City Council and Concurrent Authorities
July 29, 2025

(SJCOG). Accordingly, the Mark Thomas team will have little to no involvement with the preparation and processing of the SJMSCP documents.

We will also be responsible for project compliance with the San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP) as provided by the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG). The City will be responsible for paying any permit fees required.

LSA
will prepare a project description that details the purpose, phasing and physical elements of the proposed project.

This information will include a detailed description of the project’s technical and environmental characteristics, project background, operational characteristics, implementation schedule, required permits, construction details, and all other relevant information. Illustrative figures of the existing site conditions, including a site location map, aerial photographs of surrounding land uses, and project site photos will be included. The design for bridge replacements, culvert reconstruction, roadway design, and other relevant project plans will also be included. LSA will work closely with the City to ensure that the project description provides a level of detail appropriate for the Addendum and EA.

A draft of the project description will be submitted to the City for review (we have assumed one set of consolidated comments from the City) and acceptance prior to initiation of the impact analysis. An electronic version (in Microsoft Word and Adobe PDF formats) of the Administrative Draft and Final Draft Project Description will be provided.

Task 2.1. Preliminary Environmental Study (PES) Form
LSA will prepare the PES for the proposed project based on the Caltrans Local Assistance Procedures Manual PES Template (January 2023), or the most up-to-date version at project start. The PES, once completed, will be used to determine the appropriate environmental technical studies to be completed to clear NEPA. LSA will submit a Word and PDF version of the administrative draft PES and will respond to one set of comprehensive comments on the PES from the City and Caltrans. Based on the project type at this time we are anticipating technical studies to support a NEPA EA.

Task 2.2. NEPA Technical Studies
LSA proposes to conduct the following technical studies/technical analysis based on our current understanding of the project. The technical studies will be based on the project description , approved PES , and design provided by the Mark Thomas team for one preferred project alternative. LSA will begin preparation of the technical studies following receipt of these project materials and confirmation by City staff that neither the project description nor the design will change significantly enough to require revisions to the technical reports. In addition, LSA has scoped their level of effort for mapping/analysis on receipt of the project design in AutoCAD (i.e., .dwg) format and projected into a real-world coordinate system (e.g., State Plane) for efficient integration into geographic information system (GIS) software. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Analyses
LSA
will prepare Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas (GHG), and Energy analyses that evaluate the impacts from the project and produce an Air Quality Report (with GHG), Air Quality Conformity Checklist, Air Quality Conformity Report, and Energy Memorandum to document the results. These reports will conform to the latest Caltrans Standard Environmental Reference (SER) templates. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) administers air quality in the project site area. The analyses will be consistent with all applicable procedures and requirements of the City, SJVAPCD, Caltrans, and CEQA. LSA will conduct the following tasks to complete this scope of work.

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impacts Analysis The Air Quality Report (with GHG) will be prepared in accordance with the following protocols/guidelines: Caltrans Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol, FHWA/EPA Transportation Conformity Guidance for Quantitative Hot-spot Analyses in PM2.5 and PM10 Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas, FHWA Interim Guidance on Air Toxic Analysis in NEPA Documents (mobile source air toxics [MSAT]), and Caltrans' policy on GHG emissions .

Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
170
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

The Air Qua
lity Report will identify existing air quality conditions and potential air quality and GHG emissions impacts resulting from the proposed project, by undertaking the following subtasks:
• Describe the existing regulatory framework - The existing regulatory framework for air quality and GHG emissions, including existing laws and regulations and the roles of the local agencies including the California Air Resources Board, the SJVAPCD, Caltrans, and the City will be described. • Assess project construction- and operation-period air quality impacts - LSA will assess air quality and GHG emission impacts during construction using the Caltrans CAL-CET2020 roadway construction model, or another appropriate model as directed by Caltrans commensurate with available project specific information. The modeling will include factors such as site preparation, grading, roadwork, the construction equipment used and the length of time for a specific construction task. Once construction completes, the project would support car and truck trips on the improved roadway. If traffic data is available that shows changes that occur as a result of the proposed project, operational emissions showing the net change in pollutant and GHG emissions will be assessed using the CT- EMFAC2021 model or another appropriate model as directed by Caltrans. It is assumed the air pollutant and GHG emissions will be modeled for the following conditions at a minimum: “existing”, “existing plus project”, “forecast”, and “forecast plus project”.

The Air
Quality Report will also analyze and discuss the presence/absence of asbestos-containing structures/roadway affected by the project and construction-related impacts.

The Air
Quality Report will document whether the proposed project is included in the latest San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP), and Federal Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (FSTIP) for preliminary engineering/environmental documentation. The project will be presented to the SJCOG for Interagency Consultation (IAC) to determine if the project is considered to be a Project of Air Quality Concern (POAQC). This scope assumes that the project will not be determined to be a POAQC, thus only a qualitative PM 10 and PM2.5 Hot-Spot assessment will need to be
conducted. If the project is determined to be a POAQC, a quantitative PM10 and PM2.5 Hot-Spot assessment would need to be conducted and a contract amendment negotiated.

The Air
Quality Report will make a final determination whether the build alternatives will conform to applicable state and federal air quality plans. Caltrans Standard Specifications for Construction, as well as mitigation measures, if necessary, will be recommended to reduce short-term construction related impacts. In addition, mitigation measures will be prescribed for any operational impacts that are identified. • Air Quality Conformity Report - In addition to the air quality analysis, LSA will prepare the “Conformity Analysis Documentation for Project-Level Conformity Determinations in Metropolitan Nonattainment/Maintenance Areas” (Air Quality Conformity Report [AQCR]) required for NEPA delegation. An Air Quality Conformity Checklist and an Air Quality Conformity Report will be required to make a project-level air quality conformity determination for the proposed project. This scope assumes the preparation of a quantitative PM10 and PM2.5 Hot-Spot assessment would not be required. A qualitative PM10 and PM2.5 Hot-Spot assessment and Mobile Source Air Toxic (MSAT) analysis will be prepared according to FHWA Updated Interim Guidance for NEPA Documents. • Identify mitigation measures - LSA will identify, if necessary, practical mitigation measures to address any significant project or cumulative impacts from emissions of criteria air pollutants and/or GHGs. Mitigation measures designed to reduce the project's short-term construction and long-term air quality impacts to the extent feasible will be Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
171
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

identified. Mitigation measures established by the SJVAPCD for dust suppression will be identified to reduce particulate matter impacts. Both an evaluation of the potential mitigation measures and a discussion of their effectiveness will be provided.
• Energy Impacts Analysis - LSA will assess construction energy impacts using the same project information used for the air quality analysis described above. If traffic data showing changes that occur as a result of the proposed project is available, LSA will also assess operational energy impacts. It is assumed the energy use will be modeled for the following conditions at a minimum: “existing”, “existing plus project”, “forecast”, and “forecast plus project”. The Energy Memorandum will address both of the energy issues identified in the checklist in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines.
• Prepare and Submit the Reports - Once the Air Quality Report has been fully reviewed and finalized, the Air Quality Conformity Checklist and Air Quality Conformity Report will be completed within 3 weeks. All reports will be submitted as a Portable Document Format (PDF) file. LSA will respond to one round of consolidated minor review comments on each report/ memorandum. Additional rounds of review/revision or provision of copies in excess of that stated in this proposal are not included in this scope of work.

LSA has bu
dgeted 12 hours for responding to comments generated during review of the Air Quality Report and 8 hours for responding to comments generated during review of the AQCR. This scope excludes LSA technical staff attending project meetings or agency meetings.

Biological Resources
LSA’s ap
proach to biological resources compliance for this project considers reporting requirements set forth by Caltrans in the Caltrans Local Assistance Procedures Manual and Standard Environmental Reference combined with obtaining coverage for the project under the San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP).

Literature Review and Field Surveys
LSA will evaluate the biological resources present on the project site and determine project effects to those resources. A key objective of the evaluation will be to identify any special status plant or wildlife species, or sensitive habitats, that may be affected by the project. LSA will query relevant databases and other online data sources such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) Information, Planning, and Conservation (IPaC) System, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Service’s (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database, and the California Native Plant Rare Plant Inventory.

A prelim
inary review of the project site indicates a potential for presence of several special status species, such as burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) and Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni), for which there are several records throughout the vicinity. Pixley Slough, Bear Creek, a ditch adjacent to Eight Mile Road, and an unnamed irrigation canal adjacent to Marlette Road will also be evaluated for potential to support aquatic species such as giant gartersnake ( Thamnophis gigas) and northwestern pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata).

The follow
ing field surveys are proposed:
• General Field Survey. LSA will conduct a general field survey to map plant communities and assess habitat conditions and evaluate potential impacts to sensitive biological resources from the proposed project. LSA will also assess the existing bridges for potential habitat for nesting birds or roosting bats. • Aquatic Resources Delineation. LSA will conduct an aquatic resources delineation of the project site to identify areas potentially subject to regulation by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) or the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The delineation will be conducted in accordance with the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (January 1987), the ACOE Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0) (September 2008), and the RWQCB State Wetland Definition and Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
172
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State (April 2019). Aquatic features subject to California Department of Fish and Wildlife jurisdiction will also be identified. • Tree Survey. In conjunction with the general field survey, LSA will inventory all trees within the project impact area; data collected will include species, location, diameter at breast height (dbh), and approximate height.

Documentation
LSA proposes to prepare the following reports to document biological resources in the project area and evaluate potential project effects to biological resources:
• Natural Environment Study (NES). The results of the field surveys will be documented in an NES prepared in accordance with the Caltrans’ current SER template. The NES will include a discussion of plant communities present on the site, as well as a discussion of common plant and animal species occurring (or expected to occur) on the site based on the communities present. A generalized vegetation map will be prepared showing plant community types as well as the locations of any sensitive biological resources identified. The results of the aquatic resources delineation and other surveys will also be summarized in the NES. The NES will include an assessment of project impacts on the biological resources present, and recommended mitigation measures where appropri ate. • Aquatic Resources Delineation Report. The results of the delineation field work will be documented in an Aquatic Resources Delineation Report (ARDR) prepared in accordance with the USACE Minimum Standards for Acceptance of Aquatic Resources Delineation Reports, dated January 2016 and the and the USACE Regulatory Guidance Letter 16-01 (October 2016) regarding Preliminary Jurisdictional Delineations. The report will include a description of the setting, a discussion of the methods and results, the completed wetland data forms, location and vicinity maps, and a preliminary delineation map showing the limits of all potential jurisdictional waters of the U.S./State on the site. • Biological Assessment (BA). Coverage under the SJMSCP should by-pass the need for Section 7 consultation with the USFWS. However, if the project has potential to impact federally listed fish species regulated by the National Marine Fisheries Service or federally listed species regulated by the USFWS that are not included in the SJMSCP, then a BA consistent with Caltrans’ current SER template may be required. LSA will prepare this BA to evaluate project effects to federally listed species and identify appropriate avoidance and minimization measures. • Habitat Mitigation Plan. LSA will prepare Habitat Mitigation Plan (HMP) for inclusion with the regulatory permit applications described below. The HMP will include provisions for implementation, monitoring, and reporting for on-site restoration of temporarily impacted areas, and will describe any off-site mitigation that may be required for permanent impacts to waters of the State and U.S. and CDFW riparian habitats, if applicable. We anticipate that off - site mitigation requirements for each agency will be satisfied through fee payment for coverage under the SJMSCP.

LSA has budgeted 12 hours each for responding to comments generated during City and Caltrans review of the NES and BA, and 5 hours for responding to comments generated during City and Caltrans review of the delineation report.

This scope assumes that project boundaries and impact areas will be provided to LSA in a georeferenced format, access to all portions of the project site will be arranged by the City in advance of field surveys, and that a ll draft deliverables will undergo concurrent review by the City and Caltrans and one set of compiled comments will be provided to LSA.

Community Impacts
A Community Impact Assessment (CIA) will be prepared, consistent with the guidelines in the FHWA Technical Advisory T6640.8A, Caltrans CIA Handbook (October 2011), Caltrans CIA template (2023) and other applicable guidance from the FHWA and the Caltrans SER Web sites. LSA reviewed the Caltrans SER and determined that a mid- level CIA would be appropriate for this project. The CIA is anticipated to focus on land use impacts, consistency with applicable State, Regional, and Local Plans, farmland impacts, community character and cohesion, relocations and real property acquisition, traffic and transportation/pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and public involvement. The CIA will provide a description of existing, adopted, and proposed land uses on and in the immediate vicinity of the project site, Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
173
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

including employment and activity centers. The CIA will also address the proposed project’s consistency with relevant local, regional, and State regulations and land use, transportation, and air quality plans. Farmland impacts due to project implementation will also be discussed in the CIA. Housing, employment, and population conditions, as well as the locations of important community facilities in the vicinity of the project site will be described. Relevant demographic and land use information for the project study area will be mapped. The project is anticipated to require parcel acquisitions; however, no relocations are expected. An analysis of the project’s potential right -of-way impacts and associated socioeconomic impacts will be discussed in the CIA. The CIA will also address federal environmental justice requirements and evaluate whether the project would increase/decrease transportation equity in the affected areas of Stockton. Because the project may include detours during construction activities, a discussion of the project’s construction-period impacts on community access will also be provided in the CIA.

The CI
A will also provide recommendations to avoid, minimize, and/or mitigate potential adverse impacts of the proposed project where feasible and warranted.

LSA has bu
dgeted ten (10) hours for responding to comments generated during review of the CIA .

Phase 1 Initial Site Assessment (ISA)
Crawford will prepare a Phase 1 Initial Site Assessment (ISA) to evaluate the project alignment (from Pixley Slough to Royal Oaks Drive) and adjacent properties for evidence of recognized environmental conditions (RECs) and/or potential RECs that may significantly impact the constructability, feasibility, and/or cost of the project. The ISA will be prepared in accordance with the procedures set forth in Caltrans’ Standard Environmental Reference, Chapter 10, and ASTM E1527 -

21. The ISA will include the following elements:
• Records review : Crawford will contract with Environmental Risk Information Service (ERIS) to conduct a computerized search of federal, state, local, and tribal environmental agency database records. These database records will be reviewed for information pertaining to the subject property, and properties within ASTM standard search radii applicable to each database. The databases searched will include, at a minimum, all databases specified in ASTM E1527-21.
• Physical Setting Review: The ISA will include a summary of geologic conditions underlying the subject property and vicinity based on readily available geologic mapping from the U.S. Geological Survey and the California Geological Survey; and a summary of hydrogeologic conditions (including depth to groundwater and regional groundwater flow, if readily available) based on information from websites maintained by the State of California. • Historical Land Use Review: ERIS will provide historical aerial photographs, topographic maps, city directories, and Sanborn fire insurance maps (where available) for the subject property and vicinity. Crawford will review these data to develop a history of general property uses for the project alignment and surrounding parcels back to the alignment’s first development, or 1940, whichever is earlier. • Site Reconnaissance: Crawford will perform a driving and walking reconnaissance of the project alignment and vicinity to observe current conditions. Conditions on adjacent parcels will be observed from the public right -of- way. The reconnaissance will include observations of geologic, hydrogeologic, and topographic conditions; uses and storage of hazardous materials and wastes within and adjacent to the project alignment; and general conditions with regard to the presence of underground and aboveground stora ge tanks, drums, wells, electrical equipment, stockpiled soil, vegetation, odors, and sewage/waste disposal, as appropriate. • Interviews: Where warranted by observations and data, Crawford will make reasonable attempts to interview current and past property owners, tenants, and key site mangers where names and contact information is provided. Crawford may also contact City of Stockton or San Joaquin County Environmental Health Department Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
174
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

personnel to inquire about department knowledge pertaining to the project alignment or properties in the project vicinity, as warranted by the findings and reconnaissance. • Report of Findings: A report documenting our assessment will be prepared for the project. The report will include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following:
o Description of the subject property and vicinity;
o Summary of the physical setting, local geologic conditions, and hydrogeologic conditions; o Summary of the historical record review and historical site usage; o Findings from the records review;
o Site reconnaissance observations;
o Interview results;
o Photographs of significant items of environmental concern observed during the site reconnaissance (if any); o Findings, Opinions, and Conclusions on potential impacts: including a summary of RECs, and a discussion of significant data gaps and data failures; and
o Recommendations: As warranted by the findings for additional investigation and/or sampling for potentially hazardous materials.

Assumptions
• The project description and drawings showing planned improvements, stationing, and project limits will be provided by other members of the Mark Thomas team.
• Initial contact with adjacent parcel owners by the City will be provided if interviews or access are required. • Chain-of-title, Activity and Use Limitations, and Environmental Lien searches for the project alignment or adjacent properties are not included in this scope of work.

Deliverables:

Crawford will deliver draft and final ISA Reports to Mark Thomas to review and submit to City staff when ready for City review.

Noise Memorandum
LSA will prepare a Noise Study Report (NSR) consistent with the Caltrans Noise Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol (April 2020), and Technical Noise Supplement (TeNS) [September 2013], and the annotated outline provided by the Caltrans Standard Environmental Reference (SER). The NSR will identify traffic noise impacts on land uses located adjacent to the proposed project. Noise standards regulating noise impacts, including the Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) and applicable local noise ordinances, will be discussed for land uses located adjacent to the project. Land uses located adjacent to the project on both sides of the roadway will be identified and discussed using land use information, aerial photographs, and field reconnaissance.

Ambient no
ise level measurements will be conducted to establish the existing noise environment at representative land uses in the project area on both sides of the roadway. Short-term (20-minute) noise level measurements will be conducted at up to 14 locations with concurrent traffic counts to document the existing noise environment and to calibrate the traffic noise model. Long-term 24-hour noise level measurements will be conducted at up to 2 locations to identify the peak traffic noise hour. Locations of the short-term and long-term noise level measurements will be clearly shown on an exhibit. Observations of other noise sources, barriers, terrains, building heights, and other site -specific information will be noted during each measurement period.

The Fed
eral Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Model (TNM) version 2.5 will be used to calculate existing and future traffic noise levels. Model input data include traffic volumes, vehicle mix among autos, medium and heavy Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
175
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

trucks, vehicle speeds, ground attenuation factors, and roadway configurations. The TNM 2.5 model will be calibrated using the short-term noise levels measurement and concurrent traffic counts to ensure the accuracy of the noise model. The existing and future traffic conditions will assume either the worst-hour traffic volumes or the peak-hour traffic volumes provided in the traffic study, whichever is less. Traffic noise impacts will be determined based on the future traffic noise levels and the corresponding NAC for each land use.

Noise a
batement measures (sound walls) designed to reduce long-term traffic noise impacts by 5 dBA or more, as required to be feasible, will be evaluated. The results of the noise modeling in TNM 2.5 will be tabulated in tables and will include the insertion loss and number of benefited receptors/residential units for each soundwall height. Modeled receptors and soundwall locations will be clearly shown an exhibit.

A reason
able allowance per receptor/residential unit and total reasonable allowance will be calculated for each feasible noise barrier height. The height, length, location, top-of-wall elevations, and beginning and ending station numbers will be provided for each feasible noise barrier height.

Short-term
noise impacts from construction sources will be analyzed based on the equipment expected to be used. The construction noise impact will be evaluated in terms of maximum levels (Lmax) and the frequency of occurrence at adjacent noise-sensitive locations. Analysis requirements will be based on the sensitivity of the area, Caltrans Standard Specifications, and the City’s Municipal Code.

LSA has b
udgeted two rounds of review and each round of review for a total of thirty-two (32) hours for responding to comments generated during review of the NSR.

Noise Abatement Decision Report (NADR)
If feasible sound barriers were identified in the Noise Study Report (NSR), LSA will prepare a NADR consistent with the Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol (April 2020) and the annotated outline provided by the Caltrans SER. The report will summarize key information presented in the NSR, which would include acoustical feasibility, number of benefited residences, and the total reasonable allowance. The engineer’s construction cost estimate for the evaluated abatement will be developed by the project engineer and compared to the total reasonable allowance to determine the reasonableness of the noise abatement measure. Non-acoustical factors related to feasibility for the reasonable noise abatement measure (e.g., line-of-sight, safety, maintenance, security, geotechnical considerations, and utility relocations) will be evaluated. In addition, secondary effects of abatement on cultural resources, scenic views, hazardous materials, biology, and any other applicable resources will be addressed.

LSA has bu
dgeted two rounds of review and a total of twenty-four (24) hours for responding to comments generated during review of the NADR.

Cultural Resources (HPSR / ASR)
If the project receives federal funding, it would then qualify as an “undertaking” as defined at 36 CFR §800.16(y) and must comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, As Amended (Section 106). L SA will conduct cultural resource studies that are needed for the City and Caltrans to address requirements of NEPA, CEQA, and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act using guidance set forth in the Caltrans 2014 First Amended Programmatic Agreement Among The Federal Highway Administration, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the California State Historic Preservation Officer, and the California Department of Transportation Regarding Compliance With Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as it Pertains to the Administration of the Federal -Aid Highway Program in California (Section 106 PA).

Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
176
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

A preliminary review of the parcels within or adjacent to the proposed project area between Pixley Slough and Bear Creek that could contain cultural resources that may be affected by this project has been conducted for this proposal and is presented below.

LSA ha
s reviewed online parcel information provided by the San Joaquin County Assessor Office as well as aerial photographs and USGS topographic quadrangles to determine the age of buildings located on all parcels within and adjacent to the Study Area. Of the parcels within or adjacent to the Study Area, three contained built environment elements with a “Year Built” date over 45 years old (i.e., 1979 and older as of 2024), and are either single family or multi- family properties; therefore, a Historical Resources Evaluation Report (HRER) will be necessary. The following properties contain built environment elements 45 years old or older:
• A multi-family residential property constructed in 1963 on an 8.95-acre parcel at 10350 North Lower Sacramento Road (APN 084-030-19);
• A single-family residential property constructed in 1967 on a two-acre parcel at 10475 Lower Sacramento Road (APN 084-030-15); and
• A single-family residential property constructed in 1948 on a 32.2-acre at 10806 Lower Sacramento Road (APN 084- 050-003).

LSA anticipates evaluating these properties as part of the HRER. If any are evaluated as eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, a Finding of Effect may be required. In that case, additional scope and budget will be required.

Research and Field Investigation
LSA will
conduct the following tasks to identify cultural resources in the project area. • LSA will request a records search of the Study Area and a 0.25-mile radius be completed by the staff of the Central California Information Center (CCAIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System. The CCAIC is the official State repository for cultural resources and studies for San Joaquin County. The records search will identify recorded cultural resources and studies within and adjacent to the project site. This information will inform the existing baseline conditions of the project site and minimize redundant research .
• In order to assist Caltrans with tribal consultation, LSA will obtain the results of a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), send initial contact letters to all tribes designated by the NAHC or Caltrans, follow-up via email twice, if necessary, and compile an administrative record .
• A literature review, as necessary, of archaeological, ethnographic, historical, and environmental publications and maps at historical archives and LSA will be performed. Relevant listings reviewed will include the California Inventory of Historic Resources, Five Views: An Ethnic Sites Survey for California, California Historical Landmarks, California Points of Historical Interest, National Historic Landmarks, and the Built Environment Resources Directory (BERD) for San Joaquin County which contains the listings of the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). If available, appropriate city or county listings will be reviewed.

Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
177
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

• An LSA architectural historian will conduct property-specific research at San Joaquin County Historical Society in Lodi and the Haggin Museum in Stockton for historical and environmental information of built environment resources in or adjacent to the Study Area.
• LSA will contact the San Joaquin County Historical Society in Lodi and the Haggin Museum in Stockton for any information or concerns they may have about cultural resources in the Study Area. • LSA will consult with Caltrans to exempt any additional built environment resources in the Area of Potential Effects (APE) from evaluation, if any, in accordance with criteria set forth in Attachment 4 of the Section 106 PA. • LSA will conduct an architectural pedestrian field survey of the APE. The client must arrange/provide legal access (right-of-entry) to properties within the APE. It is anticipated that the archaeological field survey will take no more than 12 hours of field time and that the architectural field survey will take no longer than 10 hours. Negative results for archaeological resources are anticipated - in the event of positive results, a contract amendment (budget modification) will be required and a schedule adjustment may be necessary. It is anticipated that the archaeological field survey will take no more than 12 hours of field time and that the architectural field survey will take no longer than 10 hours. Negative results for archaeological resources are anticipated - in the event of positive results, a contract amendment (budget modification) will be required and a schedule adjustment may be necessary.

Documentation
• LSA will prepare an APE map to Caltrans standards which includes built environment resources. • LSA will prepare a Historic Property Survey Report (HPSR) and a Historical Resources Evaluation Report (HRER). • LSA will prepare an Archaeological Survey Report (ASR) of negative results that will document the results of the records search, survey, consultation assistance and provide environmental and cultural contexts.

If additional built environment resources are identified within or adjacent to the Study Area , or Caltrans requires updating existing DPRs of other built environment resources in the Study Area, or Caltrans requires other related cultural resource technical studies (such as a Finding of Effect) to address built environment resources, LSA will develop a scope and budget to address the additional required study and prepare draft/final documentation per Caltrans and OHP guidelines. We have budgeted 16 hours for responding to comments generated during review of the HPSR/HRER.

Farmland
Implementation of the project will require the conversion of active agricultural land to a non -agricultural use (specifically a transportation use). Since the project will be using federal funding, LSA will prepare a Form NRCS- CPA- 106 (corridor-type projects) to assess the agricultural impacts associated with converting existing agricultural land to a non-agricultural use. If the points of the Total Site Assessment in Part VI of Form NRCS-CPA-106 equate to 60 points or greater, then Form CPA-106 will be sent to the applicable NRCS field office. If, the point total in Part VI is less than 60 points, then Form NRCS-CPA-106 does not need to be submitted to NRCS, and instead, LSA will retain the form in project files as supporting documentation for NEPA. Based in part on the information presented on Form NRCS- CPA- 106, LSA will prepare a farmland analysis as part of the project-specific Community Impact Assessment (CIA), and a stand-alone Farmland Assessment Technical Report or Memorandum is not required.

LSA has b
udgeted four (4) hours for responding to comments generated during review of the Form CPA -106.

Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
178
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

Visual Resources
LSA will prepare a Visual Impact Assessment Memorandum (VIA Memo) for the project that follows the current Caltrans Visual Assessment Report Content and Recommended Format based on the Caltrans Questionnaire to Determine Visual Impact Assessment Level. The VIA Memo will consider the consistency of the project with the applicable visual resources policies in the City’s General Plan and the San Joaquin County General Plan, the Caltrans SER, the FHWA Visual Impact Assessment for Highway Projects guidelines, and other applicable regulations and guidance. The VIA Memo will describe the existing setting, identify important visual resources, and identify potential project visual impacts. The analysis will include ground-level photographs from public viewpoints near the project site. Visual conditions and project impacts will be discussed qualitatively. It is assumed the project design for the proposed project will include landscaping consistent with applicable City and Caltrans guidelines for roadways. If required, measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse project visual impacts or to provide consistency with the General Plan will be identified.

LSA ha
s budgeted twelve (12) hours for responding to comments generating during review of the VIA Memo.

Water Quality Assessment Report
LSA will prepare a Water Quality Assessment Report (WQAR) for the project that follows the current Caltrans Water Quality Assessment Report Content and Recommended Format. The WQAR will discuss watershed and drainage characteristics, surface receiving waters, groundwater hydrology, regulatory requirements, pollutants of concern, receiving waters conditions, objectives, beneficial uses, and floodplains. The report will also discuss proposed construction site, site design, structural and non-structural source control, Low Impact Development (LID) and treatment Best Management Practices (BMPs) that are being provided as part of the project. The project’s impacts on water quality will be evaluated, and avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures necessar y to prevent adverse water quality impacts will be identified.

Inform
ation to be obtained from the Storm Water Data Report (SWDR) (to be provided by the project engineer) and Hydrology Report (to be provided by the project engineer) and incorporated into the WQAR includes, but is not limited to, proposed construction and operational BMPs, disturbed soil area, new impervious surface area, additional impervious surface areas to be treated for the project, existing and proposed drainage patterns, existing and proposed rate and volume of stormwater runoff, and proposed construction and operational BMPs. Information on depth to groundwater, proposed depth of excavation, the potential for groundwater dewatering during construction, soil types, and erosion potential will be obtained from the project’s Geotechnical Report(s) (to be provided by the project engineer). Additionally, information on riparian habitat, jurisdictional waters, and aquatic- dependent species and impacts to those biological resources will be obtained from the NES.

Transportation Studies
LSA will utilize the transportation impact analysis prepared by Fehr & Peers for the CEQA document and the traffic operations report prepared for the Precise Road Plan to inform the preparation of the NEPA document.

Task 2.3. CEQA Documentation
The proposed project footprint has been previously cleared under CEQA with project-specific documentation and under the General Plan EIR. Therefore, LSA proposes to evaluate those sections of the proposed project footprint not yet cleared under project-specific environmental documentation in an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, an addendum is permitted when a project (or a project's circumstances) change, or new information is available, but these conditions result in no new environmental impacts and do not increase the severity of impacts previously identified. Once complete, the decision-making body shall consider an Addendum with the Final EIR prior to making a decision on the proposed project. CEQA Guidelines 15168(c)(4) recommends using a Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
179
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

written checklist or similar device to confirm that the environmental effects of a subsequent activity were adequately covered in a previous EIR. LSA will complete an EIR Addendum to the General Plan EIR to ensure that there are no new significant impacts not previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR.

Evaluation of Environmental Effects
This task includes evaluating the project and preparation of the environmental checklist and the Addendum for the minor modifications to the project that are not covered under the General Plan in Task 2.3 .

