Agenda packet — Turlock City Council, March 25, 2025 (part 5 of 5)

E. LINWOOD AVE

LANDER AVE

GLENWOOD AVE

GOLF RD

GOLDEN STATE BLVD

BAYWOOD LN

IRONWOOD DRROSEWOOD DR

WAGNER DR

ENGLISH AVE

AMBERWOOD LNBOXWOOD WAY

ENGLISH AVE

BIRCHWOOD WAYROCKWOOD WAY

VILLA WOODS DR

PINEWOOD ST

DONEGAL CT

HARTVICKSON DR
5TH ST

MILHOUS ST
BLOSSOM DR9TH ST

LARCHWOOD CT

ELMWOOD CT

GREENWOOD LNCLOVER DRWILLOW LNFERNWOOD DR

PEPPER RIDGE DR

HARVEST PARK DR

AMBERWOOD LNSERR DR

LACY WAY

FEARLENE AVE

BREDENBERG LNKERLEY LNLAVON NEW LN

ELMCREST CT

SUN GARDEN CT

LINDEN LN
5TH ST

CRUSHERAVE

ZACHARY CTSILVERCREEK CT

BAYWOOD LN

TEAKWOOD STPLUMWOOD CT
RAY CT

WINANS LN

GREENHILLS DR

WILLERT DR

PERSIAN LNHARTLEY LN
E. LINWOOD AVE

FLOWERGLEN AVE

EAGLEGLEN AVE
F ST5TH STLUKAS STG STH STI ST

EMILY STJESSICA ST

KATELYN STSILVA ST

SILVERGLENAVE

SIERRAGLENAVE

FALCONGLENCT

PECAN WAYPAYNE WAY

JULEP WAY

STONE CTALEXANDER CT
W. LINWOOD AVE

PICARD CT

PICARD LNFEDERATION CT
0125250500SCALE IN FEET
www.provostandpritchard.com

LEGEND GRIND AND OVERLAYFULL RECONSTRUCTIONNEW CURB RAMPNEW CURB AND GUTTERCOUNTY ROW LINE DATE:OFDESIGN ENGINEER:JOB NO:
2/28/2025 3:34 PM I:\Marketing\Proposals\2024\City of Turlock - Linwood Road Rehab 24-284\Working Drafts\CAD\Lynwood Project Map.dwg -Abby Roque TASK ORDER No. 4CITY OF TURLOCKSTANISLAUS COUNTYPROJECT MAPJSD02/28/202524-28411

Page 583 of 624 ends

ID Task Name Duration Start Finish
1 Preliminary Engineering 100 days Tue 3/25/25 Mon 8/11/25 2 Phase SUR - Topo Survey 6 wks Tue 3/25/25 Mon 5/5/25
3 Phase MON - Monument Preservation 6 wks Tue 3/25/25 Mon 5/5/25 4 Phase GEO - Preliminary Engineering -
Geoptechnical Investigation
6 wks Tue 6/17/25 Mon 7/28/25
5 Phase SD - 35% PS&E 12 wks Tue 5/6/25 Mon 7/28/25
6 Phase DR - Drainage Report 12 wks Tue 5/6/25 Mon 7/28/25 7 City Review - 35% PS&E 2 wks Tue 7/29/25 Mon 8/11/25
8 Design Development 70 days Tue 8/12/25 Mon 11/17/25
9 Phase DD - 65% Design Development 12 wks Tue 8/12/25 Mon 11/3/25 10 City Review - 65% Design Development 2 wks Tue 11/4/25 Mon 11/17/25 11 Construction Documents 65 days Tue 11/18/25 Mon 2/16/26 12 Phase CD - 95% PS&E 8 wks Tue 11/18/25 Mon 1/12/26
13 City Review 95% - Construction Documents 2 wks Tue 1/13/26 Mon 1/26/26 14 Phase FD - 100% PS&E 3 wks Tue 1/27/26 Mon 2/16/26
SD Submittal (7/28)
City Review
DD Submittal (11/3)
City Review
CD Submittal (1/12)
City Review
FD Submittal (2/16)
Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter City of Turlock
Task Order No. 4
Project Schedule

Page 1 ends

Page 584 of 624 ends

JEFFREY DORN, PE, TE, QSD
Project Manager
MICHAEL OSBORN, PE, CASp, LEED-AP
QA/QC

JEFFREY DORN, PE, TE, QSD

PROJECT MANAGER
Jeffrey Dorn is a senior engineer at Provost & Pritchard with 15 years of civil engineering and project management experience. His experience has been focused on transportation infrastructure design and provid- ing ongoing consulting services for various public agencies. Mr . Dorn’s design experience includes geometric, pavement section, grading and drainage design of roads, design of ADA-accessible sidewalks and curb ramps, bike/pedestrian trail design, utility relocation, and water, sewer, and storm water system repair and replacement. Mr . Dorn has provid- ed a wide variety of funding assistance for various cities and counties, including grant application assistance, conceptual project layouts, en- gineer’s estimates, and completing various LAPM forms authorizing right of way and construction. His experience also includes engineering report writing, front end and technical specifications, cost estimating, project management, and coordination with railroads, Caltrans, other public agencies and utility companies.

MICHAEL OSBORN, PE, LEED-AP

QUALITY ASSURANCE / QUALITY CONTROL
Michael Osborn is a senior engineer at Provost & Pritchard. With over 20 years of engineering experience, Mr . Osborn has been involved in a variety of public works, residential and commercial development, and educational facility projects. His areas of expertise include site grading design, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) site accessibility design and assessment, stormwater management, storm drainage, sanitary sewer systems design, street design, and site development.

JASON STAICER, PE

LEAD ENGINEER
Jason Staicer is an Associate Engineer with Provost & Pritchard. With over eight years of professional experience, he has been primarily fo- cused on municipal engineering, with successful projects involving roadway design, pavement management, road widening, storm and wastewater collection, utility coordination, and accessibility considera- tions. He is also experienced with commercial land development, hy- drology and hydraulics studies, and subdivision design.

ABBY ROQUE, EIT

PROJECT DESIGNER
Abby Roque has more than nine years of professional experience, cur- rently serving as Assistant Engineer . Ms. Roque is heavily involved in the design and development of construction plans for the City of Turlock’s Roads Program Capital Improvement Program. Ms. Roque has been in- volved in various engineering projects including pavement design, road- way widening, road diet design, pedestrian and bike improvements, traffic signals, signal synchronization, and signing and striping.

BRYAN BOWERS, PLS

SURVEYOR
Bryan Bowers is a land surveyor at Provost & Pritchard with over 18 years of experience in the surveying field. He has been involved with the supervision, planning, and execution of geodetic and conventional control surveys, topographic surveys, subdivision mapping, boundary surveys, subsidence monitoring, UAV observation surveys, ALTA sur- veys, boundary analysis/legal descriptions and construction staking.

NEVA M. POPENOE, PE, GE

GEOTECHNICAL GROUP MANAGER
Ms. Popenoe has more than 16 years of geotechnical engineering and materials testing experience. She has worked on a variety of projects including highways, railroad and river bridges; flexible and rigid pave- ments; residential, commercial, and industrial developments; schools and hospitals; pipelines; power facilities; impoundments; landfills; and forensic studies. She is responsible for managing and conducting geo- technical investigations including developing the scope of work and budget, site reconnaissance, field classification of soils, sampling, de- sign, and report preparation and review. She has performed geotech- nical investigations for over 100 bridges in the State of California for Caltrans, local cities and counties. In addition to bridge foundations, her design experience on these projects includes retaining walls, sound walls, roadway embankments, and pavement structural sections. She also performs field inspection and testing, data analysis, laboratory test- ing, and construction special inspections.

