companies, resource and permitting agencies, key stakeholders and a multi-disciplined team. Our team will provide the City with our highly coordinated and efficient approach, hands-on experience with HBP funded projects, and in-depth understanding of the range of issues specific to projects of similar size and scope to the San Pablo Bridge Replacement project.
Mark Thomas is focused on the delivery of bridge projects, and more specifically those bridge projects funded through the HBP. The following highlights just some of our recent HBP-funded projects. • Berry Street Bridge Replacement, Calistoga*
• Muir Woods Road Bridge Replacement, Marin
County*
• Nicasio Valley Road Bridge Replacement, Marin
County*
• Sir Francis Drake Bridge Replacement, Marin
County*
• Mountain View Road Bridge Replacement, Marin
County*
• Aldridge Road Bridge Replacement, Vacaville*
• Bridge Parkway Bridge Rehabilitation, Redwood
City*
• Harkins Slough Road Bridge over Struve Slough
West Branch, Watsonville*
• Leisure Town Road Bridge Replacement,
Vacaville*
• Marsh Creek Road Bridge Replacement, Contra
Costa County*
• Nash Road Bridge Replacement over San Benito
River, Hollister*
• San Bruno Canal Bridge, South San Francisco*
• Southern Heights Bridge Replacement, San
Rafael*
• Wilbur Avenue Overhead Widening, Antioch*
• Brewer Road Bridge Replacement, Placer County
• Coon Creek Bridge Replacement, Placer County
• Dry Creek Bridge Replacement, Yuba County
• Grizzly Bluff Road Bridge Replacement,
Humboldt County
• I Street Bridge Replacement, Sacramento
• Lime Kiln Road Bridge Replacement, Tuolumne
County
• Markham Ravine Bridge Replacement, Placer
County
• Rail Road Flat Road Bridge Replacement,
Calaveras County
• Three Bridge Replacements along Dogtown
Road, Calaveras County
• Stagecoach Road Bridge Improvements,
Calaveras County
• Watts Valley Road over Watts Valley Creek
Bridge, Fresno County
* Caltrans Oversight Projects
CITY OF SAN PABLO
San Pablo Avenue Bridge Replacement Project
APPENDIX
REQUIRED FORMS
Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHBIT 10-Q
Disclosure of Lobbying Activities
LPP 13-01 May 8, 2013
EXHIBIT 10-Q DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES
COMPLETE THIS FORM TO DISCLOSE LOBBYING ACTIVITIES PURSUANT TO 31 U.S.C. 1352
1. Type of Federal Action: 2. Status of Federal Action: 3. Report Type:
☐ a. contract ☐ a. bid/offer/application ☐ a. initial ☐ b. grant ☐ b. initial award ☐ b. material change
☐ c. cooperative agreement ☐ c. post-award
☐ d. loan For Material Change Only:
☐ e. loan guarantee year ____ quarter _________
☐ f. loan insurance date of last report __________
4. Name and Address of Reporting Entity 5. If Reporting Entity in No. 4 is Subawardee, Enter Name and Address of Prime:
☐ Prime ☐ Subawardee
Tier _______ , if known
Congressional District, if known Congressional District, if known
6. Federal Department/Agency: 7. Federal Program Name/Description:
CFDA Number, if applicable ____________________
8. Federal Action Number, if known: 9. Award Amount, if known:
10. Name and Address of Lobby Entity 11. Individuals Performing Services (If individual, last name, first name, MI) (including address if different from No. 10) (last name, first name, MI)
(attach Continuation Sheet(s) if necessary)
12. Amount of Payment (check all that apply) 14. Type of Payment (check all that apply) $ _____________ ☐ actual ☐ planned ☐a. retainer
☐b. one-time fee
13. Form of Payment (check all that apply): ☐c. commission ☐ a. cash ☐d. contingent fee
☐ b. in-kind; specify: nature _____________ ☐e. deferred Value _____________ ☐f. other, specify _______________________
15. Brief Description of Services Performed or to be performed and Date(s) of Service, including officer(s), employee(s), or member(s) contacted, for Payment Indicated in Item 12:
(attach Continuation Sheet(s) if necessary)
16. Continuation Sheet(s) attached: ☐ Yes ☐No
17. Information requested through this form is authorized by Title 31 U.S.C. Section 1352. This disclosure of lobbying reliance was placed by the tier above when his transaction was made or entered into. This disclosure is required pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1352. This information will be reported to Congress
semiannually and will be available for public inspection. Any person who fails to file the required disclosure shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure.
Signature: ________________________________________
Print Name: _______________________________________
__________________
Authorized for Local Reproduction
Federal Use Only: Standard Form - LLL
Standard Form LLL Rev. 04-28-06
Distribution: Orig- Local Agency Project Files
NOT APPLICABLE - MARK THOMAS HAS NO LOBBYING
ACTIVITIES TO DISCLOSE
Shawn O'Keefe, PE, QSD
Principal in ChargeTitle: _ _________________________
Telephone N
o.: (925) 858-8581____________________ Date: 07/25/21___ Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHBIT 10-Q
Disclosure of Lobbying Activities
EXHIBIT 10-Q D ISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES
COMPLETE THIS FORM TO DISCLOSE LOBBYING ACTIVITIES PURSUANT TO 31 U.S.C. 1352
1. Type of Federal Action: 2. Status of Federal Action: 3. Report Type:
a. contract a. bid/offer/application a. initial
b. grant b. initial award b. material change
c. cooperative agreement c. post-award
d. loan For Material Change Only:
e. loan guarantee year ____ quarter _________
f. loan insurance date of last report __________
4. Name and Address of Reporting Entity 5. If Reporting Entity in No. 4 is Subawardee, Enter Name and Address of Prime:
Prime Subawardee
Tier _______ , if known
Congressional District, if known Congressional District, if known
6. Federal Department/Agency: 7. Federal Program Name/Description:
CFDA Number, if applicable ____________________
8. Federal Action Number, if known: 9. Award Amount, if known:
10. Name and Address of Lobby Entity 11. Individuals Performing Services (If individual, last name, first name, MI) (including address if different from No. 10) (last name, first name, MI)
(attach Continuation Sheet(s) if necessary)
12. Amount of Payment (check all that apply) 14. Type of Payment (check all that apply) $ _____________ actual planned a. retainer
b. one -time fee
13. Form of Payment (check all that apply): c. commission a. cash d. contingent fee
b. in-kind; specify: nature _______________ e deferred
Value _____________ f. other, specify _________________________
15. Brief Description of Services Performed or to be performed and Date(s) of Service, including officer(s), employee(s), or member(s) contacted, for Payment Indicated in Item 12:
(attach Continuation Sheet(s) if necessary)
16. Continuation Sheet(s) attached: Yes No
17. Information requested through this form is authorized by Title 31 U.S.C. Section 1352. This disclosure of lobbying reliance was placed by the tier above when his transaction was made or entered into. This disclosure is required pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1352
. This information will be reported to Congress
semiannually and will be available for public inspection. Any person who fails to file the required disclosure shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure.
Signature: ________________________________ ________
Print Name: ________________________________ _______
Title: ________________________________ ____________
Telephone No.: ____________________ Date:___________
Authorized for Local Reproduction
Federal Use Only: Standard Form - LLL
Standard Form LLL Rev. 04-28-06
Distribution: Orig- Local Agency Project Files
LPP 13-01 May 8, 2013
Adam J. Dankberg, P.E.
Vice President
510.350.0243 07/26/2021
None / Not
Applicable
□ □ □
□ □
□ □ ---
B
----
□ □
Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHBIT 10-Q
Disclosure of Lobbying Activities
1. Type of Federal Action: 2. Status of Federal Action: 3. Report Type:
a. contract a. bid/offer/application a. initial
b. grant b. initial award b. material change
c. cooperative agreement c. post -award
d. loan For Material Change Only:
e. loan guarantee year ____ quarter _________
f. loan insurance date of last report __________
4. Name and Address of Reporting Entity 5. If Reporting Entity in No. 4 is Subawardee, Enter Name and Address of Prime:
Prime Subawardee
Tier _______ , if known
Congressional District, if known Congressional District, if known
6. Federal Department/Agency: 7. Federal Program Name/Description:
CFDA Number, if applicable ____________________
8. Federal Action Number, if known: 9. Award Amount, if known:
10. Name and Address of Lobby Entity 11. Individuals Performing Services (If individual, last name, first name, MI) (including address if different from No. 10) (last name, first name, MI)
(attach Continuation Sheet(s) if necessary)
12. Amount of Payment (check all that apply) 14. Type of Payment (check all that apply) $ _____________ actual planned a. retainer
b. one -time fee
13. Form of Payment (check all that apply): c. commission a. cash d. contingent fee
b. in -kind; specify: nature _______________ e deferred Value _____________ f. other, specify _________________________
15. Brief Description of Services Performed or to be performed and Date(s) of Service, including officer(s), employee(s), or member(s) contacted, for Payment Indicated in Item 12:
(attach Continuation Sheet(s) if necessary)
16. Continuation Sheet(s) attached: Yes No
17. Information requested through this form is authorized by Title 31 U.S.C. Section 1352. This disclosure of lobbying reliance was placed by the tier above when his transaction was made or entered into. This disclosure is required pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1352. This information will be reported to Congress
semiannually and will be available for public inspection. Any person who fails to file the required disclosure shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure.
Signature: ________________________________________
Print Name: ______________________________________
Title: ___________________________________________
Telephone No.: ____________________ Date:_ __________
Authorized for Local Reproduction
Federal Use Only: Standard Form - LLL
Standard Form LLL Rev. 04-28-06
Distribution: Orig- Local Agency Project Files
LPP 13-01 May 8, 2013
Not applicable
Brian Boxer
Regional Director, Northern California
(916) 231-1270
EXHIBIT 10-Q D ISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES
COMPLETE THIS FORM TO DISCLOSE LOBBYING ACTIVITIES PURSUANT TO 31 U.S.C. 1352
□ □ □
□ □
□ □ ---
B
----
□ □
Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHBIT 10-Q
Disclosure of Lobbying Activities
EXHIBIT 10-Q DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES
COMPLETE THIS FORM TO DISCLOSE LOBBYING ACTIVITIES PURSUANT TO 31 U.S.C. 1352
1. Type of Federal Action: 2. Status of Federal Action: 3. Report Type:
a. contract a. bid/offer/application a. initial
b. grant b. initial award b. material change
c. cooperative agreement c. post -award
d. loan For Material Change Only:
e. loan guarantee year ____ quarter _________
f. loan insurance date of last report __________
4. Name and Address of Reporting Entity 5. If Reporting Entity in No. 4 is Subawardee, Enter Name and Address of Prime:
Prime Subawardee
Tier _______ , if known
Congressional District, if known Congressional District, if known
6. Federal Department/Agency: 7. Federal Program Name/Description:
CFDA Number, if applicable ____________________
8. Federal Action Number, if known: 9. Award Amount, if known:
10. Name and Address of Lobby Entity 11. Individuals Performing Services (If individual, last name, first name, MI) (including address if different from No. 10) (last name, first name, MI)
(attach Continuation Sheet(s) if necessary)
12. Amount of Payment (check all that apply) 14. Type of Payment (check all that apply) $ _____________ actual planned a. retainer
b. one -time fee
13. Form of Payment (check all that apply): c. commission a. cash d. contingent fee
b. in -kind; specify: nature _______________ e deferred Value _____________ f. other, specify _________________________
15. Brief Description of Services Performed or to be performed and Date(s) of Service, including officer(s), employee(s), or member(s) contacted, for Payment Indicated in Item 12:
(attach Continuation Sheet(s) if necessary)
16. Continuation Sheet(s) attached: Yes No
17. Information requested through this form is authorized by Title 31 U.S.C. Section 1352. This disclosure of lobbying reliance was placed by the tier above when his transaction was made or entered into. This disclosure is required pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1352. This information will be reported to Congress
semiannually and will be available for public inspection. Any person who fails to file the required disclosure shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure.