For all environmental topics identified in the CEQA environmental checklist, LSA will substantiate the conclusion of "No New Impacts" or "No Increase in Severity of Existing Impacts." The following topics will be addressed: aesthetics; agricultural and forestry resources; air quality; biological resources; cultural resources; energy; geology and soils; greenhouse gas emissions; hazards and hazardous materials; hydrology and water quality; land use and planning; mineral resources; noise; population and housing; public services; recreation; transportation; tribal cultural resources; utilities and service systems; and wildfire. Technical studies from Task 2 will provide supporting analysis, where needed.

For each environmental topic, LSA will identify the minor changes associated with the project compared to what was evaluated in the General Plan EIR and provide a brief response to each checklist question through the comparison of the proposed project to the analysis conducted in the previous EIR.

This sco
pe of services assumes that no new impacts or substantially more severe impacts would result from the proposed project, beyond those identified in the General Plan EIR.

Administrative Draft Addendum and Checklist
LSA will prepare one draft of the Administrative Draft Addendum (memorandum and environmental checklist) for review by City staff prior to finalizing the document. LSA will provide one (1) MS Word and PDF version of the Administrative Draft in electronic format for review by City staff.

Screencheck Draft Addendum and Checklist
Based on a single set of comments received from City staff, LSA will make any necessary revisions to the Administrative Draft Addendum and will provide the City with a Screencheck Draft of the Addendum as both MS Word and PDF versions.

This submittal will include both a clean document and a compare version showing text changes made to the Administrative Draft document in underline and strikeout for the City to more easily confirm that all comments and edits are fully incorporated into the Screencheck Addendum.

Final Addendum, Checklist and Notice of Determination
Based on a single consolidated set of comments received from City staff, LSA will make any necessary revisions to the Screencheck Draft Addendum and will provide the City with final MS Word and PDF versions of the Addendum in electronic format for use and distribution by City staff.

This su
bmittal will include both a clean document and a compare version showing text changes made to the Screencheck Draft documents in underline and strikeout for the City to more easily confirm that all comments and edits are fully incorporated into the final Addendum.

LSA will
also prepare a draft Notice of Determination (NOD) for review and posting with the County Clerk by C ity staff.

LSA will also submit the NOD to the SCH on behalf of the City. LSA will also compile the Administrative Record as a part of this task.

Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
180
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

If requested, LSA can provide three (3) bound copies and ten (10) digital versions (PDF format) on a thumb drive for additional distribution and posting on the City website.

Transportation Chapter
Fehr & Peers will complete the transportation chapter for the required CEQA document. Fehr & Peers has budgeted CEQA documentation support assuming the project will require an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration to comply with CEQA. If the environmental documentation requires an EIR, a scope and fee amendment may be necessary to account for the longer schedule and added level of effort typically associated with an EIR .

VMT Analysis
Fehr & Peers will prepare a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) impact analysis following requirements noted in the City of Stockton Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (City of Stockton, 2023). We will conduct a screening assessment to determine if the project may qualify for a streamlined CEQA VMT analysis; however, based on the project description, it’s possible that the proposed project will not meet the screening criteria and a CEQA VMT analysis will be required.

According to the TIA Guidelines “Project types that would likely lead to a measurable and substantial increase in vehicle travel generally include addition of through lanes on existing or new roadways. For transportation projects that increase roadway capacity, the VMT estimates and forecasts will also need to include induced travel effects. However, not all roadway projects lead to induced travel.”
To conduct
the VMT analysis, we will run the City of Stockton General Plan Travel Demand Model for the following scenarios:
• Base Ye
ar No Project
• Base Year with Proposed Project
• Cumulative (2040) No Project
• Cumulative (2040) with Proposed Project
For each s
cenario, we will determine the project effect on VMT within the City of Stockton boundary. If the project leads to a measurable increase in VMT, Fehr & Peers will evaluate long-term induced VMT effects using the National Center for Transportation Calculator to forecast the long-term effects. If significant VMT impacts are identified, Fehr & Peers will develop VMT-reducing mitigation measures to address the impacts. These could include additional pedestrian and bicycle enhancements, enhanced transit facilities, or other vehicle trip reduction measures.

Consistency Analysis
Fehr & Peers will address the following three questions for the project:

1. Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?

2. Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)?

3. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Fehr & Peer
s will analyze the proposed project relative to transportation-related policies and plans set forth in the General Plan, Bicycle Master Plan, and other applicable transportation plans. As appropriate, modifications to the proposed project will be recommended if inconsistencies are identified.

Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
181
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

Fehr & Peers will qualitatively assess potential transit, bicycle, and pedestrian impacts by reviewing the proposed project’s physical changes to the study area’s transit, bicycle, and pedestrian networks. Specific review items will include the following.
• Consistency with applicable design standards.
• Project changes to the traffic volumes in the study area. • Project modifications to the public roadway, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian systems.

Where necessary and feasible, we will identify mitigation measures to reduce significant impacts. Each mitigation measure will identify the specific action necessary, responsibility for implementation, and level of significance after mitigation. This information will be delivered to be incorporated into the CEQA environmental document.

Transportation Chapter Documentation
Fehr & Peers will prepare an administrative draft transportation chapter for the CEQA document that describes the existing setting, regulatory setting, assumptions, methods, and analysis results. The chapter will include various figures, tables, and a technical appendix. We will submit the administrative draft chapter for review by the project team and City staff. Fehr & Peers has budgeted eight (8) hours of staff time to respond to comments on the administrative draft chapter, and to create a draft transportation chapter. This task also includes preparation of the administrative record, which includes all materials relied upon for the analysis.

Fehr & Peer
s has budgeted eight (8) hours to provide written responses to transportation-related public comments and help prepare the final CEQA document. If responses or environmental documentation require more time than has been budgeted, a scope and fee amendment will be necessary.

Task 2.4. NEPA Documentation – Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact
The Environmental Assessment (EA) will be prepared consistent with the Caltrans Standard Environmental Reference (SER) and the current EA template (currently February 8, 2023) because the project does not appear to be categorically excluded under Caltrans’ environmental review procedures. Based on LSA’s experience, the EA would likely culminate in a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). LSA will use project information provided by the project design team, to the extent possible. LSA will also rely on previously prepared technical reports provided to LSA by the City and the technical studies outlined in Task 2 above.

Prepare Administrative Draft EA
The Administrative Draft EA will include the description of the project developed under Task 2 and (a) a statement of purpose and need for the proposal, (b) a discussion of the proposed action and alternatives, (c) an analysis of probable environmental effects of the proposed action and alternatives, and (d) a list of agencies and persons consulted. These EA components are described below:
• Summary of Major Potential Impacts from Alternatives - From the subsequent chapters of the EA, LSA will prepare a summary table listing the major potential impacts by alternative. • Coordination with Public and Other Agencies - LSA will prepare a list of coordination efforts with the public and other agencies.

Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
182
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

• Purpose and Need - LSA will incorporate the project description from Task 1.2 and supplement this information with and a brief discussion of the purpose and need for the proposed action. This discussion will include a list of objectives of the project.
• Project Alternatives, Comparison of Alternatives, Preferred Alternative, and Alternatives Eliminated - LSA will prepare a description and comparative analysis of the proposed project and alternatives, including a description of alternatives considered but eliminated. EA 's must, at a minimum, include the proposed Build and No Build alternatives. Additionally, the EA must identify the preferred Alternative for the FONSI. LSA will coordinate with the project development team to identify and discuss alternatives that could reasonably achieve the need that the proposed build is intended to address. •
Affected Environment -This section of the EA will include a concise description of the human environment and natural resources that would be affected by implementation of the proposed action. This baseline is used to compare the impacts of the various alternatives.
•
Environmental Consequences - LSA will describe probable environmental effects for the project using the environmental factors identified by Caltrans. Also included will be a list of permits to be obtained and a cumulative impact analysis. LSA will prepare a summarized discussion of the probable adverse effects of both the proposed Build and its alternatives. This section of the EA will also include the information required to demonstrate compliance with other applicable requirements and will identify any permits, licenses, other approvals, or reviews that apply.

This sco
pe of work is based on the assumption that the proposed action would not result in adverse effects to the environment.
• Avoidance, Minimization and/or Abatement Measures - This section will identify environmental protection measures that have been incorporated into the action in order to avoid adverse effects.

Deliverables: Administrative Draft EA (electronic copy provided to Caltrans on behalf of the City) Prepare Screencheck Draft EA
LSA will respond to City and Caltrans comments on the Administrative Draft EA and prepare a Screencheck Draft EA.

We have budgeted sixty (60) hours for responding to agency comments generated during the Administrative Draft EA.

Circulate Draft EA
LSA will respond to City and Caltrans comments on the Screencheck Draft EA and prepare the Draft EA for circulation.

LSA has budgeted forty (40) hours for responding to agency comments generated during the Screencheck Draft EA.

Based on
final comments, LSA will submit an electronic version and up to ten (10) hard copies of the Public Review Draft EA for Caltrans to distribute to agencies and interested persons for their review and posting on the Federal Register.

The EA will also be posted on Caltrans’ and the City’s websites.

Prepare Final EA/Finding of No Significant Impact
Following the public review period, LSA will prepare responses to comments to the public comments received and how the comments were addressed. LSA has budgeted up to forty (40) hours to respond to public comments. Should an Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
183
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

unusually high volume of comments be received, LSA can complete responses on a time and materials basis. The response to public comments will be included as an appendix to the Final EA.

LSA wil
l modify the EA, as needed, to reflect the consideration of public comments and prepare the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for public release.

Task 2.5. Permitting
Permits were acquired for previously evaluated portions of the proposed project, including the Nationwide Permit Verification (Clean Water Act, Section 404), the Water Quality Certification (Clean Water Act, Section 401), Central Valley Flood Protection Board Encroachment Permits, and coverage under the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (SJMSCP). The Section 404 and Section 401 permits for the Lower Sacramento Road over Bear Creek Bridge Replacement expired April 8, 2012. Central Valley Flood Protection Board Encroachment Permits are valid until revoked. The SJMSCP coverage has not expired; however, given the time elapsed, updates may be required for the previously approved portion of the proposed project. LSA will assist the City with preparation of regulatory permitting application materials to authorize impacts associated with the project.

Regulatory Permits
The proposed project may affect jurisdictional aquatic features, including for bridge crossings at Pixley Slough and Bear Creek, which may require permits from the USACE, RWQCB, and/or CDFW.

LSA has bu
dgeted 30 hours for responses to agency comments on the applications. We have also budgeted for on -site meetings with agency representatives (if necessary).

Nationwide Permit Verification (Clean Water Act, Section 404).

The proposed project may result in discharge of material into waters of the U.S., particularly for bridge replacement at Pixley Slough and Bear Creek and possible culvert modifications at the Eight Mile Road ditch and Marlette Road canal.

Based on a preliminary review, we anticipate that each structure will be eligible for coverage under Nationwide Permit No. 14 – Linear Transportation Projects. Our costs include preparation of one Preconstruction Notifications (PCN) covering all structures for submittal to the USACE.

Water Quality Certification (Clean Water Act, Section 401) A Water Quality Certification may be required from the RWQCB for the proposed project, if it will affect wetlands or other waters of the State, to certify that the project is consistent with water quality goals and objectives. LSA will prepare an application package for submittal to the RWQCB. A processing fee must be included with the submittal (to be provided by the City, amount to be determined).

Pre-App
lication Meeting. LSA will submit a pre-application meeting request to the RWQCB at least 30 days in advance of the submittal of the 401 Water Quality Certification application package. If the RWQCB requests a meeting, LSA will schedule a 1-hour video conference with the RWQCB, the City, and the design team. LSA will also prepare a succinct project summary for discussion during the meeting, including a description of the project, the project impacts, proposed compensatory mitigation, and proposed alternatives to be addressed in the alternatives analysis (see below).

Based on input provided by the RWQCB during the pre-application meeting, LSA will discuss with the City, Caltrans and the design team any additional requirements that may not be covered under LSA’s existing scope of work before finalizing the 401 Water Quality Certification application package.

Alternatives Analysis (AA). LSA will prepare an AA consistent with the State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State (Procedures) requirements for “Tier 2 Projects,” which Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
184
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

specify an analysis of on-site alternatives that would potentially reduce impacts to waters of the State. LSA will coordinate with the design team to identify two or three conceptual alternative designs that will be evaluated in the AA (e.g., retrofit option, alternative alignment, etc.). The AA will describe cost and feasibility information (i.e., logistical or technical constraints) for each of the alternatives to demonstrate that they are impracticable when compared with the proposed project. Based on input and direction provided by LSA, the design team will provide support for the AA, including preparation of the conceptual alternative layouts and brief written descriptions, line- item cost estimates for infrastructure and fees, and feasibility input for the alternatives.

LSA will submit the Draft AA the City and the design team electronically for review. We have included 8 hours to respond to internal comments generated during review of the Draft AA. LSA’s budget for the AA also includes 8 hours to respond to questions and/or revise the Draft AA based on comments from the RWQCB.

The level o
f effort that LSA anticipates for the AA is commensurate with LSA’s interpretation of the Procedures and our experience preparing similar analyses for the USACE. If a more extensive analysis is required by the RWQCB, additional budget may be needed.

Streambed Alteration Agreement (Fish and Game Code, Section 1602) The proposed project may require notification of proposed streambed alteration to the CDFW for construction of new bridges at Pixley Slough and Bear Creek, and possibly for culvert modification at the Marlette Road canal. LSA will prepare an application package for submittal to CDFW via the Environmental Permit Information Management System (EPIMS). A processing fee must be included with the submittal (to be provided by the City, amount to be determined).

Please note that the CDFW will consider each bridge/culvert to be a separate project, requiring a separate fee for each.

We have included up to 2 hours to support EPIMS set up for the project. Based on our experience with the CDFW staff overseeing the project region, our costs assume response to one round of comments from the CDFW.

San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (SJMSCP) The projec
t falls within the boundaries of the SJMSCP, which provides coverage for species listed under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) and federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) and satisfies CEQA and NEPA requirements.

Obtaining coverage under the SJMSCP is recommended in lieu of separate USFWS Section 7 and CDFW Section 2081 Incidental Take Permit consultations. A portion of the proposed project, previously evaluated as the Lower Sacramento Road/Bear Creek Bridge Replacement, has been approved under the SJMSCP; the remainder of the proposed project will also require approval.

Per dis
cussions with City staff, staff will prepare the SJMSCP Review Form and supplemental materials for submittal to the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG).

This s
cope assumes that the biological surveys will determine that special status fish species will not have potential to present and affected by the proposed project. If special status fish species are determined to have potential, additional scope and budget will be provided to prepare documentation and support consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service. The scope also assumes that separate USFWS Section 7 consultation for species other than those included in the SJMSCP will not be required.

All inform
ation necessary to support permit applications will be provided by the City, such as diversion/dewatering plans, descriptions of construction methods and equipment, hydraulic and scour analyses, and locations of proposed staging areas.

Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
185
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

USACE Section 408 Permit Application
The project will require a Section 408 permit from the USACE for construction work within a federally regulated floodplain. The project team will apply to the USACE to obtain the authorization for work within the floodplain. LSA will prepare a screening memo that will include the Checklist for Categorical Permission (CP) 22 Trails, Roads, and Ramps and exhibits of the project area. The memo will be used as the basis for engaging the USACE Section 408 Unit in discussion.

CVFPB Encroachment Permit Application
An encroachment permit is required from the Central Valley Flood Protection Board (CVFPB) for work within a designated floodway. The project team will submit an application to the CVFPB to obtain the authorization for work within the floodway. An application fee must be included with the application (to be provided by the City).

Deliverables: Project permit applications to the USACE and CVFPB TASK 2.6 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
LSA’s project manager will undertake a variety of general project management tasks throughout the process of preparing the environmental documentation and coordinating with Mark Thomas and other team members, including coordination of the day-to-day activities associated with the project and monitoring the scope, budget, and scheduling of the project. Other project management tasks include regular client contact, contract managemen t, and assistance to team members. LSA will provide written documentation of all substantive project developments in the form of client emails and/or phone conversation records and will follow up our submittals to outside parties and conduct coordination as necessary to ensure efficient and timely review.

LSA’s prin
cipal in charge will ultimately be responsible for quality assurance for all work undertaken and will review all text, tables, and graphics before these materials are presented as administrative review documents. The principal in charge will also be available for consultation on environmental review procedural matters and strategy .

LSA will attend two in-person meetings: a kickoff meeting and a public hearing for the Draft EA. LSA will also attend up to 24 project team meetings via conference call. Additional meetings and/or public hearings will be billed on a time - and-materials basis consistent with our 10-H1 rates.

Task 2 Assumptions:

LSA's scope of work is based on the following assumptions:
• Hazardous Materials Study(ies), Geotechnical Study, Project Design, Stormwater Plans, and Hydraulic studies will be developed and provided by others on the Mark Thomas team for incorporation into the Addendum and EA. • The proposed actions will be consistent with the four-lane facility evaluated as part of the General Plan EIR and will culminate in an Addendum to that EIR. If significant unavoidable environmental impacts are identified, and a Supplemental/Subsequent EIR is required, LSA would submit an independent scope of work, cost estimate, and schedule. However, such an outcome is not expected.
• The EA will culminate in a FONSI. If significant unavoidable environmental impacts are identified, and an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required, LSA would submit an independent scope of work, cost estimate, and schedule. However, such an outcome is not expected.

Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
186
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

• The City and Caltrans (as applicable) will be responsible for distributing the EA. • The City and Caltrans (as applicable) will be responsible for filing all notices associated with the project.

TASK 2 DELIVERABLES
• Project Description (electronic copy)
• Draft Preliminary Environmental Study Form (PDF)
• Final Preliminary Environmental Study Form (PDF)
• Draft Air Quality Report (AQR) (PDF)
• Final Air Quality Report (AOR) (PDF)
• Draft Air Quality Conformity Checklist (PDF)
• Final Air Quality Conformity Checklist (PDF)
• Draft Air Quality Conformity Report (AQCR) (PDF)
• Final Air Quality Conformity Report (AQCR) (PDF)
• Draft Aquatic Resources Delineation Report (ARDR)
• Final Aquatic Resources Delineation Report (ARDR)
• Draft Biological Assessment (BA) (PDF)
• Final Biological Assessment (BA) (PDF)
• Draft Habitat Mitigation Plan (HMP) (PDF)
• Final Habitat Mitigation Plan (HMP) (PDF)
• Draft Community Impact Assessment (CIA) (PDF)
• Final Community Impact Assessment (CIA) (PDF)
• Phase 1 Initial Site Assessment (PDF)
• Draft Noise Study Report (NSR) (PDF)
• Final Noise Study Report (NSR) (PDF)
• Draft Noise Abatement Decision Report (NADR) (PDF)
• Final Noise Abatement Decision Report (NADR) (PDF)
• Draft Area of Potential Effects Map (APE) (PDF)
• Final Area of Potential Effects Map (APE) (PDF)
• Draft Historical Resources Evaluation Report (HRER) (PDF) • Final Historical Resources Evaluation Report (HRER) (PDF) • Draft Historic Property Survey Report (HPSR) (PDF)
• Final Historic Property Survey Report (HPSR) (PDF)
• Draft Archaeological Survey Report (ASR) (PDF)
• Final Archaeological Survey Report (ASR) (PDF)
• Draft Form NRCS-CPA-106 (PDF)
• Final Form NRCS-CPA-106 (PDF)
• Draft Natural Environment Study (PDF)
• Final Natural Environment Study (PDF)
• Cultural Resources (HPSR/ASR) Report (PDF)
• Administrative Draft Transportation Chapter (PDF)
• Draft VIA Memo (PDF)
• Final VIA Memo (PDF)
• Draft Water Quality Assessment Report (PDF)
• Final Water Quality Assessment Report (PDF)
• Administrative Draft EA (Electronic copy to Caltrans) Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
187
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

• Screencheck Draft EA (Electronic copy to Caltrans)
• Public Review Draft EA (electronic copy and up to ten (10) hard copies to Caltrans) • Draft Final EA/FONSI (electronic copy to Caltrans)
• Final EA/FONSI (electronic copy and five (5) hard copies to Caltrans) • Preconstruction Notification (PCN)
• Application for Water Quality Certification Alternatives Analysis • Notification of Proposed Streambed Alteration
TASK 3. PREPARATION OF PRECISE ROAD PLAN (PRP) - SEI LEAD The Mark Thomas team, lead by Siegfried (SEI), have experience in preparing a Precise Road Plan (PRP) for the City. The PRP is a focused planning effort of a roadway and/or transportation corridor that conforms to the City’s General Plan and all other City adopted plans. Its purpose is to identify and explore all feasible design options for future right -of- way, roadway alignment, lane configuration and cross sections, potential phasing, accommodations for multi- transportation, access restrictions, and intersection controls and modifications for all side streets or portions of a roadway and/or transportation in the LSR corridor.

Prior to the start of the preparation of the PRP, we will review Stockton's Municipal Code Chapter 16.148 Precise Road Plan for the City’s procedures and PRP application requirements. The Mark Thomas team will coordinate, as needed, with San Joaquin County for the possibility of the City and County co- adopting the PRP. In addition, coordination with the Eight Mile Road PRP Project will be required during the design of the LSR and Eight Mile Road intersection.

Task 3.1. 35% PRP
Using Record Drawings and other available construction documents for the project, as well as topographic information, we will l prepare a draft 35% design level geometric plan. The 35% PRP will contain preliminary information to identify the preliminary alignment and lane configuration of the proposed road widening and identify initial project impacts to access, Right of Way (ROW), driveways, utilities, and topographic features. The 35% PRP will be provided to staff for review and comment. The comments will be used to refine the elements of the project and help define a project that the community can support. Also, as we progress with the development of the PRP, we will be able to develop design and construction elements to minimize disruption to the adjacent properties along the project corridor. The Mark Thomas team will submit the 35% PRP in PDF format.

Task 3.2. 50% PRP
Using the comments from the 35% PRP, the Mark Thomas team will prepare 50% level PRP. The 50% PRP will further advance design options and also identify utility constraints that have been identified from comments from utility companies and potential solutions to work around the constraints. The goal of the 50% PRP will be to have enough of the design concepts developed so that City staff and the design team have a good understanding of the project elements to share with the community as well as stakeholders. The elements of the 50% PRP will also be a useful tool to help compose the Project Description required for the environmental document.

Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
188
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

Technical Studies
Initial Planning & Alternatives Evaluation:

Fehr & Peers will evaluate up to three alternative designs for Lower Sacramento Road. The work for this phase will focus on creating a shared understanding of the opportunities and tradeoffs associated with existing and potential active transportation facilities along the corridor. This process will involve:
• Documentation of the pros, cons, and tradeoffs of each facility type. This will be informed by Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) guides on bikeway and crossing selection and will incorporate a Safe Systems approach to corridor planning.
• Analysis of the proposed level of traffic stress along the roadway for bike and pedestrian facilities. This will take into consideration number of lanes, design speed, and separation from the roadway. • Coordination with San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) staff to discuss existing and future potential for transit ridership along the corridor based on planned development. • A review of the land use and growth assumptions along the corridor in the City’s 2040 General Plan and associated travel demand forecasting model. Fehr & Peers will also coordinate with the City of Stockton to gather information on for sites along the study corridor that have received entitlements but have not yet been constructed or are still undergoing the entitlement process.

Findings for this task will be documented in a technical memorandum, provided to City staff for one round of review and comment. Where appropriate, the document will be graphically enhanced with cross sections, sketches of potential treatments, and maps.

We will also participate in one working session with City staff to discuss our findings, respond to questions, and identify a preferred alternative for the corridor.

It is noted that this task does not include a detailed traffic operations analysis for the alternative designs. As described later in this Scope of Work, the traffic operations analysis would be completed for the preferred alternative only.

Conceptual Design Support
Once a pref
erred alternative has been identified, Fehr & Peers will review the corresponding conceptual design and provide comments and recommendations to the team on incorporating bicycle and pedestrian facilities, as well as warranted intersection traffic control improvements, into the precise road plan. Fehr & Peers allocated up to 80 hours for this task. Final elements will be determined after the evaluation of alternatives, and may include:
• Bikeway design details such as Separate Bikeway buffers and vertical elements or side path widths and details • Details of bicycle and pedestrian crossings
• Protected intersections, if Class IV facilities are selected • Conceptual signal modifications and intersection design recommendations • Lighting analysis and design
• Sight distance evaluation at up to three locations
• Design speed recommendations, based on published standards and site-specific context The 50% PRP will be submitted to staff in PDF format for review and comment . Also included with the submittal will be our responses to staff comments matrix.

Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
189
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

Task 3.3. 95% PRP
Although the 95% level PRP was not requested in the RFP, the Mark Thomas team is proposing this additional submittal to further define all key elements of the project.

The 95% PRP
, which will address comments from the 50% PRP, will further clarify and refine elements of the project. If staff and the Mark Thomas team agree that the comments generated from the 50% PRP submittal are not substantial and the 50% PRP has captured a majority of the project elements, we can forego the 95% PRP and proceed with the 100% PRP preparation
The 95% P
RP will be submitted to staff for review and comment. The PRP will be submitted in PDF format and will include our response matrix to staff comments on the 35% submittal.

Task 3.4. 100% PRP
The Mark Thomas team will prepare 100% level PRP. The 100% PRP will incorporate all previous City comments and clarify design elements. The 100% PRP will be used as the "footprint" of the project's design.

After
the 100% PRP has been completed, an electronic copy of the 100% PRP will be delivered to staff in PDF format along with a check print and our responses to comments matrix. We understand that staff will make one last review of the PRP and provide the Mark Thomas team with one last round of comments. After the final comments have been addressed, the Mark Thomas team will deliver to the City signed and stamped mylars (25"x36") and electronic files, including the AutoCAD files, on a flash drive.

Task 3.5. Council Approval
After the Mark Thomas team makes the final submittal on the PRP, we understand that staff will take the PRP to the City Council for acceptance. Comments from the Council and the public will be discussed with staff prior to incorporating them to the final PRP to make sure they are germane to the PRP. Relevant comments will be incorporated to the PRP to produce the Project's adopted PRP.

TASK 3 DELIVERABLES
• Deliverables: Precise Road Plan at the level described above and the Final PRP TASK 4. UTILITY COORDINATION
The Mark Thomas team will work with all pertinent utilities to identify utility conflicts, coordinate utility plan reviews, conduct necessary coordination meetings, and locate designed improvements as required to facilitate utility relocations. The Mark Thomas team will coordinate with all utilities in accordance with Caltrans “Manual on High and Low Risk Underground Facility within Highway Rights of Way.” The objective is to eliminate any conflicts encountered during construction, which would pose construction delays or claims.

The Mark
Thomas team will coordinate utility relocation schedule with each utility company and include in specifications for construction coordination. Full documentation of all utility coordination and plan shall be provided to the City with regular updates of progress.

The Mark T
homas team will be responsible for performing utility investigations and coordination with utility owners throughout the project development process. Utility coordination shall include use of PG&E’s online web portal to Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
190
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

assign the project to a PG&E project manager and coordinate all PG&E related work with the assigned project manager.

Members of the Mark Thomas team will be present at all necessary meetings with each utility owner. Included in our Scope of Work are the following services:
• Prepare a project limits map and request utility information from each utility owner within the area of work. • Provide copies of all utility correspondence and obtain existing records and map for City files.

Task 4.1. Utility Mapping ("A" Letter)
The Mark Thomas team will prepare Utility Letter “A” during preliminary design phase to utility owners for City to review and approve prior to transmitting to utility owners. Information on existing utilities obtained as a result of the “A” letter will be transferred to base maps in both plan and profile view. A copy of the utility data obtained from utility owners will be provided to the City and the originals will be filed in the project files.

Task 4.2. Utility Location Verification (Potholing)
The Mark Thomas team will coordinate with our potholing sub the mark outs for Underground Service Alert and pothole utilities potentially in conflict located in and near proposed improvements. We will survey all utility locations and update utility information on the plans (plan and profile) based on information obtained by potholing. We will provide the City a Utility Potholing report which will include the following information for each utility: picture, location, facility type, material, size, and depth. The consultant has assumed approximately 25 potholes will be required to positively locate existing high and low risk utilities. The utility base mapping will be updated to reflect the positive locations.

Task 4.3. Utility Conflict Mapping ("B" Letter)
The Mark Thomas team will Prepare Utility Letter “B” during 60% design phase to the affected utility owners for City to review and approve prior to transmitting to utility owners. Two sets of half-sized 60% plans will be provided to each utility owner as an attachment to the letter. The letter will request that utility owners verify any utility conflicts with proposed improvements and indicate whether any future utilities are proposed in the area that may require accommodation through the improved area. Information on existing utilities obtained as a result of the “B” letter will be used to determine potential utility conflicts and to resolve the conflicts identified. A copy of the utility data obtained from utility owners will be provided to the City and the originals will be filed in the project files.

Task 4.4. Utility Relocation Coordination
The Mark Thomas team will meet with utility companies as needed (up to 2 meetings on-site & 3 office or virtual meetings) to ensure that conflicts are identified and relocations performed, if necessary.

Task 4.5. PG&E Rule 20 Coordination
Based on discussions with City staff, staff will take the lead on the PG&E Rule 20 Coordination. The Mark Thomas team will provide assistance with utility plan preparation and attend up to two coordination meetings. The City will handle all of the other required tasks.