JASON STAICER, PE
Lead Engineer

ABBY ROQUE, EIT
Project Designer

BRYAN BOWERS, PLS
Surveyor
NEVA M. POPENOE, PE, GE
Geotechnical (BSK)
Roads Program - Task Order No. 2

KEY STAFF
4

Page 585 of 624 ends

691 N Laverne Avenue
Fresno, CA 93727
P 559.497.2880
www.bskassociates.com
Environmental, Geotechnical, Construction Services, Analytical Testing - An Employee-Owned Company Sent via email: [email protected]
March 6, 2025 BSK Proposal G24001275
Mr. Jeffery Dorn, PE, TE, QSD
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group
455 W. Fir Avenue
Clovis, California 93611
SUBJECT: Proposal for Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Task Order No. 4
Street Rehabilitation – Various Locations
Turlock, California
Dear Mr. Dorn:

At your request, BSK Associates is pleased to submit this proposal for the preparation of a Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Report for proposed roadway improvements in Turlock, California. Our current understanding of the project, scope of services, schedules, fees and references for our services is provided below. We understand the project will be subject to prevailing wages as determined by California Director of Industrial Relations (DIR).

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING AND BACKGROUND
Based email correspondence from you on July 3, 2024, February 26, 2025, and March 3, 2025 BSK understands that the project will encompass the following improvements along the following areas:

Page 586 of 624 ends

Proposal for Geotechnical Engineering Investigation BSK Proposal G24001275 Street Rehabilitation Task 4 – Various Locations March 6, 2025 Turlock, California Page 2
Street Location Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Proposed
Improvements
E Linwood Avenue Lander Avenue Golf Road FDR-C or Conventional Pavement
Rockwood Avenue 9 th Street 5th Street Grind and Overlay Rosewood Drive Lander Avenue Baywood Lane Grind and Overlay Baywood Lane E Glennwood Avenue E Linwood Avenue Grind and Overlay 5th Street W F Street E Linwood Avenue FDR-C or Conventional Pavement

SCOPE OF SERVICES
The objective of the geotechnical investigation is to assess soil conditions and to provide geotechnical engineering recommendations for the use by the project designers in preparation of the plans and specifications for the project. Based upon the above project understanding, BSK proposes the following scope of services, which will generally include a field exploration, laboratory testing program, engineering analyses, and report preparation.

Field Exploration
Our proposed drilling program will include a total of thirteen (13) borings to 3 feet beneath the existing ground surface (bgs) or until auger refusal in the roadway pavement. We will measure the existing pavement section and obtain bulk soil samples at each location to analyze for new pavement design.

We will backfill each boring hole with soil cuttings and/or gravel and cap with asphalt patch or quick setting concrete tinted black.

Test borings will be drilled using a truck-mounted drill rig equipped with an 8-inch diameter hollow stem auger, or manually operated augers. The sampling of bulk and intact soil specimens for purposes of laboratory testing, and visually classifying soils exposed during the drilling process will be provided by a BSK Geologist or Engineer.

In order for BSK to complete the field investigation as described above, the project site must be readily accessible. Access limitations due to existing improvements may result in time delays and/or additional charges.

Page 587 of 624 ends

Proposal for Geotechnical Engineering Investigation BSK Proposal G24001275 Street Rehabilitation Task 4 – Various Locations March 6, 2025 Turlock, California Page 3
An arrangement to identify underground utilities is necessary prior to our field exploration. Prior to commencement of drilling operations, a BSK representative will visit the site to mark the test boring locations, evaluate site accessibility, and contact Underground Service Alert (USA) to determine if any of the test borings may conflict with underground utilities. BSK will not be responsible for damage to underground utilities or other installations unless they are accurately marked on the ground surface and on plans made available to us prior to beginning of field operations. Private utility locating services will be provided to further identify potential underground utilities. The associated fee for private utility locating is provided in the fee schedule below.

An encroachment permit with the City of Turlock will be secured prior to drilling and is anticipated to be provided without a fee. It is understood no other permits will be required.

It is anticipated borings will require a shoulder or lane closure, and traffic control will be limited to flagging operations.

Laboratory Testing
The laboratory testing program will incorporate physical and chemical tests to evaluate the minus 200 gradation, R-value, corrosion potential (soluble sulfates), in-situ moisture content and dry density, and soil cement mix design.

To aid in design of full depth reclamation, we will obtain bulk samples of the near surface soil and mix the soil with cement, and then conduct a compression test on the samples after 7 days. Three cement contents will be tested, with three samples at each percentage.

Geotechnical Analysis and Report Preparation
Based on the results of the field exploration and laboratory testing program, engineering analyses will be performed to evaluate site conditions and develop recommendations for site preparation procedures and engineering parameters for the proposed construction. Specifically, the report will incorporate the following items:
 Vicinity Map and Site Plan with boring locations
 Subsurface Conditions, Soil Boring Logs, Depth to Groundwater (if encountered)  Summary of Laboratory Tests
 Corrosion characteristics of on-site soils (soluble sulfates)  Recommendations for site preparation, and earthwork
 Requirements for imported fill materials
 Recommendations for site drainage
 Recommendations for construction observations and testing and excavation suitability

Page 588 of 624 ends

Proposal for Geotechnical Engineering Investigation BSK Proposal G24001275 Street Rehabilitation Task 4 – Various Locations March 6, 2025 Turlock, California Page 4
 Recommendations for conventional pavement section with asphalt concrete and Class II aggregate base
 Core information: AC and AB section thickness and thickness of other pavement materials encountered
 Recommendations for alternative pavement sections including recommendations for full-depth reclamation with cement (FDR-C)
The geotechnical report will be prepared under the supervision of, and signed by, a California Licensed Geotechnical Engineer.

SCHEDULE
Work on this project will begin immediately upon receipt of your authorization to proceed with submittal of encroachment permit applications (as applicable), preparation of a Work Plan and field marking of our borehole locations for USA. We anticipate mobilizing for our geotechnical investigation within two (2) weeks of receiving notice to proceed, pending site access, encroachment permits, weather conditions and coring subcontractor availability. We anticipate that drilling will be completed within two (2) working days and our laboratory testing program to be completed within three (3) weeks following completion of our field work. Our written reports will be submitted within one (1) week following the completion of our laboratory testing program. Preliminary design recommendations may be provided prior to finalizing the report, as requested.

FEES
Fees for our services will be charged on a time and materials basis. Our fee will be invoiced monthly.

For the scope of services outlined in this proposal, our fee, approximately broken down by task, will be as follows:

Estimated Fee
Site Reconnaissance, Permit Application, Utility Marking $ 2,403 Field Exploration/Private Utility Clearance $28,181
Laboratory Testing $ 4,937
Engineering Analysis and Report Preparation $ 3,425
Estimated Fee
Initial Here if Desired________ $38,946
Our fee applies to work commenced within 60 days of this proposal. The fees presented in this proposal are based on prompt payment for services presented in our standard invoicing format. Additional charges will be applied for specializing invoicing if backup documentation is needed. These special services will be charged on a time and expenses basis. Late fees will be charged if payment is not received in accordance with terms contained in our contract.

Page 589 of 624 ends

Proposal for Geotechnical Engineering Investigation BSK Proposal G24001275 Street Rehabilitation Task 4 – Various Locations March 6, 2025 Turlock, California Page 5

PROPOSAL ASSUMPTIONS
A detailed cost estimate for performing the required testing and inspection services during construction will be provided after the project plans and specifications are completed. This proposal and cost estimate were prepared based on the following assumptions:
 Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group will provide to BSK Associates, prior to mobilization, legal right of entry to the site (and other areas if required) to conduct the scope of services  Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group will notify BSK Associates, prior to mobilization, of any restrictions, special site access requirements, or known potentially hazardous conditions at the site (e.g. hazardous materials or processes, specialized protective equipment requirements, unsound structural conditions, etc.).
 Work can be performed during normal business hours (Monday through Friday, 7:00am to 7:00pm).
 Excess soil cutting generated during our field exploration can be left onsite at an area selected by the Owner or one of its representatives.
 Prevailing wages apply. DIR Project ID will be provided prior to start of work.  Project meetings/conference calls, plan reviews, response to Agency review comments and construction services are not included in our estimate, but can be provided on request on a “time and materials” basis.
 BSK will retain soil samples for a maximum of sixty (60) days.