Signature: ________________________________ ________
Print Name: ________________________________ _______
Title: ________________________________ ____________
Telephone No.: ____________________ Date:___________
Authorized for Local Reproduction
Federal Use Only: Standard Form - LLL
Standard Form LLL Rev. 04-28-06
Distribution: Orig- Local Agency Project Files
LPP 13-01 May 8, 2013
N/A
Benjamin Crawford
President
(916) 952-6684
□ □ □
□ □
□ □ ---
B
----
□ □
Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHBIT 10-Q
Disclosure of Lobbying Activities
EXHIBIT 10-Q DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES
COMPLETE THIS FORM TO DISCLOSE LOBBYING ACTIVITIES PURSUANT TO 31 U.S.C. 1352
1. Type of Federal Action: 2. Status of Federal Action: 3. Report Type:
a. contract a. bid/offer/application a. initial
b. grant b. initial award b. material change
c. cooperative agreement c. post -award
d. loan For Material Change Only:
e. loan guarantee year ____ quarter _________
f. loan insurance date of last report __________
4. Name and Address of Reporting Entity 5. If Reporting Entity in No. 4 is Subawardee, Enter Name and Address of Prime:
Prime Subawardee
Tier _______ , if known
Congressional District, if known Congressional District, if known
6. Federal Department/Agency: 7. Federal Program Name/Description:
CFDA Number, if applicable ____________________
8. Federal Action Number, if known: 9. Award Amount, if known:
10. Name and Address of Lobby Entity 11. Individuals Performing Services (If individual, last name, first name, MI) (including address if different from No. 10) (last name, first name, MI)
(attach Continuation Sheet(s) if necessary)
12. Amount of Payment (check all that apply) 14. Type of Payment (check all that apply) $ _____________ actual planned a. retainer
b. one -time fee
13. Form of Payment (check all that apply): c. commission a. cash d. contingent fee
b. in -kind; specify: nature _______________ e deferred Value _____________ f. other, specify _________________________
15. Brief Description of Services Performed or to be performed and Date(s) of Service, including officer(s), employee(s), or member(s) contacted, for Payment Indicated in Item 12:
(attach Continuation Sheet(s) if necessary)
16. Continuation Sheet(s) attached: Yes No
17. Information requested through this form is authorized by Title 31 U.S.C. Section 1352. This disclosure of lobbying reliance was placed by the tier above when his transaction was made or entered into. This disclosure is required pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1352. This information will be reported to Congress
semiannually and will be available for public inspection. Any person who fails to file the required disclosure shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure.
Signature: ________________________________ ________
Print Name: ________________________________ _______
Title: ________________________________ ____________
Telephone No.: ____________________ Date:___________
Authorized for Local Reproduction
Federal Use Only: Standard Form - LLL
Standard Form LLL Rev. 04-28-06
Distribution: Orig- Local Agency Project Files
LPP 13-01 May 8, 2013
Han-Bin Liang
President
: 925.330.1500
□ □ □
□ □
□ □ ---
B
----
□ □
Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHBIT 10-Q
Disclosure of Lobbying Activities
EXHIBIT 10-Q DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES
COMPLETE THIS FORM TO DISCLOSE LOBBYING ACTIVITIES PURSUANT TO 31 U.S.C. 1352
1. Type of Federal Action: 2. Status of Federal Action: 3. Report Type:
a. contract a. bid/offer/application a. initial
b. grant b. initial award b. material change
c. cooperative agreement c. post -award
d. loan For Material Change Only:
e. loan guarantee year ____ quarter _________
f. loan insurance date of last report __________
4. Name and Address of Reporting Entity 5. If Reporting Entity in No. 4 is Subawardee, Enter Name and Address of Prime:
Prime Subawardee
Tier _______ , if known
Congressional District, if known Congressional District, if known
6. Federal Department/Agency: 7. Federal Program Name/Description:
CFDA Number, if applicable ____________________
8. Federal Action Number, if known: 9. Award Amount, if known:
10. Name and Address of Lobby Entity 11. Individuals Performing Services (If individual, last name, first name, MI) (including address if different from No. 10) (last name, first name, MI)
(attach Continuation Sheet(s) if necessary)
12. Amount of Payment (check all that apply) 14. Type of Payment (check all that apply) $ _____________ actual planned a. retainer
b. one -time fee
13. Form of Payment (check all that apply): c. commission a. cash d. contingent fee
b. in -kind; specify: nature _______________ e deferred Value _____________ f. other, specify _________________________
15. Brief Description of Services Performed or to be performed and Date(s) of Service, including officer(s), employee(s), or member(s) contacted, for Payment Indicated in Item 12:
(attach Continuation Sheet(s) if necessary)
16. Continuation Sheet(s) attached: Yes No
17. Information requested through this form is authorized by Title 31 U.S.C. Section 1352. This disclosure of lobbying reliance was placed by the tier above when his transaction was made or entered into. This disclosure is required pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1352. This information will be reported to Congress
semiannually and will be available for public inspection. Any person who fails to file the required disclosure shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure.
Signature: ________________________________ ________
Print Name: ________________________________ _______
Title: ________________________________ ____________
Telephone No.: ____________________ Date:___________
Authorized for Local Reproduction
Federal Use Only: Standard Form - LLL
Standard Form LLL Rev. 04-28-06
Distribution: Orig- Local Agency Project Files
LPP 13-01 May 8, 2013
NOT APPLICABLE
Signature: ________________________________________
Print Name: _______________________________________
Title: ____________________________________________
Telephone No.: ____________________ Date:___________
Amber Costello
President
562-260-0507
□ □ □
□ □
□ □ ---
B
----
□ □
Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHBIT 10-Q
Disclosure of Lobbying Activities
EXHIBIT 10-Q DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES
COMPLETE THIS FORM TO DISCLOSE LOBBYING ACTIVITIES PURSUANT TO 31 U.S.C. 1352
1. Type of Federal Action: 2. Status of Federal Action: 3. Report Type:
a. contract a. bid/offer/application a. initial
b. grant b. initial award b. material change
c. cooperative agreement c. post -award
d. loan For Material Change Only:
e. loan guarantee year ____ quarter _________
f. loan insurance date of last report __________
4. Name and Address of Reporting Entity 5. If Reporting Entity in No. 4 is Subawardee, Enter Name and Address of Prime:
Prime Subawardee
Tier _______ , if known
Congressional District, if known Congressional District, if known
6. Federal Department/Agency: 7. Federal Program Name/Description:
CFDA Number, if applicable ____________________
8. Federal Action Number, if known: 9. Award Amount, if known:
10. Name and Address of Lobby Entity 11. Individuals Performing Services (If individual, last name, first name, MI) (including address if different from No. 10) (last name, first name, MI)
(attach Continuation Sheet(s) if necessary)
12. Amount of Payment (check all that apply) 14. Type of Payment (check all that apply) $ _____________ actual planned a. retainer
b. one -time fee
13. Form of Payment (check all that apply): c. commission a. cash d. contingent fee
b. in -kind; specify: nature _______________ e deferred Value _____________ f. other, specify _________________________
15. Brief Description of Services Performed or to be performed and Date(s) of Service, including officer(s), employee(s), or member(s) contacted, for Payment Indicated in Item 12:
(attach Continuation Sheet(s) if necessary)
16. Continuation Sheet(s) attached: Yes No
17. Information requested through this form is authorized by Title 31 U.S.C. Section 1352. This disclosure of lobbying reliance was placed by the tier above when his transaction was made or entered into. This disclosure is required pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1352. This information will be reported to Congress
semiannually and will be available for public inspection. Any person who fails to file the required disclosure shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure.
Signature: ________________________________ ________
Print Name: ________________________________ _______
Title: ________________________________ ____________
Telephone No.: ____________________ Date:___________
Authorized for Local Reproduction
Federal Use Only: Standard Form - LLL
Standard Form LLL Rev. 04-28-06
Distribution: Orig- Local Agency Project Files
LPP 13-01 May 8, 2013
NOT APPLICABLE
Rich Walkling
CFO
510.644.2798 x5 7/20/21
Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 10-O1
Consultant Proposal DBE Commitment
EXHIBIT 10-O1 CONSULTANT PROPOSAL DBE COMMITMENT
1. Local Agency: 2. Contract DBE Goal:
3. Project Description:
4. Project Location:
5. Consultant's Name: 6. Prime Certified DBE:
7. Description of Work, Service, or Materials
Supplied
8. DBE
Certification
Number
Local Agency to Complete this Section
17. Local Agency Contract Number:
18. Federal-Aid Project Number:
19. Proposed Contract Execution Date:
20. Consultant’s Ranking after Evaluation: __________________________ Local Agency certifies that all DBE certifications are valid and information on this form is complete and accurate.
9. DBE Contact Information
11. TOTAL CLAIMED DBE PARTICIPATION
10. DBE %
%
IMPORTANT: Identify all DBE firms being claimed for credit, regardless of tier. Written confirmation of each listed DBE is required.
12. Preparer's Signature 13. Date
14. Preparer's Name 15. Phone
16. Preparer's Title
DISTRIBUTION: Original – Included with consultant’s proposal to local agency.
ADA Notice: For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in alternate formats. For information call (916) 654-6410 or TDD (916) 654- 3880 or write Records and Forms Management, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814.
LPP 18-01 Page 1 of 2
January 2019
Monument - Amber Costello I President
562.260.0507 I [email protected]
8 Cobblestone Court, Laguna Niguel, CA 92677
and Utility Coordination
CITY OF SAN PABLO
San Pablo Avenue Bridge Replacement Project
APPENDIX
Detailed Scope of Work
SCOPE OF WORK
Mark Thomas will follow the scope of work below. Based on our review of the project site, our knowledge of the area, and information we have gathered from the RFP, these scope items are needed to accomplish our proposed work approach. Mark Thomas will diligently perform this scope of work and will be responsible for items of work under this contract to the extent that issues arising from the performance of these services are within our reasonable control, and that Mark Thomas’ obligation to indemnify and defend are limited to the extent actually caused by Mark Thomas in the performance of this scope of work.
TASK 1.0 PROJECT ADMINISTRATION
Task 1.1 Project Management
Mark Thomas will coordinate with the City and manage the project team. This includes preparing contract paperwork, memos, letters, and emails, and making phone calls. Management activities also including preparing monthly invoices and status reports, which will outline the charges made by Mark Thomas and our subconsultants. Mark Thomas will adhere to the project budget , and will actively manage sub-consultant budget requirements
Task 1. 2 Project Development Team Meetings
Mark Thomas will organize, schedule, and chair Project Development Team (PDT) meetings, public outreach meetings, stakeholder coordination meetings, utility coordination meetings, right-of-way and easement coordination and acquisition meetings, field reviews, and other project related meetings. As applicable, the meetings will be setup in advance according to the project schedule.