Task 4.6. Relocation Notices ("C" Letter)
The Mark Thomas team will prepare Utility Letter “C” during 100% design phase to the affected utility owners for City to review and approve prior to transmitting to utility owners. Two sets of half-sized 100% plans will be provided to each utility owner as an attachment to the letter. The letter will indicate to the utility owners whether any changes have been made to the project plans since the Utility Letter “B” and will request written confirmation of utility relocations and utility Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
191
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

relocation schedule. A copy of the utility data obtained from utility owners will be provided to the City and the originals will be filed in the project files.

TASK 4 DELIVERABLES
• Deliverable : Utility Correspondence & Existing Records Package • Deliverable : Draft Utility A letters (Word Document) • Deliverable : Final Utility A letters (Word Document & PDF) • Deliverable : Utility Potholing Report (PDF)
• Deliverable : Draft Utility B Letters (Word Document) • Deliverable : Final Utility B Letters (Word Document & PDF) • Deliverable : Draft Utility C Letters (Word Document) • Deliverable : Final Utility C Letters (Word Document & PDF) TASK 5. PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATE (PS&E)
The Mark Thomas team will prepare complete PS&E documents, which include design improvement plans for demolition, grading, striping, electrical, drainage, paving, staging, erosion control, and other civil details as well as technical specifications, and engineer’s estimate. The PS&E shall be prepared according to the City’s and Caltrans’ standards and current CA MUTCD, as appropriate. Prepare a base map showing existing information to facilitate the design of all the necessary improvements. The base map limits shall be sufficient to cover all necessary improvements within the project area.

Im
provement plans for modifications, traffic signal, striping, roadway, drainage, electrical, lighting, bridges, landscaping, irrigation, erosion control, and water pollution prevention plans, shall be submitted for review to the City at 30%, 65%, 95%, and 100% completion stage. The Consultant will provide one electronic copy (PDF format) and two full scale (24x36) at each design stage to the City for review and comments. The original red- line comments from the reviewing agency shall be addressed in the succeeding submittal and provide a matrix tracking form.

The Mark Thomas team will provide project specifications and project estimates with the 65% and 100% submittals.

We anticipate that the City will make all comments on design submittals via Bluebeam software. With each set of comments, we will review comments, incorporate changes into the following submittal, create a matrix to track all comments, and provide a signed Quality Control Checklist. Any comments not incorporated in the design must will be responded to via the comments matrix.

Task 5.1. Traffic Operations Report
Traffic Operations Analysis Report
Fehr & Peers will use the recently updated 2022 base year City of Stockton travel demand forecasting (TDF) model utilized as part of the Stockton Transportation Master Plan (TMP) and Impact Fee Study to forecast Existing Plus Project AM and PM peak hour turning movement volumes at seven (7) study intersections along the Lower Sacramento Road study corridor. Fehr & Peers will add an appropriate level of roadway network and traffic analysis zone detail to the model to support intersection-level analysis and project development.

Feh
r & Peers will utilize the 2040 City of Stockton General Plan model recently updated for use on the TMP to develop intersection turning movement forecasts at up to nine (9) study intersections for Cumulative No Project and Cumulative Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
192
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

Plus Project conditions. The study encompasses nine intersections, with seven analyzed under Existing Conditions and two potential future intersections. Fehr & Peers budgeted the analysis of two potential future intersections that may be constructed by upcoming developments necessitating new access points along the Lower Sacramento Road study corridor. The same level of roadway network and traffic analysis zone details that were added to 2022 TDF model will be added to the 2040 General Plan TDF model to support intersection-level analysis. Fehr & Peers will coordinate with the City of Stockton to adjust 2040 TDF model land use assumptions in the vicinity of the project corridor to reflect recently (or soon to be) entitled projects that are not yet constructed.

Fehr & Peer
s will coordinate with the Eight Mile Road Precise Road Plan team to ensure consistency among the future turning movement forecasts developed for the Lower Sacramento Road/Eight Mile Road intersection.

Existing Plus Project Traffic Operations Analysis
Fehr & Peers will analyze AM, PM, and Daily volume-to-capacity ratios at up to four (4) study roadway segments using procedures described in the HCM. Fehr & Peers will analyze level of service (LOS) at up to seven (7) study intersections for weekday AM and PM peak hours using the Synchro/SimTraffic software. Maximum queue lengths for key turning movements will be used to provide recommendations on turn pocket lengths at the study intersections.

Peak hou
r traffic volumes will also be used to evaluate whether any of the unsignalized study intersections meet the peak hour signal warrant based on the methodology provided in the most recent California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices.

Cumulative Traffic Operations Analysis
Fehr & Peers will analyze Cumulative No Project and Cumulative Plus Project AM, PM, and Daily volume-to-capacity ratios at up to four (4) study roadway segments using procedures described in the HCM. Fehr & Peers will use microsimulation analysis methods to analyze operations at up to nine (9) study intersections (seven existing and two future intersections) under Cumulative No Project and Cumulative Plus Project conditions. Analysis results will inc lude intersection level of service, control delay, travel time, and maximum queue lengths for key turning movements.

Maximum queue lengths for key turning movements will be used to provide recommendations on turn pocket lengths at the study intersections.

Peak hou
r traffic volumes will also be used to evaluate whether any of the unsignalized study intersections meet the peak hour signal warrant based on the methodology provided in the California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices.

Fehr & Peer
s will present the findings of the Cumulative analysis to City staff and have budgeted for up to three (3) rounds of revisions to the analysis to incorporate any refinements to the preferred alternative scenario (based upon the outcome of the traffic operations analysis). If more than three rounds of revisions are required based on City input, Fehr & Peers will prepare a supplemental scope before proceeding with any additional analysis.

Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE)
Since the project does not fall within the jurisdiction of Caltrans, City staff and the Mark Thomas team agree that an ICE is not required. Although an ICE will not be prepared, the traffic analysis that Fehr & Peers is preparing will be sufficient to make recommendations to the City on intersection operations improvements as well as providing a brief qualitative analysis regarding roundabouts at the intersections.

Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
193
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

Level of Traffic Stress (LTS)
Fehr & Peers will evaluate active transportation facilities and the corresponding LTS along the Lower Sacramento Road study corridor for the following future scenarios:
• Existing Plus Project
• Cumulative No Project
• Cumulative Plus Project
Traffic Operations Analysis Report
Fehr & Peers will document the assumptions, methodologies, and findings of the traffic operations analysis in a draft report for review by the project team and City staff. Fehr & Peers will also provide recommended signal timing plans for signalized study intersections in the form of Synchro files and Synchro report outputs. Fehr & Peers has budgeted up to 16 hours to respond to two rounds of consolidated comments on the draft report to produce the final report.

Task 5.1.2 Topographic Base Mapping
It is assumed existing photogrammetric base mapping prepared previously for Bear Creek, UPRR Grade Separation and Pixley Slough will be used in this phase of the project. Additional topographic base mapping will be collected in areas identified with no previous topographic base mapping collected, and in areas that have been modified or constructed since original topographic base mapping has been collected. The existing photogrammetric linework will be updated to reflect the existing conditions using high-resolution aerial imagery. Recent projects which have been constructed since the photogrammetry was prepared will be reflected in the base mapping, including the Bear Creek and Pixley Slough Bicycle and Pedestrian Path Project. The photogrammetry will also be updated with supplemental topographic surveys as outlined in the scope of work below. Supplemental Topographic Surveys will be conducted to facilitate design efforts. It is assumed encroachment permits will allow access of local roads.

Task 5.1.3 Geotechnical Design Report (GDR)
Crawford will perform pavement analysis and assessment of the existing roadway structural sections and provide recommendations for maintenance and/or reconstruction.

Traffic I
ndex calculations will be provided with the pavement analysis memo and recommendations . Coring will take place at approximately 500-foot intervals and will be advanced approximately 3 to 4 feet below grade to characterize the soil and existing pavement sections. A memo outlining the geotechnical conditions and pavement restoration, replacement, and reconstruction will be prepared.

Task 5.1.4 Structure Foundation Report (FR)
Crawford makes allowance to address design related revisions to foundation data/loading in order to provide a revised foundation report. No additional field exploration or laboratory testing is included in this scope of services.

Crawfo
rd will complete engineering evaluation and analysis (using computer software where applicable) for the following: soil correlations; bearing resistance; lateral capacity; pile drivability analysis; site seismicity including procedures consistent with current Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria, to determine the site acceleration response spectrum (ARS); liquefaction potential; lateral earth pressure and coefficient of friction to resist sliding; flexible and rigid pavements; and soil corrosivity.

Crawfor
d will prepare a revised/updated Foundation Report (FR) consistent with current Caltrans guidelines/format for review and comment by the design team and Caltrans. The revised report will include: Introduction; Project Description; Exceptions to Policy; Geotechnical Investigation; Geotechnical Conditions (Geology, Surface Conditions and Subsurface Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
194
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

Conditions); Groundwater; As-built Data; Scour Data; Corrosion Evaluation; Seismic Information (Ground Motion Hazard, Caltrans ARS Online Curve, and Other Seismic Hazards); Geotechnical Recommendations (Deep Foundations, Approach Fills); Notes for Specifications; Notes for Construction; and Appendices.

Crawfor
d services for this task also include allowance for the Caltrans review process to respond to review comments.

Crawford will contact Caltrans if necessary to rectify comments received on the draft report for concurrence and include comment responses in the final report.

Following re
ceipt of all Draft FR review comments and concurrence with Caltrans, Crawford will prepare and submit a Final FR incorporating the comments as necessary. The FR will be submitted electronically as a PDF file.

Task 5.1.5 Structure Hydraulics Report
Avila and Associates will review all available background information for the project including inspection reports and as-built plans.

Avila will obtain and review the peak discharge estimates for the 50-year, and 100-year from previous studies by West Yost Associates and the San Joaquin Area Flood Control Agency (SJAFCA). It is assumed that discharge estimates are readily available, well documented and reasonable.

Avila will obtain and review the 1D HEC-RAS model for Pixley Slough and Bear Creek of the existing conditions from West Yost Associates or SJAFCA provided by others.

Avila will u
pdate the existing conditions 1D model for Pixley Slough and Bear Creek for up to two proposed conditions alternatives based on project plans and grading provided by others.

Avila will u
pdate the proposed conditions model once for the final alternative of Pixley Slough and Bear Creek.

For scour analysis, Avila will review additional Maintenance Reports (since 2008) for adjacent upstream and downstream bridges to assist in degradation analysis for Pixley Slough and Bear Creek. Avila will complete local scour calculations including pier, contraction, abutment, and pressure flow scour for the preferred bridge alternative modeled using the methods described in the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Publication HEC -18, Evaluating Scour at Bridges for Pixley Slough. Avila will update scour for the final alternative and provide a Scour Data Table for Pixley Slough and Bear Creek.

For Bank P
rotection, Avila will complete calculations to determine the need for bank protection. If bank protection is required, parameters will be provided according to FHWA publication HEC -23, Bridge Scour and Stream Instability Countermeasures for rock riprap for the one chosen proposed bridge alternative for Pixley Slough and Bear Creek.

Avila
will complete the hydrology and hydraulic analyses required to determine the Overtopping Flood and Flood of Record at the bridge over Pixley Slough and Bear Creek.

Avila will complete a Location Hydraulic Study (Floodplain Encroachment Report) in accordance with 23 CFR 650.113. This document is generally included in the environmental document for the bridge over Pixley Slough and Bear Creek.

Avila will complete a draft Preliminary Hydraulic Report documenting the hydrology and hydraulic results for the existing conditions and up to two proposed bridge alternatives for Pixley Slough and Bear Creek. Avila will incorporate comments and update the Draft Preliminary Report to a Final Preliminary Hydraulic Report. Avila will complete a draft Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
195
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

Final Hydraulic Report documenting the hydrology, hydraulic, scour, and bank protection results for the existing conditions and preferred proposed bridge alternative. Avila will address comments and finalize the Final Hydraulic Report for Pixley Slough and Bear Creek.

The following is assumed:

• Topograp
hic information will be provided by other Mark Thomas team members. HEC-RAS models are still valid, no significant channel changes have occurred since the HEC-RAS modeling in ~ 2008. • Historical bridge cross sections are available in the bridge inspection reports for the bridge (and adjacent bridge) and are sufficient for the degradation analysis.
• Degradation estimates will be straight-line extrapolation using best available data. • No numeric sediment transport models will be completed. • Bank protection will be rock riprap.
• It is assumed that the structure replacement will not cause a significant encroachment into the floodplain or a change in the water surface elevation; if a significant encroachment into the floodplain or change in water surface elevation is found, a separate task order will be necessary. • No insurable structures will be adversely impacted by the structure replacement. • No Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) coordination.

No Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) or Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) or formal No- Rise certification is included in this scope of work.

Task 5.1.6 Roadway Drainage Design Report
The Mark Thomas team will develop a draft drainage report using the Rational Method to analyze the existing drainage facilities and drainage patterns in the area and to determine the proposed facilities needed to effectively manage roadway runoff and accommodate the proposed improvements.

The existing storm drainage system will be mapped from topographic surveys and as-built information from the City.

Proposed drainage shed areas will be developed from topography, field reviews, and the proposed roadway improvements in the project area. Supplemental mapping (adjacent project mapping, drainage master plans, etc., if available) will be evaluated with available topographic mapping. Tributary areas will be defined, and flow rates calculated for inlets and pipelines. The calculations will define pipe/culvert lengths, sizes, peak flow velocities, and hydraulic grade lines. The draft report will be submitted to city for review and comment.

Based on comments received on the draft drainage report, we will update and finalize the report. Comments will be addressed and documented in a comment matrix.

Task 5.2. PS&E
Task 5.2.1. 30% Plans - Transportation & Structures
At a minimum, the 30% design shall include a basic geometric configuration of roadway (including intersections) bridge, and culvert design, and cross sections of each of the major project elements. ADA improvements and ramp locations will be shown. Consultant to consider in the overall design, turning radius of the various vehicles (including buses, trucks, semitrucks with trailers) used by various local agencies, including but not limited to: Lodi/Stockton Unified School District, Stockton Fire Department, San Joaquin Regional Transit District, and Stockton Waste Management.

Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
196
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

Plans shall include all critical traffic factors for geometric and control design. Factors include, but not limited to, design speed, available right of way, terrain/topography, design vehicle, peak hour volumes, possible resolutions to traffic queuing along Eight Mile Road, roadway cross section, lane widths, and roadway camber.

The plans w
ill also include landscaping and irrigation design of median and sidewalk parkways. It is assumed that the City has water mains in the vicinity to provide water service to the planter areas. It is further assumed that the medians and the parkways areas will be a combination of planting and other no maintenance materials such as decomposed granite, rock mulch, and boulders.
30% Traffic Signal Design Plans
Fehr & Peers will prepare PS&E for traffic signal system modifications for the following four study intersections that are currently signalized:
• Lower S
acramento Road/Eight Mile Road (major signal modification assumed) • Lower Sacramento Road/Marlette Road (major signal modification assumed) • Lower Sacramento Road/Grider Way (minor signal modification assumed) • Lower Sacramento Road/Royal Oaks Drive (minor signal modification assumed) Mark Th
omas will provide base maps including civil improvements, striping, utilities, and right -of-way, and the City and County will provide any relevant record drawings for Fehr & Peers’ use in developing P lans. Fehr & Peers will prepare plans at the 30% submittal level and submit to Mark Thomas for processing. Fehr & Peers will address City comments and prepare written responses.

The tr
affic signal design will identify type of controller and service, vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian detection, vehicle and pedestrian signals, emergency vehicle pre-emption, and the conductor and equipment schedules conforming to City of Stockton standards. The design will also include removal of existing streetlighting and/or traffic signal infrastructure necessary to accommodate proposed traffic signal system improvements. Fehr & Peers will coordinate with PG&E to identify new or modified electrical service points to include on the plans.

The follow
ing plan sheets will be included:
• Cover Sheet (1 sheet, no scale)
• Traffic Signal Plan (1 sheet per intersection, 20 scale) • Traffic Signal Schedules (1 sheet per intersection, no scale) • Traffic Signal Details (up to 2 sheets, no scale)
Fehr Pe
ers assumes that traffic signal interconnect design services for Lower Sacramento Road study corridor are not required. Any services not specifically listed above will be considered additional work for which a separate scope and fee will be prepared.
30% Street Lighting Design Plans (F&P)
Fehr & Peers will prepare lighting PS&E for the Lower Sacramento Road study corridor between Pixley Slough and Royal Oaks Drive, excluding the 1,800 lineal feet of corridor that was recently improved as part of the railroad grade separation project, which Fehr & Peers assumes does not require street lighting upgrades. Fehr & Peers will prepare lighting PS&E for approximately 8,300 lineal feet of the Lower Sacramento Road corridor.

Mark Th
omas will provide base maps including civil improvements, striping, utilities, and right -of-way, and the City and County will provide any relevant record drawings for Fehr & Peers’ use in developing p lans. Fehr & Peers will prepare Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
197
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

lighting plans at the 30% submittal level and submit to Mark Thomas for processing. The design will conform to City of Stockton, and where relevant San Joaquin County, design standards for the type of light poles and luminaires to be modified and/or installed. Fehr & Peers will coordinate the pole and luminaire selection with City of Stockton and San Joaquin County staff. Fehr & Peers will perform an AGi32 photometric analysis of the lighting layout to aid in the design and will provide the lighting analysis with the plans for City and County review. Fehr & Peers will coordinate with the Mark Thomas team for light placement. The lighting design will identify modifications to existing street lighting infrastructure, proposed pole locations, luminaire types, conduit, pull boxes, and electrical service.

Fehr & P
eers will prepare the following lighting sheets:
• Study Corridor Lighting (Pixley Slough to Royal Oaks Drive): Up to four (4) sheets, 1” = 40’ • Notes and Detail Sheets: Up to four (4) sheets, not to scale Fehr & P
eers will prepare electrical load calculations for the lighting design. Fehr & Peers will coordinate with the Mark Thomas team to obtain the system load requirements and submit them with applications to the utility service provider (PG&E) to establish new and/or modified electrical service point locations. Fehr & Peers will include the service points for the lighting on the plans. Any electrical connection or application fees shall be paid for by the City of Stockton . Any services not specifically listed above will be considered additional work for which a separate scope and fee will be prepared.

Task 5.2.2 65% Plans Specifications and Estimate - Transportation & Structures At a minimum, the design shall be developed far enough to identify locations of utilities, geometric features, and other design elements. ADA improvements and curb ramp details will be included on the plans. Prepare the plans such that the environmental documents may be completed with the 65% submittal. Consultant to thoroughly consider in the overall design all critical elements, including but not limited to horizontal and vertical constraints, underground constraints (such as utilities and geotechnical conditions), right-of-way, environmental and overall project budget constraints. Provide a preliminary Engineer’s Estimate and project schedule reflective of the 65% level of completion.

Bridge structure estimate should reflect staging of construction with dewatering and site protection plans along with planned road closure and detours. Quantify road closure in calendar days both continuous and in phases. Site protection includes, but not limited to, measures preventing vandalism, graffiti, theft, and site disruption after work hours.
65% Traffic Signal Design PS&E (F&P)
Fehr & Peers will prepare PS&E for traffic signal system modifications for the following four study intersections that are currently signalized:
• Lower S
acramento Road/Eight Mile Road (major signal modification assumed) • Lower Sacramento Road/Marlette Road (major signal modification assumed) • Lower Sacramento Road/Grider Way (minor signal modification assumed) • Lower Sacramento Road/Royal Oaks Drive (minor signal modification assumed) Mark Th
omas will provide base maps including civil improvements, striping, utilities, and right -of-way, and the City and County will provide any relevant record drawings for Fehr & Peers’ use in developing PS&E. Fehr & Peers will prepare plans and estimates at the 65% submittal level and submit to Mark Thomas for processing. With each submittal, Fehr & Peers will address City comments and prepare written responses.

The tr
affic signal design will identify type of controller and service, vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian detection, vehicle and pedestrian signals, emergency vehicle pre-emption, and the conductor and equipment schedules conforming to Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
198
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

City of Stockton standards. The design will also include removal of existing streetlighting and/or traffic signal infrastructure necessary to accommodate proposed traffic signal system improvements. Fehr & Peers will coordinate with PG&E to identify new or modified electrical service points to include on the plans.

The follow
ing plan sheets will be included:
• Cover Sheet (1 sheet, no scale)
• Traffic Signal Plan (1 sheet per intersection, 20 scale) • Traffic Signal Schedules (1 sheet per intersection, no scale) • Traffic Signal Details (up to 2 sheets, no scale)
Fehr Pe
ers assumes that traffic signal interconnect design services for Lower Sacramento Road study corridor are not required. Any services not specifically listed above will be considered additional work for which a separate scope and fee will be prepared.
65% Street Lighting Design PS&E (F&P)
Fehr & Peers will prepare lighting PS&E for the Lower Sacramento Road study corridor between Pixley Slough and Royal Oaks Drive, excluding the 1,800 lineal feet of corridor that was recently improved as part of the railroad grade separation project, which Fehr & Peers assumes does not require street lighting upgrades. Fehr & Peers will prepare lighting PS&E for approximately 8,300 lineal feet of the Lower Sacramento Road corridor.

Mark Th
omas will provide base maps including civil improvements, striping, utilities, and right -of-way, and the City and County will provide any relevant record drawings for Fehr & Peers’ use in developing PS&E. Fehr & Peers will prepare lighting plans and estimates at the 65% submittal and submit to Mark Thomas for processing. The design will conform to City of Stockton, and where relevant San Joaquin County, design standards for the type of light poles and luminaires to be modified and/or installed. Fehr & Peers will coordinate the pole and luminaire selection with City of Stockton and San Joaquin County staff. Fehr & Peers will perform an AGi32 photometric analysis of the lighting layout to aid in the design and will provide the lighting analysis with the plans for City and County review. Fehr & Peers will coordinate with the Mark Thomas team for light placement. The lighting design will identify modifications to existing street lighting infrastructure, proposed pole locations, luminaire types, conduit, pull boxes, and electrical service.

Fehr & P
eers will prepare the following lighting sheets:
• Study Corridor Lighting (Pixley Slough to Royal Oaks Drive): Up to four (4) sheets, 1” = 40’ • Notes and Detail Sheets: Up to four (4) sheets, not to scale Fehr & P
eers will prepare electrical load calculations for the lighting design. Fehr & Peers will coordinate with the Mark Thomas team to obtain the system load requirements and submit them with applications to the utility service provider (PG&E) to establish new and/or modified electrical service point locations. Fehr & Peers will include the service points for the lighting on the plans. Any electrical connection or application fees shall be paid for by the City of Stockton . Any services not specifically listed above will be considered additional work for which a separate scope and fee will be prepared.

Prelimin
ary Specifications and Estimates will be submitted with the 95% submittal.

Task 5.2.3 95% PS&E - Transportation & Structures
Project specifications shall be included at this stage and a detailed Engineer’s Estimate including all project elements.

Project Specifications shall include Contractor Pre-Qualification Requirements in compliance with Caltrans Procedures.

One electronic (PDF format) copy via Bluebeam of PS&E shall be provided to the City for review. The review comments Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
199
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

from the 65% submittal shall be itemized and a written response to the comments shall be prepared in a comment matrix.
95% Traffic Signal Design PS&E (F&P)
Fehr & Peers will prepare PS&E for traffic signal system modifications for the following four study intersections that are currently signalized:
• Lower S
acramento Road/Eight Mile Road (major signal modification assumed) • Lower Sacramento Road/Marlette Road (major signal modification assumed) • Lower Sacramento Road/Grider Way (minor signal modification assumed) • Lower Sacramento Road/Royal Oaks Drive (minor signal modification assumed) Mark Th
omas will provide base maps including civil improvements, striping, utilities, and right -of-way, and the City and County will provide any relevant record drawings for Fehr & Peers’ use in developing PS&E. Fehr & Peers will prepare plans at the 95% submittal level and submit to Mark Thomas for processing. With each submittal, Fehr & Peers will address City comments and prepare written responses.

The tr
affic signal design will identify type of controller and service, vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian detection, vehicle and pedestrian signals, emergency vehicle pre-emption, and the conductor and equipment schedules conforming to City of Stockton standards. The design will also include removal of existing streetlighting and/or traffic signal infrastructure necessary to accommodate proposed traffic signal system improvements. Fehr & Peers will coordinate with PG&E to identify new or modified electrical service points to include on the plans.

The follow
ing plan sheets will be included:
• Cover Sheet (1 sheet, no scale)
• Traffic Signal Plan (1 sheet per intersection, 20 scale) • Traffic Signal Schedules (1 sheet per intersection, no scale) • Traffic Signal Details (up to 2 sheets, no scale)
Fehr Pe
ers assumes that traffic signal interconnect design services for Lower Sacramento Road study corridor are not required. Any services not specifically listed above will be considered additional work for which a separate scope and fee will be prepared.
95% Street Lighting Design PS&E (F&P)
Fehr & Peers will prepare lighting PS&E for the Lower Sacramento Road study corridor between Pixley Slough and Royal Oaks Drive, excluding the 1,800 lineal feet of corridor that was recently improved as part of the railroad grade separation project, which Fehr & Peers assumes does not require street lighting upgrades. Fehr & Peers will prepare lighting PS&E for approximately 8,300 lineal feet of the Lower Sacramento Road corridor.

Mark Th
omas will provide base maps including civil improvements, striping, utilities, and right -of-way, and the City and County will provide any relevant record drawings for Fehr & Peers’ use in developing PS&E. Fehr & Peers will prepare lighting PS&E at 95% submittal level and submit each to Mark Thomas for processing. The design will conform to City of Stockton, and where relevant San Joaquin County, design standards for the type of light poles and luminaires to be modified and/or installed. Fehr & Peers will coordinate the pole and luminaire selection with City of Stockton and San Joaquin County staff. Fehr & Peers will perform an AGi32 photometric analysis of the lighting layout to aid in the design and will provide the lighting analysis with the plans for City and County review. Fehr & Peers will coordinate with the Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
200
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

Mark Thomas team for light placement. The lighting design will identify modifications to existing street lighting infrastructure, proposed pole locations, luminaire types, conduit, pull boxes, and electrical service.

Fehr & P
eers will prepare the following lighting sheets:
• Study Corridor Lighting (Pixley Slough to Royal Oaks Drive): Up to four (4) sheets, 1” = 40’ • Notes and Detail Sheets: Up to four (4) sheets, not to scale Fehr & P
eers will prepare electrical load calculations for the lighting design. Fehr & Peers will coordinate with the Mark Thomas team to obtain the system load requirements and submit them with applications to the utility service provider (PG&E) to establish new and/or modified electrical service point locations. Fehr & Peers will include the service points for the lighting on the plans. Any electrical connection or application fees shall be paid for by the City of Stockton . Any services not specifically listed above will be considered additional work for which a separate scope and fee will be prepared.

Task 5.2.4 Final PS&E (100% Complete) Transportation & Structures Complete roadway, culvert, and two (2) bridge structure design revisions from preliminary design. Detailed project estimates and specifications shall be included at this stage. This is the final design, including final construction staging, work zone traffic control, and utility coordination. Consultant shall provide the necessary final PS&E documents in a bid-ready form. Project files and the Project Engineer’s/Resident Engineer’s file will also be submitted with the Final PS&E.

Final PS&E submittal shall include: One complete plan set of reproducible 24”x36” on mylars (after editorial review of 100% plan check via Bluebeam), final cost estimate and specifications, AutoCAD and PDF format drawing files, Microsoft Word format specifications, and Excel format cost estimate delivered to the City. 100% Traffic Signal Design PS&E (F&P)
Fehr & Peers will prepare PS&E for traffic signal system modifications for the following four study intersections that are currently signalized:
• Lower S
acramento Road/Eight Mile Road (major signal modification assumed) • Lower Sacramento Road/Marlette Road (major signal modification assumed) • Lower Sacramento Road/Grider Way (minor signal modification assumed) • Lower Sacramento Road/Royal Oaks Drive (minor signal modification assumed) Mark Th
omas will provide base maps including civil improvements, striping, utilities, and right -of-way, and the City and County will provide any relevant record drawings for Fehr & Peers’ use in developing PS&E. Fehr & Peers will prepare PS&E at 100% submittal level and submit each to Mark Thomas for processing. With each submittal, Fehr & Peers will address City comments and prepare written responses. Fehr & Peers will prepare final, signed, PS&E; plans will be digitally signed PDFs, specifications will be provided in MS Word format, and estimates will be lump sum.

The tr
affic signal design will identify type of controller and service, vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian detection, vehicle and pedestrian signals, emergency vehicle pre-emption, and the conductor and equipment schedules conforming to City of Stockton standards. The design will also include removal of existing streetlighting and/or traffic signal infrastructure necessary to accommodate proposed traffic signal system improvements. Fehr & Peers will coordinate with PG&E to identify new or modified electrical service points to include on the plans.

The follow
ing plan sheets will be included:

Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
201
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

• Cover Sheet (1 sheet, no scale)
• Traffic Signal Plan (1 sheet per intersection, 20 scale) • Traffic Signal Schedules (1 sheet per intersection, no scale) • Traffic Signal Details (up to 2 sheets, no scale)
Fehr Pe
ers assumes that traffic signal interconnect design services for Lower Sacramento Road study corridor are not required. Any services not specifically listed above will be considered additional work for which a separate scope and fee will be prepared.
100% Street Lighting Design PS&E (F&P)
Fehr & Peers will prepare lighting PS&E for the Lower Sacramento Road study corridor between Pixley Slough and Royal Oaks Drive, excluding the 1,800 lineal feet of corridor that was recently improved as part of the railroad grade separation project, which Fehr & Peers assumes does not require street lighting upgrades. Fehr & Peers will prepare lighting PS&E for approximately 8,300 lineal feet of the Lower Sacramento Road corridor.