Please contact us immediately if you are aware of any inaccuracies in these assumptions and conditions, so we may revise the proposal or fee.

GENERAL CONDITIONS AND AGREEMENT
We understand that if this proposal is acceptable to the Client, an agreement for Professional Services will be sent to BSK and this proposal will be incorporated as an exhibit. Please note, if changes occur in the design of this project, BSK must be notified in writing and given an opportunity to revise our scope of work, if necessary.

Page 590 of 624 ends

Proposal for Geotechnical Engineering Investigation BSK Proposal G24001275 Street Rehabilitation Task 4 – Various Locations March 6, 2025 Turlock, California Page 6

CLOSING
BSK appreciates the opportunity to submit this proposal to you and we look forward to working with you on this project. Please contact us at 559-818-0799, extension 525, or at [email protected] if you have questions.

Respectfully submitted,
BSK Associates
Adrian Sizemore, EIT Neva M. Popenoe, PE, GE
Staff Engineer II Fresno Branch Manager
GE 3024

Page 591 of 624 ends

PROPOSAL FOR CITY OF TURLOCK ROADS PROGRAM TASK ORDER 4 Estimated Staffing Plan and Cost Breakdown
Principal
Engineer
Senior
Engineer
Assistant
Engineer
Assistant
Engineer
Assistant
Engineer
Senior
Technician
Senior
Engineer
Senior
Technician
Senior
Project
Admin
Project
Admin
Licensed
Surveyor
1 man
survey
Senior
Technician
Assistant
Surveyor Intern
Dorn_J Staicer_J Roque_A 1 man
survey
Total
Hours Mileage Expenses Subtotal
Labor Total Fee
TASK $218.79 $175.55 $134.94 $115.29 $96.95 $131.01 $196.51 $148.70 $105.46 $87.78 $171.62 $221.07 $124.46 $100.88 $65.50 0.700 Phase SUR
1 Topo Survey 4 120 120 120 364 2160 1,512.00 $54,256 $55,768 2 Verify Right of Way 8 80 120 40 248 1440 1,008.00 $38,029 $39,037 Phase MON
1 Office Prep, Research 24 24 48 - $7,106 $7,106
2 Pre-Con Field Work 24 16 16 56 900 630.00 $8,911 $9,541 3 Pre-Con Corner Record 24 24 - $2,987 $2,987
4 Post-Con Field Work 24 16 16 56 900 630.00 $8,911 $9,541 5 Post-Con Corner Record 24 24 - $2,987 $2,987
Phase GEO
1 Geotechnical Investigation 0 38,946.51 $0 $38,947
Phase DR
1 Review Existing Documents 8 8 16 8 40 - $6,089 $6,089 2 Site Visit 8 8 16 180 126.00 $2,830 $2,956
3 Prepare Drainage Report 16 8 24 20 8 76 - $10,785 $10,785 Phase UTL
1 Pothole/GPR Existing Utilities 0 55,900.00 $0 $55,900 Phase SD
1 Kickoff Meeting 2 2 2 2 2 2 12 - $1,570 $1,570
2 Drawing Set Up 4 32 8 44 - $5,922 $5,922
3 Utlity Research & Potholing 4 8 8 20 - $2,657 $2,657
4 Basemap Review, Coord, Set up 4 20 40 64 - $8,814 $8,814 5 Project Management 40 40 80 - $14,149 $14,149
6 35% Plans 40 40 150 100 100 40 12 40 522 - $67,457 $67,457 7 35% Design Review Meeting 8 8 16 180 126.00 $2,830 $2,956 8 Preliminary EOPCC 4 4 12 24 44 - $5,964 $5,964
9 Utility Relocation Letters & Exhibits 2 20 24 8 54 - $6,606 $6,606 10 Streetlight Review 4 20 24 - $3,574 $3,574
Phase DD
1 65% Front End & Technical Specs 60 12 12 12 96 - $17,066 $17,066 2 65% Plans 40 40 200 150 150 40 20 40 680 - $86,388 $86,388 3 65% Design Review Meeting 8 8 16 180 126.00 $2,830 $2,956 4 Preliminary EOPCC 4 4 12 24 44 - $5,964 $5,964
5 Utility Relocation Letters & Exhibits 2 24 2 28 - $3,852 $3,852 Phase CD
1 95% Front End & Technical Specs 24 12 12 12 60 - $9,189 $9,189 2 95% Plans 40 40 160 80 80 20 20 40 480 - $63,514 $63,514 3 Preliminary EOPCC 2 8 24 34 - $4,284 $4,284
Phase FD
1 Final Front End & Technical Specs 16 12 12 12 52 - $7,439 $7,439 2 Final Plans 4 40 40 40 124 300.00 $14,762 $15,062
3 Final EOPCC 2 8 16 26 - $3,362 $3,362
Phase BID
1 Bidding Assistance (x2) 16 40 56 - $8,898 $8,898
Phase CON
1 Construction Support 80 80 40 40 8 12 12 272 - $40,679 $40,679 2 Site Visits (x4) 24 24 48 1080 756.00 $8,490 $9,246
3 Record Drawings 4 40 20 64 - $8,579 $8,579
Total units 466 144 1012 544 440 174 60 8 48 76 36 248 344 192 120 3,912 7020 $100,061 Total $ $101,956 $25,279 $136,559 $62,718 $42,658 $22,796 $11,791 $1,190 $5,062 $6,671 $6,178 $54,825 $42,814 $19,369 $7,860 $100,061 $547,727 $647,779.27

Page 592 of 624 ends

Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 10-H1
PAGE 1
Prime Consultant Subconsultant
Consultant:

Project No. Contract No. Date: 2/28/2025
Direct Labor
Hours Actual Hourly Rate Total
Principal Engineer II Jeff Dorn 466 83.50$ 38,911.00$
Senior Engineer III Jason Staicer 144 67.00$ 9,648.00$
Assistant Engineer V Abby Roque 1012 51.50$ 52,118.00$
Senior Engineer V 60 75.00$ 4,500.00$
Licensed Surveyor IV 36 65.50$ 2,358.00$
Senior Technician V 8 56.75$ 454.00$
Senior Technician IV 174 50.00$ 8,700.00$
Senior Technician I 344 47.50$ 16,340.00$
Assistant Surveyor II 192 38.50$ 7,392.00$
Intern IV 120 25.00$ 3,000.00$
Assistant Engineer IV 544 44.00$ 23,936.00$
Project Administrator IV 76 33.50$ 2,546.00$
Senior Project Administrator II 48 40.25$ 1,932.00$
Assistant Engineer I 440 37.00$ 16,280.00$
1 Man Survey 248 84.37$ 20,923.76$
-$
3,912.0 209,038.76$

LABOR COSTS
a) Subtotal Direct Labor Costs 209,038.76$
b) Anticipated Salary Increases -$
c) TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS [(a)+(b)] 209,038.76$

INDIRECT COSTS
d) Fringe Benefits (Rate): 50.83% e) Total Fringe Benefits[(c) × (d)] 106,254.40$ f) Overhead (Rate): 61.31% g) Overhead [(c) × (f)] 128,157.48$ h) 26.06% i) Gen & Admin [(c) × (h)] 54,475.50$
j) TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS [(e) +(g) + (i)] 288,887.39$

FIXED FEE
p) (Rate): 10.0% k) 49,792.61$
l) CONSULTANT'S OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODC) - ITEMIZE (Add additional pages if necessary) Quantity Unit(s) Unit Cost Total
7020 0.700 4,914.00$
55,900.00$
-$
300.00$
-$
l) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS 61,114.00$
m) SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS (Add additional pages if necessary) Subconsultant 1: 38,946.51$
Subconsultant 2: -$
Subconsultant 3: -$
Subconsultant 4: -$
m) TOTAL SUBCONSULTANT' COSTS 38,946.51$
n) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS INCLUDING SUBCONSULTANTS [(l)+(m)] 100,060.51$ TOTAL COST [(c) + (j) + (k) + (n)] 647,779.27$
NOTES:

1. 2.