The Mark Thomas Team will be responsible for all communication and coordination with project stakeholders prior to stakeholder meetings and throughout the duration of the project. The Mark Thomas Team will be responsible for coordinating venues for public outreach meetings. It is assumed the cost of renting meeting space (if required) will not be the responsibility of Mark Thomas.
Mark Thomas will prepare meeting agendas, meeting sign-in sheets, and meeting summaries for all meetings.
Meeting summaries will include discussion items, key points which direct work or otherwise influence project decisions or tasks, and action items with due dates date and responsible parties. It is assumed that there will be 36 meeting held via conference call and 12 in person meetings. The project is anticipated to last 48 months from Notice to Proceed to construction advertisement.
Task 1. 3 Project Schedule
Mark Thomas will develop and maintain a critical path method (CPM) design schedule The schedule will be updated as progress is made, with critical path activities clearly shown for team review purposes. The project schedule tasks will align with the tasks included within the Scope of Services. The proposed schedule shall include proposed meeting frequency for PDT meetings, stakeholder meetings, public outreach meetings, utility coordination meetings, and project management meetings with City Staff.
Task 1. 4 Quality Control
Mark Thomas will prepare and implement our established Quality Assurance (QA) Procedures to verify that all deliverables have been reviewed for completeness and accuracy, that the submittals conform to the applicable standards, as well as to check that the deliverable satisfies the purpose and need for the submittal. We will complete and document an independent technical review of each major submittal. Review comments will be addressed prior to submittal to the City. Mark Thomas will review subconsultant submittals according to the same standards. Transmittals for all deliverables will include the name and contact information for the person responsible for ensuring quality deliverables.
TASK 1 DELIVERABLES:
Monthly Invoices and Progress Reports
Meeting Agendas and Summaries
Project Schedule
Quality Control Documents
TASK 2.0 SURVEYING AND MAPPING
Task 2.1 Control Survey
Mark Thomas will perform a field survey to establish the control necessary to facilitate topographic surveys of each site. Inter-visible local project horizontal control (NAD83) and vertical control (NAVD88) will be established based upon GPS ties to the CSRC network, 2017.50 epoch for horizontal (State Plane Zone 3) and vertical or other benchmarks as requested and provided. Two (2) days of fieldwork is anticipated for the Control Survey.
Mark Thomas will include control points in the Electronic Base Map which will include coordinates and elevations used for each point.
Task 2.2 Topographic Survey
Mark Thomas will perform a field survey to collect detailed topographic data. Topographic mapping will be sufficient to serve as the basis for design work of bridge and roadway improvements including ADA ramps where applicable. Pertinent above and below ground features will be located based upon surface visible evidence and documented using conventional ground survey techniques.
Limits of data collected will extend to the approximate right of way (back of walk) but not beyond fences.
Features to be captured include, but are not limited to sidewalks, thresholds, curb and gutter, driveways, curb ramps, fences, private utilities, storm and sewer facilities, trees, street lighting, signing, striping, markings, grade breaks, top and toe of dirt areas and trees over 6” diameter at breast height. Structural elements will include columns, abutments, soffits, and any exposed footings. Storm and sewer will be dipped to determine invert elevations and pipe diameters. The topographic survey of the hardscape features is limited to eight (8) days of fieldwork.
As part of the topographic survey, creek cross sections will be taken at six (6) locations: at the bridge faces, as well as 100' and 200' up and down stream of the bridge. It is expected that these cross sections will be onerous to collect due to the thick vegetation and thus are limited to six cross sections and five (5) days of field work. If additional creek cross sections are required, the additional work will be negotiated in a separate fee.
Since base mapping will be included as base layers on plan production, no sheets are included as deliverable or are being prepared with this effort. Based upon information gathered, Mark Thomas will compile an electronic base map. This will include a Digital Terrain Model, right of way and property lines. Mark Thomas will run break lines as appropriate; include elevation spot shots and other relevant features from Topographic Survey. The current City Ortho-rectified images will be included for context, but Mark Thomas excludes the adjustment of the current images or acquisition of new images. The electronic base map will conform to the following:
• All text style, orientation and size shall be as directed. • Include control points.
• Include all topographic survey points used to create the planimetrics and surface model. • Place non-topographic information on separate layers. • Delineate planimetric features
Task 2.3 Boundary Survey
Mark Thomas will research and obtain record mapping from the County and City as necessary to determine the parcel lines being impacted by the project.
Mark Thomas will perform a field survey to locate necessary monumentation to establish the Right-of-way lines of 23rd Street, San Pablo Ave, Road 20, and Brookside Dr as necessary to facilitate design of bridge improvements. The boundary survey work will be based upon Parcel maps (PM), Records of Survey (RS) & Tract maps (TM) found in public record. It is our understanding that no other monument ties to other maps will be necessary to complete this project other than those available in accessible public records. Since right of way lines to be surveyed along this corridor are not shown on a previously recorded map, the requirement to file a record of survey will be triggered. Should a material discrepancy be found or evidence of a dispute with adjoiners be discovered, Mark Thomas will stop work under the current scope and discuss options with the project team to move forward. Work will continue when agreement has been reached on path forward and additional budget for a Pre-construction record of survey has been secured.
Once the locations of the property lines are established based on the field evidence collected, Mark Thomas will plot this boundary in a CAD file. Mark Thomas assumes a current title report for three (3) parcels adjacent to the bridge work will be provided to show the locations of easements. Only easements shown in the provided title reports will be shown. It is assumed that boundary evidence necessary to define the boundary will be readily available.
TASK 2 DELIVERABLES:
Project Base Mapping (AutoCAD Civil 3D 2018)
TASK 3.0 ENGINEERING STUDIES
Task 3.1 Utility Coordination
Monument will provide utility coordination for the project. Due to the federal funding associated with the project, utility coordination services will be conducted in general conformance with Caltrans Local Assistance and Utility Relocation Manuals.
Utility “A” Letters – Monument will send letters to utility companies with facilities in the project area project, requesting copies of their existing facility maps. These maps will become the basis of the project utility mapping.
Conflict Mapping – Using the 65% plan package, Mark Thomas will prepare conflict mapping (“B” plans) and Monument will prepare “B” Letters for City review. Two copies of the conflict mapping will be sent to each utility showing their facilities and anticipated conflicts. Monument will draft signature-ready utility notification letters to utility companies for City signatures. Utility Notification letters will identify limits of relocation and proportionate cost sharing.
Relocation Coordination – Monument will follow the Caltrans process for utility relocations, which include Record of Investigation (ROI), Claim Letters, Utility Agreements (UA), and Notice to Owners (NTO) prior to completing the Utility Certification.
Monument will work with the City to finalize all utility agreements and certifications to satisfy City requirements.
Final utility agreements will be included in the Right of Way Certification package.
When the relocation plans are received, Mark Thomas will check the relocation design against the latest project plans for conflicts. Monument will then send a copy of the Final Plans (“C” Plans) along with a NTO (Caltrans Exhibit 14-D in the Local Assistance Procedures Manual) directing the utility company to initiate relocation construction. It is assumed that these designs will be provided by the private utility company.
Depending on the proximity to potential physical conflicts, potholing of existing underground facilities may be necessary to positively locate the utility. If this is determined to be the case, Monument will submit an amendment request to cover this additional work.
Task 3.2 Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Report Task 3.2.1 Geotechnical Management
CAInc will provide project management and allowance for two project team meetings (by phone) to address geotechnical design elements of the project.
Task 3.2.2 Preliminary Foundation Report
CAInc will prepare a Preliminary Foundation Report (PFR) as part of the Type Selection process. The PFR will be based on existing subsurface data, Bridge Inspection Reports, published geologic mapping and seismicity data, aerial photographs, preliminary project data, and site review. No subsurface exploration will be completed for this task.
The PFR will summarize anticipated earth materials and conditions based on reference data and site exposures; provide preliminary seismic input parameters (including ARS Curve consistent with current Caltrans practice); discuss preliminary foundation types (e.g., spread footings, driven piling, and CIDH piling); provide preliminary recommendations for bridge foundations; discuss liquefaction and seismic settlement potential; and discuss roadway approaches and pavement options.
Task 3.2.3 Foundation Investigation
Following type-selection, CAInc will perform a site-specific foundation study to evaluate the subsurface conditions for design of new structure foundations.
Fieldwork Exploration - CAInc will visit the site, mark boring locations, and notify Underground Service Alert (USA) for underground utility clearance. CAInc will obtain the required City encroachment permit and County environmental health permits for the site. It is assumed that all fees will be waived for the permits.
To assess the subsurface conditions, CAInc will complete three deep, sampled test borings for the bridge structure and two shallow roadway borings for the approaches. The bridge borings will be drilled to approximately 80 to 120 ft deep and the roadway borings 5 to 10 ft deep. A CAInc engineer/geologist will log the borings and direct the sampling in accordance with the Caltrans Logging Manual (2010 Edition).
Groundwater elevations will be noted, where encountered. We will collect bulk and relatively “undisturbed” soil samples from the borings for laboratory testing. Drive samples will be taken at approximate 2.5 ft to 10 ft intervals using a 2.0”O.D. “Standard Penetration” (ASTM D1586) or 3.0” O.D. “Modified California” sampler (ASTMD3550), driven with a standard 350 ft-lb automatic or manually operated hammer per ASTMD1586.
Shelby tube thin-walled sampling may also be utilized within the borings. The borings will be cement-grout backfilled in accordance with permit requirements.
CAInc anticipates traffic control will be needed for temporary single lane closures with flaggers. Due to the intersection configuration, multiple flaggers are expected to be required.
Laboratory Testing - CAInc will perform the following laboratory tests, as appropriate, on selected soil samples retrieved from the test borings:
• Moisture Content/Unit Weight (ASTM D2216/D2937)
• Gradation Analysis (ASTM D6913)
• #200 Wash (ASTM D1140)
• Plasticity Index (ASTM D4318)
• Unconfined compressive and/or direct shear strength tests (ASTM D2166, D3080) • Corrosivity tests - pH, sulfates/chlorides, and minimum resistivity (CTM 643, 417/422, 643) • R-Value (CTM 301)
Engineering Analysis - Engineering evaluation and analysis to develop geotechnical recommendations for this project is expected to include bearing capacity; lateral capacity; liquefaction; site seismicity consistent with current Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria; lateral earth pressure and coefficient of friction to resist sliding; and soil corrosivity.
Draft and Final Foundation Report - CAInc will prepare Draft and Final Foundation Report for final bridge design. The report will provide a site/project description, summarize site geology, groundwater, subsurface exploration and field and laboratory soil tests, discuss scour considerations (based on Hydraulics Report prepared by WRECO), bridge approaches, construction considerations, and include a “Log of Test Borings” (LOTB) drawing. The Final Foundation Report will be signed and stamped by CAInc after addressing written comments.
Task 3.2.4 Plan Review
CAInc will perform a geotechnical review of the draft plans (65%) and final (100%) plans/specifications and provide comments to the design team.
Task 3.3 Hydrology and Hydraulics Analysis
Task 3.3.1 Hydraulics Management
WRECO will attend the project kickoff meeting and one project team meeting. WRECO will also participate in up to four conference calls with the City and project team. On a monthly basis, WRECO will provide the project team with invoices and progress reports for the project.