Mark Thomas will provide base maps including civil improvements, striping, utilities, and right -of-way, and the City and County will provide any relevant record drawings for Fehr & Peers’ use in developing PS&E. Fehr & Peers will prepare lighting PS&E at 100% submittal level and submit to Mark Thomas for processing. The design will conform to City of Stockton, and where relevant San Joaquin County, design standards for the type of li ght poles and luminaires to be modified and/or installed. Fehr & Peers will coordinate the pole and luminaire selection with City of Stockton and San Joaquin County staff. Fehr & Peers will perform an AGi32 photometric analysis of the lighting layout to ai d in the design and will provide the lighting analysis with the plans for City and County review. Fehr & Peers will coordinate with the Mark Thomas team for light placement. The lighting design will identify modifications to existing street lighting infrastructure, proposed pole locations, luminaire types, conduit, pull boxes, and electrical service.

Fehr & P
eers will prepare the following lighting sheets:
• Study Corridor Lighting (Pixley Slough to Royal Oaks Drive): Up to four (4) sheets, 1” = 40’ • Notes and Detail Sheets: Up to four (4) sheets, not to scale Fehr & P
eers will prepare electrical load calculations for the lighting design. Fehr & Peers will coordinate with the Mark Thomas team to obtain the system load requirements and submit them with applications to the utility service provider (PG&E) to establish new and/or modified electrical service point locations. Fehr & Peers will include the service points for the lighting on the plans. Any electrical connection or application fees shall be paid for by the City of Stockton . Any services not specifically listed above will be considered additional work for which a separate scope and fee will be prepared.

Task 5.3. Quality Assurance / Quality Control
The PS&E will go through a quality control reviews before submittal (at the 95% and 100% stage). These reviews will ensure conformance to Caltrans and City Standard criteria as well as minimize typographical omissions. The consultant will provide a signed Quality Control Checklist at the time of each deliverable submittal.

Fehr & Peer
s will complete an internal QA/QC review and provide a signed quality control checklist at the time of 95% and 100% deliverable submittal.

TASK 5 DELIVERABLES
• Traffic Operations Report (PDF)
• Intersection Control Evaluation Memorandum (PDF)
Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
202
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

• Lighting Analysis Study (PDF)
• Topographic Base Mapping (AutoCAD Civil3D DWG)
• Geotechnical Design Report (PDF)
• Draft Foundation Report (PDF)
• Final Foundation Report (PDF)
• Draft Structures Hydraulics Report (PDF)
• Final Structures Hydraulics Report (PDF)
• Draft Roadway Drainage Design Report (PDF)
• Final Roadway Drainage Design Report (PDF)
• 30% Plans (2- 24x36 full scale printed & PDF) Specifications (WORD & PDF) • 65% Plans (2- 24x36 full scale printed & PDF) Specifications (WORD & PDF), Comment Tracking Matrix (PDF), City Comment Response (Bluebeam PDF)
• 95% Plans (2- 24x36 full scale printed & PDF) Specifications (WORD & PDF), Estimate (Excel & PDF), Comment Tracking Matrix (PDF), City Comment Response (Bluebeam PDF) • 100% & Final Plans - (24x36 full scale formatted PDF) Specifications (WORD & PDF), Estimate (Excel & PDF), Comment Tracking Matrix (PDF), City Comment Response (Bluebeam PDF) For final plans - 1- 24x36 full scale mylar plan set stamped and signed, Electronic files Package of all AutoCAD drawing files Compact Disk or USB Flash Drive.

TASK 6. PREPARATION OF PROJECT STUDY REPORT (OPTIONAL
TASK)
The Project Study Report (PSR) is a project initiation document (PID) that is required for any project applying for funding through the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The PSR contains a report of preliminary engineering efforts that defines and justifies the project scope with regard to transportation deficiencies. It must also include a detailed alternatives analysis, preliminary cost estimate for all components, project schedule, description of the PS&E, and anticipated environmental compliance requirements.

The PSR is an Optional Task, and the Mark Thomas team will prepare a PSR (that will follow Appendix L of the Caltrans Project Development Procedure Manual for report requirements with the California Transportation Commission ) if requested by the City. Since this is an Optional Task, no budget has been included for this task and the PSR would be done as an amendment to our agreement.

TASK 7. PUBLIC OUTREACH
The Mark Thomas team (lead by SEI) will conduct Public Outreach for the project.

We anticip
ate holding two (2) Public Information Meetings to present concepts and design features to neighboring residents, businesses, and to the general public. We will work with City staff to determine a location near the project site to have the meeting. The meetings materials will be designed primarily to provide information on the project features, goals, and construction impacts.

The Mark Thomas Team will research and develop a coded database of potentially interested parties, which will be updated throughout the project with names from the public meetings sign-in; information from the project team; and from e-mail and personal contacts. The database will be coded according to interest and involvement with the project.

We anticipate the following groups to be on the stakeholders list:

Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
203
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

• District 1 Council member and other elected and appointed officials • Residents and property owners adjacent to the proposed project area • Businesses and other establishments adjacent to the project area • Emergency responders
• Lodi Unified School District
• Public Transit
• Utility Companies
• Pertinent City staff
• San Joaquin County Public Works
Sigfried will schedule the meetings and make all meeting arrangements, write, design, and issue meeting notices by first-class mail to stakeholders and up to 1,000 mailers by third-class mail to nearby residents; prepare agendas, sign-in sheets, comment sheets, signage, and other print materials; facilitate meeting proceedings; venue coordination, prepare exhibits and a PowerPoint presentation for each meeting to illustrate concepts and plan elements; record public comments/assist with appropriate responses; and prepare a detailed meeting report. We will administer Title VI compliance documentation at the public meeting. The need for a translator will be discussed with City staff prior to the meetings.

Following the meeting, we will develop a summary of the meeting which will include all feedback received and photography. The meeting should be scheduled after the 65% plans and environmental documents have been prepared.

Sigf
ried will coordinate the noticing for two public outreach meetings and a public hearing near the project design completion phase. Sigfried and the design team will also attend planning commission meetings, public hearing meetings, and meetings with stakeholders as required for the duration of the project. Outreach after completion of design is excluded.

If
a third meeting is required, we'll attempt to work it in our existing budget by reusing notification materials.

Feh
r & Peers will attend up to two (2) public outreach meetings and two (2) public hearings to support the project team in presenting and/or responding to public questions on topics related the traffic operations analysis, active transportation, transit, and safety elements of the project.

TASK 7 DELIVERABLES
• Meeting Notices
• Mailers
• Sign-in-Sheets
• Comment Sheets
• Agendas
• Meeting Summary
TASK 8. COORDINATION / MEETINGS
The Mark Thomas team will provide project management services to meet the project scope, schedule and budget as set forth in the accepted proposal. Appropriate members of the Mark Thomas team will attend meetings with City staff, Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
204
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

public, businesses, and individuals as needed. At this time, we anticipate that the meetings will virtual meetings via Microsoft Teams. Appropriate members of the Mark Thomas team will attend meetings with City and Caltrans staff and other agencies when necessary to discuss and finalize the design. We anticipate these meetings to be virtual.

For all mee
tings lead by the Mark Thomas team, our deliverables include, but are not limited to, meeting agendas and minutes.

Task 8.1. Project Management/Project Initiation
This task includes ongoing general project coordination and oversite of the project and team members as well as internal staff. Also included in this task is the preparation of memos, letters, e-mail, and other correspondence necessary to manage the project. This task also includes setting up project files and reviewing documentation between team members.

Task 8.2. Project Development Team Meetings
We anticipate holding up to 20 PDT meetings over the course of the project. The intervals of the PDT meeting will be discussed with staff right after receiving the Norice to Proceed. Initially we feel that the meetings should be held monthly. Topic of the meetings will vary, and the initial meetings will be focused on the design parameters, environmental and progress of the design. We also plan to use some of the PD Ts to have focus meetings on topics that may not pertain to the entire PDT.

The Mark
Thomas team will draft the meeting agendas and distribute them to the other members of the PDT. We will also take the lead with preparing the minutes of the meetings and distributing them to the PDT.

We plan to
hold these meetings virtual (via TEAMS) and we'll send out the meeting invite.

Task 8.3. Agency Coordination Meetings
Initially, at the beginning of the design, we may need to have coordination meeting with agency stakeholders. Based on our experience, we have found that agencies are more receptive to meeting requests from City staff. Accordingly, we anticipate asking staff to be the initial agency contact and members of the Mark Thomas team will attend these meeting. We anticipate these meeting to be virtual.

We anticipate meetings with the following key stakeholders - all utility companies, Regional Transit District (RTD), Union Pacific Railroad, City of Stockton Fire Department, Waste Collection, and Lodi/Stockton Unified School District. We plan to facilitate the meetings by providing them with plans for their use and mark-ups to identify project related issues.

After t
he initial meeting, we should be able to continue the dialog with the agency with little involvement from the City.

We also pla
n on preparing meeting agendas and distributing notes from the agency meetings.

Task 8.4. Cost Accounting and Progress Reports
On a monthly basis, we will provide the City with an accounting of project expenditures. The accounting will be for all project subconsultants. Accounting information will include the initial budget per task, amount spent on the tasks, task amount remaining and percentage budget remaining.

Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
205
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

With the accounting, we will provide a summary to the City on items completed for the invoicing month and anticipated tasks to be performed in the upcoming month.

Th
is information will be sent to staff on a monthly basis with our invoice.

Task 8.5. CPM Schedule
The Mark Thomas team will prepare and provide a comprehensive schedule to reflect the timeframe for each stage/task of the proposed scope of work, utilizing Microsoft Project. The project schedule will show a base line, tasks, duration, milestones, assignments, critical paths, and other relevant data. The project schedule shall be maintained and updated every other month or when a change in the project causes a shift in completing a major milestone by more than three weeks.

TASK 8 DELIVERABLES
• Deliverable: Monthly PDT Agendas & Minutes (PDF) (Up to 20 Meetings) • Deliverable: Monthly Cost Accounting and Progress Report (PDF). Provided with our invoice • CPM Schedule in Microsoft Project (Updated every 2 Months) TASK 9. DESIGN SUPPORT DURING BIDDING AND CONSTRUCTION
As part of this Scope of Work, the Mark Thomas team will provide bid support services that consist of assisting the City in addressing inquiries to design related Requests for Information (RFI) during the project advertisement phase as well as preparing clarification memorandums that staff can post and pass onto bidders. .

The Mark Thomas team will also provide to the City, design support during construction of the project. These services include responding to design related RFIs, design submittal reviews and approvals, revising project plans to address City approved design changes necessary during construction, assist City staff and the Resident Engineer in reviewing Contractor requested Contract Change Orders, attend construction and field meeting if necessary, assist the City inspection team with specific design-related issues during construction and any needed consultation with the construction contractor, construction manager, and/or the City Project Manager throughout construction.

Deliverables include, but are not limited to, the following: memorandums of clarification, contract addenda, conform drawings, requests for clarifications, and clarification sketches.

Task 9.1. Bidding Assistance
The team will assist during bidding by answering questions and providing interpretation of the construction documents.

Fehr & Peers will assist during bidding by answering questions and providing interpretation of the construction documents pertaining to the traffic signal and street lighting plans prepared by Fehr & Peers. Fehr & Peers budgeted up to 16 hours for bidding support services. Should the level of effort for these services exceed the budget, Fehr & Peers will prepare a supplemental scope and fee before proceeding with any additional services.

Task 9.2. Design Support During Construction
During the construction of the project, Fehr & Peers will be available to address the following items in relation to the work shown on the traffic signal and street lighting plans prepared by Fehr & Peers: attend pre-construction meeting, Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
206
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

interpret and clarify the design intent of the PS&E, review proposed construction changes to provide recommendations, review contractor submittals for conformance with the design documents, and respond to requests for information. As the level of effort involved in providing construction support services is uncertain, Fehr & Peers budgeted up to 38 hours for construction support services. Should the level of effort for these services exceed the budget, Fehr & Peers will prepare a supplemental scope and fee before proceeding with any additional services.

Crawfor
d will respond to contractor Request for Information (RFI) submittals, two (8 hour, total 16 hours) days plus travel for a field representative to be on-site to observe initial pile installation and consultation with the design team.

Field observation will be supplemented by principal level engineering consultation and supervision of the field representative. Our on-site observations will be documented in a Daily Field Report (DFR).

Since, a
t this time, we do not know the level of effort required for Bidding Assistance and Construction Support, we have provided a budget amount for the efforts. If we it looks like we will exceed our budget amounts, we will discuss possible fee amendments with the City.

TASK 10. AS-BUILT DRAWINGS
Task 10.1. As-Built Drawings
The Mark Thomas team will prepare Record Drawings upon receipt of red-lines from the Construction Manager and/or the contractor. We will produce one complete set of Record Drawings in AutoCAD. We will submit to the City 1-PDF and AutoCAD files of the Record Drawings.

Fehr & P
eers will prepare as-built drawings based on contractor mark-ups provided for the traffic signal and street lighting plans prepared by Fehr & Peers. No field visits are included in this scope. Fehr & Peers budgeted up to 38 hours for preparation of as-built drawings. Should the level of effort for these services exceed the budget, Fehr & Peers will prepare a supplemental scope and fee before proceeding with any additional services .

TASK 11. PRESERVING AND PERPETUATING SURVEY MONUMENTS
The Mark Thomas team (lead by SEI) will identify, list, and show existing survey monuments on construction plans. We will include language in the PS&E package to preserve all monumentation affected by the work being performed in accordance with Section 8771 of the Professional Land Surveyors Act in the Business and Professionals Code of the State of California.

Task 11.1. Prepare Monumentation Map
After completion of the survey for the Project, the Mark Thomas team will prepare a Monumentation Map for the project that shows location of found monuments in the field and compare it to record maps. Record monuments that are missing from our field survey will be identified as missing on the Monumentation Map.

Task 11.2. Prepare Monumentation Preservation Certificate At the completion of Project construction, the Mark Thomas team (lead by SEI) will prepare a Surveyor's Certificate that states that all monuments are preserved either by protecting and remaining in place during construction or set/reset as part of construction.

Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
207
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

TASK 12. RIGHTS OF ENTRY
The Mark Thomas team will prepare and provide all right-of-entry (ROE) letters to access private properties during field reconnaissance. All access and coordination to private property will be done by the Mark Thomas team.. The Mark Thomas team will identify impacts to all residences and businesses and present feasible mitigation measures on the design improvement plans. This includes, but is not limited to, service interruptions, property encroachments, access restrictions, potential damage to property, etc.

The Mar
k Thomas team will send out letters to property owners with a right-of-entry form (reviewed and approved by the City) and any exhibits needed to adequately portray the work to be done. These documents are meant for minor conform work that is needed to conform the adjacent properties to the final project.

We will p
rovide copies of all utility correspondence, public notices, and right-of-entry (ROE) letters to the City for their files.

Task 12.1. Right of Entry Letters (Field Reconnaissance) The Mark Thomas team will need to perform field reconnaissance as necessary to complete survey, design and environmental tasks. We will develop an exhibit using Google Maps to identify the properties that we'll need to send ROE letters to in order to get approval to be on the property. We will review the exhibit with staff prior to mailing the ROE Letters.

Task 12.2. Right of Entry Permits (Construction)
Towards the completion of the project's design, the Mark Thomas team will prepare Right of Entry Permits for the construction phase of the project as necessary. Drafts of the ROE Permits will be provided to the City for their review and approval.

The ROE Permits will be provided to the Project's Right of Way Agent who will be the person responsible for negotiating acquisitions of needed Right of Way and easements for the project. The Agent will be responsible for obtaining owner's signatures on the ROE Permits.

TASK 13. RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION
Right-of-Way will need to be acquired as part of this project as well as all necessary or required permitting. Consultants shall perform surveying and preparation of right-of-way acquisition documents including plats and legal descriptions, appraisals, negotiation, and acquisition services. These services shall be included in the proposal for approximately thirteen (13) parcels.

Task 13.1. Prepare Right of Way Appraisal Exhibit
This task includes the preparation of exhibits as requested by the project's appraiser. The exhibits will help clarify details of the design as it relates to impacts of the project to private property and privately owned landscaping (i.e. elevation changes to driveways, location of retaining walls in relationship to privately owned improvements, slope limits around privately owned trees, etc.)
Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
208
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

Since we do not have a definitive number of exhibits that will be required or the complexity of the needed exhibit , we have estimated a budget for this task.

Task 13.2. Prepare Legal Description and Plats
Siegfried will perform a right of way survey of the project corridor to establish the existing right of way and existing monumentation. Upon approval of the areas of acquisitions, we will begin the preparation of drafts plats for the various right of way dedications and easements for the project. Said documents will be provided to the City for review and approval as well as provided to the acquisitions and appraisal team members for negotiations and agreement generation.

We
anticipate one round of drafts for review by the City and then produce final description and plats.

Task 13.3. Right of Way Appraisal and Acquisitions
Task 13.3.1. Fee Appraisal
Monument will prepare right of way Cost Estimates for the PRP for each alternative under consideration including:
• Take an inventory of the affected properties for each selected option. • Using public Assessor’s Roll information, investigate the ownership, lot size, and building size of each affected property.
• Visually inspect each property (exterior street view) and evaluate effects of proposed acquisition. List all businesses on each property and the approximate space they occupy. • Sort each property into product types to determine the universe of real estate data sets to research and create valuation data sets for each product type.
• Prepare an estimate of the probable cost of each full property acquisition or the cost of each partial acquisition (plus damages) using the data sets created and utilizing our various real estate value databases. • Prepare an estimate of the probable relocation assistance exposure for each residential or non -residential occupant located on each property.
• Prepare an estimate of the immoveable fixtures and equipment associated with each business property. • Prepare an estimate of the total probable loss of business goodwill attributable to each operating business. • Prepare an estimate of the inspection and demolition costs associated with delivering each cleared site. • Prepare an estimate of the total services and incidental costs associated with each real estate acquisition program (appraisals, acquisition and relocation agents, title/escrow, and legal services).

Th
e report will contain a textual description of the project areas studied, a summary of total probable costs of the study area itemized by major component and will include detailed spreadsheets showing how the summary sheets were calculated. The spreadsheets will contain a parcel-by-parcel breakdown of all probable costs.

In t
he event that the acquisition program is to be phased or determined to be implemented at a future date, formulized spreadsheets will be created which apply the appropriate cost escalation factors to reflect the projected schedule.

Righ
t of way data sheet and cost estimate are not a part of this scope, and would be an additional task to this Scope of Work.

Task 13.3.2. Appraisal Review
Review appraisals will be provided for each appraisal by Monument, and in accordance with State and Federal law and County policy as required. The review appraiser will, as appropriate:

Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
209
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

• 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. o Identify the scope of work to be performed.
o Develop an opinion as to the completeness of the material under review, given the scope of work applicable in the assignment.
o 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 .
o 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 .
o 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 .
o 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 13.3.3. Acquisition and Negotiation (Right of Way Agent) Monument will provide right -of-way delivery services required for the County to purchase right -of-way required to construct the Project. The tasks will be performed in accordance with applicable Federal, State and local regulations, Caltrans Policies and Procedures and County’s right-of-way Policies and Procedures.

Monument
will provide the following services under the direction of 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 right-of-way plans, appraisal reports, title reports, appraisal maps and legal descriptions and all other pertinent documents.
• Prepare acquisition offer packages consisting of the C ity'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.

Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
210
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

• Monument’s acquisition agent will meet personally with each property owner to present the City's purchase offer, explain the project design requirement, and inform him or her of the City's right-of-way 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 C ity 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 C ity, 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 C ity. 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 C ity. Our primary goal will be to reach an acceptance of the offer with each property owner. We will work with the County in recommending solutions to achieve acceptance of the offer. • Eminent Domain Support – If requested, coordinate with City'ss 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.

A. Provide bilingual acquisition agents, if necessary.

B. Prepare all applicable forms, secure property owner’s approval and signature and submit the forms to the City for review and acceptance.

C. 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.

Exclusion:

The Mark Thomas team has not budgeted participating in the Eminent Domain process. If our services are required, this will need to be an amendment to our Agreement.

TASK 13 DELIVERABLES
Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
211
Lower Sacramento Road Widening - Scope of Work
City of Stockton

• Right of way Cost Estimates
• Appraisal Report of up to 13 Parcels (PDF)
• Negotiations of up to 13 Parcels
TASK 14. FUNDING AND GRANT WRITING
The Lower Sacramento Road Widening and Bridge Replacements project design phase is currently funded with Measure K local funds; however, the City plans to pursue federal and state funding opportunities for the right -of-way (ROW) and construction phases.

The Mark Thomas team will work with the City to identify eligible grants to apply for during each proposed phasing.

We will prepare and submit three grant applications to acquire funding for construction of the project. Grant applications may include but are not limited to Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), Active Transportation Program (ATP), and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ), among others.

The applications will be delivered to the City for submission.

TASK 14 DELIVERABLES
• Draft & Final Grant Applications
Exhibit A

EXHIBIT 1
212
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecessors Successors 1 Lower Sacramento Road Widening and Bridge Replacements1551 days Tue 7/29/25 Tue 7/8/31 2 Project Initiation 26 days Tue 7/29/25 Tue 9/2/25
3 Notice to Proceed (Council Approval of Contract) 0 days Tue 7/29/25 Tue 7/29/25 4,88 4 Execute Contract / Subagreements 2 wks Tue 7/29/25 Mon 8/11/25 3 5FS+15 days 5 Kickoff Meeting 1 day Tue 9/2/25 Tue 9/2/25 4FS+15 days 7,40,13,30,50,54,104,66 6 Task 1 Background Research 60 days Wed 9/3/25 Tue 11/25/25 7 Task 1.1 - Data Gathering 12 wks Wed 9/3/25 Tue 11/25/25 5 8SS 8 Task 1.2 - Existing Plan Review 12 wks Wed 9/3/25 Tue 11/25/25 7SS 9SS 9 Task 1.3 - Documentation of Existing Conditions 12 wks Wed 9/3/25 Tue 11/25/25 8SS 10 10 Task 1 Complete 0 days Tue 11/25/25 Tue 11/25/25 9 119,46 11 Task 2 - Environmental Services 585 days Wed 9/3/25 Tue 11/30/27 12 Task 2.1 - PES Form 90 days Wed 9/3/25 Tue 1/6/26
13 Prepare Project Description and Maps 2 wks Wed 9/3/25 Tue 9/16/25 5 14 14 Prepare Draft PES 4 wks Wed 9/17/25 Tue 10/14/25 13 15 15 City Review 1 wk Wed 10/15/25 Tue 10/21/25 14 16
16 Revisions 1 wk Wed 10/22/25 Tue 10/28/25 15 17
17 Submit to Caltrans 0 days Tue 10/28/25 Tue 10/28/25 16 18 18 Caltrans Review 6 wks Wed 10/29/25 Tue 12/9/25 17 19 19 Revisions 2 wks Wed 12/10/25 Tue 12/23/25 18 20
20 Resubmit to Caltrans 0 days Tue 12/23/25 Tue 12/23/25 19 21FS+2 wks 21 Caltrans Approves PES Form 0 days Tue 1/6/26 Tue 1/6/26 20FS+2 wks 23 22 Task 2.2 - NEPA Technical Studies 260 days Wed 1/7/26 Tue 1/5/27 23 NEPA TECHNICAL STUDIES 6 mons Wed 1/7/26 Tue 6/23/26 21 24 24 SECTION 7 CONSULTATION 6 mons Wed 6/24/26 Tue 12/8/26 23 25FF+1 mon 25 NEPA EA 12 mons Wed 2/4/26 Tue 1/5/27 24FF+1 mon 26
26 NEPA CE Complete 0 days Tue 1/5/27 Tue 1/5/27 25 35,112 27 Task 2.3 - CEQA Documentation 180 days Wed 9/3/25 Tue 5/12/26 28 2.3.1 Prepare CEQA Addendum 4 mons Wed 1/21/26 Tue 5/12/26 32 33 29 2.3.2 Transportation Chapter 100 days Wed 9/3/25 Tue 1/20/26 33 CEQA Addendum Complete 0 wks Tue 5/12/26 Tue 5/12/26 28 34,35 34 Task 2.4 Permitting 160 days Wed 9/2/26 Tue 4/13/27 33 35 Prepare Permit Applications 2 mons Wed 4/21/27 Tue 6/15/27 33,26,76FF+2 wks 36FS+6 mons 36 All Permits Complete 0 days Tue 11/30/27 Tue 11/30/27 35FS+6 mons 37 37 Task 2 Complete 0 days Tue 11/30/27 Tue 11/30/27 36 119,95 38 Task 3 - Preparation of Precise Road Plan 200 days Wed 11/26/25 Tue 9/1/26 39 Task 3.1 Preparation of Precise Road Plan 200 days Wed 11/26/25 Tue 9/1/26 40 3.1 35% Geometric Plan 2 mons Wed 11/26/25 Tue 1/20/26 5,48FF 41FS+1 mon 41 3.2 50% PRP 6 wks Wed 2/18/26 Tue 3/31/26 40FS+1 mon 42FS+1 mon,84FS+2 wks 42 3.3 95% PRP 6 wks Wed 4/29/26 Tue 6/9/26 41FS+1 mon 43FS+1 mon,59 43 3.4 100% PRP 1 mon Wed 7/8/26 Tue 8/4/26 42FS+1 mon 44FS+1 mon 44 3.5 Council Approval 0 mons Tue 9/1/26 Tue 9/1/26 43FS+1 mon 75 45 3.2 Traffic Analysis 40 days Wed 11/26/25 Tue 1/20/26 46 3.2.1 Initial Planning and Alternatives Evaluation 2 mons Wed 11/26/25 Tue 1/20/26 10 47SS 47 3.2.2 Conceptual Design Support 2 mons Wed 11/26/25 Tue 1/20/26 46SS 48 48 Task 3 Complete 0 days Tue 1/20/26 Tue 1/20/26 47 40FF 49 Task 4 - Utility Coordination 755 days Wed 9/3/25 Tue 7/25/28 50 4.1 Utility Mapping ("A" Letter) 2 mons Wed 9/3/25 Tue 10/28/25 5 51 51 4.2 Utility Location Verification ((Potholing) 2 mons Wed 6/2/27 Tue 7/27/27 50,76 52 52 4.3 Utility Conflict Mapping ("B" Letter") 2 mons Wed 7/28/27 Tue 9/21/27 51 53 53 4.4 Utility Relocation Coordination 6 mons Wed 9/22/27 Tue 3/7/28 52 55 54 4.5 PG&E Rule 20 Coordination 18 mons Wed 9/3/25 Tue 1/19/27 5 55 55 4.6 Relocation Notices ("C" Letter) 0 days Tue 7/25/28 Tue 7/25/28 53,54,114 56 Task 5 - Plans, Specifications and Estimate (PS&E) 615 days Wed 9/3/25 Tue 1/11/28 57 5.1 Preliminary Engineering 435 days Wed 9/3/25 Tue 5/4/27 58 5.1.1 Traffic Operations Report 115 days Wed 6/10/26 Tue 11/17/26 59 5.1.1.1 Travel Demand Model Forecasting 6 wks Wed 6/10/26 Tue 7/21/26 42 60 60 5.1.1.2 Existing Condition Plus Project Analysis 6 wks Wed 7/22/26 Tue 9/1/26 59 61 61 5.1.1.3 Cumulative Traffic Operations Analysis 3 wks Wed 9/2/26 Tue 9/22/26 60 62 7/29
11/25
10/28
12/23
1/6
1/5
5/12
11/30
11/30
9/1
1/20
7/25

J S N J M M J S N J M M J S N J M M J S N J M M
Half 2, 2025 Half 1, 2026 Half 2, 2026 Half 1, 2027 Half 2, 2027 Half 1, 2028 Half 2, 2028 Half 1, 2029 Lower Sacramento Road Widening and Bridge Replacement
July 29, 2025
<INSERT CLIENT LOGO HERE>
Exhibit B