3. Total
General and Administrative (Rate):

TOTAL FIXED PROFIT [(c) + (j)] × (p)]
Classification/Title Name
Anticipated salary increases calculations (page 2) must accompany.

Key personnel must be marked with an asterick (*) and employees that are subject to prevailing wage requirements must be marked with two astericks (**). All costs must comply with 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 congnizant agency or accepted by Caltrans.

Test
BSK Associates
Description
Note: Mark-ups are Not Allowed
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group
2nd Tier Subconsultant
COST PROPOSAL 1

COST-PLUS-FIXED FEE OR LUMP SUM OR FIRM FIXED PRICE CONTRACTS (DESIGN, ENGINEERING, AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES)
Permit Fees
Plan Sheets
Mileage Costs
Potholing/GPR
X
LPP 15-01 3/10/2025

Page 593 of 624 ends

Cost Proposal
Certification of Direct Costs:

Prime Consultant or Subconsultant Certifying:

Name: Title:

Signature: Date of Certification (mm/dd/yyyy):

Email: Phone Number: (559) 449-2700
Address: 455 W. Fir Ave., Clovis, CA 93611
List Services the consultant is providing under the proposed contract:
*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.

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)
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 approved or Caltrans accepted Indirect Cost Rate(s).

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 Procedures

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) Director of Operations
Jeffrey Dorn
03/10/2025
[email protected]
Civil engineering design and land surveying services for the City of Turlock's Roads Program

Page 594 of 624 ends

Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 10-H1
Cost Proposal
Note: Mark-ups are Not Allowed  Subconsultant
Consultant
Project No. G24001275 Contract No. Date 3/3/2025

DIRECT LABOR
Hours Actual Hourly Rate Total

4.00 80.50 $322.00

62.36 $0.00

14.00 49.83 $697.62

40.67 $0.00

12.00 36.54 $438.48

16.00 51.56 $824.96

4.00 77.34 $309.36

5.00 32.46 $162.30
$0.00
$0.00

LABOR COSTS
a) Subtotal Direct Labor Costs $2,754.72
b) Anticipated Salary Increases (see page 2 for sample) $68.87 c) TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS [(a) + (b)] $2,823.59

INDIRECT COSTS

72.04% [(c) x (d)] $2,034.11
f) Overhead (Rate: 137.09%) g) Overhead [(c) x (f)] $3,870.94 h) General and Administrative (Rate: 0.00% ) i) Gen & Admin [(c) x (h)] $0.00 j) TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS [(e) + (g) + (i)] $5,905.05
FIXED FEE k) TOTAL FIXED PROFIT [(c) + (j)] x fixed fee %] $872.86 k) (Rate: 10.00% )
l) CONSULTANT'S OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODC) - ITEMIZED (Add additional pages if necessary) Unit(s) Unit Cost Total
540 $1.00 $540.00
0 $20.00 $0.00
Base Rock Backfill 1 $153.00 $153.00
1 $105.00 $105.00
l) Total Other Direct Costs $5,735.00
m) SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS (Add additional pages if necessary) $12,282.00
$5,693.00
$5,635.00
$23,610.00
n) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS INCLUDING SUBCONSULTANTS [ (l) + (m)] $29,345.00 TOTAL COST [(c) + (j) + (k) + (n)] $38,946.51
NOTES:

EXHIBIT 10-H COST PROPOSAL PAGE 1 OF 3

ACTUAL COST-PLUS-FIXED FEE OR LUMP SUM (FIRM FIXED PRICE) CONTRACTS (DESIGN, ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES)
BSK Associates
Classification/Title Name
☐ Prime Consultant
Baja Exploration
Principal TBD
Senior Professional TBD
Project Professional II TBD
Staff Professional II
Project Professional I TBD
Group 3 Engineering Technician OT*
Subconsultant 2: Traffic Control
1 $4,937.00 $4,937.00
Subconsultant 1:

Group 3 Engineering Technician*
TBD
TBD
Drilling Supplies (tubes, caps, paint, stakes)
Laboratory testing (Mod. Proctor, Sieve Analysis,
Density/moisture content, Atterberg Limit, Direct Shear, R- Value, Expansion Index, Corrosion Potential)
d) Fringe Benefits Rate: ) e) Total Fringe Benefits Description of Item
Travel/Mileage Costs (supported by consultant actual costs) Asphalt Patch

1. All costs must comply with the Federal cost principles. Subconsultants will provide their own cost proposals.

2. The cost proposal format shall not be amended. Indirect cost rates should be based on consultant's annual accounting period
and established by a cognizant agency or acccepted by Caltrans. m) TOTAL SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS $
Subconsultant 3: GPRS (GPR Utility Clearance)
TBD
Project Administrator TBD

Page 1 of 3 ends

January 2018

Page 595 of 624 ends

Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 10-H1
Cost Proposal

1. Calculate Average Hourly Rate for 1st year of the contract (Direct Labor Subtotal divided by total hours)45719 Avg Hourly 5 Year Contract
Rate Duration
$2,754.72 = $50.09 Year 1 Avg Hourly Rate
Avg Hourly Rate
Year 1 $50.09 + = $52.59 Year 2 Avg Hourly Rate
Year 2 $52.59 + = $55.22 Year 3 Avg Hourly Rate
Year 3 $55.22 + = $57.98 Year 4 Avg Hourly Rate
Year 4 $57.98 + = $60.88 Year 5 Avg Hourly Rate
Total Hours
per Year
Year 1 50.00% * = 27.5 Estimated Hours Year 1
Year 2 50.00% * = 27.5 Estimated Hours Year 2
Year 3 0.00% * = 0.0 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% = 55.0
Year 1 $50.09 * = $1,377.36 Estimated Hours Year 1
Year 2 $52.59 * = $1,446.23 Estimated Hours Year 2
Year 3 $55.22 * = $0.00 Estimated Hours Year 3
Year 4 $57.98 * = $0.00 Estimated Hours Year 4
Year 5 $60.88 * = $0.00 Estimated Hours Year 5
= $2,823.59
= $2,754.72
= $68.87 Transfer to Page 1
NOTES:

55.0 55.0

55.0 55.0
Total

55.0 5%
5%
5%
5%
per Cost ProposalCompleted Each Year
Estimated %
EXHIBIT 10-H1 COST PROPOSAL PAGE 2 OF 3

3. Anticipated salary increases calculation (page 2) must accompany.

1. 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 the breakdown of the labor to be performed each year.

ACTUAL COST-PLUS-FIXED FEE OR LUMP SUM (FIRM FIXED PRICE) CONTRACTS (CALCULATIONS FOR ANTICIPATED SALARY INCREASES)

3. Calculate estimated hours per year (Multiply estimate % each year by total hours) 0 0
(calculated above) Cost per Year
Total Direct Labor Cost with Escalation
Direct Labor Subtotal before Escalation
Estimated total of Direct Labor Salary Increase
Direct Labor
Subtotal per Cost Proposal Cost Proposal
Total Hours
0 Avg Hourly Rate
(calculated above)
28 28

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

2. The cost proposal format shall not be amended. Indirect cost rates should be based on consultant's annual accounting period and established by a cognizant
agency or acccepted by Caltrans.

Estimated hours

4. Calculate Total Costs including Escalation (Multiply Average Hourly Rate by the number of hours) Total Hours per

55.00 Proposed Escalation

4. Calculations for anticipated salary escalation must be provided.

2. Calculate hourly rate for all years (Increase the Average Hourly Rate for a year by proposed escalation %)

Page 2 of 3 ends

January 2018

Page 596 of 624 ends

Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 10-H1
Cost Proposal
Name: Title*:

Signature:

Email:

Address:

I, the undersigned, certify to the best of my knowledge and belief that all direct costs identifited 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)
691 N. Laverne Ave, Suite 101, Fresno, CA 93727
* 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.

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) Certification of Direct Costs:

List services the consultant is providing under the proposed contract.