Task 3.3.2 Data Review
WRECO will review available data, including previous studies, provided by the City and project team. Key information to review will be the available hydrologic and hydraulic data for San Pablo Creek, Caltrans Bridge Inspection Reports, City maintenance records, and as-built drawings.
Task 3.3.3 Field Reconnaissance
WRECO will conduct a field reconnaissance to assess the existing conditions in the project vicinity.
Task 3.3.4 Hydrologic Analysis
WRECO was responsible for the current edition of the Flood Insurance Rate Map for the City and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), including San Pablo Creek. WRECO will confirm with FEMA on their published design peak discharges and make sure that data is still current. As an independent check, WRECO will perform a hydrologic analysis following the United States Geological Survey (USGS) regional regression method.
Task 3.3.5 Hydraulic Analysis
WRECO has the effective hydraulic model for FEMA, but WRECO will verify with FEMA whether WRECO’s model is still the official effective model. WRECO will perform a hydraulic analysis to determine the design flow characteristics for the Project site through the study area for the base flood (Q100) and design flood (Q50).
The hydraulic model of choice will be the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Hydrologic Engineering Center's River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) model. The hydraulics at the Project site can be simulated with a one-dimensional (1-D) HEC-RAS model. WRECO will coordinate with the Project Team to obtain the surveyed channel cross sections to be integrated into the base hydraulic model. If the need for a better understanding of the flow and velocity patterns by or near the bridge arises, then as an optional task, WRECO can upgrade the modeling efforts to simulate the hydraulics at the proposed bridge site with:
1. A 1-D channel and two-dimensional (2-D) floodplains (HEC-RAS or InfoWorks ICM), or
2. A full 2-D model (HEC-RAS, FLO-2D, or SRH-2D).
Task 3.3.6 Scour Analysis
WRECO will perform a bridge scour analysis to determine the scour potential per the methodology specified in the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) HEC-18 manual. WRECO will make recommendations on the need for scour countermeasures for the proposed bridge per the FHWA’s HEC-23 and Caltrans’ Highway Design Manual (HDM).
Task 3.3.7 Dry Weather Flow and Bypass
WRECO will estimate the magnitude of the dry weather flow volume anticipated during the construction season. WRECO will provide a recommendation for a temporary culvert size to support the Project Team with their development of the conceptual temporary creek diversion design.
Task 3.3.8 Bridge Design Hydraulic Study
WRECO will prepare a Bridge Design Hydraulic Study Report, which will summarize the results from the hydraulic and bridge scour analyses and recommendations for bridge scour countermeasures. The report will also include all the detailed hydraulic model outputs.
Task 3. 4 Intersection Alternatives
Mark Thomas, with input from the City and Kimley-Horn, will develop up to three (3) intersection configuration alternatives. Each alternative will include solutions for improving bicycle, pedestrian, transit, and auto circulation. The alternatives will be analyzed for traffic as well bicycle and pedestrian safety through Task 3.5.
Kimley-Horn will create a graphic to depict bicycle and pedestrian circulation through the alternative.
Task 3.5 Traffic Alternatives Analysis
Task 3.5.1 Data Collection and COVID Adjustment
Kimley-Horn will collect new traffic data at the following locations:
• San Pablo Ave/23rd/Rd 20
• San Pablo Ave/Rd 20 (west leg)
• San Pablo Ave/Purisma
• San Pablo Ave/Lovegrove
• 23rd St/Brookside Rd
• 23rd St/Standard Ave
Data collected will include auto, bicycle, and pedestrian turning movement counts on three consecutive weekdays during the AM and PM peak hours (3 hours per peak period).
Kimley-Horn will use traffic data collected at a subset of these intersections from pre-COVID conditions to calibrate/adjust 2021 counts to reflect baseline pre-COVID conditions.
Kimley-Horn will also collect:
• Current collision information (assumed to be from Crossroads or SWITRS) for a recent 5-year period • Current signal timing information
• Current transit stop-level ridership and transit speed/delay (assumed to be provided at no cost by AC Transit)
Task 3.5.2 Develop VISSIM Baseline Model
Kimley-Horn will develop and calibrate a VISSIM model that encompasses the intersections identified in Task
3.5.1. The model will be calibrated per Caltrans and FHWA methodologies. The VISSIM model will include vehicle turning movements, buses, bicycles, and pedestrians. It will not include parking maneuvers and local driveways.
The VISSIM model will be developed for the base year for AM and PM conditions. One hour will be modeled for each peak period. The model is not assumed to include any 3D roadside features, such as buildings or landmarks.
Task 3.5.3 Develop VISSIM Future Year No- Build/Build Models The City, with input from Mark Thomas, will identify a future analysis year. Kimley-Horn will obtain base year and forecast year the off-the-shelf traffic volumes from the CCTA Travel Demand Model. These volumes will be used to identify growth rates to extrapolate current counts to the identified future analysis year. An estimated average growth rate will be utilized for bicycle and pedestrian volumes.
Kimley-Horn will develop traffic volumes associated with each of the up to three build alternatives for existing and future year conditions. This is assumed to account for any traffic redistribution or diversion associated with the build alternatives. No new travel demand modeling will be performed.
Kimley-Horn will develop a VISSIM model reflecting future no-build conditions. Kimley-Horn will then model up to three Build alternatives for each of the existing and future year conditions. All models are assumed to have the same study area as the baseline model.
The VISSIM models will be utilized to calculate intersection delay, queuing, travel time on 23rd Street and San Pablo Avenue, and network performance metrics. The VISSIM models will also be utilized to create a short simulation video (less than three minutes) for each of the no-build and build alternatives for one time period for one analysis year (up to 4 total videos). Up to two rounds of revisions will be performed for the models/videos.
Task 3.5.4 Bike/Ped Evaluation and Safety Analysis
Kimley-Horn will prepare a bicycle and pedestrian evaluation and safety analysis. This will qualitatively assess the relative safety performance and circulation benefits/challenges of each of the build alternatives. This will consist of annotated exhibits with callouts.
Task 3.5.5 Draft Alternatives Analysis Summary
Kimley-Horn, with input from Mark Thomas, will draft an alternatives analysis summary. It is assumed that up to two rounds of City review and revision will be addressed.
Task 3.5.6 Revised Alternatives Analysis Summary
Kimley-Horn will address consolidated comments on the Alternatives Analysis and submit a revised Alternatives Analysis Summary.
Task 3.6 Design Criteria and Constraints Memorandum
Mark Thomas will develop a Design Criteria and Constraints Memorandum documenting the project constraints, design standards used, design parameters (roadway classification, ADT, design speed, etc.), and project specific design criteria. The preliminary geometrics will be submitted in parallel with the memorandum.
Task 3.7 Preliminary Roadway Geometrics
Upon selection of the preferred intersection alternative, Mark Thomas will prepare preliminary roadway geometrics (35%), including horizontal alignment, vertical profile, and typical roadway sections, for review by the City. The plans will be prepared in conformance with City and AASHTO standards. A preliminary cost estimate will be prepared for the 35% design plans.
Concurrence from Caltrans Local Assistance will be required to document the roadway cross-section and approach limits for approved HBP funding. Mark Thomas will prepare a Long Approach Justification Memo to Caltrans documenting the need for roadway approaches in excess of 200 feet. City approval of the preliminary roadway plans will set the limits for environmental study areas.
Task 3.8 Structure Type Selection Report
Mark Thomas will prepare a Structure Type Selection Report to assist the City in determining the best suited structure type for the project. Prior to preparing the Structure Type Selection Report, Mark Thomas will discuss with the City the alternatives to be considered in the report. Two different alternatives are assumed to be presented in the report, which will include a General Plan, Foundation Plan, and General Plan Estimate for each
structure type. The report will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the alternatives and will address geotechnical, hydraulic, aesthetic, constructability, and environmental issues, as well as costs. After approval from the City, the Structure Type Selection Report will be submitted to Caltrans Structure Local Assistance for funding approval.
Task 3. 9 Urban Conceptual Design
The urban design component of this project is defined as those areas within the project limits than can be identified as:
a) Pedestrian areas
b) Architectural aesthetic enhancements for bridge and retaining walls c) Architectural style for site lighting
d) Gateway monuments
e) Planting areas
f) Wayfinding
g) Placemaking
To develop these high-profile community driven elements, Mark Thomas team of in-house landscape architects and urban designers will implement an iterative conceptual design process in conjunction with public engagement, roadway geometry development, and bridge type selection. We will begin the process with background and context investigation. For this, Mark Thomas will collect past studies, planning documents, specific plans, utility information, traffic studies, and other plans for nearby projects that may influence the design for this project. Then a base map will be developed for use in site analysis and conceptual design. A walking audit, led by Mark Thomas’s landscape architecture and urban design division will be conducted with City staff and project stakeholders (stakeholders list will be developed with input from City staff). After the walking audit, we will incorporate observations and input from participants into three plan studies:
a) Existing Conditions Plan – documenting land use, parking lot driveway aprons, current overlooks, signage and monumentation, existing parking locations, existing urban forest b) Existing Circulation Plan – documenting vehicular traffic, bicycle facilities, school paths of travel, sidewalks, crosswalks, bus routes, stops, and circulation c) Opportunities and Constraints Plan – identifying key opportunity sites, congestion areas, destinations, need for amenities, potential social spaces, sight lines, safety issues, etc.) These plan studies will be presented at the first public workshop intended to gather input from residents about their needs, priorities, and vision for the project.
After completing this info gathering phase and receiving feedback from City Staff, Mark Thomas’s landscape architecture and urban design division will develop the conceptual design for the project. For this task, we will prepare a draft, preferred, and final conceptual design package. Prior to presenting the draft conceptual design package to the stakeholders and public, City staff will be provided an “administrative draft” to review and comment on. Once we have incorporated staff’s comments and refined the draft package, it will be ready for public consideration. For this draft package, we will develop two alternatives for consideration. Based on feedback received from the public, stakeholders, and the City, we will refine the package and prepare a single preferred alternative. This preferred alternative package will be taken to the public for feedback after which we will prepare a final conceptual design package to be presented before City Council.
Task 3. 10 35% Traffic Signal Design
Kimley-Horn will prepare 35% design plans for the modification of one (1) traffic signal. At the 35% design phase, the design will only show above ground elements (poles, pull boxes, and cabinets) and conduit routing, however it will not include conduit content. City and Caltrans standards will be utilized as guidelines for the traffic signal installation. A single Traffic Signal Design Plan sheet will be developed as part of this task. It is assumed that since this is an existing traffic signal location, a service disconnect/reconnect is all that will be needed and no additional coordination with PG&E will be necessary.