EXHIBIT 1
213
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecessors Successors 62 5.1.1.4 Intersection Control Evaluation 4 wks Wed 9/23/26 Tue 10/20/26 61 63FF 63 5.1.1.5 Level of Traffic Stress 2 wks Wed 10/7/26 Tue 10/20/26 62FF 64SS 64 5.1.1.6 Traffic Operations Anlaysis Report 6 wks Wed 10/7/26 Tue 11/17/26 63SS 75SS+2 wks 65 5.1.4 Topographic Base Mapping 90 days Wed 9/3/25 Tue 1/6/26 66 Set Control for Aerial Mapping 2 wks Wed 9/3/25 Tue 9/16/25 5 67 67 Aerial Mapping 3 mons Wed 9/17/25 Tue 12/9/25 66 68
68 Supplemental Topo Surveys 1 mon Wed 12/10/25 Tue 1/6/26 67,104 109,101 69 5.1.5 Geotechnical Design Report 3 mons Wed 2/10/27 Tue 5/4/27 76SS 70SS 70 5.1.6 Structure Foundation Report 3 mons Wed 2/10/27 Tue 5/4/27 69SS 71SS 71 5.1.7 Structure Hydraulic Report 3 mons Wed 2/10/27 Tue 5/4/27 70SS 72SS 72 5.1.8 Roadway Drainage Report 3 mons Wed 2/10/27 Tue 5/4/27 71SS 73 73 Task 5.1 Complete 0 days Tue 5/4/27 Tue 5/4/27 72
74 5.2 PS&E 320 days Wed 10/21/26 Tue 1/11/28
75 5.2.1 30% Plans 3 mons Wed 10/21/26 Tue 1/12/27 44,64SS+2 wks 76FS+1 mon,81FF,85FS+2 wks,108,117FS+2 mons 76 5.2.2 65% Plans 4 mons Wed 2/10/27 Tue 6/1/27 75FS+1 mon 51,35FF+2 wks,77FS+1 mon,69SS 77 5.2.1 95% Plans 4 mons Wed 6/30/27 Tue 10/19/27 76FS+1 mon 78FS+1 mon 78 5.2.4 Final PS&E (100% Complete) 2 mons Wed 11/17/27 Tue 1/11/28 77FS+1 mon 79 79 Task 5 Complete 0 days Tue 1/11/28 Tue 1/11/28 78 119,95 80 Task 6 - Prepare Project Report 60 days Wed 10/21/26 Tue 1/12/27 81 Prepare Project Report 12 wks Wed 10/21/26 Tue 1/12/27 75FF 82 82 Task 6 Complete 0 days Tue 1/12/27 Tue 1/12/27 81 119 83 Task 7 Public Outreach 205 days Tue 4/14/26 Tue 1/26/27 84 Public Meeting #1 (During PRP Process) 0 days Tue 4/14/26 Tue 4/14/26 41FS+2 wks 85 85 Public Meeting #2 (Following 30% PS&E) 0 days Tue 1/26/27 Tue 1/26/27 75FS+2 wks,84 86 86 Task 7 Complete 0 mons Tue 1/26/27 Tue 1/26/27 85 119 87 Task 8 - Coordination / Meetings 1180 days Tue 7/29/25 Mon 2/4/30 88 8.1 Project Intiation 2 wks Tue 7/29/25 Mon 8/11/25 3 89SS 89 8.2 PDT Meetings 59 mons Tue 7/29/25 Mon 2/4/30 88SS 90SS 90 8.3 Agency Coordination Meetings 1180 days Tue 7/29/25 Mon 2/4/30 89SS 91SS 91 8.4 Cost Accounting 1180 days Tue 7/29/25 Mon 2/4/30 90SS 92SS 92 8.5 CPM Schedule 1180 days Tue 7/29/25 Mon 2/4/30 91SS 93 93 Task 8 Complete 0 days Mon 2/4/30 Mon 2/4/30 92
94 Task 9 Design Support During Bidding and Construction 630 days Wed 9/20/28 Tue 2/18/31 95 9.1 Bidding Assistance 6 wks Wed 9/20/28 Tue 10/31/28 79,106,37,114FS+2 mons96FS+3 mons 96 9.2 Design Support During Construction 27 mons Wed 1/24/29 Tue 2/18/31 95FS+3 mons 97 97 Construction Complete 0 days Tue 2/18/31 Tue 2/18/31 96 99FS+6 mons 98 Task 10 - As-Built Drawings 40 days Wed 8/6/31 Tue 9/30/31 99 10.1 As-Built Drawings 2 mons Wed 8/6/31 Tue 9/30/31 97FS+6 mons 119FS+1 mon 100 Task 11. Preserving and Perpetuating Survey Monuments60 days Wed 1/7/26 Tue 3/31/26 101 11.1 Prepare Preconstruction Record of Survey 3 mons Wed 1/7/26 Tue 3/31/26 68 102 102 Task 11 Complete 0 days Tue 3/31/26 Tue 3/31/26 101 103 Task 12 Rights of Entry 755 days Wed 9/3/25 Tue 7/25/28 104 12.1 Right of Entry Letters (Field Reconnaissance) 2 mons Wed 9/3/25 Tue 10/28/25 5 68 105 12.2 Right of Entry Permits (Construction) 6 mons Wed 2/9/28 Tue 7/25/28 114FF 106 106 Task 12 Complete 0 days Tue 7/25/28 Tue 7/25/28 105 95 107 Task 13 - Right of Way Acquisition 400 days Wed 1/13/27 Tue 7/25/28 108 13.1 Prepare Right of Way Appraisal Exhibit 1 mon Wed 1/13/27 Tue 2/9/27 75 109 109 13.2 Prepare Legal Descripions and Plats 3 mons Wed 2/10/27 Tue 5/4/27 108,68 111 110 13.3 Right of Way Appraisals and Acquisitions 320 days Wed 5/5/27 Tue 7/25/28 111 Appraisals (Including City Review / Approval) 16 wks Wed 5/5/27 Tue 8/24/27 109 112 112 Formal Offers 0 days Tue 8/24/27 Tue 8/24/27 111,26 113 113 Negotiations / Agreements 12 mons Wed 8/25/27 Tue 7/25/28 112 114 114 Right of Way Acquired 0 days Tue 7/25/28 Tue 7/25/28 113 55,95FS+2 mons,105FF 115 Task 14 Funding and Grant Writing 40 days Wed 3/10/27 Tue 5/4/27 116 14.1 Preparation of Grant Applications 40 days Wed 3/10/27 Tue 5/4/27 117 Prepare Grant Application (ATP) 2 mons Wed 3/10/27 Tue 5/4/27 75FS+2 mons 118 118 Task 14 Complete 0 days Tue 5/4/27 Tue 5/4/27 117 119 119 Contract Complete 0 days Tue 10/28/31 Tue 10/28/31 10,37,79,86,82,118,99FS+1 mon 5/4
1/11
1/12
4/14
1/26
1/26
3/31
7/25
8/24
7/25
5/4

J S N J M M J S N J M M J S N J M M J S N J M M
Half 2, 2025 Half 1, 2026 Half 2, 2026 Half 1, 2027 Half 2, 2027 Half 1, 2028 Half 2, 2028 Half 1, 2029 Lower Sacramento Road Widening and Bridge Replacement
July 29, 2025
<INSERT CLIENT LOGO HERE>
Exhibit B

EXHIBIT 1
214
Sr. Technical Lead
Project Manager
Technical Lead
Sr. Technical
Engineer
Project Engineer
Design Engineer II
Design Engineer I
Sr. Technician
Technician
Survey Manager II
Project Surveyor II
Asst Surveyor II
Lead Survey
Technician
Survey Technician III
2-Person Crew
(OE3)*
Sr. Project
Accountant
Sr. Project
Coordinator
Avila Associates
Crawford
Fehr & Peers
LSA
Monument ROW
Siegfried
$265 $214 $214 $186 $164 $142 $115 $145 $97 $242 $192 $136 $157 $136 $328 $146 $145

1.0 BACKGROUND RESEARCH

1.1 Data Gathering 4 22 36 44 106 $13,843.98 - 15,804 - - 13,666 $43,313.90

1.2 Existing Plan Review 8 38 46 60 152 $20,295.97 - - - - - 19,294 $39,589.49

1.3 Documentation of Existing Conditions 1 10 14 14 39 $5,200.00 - - 10,925.31 - - 1,232 $17,357.55 Subtotal Phase 1 0 13 0 0 70 96 0 0 118 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 297 $39,339.95 $0.00 $0.00 $26,729.55 $0.00 $0.00 $34,191.44 $100,260.94

2.0 PERMITTING/ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES

2.1 Preliminary Environmental Study (PES) Form 1 6 7 7 21 $2,871.00 - - - 15,600 - 1,857 $20,328.37

2.2 NEPA Technical Studies 6 45 65 74 190 $25,071.99 - 10,875 - 215,506 - - $251,452.97

2.3 CEQA Environmental Documentation 2 16 20 24 62 $8,220.00 - - 26,629.70 47,701 - - $82,550.95

2.4 NEPA Documentation (EA/FONSI) 4 35 40 50 129 $17,126.00 - - - 165,984 - - $183,110.10

2.5 Permitting 4 10 14 26 54 $7,005.98 - - - 66,105 - - $73,110.92

2.6 Environmental Project Management 0 $0.00 - - - 44,814 - - $44,814.49 Subtotal Phase 2 0 17 0 0 112 146 0 0 181 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 456 $60,294.96 $0.00 $10,875.00 $26,629.70 $555,710.65 $0.00 $1,857.48 $655,367.79

3.0 PREPERATION OF PRECISE ROAD PLAN

3.1 35% Geometric Plan 1 8 10 12 31 $4,110.00 - - - - - 46,622 $50,731.76

3.2 50% PRP 1 8 10 12 31 $4,110.00 - - - - - 40,700 $44,809.76

3.3 95% PRP 1 6 7 10 24 $3,162.00 - - - - - 34,792 $37,953.64

3.4 100% PRP 1 4 4 6 15 $2,020.00 - - - - - 19,072 $21,091.80

3.5 C ounc
il Approval 1 2 2 4 9 $1,213.99 - - - - - 4,036 $5,249.59

3.6 Technical Studies 1 4 4 8 17 $2,214.00 - - 44,969 - - $47,182.78 Subtotal Phase 3 0 6 0 0 32 37 0 0 52 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 127 $16,829.98 $0.00 $0.00 $44,968.78 $0.00 $0.00 $145,220.56 $207,019.32

4.0 UTILITY COORDINATION

4.1 Utility Mapping (A Letter) 3 18 24 34 79 $10,299.99 - - - - - - $10,299.99

4.2 Utility Location Verification (Potholing) 3 16 26 34 79 $10,255.99 - - - - - - $10,255.99

4.3 Utility Conflict Mapping (B Letter) 5 36 50 62 153 $20,087.99 - - - - - - $20,087.99

4.4 Utility Relocation Coordination 16 60 50 62 188 $26,377.93 - - - - - - $26,377.93

4.5 PG&E Rule 20 Coordination 2 16 26 34 78 $10,042.00 - - - - - 17,184 $27,225.84

4.6 Relocation Notices (C Letter) 1 8 12 20 41 $5,170.00 - - - - - - $5,170.00 Subtotal Phase 4 0 30 0 0 154 188 0 0 246 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 618 $82,233.90 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $17,183.84 $99,417.74

5.0 PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS & ESTIMATE (PS&E)

5.1 Preliminary Engineering

5.1.1 Traffic Operations Report 2 10 15 20 47 $6,137.99 - - 58,271 - - - $64,409.44

5.1.2 Topographic Base Mapping 2 8 14 16 10 20 8 16 48 70 8 220 $45, 787.39 - - - - - - $45,787.39

5.1.3 Geotechnical Design Report 1 5 8 10 24 $3,140.00 - - - - 26,231 $29,371.20

5.1.4 Structure Foundation Report 20 40 60 $10,839.89 - 41,483 - - - - $52,322.84

5.1.5 Struc t
ure Hydraulic Report 20 40 60 $10,839.89 50,770 - - - - - $61,609.85

5.1.6 Roadway Drainage Design Report 16 80 100 100 296 $40,443.93 - - - - - 14,809 $55,252.93

5.2 PS&E 0 $0.00 - - - - - - $0.00

5.2.1 30% Plans (Structures) 40 120 80 240 $39,840.20 - - - - - $39,840.20

5.2.1 30% Plans (Transportation) 20 240 460 500 1220 $157,459.95 - - 50,739 - - 105,906 $314,104.93

5.2.2 65% Plans & Estimate (Structures) 40 120 100 20 120 400 $62,140.37 - - 54,316 - - - $116,456.33

5.2.2 65% Plans & Estimate (Transportation) 24 250 340 370 984 $130,306.01 - - - - 119,317 $249,623.01

5.2.3 95& PS&E (Structures) 40 120 180 80 16 100 536 $88,100.96 - - 36,642 - - - $124,742.94

5.2.3 95& PS&E (Transportation) 40 275 430 590 1335 $171,949.90 - - - - 149,474 $321,423.90

5.2.4 Final PS&E (100% Complete) (Structures) 36 40 20 80 176 $27,284.08 - - 18,968 - - - $46,252.08

5.2.4 Final PS&E (100% Complete) (Transportation) 20 180 230 300 730 $95,560.01 - - - - 86,256 $181,816.01

5.3 QA/QC (Structures) 40 40 $10,600.01 - - 3,570 - - 15,838 $30,007.75

5.3 Q A/QC (Transportation) 5 40 50 60 155 $20,550.00 - - -- $20,550.00 Subtotal Phase 5 40 130 196 120 1588 1867 56 380 1906 10 20 8 16 48 70 0 8 4087 $920,980.59 $50,769.96 $41,482.95 $222,505.79 $0.00 $0.00 $517,831.52 $1, 753,570.81

6.0 PROJECT STUDY REPORT

6.1 Project Study Report (Optional) 0 $0.00 - - $0.00
Subtotal Ph
ase 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 COST PROPOSAL FOR PROJECT SCOPE: Stockton - Lower Sacramento Road - Updated 04/10/2025

TOTAL COST
Subconsultants
Total
Hours Total MT Cost
Exhibit C

EXHIBIT 1
215
Sr. Technical Lead
Project Manager
Technical Lead
Sr. Technical
Engineer
Project Engineer
Design Engineer II
Design Engineer I
Sr. Technician
Technician
Survey Manager II
Project Surveyor II
Asst Surveyor II
Lead Survey
Technician
Survey Technician III
2-Person Crew
(OE3)*
Sr. Project
Accountant
Sr. Project
Coordinator
Avila Associates
Crawford
Fehr & Peers
LSA
Monument ROW
Siegfried
$265 $214 $214 $186 $164 $142 $115 $145 $97 $242 $192 $136 $157 $136 $328 $146 $145 COST PROPOSAL FOR PROJECT SCOPE: Stockton - Lower Sacramento Road - Updated 10/3/2024

TOTAL COST
Subconsultants
Total
Hours Total MT Cost

7.0 PUBLIC OUTREACH

7.1 Public Outreach Plan 22 2 4 10 $1,427.98 - - 4,449 - - 11,204 $17,081.57

7.2 Stakeholder Outreach 84 4 8 24 $3,711.93 - - - - - 18,079 $21,791.13

7.3 Public Outreach Meeting #1 81 0 10 2 0 48 $6,711.94 - - - - - 21,957 $28,669.34

7.4 Public Outreach meeting #2 81 0 10 2 0 48 $6,711.94 - - - - - 21,957 $28,669.34 Subtotal Phase 7 0 26 0 0 26 26 0 0 52 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 130 $18,563.80 $0.00 $0.00 $4,449.31 $0.00 $0.00 $73,198.28 $96,211.39

8.0 COORDINATION/MEETINGS

8.1 Project Initiation 4 24 10 24 62 $11,315.91 - - - - - 5,184 $16,499.59

8.2 Project Development Team Meetings 4 240 240 484 $91,778.27 2,378 - 4,974 - - 56,623 $155,753.72

8.3 Agency Coordination Meetings 4 320 120 120 564 $106,257.19 - - - - - 34,790 $141,047.19

8.4 Cost Accounting & Progress Reports 120 80 80 80 360 $62,079.16 - - - - - 11,128 $73,206.84

8.5 CPM Schedule 80 4 6 8 98 $19,403.28 - - - - - 1,391 $20,794.24 Subtotal Phase 8 12 784 0 0 454 126 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 80 104 1568 $290,833.80 $2,378.34 $0.00 $4,974.07 $0.00 $0.00 $109,115.36 $407,301.57

9.0 DESIGN SUPPORT DURING BIDDING & CONSTRUCTION

9.1 Bidding Assistance 4 4 $855.96 - - 3,621 - - 7,774 $12,250.78

9.2 Design Support During Construction 25 165 220 280 690 $90,809.94 - 8,576 - - 75,242 $174,627.46 Subt
otal Phase 9 0 29 0 0 165 220 0 0 280 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 694 $91,665.91 $0.00 $0.00 $12,196.82 $0.00 $0.00 $83,015.52 $186,878.25

10.0 AS-BUILT DRAWINGS

10.1 As-Built Drawings 42 0 25 5 0 99 $12,535.99 - - 7,425 - - 9,770 $29,730.79 Subtotal Phase 10 0 4 0 0 20 25 0 0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 99 $12,535.99 $0.00 $0.00 $7,424.56 $0.00 $0.00 $9,770.24 $29,730.79

11.0 PRESERVING & PERPETUATING SURVEY MONUMENTS

11.1 Prepare Monumentation Map 0 $0.00 - - - - - 5,297 $5,296.88

11.2 Prepare & File Corner Records 0 $0.00 - - - - - 3,315 $3,314.96 Subtotal Phase 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $8,611.84 $8,611.84

12.0 RIGHTS OF ENTRY

12.1 Right of Entry Letters (Field Reconnaissance) 18 4 1 0 23 $3,064.01 - - - - - 2,147 $5,211.05

12.2 Right of Entry Permits (Construction) 22 0 30 4 2 94 $12,042.00 - - - - - - $12,042.00 Subtotal Phase 12 0 3 0 0 28 34 0 0 52 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 117 $15,106.01 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,147.04 $17,253.05

13.0 RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION

13.1 Prepare Right of Way Appraisal Exhibit 81 5 25 4 0 88 $11,601.94 - - - - - $11,601.94

13.2 Prepare Legal Description & Plats 16 6 12 20 54 $8,051.86 - - - - - 96,105 $104,156.86

13.3 Right of Way Appraisal & Acquisitions 60 50 50 90 250 $36,869.53 - - - - 195,700 - $232,569.53 Subtotal Phase 13 0 84 0 0 71 87 0 0 150 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 392 $56,523.33 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $195,700.00 $96,105.00 $348,328.33

14.0 FUNDING & GRANT WRITING

14.1 Grant Research and Summary Memo 12 2 2 7 $1,019.99 - - - - - 7,581 $8,601.03

14.2 ATP Grant and Supple
ments 14 6 4 15 $2,109.99 - - - - - 21,278 $23,388.31

14.3 Bridge Grant 14 6 4 15 $2,109.99 - - - - - 21,278 $23,388.31

14.4 TBD Grant 14 6 4 15 $2,109.99 - - - - - 21,278 $23,388.31 Subtotal Phase 14 0 4 0 0 14 20 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 52 $7,349.97 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $71,416.00 $78,765.97 TOTAL HOURS 52 1130 196 120 2734 2872 56 380 3169 10 20 8 16 48 70 80 112 11073 Anticipated Salary Increases $0.00 $2,431.54 $0.00 $14,332.09 $57,325.02 $0.00 $53,502.96 $127,591.61 OTHER DIRECT COSTS $113,935.00 $0.00 $1,125.50 $536.00 $2,995.52 $1,900.00 $98,430.00 $218,922.02 TOTAL COST $13,780 $241,810 $41,942 $22,321 $448,381 $407,821 $6,440 $55,102 $307,394 $2,420 $3,840 $1,088 $2,512 $6,527 $22,960 $11,680 $16,240 $1,726,193.21 $55,579.84 $53,483.45 $364,746.67 $616,031.19 $197,600.00 $1,321,597.08 $4,335,231.44 Exhibit C

EXHIBIT 1
216
Cost Proposal 1
Cost Plus Fixed Fee or Lump Sum
Prime Consultant Subconsultant 2nd T ier Subconsultant Consultant: Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

Project No. Contract No Date 4/10/2025
Range Hours Actual Hourly
Rate Total
Principal $138 - $165 154.50$ -$
Sr. Engineering Manager $112 - $148 137.82$ -$
Engineering Manager $105 - $126 115.69$ -$
Design Manager $101 - $126 115.69$ -$
Sr. Project Manager $75 - $107 96.11$ -$
Sr. Technical Lead $75 - $107 52 96.11$ 4,997.72$
Project Manager $62 - $88 1130 77.61$ 87,699.30$
Technical Lead $62 - $88 196 77.61$ 15,211.56$
Sr. Project Engineer $56 - $78 67.46$ -$
Sr. Technical Engineer $56 - $78 120 67.46$ 8,095.20$ Project Engineer $50 - $70 2734 59.48$ 162,618.32$
Civil Engineering Designer $40 - $67 56.94$ -$
Design Engineer II $38 - $62 2872 51.50$ 147,908.00$
Design Engineer I $30 - $52 56 41.71$ 2,335.76$
Sr. Planner $38 - $62 51.50$ -$
Planner II $31 - $53 42.80$ -$
Planner I $28 - $45 34.09$ -$
Sr. Technician $40 - $63 380 52.59$ 19,984.20$
Technician $23 - $46 3169 35.18$ 111,485.42$
Intern $17 - $34 23.94$ -$
Survey Division Manager $85 - $126 115.33$ -$
Survey Manager II $74 - $96 10 87.77$ 877.70$
Survey Manager I $69 - $89 78.70$ -$
Project Surveyor III $65 - $91 80.51$ -$
Project
Surveyor II $60 - $80 20 69.63$ 1,392.60$
Project Surveyor I $52 - $75 64.19$ -$
Asst Surveyor III $45 - $65 54.76$ -$
Asst Surveyor II $41 - $60 8 49.32$ 394.56$
Asst Surveyor I $35 - $54 43.88$ -$
Survey Specialist III $58 - $87 76.53$ -$
Survey Specialist II $45 - $69 58.75$ -$
Survey S
pecialist I $35 - $56 45.70$ -$
Lead Survey Technician $46 - $67 16 56.94$ 911.04$
Survey Technician III $37 - $60 48 49.32$ 2,367.36$
Survey Technician II $34 - $56 45.70$ -$
Survey Technician I $19 - $51 40.26$ -$
Chief of Party (OE3)* $55 - $73 62.02$ -$
Instrumentperson (OE3)* $51 - $67 56.58$ -$
Chainperson (OE3)* $48 - $65 54.76$ -$
Note: Mark-ups are Not Allowed

DIRECT LABOR
Classification/Title Name
Exhibit C

EXHIBIT 1
217
Apprentice (OE3)* $28 - $50 39.53$ -$
2-Person Crew (OE3)* $103 - $129 70 118.96$ 8,327.20$ 3-Person Crew (OE3)* $133 - $169 158.85$ -$
Utility Locator (PW North)* $44 - $60 49.32$ -$
2-Person Utility Locate (PW North)* $90 - $108 97.20$ -$ Chief of Party (OE12)* $64 - $84 73.26$ -$
Instrumentperson (OE12)* $58 - $77 66.01$ -$
Chainperson (OE12)* $58 - $75 64.19$ -$
Apprentice (OE12)* $24 - $50 39.53$ -$
2-Person Crew (OE12)* $122 - $148 137.46$ -$
3-Person Crew (OE12)* $146 - $186 175.54$ -$
Utility Locator (PW South)* $62 - $78 67.82$ -$
2-Person Utility Locate (PW South)* $125 - $148 137.46$ -$ LAUD Division Manager $85 - $104 93.93$ -$
Sr. LAUD Project Manager $77 - $99 88.13$ -$
LAUD Project Manager $65 - $87 76.53$ -$
Sr. Landscape Architect $41 - $70 59.12$ -$
Landscape Architect $38 - $64 53.68$ -$
Landscape Designer II $33 - $53 42.43$ -$
Landscape Designer I $27 - $45 34.09$ -$
Landscape Intern $17 - $34 23.94$ -$
District Manager-Engineer $110 - $133 122.22$ -$
Deputy District Manager $97 - $120 109.89$ -$
Operations Manager $78 - $106 95.38$ -$
Sr. Sanitary Project Engineer $68 - $95 84.87$ -$
Sanitary Project Engineer $57 - $85 74.71$ -$
Associat
e Sanitary Engineer $54 - $75 64.19$ -$
Assistant Sanitary Engineer $48 - $67 56.22$ -$
Sr. Inspector* $42 - $60 49.32$ -$
Inspector* $34 - $52 41.35$ -$
Inspector - Apprentice* $21 - $40 29.38$ -$
Area Manager - CM $105 - $145 134.19$ -$
Division Manager - CM $105 - $145 123.31$ -$
Sr. Resident Engineer $90 - $118 107.35$ -$
Sr. Pr
oject Manager - CM $80 - $112 101.91$ -$
Project Manager - CM $72 - $103 92.85$ -$
Resident Engineer $72 - $103 92.12$ -$
Project Controls/Scheduler $53 - $88 77.25$ -$
Inspector - CM* $43 - $102 77.61$ -$
Asst. Resident Engineer* $55 - $89 78.70$ -$
Office Engineer $38 - $66 55.85$ -$
Office Technician $22 - $40 29.38$ -$
Expert Witness $170 - $185 179.16$ -$
Strategic Consulting $170 - $185 179.16$ -$
Funding Manager $88 - $114 103.36$ -$
Sr. Funding Specialist $52 - $78 67.10$ -$
Funding Specialist $38 - $67 56.94$ -$
Project Accountant Manager $55 - $78 67.10$ -$
Sr. Project Accountant $41 - $63 80 52.95$ 4,236.00$
Exhibit C

EXHIBIT 1
218
Project Accountant $36 - $57 46.79$ -$
Sr. Project Coordinator $43 - $63 112 52.59$ 5,890.08$ Project Coordinator $33 - $52 41.71$ -$
Sr. Project Assistant $34 - $52 41.35$ -$
Project Assistant $24 - $42 31.92$ -$
Sr. Technical Writer $35 - $59 48.96$ -$
Technical Writer $21 - $42 31.92$ -$
Sr. Graphic Manager $50 - $73 62.74$ -$
Sr. Graphic Designer $40 - $64 53.68$ -$
Graphic Designer $35 - $56 45.70$ -$

LABOR COSTS
584,732.02$
-$
c) TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS [(a) + (b)] 584,732.02$

INDIRECT COSTS

95.61% ) e) Total Fringe Benefits [(c) x (d)] 559,062.28$

55.05% ) g) Overhead [(c) x (f)] 321,894.98$
) i) Gen & Admin [(c) x (h)] -$
j) TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS [(e) + (g) + (i)] 880,957.26$
FIXED FEE k) TOTAL FIXED FEE [(c) + (j)] x fixed fee: 10% 146,568.93$ l) CONSULTANT'S OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODC) - ITEMIZE (Add additional pages if necessary) Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total
1 LS 100,000.00$ 100,000.00$
1 LS 12,600.00$ 12,600.00$
500 Mile 0.67$ 335.00$
1000 Each 1.00$ 1,000.00$
-$
l) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS 113,935.00$
m) SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS (Add additional pages if necessary) Avila Associates 55,579.84$
Crawford 53,483.45$
Fehr & Peers 364,746.67$
LSA 616,031.19$
Monument ROW 197,600.00$
Siegfried 1,321,597.08$
m) TOTAL SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS 2,609,038.23$
n) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS INCLUDING SUBCONSULTANTS [(l) + (m)] 2,722,973.23$ TOTAL COST [(c) + (j) + (k) + (n)] 4,335,231.44$
NOTES:

1. 2.

3. d) Fringe Benefits (Rate:
f) Overhead & G&A (Rate:
h) General & Admin (Rate:

Description of Item
Potholing
Survey
a) Subtotal Direct Labor Costs
b) Anticipated Salary Increases (see page 2 for calculation) Subconsultant 1:

Subconsultant 2:

Subconsultant 3:

Subconsultant 4:

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

Mileage
Reproductions
Subconsultant 5:

Subconsultant 6:The cost proposal format shall not be amended. Indirect cost rates shall be updated on an annual basis in accordance with the consultant's annual accounting period and established by a cognizant agency or accepted by Caltrans.

Anticipated salary increases calculation (page 2) must accompany.

Exhibit C

EXHIBIT 1
219
Consultant
Project No. Contract No Date 4/10/2025

1. Calculate Average Hourly Rate for 1st year of the contract (Direct Labor Subtotal divided by total hours) Avg Hourly 5 Year Contract
Rate Duration
$ 584,732.02 = $ 52.81 Year 1 Avg Hourly Rate
Avg Hourly Rate
Year 1 $ 52.81 + = $ 55.45 Year 2 Avg Hourly Rate
Year 2 $ 55.45 + = $ 58.22 Year 3 Avg Hourly Rate
Year 3 $ 58.22 + = $ 61.13 Year 4 Avg Hourly Rate
Year 4 $ 61.13 + = $ 64.19 Year 5 Avg Hourly Rate
Total Hours
per Year
Year 1 20.00% * = 2214.6 Estimated Hours Year 1
Year 2 20.00% * = 2214.6 Estimated Hours Year 2
Year 3 20.00% * = 2214.6 Estimated Hours Year 3
Year 4 20.00% * = 2214.6 Estimated Hours Year 4
Year 5 20.00% * = 2214.6 Estimated Hours Year 5
Total 100% = 11073.0
Year 1 $ 52.81 * = $
116,946.40 Estimated Hours Year 1
Year 2 $ 55.45 * = $ 122,793.72 Estimated Hours Year 2 Year 3 $ 58.22 * = $ 128,933.41 Estimated Hours Year 3 Year 4 $ 61.13 * = $ 135,380.08 Estimated Hours Year 4 Year 5 $ 54.12 * = $ 119,854.15 Estimated Hours Year 5 = $ 623,907.77
= $ 584,732.02
= $ 39,175.75 Transfer t
o Page 1
NOTES:

1. 2.

3. 4.

Total Hours
per Cost Proposal per Cost Proposal
11073

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

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

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

Calculations for anticipated salary escalation must be provided. 2215
2215
2215
2215
Total Direct Labor Cost with Escalation
11073.0
Total

4. Calculate Total Costs including Escalation (Multiply Average Hourly Rate by the number of hours) Avg Hourly Rate Estimated hours
Cost per Year
(calculated above) (calculated above)
2215
Completed Each Year per Cost Proposal
11073.0
11073.0
11073.0
11073.0
5%
5%

3. Calculate estimated hours per year (Multiply estimate % each year by total hours) Estimated % Total Hours

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

EXHIBIT 1
220
I, the undersigned, certify to the best of my knowledge and belief that all direct costs identified on the cost proposal(s) in this contract are actual, reasonable, allowable, and allocable to the contract in accordance with the contract terms and the following requirements:

1. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)

2. Terms and conditions of the contract

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

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

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

6. 48 Code of Federal Regulations Part 9904 - Cost Accounting Standards Board (when applicable) All costs must be applied consistently and fairly to all contracts. All documentation of compliance must be retained in the project files and be in compliance with applicable federal and state requirements. Costs that are noncompliant with the federal and state requirements are not eligible for reimbursement. Local governments are responsible for applying only cognizant agency or Caltrans accepted Indirect Cost Rate(s).