Geotechnical Engineering Services
EXHIBIT 10-H1 COST PROPOSAL PAGE 3 OF 3
Date of Certification:
[email protected] Phone Number: 209.914.7258 7/25/2024
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 approved or Caltrans accepted Indirect Cost Rate(s).

Prime Consutlant or Subconsultant Certifying:

Tim Rodriguez Chief Operating Officer

2. Terms and conditions of the contract

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

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

Page 3 of 3 ends

January 2018

Page 597 of 624 ends

Page 1 of 4 ends

CITY CONTRACT NO. 2023-111, Amendment No. 3 for Task Order No. 3

AMENDMENT NO. 3 FOR TASK ORDER NO. 3
Under the Terms of the

MASTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TURLOCK
and
SIEGFRIED ENGINEERING, INC.
for
ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES (City Contract No. 2023-111)

City Project No. 25-026

THIS AMENDMENT NO. 3 for Task Order No. 3 under the terms of City Contract No. 2023-111 is entered into by and between the CITY OF TURLOCK, a California municipal corporation (“City”), and SIEGFRIED ENGINEERING, IN C., a California corporation (“Professional”), on this _______ day of _______ 2025 (the “Effective Date of Task Order No. 3”).

City and Professional may be collectively referred to herein as the “Parties” or individually as “Party.” There are no other parties to this Amendment No. 3.

WHEREAS, the Parties hereto previously entered into a Master Agreement (City Contract No. 2023-111) dated April 25, 2023, for engineering design services to assist City with Design Services for Roads Program Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Projects (“Agreement”); and

WHEREAS, the Agreement stipulates that the scope of services and fees associated with specific projects will be agreed upon through task orders approved under the terms of Agreement by a written amendment to the Agreement; and

WHEREAS, Amendment No. 3 for Task Order No. 3 provides the scope of services, associated fees, and schedule for specific projects under City Project No. 25-026 “Siegfried Task Order No. 3 for Roads Program CIP Projects.”

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereto mutually agree to amend the Agr eement as follows:

1. Exhibit D, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby added to the Agreement.

2. Recital B of the Agreement is amended to read as follows:

B. Professional has made a proposal to City to provi de such professional services. A description of the services Professiona l proposes to provide is included in the Scope of Services in Exhibits A through D attached hereto and incorporated

Page 598 of 624 ends

Page 2 of 4 ends

CITY CONTRACT NO. 2023-111, Amendment No. 3 for Task Order No. 3

herein by reference (“Services”). City desires to r etain Professional to perform the Services, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.

3. Recital C of the Agreement is amended to read as follows:

C. The Parties anticipate that one or more projects fo r Services shall be determined through creation of a Task Order as a Ci ty-requested modification of services under Section 5.2 of this Agreement which shall be approved by written amendment to this Agreement. The Parties shall outline the schedule or timeline for providing the Services agreed upon under each Task Order (“Completion Schedule”), which shall be included in one or more written amendments to this Agreement. Such Completion Schedule is included in Exhibit D.

4. Recital D of the Agreement is amended to read as follows:

D. The Parties shall outline the rates and method of payment to Professional for its performance of the Services under this Agre ement as determined under each Task Order (“Compensation Schedule”), which shall b e included in one or more written amendments to this Agreement. Such Compensation Schedule is included in Exhibit D.

5. Section 5 of the Agreement is amended to read as follows:

5.1. Services . Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Professional shall provide City the Services described in Exhibits A through D . Any request for Services not included in Exhibits A through D will be considered a request for additional or modified Services (“Modif ication” or “Modifications”).

Professional shall not receive additional compensat ion for any Modification of the Services unless the Parties agree otherwise in a writing executed by both Parties.

5.2. City Requested Modification of Services. City may, by written order, authorize Modifications to the Services described i n Exhibits A through D . If such Modifications cause an increase in the cost or time required for performance of Professional’s Services, the Parties shall enter in to a written amendment to this Agreement to adjust the Services and the compensati on to be paid to Professional and, if necessary, amend the Completion Schedule or Compensation Schedule. The Services, Completion Schedule, or Compensation Sche dule shall not be revised unless City and Professional mutually agree to a wr itten amendment to this Agreement reflecting such revisions, additional com pensation, time for performance or such other terms or conditions mutually agreed upon by the Parties.

6. Section 6 of the Agreement is amended to read as follows:

6.1. Amount, Time and Manner of Payment for Profess ional Services. City shall pay Professional according to the rates and timing set forth in the Compensation Schedule for each Task Order within each Amendment to the Agreement. Each Compensation Schedule shall include an exhibit based on Exhibit 10-H1 of Caltrans Local Assistance Procedures Manual (LAPM). Professional will be allowed to include an amount for the anticipated salary increases as calculated per Exhibit 10-H1. City’s total compensation to Professional shall not exceed the cumulative amount resulting from each Task Order with each approved Amendment t o the Agreement. The

Page 599 of 624 ends

Page 3 of 4 ends

CITY CONTRACT NO. 2023-111, Amendment No. 3 for Task Order No. 3

compensation for Amendment No. 3 shall not exceed N ine-Hundred-Ninety-Three Thousand Three-Hundred-Ninety-Seven Dollars and Nin ety-Two Cents ($993,397.92) for City Project No. 25-026 (“Maximum Payment”), unless the Parties mutually agree in writing otherwise.

7. Execution and Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed simultaneously, and in several counterparts, each o f which shall be deemed an original, but which together shall constitute one a nd the same instrument. The Parties agree that this Amendment and any other doc uments to be delivered in connection herewith may be electronically signed ut ilizing services such as DocuSign and Nitro Sign, or by transmitting signatures in pdf or similar format, and that any electronic signatures appearing on this Ag reement or such other documents are the same as handwritten signatures fo r the purposes of validity, enforceability, and admissibility

8. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect for the Term of the Agreement.

[Signatures on Following Page ]

Page 600 of 624 ends

Page 4 of 4 ends

CITY CONTRACT NO. 2023-111, Amendment No. 3 for Task Order No. 3

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Amendment No. 3 to be executed by and through their respective officers thereunto duly authorized.

PROFESSIONAL

Siegfried Engineering, Inc., a California
corporation

By:

Adam Merrill, Vice President

Date
CITY

City of Turlock, a California
municipal corporation

By:

Reagan M. Wilson, City Manager

Date:

APPROVED AS TO SUFFICIENCY:

By:

Christopher Fisher,
Municipal Services Director

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By:

George A. Petrulakis, City Attorney

ATTEST:

By:

Nichole Fiez, City Clerk

03/12/2025

Page 601 of 624 ends

STOCKTON SACRAMENTO MODESTO SAN JOSE
3428 Brookside Rd. 1164 National Dr. #20 100 Sycamore Ave. #100 84 W. Santa Clara St. #700 Stockton, CA 95219 Sacramento, CA 95834 Modesto, CA 95354 San Jose, CA 95113 t | 209.943.2021 t | 916.520.2777 t | 209.762.3580 t | 408.754.2021

F:\22projects\22157 City of Turlock Road CIP\TO#3\W orking Documents\Contracts and Proposals\22157 City of Turlock Road CIP Task Order #3 Scope and Fee Ver 1b.docx
PAGE - 1 -

March 5, 2025

Fred Pezeshk, P.E.

Roads Program Manager
City of Turlock, Municipal Services Department
156 S. Broadway, Ste. 150
Turlock, CA 95380

RE: City of Turlock Roads Program CIP Task #3

TURLOCK, CALIFORNIA

PROPOSAL FOR PROFESSIONAL DESIGN SERVICES

Dear Fred,
We appreciate the opportunity to propose our servic es to you for this project. Our scope of work, base d on previous coordination and emails on the project, is as follows.