TASK 3 DELIVERABLES:
Utility “A” Letters
Conflict Mapping
ROIs, NTOs, and UAs, as applicable
Preliminary Foundation Report
Draft and Final Foundation Report
Draft and Final Bridge Design Hydraulic Study Report
Alternatives Analysis Summary Report
Design Criteria and Constraints Memorandum
Preliminary Roadway Geometrics
Structure Type Selection Report
Site Analysis Plans
• Existing Conditions Plan
• Existing Circulation Plan
• Opportunities and Constraints Plan
Administrative Draft Conceptual Alternatives Package (two alternatives) • One overall plan of each alternative (color rendered) • Up to three illustrative cross sections of each alternative (color rendered) • Inspirational images and materials exhibit
Draft Conceptual Alternatives Package (two alternatives) • Refinement of admin draft package
• Two 3D renderings of each alternative
• Alternative gateway monument elevations (color rendered; three total elevations) o Two roadway arch alternatives
o One at grade monument
Preferred Conceptual Alternative Package
• One overall plan
• Three illustrative cross sections
• Inspirational images
• One gateway monument elevation
• Two 3D renderings
• Cost estimate
Final Conceptual Design Package
• Refinement of exhibits and documents listed in Preferred Conceptual Alternative Package 35% Signal Plans
TASK 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES AND DOCUMENTATION
Task 4.1 Public Outreach Plan
Task 4. 1.1 Public Engagement Plan
Kimley-Horn will develop a macro-level Public Engagement Plan that will outline who we will engage in this project, activities and promotion, and how we will connect with the public and stakeholders. The Public Engagement Plan will also include a schedule that documents when the engagement will take place and how the timing aligns with other aspects of the project. It will also include a process to identify key stakeholders and ensure these organizations and individuals are represented in the project. At the conclusion of the public outreach program, the Plan will be reformatted to be a record of all activities, materials and a summary of inputs received.
Task 4. 1.2 Develop Social Pinpoint Portal
Kimley-Horn will use Social Pinpoint as an engagement tool with the community. Social Pinpoint is a tool used on city and region-wide project across the country that offers a one-license, complete engagement toolkit for the public. For the project’s Social Pinpoint page, Kimley-Horn will provide instant translation, a wiki-map or idea walls, forums, and a visual preference survey. In addition, the fact sheet and FAQ will also be available here, as will the access link for the virtual meeting.
Task 4. 1.3 Meeting/Pop -Ups
Kimley-Horn will implement three meeting options, allowing community members to choose to participate in a way they feel comfortable:
• Zoom virtual public meeting, with a professional facilitator. It is assumed this would run for approximately ninety minutes and include a technical presentation and Q&A. Simultaneous Spanish and Tagalog audio tracks will be provided. Kimley-Horn will provide the platform. • In-person public meeting, with a professional facilitator. Spanish and Tagalog speaking staff will be available to support Q&A and presentation materials will be available in these languages. If health restrictions disallow this, we will provide another virtual meeting. It is assumed that the City will provide the venue.
• Pop-up event at a local community event, such as a farmers’ market or adjacent / outside an educational facility. This will include a booth with informational materials and iPad and printed surveys.
Spanish and Tagalog speakers will staff this booth. Kimley-Horn will identify the location (with the consent of the City) and book the venue.
The specific approach for this task will be defined in the Public Engagement Plan and will be commensurate with the budget identified.
In addition to the 3 community meetings, Kimley-Horn will attend up to four (4) stakeholder meetings and four (4) City coordination meetings.
Task 4. 1.4 Design Collaboration Workshop
In addition to the public meetings, Kimley-Horn will facilitate a virtual aesthetics workshop with Contra Costa College Art Department students. We see this as an opportunity to promote the project and engage younger people in the process, while also embedding a community vision into the final design.
Kimley-Horn will collaborate with Contra Costa College to do this in-person, with a back-up virtual option.
Workshop activities will be developed for students to respond to, and feedback will be managed in a structured process, such as through visual preference ranking activities.
Task 4.2 Environmental Management
ESA will provide project administration activities for the environmental elements of the project, including meeting attendance and environmental elements of the project schedule, monthly status reports and updates, and budget management. ESA will participate in one project kick-off meeting, up to 12 virtual PDT meetings (up
1.5-hour meeting) and up to two virtual focus meetings (1-hour meetings).
To support public outreach, ESA will also attend up to two public outreach meetings during implementation of the Public Outreach Plan, and provide support for environmental elements of those meetings, such as providing a summary of environmental resources in the project area and the expected level of environmental review.
Task 4.3 Environmental Reviews and Technical Studies
Task 4.3.1 Preliminary Environment Study Form (PES) and Field Review To support initiation of the NEPA review process with Caltrans District 4 Local Assistance, ESA will prepare a PES form for the project in accordance with the requirements of the Local Assistance Procedures Manual (LAPM), Chapter 6. Once the City have approved and signed the Draft PES, ESA will submit the Draft PES to the Caltrans District 4 Local Assistance team. We assume that a field review with the City, Caltrans, and Mark Thomas will be required, which ESA will schedule, and ESA’s Project Manager will attend. Following the Field Review Meeting, ESA will prepare any needed revisions to the Draft PES and submit it to Caltrans for final approval and signature. Following Caltrans signature of the PES form, ESA will initiate environmental technical studies identified in the PES.
Task 4.3.2 Cultural Resources Report
ESA will complete cultural resource studies to identify and assess potential effects to archaeological and historic properties in the project’s Area of Potential Effect (APE). All documents will be prepared in conformance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (as amended), Appendix K of CEQA Guidelines, Volume 2 of the Caltrans Standard Environmental Reference (SER), and the First Amended Section 106 Programmatic Agreement among Federal Highways Administration, the State Office of Historic Preservation, the Advisory Council of Historic Preservation, and Caltrans effective January 1, 2014 (106 PA).
ESA will prepare a Historic Property Survey Report (HPSR) and an Archaeological Survey Report (ASR). The HPSR will identify whether historic properties, including archaeological resources, are in the APE and whether the project would cause an adverse effect to such properties, if they exist.
The ASR will accompany the HPSR and will include the results of a records search at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, a geoarchaeological analysis to determine the potential for buried archaeological resources, and an analysis of historic maps and aerial imagery. The ASR will also include an analysis of existing conditions, such as utilities, that may have impacted buried archaeological resources.
ESA will contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to request a search of the sacred lands file and request a list of Native American contacts for the region. On behalf of Caltrans, ESA will send a letter to each Native American contact providing a description and map of the proposed project and a request to consult on the project according to the provisions of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. All communication will be documented and provided as an appendix to the ASR.
On behalf of the City, ESA will send a letter to each Native American contact who has requested to be notified pursuant to AB 52 to provide a description and map of the proposed project and a notification of their opportunity to consult on the project according to the provisions of AB 52. All communication will be documented and provided as part of the CEQA document prepared for the project.
ESA understands that the San Pablo Bridge was constructed in 1923 and would therefore meet the minimum age threshold for consideration as a significant historic resource, however it is listed on the current Caltrans Local Historic Bridge Inventory as a Category 5 bridge (meaning not eligible for listing). ESA assumes that Caltrans will not require an analysis of historic architectural resources and a Historic Resources Evaluation Report will not be required. It is assumed that no buildings or structure will be impacted by the project. ESA assumes that an Extended Phase I (XPI) subsurface survey will not be required.
Task 4.3.3 Initial Site Assessment
CAInc will prepare a limited Initial Site Assessment (ISA) to identify existing hazardous materials conditions that might affect the project. CAInc will also collect samples to assess if lead in soil (aerially deposited lead, or ADL) and traffic striping paint is present at concentrations above the hazardous waste threshold.
CAInc will review selected federal, state, and regional environmental agency databases for information pertaining to sites and facilities within a minimum search distance of not less than one-eighth mile from the alignment (660 feet). This data will be obtained from a vendor specializing in retrieval of environmental information. The records review will include historical aerial photographs and topographic maps. Chain-of-title research and/or review is not included.
CAInc will perform a reconnaissance to identify visual evidence of current or past uses of adjacent properties, including above or below ground fuel storage tanks, vehicle maintenance areas, past oil and gas operations, dump sites, discolored soils or stressed vegetation, discharges, odors, transformers, wells, standing water, hazardous substance containers or unidentified containers, etc. Reconnaissance will be performed primarily by drive-by observation (windshield survey), supplemented by local walking traverse at locations where drive-by observation indicates possible evidence of hazardous materials that could affect the project.
Where warranted by the research and observation, CAInc will make reasonable attempts to conduct interviews with persons identified as knowledgeable about potentially contaminated facilities adjacent to the project site.
Interviews may be conducted in person, by telephone, or in writing. Individuals interviewed might include owners, occupants, local government officials, or others.
To determine if ADL has adversely impacted soil at the project sites, CAInc will collect soil samples for lead analysis from up to four locations. At each sample location, a hand auger will be used to advance a shallow boring (about 30 inches below ground surface [bgs]). Discrete soil samples will be collected from 0 to 6 inches, 12 to 18 inches, and 24 to 30 inches bgs. Cuttings and adjacent native material will be used to backfill the boring to ground surface. In addition, one sample of the white traffic striping paint will be collected (yellow paint is not present on the bridge or approaches).
Up to twelve soil samples and one striping paint sample will be submitted to an accredited analytical laboratory under chain-of-custody. Proposed analytical testing will include:
• Total lead by EPA Method 6010, using metals extraction by EPA method 3050A. • Samples with reported total lead concentrations exceeding 50 mg/kg lead will be re-analyzed for soluble lead using both the CA Waste Extraction Test (WET) and Toxicity Leach Characteristic Potential (TCLP) methods.
• pH analysis will be performed on one soil sample.
CAInc will contract with a certified asbestos and lead inspector to evaluate the bridge for the presence of asbestos, asbestos-containing materials, or lead-based paint.
Crawford will prepare a Draft and Final Initial Site Assessment Report that includes the records review, site reconnaissance information, interview information, results of hazardous materials sampling and testing program, copies of laboratory reports, and conclusions of potential impacts of any recognized environmental conditions concerning the project site and, where warranted, recommendations for further study.
Task 4.3.4 Water Quality Assessment Report
In order to provide the existing physical and regulatory environment information for water quality, WRECO will:
1) identify and describe the current and upcoming laws that relate to water quality; 2) describe the beneficial uses as detailed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Basin Plan for all potentially-affected waters; 3) discuss water quality objectives for all potentially-affected waters; 4) list potential sources of pollutants, existing water quality of the receiving water bodies, i.e. Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) or 303(d)impaired water bodies listed; and 5) describe the watershed, existing drainage, and hydrologic conditions.
WRECO will evaluate the water quality impacts for each proposed alternative and recommend possible best management practices or project features to address water quality issues. WRECO will document our findings in a technical report.
Task 4.3.5 Construction Noise Technical Memo
Residential uses are located near the project area; construction of the project will result in construction related noise that may affect sensitive noise receptors adjacent to the project. To evaluate potential construction noise impacts from the project, ESA will prepare a Construction Noise Technical Memo to identify noise sensitive land uses in and near the project area and evaluate potential noise effects that would result from construction of the project. The Construction Noise Technical Memo will:
• Describe the existing noise environment within the Project area by collecting one long-term (24-hour) and up to four short-term noise measurements. These measurements will focus on sensitive receptors adjacent to the bridge work areas.
• Summarize state and local noise policies, regulations, and standards, as they would pertain to the proposed project; discuss applicable City noise ordinances and existing General Plan policies; and identify specific restrictions or limitations on noise generating activities related to construction and vehicular movement (e.g., truck routes and unloading) that could occur due to the proposed. • Discuss the noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptors based on the long-term and short-term noise measurements.
• Assess potential construction noise impacts and any standard construction noise mitigation measures that will be applicable to the proposed project.
• ESA will estimate the change in noise levels due to baseline plus Project and cumulative traffic along key roadway segments most affected by truck traffic bringing materials to and from the project work areas to determine if there could be significant project effects on noise levels along streets used to access the project site where existing noise-sensitive land uses exist. • Identify practical, feasible mitigation measures including the use of performance standards to address identified potentially significant impacts. Evaluate whether mitigation measures would reduce the impacts below a level of significance.