Name: R. Matt Brogan Title *: Vice President
Signature: Date of Certification: 4/10/2025
Email: [email protected] Phone number: (916) 381-9100 Address: 701 University Avenue, Suite 200, Sacramento, CA 95825 List services the consultant is providing under the proposed contract:

Certification of Direct Costs:

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

Exhibit C

EXHIBIT 1
221
Cost Proposal 1
Cost Plus Fixed Fee or Lump Sum
Prime Consultant Subconsultant 2nd Tier Subconsultant Consultant Avila Associates
Project No Contract No Date
Range Hours Actual
Hourly Rate Total
70 95.00$ 6,650.00$
190 70.50$ 13,395.00$
44 45.50$ 2,002.00$
0 47.50$ -$
4 35.00$ 140.00$

LABOR COSTS
22,187.00 $
1,015.06$
c) TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS [(a) + (b)] 23,202.06$

INDIRECT COSTS

52.06% ) e) Total Fringe Benefits [(c) x (d)] 12,078.99$

24.18% ) g) Overhead [(c) x (f)] 5,610.26$

41.53% ) i) Gen & Admin [(c) x (h)] 9,635.82$
j) TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS [(e) + (g) + (i)] 27,325.07$
FIXED FEE k) TOTAL FIXED FEE [(c) + (j)] x fixed fee: 10% 5,052.71$ l) CONSULTANT'S OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODC) - ITEMIZE (Add additional pages if necessary) Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total
-$
l) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS -$
m) SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS (Add additional pages if necessary) m) TOTAL SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS -$
n) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS INCLUDING SUBCONSULTANTS [(l) + (m)] -$ TOTAL COST [(c) + (j) + (k) + (n)] 55,579.84$
NOTES:

1. 2.

3. Assistant Engineer
Administrative Assistant
Note: Mark-ups are Not Allowed

DIRECT LABOR
Classification/Title Name
Project Manager
Senior Engineer
Assistant Engineer
Cathy Avila
Todd Remington
Katherine Gwynn
Joe Ferraro
a) Subtotal Direct Labor Costs
b) Anticipated Salary Increases (see page 2 for calculati d) Fringe Benefits (Ra t
f) Overhead & G&A (Ra t
h) General & Admin (Ra t
Description of Item
Key personnel must be marked with an asterisk (*) and employees that are subject to prevailing wage requirements must be marked with two asterisks (**). All costs must comply with the Federal cost principles. Subconsultants will provide their own cost proposals
The cost proposal format shall not be amended. Indirect cost rates shall be updated on an annual basis in accordance with the consultant's annual accounting period and established by a cognizant agency or accepted by Caltrans.

Anticipated salary increases calculation (page 2) must accompany.

Exhibit C

EXHIBIT 1
222
Consultant
Project No Contract No Date

1. Calculate Average Hourly Rate for 1st year of the contract (Direct Labor Subtotal divided by total h Avg Hourly 5 Year Contract
Rate Duration
$ 22,187.00 = $ 72.04 Year 1 Avg Hourly Rate
Avg Hourly Rate
Year 1 $ 72.04 + = $ 75.64 Year 2 Avg Hourly
Rate
Year 2 $ 75.64 + = $ 79.42 Year 3 Avg Hourly
Rate
Year 3 $ 79.42 + = $ 83.39 Year 4 Avg Hourly
Rate
Year 4 $ 83.39 + = $ 87.56 Year 5 Avg Hourly
Rate
Total Hours
per Year
Year 1 40.00% * = 123.2 Estimated Hours Year
1 Year 2 30.00% * = 92.4 Estimated Hours Year
2 Year 3 30.00% * = 92.4 Estimated Hours Year
3 Year 4 0.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours Year
4 Year 5 0.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours Year
5 Total 100% = 308.0
Year 1 $ 72.04 *= $ 8,874.80 Estimated Hours Year
1 Year 2 $ 75.64 *= $ 6,988.91 Estimated Hours Year 2 Year 3 $ 79.42 *= $ 7,338.35 Estimated Hours Year 3 Year 4 $ 83.39 *= $ - Estimated Hours Year
4 Year 5 $ - *= $ - Estimated Hours Year
5 = $ 23, 202.06
= $ 22,187.00
= $ 1,015.06 Transfer to Page 1
NOTES:

1. 2.

3. 4.

CALCULATIONS FOR ANTICIPATED SALARY INCREASES
Avila Associates

2. Calculate hourly rate for all years (Increase the Average Hourly Rate for a year by proposed escalat Proposed Escalation
5%
5%
Direct Labor Subtotal Total Hours
per Cost Proposal per Cost Proposal
308
Completed Each Year per Cost Proposal
308.0
308.0
308.0
308.0
5%
5%

3. Calculate estimated hours per year (Multiply estimate % each year by total hours) Estimated % Total Hours
123
92 92
0 0
Total Direct Labor Cost with Escalation
308.0
Total

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

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

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

Calculations for anticipated salary escalation must be provided.

Exhibit C

EXHIBIT 1
223
I, the undersigned, certify to the best of my knowledge and belief that all direct costs identified on the cost proposal(s) in this contra are actual, reasonable, allowable, and allocable to the contract in accordance with the contract terms and the following requiremen

1. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)

2. Terms and conditions of the contract

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

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

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

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

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

Name: Title *:

Signature: Date of Certification:

Email: Phone number:

Address:

List services the consultant is providing under the proposed contract:

Certification of Direct Costs:

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

Exhibit C

EXHIBIT 1
224
Lower Sacramento Road Project - ISA Only
Principal *
Principal *
Principal *
Senior Project Manager
Project Manager II
Project Manager I
Senior Engineer / Geologist
Project Engineer II / Geologist
Project Engineer I / Geologist
Staff Engineer / Geologist
Senior Project Coordinator
Project Coordinator
Administrative Assistant
Special Inspector
Senior Technician
Staff Technician
Special Inspector I (Masonry) **
Special Inspector II (Welding) **
Laborer Technician **
Soils/Asphalt Technician **
Concrete Technician **
Anticipated Salary Increase
Crawford Staff Ben
Crawford
Eric
Nichols
Shawn
Leyva
Chris
Trumbull TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Initial Hourly Rate $79.00 $67.59 $62.00 $74.67 $56.44 $50.00 $45.38 $41.49 $37.63 $34.25 $36.75 $29.00 $29.75 $44.50 $38.50 $33.48 $52.48 $51.05 $37.63 $48.25 $45.58 $0.00 Fringe Benefits 93.29% $73.70 $63.05 $57.84 $69.66 $52.65 $46.65 $42.34 $38.71 $35.11 $31.95 $34.28 $27.05 $27.75 $41.51 $35.92 $31.23 $48.96 $47.62 $35.11 $45.01 $42.52 $0.00 Overhead 116.79% $92.26 $78.94 $72.41 $87.21 $65.92 $58.40 $53.00 $48.46 $43.95 $40.00 $42.92 $33.87 $34.75 $51.97 $44.96 $39.10 $61.29 $59.62 $43.95 $56.35 $53.23 $0.00 G&A 20.00% $15.80 $13.52 $12.40 $14.93 $11.29 $10.00 $9.08 $8.30 $7.53 $6.85 $7.35 $5.80 $5.95 $8.90 $7.70 $6.70 $10.50 $10.21 $7.53 $9.65 $9.12 $0.00 Fixed Fee 10% $26.08 $22.31 $20.46 $24.65 $18.63 $16.50 $14.98 $13.70 $12.42 $11.31 $12.13 $9.57 $9.82 $14.69 $12.71 $11.05 $17.32 $16.85 $12.42 $15.93 $15.05 $0.00 Hourly Rate $286.84 $245.41 $225.11 $271.12 $204.93 $181.54 $164.77 $150.65 $136.63 $124.36 $133.43 $105.30 $108.02 $161.57 $139.79 $121.56 $190.55 $185.36 $136.63 $175.19 $165.50 $0.00 TASK 1
Project Management, Coordination, Site Review 2.00 6.00 2.00 2.00 12.00 1,978.97$ $ 1,000.00 2,978.97$ Task 1 - Hours 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.00 1,978.97$ $ 1,000.00 2,978.97$ TASK 2 -$ -$
Site Reconnaissance and Sample Collection 1.00 6.00 7.00 984.55$ $ 125.50 1,110.05$ Task 2 - Hours 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.00 984.55$ $ 125.50 1,110.05$ TASK 3 -$ -$
Laboratory Testing 0.00 -$ $ - -$
Task 3 - Hours 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -$ $ - -$ TASK 4 -$ -$
Research / Interviews 1.00 4.00 5.00 711.29$ $ - 711.29$ Task 4 - Hours 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 711.29$ -$ 711.29$ TASK 5 -$ -$
Draft and Final Reports 3.00 24.00 8.00 8.00 2.00 2.00 47.00 7,200.62$ $ - 7,200.62$ Task 5 - Hours 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.00 0.00 8.00 8.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.00 7,200.62$ -$ 7,200.62$ TASK 6 -$ -$
Plan Review & Consultation 0.00 -$ $ - -$
Task 6 - Hours 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -$ -$ -$ TASK 7 -$ -$

0.00 -$ $ - -$
Task 7 - Hours 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -$ -$ -$ Subtotal- Hours/Tasks 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.00 0.00 20.00 8.00 4.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 71.00 10,875.43$
Overtime and Graveyard Charges May Apply 1,125.50$
(*) Indicates Key Staff ANTICIPATED SALARY INCREASE: -$ (**) Indicates Prevailing Wage Classifications TOTAL ESTIMATED FEE: 12,000.93$ OTHER DIRECT COSTS:

LABOR COST:

Crawford & Associates, Inc. - Tasks and Descriptions
5/3/2024

LABOR COST PER TASK

OTHER DIRECT COSTS

TOTAL COST PER TASK

HOURS PER TASK

EXHIBIT C

EXHIBIT 1
225
Lower Sacramento Road - Geotechnical
Principal *
Principal *
Principal *
Senior Project Manager
Project Manager II
Project Manager I
Senior Engineer / Geologist
Project Engineer II / Geologist
Project Engineer I / Geologist
Staff Engineer / Geologist
Senior Project Coordinator
Project Coordinator
Administrative Assistant
Special Inspector
Senior Technician
Staff Technician
Special Inspector I (Masonry) **
Special Inspector II (Welding) **
Laborer Technician **
Soils/Asphalt Technician **
Concrete Technician **
Anticipated Salary Increase
Crawford Staff Ben
Crawford
Eric
Nichols
Shawn
Leyva
Chris
Trumbull TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Initial Hourly Rate $79.00 $67.59 $62.00 $74.67 $56.44 $50.00 $45.38 $41.49 $37.63 $34.25 $36.75 $29.00 $29.75 $44.50 $38.50 $33.48 $52.48 $51.05 $37.63 $48.25 $45.58 $0.00 Fringe Benefits 93.29% $73.70 $63.05 $57.84 $69.66 $52.65 $46.65 $42.34 $38.71 $35.11 $31.95 $34.28 $27.05 $27.75 $41.51 $35.92 $31.23 $48.96 $47.62 $35.11 $45.01 $42.52 $0.00 Overhead 116.79% $92.26 $78.94 $72.41 $87.21 $65.92 $58.40 $53.00 $48.46 $43.95 $40.00 $42.92 $33.87 $34.75 $51.97 $44.96 $39.10 $61.29 $59.62 $43.95 $56.35 $53.23 $0.00 G&A 20.00% $15.80 $13.52 $12.40 $14.93 $11.29 $10.00 $9.08 $8.30 $7.53 $6.85 $7.35 $5.80 $5.95 $8.90 $7.70 $6.70 $10.50 $10.21 $7.53 $9.65 $9.12 $0.00 Fixed Fee 10% $26.08 $22.31 $20.46 $24.65 $18.63 $16.50 $14.98 $13.70 $12.42 $11.31 $12.13 $9.57 $9.82 $14.69 $12.71 $11.05 $17.32 $16.85 $12.42 $15.93 $15.05 $0.00 Hourly Rate $286.84 $245.41 $225.11 $271.12 $204.93 $181.54 $164.77 $150.65 $136.63 $124.36 $133.43 $105.30 $108.02 $161.57 $139.79 $121.56 $190.55 $185.36 $136.63 $175.19 $165.50 $0.00 TASK 1
Project Design, Team Meetings, and Management 8.00 3.00 12.00 6.00 12.00 6.00 2.00 2.00 51.00 9,196.80$ $ - 9,196.80$ Task 1 - Hours 0.00 8.00 3.00 0.00 12.00 0.00 6.00 12.00 6.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 51.00 9,196.80$ $ - 9,196.80$ TASK 2 -$ -$
Foundation Report 12.00 4.00 30.00 36.00 30.00 12.00 16.00 140.00 24,073.53$ $ - 24,073.53$ Task 2 - Hours 0.00 12.00 4.00 0.00 30.00 0.00 36.00 30.00 12.00 16.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 140.00 24,073.53$ $ - 24,073.53$ TASK 3 -$ -$
Plan Review and Consulting 4.00 2.00 6.00 10.00 22.00 3,887.44$ $ - 3,887.44$ Task 3 - Hours 0.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 22.00 3,887.44$ $ - 3,887.44$ TASK 4 -$ -$
Design Support During Bidding and Construction 4.00 12.00 10.00 26.00 4,325.18$ $ - 4,325.18$ Task 4 - Hours 0.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.00 0.00 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 26.00 4,325.18$ -$ 4,325.18$ TASK 5 -$ -$

0.00 -$ $ - -$
Task 5 - Hours 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -$ -$ -$ TASK 6 -$ -$

0.00 -$ $ - -$
Task 6 - Hours 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -$ -$ -$ TASK 7 -$ -$

0.00 -$ $ - -$
Task 7 - Hours 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -$ -$ -$ Subtotal- Hours/Tasks 0.00 28.00 9.00 0.00 42.00 6.00 54.00 42.00 38.00 16.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 239.00 41,482.95$
Overtime and Graveyard Charges May Apply -$
(*) Indicates Key Staff ANTICIPATED SALARY INCREASE: -$ (**) Indicates Prevailing Wage Classifications TOTAL ESTIMATED FEE: 41,482.95$ OTHER DIRECT COSTS:

LABOR COST:

Crawford & Associates, Inc. - Tasks and Descriptions
5/3/2024

LABOR COST PER TASK

OTHER DIRECT COSTS

TOTAL COST PER TASK

HOURS PER TASK

EXHIBIT C

EXHIBIT 1
226
FEHR & PEERS
Principal, Project
Manager
Principal‐in‐Charge
Associate
Senior Transportation
Planner
Transportation
Engineer / Planner
Technician
Principal
Associate
Transportation
Engineer / Planner
Senior Project
Coordinator
Francisc Adrian
Engel
Kari
McNickl
e
Yoyo
Zeng
Sree
Gudimell
a
Tim
Wilbur
Kristin
Calia
Danny
Murphy
Brian
Situ
JoLynn
Soutoo Martin
$262.38 $246.66 $202.40 $166.45 $112.46 $97.46 $260.88 $203.90 $116.95 $153.69

1.0 BACKGROUND RESEARCH

1.1 Data Gathering 16 0 16 8 76 0 0 00 1 6 1 3 2 $19,774.08 $19,774.08

1.1.1 Transportation  Impact Analysis Data Gathering (F&P) 16 0 16 8 76 0 0 00 1 6 1 3 2 $19,774.08 $19,774.08

1.1.1.1 Transportation  Data Collection (F&P) 04 4 4 1 20 0 0 00 1 8 $2,706.42 $2,706.42

1.1.1.2 Street & Intersection Capacity  Analysis (F&P) 04 4 4 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 $6,901.98 $6,901.98

1.1.1.3 Collision  Analysis (F&P) 04 4 4 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 $5,082.84 $5,082.84

1.1.1.4 Level of Traffic  Stress (F&P) 04 4 4 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 $5,082.84 $5,082.84

1.3 Documentation of Existing Conditions 16 2 0 0 32 16 0 0 00 7 3 $10,925.31 $10,925.31 Subtotal Phase 1 32 2 16 8 108 16 0 0 0 23 205 $30,699.39 $30,699.39

2.0 PERMITTING/ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES

2.3 CEQA Documentation 36 2 2 36 60 8 8 80 1 8 1 6 2 $26,629.70 $26,629.70

2.3.2 Transportation  Chapter (F&P) 36 2 2 36 60 8 8 80 1 8 1 6 2 $26,629.70 $26,629.70

2.3.2.1 VMT  Analysis (F&P) 8 0 2 24 24 00 0 0 0 6 5 $10,273.51 $10,273.51

2.3.2.2 Consistency  Analysis (F&P) 12 0 0 0 12 00 0 0 0 2 7 $4,959.15 $4,959.15

2.3.2.3 Transportation  Chapter Documentation (F&P) 16 2 0 12 24 8 8 8 80 7 0 $11,397.04 $11,397.04 Subtotal Phase 2 3 622 3 6 6 0 0 8 8 8 1 8 1 6 2 $26,629.70 $26,629.70

3.0 PREPERATION OF PRECISE ROAD PLAN

3.1 Technical Studies 48 32 16 8 28 20 16 24 32 26 250 $46,961.46 $46,961.46

3.1.1 Initial  Planning & Alternatives Evaluation (F&P) 32 24 8 8 24 16 8 16 16 18 170 $31,512.26 $31,512.26

3.1.2 Conceptual  Design Support  (F&P) 1 68 88 4 4 44 1 68 8 0 $15,449.20 $15,449.20 Subtotal Phase 3 48 32 16 8 28 20 16 24 32 26 250 $46,961.46 $46,961.46

5.0 PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS & ESTIMATE (PS&E)

5.1.1 Traffic  Operations Analysis Report (F&P) 64 4 8 52 232 16 0 0 0 48 424 $63,080.76 $63,080.76

5.1.1.1 Travel  Demand Forecasting (F&P) 8 0 0 24 40 00 0 0 0 8 1 $11,975.45 $11,975.45

5.1.1.2 Existing  Plus Project Traffic Operations Analysis (F&P) 08 8 8 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 3 $9,004.87 $9,004.87

5.1.1.3 Cumulative  Traffic Operations Analysis (F&P) 16 0 0 16 80 00 0 0 1 4 1 2 6 $18,009.74 $18,009.74

5.1.1.4 Intersection  Control Evaluation (F&P) 8 8 80 1 60 0 0 00 2 7 $4,359.47 $4,359.47

5.1.1.5 Level of Traffic  Stress (F&P) 04 4 4 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 $5,082.84 $5,082.84

5.1.1.6 Traffic  Operations Analysis Report (F&P) 20 4 0 4 40 16 0 0 0 11 95 $14,648.39 $14,648.39

5.2.1 30% Plans 16 12 0 0 0 8 48 80 80 30 274 $50,738.62 $50,738.62

5.2.1.1 Traffic  Signal Design (F&P) 68 8 8 40 2 4 4 0 4 0 1 5 1 3 7 $25,369.31 $25,369.31

5.2.1.2 Street Lighting  Design (F&P) 8 8 86 40 2 4 4 0 4 0 1 5 1 3 7 $25,369.31 $25,369.31

5.2.2 65% Plans  & Estimate 18 10 0 0 0 12 54 84 84 32 294 $54,315.96 $54,315.96

5.2.2.1 Traffic  Signal Design (F&P) 12 8 0 0 0 6 36 60 60 22 204 $37,730.46 $37,730.46

5.2.2.2 Street Lighting  Design (F&P) 26 66 60
1 8 2 4 2 4 1 0 9 0 $16,585.50 $16,585.50

5.2.3 95% PS&E 12 8 0 0 0 8 36 56 56 22 198 $36,641.98 $36,641.98

5.2.3.1 Traffic  Signal Design (F&P) 68 8 8 40 2 4 4 0 4 0 1 5 1 3 7 $25,369.31 $25,369.31

5.2.3.2 Street Lighting  Design (F&P) 4 4 42 04 1 2 1 6 1 67 6 1 $11,272.67 $11,272.67

5.2.4 Final  PS&E (100% Complete) 6 6 66 04 1 8 2 8 2 8 1 2 1 0 2 $18,968.00 $18,968.00

5.2.4.1 Traffic  Signal Design (F&P) 44 4 4 20 1 2 2 0 2 08 7 0 $13,008.16 $13,008.16

5.2.4.2 Street Lighting  Design (F&P) 22 2 2 0 0 0 0 02 3 2 $5,959.84 $5,959.84

5.3 QA/QC 0 0 00 0 00 1 60 2 18 $3,569.78 $3,569.78
Subtotal Phase 5 116 40 8 52 232 48 156 264 248 146 1310 $227,315.10 $227,315.10

6.0 PUBLIC OUTREACH

6.1 Public Outreach ‐ (F&P) 1 2 0 0 0 44 4 4 4 4 2 3 $4,449.31 $4,449.31 Subtotal Phase 6 1 20 00 4 4 4 4 44 2 3 $4,449.31 $4,449.31

7.0 COORDINATION/MEETINGS

7.2 Project Development Team Meetings (F&P) 14 0 0 0 44 4 4 4 4 2 5 $4,974.07 $4,974.07 Subtotal Phase 7 1 4 0 0 0 4 4 4 4 44 2 5 $4,974.07 $4,974.07

8.0 DESIGN SUPPORT DURING BIDDING & CONSTRUCTION

8.1 Bidding Assistance (F&P) 2 2 20 00 0 0 0 0 1 6 $3,620.82 $3,620.82

8.2 Design Support During Construction (F&P) 02 2 2 00 1 6 1 604 3 8 $8,576.00 $8,576.00 Subtotal Phase 8 4 4 40 00 2 2 2 2 6 0 5 4 $12,196.82 $12,196.82

9.0 AS‐BUILT DRAWINGS

9.1 As‐Built Drawings (F&P) 02 2 2 0 00 1 684 3 8 $7,424.56 $7,424.56 Subtotal Phase 9 2 2 20 0 00 1 6 4 8 3 8 $7,424.56 $7,424.56 TOTAL HOURS 264 76 42 104 436 100 202 326 288 229 2067
Anticipated Salary Increases $14,607.57 $14,607.57
OTHER DIRECT COSTS $5,670.00 $5,670.00
TOTAL COST $69,268 $18,746 $8,501 $17,311 $49,033 $9,746 $52,698 $66,471 $33,682 $35,195 $380,927.98 $380,927.98 COST PROPOSAL FOR PROJECT SCOPE:  Stockton ‐ Lower Sacramento Road TOTAL COSTTotal
Hours
Total F&P
Cost
Exhibit C

EXHIBIT 1
227
Cost Proposal 1
Cost Plus Fixed Fee or Lump Sum
Prime Consultant Subconsultant 2nd Tier Subconsultant Consultant Fehr & Peers
Project No. Contract No Date 4/4/2025
Range Hours Actual Hourly
Rate Total
Principal 248 84.13$ 20,864.24$
Principal 74 79.09$ 5,852.66$
Associate 42 64.90$ 2,725.80$
Senior Transportat 92 53.37$ 4,910.04$
Transportation Eng 412 36.06$ 14,856.72$
Technician 100 31.25$ 3,125.00$
Principal 202 83.65$ 16,897.30$
Associate 326 65.38$ 21,313.88$
Transportation Eng 288 37.50$ 10,800.00$
Senior Project Coo 221 49.28$ 10,890.88$

LABOR COSTS
112,236.52$
4,545.58$
c) TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS [(a) + (b)] 116,782.10$

INDIRECT COSTS

62.39% ) e) Total Fringe Benefits [(c) x (d)] 72,860.35$

88.04% ) g) Overhead [(c) x (f)] 102,814.96$

33.09% ) i) Gen & Admin [(c) x (h)] 38,643.20$
j) TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS [(e) + (g) + (i)] 214,318.51$
FIXED FEE k) TOTAL FIXED FEE [(c) + (j)] x fixed fee: 10% 33,110.06$ l) CONSULTANT'S OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODC) - ITEMIZE (Add additional pages if necessary) Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total
800 Miles 0.67$ 536.00$
0 EA 500.00$ -$
0 EA 500.00$ -$
l) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS 536.00$
m) SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS (Add additional pages if necessary) m) TOTAL SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS -$
n) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS INCLUDING SUBCONSULTANTS [(l) + (m)] 536.00$ TOTAL COST [(c) + (j) + (k) + (n)] 364,746.67$
NOTES:

1. 2.

Note: Mark-ups are Not Allowed
WT19007

DIRECT LABOR
Classification/Title Name
Kristin Calia
Danny Murphy
Brian Situ
JoLynn Souto
Francisco Martin
Adrian Engel
Kari McNickle
Yoyo Zeng
Sree Gudimella
Tim Wilbur
a) Subtotal Direct Labor Costs
4-Hour Peak Period Intersection Turning Movement Counts 72-Hour Roadeway ADT Counts
b) Anticipated Salary Increases
(see page 2 for calculatio
d) Fringe Benefits (Ra t
f) Overhead & G&A (Rate
h) General & Admin (Ra t
Description of Item
Mileage (field work, meeting attendance, project travel) Key personnel must be marked with an asterisk (*) and employees that are subject to prevailing wage requirements must be marked with two asterisks (**). All costs must comply with the Federal cost principles. Subconsultants will provide their own cost proposals.

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

EXHIBIT 1
228
Consultant
Project No. Contract No Date 4/4/2025

1. Calculate Average Hourly Rate for 1st year of the contract (Direct Labor Subtotal divided by total hours Avg Hourly 5 Year Contract
Rate Duration
$ 112,236.52 = $ 55.98 Year 1 Avg Hourly
Rate
Avg Hourly Rate
Year 1 $ 55.98 + = $ 58.78 Year 2 Avg Hourly
Rate
Year 2 $ 58.78 + = $ 61.72 Year 3 Avg Hourly
Rate
Year 3 $ 61.72 + = $ 64.80 Year 4 Avg Hourly
Rate
Year 4 $ 64.80 + = $ 68.04 Year 5 Avg Hourly
Rate
Total Hours
per Year
Year 1 40.00% * = 802.0 Estimated Hours Year
1 Year 2 40.00% * = 802.0 Estimated Hours Year
2 Year 3 20.00% * = 401.0 Estimated Hours Year
3 Year 4 0.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours Year
4 Year 5 0.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours Year
5 Total 100% = 2005.0
Year 1 $ 55.98 *= $ 44,894.61 Estimated Hours Year
1 Year 2 $ 58.78 *= $ 47,139.34 Estimated Hours Year
2 Year 3 $ 61.72 *= $ 24,748.15 Estimated Hours Year
3 Year 4 $ 64.80 *= $ - Estimated Hours Year
4 Year 5 $ - *= $ - Estimated Hours Year
5 = $ 116,782.10
= $ 112,236.52
= $ 4,545.58 Transfer to Page 1
NO
TES:

1. 2.

CALCULATIONS FOR ANTICIPATED SALARY INCREASES
Fehr & Peers
WT19007

2. Calculate hourly rate for all years (Increase the Average Hourly Rate for a year by proposed escalation Proposed Escalation
5%
5%
Direct Labor Subtotal Total Hours
per Cost Proposal per Cost Proposal
2005
Completed Each Year per Cost Proposal
2005.0
2005.0
2005.0
2005.0
5%
5%

3. Calculate estimated hours per year (Multiply estimate % each year by total hours) Estimated % Total Hours
802
802
401
0 0
Total Direct Labor Cost with Escalation
2005.0
Total

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

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

Exhibit C

EXHIBIT 1
229
I, the undersigned, certify to the best of my knowledge and belief that all direct costs identified on the cost proposal(s) in this contract are actual, reasonable, allowable, and allocable to the contract in accordance with the contract terms and the following requir ements:

1. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)

2. Terms and conditions of the contract

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

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

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

6. 48 Ccode of Federal Regulations Part 9904 - Cost Accounting Standards Board (when applicable) All costs must be applied consistently and fairly to all contra cts. All documentation of compliance must be retained in the pro ject files and be in compliance with applicable federal and st ate requirements. Costs that are noncompliant with the federal and state req uirem e
are not eligible for reimbursement.