I. Project Description

Siegfried will assist City of Turlock with the plan s, specifications and cost estimate for the City of Turlock Roads Program CIP (total 20,973 LF) for selected streets identified in the attached exhibits and shown in th e table. The streets that are proposed for rehabilitation are N. Broadway Avenue, Orchard Street, Race Street, Mill Street, Bel Air Court, Alpha Road, S. Rose Street, S. Minaret Avenue, Cottonwood Street, Alfreda Street, Little Street, Minerva Street, and Chestnut Street. Additionally, reconstr uction of 2024 emergency sewer trench repair on Far r Street between Columbia Avenue and West Main Street; for this area we expect to repave one lane where pavement was removed and trench patch was done as well as restriped.

We anticipate two separate bid packages for the are as identified. Total estimated construction cost fo r both bid packages is projected to be $13M-$15M, assuming a m ajority of the streets need more extensive pavement rehabilitation based on the condition of a majority of the streets.

We plan to assist the City of Turlock with the pave ment rehabilitation options and how these deficienc ies will be improved, which will be included with the project.

Scope of Work

Siegfried Engineering, Inc. (Siegfried) will provide civil engineering, geotechnical engine ering and surveying services to City of Turlock (Client) for the City Road Program CIP (Project) in Turlock, California including the following services:

TASK 1 – MEETINGS & COORDINATION

1. Attending meeting(s) with the City PM to coordin ate the project related items.

2. Field visits to verify improvements and coordina tion with the City PM after the initial 30% submittal.

3. Regular meetings to check in on status and updat e the City PM.

4. Milestone or submittal meetings to review commen ts and any revisions.

5. Updating the schedule and keeping the City PM up dated on progress.

6. Reviewing all City department’s comments and coo rdinating.

7. Billing reports

8. Coordination with project team.

Page 602 of 624 ends

F:\22projects\22157 City of Turlock Road CIP\TO#3\W orking Documents\Contracts and Proposals\22157 City of Turlock Road CIP Task Order #3 Scope and Fee Ver 1b.docx
PAGE - 2 -

TASK 2.1 – TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY & RESEARCH

1. The topographic survey of the approximate limits shown in attached Exhibits. The survey will be in sufficient detail for use by Siegfried in design and plan development. Where necessary, Siegfried will supplement the conventional survey data with terrestrial LiDAR data.

2. The following features will be located and mappe d:
a. Flow line and lip of gutter lines.
b. Top of curb.
c. Crown of roadway.
d. Edge of pavement.
e. Edge of concrete.
f. Striping.
g. Signage.
h. Curb ramps, where determined those improvements are necessary. i. Sidewalks and driveway, where determined those i mprovements are necessary. j. Shots will generally be at 50’ station spacing a long the roadways, and at grade breaks, beginning, middle and ends of horizontal curves, including side street curb returns. (Essentially a cross section of the imp acted area) k. Manholes and Clean outs
l. Utility boxes/vaults/etc.
m. Fences.
n. Walls.
o. Gates.
p. Trees.
q. Dips for sewer and storm where drainage improvem ents as necessary.

3. Client to provide as-builts, if available.

4. Office preparation and mapping of the surveyed f eatures utilizing AutoCAD Civil 3D.

5. Review General Plan, ATP, and SRTS requirements for each street.

6. Mapping will be based on the California Coordina te System, NAD83, NAVD88 datum.

7. Underground utility lines will be mapped as a pa rt of this scope of work, record information and surface utility shots will be used to map the utilities to the best of our ability.

8. Utility research, notifications and letters to a ffected utility companies and agencies. Coordinating with various utility companies on their existing facilities and if adjustments are necessary.

TASK 2.2 – POTHOLING, 30 LOCATIONS ASSUMED

Potholing will be provided by Siegfried. Locations are to be identified during design by Siegfried and City staff. Siegfried shall assume 30 Potholes are needed. Siegfried will compile potholing information into a pothole locat ion map and table format document, which includes the following infor mation: Pothole #, Utility Information, Cover/Depth to top and bottom, horizontal distance to new utility (if applicable), Outside Diameter, Material Type, Asphalt Concrete Thickness, Aggregate Base Thickness. In addition to data listed above, g round locations of each pothole shall be provided ( to be shot by GPS or similar method) in PNEZD format within a Microsoft Word compatible “.txt” document. This information w ill be furnished upon completion of potholing.

Page 603 of 624 ends

F:\22projects\22157 City of Turlock Road CIP\TO#3\W orking Documents\Contracts and Proposals\22157 City of Turlock Road CIP Task Order #3 Scope and Fee Ver 1b.docx
PAGE - 3 -

TASK 3 – PAVEMENT TESTING & DESIGN

Task 3.1 – Field Exploration
We assume no encroachment permits will be required for this City project. Prior to initiating our fie ld explorations, we will mark the work area with white paint and contact Underground Service Alert (USA) for utility clearance. We have not included fee allowance for hiring an underground utility loc ator service. We will not take responsibility for damage to underground utilities that are not accurately located within our exploratory locations.

Drilled Borings
Following the utility clearance, we will advance one core boring at a frequency of approximately 1 boring up to 600 (±) lineal feet, or 1 per street segment. We anticipate a maximum of 40 core locations with at least one location placed on any given street segment . At selected locations, cores will be taken across the street to establish a generalized cross section where there was evidence of historical overlays performed . The cores will be advanced with a manual core dr ill equipped with 4- or 6-inch diameter core barrels. At select locations, a dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) will be advanced.

During our exploration, a representative from this firm will oversee the testing and collect samples. A continuous log will be maintained asphalt concrete, base, and underlying s ubgrade description. Bulk samples collected will be sealed to prevent moisture loss and transported to the laboratory for testing and analysis. The depth to initial ground water will be measured and recorded during the drilling, if encountered. A visual survey of the existing pavement sections will be prepared that includes the type and severity of the pavement dist ress observed. This provides a tool for selecting the appropriate pavement treatment strategy.

We intend to locate the core borings by pacing from known features which is normally of sufficient acc uracy for such work.

We have not included in our scope a budget for an accurate survey of the core locations. If accurate locations are required, then additional budget would be needed. The actual number of core borings may be revised in the field based on the conditions encountered in the various locations, or as requested by the Client or the reviewing agency . Locations will be presented to you prior to work being performed. Gi ven that the cores will be located within the paved roadways, we will provide traffic control devices per the California Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).

We assume that the drill cuttings will be backfilled in the hole and the surface topped with cold patch asphalt. We anticipate completing up to 6 locations per day given the mobi lization between core locations, setting up traffic control, and a work time allocated from 9 am to 3 pm.

Subconsultants
• Driller: We will utilize our own equipment to cor e locations. • Traffic Control: City Rise will provide traffic c ontrol services.

Task 3.2 – Laboratory Testing
We will perform soils laboratory testing to evaluat e the geotechnical characteristics of the samples o btained. Index testing consisting of moisture content, dry density, Atterberg Limits, and particle size analysis will be performed for the in-situ soils.

Resistance “R” Value tests will be performed for pa vement design. Corrosivity tests may be performed to determine the site corrosivity. The frequency of tests performed will depend on the conditions encountered.

Subconsultants
• Lab Testing Support: Construction Testing Service s and Twining

Task 3.3 – Final Report Preparation
The results of the field exploration, laboratory te sts and engineering analysis will be presented in a design level report prepared in accordance with the direction of a California Registered Geotechnical Engineer that will i nclude the following:

Page 604 of 624 ends

F:\22projects\22157 City of Turlock Road CIP\TO#3\W orking Documents\Contracts and Proposals\22157 City of Turlock Road CIP Task Order #3 Scope and Fee Ver 1b.docx
PAGE - 4 -

• Summarize results of field exploration
• Summarize results of laboratory testing
• Conclusions and comments on applicable and propose d pavement reconstruction or rehabilitation methods for each segment
• Presentation of the soil laboratory tests
• Graphics including a scaled site plan, boring loca tion map, and coring/boring logs, etc. • Appendices containing results of our field explora tion and laboratory testing.