Task 4.3.6 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report (ARDR)
An aquatic resources delineation will be performed to quantify the existing jurisdictional waters within the project site. The USACE jurisdiction will be determined in the field using the presence of an ordinary high-water mark and the methodology in the USACE 1987 wetland delineation manual and any applicable regional supplements (e.g., Arid West supplement). RWQCB jurisdiction will be determined per recently adopted State Procedures for Discharges of Dredged/Fill Material to Waters of the State. CDFW jurisdiction will be determined by the presence of hydrophytic vegetation, the location of a definable bed and bank, and the presence of associated riparian, wildlife, or fish resources. The boundaries of these jurisdictions will be mapped on figures of an appropriate scale. Civil surveys of any delineated areas are not included in this scope of work.
A stand-alone Aquatic Resources Delineation Report (ARDR) will be prepared describing jurisdictional waters and wetlands in the project area. The report will include methods, results, and a graphic depicting the approximate size and location of any jurisdictional areas. The report will be consistent with the requirements of USACE, RWQCB and CDFW. Copies of field data sheets will be included. The report will describe delineation methodology and jurisdictional areas of the site. The report will provide the necessary documentation for developing and processing subsequent Section 401 permit and/or Waste Discharge permit, 404 permit, and Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement, as applicable.
Task 4.3.7 Natural Environment Study (NES)
The Biological Survey Area (BSA) will include a 250-foot buffer around the maximum footprint that includes both alternatives proposed. ESA will prepare a NES that addresses the presence and potential impacts to sensitive biological resources. The review will include waters of the state and U.S., sensitive natural communities, and a site-specific evaluation of special-status species that were identified based on preliminary database searches (California Natural Diversity Database, USFWS, NOAA Fisheries, and California Native Plant Society’s databases) and GIS analysis. Aquatic features within the BSA will be reviewed for their capacity to support freshwater emergent vegetation or riparian vegetation, local trees will be evaluated to determine if bats may roost in foliage or crevices, and a qualified botanist will make a determination on the potential presence of
special-status plants in the BSA. A qualified botanist will conduct a survey of all locally regulated trees and those potentially subject to CDFW regulation (per California Fish and Game Code 1602, riparian habitat) within the BSA to accurately assess impacts. The tree assessment will evaluate trees per local protection requirements and riparian trees 4-inches in diameter or greater. An International Society of Arboriculture arborist tree survey is not expected to be required by Caltrans and is not included in this scope of work. To document the findings of habitat assessment effort; the estimated impacts on habitats, waters, wildlife, plants, and trees; and provide recommendations for avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures that should be applied to the project, ESA will complete a NES report. The NES will be prepared according to the current NES template (posted 6-25- 2020) as acceptable by Caltrans and as outlined in current “Guidance for Consultants” in Procedures for Completing the Natural Environmental Study and Related Biological Reports.
Task 4.3.8 Biological Assessment
If the results of the NES identify that federally listed species (e.g., California red-legged frog, central California coast steelhead Distinct Population Segment) may be affected by the project, ESA will prepare a Biological Assessment (BA) to assess the effects of the project and to support Caltrans as the NEPA Lead Agency to complete Section 7 Consultation with the appropriate federal resource agencies. Conservation measures utilized in the BA will incorporate minimization measures from applicable, species-specific programmatic biological opinions (e.g., Programmatic Biological Opinion for Projects Funded or Approved under the Federal Highway Administration's Federal Aid Program for California red-legged frog). The BA will be prepared as acceptable by Caltrans and in accordance with all the requirements shown at the Caltrans SER including the Caltrans BA template (posted 6-25-2020) and associated Biological Assessment Checklists for USFWS and NMFS (i.e., NOAA Fisheries) (posted 10-28-2020).
Task 4.3.9 Minor Visual Impact Assessment
To address changes to the visual environment of the project area, ESA will prepare a Minor Visual Impact Assessment (Minor VIA) to briefly describe project features, project effects and recommended avoidance and minimization measures. The Minor VIA will follow the requirements of the Caltrans Visual Impact Assessment (for Minor Level VIA) and will include photographs of visual resources in the project area, an evaluation of the change in visual resources that would result from the project, and recommend avoidance and minimization measures, if needed.
Task 4.3.10 Section 4(f) de Minimis Memorandum
ESA will evaluate the project’s “use” of publicly owned, publicly accessible recreational resources in the project area, specifically Kennedy Plaza located west of the San Pablo Avenue bridge, to comply with the requirements of Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966. It is assumed that the project would result in a de Minimis use of the Kennedy Plaza park. ESA will notify the park’s Owner With Jurisdiction (OWJ) of the proposed use of the park, and coordinate with the OWJ to obtain their written concurrence with the de Minimis finding. ESA will document the applicability of the de Minimis finding in a memorandum that examines all the elements required under the Caltrans NEPA Assignment Tracking Worksheet for Section 4(f) de Minimis finding, including written concurrence from the OWJ, and provide the memo to Caltrans for their use in making the Section 4(f) de Minimis finding for the project.
Task 4.3.10 Community Impact Assessment Memorandum
ESA will prepare a Community Impact Assessment Memorandum (CIA Memo) to evaluate and document the project’s potential effects to the community as they relate to land use and consistency with appliable plans and programs, growth inducement, community character and cohesion, right-of-way acquisitions and relocations, environmental justice, utilities and emergency services, and economic impacts.
Task 4.3.11 Floodplain Evaluation Report
Based on WRECO’s preliminary qualitative assessments, the Project may result in a floodplain encroachment.
Therefore, WRECO will prepare a Floodplain Evaluation Report, which will include the Technical Information for the Location Hydraulic Study and Floodplain Evaluation Report Summary forms, to document the investigation and determine the specific impacts to the floodplain and necessary avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures.
4.4 NEPA & CEQA Environmental Documentation
Task 4.4.1 CEQA Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Administrative Draft Environmental Document - Following the technical analyses described above in Task 5.2, ESA will prepare an Administrative Draft Environmental Document incorporating an environmental checklist, technical analyses, a discussion of critical environmental issues identified, an analysis of the cumulative effects of the project, mitigation measures, and a list of potential permits required. It is expected that preparation of an Initial Study to support a Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) would be the appropriate document to meet the requirements of CEQA. The Administrative Draft Environmental Document will be completed in the City's preferred formant and provided to the City for review and comment.
Draft Environmental Document - Following review by the City, the Administrative Draft Environmental Document will be revised to incorporate City review comments. The Draft Environmental Document (IS/MND) will then be submitted to City for approval to circulate. ESA will also prepare an administrative draft Notice of Completion (NOC) and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (NOI). When approval to circulate has been obtained from City, ESA will circulate the Draft IS/MND in accordance with the requirements of the City of San Pablo policies. An electronic copy of the Draft IS/MND will be submitted to the State Clearinghouse, together with the NOI and NOC, for distribution to agencies via the State Clearinghouse.
Final Environmental Document - Following circulation of the Draft Environmental Document (IS/MND), ESA will address comments received from agencies and the public during the circulation period and develop a log of the comments and responses to them. ESA will revise the Environmental Document as needed to address comments received as well as to make any agency-initiated changes that may be recommended, and prepare the Final Environmental Document, including a CEQA Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for approval by the City.
ESA will concurrently prepare the Notice of Determination (NOD) for the project and provide it to the City for review. Following adoption of the IS/MND and MMRP by the City, ESA will file the NOD with the State Clearinghouse, along with proof of payment of an environmental filing fee provided by the City. The filing of the NOD at the State Clearinghouse will mark the conclusion of the CEQA process.
Task 4.4.2 NEPA Categorical Exclusion
Following Caltrans approval of the technical studies completed for the project as described above in task 4.2, as well as conclusion of consultations under Section 7 and Section 106, ESA will coordinate with Caltrans to
support their issuance of a Categorical Exclusion (CE) under NEPA. ESA will develop an Environmental Commitment Record (ECR) for Caltrans to attach to the NEPA CE Form. The ECR shall identify all design, construction and post-regulatory mitigation requirements, the responsible party, timing, and verification.
TASK 4 DELIVERABLES:
Public Engagement Plan
Project Website & Survey
Preliminary Environment Study Form
Area of Potential Effects Map
Letters for Section 106 and AB52 Consultation
Historic Property Survey Report
Archaeological Survey Report
Initial Site Assessment
Water Quality Assessment Report
Construction Noise Assessment Memorandum
Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
Natural Environment Study
USFWS/NMFS Biological Assessment
Minor Visual Impact Assessment
Section 4(f) de Minimis Memorandum
Community Impact Assessment Memorandum
Floodplain Evaluation Report
Administrative Draft IS/MND
Draft IS/MND, Notice of Completion and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for circulation
Final IS/MND, MMRP and Notice of Determination
NEPA Environmental Commitments Record
NEPA CE Checklist
TASK 5.0 PERMITTING
Task 5. 1 Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit
Pablo Creek is expected to be subject to USACE jurisdiction as a water of the U.S. ESA will prepare a Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 Permit application to assess the effects of the project on USACE jurisdictional features and secure regulatory approval. It is anticipated that the project would be eligible for a Nationwide Permit 3 (Maintenance), which covers the removal and/or replacement of any previously authorized structures (i.e., San Pablo Bridge). Preparation of the CWA Section 404 Permit application will be completed in conjunction with Task 5.2 and 5.3 following circulation of the Draft Environmental Document. Avoidance and minimization measures utilized in the NES and conservation measures used in the BA will be incorporated into the CWA Section 404 Permit application, as applicable.
Task 5.2 Clean Water Act Section 401 Permit
San Pablo Creek is expected to be subject to RWQCB jurisdiction as a water of the State. ESA will prepare a Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 401 Permit application to assess the effects of the preferred alternative on RWQCB jurisdictional features and secure regulatory approval. Preparation of the CWA Section 401 Permit application will be completed in conjunction with Tasks 5.1 and 5.3 following circulation of the Draft Environmental Document. ESA will also prepare a Prefiling Meeting Notification to support the CWA 401 permit application. Avoidance and minimization measures utilized in the NES and conservation measures used in the BA will be incorporated into the CWA Section 401 Permit application, as applicable.
Task 5. 3 Streambed Alter ation Agreement
Implementation of the project is expected to impact areas (i.e., streambed, streambank, and riparian habitat) regulated by CDFW under California Fish and Game Code Section 1602. Therefore, ESA will prepare a Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAA) to assess the effects of the preferred alternative. Preparation of the SAA will be completed for the preferred alternative following circulation of the Draft Environmental Document.
Avoidance and minimization measures utilized in the NES and CWA Section 404 and 401 Permit applications, as well as conservation measures used in the BA will be incorporated into the SAA application.