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

Name: David B. Robinson Title *: Principal
Signature: Date of Certification: 4/4/2025
Email:
[email protected] Phone number: 916-262-7389
Address:

List services the consultant is providing under the proposed contract:

Certification of Direct Costs:

Prime Consultant or Subconsultant Certifyin
* An individual executive or financial officer of the consultant's or subconsultant's organization at a level no lower than a Vice President or a Chief Financial Officer, or equivalent, who has authority to represent the financial information utilized to establish the cost proposal for the contract.
-Multimodal transportation planning
-Traffic engineering
-Traffic operations analysis
-Roadway safety analysis
-Travel demand forecasting
-Traffic signal design
-Street lighting analysis and design
-Environmental impact analysis and documentation support -
Stakeholder engagement
555 Capitol Mall, Suite 510, Sacramento, CA 95814
Exhibit C

EXHIBIT 1
230
Exhibit C
Cost Proposal 1
Cost Plus Fixed Fee or Lump Sum
Prime Consultant Subconsultant 2nd Tier Subconsultant Contract No Date 10/2/2024
Range Hours Actual Hourly
Rate Total
220 62.50$ 13,750.00$
620 41.61$ 25,798.20$
38 72.12$ 2,740.56$
137 48.41$ 6,632.17$
323 52.88$ 17,080.24$
159 41.34$ 6,573.06$
672 31.64$ 21,262.08$
16 76.58$ 1,225.28$
172 40.11$ 6,898.92$
126 42.12$ 5,307.12$
28 75.72$ 2,120.16$
156 52.09$ 8,126.04$
110 33.45$ $ 3,671.14
31 85.19$ 2,640.89$
158 38.08$ 6,016.64$
229 49.08$ 11,239.32$
83 48.44$ 4,020.52$
31 27.28$ 845.68$
16 36.54$ 584.64$
336 38.99$ 13,100.64$

43.97$ -$

LABOR COSTS
176,109.69
$ 159,633.30
$ 16,467.17
c) TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS [(a) + (b)] $
101.89% )
114.58% )
e) Total Fringe Benefits [(c) x (d)] $ 179,28.77
g) Overhead [(c)
x (f)] $ 201,775.92
) -i) Gen & Admin [(c) x (h)] $
j) TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS [(e) + (g) + (i)] $ 381,204.69

INDIRECT COSTS
d) Fringe Benefits
f) Overhead & G&A
h) General & Admin

FIXED FEE
k) TOTAL FIXED FEE [(c) + (j)] x fixed fee: 10% $ 55,730.52 Note: Mark-ups are Not Allowed
Consultant LSA Associates, Inc.

Project No

DIRECT LABOR
Classification/Title Name
Lynnea Palecki
Lloyd Sample
Michael Hibma
Principal in Charge
Project Manager/Senior Enviro
Director, Air Quality
Senior Technical Specialist
Senior Technical Specialist
Technical Specialist
Environmental Planner
Principal (Cultural Resources)
Historian/Architectural Historia
Rory Goodwin
JT Stephens
Jason Lui
Amanda Durgen
Kat Hughes
Jessica Coria
Ron Brugger
Carie Wingart
Anna Van Zuuk
Caleb Kulasxa
Jennette Bosseler
Corey Knips
Pam Reading
Ashley Honer
Meredith Canterbury
Matt Philips
Jaimi Starr
a) Subtotal Direct Labor Costs
b) Anticipated Salary Increases (see page 2 for calculati (Rat
(Rat
(Rat
Project Assistant
Document Management
Contingency
Archaeologist
Principal (Noise)
Associate
Technical Specialist
Principal (Planning)
Technical Specialist
GIS
Graphics
Office Assistant

EXHIBIT 1
231
Exhibit C
l) CONSULTANT'S OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODC) - ITEMIZE (Add additional pages if necessary) Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total
497 cost 0.07$ $ 34.97
750 cost 0.40$ 300.00$
24 cost 0.10$ 2.40$
80 cost 0.75$ 60.00$
1 cost 1,000.00$ 1,000.00$
10 each 5.00$ 50.00$
2199 miles $ 0.67 $ 1,473.33
1 days 75.00$ 75.00$
-$
l) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS $ 2,995.52
m) SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS (Add additional pages if necessary) -m) TOTAL SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS $
n) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS INCLUDING SUBCONSULTANTS [(l) + (m)] $ 2,995.52 616,031.19TOTAL COST [(c) + (j) + (k) + (n)] $
NOTES:

1. 2.

3. Reproduction (8x11 Color)
Reproduction (11x17 B/W)
Reproduction (11x17 Color)
Records Search
Flash Drive
Mileage on road
Description of Item
Reproduction (8x11 B/W)
Key personnel must be marked with an asterisk (*) and employees that are subject to prevailing wage requirements must be marked with two asterisks (**). All costs must comply with the Federal cost principles. Subconsultants will provide their own cost proposals.

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

Anticipated salary increases calculation (page 2) must accompany.

GPS Unit
Subconsultant 1:

EXHIBIT 1
232
Consultant
Project No Contract No Date 10/2/2024

1. Calculate Average Hourly Rate for 1st year of the contract (Direct Labor Subtotal divided by total hou Avg Hourly 5 Year Contract
Rate Duration
= $ 43.61 Year 1 Avg Hourly
Rate
Avg Hourly Rate
Year 1 $ 43.61 + = $ 45.79 Year 2 Avg Hourly
Rate
Year 2 $ 45.79 + = $ 48.08 Year 3 Avg Hourly
Rate
Year 3 $ 48.08 + = $ 50.48 Year 4 Avg Hourly
Rate
Year 4 $ 50.48 + = $ 53.00 Year 5 Avg Hourly
Rate
Total Hours
per Year
Year 1 0.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours Year
1 Year 2 25.00% * = 915.2 Estimated Hours Year
2 Year 3 50.00% * = 1830.4 Estimated Hours Year
3 Year 4 25.00% * = 915.2 Estimated Hours Year
4 Year 5 0.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours Year
5 Total 100% = 3660.8
Year 1 $ 43.61 * = $ - Estimated Hours Year
Year 2 $ 45.79 * = $ 41,903.74
1 2
Estimated Hours Year
Year 3 $ 48.08 * = $ 87,997.86 3
Estimated Hours Year
Year 4 $ 50.48 * = $ 46,198.87 4
Estimated Hours Year
Year 5 $ - * = $ - Estimated Hours Year
5 = $ 176,100.47
= $ 159,633.30
= $ 16,467.17 Transfer to Page 1
NOTES:

1. 2.

3. 4.

CALCULATIONS FOR ANTICIPATED SALARY INCREASES
LSA Associates, Inc.

2. Calculate hourly rate for all years (Increase the Average Hourly Rate for a year by proposed escalatio Proposed Escalation
5%
5%
Total HoursDirect Labor Subtotal
per Cost Proposal $
159,633.30
per Cost Proposal
3661
Complet
ed Each Year per Cost Proposal
3660.8
3660.8
3660.8
3660.8
5%
5%

3. Calculate estimated hours per year (Multiply estimate % each year by total hours) Estimated % Total Hours
0 915
1830
915
0 Total Direct Labor
Cost with Escalation
3660.8
Total

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

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

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

Calculations for anticipated salary escalation must be provided.

Exhibit C

EXHIBIT 1
233
I, the undersigned, certify to the best of my knowledge and belief that all direct costs identified on the cost proposal(s) in this contract are actual, reasonable, allowable, and allocable to the contract in accordance with the contract terms and the following requirements

1. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)

2. Terms and conditions of the contract

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

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

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

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

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

Name: Anthony Petros Title *: CEO
Signature: Date of Certification: 10/2/2024
Email:
[email protected] Phone numb (949) 553-0666, Ext. 7268 Address: 3210 El Camino Real, Suite 100, Irvine, California 92602 List services the consultant is providing under the proposed contract:

Certification of Direct Costs:

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

Environmental services for the Lower Sacramento Road Widening and Bridge Replacements project for the City of Stockton Exhibit C

EXHIBIT 1
234
Exhibit C
StaffName BobMorrison TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Classification ROWPIC Senior PM Acquisition Manager Senior Agent Agent Professional Staff Admin FULLYBURDENEDRATE $290.00 $210.00 $190.00 $145.00 $110.00 $100.00 $85.00 ROWAcquisition
Task1ͲROWPlanning 4 20 40 40 104 $15,160.00 $ 15,160.00 Task2ͲAppriasal(13) $84,500.00 $ 84,500.00 Task3ͲAppraisalReview(13) $ Ͳ $32,500.00 $ 32,500.00 Task4ͲNegotiation(13) 16 40 60 320 40 40 516 $63,540.00 $ 63,540.00 $ Ͳ $  Ͳ $ Ͳ $  Ͳ $ Ͳ $  Ͳ $ Ͳ $  Ͳ $ Ͳ $  Ͳ Mileage,Mail $ 1,900.00
TOTALHOURS 20 20 40 100 320 80 40 620
TOTALCOST $5,800.00 $4,200.00 $7,600.00 $14,500.00 $35,200.00 $8,000.00 $3,400.00 $78,700.00 $117,000.00 $ 197,600.00 TOTAL
HOURS
OTHERDIRECT
COST TOTALCOSTMonument
Labor

EXHIBIT 1
235

MONUMENT

HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE
Right of Way Management & Implementation
Program Manager / Principal $290.00 per hour
Senior Project Manager / Sr. Utility Project Manager $210.00 per hour ROW Project Manager 2 / Utility Project Manager 2 $190.00 per hour ROW Project Manager 1 / Utility Project Manager 1 $160.00 per hour Utility Coordinator $130.00 per hour
Senior Acquisition Agent / Senior Relocation Agent / Senior Analyst $145.00 per hour
Acquisition Agent 2 / Relocation Agent 2 / Property Manager $120.00 per hour Acquisition Agent 1/ Relocation Agent 1 $110.00 per hour Senior Project Coordinator $120.00 per hour
Project Coordinator 2 $110.00 per hour
Project Coordinator 1 $100.00 per hour
Senior Project Analyst $135.00 per hour
Project Analyst $110.00 per hour
Researcher $90.00 per hour
Project Support / Administrative
Professional Staff $85.00 per hour
Project Controller 2 $100.00 per hour
Exhibit C

EXHIBIT 1
236
Exhibit C
Project Controller 1 $75.00 per hour
Project Support Specialist $75.00 per hour
The above hourly rates are exclusive of local travel/mileage, photocopying, first class postage and overnight courier service . These expenses including out-of-pocket expenses such as pre -approved travel and lodging, outside exhibit preparation, requested overnight courier or registered and/or certified mail (return receipt requested) charges, and specialty reproduction (unless otherwise specified) are in addi tion to the contract amount and will be charged at cost plus ten percent (+10%) for administration, coordination, and handling. Subcontracted services, other than those listed above, will be invoiced at cost plus ten percent (+10%).

In the event Monument is required to perform any act in relation to litigation arising out of any project with the Client (for example, expert consulting, responding to a complaint, or proceeding with discovery and trial), such services are not part of thi s contract, nor are they part of our normal fees.

If required, these types of services will be invoiced at two times the regular hourly rates.

In the event this work outlined in the proposed scope extends beyond 2024, the hourly rates and any remaining amount in the contract shall be adjusted upwardly by five percent (5%) per annum, compounded annually, on the anniversary date of this proposal.

Written communication services in other languages would be an additional cost and would be billed separately based on quoted hourly rates by independent translation services. Verbal communication in Spanish, if necessary, will be included at no additional charge.

Monument will submit monthly invoices for the professional and trade services rendered based on the hourly rate schedule prov ided above. The client shall promptly pay the uncontested amount due within no more than thirty (30) days after receipt of invoice. Upon completion of services, the remaining unbilled amount of the project balance shall become immediately due and payable.

Sub-Consultant pass through costs/budgets are subject to change based on the timing of the work performed. The Fees provided are based on the best information available at the time of the proposal.

EXHIBIT 1
237
Cost Proposal 1
Cost Plus Fixed Fee or Lump Sum
Prime Consultant Subconsultant 2nd Tier Subconsultant Consultant Siegfried
Project No Contract No Date 5/16/2024
Range Hours Actual Hourly
Rate Total
Managing Principal 764 117.91$ 90,083.24$
Principal 252 98.50$ 24,822.00$
Principal 108 98.50$ 10,638.00$
Principal 124 98.50$ 12,214.00$
Senior Associate 36 91.35$ 3,288.60$
Senior Associate 36 91.35$ 3,288.60$
Associate 443 59.09$ 26,176.87$
Associate 443 59.09$ 26,176.87$
Project Engineer 746 53.00$ 39,538.00$
Engineer II 500 43.00$ 21,500.00$
Engineer I 540 36.30$ 19,602.00$
Landscape Architect II 326 33.02$ 10,764.52$
Project Landscape Arch 482 37.00$ 17,834.00$
Manny Debranca 192 42.00$ 8,064.00$
Danial Duran 112 38.00$ 4,256.00$
Diego Moreno 80 74.00$ 5,920.00$
Mike Kincaid 284 45.49$ 12,919.16$
Greg Samoy 424 42.57$ 18,049.68$
Anthony Linnerman 144 39.00$ 5,616.00$
Dalton Reed 396 27.43$ 10,862.28$
TBD 492 45.50$ 22,386.00$
Elizabeth Zapien 100 26.00$ 2,600.00$

LABOR COSTS
396,599.82$
18,144.44$
c) TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS [(a) + (b)] 414,744.26$

INDIRECT COSTS

64.60% ) e) Total Fringe Benefits [(c) x (d)] 267,924.79$

49.38% ) g) Overhead [(c) x (f)] 204,800.72$

54.13% ) i) Gen & Admin [(c) x (h)] 224,501.07$
j) TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS [(e) + (g) + (i)] 697,226.58$
FIXED FEE k) TOTAL FIXED FEE [(c) + (j)] x fixed fee: 10.0% 111,197.08$ Note: Mark-ups are Not Allowed
WT-19007

DIRECT LABOR
Classification/Title Name
Louie Mendez
TBD
Charley Scott
Ryan Gleave
Andrew Manes
Josie Fong
Regina Peredes
Paul Schneider
Kevin Genasci
Brad Quon
Thais Del Castillo
Bob Norbutas
Senior Technician
Technician III
Technician I
Senior Project Coordinator
Clerical
Shellie Tipton
Surveyor II
Surveyor I
Party Chief
BIM Manager
a) Subtotal Direct Labor Costs
b) Anticipated Salary Increases (see page 2 for calculation) d) Fringe Benefits (Rate:
f) Overhead & G&A (Rate:
h) General & Admin (Rate:

Exhibit C

EXHIBIT 1
238
Exhibit C
l) CONSULTANT'S OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODC) - ITEMIZE (Add additional pages if necessary) Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total
20 EA 1,500.00$ $ 30,000.00$
1 EA 3,500.00$ $ 3,500.00$
20 EA 750.00$ $ 15,000.00$
1 LS 15,000.00$ $ 15,000.00$
1 LS 6,000.00$ $ 6,000.00$
8000 EA 0.72$ $ 5,760.00$
1 LS 500.00$ $ 500.00$
1000 EA 0.67$ $ 670.00$
1 LS 22,000.00$ $ 22,000.00$
98,430.00l) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS $
m) SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS (Add additional pages if necessary) -m) TOTAL SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS $
98,430.00n) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS INCLUDING SUBCONSULTANTS [(l) + (m)] $ 1,321,597.92TOTAL COST [(c) + (j) + (k) + (n)] $
NOTES:

1. 2.

3. San Joaquin County Drilling Permits
R-Value Tests
Traffic Control
Outreach Rental Space
Mailers
Outreach Refreshments
Description of Item
Title Reports
Key personnel must be marked with an asterisk (*) and employees that are subject to prevailing wage requirements must be marked with two asterisks (**). All costs must comply with the Federal cost principles. Subconsultants will provide their own cost proposals.

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

Anticipated salary increases calculation (page 2) must accompany.

Mileage
Driller
Subconsultant 1:

EXHIBIT 1
239
Exhibit C
Consultant
Project No Contract No Date 5/16/2024

1. Calculate Average Hourly Rate for 1st year of the contract (Direct Labor Subtotal divided by total hours Avg Hourly 5 Year Contract
Rate Duration
$ 39 599.82 = $ 56.46 Y
Rat
ear
e
1 Avg Hourly
Avg Hourly Rate
Year 1 $ 56.46 + = $
Year 2 $ 59.29 + = $
Year 3 $ 62.25 + = $
Year 4 $ 65.36 + = $

59.29 Year 2 Avg Hourly Rate

62.25 Year 3 Avg Hourly Rate

65.36 Year 4 Avg Hourly Rate

68.63 Year 5 Avg Hourly Rate
Total Hours
per Year
Year 1 * = 2809.6
Year 2 * = 2107.2
Year 3 * = 2107.2
Year 4 * = 0.0
Year 5 * = 0.0
Estimated Hours Year 1
Estimated Hours Year 2
Estimated Hours Year 3
Estimated Hours Year 4
Estimated Hours Year 5
Total

40.00%

30.00%

30.00%

0.00%

0.00%
100% = 7024.0
Year 1 $ 56.46 *= $ $ 15 639.93
Estimated Hours Year 1
Year 2 $ 59.29 *= $ 124,928.94 Estimated Hours Year 2 Year 3 $ 62.25 *= $ 131,175.39 Estimated Hours Year 3 Year 4 $ 65.36 =* $
Year 5 $ =- * $
- Estimated Hours Year 4
- Estimated Hours Year 5
= $ $ 41 744.26
= $ $ 39 599.82
= $ $ 1 144.44 Transfer to Page 1

CALCULATIONS FOR ANTICIPATED SALARY INCREASES
Siegfried
WT-19007

2. Calculate hourly rate for all years (Increase the Average Hourly Rate for a year by proposed escalation Proposed
Escalation
5%
5%
Total HoursDirect Labor ubtotal
per Cost Proposal
per Cost
Proposal
7024
Estimated %
Completed Each Year per Cost
Proposal
7024.0
7024.0
7024.0
7024.0
5%
5%

3. Calculate estimated hours per year (Multiply estimate % each year by total hours) Total Hours
2810
2107
2107
0 0
7024.0
Total

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

EXHIBIT 1
240
NOTES:

1. 2.

3. 4.

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

1. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)

2. Terms and conditions of the contract

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

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

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

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

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

Name: Paul J. Schneider Title *: President
Signature: Date of Certification: 5/16/2024
Email:
[email protected] Phone number: 209-607-0710
Address: 3428 Brookside Road, Stockton CA
List services the consultant is providing under the proposed contract:

Certification of Direct Costs:

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

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

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

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

Calculations for anticipated salary escalation must be provided.

Exhibit C

EXHIBIT 1
241
REV 2024-03-25
Insurance Requirements
(WT19007, Professional Services)
Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees.

MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMIT OF INSURANCE
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:

1. Commercial General Liability (CGL): Insurance Services Office Form CG 00 01 covering CGL on an “occurrence” basis, including products and completed operations, property damage, bodily injury and personal & advertising injury with limits no less than $2,000,000 per occurrence. If a general aggregate limit applies, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location (ISO CG 25 03 or 25 04) or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.

2. Automobile Liability: Insurance Services Office Form Number CA 0001 covering, Code 1 (any auto), or if Consultant has no owned autos, Code 8 (hired) and 9 (non-owned), with limit no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.

3. Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits, and Employer’s Liability Insurance with limit of no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.
(Not required if consultant provides written verification it has no employees)

4. Professional
Liability (Errors and Omissions) Insurance appropriates to the Consultant’s profession, with limit no less than $5,000,000 per occurrence or claim, $5,000,000 aggregate.

If the Consultant maintains broader coverage and/or higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City of Stockton requires and shall be entitled to the broader coverage and/or the higher limits maintained by the contractor. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City of Stockton.

Other Insurance Provisions
The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:

Exhibit D

EXHIBIT 1
242
REV 2024-03-25
Additional Insured Status
The City of Stockton, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds on the CGL policy with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of the Contractor including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations. General liability coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Contractor’s insurance (at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85 or if not available, through the addition of both CG 20 10, CG 20 26, CG 20 33, or CG 20 38; and CG 20 37 if a later edition is used). Additional insured Name of Organization shall read “City of Stockton, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers.” Policy shall cover City of Stockton, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers for all locations work is done under this contract.

Primary Coverage
For any claims related to this contract, the Contractor’s insurance coverage shall be primary and non-contributory and at least as broad as ISO CG 20 01 04 13 as respects the City of Stockton, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City of Stockton, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor’s insurance and shall not contribute with it. This requirement shall also apply to any Excess or Umbrella liability policies. The City of Stockton does not accept endorsements limiting the Contractor’s insurance coverage to the sole negligence of the Named Insured.

Umbrella or Excess Policy
The Contractor may use Umbrella or Excess Policies to provide the liability limits as required in this agreement. This form of insurance will be acceptable provided that all of the Primary and Umbrella or Excess Policies shall provide all of the insurance coverages herein required, including, but not limited to, primary and non-contributory, additional insured, Self-Insured Retentions (SIRs), indemnity, and defense requirements. The Umbrella or Excess policies shall be provided on a true “following form” or broader coverage basis, with coverage at least as broad as provided on the underlying Commercial General Liability insurance. No insurance policies maintained by the Additional Insureds, whether primary or excess, and which also apply to a loss covered hereunder, shall be called upon to contribute to a loss until the Contractor’s primary and excess liability policies are exhausted.

Notice of Cancellation
Each insurance policy required above shall provide that coverage shall not be canceled, except with notice to the City of Stockton.

Waiver of Subrogation
Contractor hereby grants to City of Stockton a waiver of any right to subrogation which any insurer of said Contractor may acquire against the City of Stockton by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance. Contractor agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to affect this waiver of subrogation, but this Exhibit D

EXHIBIT 1
243
REV 2024-03-25
provision applies regardless of whether or not the City of Stockton has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.

Self-Insured Retentions

Self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City of Stockton. The City of Stockton may require the Contractor to purchase coverage with a lower retention or provide proof of ability to pay losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses within the retention. The policy language shall provide, or be endorsed to provide, that the self-insured retention may be satisfied by either the named insured or City of Stockton. The CGL and any policies, including Excess liability policies, may not be subject to a self-insured retention (SIR) or deductible that exceeds $25,000 unless approved in writing by City of Stockton. Any and all deductibles and SIRs shall be the sole responsibility of Contractor or subcontractor who procured such insurance and shall not apply to the Indemnified Additional Insured Parties. City of Stockton may deduct from any amounts otherwise due Contractor to fund the SIR/deductible. Policies shall NOT contain any self-insured retention (SIR) provision that limits the satisfaction of the SIR to the Named. The policy must also provide that Defense costs, including the Allocated Loss Adjustment Expenses, will satisfy the SIR or deductible. City of Stockton reserves the right to obtain a copy of any policies and endorsements for verification.

Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers authorized to conduct business in the state with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City of Stockton.

Claims Made Policies (Professional & Pollution only)
If any of the required policies provide claims-made coverage:

1. The Retroactive Date must be shown, and must be before the date of the contract or the beginning of contract work.

2. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for
at least five (5) years after completion of the contract of work.

3. If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another
claims-made policy form with a Retroactive Date prior to the contract effective date, the Contractor must purchase “extended reporting” coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of work.

Exhibit D

EXHIBIT 1
244
REV 2024-03-25
Verification of Coverage
Contracto
r shall furnish the City of Stockton with original certificates and amendatory endorsements or copies of the applicable policy language effecting coverage required by this clause and a copy of the Declarations and Endorsements Pages of the CGL and any Excess policies listing all policy endorsements. All certificates and endorsements and copies of the Declarations & Endorsements pages are to be received and approved by the City of Stockton before work commences. However, failure to obtain the required documents prior to the work beginning shall not waive the Contractor’s obligation to provide them. The City of Stockton reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements required by these specifications, at any time. City of Stockton reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances.

Subcontractors
Consultant shall require and verify that all subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all the requirements stated herein, and Contractor shall ensure that City of Stockton is an additional insured on insurance required from subcontractors.

Duration of Coverage
CGL & Excess liability policies for any construction related work, including, but not limited to, maintenance, service, or repair work, shall continue coverage for a minimum of 5 years for Completed Operations liability coverage. Such Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the contract of work.

Special Risks or Circumstances
City of Stockton reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances.

Certificate Holder Address
The address for mailing certificates, endorsements and notices shall be:

City of Stockton
Its Officers, Officials, Employees, and Volunteers
400 E Main St, 3rd Floor – HR
Stockton, CA 95202
Exhibit D

EXHIBIT 1
245
Exhibit E

EXHIBIT 1
246
Exhibit E

EXHIBIT 1
247
Exhibit E

EXHIBIT 1
248
Subject:

CITY OF STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA

CITY MANAGER ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE
Directive No. HR-15 Page No. 4 of 14

DISCRIMINATION AND

HARASSMENT POLICY
Effective Date: Revised From:
7/27/09
5/1/2015 4/6/09
3/1/2010
(see below)
PER-015 (Sexual Harassment in the Workplace) revised from 10/21/94, 5/1/95, 1/1/98 PER-037 (Sexual Harassment Investigative Procedures) revised from 2/15/93 otherwise adversely affecting an employee's or non-employee's employment opportunities.

Harassment may take many forms, including, but not limited to, the following examples:

1. Verbal Harassment: Epithets, derogatory and offensive comments or slurs based on race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, physical or mental disability, marital status, pregnancy, medical condition, gender, sexual orientation, political affiliation, age, or any other category or attribute identified under state and federal law.

2. Physical Harassment: Assault, impeding or blocking movement that results in the physical interference with normal work or movement on the basis of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, physical or mental disability, marital status, pregnancy, medical condition, gender, sexual orientation, political affiliation, age, or any other category or attribute identified under state and federal law.

3. Visual Harassment: The displaying of posters, photography, notices, bulletins, e-mails, cartoons or drawings with derogatory and offensive content based on race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, physical or mental disability, marital status, pregnancy, medical condition, gender, sexual orientation, political affiliation, age, or any other category or attribute identified under state and federal law.

C. "Sexual harassment," as used in this policy, is a subcategory of harassment, and is specifically defined by law as unwanted sexual advances, requests for sexual favors or visual, verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature when:

1. Submission to such conduct is made a term or condition of employment; or

2. Submission to or rejection of such conduct is used as a basis for employment decisions affecting the individual; or
Exhibit E

EXHIBIT 1
249
Exhibit E

EXHIBIT 1
250
Exhibit E

EXHIBIT 1
251
Exhibit E

EXHIBIT 1
252
Exhibit E

EXHIBIT 1
253
Exhibit E

EXHIBIT 1
254
Exhibit E

EXHIBIT 1
255
Exhibit E

EXHIBIT 1
256
Exhibit E

EXHIBIT 1
257
Exhibit E

EXHIBIT 1
258
Exhibit E

EXHIBIT 1
259
City of Stockton
Legislation Text
File #: 25-0688, Version: 1
APPROVE MOTION TO AUTHORIZE STANDARD AGREEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 1 FOR TREE

MAINTENANCE SERVICES

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve a motion to:

1. Approve findings pursuant to Stockton Municipal Code 3.68.070 in support of an exception to the competitive bidding process.

2. Authorize the City Manager to execute Standard Agreement Amendment No. 1 to the Cooperative/Piggyback Purchase Agreement, Contract No. 23-177, through the City of Tracy with West Coast Arborists, Inc. of Anaheim, CA, for Tree Maintenance Services Piggyback, Project No. OM-25-060.

3. Authorize the City Manager to execute a two-year contract extension to the Cooperative/Piggyback Purchase Agreement, Contract No. 23-177, with West Coast Arborists, Inc. of Anaheim, CA, at an annual cost not to exceed $370,000, for a cumulative contract total not to exceed $830,000.

It is also recommended that the City Manager be authorized to take appropriate and necessary actions to carry out the purpose and intent of this motion.

Summary
The City utilizes contracted tree maintenance services to provide after-hours support, emergency response, and to supplement the City’s tree crew. The estimated annual cost for tree maintenance services is $370,000.

On December 31, 2024, the City Manager authorized a one-year Cooperative/Piggyback Purchase Agreement (COOP) through the City of Tracy, with West Coast Arborists, Inc. of Anaheim, CA, in the amount of $90,000 (Attachment A). The COOP includes all necessary maintenance services for trees, including pruning, removals, stump grinding, replanting, and any additional services needed to care for the City’s urban forest. On July 7, 2025, the City of Tracy extended the term of their contract with West Coast Arborists, Inc. for an additional two years, allowing the City of Stockton to extend our COOP to July 31, 2027.

It is recommended that Council approve a motion authorizing the City Manager to execute Standard Agreement Amendment No. 1, in the amount of $740,000, and execute a two-year contract extension with West Coast Arborists, Inc. for Tree Maintenance Services Piggyback, Project No. OM-25-060 (Attachment B). The total revised contract amount will be $830,000.

City of Stockton Printed on 7/24/2025Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™
260
File #: 25-0688, Version: 1

DISCUSSION
Background
The City is responsible for the maintenance of City-owned trees Citywide. Public Works is currently staffed with one tree crew of five employees. The City tree crew primarily responds to emergency situations during normal working hours and removes trees on the City’s tree backlog list. To supplement the tree crew, Public Works relies on tree service contractors during emergency storm events or after hours.

On December 31, 2024, the City Manager authorized a one-year COOP through the City of Tracy with West Coast Arborists, Inc. of Anaheim, CA, in the amount of $90,000 (Attachment A). On July 7, 2025, the City of Tracy extended the term of their contract with West Coast Arborists, Inc. for an additional two years, allowing the City of Stockton to extend our COOP to July 31, 2027.

The existing COOP includes all necessary maintenance services for trees, including pruning, removals, stump grinding, replanting, and any additional services needed to care for the City’s Urban Forest.

Present Situation
The COOP is designed to meet agency purchasing guidelines and was created through a competitive request for proposals. The COOP includes West Coast Arborists, Inc., as an authorized vendor, that has considerable experience with the City’s tree standards. Staff is proposing to utilize the existing COOP, Contract No. 23-177, through the City of Tracy with West Coast Arborists, Inc. for all necessary maintenance services for trees, including pruning, removals, stump grinding, replanting, and any additional services needed to care for the City’s Urban Forest.

The contract with the City of Tracy and West Coast Arborists, Inc. allows for an extension of up to five years. On July 7, 2025, the City of Tracy extended the term of their contract for an additional two years, allowing the City of Stockton to extend our COOP to July 31, 2027.