Schedule
We could begin field work (i.e., permit procurement , USA, and driller coordination) upon notice to pro ceed. We note the permit procurement and developing the traffic control plan could push the schedule upwards of 2 to 3 weeks from notice to proceed. Laboratory testing should be completed at least 4 weeks following the completion of our fieldwork. We will submit an electronic copy of the geotechnical report in PD F format within 8 weeks of completion of the labora tory testing. If a quicker turnaround time is needed, please inform the undersigned.

Assumptions to Task
The scope of services presented above for task 3 was developed based on our knowledge of the project requirements and the following assumptions:

• The field exploration will be under the direct sup ervision of our staff. This task is estimated to take up to 8 workdays. • Excess cuttings or non-cohesive soils will be used to backfill the hole and will be topped with at le ast 6 inches of cold patch asphalt.
• The exploration assumes access will be provided by the City. Work will be performed within the existi ng roadway at locations mutually agreeable to you and so that existing utilities are not impacted. • Work will be performed with conventional, portable hand coring rigs and/or truck mounted drill rigs, if needed. • Laboratory testing frequency and type may vary bas ed on the actual conditions encountered. • Siegfried staff will utilize the appropriate perso nal protective equipment typical for performing dri lling services for geotechnical investigations.

TASK 4, 5, 6 & 7 – PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMA TE (30%, 60% 90% and 100%/Bid)

1. Siegfried shall produce the project improvement plans.

A. At 30% submittal, Siegfried shall review of exis ting streetlighting vs. Standard Drawings E-6 through E-8, to identify if the existing meets the standards and where the deficiencies are. If any design is required, an amendment will be added for the additional scope.

B. At 30% submittal Siegfried shall present the Cit y PM with preferred design however shall also inclu de some cost savings options as necessary to lower the project cost.

C. Based upon the topographic survey and the approv ed areas of improvement, Siegfried will prepare the Project civil improvement plans including the following:
1) Cover Sheet.
2) Notes Sheet.
3) Topography and Demolition Plan.
4) Paving Plan.
5) Drainage and Grading Plan, in accordance with th e American Disability Act (ADA). 6) Underground utilities, coordination with utility companies and agencies. 7) Alignment, dimensions and paving legend usable f or construction staking.

Page 605 of 624 ends

F:\22projects\22157 City of Turlock Road CIP\TO#3\W orking Documents\Contracts and Proposals\22157 City of Turlock Road CIP Task Order #3 Scope and Fee Ver 1b.docx
PAGE - 5 -

8) All details necessary to clarify the plan intent are included and will be part of the plan set. 9) Cross Sections, as required by the City.
10) Striping Plan (no traffic signal is anticipated ) and Traffic Control Plans 11) Prepare the Project Infrastructure Construction Ero sion Control Plan only for erosion control during t he construction of the improvements shown in Siegfried 's plans, including best management practices (BMP's), but excluding a detailed non-visible pollutant monitoring and testing plan.

2. Cost estimate for the project areas depicted in attached Exhibits.

3. Review drainage and potential connections to the existing drainage system where necessary.

4. Within the scoped area, review the items listed in the project description to identify which improvements will be included in the project plans with the City staff.

5. Assist the City with the project specifications.

6. Siegfried shall write technical sections to be i ncluded in the County template, Siegfried will revi ew the final version of the specifications to confirm that they adequately cover the work and bid items. Siegfried shall sign the plans and the specifications.

TASK 8 – BIDDING & CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION

1. Answering questions during bidding process.

2. Review construction submittals and RFIs.

3. Attending kick off meeting with the contractor a nd City.

4. Coordination with the City PM on questions durin g construction and site meetings as necessary durin g construction.

TASK 9 – RECORD OF SURVEY FOR MONUMENT PRESERVATION (PRE-CONSTRUCTION)

1. Based on the requirement that a Monument Preserv ation Survey be submitted as part of the City of Turlock Encroachment Permit, Siegfried will prepare and submit a Record of Survey for the purpose of a Pre-Construction Monument Preservation Survey.

2. Siegfried will research and review record maps a nd title documents.

3. Siegfried will survey and record existing monume nts within the Project area.

4. Siegfried will perform a limited topographic sur vey of existing surface features as necessary to co nfirm location of right-of-way lines.

5. Siegfried will establish the rights-of-way withi n the project area as described in the Project Description and include this determination in the Survey.

6. Siegfried will facilitate the map check review a nd recording of the Survey with the City of Turlock Engineering Division.

7. This task does not cover plan check and/or submi ttal fees.

TASK 10 – RECORD OF SURVEY FOR MONUMENT PRESERVATIO N (POST-CONSTRUCTION)

2. Siegfried will survey and record existing monume nts within the Project area.

3. Siegfried will note and re-establish monuments t hat have been disturbed due to construction activit ies, if any, and include them in the Survey.

4. Siegfried will facilitate the map check review a nd recording of the Survey with the City of Turlock Engineering Division.

5. This task does not cover plan check and/or submi ttal fees.

Page 606 of 624 ends

F:\22projects\22157 City of Turlock Road CIP\TO#3\W orking Documents\Contracts and Proposals\22157 City of Turlock Road CIP Task Order #3 Scope and Fee Ver 1b.docx
PAGE - 6 -

EXCEPTIONS TO THE SCOPE

It is understood that the following are not included in the scope:
a. map application and checking and recordation fee s , permits, b. preliminary title reports,
c. displaying (mapping of) irrigation system featur es, d. any site-specific safety, biology or other train ing or orientation. e. ALTA Survey and construction staking,
f. hazardous waste testing, monitoring and continge ncy plan for both site and building demolition work,
g. Phase I Environmental Assessment, Phase II Subsu rface Investigation, and asbestos and lead containing material investigation and report,
h. infiltration testing,
i. CEQA/NEPA/EIR
j. permit applications and fees,
k. construction management, inspection, supervision and scheduling, l. gas, electric and telephone service plans,
m. tentative maps, parcel maps, final maps and lega l descriptions and sketches, n. title reports,
o. SWPPP, QSD & QSP services.

Limits of Work

The project limits extend as indicated on the attached Exhibits.

II. Fee Proposal

Table 2: Estimated Fee
Task Description Total
1 Meetings & Coordination $50,961.17
2A Topographic Survey & Research $187,092.22
2B Potholing (50 potholes) $50,000.00
3 Pavement Testing & Design $92,168.91
4 30% Plans & Estimate $169,127.76
5 60% PS&E Submittal $135,667.79
6 90% PS&E Submittal $135,667.79
7 Final Bid Package/100% PS&E Submittal $53,017.36
8 Bidding & Construction Administration $38,664.73
9 Preconstruction Monument Preservation and ROS $51,252.02 10 Postconstruction Monument Preservation and ROS $29,778.17 TOTAL FEE $993,397.92

Page 607 of 624 ends

F:\22projects\22157 City of Turlock Road CIP\TO#3\W orking Documents\Contracts and Proposals\22157 City of Turlock Road CIP Task Order #3 Scope and Fee Ver 1b.docx
PAGE - 7 -

We look forward to working with you and the City. If you have any questions regarding this proposal, p lease do not hesitate to call me directly. We will commence work upon your authorization to proceed and the execut ion of your contract documents.