TASK 5 DELIVERABLES:
404, 401, and 1602 Permit Applications
TASK 6.0 ENGINEERING
Task 6.1 65 % Structure Plans
Mark Thomas will prepare structural calculations and bridge plans for the selected bridge alternative. For the purposes of this scope of work, it is assumed that a three-span cast-in-place post tensioned concrete slab will be the preferred structure alternative. The structure design will be performed in accordance with AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 8th Edition with California Amendments and Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria, Version 2.0. The latest versions of the Caltrans Bridge Design Manuals will be used. In general, it is anticipated that the following structure plan sheets will be prepared:
Bridge Plans # of sheets
General Plan 1
Deck Contours 1
Foundation Plan 1
Abutment Layout 2
Abutment Details 2
Pier Layout 1
Typical Section 1
Longitudinal Section 1
Slab Reinforcement Details 1
Utility Details 2
Aesthetic Details 2
Log of Test Borings 2
Total Bridge Plan Sheets 17
Task 6.2 65% Roadway Plans
Utilizing the 35% geometric drawings, Mark Thomas will advance the roadway design to a 65% level. New pavement sections will be updated based on actual R-values from the geotechnical investigation. We assume all dry utility design will be completed by the owner and we will only reference them in our plans. In general, it is anticipated that the following roadway plan sheets will be prepared:
Roadway Plans # of sheets
Title Sheet 1
Survey Control Plan 1
Typical Sections 3
Layouts 5
Construction Details 10
Drainage and Utility Plan & Details 10
Signing and Striping Plan 7
Stage Construction / Traffic Handling 10
Temporary Creek Diversion 3
Total Roadway Plan Sheets 50
Ta
sk 6.3 65% Landscape and Urban Design Plans
Utilizing the Urban Conceptual Design drawings, Mark Thomas will advance the landscape and urban design elements to a 65% level. In general, it is anticipated that the following landscape and urban design plan sheets will be prepared (at 20scale):
Landscape and Urban Design Plans # of sheets
Site Construction Plan 6
Site Construction Details 3
Irrigation Plan 5
Irrigation Details 2
Planting Plan and Details 5
Total Landscape and Urban Design Sheets 21
Task 6. 4 65% Traffic Signal Plans
Utilizing the 35% traffic signal plans, Kimley-Horn will advance the signal design to a 65% level. Additional design detail will be developed, including conduit contents and equipment schedules. In general, it is anticipated that the following traffic signal plan sheets will be prepared:
Roadway Plans # of sheets
Title Signal Design 1
Traffic Signal Schedules 1
Traffic Signal Details 1
Total Traffic Signal Plan Sheets 3
Ta
sk 6.5 Stormwater Management Plan
Mark Thomas will prepare a Stormwater Management Plan summarizing the project impacts to water quality and recommended best management practices (BMP). Our study will address the impacts from roadway improvements, and we will utilize guidance from the City, Contra Costa Countywide Clean Water Program, and San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) MRP. Since there is no work in Caltrans’ Right-of-Way, we assume a Stormwater Data Report will not needed.
Task 6. 6 Drainage Report
Mark Thomas will review readily available data and update design calculations to assess the capacity of the proposed drainage systems. Mark Thomas will prepare the Drainage Report, which will include calculations to assess the need for any drainage improvements. The results and design recommendations will be summarized in the Drainage Report. The report is expected to include an evaluation of the existing facilities and proposed conditions, unusual and special conditions, drainage mapping, and hydraulic analyses.
Task 6.7 95 % Structure Plans
City comments from the 65% submittal will be addressed and incorporated into the 95% design. Responses to comments will be prepared and submitted.
Mark Thomas will perform an independent design check of the bridge plans in conformance with Caltrans bridge design procedures. The independent check will be completed by an engineer who was not involved in the original design of the structure. Calculations and computer runs will be performed to check the bridge layout and structural integrity. A plan set will be marked up in two colors, yellow indicating approved items and red indicating items to be discussed. Upon completion of the independent check, discrepancies between the designer and checker will be reconciled and plans updated.
Task 6.8 95 % Roadway Plans
City comments from the 65% submittal will be addressed and incorporated into the 95% design. Responses to comments will be prepared and submitted. The roadway plans will be advanced to final construction documents.
Additional information will be shown on plans including details of utility relocations, conforms, and required new right-of-way and/or TCEs.
Task 6. 9 95% Landscape and Urban Design Plans
City comments from the 65% submittal will be addressed and incorporated into the 95% design. Responses will be prepared and submitted. For this submittal materials, colors, finishes, equipment, detailed construction dimensioning will be completed.
Task 6. 10 95% Traffic Signal Plans
City comments from the 65% submittal will be addressed and incorporated into the 95% design. Responses will be prepared and submitted. For this submittal pertinent construction details will be added to the plans Task 6.11 Special Provisions
Mark Thomas will develop project special provisions using 2018 Caltrans Standard Specifications. The special provisions will be prepared using Microsoft Word. Special provisions will be submitted at the 95% and Final submittals. It is assumed that the City will provide their boilerplate contract language for inclusion into the specifications at the 95% submittal.
Task 6.12 Engineer’s Estimate
Mark Thomas will develop quantities and prepare construction cost estimates using the project geometrics and surfaces developed from survey information. Cost estimates will be calculated at the 65%, 95%, and Final submittals. Construction costs will be developed using current bid results from similar projects, Caltrans database information and from Caltrans latest Construction Cost Manual. All estimates will be done in Caltrans BEES format using Microsoft Excel.
Task 6.13 PS&E Environmental Compliance Review
In support of completion of 95% PS&E, ESA will complete an Environmental Compliance Review to ensure that all environmental commitments and regulatory permit conditions of approval are correctly included in the project design and specifications. ESA will review 95% plan sheets and confirm locations of environmentally sensitive areas and environmental work limits as required by CEQA and NEPA documents and regulatory permits. ESA will also review 95% specifications to confirm that environmental commitments are correctly included. Finally, ESA will support the City to meet its regulatory permit mitigation obligations by identifying mitigation banks that would be meet the qualifications for purchase of mitigation bank credits or payment of in- lieu fees, as applicable and appropriate pursuant to regulatory permits.
Task 6.14 Final PS&E Submittal
City comments from the 95% submittal will be addressed and incorporated into the final design. Responses to comments will be prepared and submitted. All final plan revisions will be made. Updates to the specifications and estimate will be completed. A bid ready PS&E package will be submitted.
Task 6.15 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
A SWPPP will be prepared in compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit (CGP), and in accordance with the City’s Storm Water Management Plan., Mark Thomas will prepare the SWPPP for the project, including uploading Permit Registration Documents (PRD’s) to the statewide database of construction projects (referred to as the Storm Water Multi-Application Report Tracking System or SMARTS database). The PRDs include the Notice of Intent (NOI), a risk assessment, post- construction calculations, a site map, a SWPPP, a signed certificate, and the first annual permit fee (to be paid by
the City). Temporary and permanent water quality and erosion control measures will be designed using Best Management Practices (BMP), as identified on the Water Pollution Control Plans, included in the SWPPP.
Task 6.1 6 Bridge Load Rating
Mark Thomas will perform a load rating based on the as-built condition of the bridge. The maximum shears and moments will be calculated to determine the capacity. To determine the demands, two levels of analysis will be completed, the Design Level and the State Legal Load Level. For the Design Level, the HL-93 loading will be placed on the bridge and the demands compared to the capacities. Then the State Legal Loads will be placed on the bridge and their demands also compared to the capacities.
TASK 6 DELIVERABLES:
Stormwater Management Plan
Drainage Report
Plans (7 sets of half-size plans and PDF) at 65%, 95%, and Final Submittals Engineer’s Estimate (EXCEL) at 65%, 95% and Final Submittals Special Provisions (Word) at 95% and Final Submittals
Response to Comments Matrix (PDF) at 95% and Final Submittals Plans – 1 electronic copy prepared in AutoCAD 2018 format at Final Submittal Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Bridge Load Rating
TASK 7.0 RIGHT OF WAY SERVICES
It is assumed that acquisitions (temporary and/or permanent) may be needed from the following three parcels:
411-291-009, 411-361-061, and 416-120-028
Task 7.1 Appraisal Mapping
Right of way mapping showing up to three parcels will be prepared using the existing boundary data from the retracement and the new easement/ right of way requirements. Additionally, the Appraisal Mapping will show screened topographic information and have tabular data for parcel acquisitions, including, owner name, areas of total ownership, acquisition remainder, and encumbrances.
Task 7.2 Plat & Legal Descriptions
Once right of way needs have been identified and received authorization, Mark Thomas will prepare up to three legal descriptions with 8-1/2” x 11” plats. One round of minor revisions is included in this scope of work. If additional legal descriptions are required additional fee will be negotiated.
Task 7.3 Record of Survey
Since some of the properties and right of way lines to be surveyed for this project were created by deed conveyance, these lines have not been shown on a previously recorded map. As a result, Mark Thomas will be obligated under Business and Professions code 8762 of the Professional Land Surveyors Act to file a Record of Survey with Contra Costa County. The Record of Survey will be summitted showing the re-establishment of the right of way and the proposed right of acquisitions. Once comments have been reviewed by the County
Surveyor, Mark Thomas will address comments and resubmit for recordation. This scope of work includes addressing one round of comments from the County Surveyor.
Task 7. 4 Right of Way Management
Monument will be responsible for the technical and administrative functions required to provide right of way (ROW) services on the project. Monument's ROW management activities will include:
• Plan, organize, supervise, coordinate, and administer the various elements of the ROW scope of work. • Meet with relevant parties regarding proposed project to identify acquisition issues, and/or to discuss project status, procedural issues, budget, and schedules. • Prepare and implement an effective Acquisition Management Plan to ensure the project is delivered in the most efficient and effective manner and in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and procedures.
• Participate in in-person project coordination meetings with the City and design team to communicate project updates, coordinate right-of-way issues and make recommendations to the City on policy development, risk mitigation and general project consultation. • Prepare and deliver written progress status reports for acquisition cases. • Create, monitor, and update project schedules utilizing MS Project software. • Participate in project related meetings, make public presentations to individuals and organizations, and represent the City in presentations and public hearing on all matters pertaining to the acquisition process.
• Conduct research and analyses to support the goals and objectives of the project. • Prepare and maintain a QA/QC plan throughout the duration of the project. The QA/QC plan is intended to verify that the appraisals, maps, reports, plans, studies, estimates, offer documents, agreements and other documents submitted under this scope of work are complete, accurate, checked, and proofread to meet professional standard practices.
• Update each parcel file checklist (our QA/QC Manager, will conduct weekly reviews of the project reporting to verify compliance with the City and regulatory compliance). • Finalize all work product, and prepare and deliver presentations to City staff and key stakeholders, as appropriate.
• Assist the City with any file audits.
Task 7. 5 Fee Appraisal
The appraisal will be prepared by individuals licensed with the State of California, Office of Real Estate Appraisers, as a Certified General Real Estate Appraiser. Monument's appraisers both retain the requisite qualifications and experience necessary to competently complete appraisals in a competent and professional manner, in accordance with applicable laws and policies. As part of the fee appraisal, Monument will:
• Prepare the Notice of Decision to Appraiser letter for each property, advising the property owner of the proposed project, introducing the appraiser, enclosing an Acquisition Brochure describing the City’s acquisition process, and contract information to answer questions and concerns. • The appraisal report will comply with laws that are applicable to the specific appraisal assignment and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP).
• Afford the property owner or the owner’s designated representative the opportunity to accompany the appraiser on the inspection of the property.
• Perform an inspection of the subject property. The inspection should be appropriate for the appraisal problem, and the Scope of Work should address:
o The extent of the inspection and description of the neighborhood and proposed project area, o The extent of the subject property inspection, including interior and exterior areas, o The level of detail of the description of the physical characteristics of the property being appraised (and, in the case of a partial acquisition, the remaining property). • In the appraisal report, identify the highest and best use. If highest and best use is in question or different from the existing use, provide an appropriate analysis identifying the market-based highest and best use. • Present and analyze relevant market information.