It is recommended that Council approve a motion authorizing the City Manager to execute Standard Agreement Amendment No. 1, in the amount of $740,000, and execute a two-year contract extension with West Coast Arborists, Inc. for the Tree Maintenance Services Piggyback, Project No. OM-25-060 (Attachment B). The total revised contract amount will be $830,000.

Findings
Pursuant to Stockton Municipal Code (SMC) section 3.68.070, Council may approve findings which support an exception to the competitive bidding process. These findings include:

1. City of Tracy established a COOP with West Coast Arborists, Inc. for maintenance services for trees, pruning, removals, stump grinding, replanting, and any additional services.

City of Stockton Printed on 7/24/2025Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™
261
File #: 25-0688, Version: 1

2. The West Coast Arborists, Inc. COOP was established pursuant to a formal competitive bidding process conducted by City of Tracy.

3. Taking advantage of the leverage procurement agreement negotiated by the City of Tracy will save the administrative expense of City staff conducting a separate procurement.

4. The bid used by the City of Tracy has been assessed as compatible with the City’s standards.

FINANCIAL SUMMARY
The COOP with West Coast Arborists, Inc. for Tree Maintenance Services Piggyback, Project No.

OM-25-060, is funded by the Parks General Fund, Landscape Maintenance District Operating Fund, and Streets and Trees Operating Budget on a fiscal year basis. Funding for these services will be allocated in various operating accounts for Fiscal Years 2025-26 and 2026-27.

Attachment A - COOP through the City of Tracy with West Coast Arborists, Inc.

Attachment B - Standard Agreement Amendment No. 1 with West Coast Arborists, Inc.

City of Stockton Printed on 7/24/2025Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™
262

ATTACHMENT A
263

ATTACHMENT A
264

ATTACHMENT A
265

ATTACHMENT A
266

ATTACHMENT A
267

ATTACHMENT A
268

ATTACHMENT A
269

ATTACHMENT A
270

ATTACHMENT A
271

ATTACHMENT A
272

ATTACHMENT A
273

ATTACHMENT A
274

ATTACHMENT A
275

ATTACHMENT A
276

ATTACHMENT A
277

ATTACHMENT A
278

ATTACHMENT A
279

ATTACHMENT A
280

ATTACHMENT A
281

ATTACHMENT A
282

ATTACHMENT A
283

ATTACHMENT A
284

ATTACHMENT A
285

ATTACHMENT A
286

ATTACHMENT A
287

ATTACHMENT A
288

ATTACHMENT A
289

ATTACHMENT A
290

ATTACHMENT A
291

ATTACHMENT A
292

ATTACHMENT A
293

ATTACHMENT A
294

ATTACHMENT A
295

ATTACHMENT A
296

CITY OF STOCKTON
STANDARD AGREEMENT AMENDMENT Agreement Number: Amendment Number:
425000400 1
This Amendment Number_1 _ to the above referenced Agreement is entered into on _______ between the City of Stockton ("City") and West Coast Arborists, Inc. "Contractor" for Tree Maintenance Services Piggyback, Project No. OM-25-060.

RECITALS
Cooperative/Piggyback Purchase Agreement (COOP), states the Agreement may be amended only by written amendment, consistent with the COOP, signed by Contractor and City, and; The City needs to extend the terms specified in Section 1, Agreement Term, of the COOP to July 31, 2027; and The City needs to increase the not-to-exceed amount in Section 3, Compensation, of the COOP by $740,000 to continue tree maintenance services.

Now, therefore, the City and the Contractor mutually agree as follows:

1. The tennination date in Section1, Agreement Term, of the contract is extended to July 31, 2027.

2. The total not-to-exceed amount in Section 3, Compensation, of the contract is amended to $830,000.

All other tenns and conditions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged and remain in full force and effect unless modified by a written amendment signed by both parties.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the authorized parties have executed this Agreement

CONTRACTOR
Patrick Mahoney, President
Printed Name and Title of Person Signing
2200 E. Via Burton, Anaheim, CA 92806
Address
Steve Colangelo, Interim City Manager
ATTEST:

Katherine Roland, CMG, CPMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Lori M. Asuncion, City Attorney
BY·
(Rev. 02.13.25)

CITY OF STOCKTON
06/12/25
Date
Date

ATTACHMENT B
297
City of Stockton
Legislation Text
File #: 25-0714, Version: 1

ADOPT RESOLUTION TO AWARD A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT FOR THE

DOWNTOWN STOCKTON WEBER AVENUE BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY

PROJECT

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution to:

1. Appropriate funds in the amount of $9,427,000 from the State Active Transportation Program to the Downtown Stockton Weber Avenue Bike and Pedestrian Connectivity, Project No.

WT24038/ATPSB1L-5008(206).

2. Approve findings pursuant to Stockton Municipal Code section 3.68.070 in support of an exception to the competitive bidding process.

3. Award a Professional Services Contract to R.E.Y. Engineers, Inc. of Folsom, CA, in the amount of $1,412,881.13 for design of the Downtown Stockton Weber Avenue Bike and Pedestrian Connectivity, Project No. WT24038/ATPSB1L-5008(206).

It is also recommended that the City Manager be authorized to take appropriate and necessary actions to carry out the purpose and intent of this resolution.

Summary
Public Works was successful in receiving $9,427,000 in Regional Active Transportation Program (ATP) funds for the Downtown Stockton Weber Avenue Bike and Pedestrian Connectivity, Project No.

WT24038/ATPSB1L-5008(206). The project will construct bike facilities and pedestrian improvements along Weber Avenue from Washington Street to Wilson Way (Attachment A). The project will also upgrade curb ramps to current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards, install Class IV bike lanes, rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFB), crosswalks, signal timing improvements, bike storage, bike lockers, public art, trees, new signage, sidewalk improvements, and curb and gutter.

On January 17, 2025, the City advertised a Request for Proposals (RFP) for design of the Downtown Stockton Weber Avenue Bike and Pedestrian Connectivity, Project No. WT24038/ATPSB1L-5008 (206). On February 26, 2025, four firms submitted proposals for this project. The Selection Committee evaluated the proposals and found R.E.Y. Engineers, Inc. of Folsom, CA, to be the most qualified firm for this project.

It is recommended that Council adopt a resolution appropriating funds and authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Contract in the amount of $1,412,881.13 with R.E.Y.

Engineers, Inc. for design services. It is anticipated that the design will be completed by fall 2026.

City of Stockton Printed on 7/24/2025Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™
298
File #: 25-0714, Version: 1

DISCUSSION
Background
Federal and State ATP funds are available for projects that encourage increased use of active modes of transportation such as walking and bicycling. In 2022, Public Works submitted the Downtown Stockton Weber Avenue Bike and Pedestrian Connectivity project grant application for the ATP Cycle 6 program. The project was awarded $9,427,000 in Regional ATP funds (State funds only). The project was identified in the Greater Downtown Stockton ATP.

The project will construct bike facilities and pedestrian improvements along Weber Avenue from Washington Street to Wilson Way (Attachment A). The project will also upgrade curb ramps to current ADA standards, install Class IV bike lanes, RRFB, crosswalks, signal timing improvements, bike storage, bike lockers, public art, trees, new signage, sidewalk improvements, and curb and gutter.

Present Situation
On January 17, 2025, the City advertised an RFP for design of the Downtown Stockton Weber Avenue Bike and Pedestrian Connectivity, Project No. WT24038/ATPSB1L-5008(206). On February 26, 2025, four proposals were received from the following firms:
· CSG Consultants (Sacramento, CA)
· Kimley-Horn (Sacramento, CA)
· R.E.Y. Engineers, Inc. (Folsom, CA)
· Siegfried Engineering, Inc. (Stockton, CA)
The Selection Committee evaluated and ranked all proposals based on each firm’s understanding of work, experience with similar kinds of projects, staff qualifications, capability of developing innovative or advanced techniques, familiarity with State and federal procedures, financial responsibility, and demonstrated technical ability.

R.E.Y. Engineers, Inc. received the highest ranking, based on the noted criteria, and was determined to be the most qualified firm for this project. Staff negotiated a fee in the amount of $1,412,881.13 with R.E.Y. Engineers, Inc. for design services. The fee is approximately 15 percent of the estimated construction cost, which is reasonable for a project of this size and complexity.

It is recommended that Council adopt a resolution appropriating funds and authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Contract to R.E.Y. Engineers, Inc. in the amount of $1,412,881.13 for design services for the Downtown Stockton Weber Avenue Bike and Pedestrian Connectivity, Project No. WT24038/ATPSB1L-5008(206). It is anticipated that the design will be completed by fall 2026.

Findings
Pursuant to Stockton Municipal Code (SMC) section 3.68.070, Council may approve findings which support an exception to the competitive bidding process. These findings include:

City of Stockton Printed on 7/24/2025Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™
299
File #: 25-0714, Version: 1

1. The City does not have sufficient staff and expertise to design this project.

2. Use of the RFP process is appropriate for this Professional Services Contract because it relies on the evaluation of professional qualifications and performance as the basis for selection of a vendor. Use of the criteria helps ensure selection of a vendor that will provide the highest quality professional service, which is in the public interest.

3. The City negotiated a contract following solicitation of competitive proposals in accordance with SMC section 3.68.070.A.3.

FINANCIAL SUMMARY
With the appropriation of funds in the amount of $9,427,000 from the State Active Transportation Program to the Downtown Stockton Weber Avenue Bike and Pedestrian Connectivity, Project No.

WT24038/ATPSB1L-5008(206), there will be sufficient funding to award a Professional Services Contract to R.E.Y. Engineers, Inc. for the project.

There is no impact to the City’s General Fund or any other unrestricted fund as a result of taking the recommended actions.

Attachment A - Vicinity Map
City of Stockton Printed on 7/24/2025Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™
300
301

Resolution No.

STOCKTON CITY COUNCIL

RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING FUNDS AND AWARDING A PROFESSIONAL

SERVICES CONTRACT FOR THE DOWNTOWN STOCKTON WEBER AVENUE BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY, PROJECT NO. WT24038/ATPSB1L-5008(206)

On January 17, 2025, the City advertised a Request for Proposals (RFP) for design of the Downtown Stockton Weber Avenue Bike and Pedestrian Connectivity, Project No.

WT24038/ATPSB1L-5008(206). Four proposals were received; and

The project will construct bike facilities and pedestrian improvements along Weber Avenue from Washington Street to Wilson Way. The project will also upgrade curb ramps to current American s with Disabilities Act standa rds, install Class IV bike lanes, rectangular rapid flashing beacons, crosswalks, signal timing improvements, bike storage, bike lockers, public art, trees, new signage, sidewalk improvements, and curb and gutter; and

R.E.Y . Engineers, Inc. was determined to be the most qualified firm for this project.

Staff negotiated a fee in the amount of $1,412,881.13 with R.E.Y . Engineers, Inc. for design services; and

Appropriation of funds is needed to fund all design related costs to complete the project; now, therefore,

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STOCKTON, AS FOLLOWS:

1. The City Council approves the appropriation of funds in the amount of $9,427,000.00 from the State Active Transportation Program to the Downtown Stockton Weber Avenue Bike and Pedestrian Connectivity, Project No. WT24038/ATPSB1L - 5008(206).

2. The City Council approves findings pursuant to Stockton Municipal Code (SMC) Section 3.68.070 in support of an exception to the competitive bidding process.

These findings include:

a. The City does not have sufficient staff and expertise to design this project.

b. Use of the RFP process is appropriate for this Professional Services Contract because it relies on the evaluation of professional qualifications and performance as the basis for selection of a vendor. Use of the criteria helps ensure selection of a vendor that will provide the highest quality professional service, which is in the public interest. 302

c. The City negotiated a contract following solicitation of competitive proposals in accordance with SMC section 3.68.070.A.3.

3. The City Council awards a Professional Services Contract between the City of Stockton and R.E.Y . Engineers, Inc ., in the amount of $ 1,412,881.13, and the City Manager is authorized and directed to execute same, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 1 and incorporated by this reference.

4. The City Manager is hereby authorized to take whatever actions are necessary and appropriate to carry out the purpose and intent of this Resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED July 29, 2025 .

CHRISTINA FUGAZI
Mayor of the City of Stockton
ATTEST:

KATHERINE ROLAND, CMC, CPMC
City Clerk of the City of Stockton

303
State Professional Services Contract – R.E.Y. ENGINEERS, INC. – Downtown Stockton Weber Avenue Bike and Pedestrian Connectivity, Project No. WT24038/ATPSB1L-5008(206) (Updated 010/18/23) A. Consultant represents that it is licensed in the State of California and is qualified, willing and able to provide the services proposed in the SCOPE OF WORK section of this Contract.

B.

City finds it necessary and advisable to us e the services of the Consultant for the purposes provided in this Contract.

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

1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. Subject to the terms and c onditions set forth in this Contract, Consultant shall undertake and complete the services described in Exhibit A .

Consultant shall provide said services at the time, place, and in the manner specified in Exhibit A and compatible with the standards of the profession. Consultant agrees that it shall produce a fully complete project that is acceptable to the City.

2. COMPENSATION. City shall pay Consultant for services outlined in Exhibit A according to the fee not to exceed the schedule detailed in Exhibit B, which is attached to this Contract and incorporated by this reference. Consultant agrees this fee is for full remuneration for performing all services and furnishing all sta ffing and materials called for in the scope of services. The payments shall be made on a monthly basis upon receipt and approval of Consultant’s invoice. Total compensation for services and reimbursement for costs shall not exceed $1,412,881.13 or as otherwise mutually agreed to in a Contract Amendment.

3. INSURANCE. During the term of this Contract, Consultant shall maintain in full force and effect at its own cost and expense the insurance coverage as set forth in the attached Exhibit D and shall otherwise comply with the other provisions of Exhibit D.

4. INDEMNITY AND HOLD HARMLESS. Pursuant to the full language of California Civil Code §2782, design Professiona l agrees to indemnify, includi ng the cost to defend, City of Stockton and its officers, officials, employ ees, and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, costs, or liability that arise out of, or pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Design Professional and its employees or agents in the performance of services under this contract, but this indemnity does not apply to liability for EXHIBIT 1

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT
(for State funded projects)
THIS CONTRACT is entered into this day of ______ 2025, between the CITY OF STOCKTON, a municipal corporation (“City”), and R.E.Y. ENGINEERS, INC. whose address is 905 SUTTER STREET, SUITE 200, FOLSOM, CA 95630 (“Consultant”) for the

DOWNTOWN STOCKTON WEBER AVENUE BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY, PROJECT NO. WT24038/STATE PROJECT NO. ATPSB1L-5008(206) , hereinafter referred to as “Project”.

RECITALS
304
State Professional Services Contract – R.E.Y. ENGINEERS, INC. – Downtown Stockton Weber Avenue Bike and Pedestrian Connectivity, Project No. WT24038/ATPSB1L-5008(206) (Updated 010/18/23) A. Invoices s
ubmitted by Consultant to City must contain a brief description of work performed, time used and City project number. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of approval of invoice by City.

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

6. CONFORMANCE T
O APPLICABLE LAWS . Consultant shall comply with all
applicable Federal, State, and Municipal laws, rules, and ordinances. Consultant shall not discriminate in the employment of persons or in the provision of services under this Contract on the basis of any legally protected classification, including race, color, national origin, ancestry, sex or religion of such person.

A. TITLE VI
Title VI
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires that “no person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.” (42 USC Section 2000d). http://www.dol.gov/oasam/regs/statutes/titlevi.htm.

The City of
Stockton requires compliance with the requirements of Title VI in all of its programs and activities regardless of funding source.

B. DISCRIMINA

TION AND HARASSMENT POLICY
The City of
Stockton has a Discrimination and Harassment Policy (Exhibit G). The purpose of this policy is to reaffirm the City’s commitment to demonstrating respect for all individuals by strictly prohibiting discrimination and harassment, including damages arising from the sole negligence, active negligence, or willful acts of the City of Stockton; and does not apply to any passive negligence of the City of Stockton unless caused

at least in part by the Design Professional. The City of Stockton agrees t hat in no event shall the cost to defend charged to the Design Professional exceed that professional’s proportionate percentage of fault. This duty to indemnify s hall not be waived or modified by contractual agreement or acts of the parties.

5. SCHEDULE AND TERM. Consultant shall perform the scope of work as described in Exhibit A according to the schedule detailed in Exhibit C, which is attached to this Contract and incorporated by this reference. This contract shall commence on the date written above and shall expire on December 31, 2029, unless extended by mutual agreement through the issuance of a Contract Amendment.

EXHIBIT 1

305
State Professional Services Contract – R.E.Y. ENGINEERS, INC. – Downtown Stockton Weber Avenue Bike and Pedestrian Connectivity, Project No. WT24038/ATPSB1L-5008(206) (Updated 010/18/23) sexual harassment in the workplace, to define the types of behavior and conduct prohibited by this policy, and to set forth a procedure for reporting, investigating, and resolving complaints of discrimination and harassment in the workplace.

C. LABOR STANDARDS PROVISIONS/CALIFORNIA LABOR CODE

The bidder shall understand that conditions set forth in Chapter 1, Part 7, Division 2 of the California Labor Code shall be considered part of the contract agreement. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=LAB&div ision=2.&title=&part=7.&chapter=1.&article=2.

D. PREVAILING WAGE RATES

Consultant and any subcontractor shall pay each employee engaged in the trade or occupation not less than the prevailing hourly wage rate. In accordance with the provisions of Section 1770 of the Labor Code, the Director of Department of Industrial Relations of the State of California has determined the general prevailing rates of wages and employer payments for health and welfare, pension, vacation, travel time, and subsistence pay as provided for in Section 1773.1, apprenticeship or other training programs authorized by Section 3093 and similar purposes applicable to the work to be done. Consultant performing the work under this contract shall obtain a copy of the wage rate determination and shall distribute copies to each subcontractor. As the wage determination for each craft reflects an expiration date, it shall be the prime Consultant and each subcontractor's responsibility to e nsure that the prevailing wage rates of concern is current and paid to the employee.

i. The Consultant performing the work shall be responsible for obtaining a copy of the State wage rate determination. State wage rates may be obtained at http://www.dir.ca.gov/OPRL/pwd/Determinations/Northern/Northern.pdf. The Consultant shall be responsible for posting said wage rates at a prominent location at the work site and shall maintain same in a good readable condition for the duration of the work.

ii. Should the Consultant choose to work on a Saturday, Sunday or on a holiday recognized by the Labor Unions, the Consultant shall reimburse the City the actual cost of engineering, inspection, superintendence, and or other overhead expenses which are directly chargeable to the contract. Should such work be undertaken at the request of the City, reimbursement will not be required. To conform strictly with the provisions of Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 2, of the Labor Code of the State of California. To forfeit as a penalty to City the sum of TWENTY FIVE AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($25.00) for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed by Consultant, or by any subcontractor under Consultant, in the execution of this contract, for each calendar day during which any laborer, worker, or mechanic is required or permitted to work more than eight (8) hours and who is not paid the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for holiday and overtime work in violation of the provisions of Sections EXHIBIT 1

306
State Professional Services Contract – R.E.Y. ENGINEERS, INC. – Downtown Stockton Weber Avenue Bike and Pedestrian Connectivity, Project No. WT24038/ATPSB1L-5008(206) (Updated 010/18/23) 1770 to 1781 of the Labor Code of the State of California. That all sums forfeited under the provisions of the foregoing sections shall be deducted from the payments to be made under the terms of this contract.

iii. PAYROLL RECORDS The Consultant to whom the contract is awarded shall ensure that the prime and each subcontractor will, in accordance with Section 1776 of the Labor Code, maintain certified payroll records. A copy of said records shall be provided with each invoice to the Public Works Department, Attention: Contract Complia nce Officer. It shall be the Consultant’s responsibility to obtain copies of the current prevailing wage rate determination for all subcontractors. Additionally, certified payroll records must be uploaded to the DIR website as required by labor code.

iv. APPRENTICESHIP STANDARDS The Consultant shall comply with the provisions established in Section 1777.5 of the Labor Code concerning the 1) certified approval by local joint apprenticeship committees for the employment and training of apprentices, and 2) contribution of funds to administer and conduct apprenticeship programs, if applicable to the job.

E. APPENDIX E OF THE TITLE VI ASSURANCES

During the performance of this contract, the contractor, for itself, its assignees, and successors in interest agrees to comply with Appendix E of the Title VI Assurances attached as Exhibit F.

F. SANCTIONS

Deliverables must conform with all applicable federal, state, and local laws. Such conformity includes compliance with federal sanctions, and Contractor certifies that it has not and will not engage in prohibited transactions with sanctioned persons or entities.

7. RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF CITY. City shall make available to Consultant all data and information in the possession of City which both parties deem necessary to complete the work, and City shall actively aid and assist Consultant in obtaining such information as may be deemed necessary from other agencies and individuals.

8. OBLIGATIONS OF CONSULTANT. Throughout the term of this Contract, Consultant represents and warrants that it has or will have at the time this Contract is executed, all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance, and approvals of whatsoever nature which are legally required for the Consultant to practice its professions, and Consultant shall, at its own cost and expense, keep in effect during the life of this Contract all such licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance, and approvals. Consultant shall meet with the Public Works Director or other personnel of City or third parties as necessary on all matters connected with the carrying out of Consultant’s services. Such meetings shall be held at the request of either party hereto. Consultant further warrants that it will follow the best current, generally accepted and EXHIBIT 1

307
State Professional Services Contract – R.E.Y. ENGINEERS, INC. – Downtown Stockton Weber Avenue Bike and Pedestrian Connectivity, Project No. WT24038/ATPSB1L-5008(206) (Updated 010/18/23) professional practices to make findings, render opinions, prepare factual presentations, and provide professional advice and recommendations regarding this project.

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

10. CONTRACT AMENDMENTS. City reserves the right to make such alterations as may be deemed necessary or advisable and to require such extra work as may be required for the proper completion of the work contemplated by Consultant. Any such changes will be set forth in a Contract Amendment which will specify, in addition to the work done in connection with the change made, adjustment of contract time, if any, and the basis of compensation for such work. A Contract Amendment will not become effective until approved by the authorized City official.

11. TERMINATION. The City may terminate this Contract upon thirty (30) calendar days written notice to Consultant with the reason for termination stated in the notice. The Contract shall then be deemed terminated and no further work shall be performed by Consultant. If the Contract is so terminated, the Consultant shall be paid for that percentage of work actually completed at the time the notice of termination is received.

12. CONSULTANT STATUS. In performing the obligations set forth in this Contract, Consultant shall have the status of an independent contractor and Consul tant shall not be considered to be an employee of the City for any purpose. All persons working for or under the direction of Consultant are its agents and employees, and are not agents of the City.

Subcontractors shall not be recognized as having any direct or contractual relationship with the City. The persons engaged in the work, including employees of subcontractors and suppliers, will be considered employees of Consultant. The Consultant shall be responsible for the work of subcontractors, which shall be subject to the provisions of this Contract. The Consultant is responsible to the City for the acts and omissions of its subcontractors and persons directly or indirectly employed by them.

A. If in the performance of this Contract any third persons are employed by Consultant, such persons shall be entirely and exclusively under the direction, supervision, and control of Consultant. All terms of employment including hours, wages, working conditions, discipline, hiring, and discharging or any other term of employment or requirement of law shall be determined by Consultant.

EXHIBIT 1

308
State Professional Services Contract – R.E.Y. ENGINEERS, INC. – Downtown Stockton Weber Avenue Bike and Pedestrian Connectivity, Project No. WT24038/ATPSB1L-5008(206) (Updated 010/18/23) i. It is further understood and agreed that Consultant must issue W -2 forms or other forms as required by law for income and employment tax purposes for all of Consultant’s personnel.
ii. As
an independent contractor, Consultant hereby indemnifies and holds City harmless from any and all claims that may be made against the City based upon any contention by any third party that employer -employee relationship exists by reason of this Contract.

13. ASS
IGNMENT. Consultant shall not assign, sublet, or transfer this Contract or any interest or obligation in the Contract without the prior written consent of the City, and then only upon such terms and conditions as City may set forth in writing. Consultant shall be solely responsible for reimbursing subcontractors.

14. HEADI
NGS NOT CONTROLLING. Headings used in the Contract are for reference purposes only and shall not be considered in construing this Contract.

15. NOT
ICES. Any and all notices herein required shall be in writing and shall be sent by certified or registered mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows:

TO
CONSULTANT: TO CITY:

R.E.Y. Engineers, Inc. Public Works Director
905 Sutter Street City of Stockton
Suite 200 22 E. Weber Ave., Rm. 301
Folsom, CA 95630 Stockton, CA 95202

16. LI
CENSES, CERTIFICATIONS, AND PERMITS. Prior to the City’s execution of this Contract and prior to the Consultant’s engaging in any operation or activity set forth in this Contract, Consultant shall obtain a City of Stockton business license, which must be kept in effect during the term of this Contract. Consultant covenants that it has obtained all certificates, licenses, permits and the like required to perform the services under this Contract.

17. RECO
RDS AND AUDITS. City reserves the right to periodically audit all charges made by Consultant to City for services under this Contract. Upon request, Consultant agrees to furnish City, or a designated representative, with necessary information and assistance.

Cons
ultant agrees that City or its delegate shall have the right to review, obtain, and copy all records pertaining to performance of the Contract. Consultant agrees to provide City or its delegate with any relevant information requested, and shall permit City or its delegate access to its premises, upon reasonable notice, during normal business hours for the purpose of interviewing employees and inspecting and copying such books, records, accounts, and other material that may be relevant to a matter under investigation for the purposes of determining compliance with this Contract. Consultant agrees to maintain such records for a period of three years from the date that final payment is made.

EXHIBIT 1

309
State Professional Services Contract – R.E.Y. ENGINEERS, INC. – Downtown Stockton Weber Avenue Bike and Pedestrian Connectivity, Project No. WT24038/ATPSB1L-5008(206) (Updated 010/18/23)

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

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

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

21. GO
VERNING LAW. California law shall govern any legal action pursuant to this Contract with venue for all claims in the Superior Court of the County of San Joaquin, Stockton Branch or, where applicable, in the federal District Court of California, East ern District, Sacramento Division.

22. NO P
ERSONAL LIABILITY. No official or employee of City shall be personally liable to Consultant in the event of any default or breach by City or for any amount due Consultant.

23. INT
EGRATION AND MODIFICATION . The response by Consultant to the Request for Proposals and the Request for Proposals on file with the City Clerk are hereby incorporated herein by reference to the extent that such documents do not differ from the provisions and terms of this Contract that shall supersede such response to Request for Proposals. This Contract represents the entire integrated agreement between Consultant and City, supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements, either written or oral, between the parties, and may be amended only by written instrument signed by Consultant and City. All exhibits and this contract are intended to be construed as a single document.

Should any inconsistency occur between the specific terms of this Contract and the attached exhibits, the terms of this Contract will prevail.

24. STA
TE CONTRACT PROVISIONS. Consultant shall comply with the State Funded Consultant Contract Provisions which are attached hereto as Exhibit “E” and incorporated herein by this reference.

25. SEVERA
BILITY. The provisions of this Contract are severable to the extent that should any of its provisions or terms be declared void in whole or in part by operation of law or agreement of the parties, the remainder of the provisions or terms not expressly declared void shall remain enforceable and in full effect.

26. THI
RD PARTY RIGHTS. Nothing in this Contract shall be construed to give any rights or benefits to anyone other than City and Consultant.

EXHIBIT 1

310

27. AUTHORITY. The undersigned hereby represent and warrant that they are authorized by the parties to execute this Contract.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF: the parties have executed this Contract the day and year first hereinabove written.

CITY OF STOCKTON
By: ____________ _

STEVE COLANGELO

INTERIM CITY MANAGER
ATTEST:

By: _____________ _

KA THERINE ROLAND, CMC, CPMC

CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By: ___________ _ ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
R.E.Y. ENGINEERS, INC.

By:_)-,-=--;,�...........,__-__ _
(s,fignature
V
Jim Fisher
Print Name
Title: President
State Professional Services Contract- R.E.Y. ENGINEERS, INC. - Downtown Stockton Weber Avenue Bike and Pedestrian Connectivity, Project No. WT24038/ A TPS B 1 L-5008(206) (Updated 010/18/23)

EXHIBIT 1
311
Project No. WT24038/ATPL-5008(206) | Proposal for the

DOWNTOWN STOCKTON WEBER AVENUE BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY PAGE 21
 The City’s handling of bid opening, change orders, and punch list walkthroughs will not require additional engineering suppor t beyond the scoped bid support/construction support hours.  Redline markups provided by the City inspector and Contractor will be comprehensive and accurate, requiring minimal additional verification.

Detailed Work Plan

ASSUMPTIONS
 No bid add alternatives.
 City is only using local and State ATP funds for design and construction. If additional funds are obtained, additional design funds may be necessary.
 Utility relocations will be limited to adjustments to grade.  Right of way acquisition services, including temporary construction easements, will not be necessary.  Existing drainage systems are adequately sized; therefore hydrologic, hydraulic, or water quality studies are not required.  Treatment control, low-impact development, or hydromodification methods for storm water management are not required.  Field work will occur in the City’s right-of-way and will be covered in a no-fee encroachment permit.  City will provide boiler plate Front End Documents (Notice to Bidders, Contract, etc.).  City will prepare R/W Certification and self-certify Right-of-Way.  City will prepare and process CTC Allocation Form (LAPG 25A or F) and other associated documentation.  Contractor will prepare any construction staging and traffic control plans.  Contractor will prepare a SWPPP or WPCP and obtain a WDID Number, if necessary.  Contractor will either protect in place or replace any survey monuments affected during construction within the project limits.

EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT 1