• In developing and reporting the appraisal, disregard any decrease or increase in the fair market value of the real property caused by the project for which the property is to be acquired, or by the likelihood that the property would be acquired for the project.
• Report the appraiser’s analysis, opinions, and conclusions in the appraisal report.
Task 7. 6 Appraisal Review
Review appraisals will be provided for each appraisal, and in accordance with State and Federal law and City policy as required. The review appraiser will, as appropriate:
• Identify the reviewer’s client and intended users, the intended use of the reviewer’s opinions and conclusions, and the purpose of the assignment.
• Identify the following:
o Subject of the appraisal review assignment.
o Effective date of the review.
o Property and ownership interest appraised (if any) in the work under review. o Date of the work under review and the effective date of the opinion or conclusion in the work under review.
o Appraiser(s) who completed the work under review unless the identity was withheld. • Identify the scope of work to be performed.
• Develop an opinion as to the completeness of the material under review, given the scope of work applicable in the assignment.
• Develop an opinion as to the apparent adequacy and relevance of the data and the propriety of any adjustments to the data, given the scope of work applicable in the assignment. • Develop an opinion as to the appropriateness of the appraisal methods and techniques used, given the scope of work applicable in the assignment, and develop the reasons for any disagreement. • Develop an opinion as to whether the analyses, opinions, and conclusions are appropriate and reasonable, given the scope of work applicable in the assignment, and develop the reasons for any disagreement.
• Review appraisals will be forwarded to the City for establishment of just compensation prior to the preparation of offers to acquire the proposed land rights for the project.
Task 7. 7 Acquisition and Negotiation
Monument will provide ROW delivery services required for the City to purchase ROW required to construct the project. The tasks will be performed in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and local regulations, Caltrans Policies and Procedures and City’s ROW Policies and Procedures.
Monument will provide the following services under the direction of the City staff:
• Provide the Acquisition and Negotiations Services to acquire the property interests required for the Project in a timely, efficient manner and at a reasonable cost. Work shall be performed in accordance with Caltrans and the City’s Policies and Procedures and applicable Federal, State, and local regulations. • Coordinate and manage the acquisition process with the City, legal counsel, design team, property owners, and tenants along with the title company, appraisers, and other consultants to insure effective cross-discipline communications.
• Review ROW plans, appraisal reports, title reports, appraisal maps and legal descriptions and all other pertinent documents.
• Prepare acquisition offer packages consisting of the City’s written purchase offer, appraisal summary statement, acquisition brochure, acquisition agreement, conveying instruments (Grant Deed, Permanent and/or Temporary Easements, etc.), Certificate of Acceptance, recommendation of Amount of Just Compensation, plat maps and legal descriptions, and Title VI Information. • Monument’s acquisition agent will meet personally with each property owner to present the City’s purchase offer, explain the project design requirements, and inform him or her of the City’s ROW acquisition process.
• Negotiate personally in good faith with each property owner, his/her agent or representative and discuss appraisal and valuation of the property interests, gather information from the property for consideration and address any questions or concerns that may arise during the acquisition process. • Establish and maintain an acquisition file for each property owner or property interest acquired and maintain a file checklist pursuant to the City’s specifications. • As may be required to secure Right of Entry Agreements; licenses or permits from property owners for purposes of performing hazardous waste, archeological and other inspections. • Promptly transmit executed documents (acquisition agreements, executed deeds, rental agreements, statements of information, offset statements, and the like) to the City for acceptance and processing. A report summarizing the pertinent information relative to the transaction will be included. • Prepare and submit a Letter of Recommendation to the City for any proposed administrative settlements with property owners. The letter will include a chronology of the negotiation efforts, provide supporting evidence and documentation and an explanation of the benefits and rationale behind the recommendation.
• Escrow Coordination - Coordinate opening of escrows with direction from the project manager, assist the escrow company in obtaining additional documentation as necessary to provide clear title to the City, supervise and review the closing of escrows, and review closing statements for completeness and accuracy. We will serve as liaison between the title company, escrow holder, and the City. Upon closing of escrow, tax cancelation letters will be prepared for City signature, as necessary, for fee interest acquisitions.
• Recommend condemnation action when negotiations have reached an impasse. The required justification will be submitted in writing to the City. Our primary goal will be to reach an acceptance of
the offer with each property owner. We will work with the City in recommending solutions to achieve acceptance of the offer.
• Eminent Domain Support – If requested, coordinate with City’s condemnation counsel, as required, to support the condemnation activities until the Resolution of Necessity is adopted and possession is granted by the courts. Litigation support after the hearing for the Resolution of Necessity, such as depositions, mediation appearances and expert testimony, can be provided on a time-and-materials basis.
• Perform any other normal procedures and processes to implement the acquisition assignment and provide any other supporting information and/or correspondence required by the City. • Provide bilingual acquisition agents, if necessary.
• Prepare all applicable forms, secure property owner’s approval and signature and submit the forms to the City for review and acceptance.
• Upon completion of the acquisition process for each property or property interest, or at project completion, Monument will provide the City with the original acquisition file as well as electronic copy of files for future audit purposes.
Task 7.8 Right of Way Certification
Monument will prepare and submit to Caltrans, a right-of-way certification form and other required documents in accordance with the Caltrans Right of Way Manual and FHWA requirements.
TASK 7 DELIVERABLES:
Appraisal Maps
Plat & Legal Descriptions
Appraisals
Appraisal Reviews
Acquisition Offer Packages
Right of Way Certification Form
TASK 8.0 BIDDING SUPPORT
Task 8.1 Bidding Support
Mark Thomas will assist the City during the bidding process. The work may include answering bid inquiries from prospective bidders, attending pre-bid meetings, and preparing addenda to the PS&E documents during the advertisement period. Mark Thomas assumed no more than 40 hours of bidding support will be needed.
TASK 9.0 CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT (OPTIONAL)
Task 9.1 Construction Support
Mark Thomas team will assist the City during construction of the project. The work may include responding to Requests for Information (RFIs) by the contractor, providing consultation and interpretation of the contract documents, preparing Contract Change Orders (CCOs), reviewing shop drawings, and attending construction
meetings and filed visits. It is assumed that the City will retain a Construction Manager to administer the construction project. For the purposes of this scope, Mark Thomas assumed no more than 200 hours of construction support will be needed.
Task 9.2 As-Built Record Drawings
Mark Thomas will prepare as-built record drawings based on the red-lined as-built drawings submitted by the Construction Manager after completion of construction
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecessors
1 City Council Approves Contract/Notice to Proceed 0 days Mon 9/20/21 Mon 9/20/21 2 Kick-Off Meeting 0 days Wed 9/29/21 Wed 9/29/21 1FS+8 days 3 Surveying and Mapping 45 days Thu 9/30/21 Wed 12/1/21 4 Permission to Enter 25 days Thu 9/30/21 Wed 11/3/21 2 5 Control/Topo/Boundary/Creek Cross-Sections 10 days Thu 11/4/21 Wed 11/17/21 4 6 Base Mapping/Compilation 10 days Thu 11/18/21 Wed 12/1/21 5 7 Compiled Base Map 0 days Wed 12/1/21 Wed 12/1/21 6
8 Engineering Studies 780 days Thu 9/30/21 Wed 9/25/24
9 Utility Coordination 780 days Thu 9/30/21 Wed 9/25/24 16 Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Report 415 days Thu 9/30/21 Wed 5/3/23 26 Hydrology and Hydraulic Analysis 425 days Thu 9/30/21 Wed 5/17/23 34 Intersection and Traffic Alternatives Analysis 120 days Thu 12/2/21 Wed 5/18/22 35 VISSIM Baseline Model 20 days Thu 12/2/21 Wed 12/29/21 7 36 VISSIM Future Year Model 10 days Thu 12/30/21 Wed 1/12/22 35 37 Develop Intersection Alternatives 20 days Thu 1/13/22 Wed 2/9/22 36 38 City Review 10 days Thu 2/10/22 Wed 2/23/22 37
39 Evaluate Intersection and Traffic Alternatives 20 days Thu 2/24/22 Wed 3/23/22 38 40 Bike/Ped Evaluation and Safety Analysis 10 days Thu 3/24/22 Wed 4/6/22 39 41 Draft Alternatives Analysis Summary 10 days Thu 4/7/22 Wed 4/20/22 40 42 City Review 10 days Thu 4/21/22 Wed 5/4/22 41
43 Respond to Comments 10 days Thu 5/5/22 Wed 5/18/22 42 44 Approved Alternatives Analysis Summary 0 days Wed 5/18/22 Wed 5/18/22 43 45 Preliminary Roadway Geometrics 60 days Thu 5/19/22 Wed 8/10/22 46 Prepare Draft Design Criteria and Constraint Memo 10 days Thu 5/19/22 Wed 6/1/22 44 47 Prepare Draft Roadway Geometrics 30 days Thu 5/19/22 Wed 6/29/22 44 48 City Review 20 days Thu 6/30/22 Wed 7/27/22 47,46
49 Respond to Comments 10 days Thu 7/28/22 Wed 8/10/22 48 50 Approved Memo and 35% Roadway Plans 0 days Wed 8/10/22 Wed 8/10/22 49 51 Type Selection Report 80 days Thu 8/11/22 Wed 11/30/22 52 Prepare Draft Type Selection Report 30 days Thu 8/11/22 Wed 9/21/22 17FF,50 53 City Review 20 days Thu 9/22/22 Wed 10/19/22 52
54 Caltrans Review 20 days Thu 10/20/22 Wed 11/16/22 53 55 Respond to Comments 10 days Thu 11/17/22 Wed 11/30/22 54 56 Approved Type Selection Report 0 days Wed 11/30/22 Wed 11/30/22 55 57 Urban Concept Design 140 days Thu 5/19/22 Wed 11/30/22 58 Site Analysis 30 days Thu 5/19/22 Wed 6/29/22 44
59 Admin Draft Concept Alternatives Package 20 days Thu 6/30/22 Wed 7/27/22 58 60 City Review 20 days Thu 7/28/22 Wed 8/24/22 59
61 Draft Conceptual Alternatives Package 20 days Thu 8/25/22 Wed 9/21/22 60 62 City Review 20 days Thu 9/22/22 Wed 10/19/22 61
63 Preferred Conceptual Alternative Package 10 days Thu 10/20/22 Wed 11/2/22 62 64 City Review 20 days Thu 11/3/22 Wed 11/30/22 63
65 Approved Conceptual Alternative 0 days Wed 11/30/22 Wed 11/30/22 64 66 Environmental Studies and Documentation 720 days Thu 9/30/21 Wed 7/3/24 67 Public Outreach 315 days Thu 9/30/21 Wed 12/14/22
68 Develop Public Engagement Plan 40 days Thu 9/30/21 Wed 11/24/21 2 69 Develop Social Pinpoint Portal 20 days Thu 11/25/21 Wed 12/22/21 68 70 Community Meeting 0 days Wed 8/24/22 Wed 8/24/22 60,69 71 Community Meeting 0 days Wed 10/19/22 Wed 10/19/22 62,70 72 Design Collaboration Workshops 20 days Thu 10/20/22 Wed 11/16/22 71 73 Stakeholder Coordination Meetings 20 days Thu 11/17/22 Wed 12/14/22 72 9/20
9/29
12/1
5/18
8/10
11/30
11/30
8/24
10/19
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov 2022 2023 2024 2025
Mark Thomas City of San Pablo
San Pablo Avenue Bridge Replacement