Sincerely,

____________________________
Adam K. Merrill, P.E., QSD, QSP
Vice President
C76826

SIEGFRIED

Page 608 of 624 ends

F:\22projects\22157 City of Turlock Road CIP\TO#3\W orking Documents\Contracts and Proposals\22157 City of Turlock Road CIP Task Order #3 Scope and Fee Ver 1b.docx
PAGE - 8 -

Table 1: Streets Identified for Task 3 Rehabilitation
Street Name From To PCI

Length
(ft)
Width
(ft)
District
N. Broadway Ave. W. Olive Ave. W. Main St. 62 380 53 2 N. Broadway Ave. W. Olive Ave. Florence St. 83 554 54 2 N. Broadway Ave. Florence St. Orchard St. 33 1,118 36 2 N. Broadway Ave. Orchard St. W. Canal Dr. 37 1,407 37 2 Orchard St. N. 1st St. SW End 13 544 38 2
Race St. S. Thor St. Minaret Ave. 37 321 39 1
Mill St. S. Center St. S. Thor St. 0 338 45 1
Mill St. S. Thor St. S. Palm St. 24 374 39 1
Mill St. S. Palm St. Minaret Ave. 41 269 54 1
Bel Air Ct. N. Palm St. East End 0 518 34 1
Bel Air Ct. West End N. Palm St. 19 194 34 1
Alpha Rd. East Ave. E. F St. 28 613 25 1
Alpha Rd. E. F St. Cottonwood St. 63 859 30 1
Alpha Rd. Cottonwood St. S. Berkeley Ave. 79 1,418 33 1 S. Rose St. Alfreda St. S. Berkeley Ave. 10 941 37 1
S. Rose St. Cottonwood St. Alfreda St. 29 800 37 1
S. Rose St. E. F St. Cottonwood St. 27 859 37 1
S. Rose St. Rose St. E. F St. 37 823 37 1
S. Minaret Ave Minerva St. E. F St. 21 1,115 33 1
S. Minaret Ave E. F St. Cottonwood St. 9 856 34 1
S. Minaret Ave Cottonwood St. Alfreda St. 19 804 38 1
S. Minaret Ave Alfreda St. Little St. 0 1,164 38 1
Cottonwood S S. Minaret Ave. Alpha Rd. 23 558 27 1
Alfreda St. S. Minaret Ave. Alpha Rd. 10 587 38 1
Little St. S. Minaret Ave. S. Berkeley Ave. 49 157 38 1 Minerva St. S. Golden State Blvd. S. Center St. 0 3 25 38 1 Minerva St. S. Center St. Minaret Ave. 0 459 36 1
Chestnut St. N. Soderquist Rd. Grant Ave. 62 1,968 38 2 Chestnut St. Grant Ave. N. Broadway Ave. 53 266 38 2
Chestnut St. N. Broadway Ave. N. 1st St. 8 384 36 2

Page 609 of 624 ends

Page 610 of 624 ends

Page 611 of 624 ends

1 CIVIL ■ STRUCTURAL ■ GEOTECHNICAL ■ SURVEY ■ LANDSCAPE ■ PARTNERING 100 Sycamore Avenue, Suite 100, Modesto, CA 95354 ■ t | 209.762.3580 f | 209.942.0214 ■ siegfried eng.com

RESPONSIBLE PERSONNEL

ERIN CAHOON
Public Outreach
Erin brings over 25 years over experience in marketing, public outreach, and graphic design. As a practical
artist, creative thinker, and problem solver, she can
visualize and conceptualize complex ideas and make
them visually appealing and easy to digest. Her public outreach approach keeps communication at the forefront and she utilizes her strong design background to bridge the divide between engineering concepts to digestible information that stakeholders can understand.

JORI LEMMON, PE, SE
Structural Engineer (As-Needed)
Jori Lemmon is a structural engineer with 20 years
of experience in all construction materials and
specializes in seismic design and construction
practices. Jori is experienced with collaboration
across multiple locations for project work and communicating with various disciplines. She has worked on numerous public and private projects, including military, health care, seismic retrofit, correctional and educational facilities.

BOB NORBUTAS, PLA
Landscape Architect (As-Needed)
Robert successfully manages and directs a broad
range of projects, providing oversight and leadership to some of Siegfried’s largest projects. His top priority is interacting with clients to understand their needs and
ensure their projects are user-focused and transformative.

JOY BHATTACHARYA, PE, PTOE
AMG | Traffic Engineering (As-Needed)
Joy is AMG’s Vice President of Innovative Transportation Solutions. He has in-depth experience in the development, design and implementation of various engineering
strategies in major metropolitan areas, including
Adaptive/Responsive Traffic Signal Systems and Transit
Priority Systems; Incident Management Plans; design of automated Electronic Toll Collection systems; preparation of PS&E for field implementation of CCTV, Changeable Message Signs, Highway Advisory Radio, Ramp Metering and ATMS systems; and freeway and arterial operations using micro-simulation.

ADAM MERRILL, PE, QSD/QSP
Project Manager/Lead Civil Engineer
Adam is recognized for his technical abilities and
broad knowledge when it comes to civil engineering
infrastructure projects. His duties include client
management, planning, designing, preparing reports,
and participating in and directing public outreach efforts to ensure community and project stakeholder consensus.

KEVIN GENASCI, PLS
Lead Survey Manager
Kevin’s clients benefit from his extensive experience in both the field and office. He specializes in surveys to sup- port the design of residential subdivisions, commercial site developments, industrial site developments, and
municipal infrastructure projects. His expertise includes topographic surveying and mapping, boundary surveying, construction surveying, site development, and municipal infrastructure design support.

BRADFORD QUON, PE, GE
Lead Geotechnical Engineer
Brad has over 24 years of geotechnical engineering
design and construction experience for infrastructure,
earthwork, and flood control projects. His geotechnical engineering experience includes performing field
explorations, laboratory testing of soils, geotechnical engineering analysis (i.e. shallow and deep foundations, retaining structures, slope stability, and seepage analyses), and geotechnical investigation report preparation.

NATHAN BEREND, PE
Civil Engineer
Nathan is experienced with both public and private
projects throughout Central and Northern California.

As Civil Engineer, he is relied upon for his broad
knowledge, technical skills, and ability to help solve
engineering issues on all types of projects.

PROJECT MANAGER (PM)
Adam Merrill, PE, QSD/QSP
Lead Civil Engineer

TEAM MEMBERS
Kevin Genasci, PLS
Lead Survey Manager
Bradford Quon, PE, GE
Lead Geotechnical Engineer

SUBCONSULTANTS
Joy Bhattacharya, PE, PTOE
AMG | Traffic Engineering

TEAM ROLES

ORGANIZATIONAL CHART
Erin Cahoon
Public Outreach
Nathan Berend, PE
Civil Engineer
Jori Lemmon, PE, SE
Structural Engineer (As-Needed)
Bob Norbutas
Landscape Architect (As-Needed)

KEY TEAM MEMBERS

SUPPORT STAFF

KEY TEAM MEMBERKEY TEAM MEMBERKEY TEAM MEMBER

Page 612 of 624 ends

Siegfried Engineering, Inc.

Principal Civil
Engineer
Principal
Survey
Manager
Principal
Geotechnical
Engineer
Senior
Associate
Geotech
Associate
Civil
Project
Engineer Engineer II Engineer I
Associate
Engineering
Technician
(PW)
Senior
Technician Technician I Technician
(PW)
Project Land
Surveyor Surveyor II Surveyor I Survey Tech
III
Survey Tech
II Party Chief
Adam Merrill Kevin
Genasci Brad Quon Charley Scott Nathan
Berend
Harpreet
Chohan
Jose
Ruvalcaba
Alejandro
Aguilera
Alejandro
Aguilera Mike Kincaid RJ Teel RJ Teel Dani Cano Manny
DaBranca Scott Soares Daniel Duran Dalton Reed Diego Moreno $85.00 $85.00 $85.00 $74.00 $60.43 $55.29 $41.82 $36.06 $76.32 $45.49 $29.00 $71.13 $62.50 $55.37 $40.00 $38.00 $30.00 $58.49 $250.68 $250.68 $250.68 $218.24 $178.22 $163.06 $123.34 $106.35 $225.08 $134.16 $85.53 $209.78 $184.33 $163.30 $117.97 $112.07 $88.48 $172.50 1 Meetings & Coordination 110 30 12 12 30 30 224 $50,961.17 2 Topogrpahic Survey & Research 20 64 40 40 40 32 80 120 80 80 320 360 1276 $187,092.22 3 Pavement Testing & Design 30 80 104 48 204 48 514 $74,360.91 4 30% Plans & Estimate 80 240 240 240 280 1080 $169,127.76 5 60% PS&E Submittal 80 180 180 200 220 860 $135,667.79 6 90% PS&E Submittal 80 180 180 200 220 860 $135,667.79 7 Final Bid Package/100% PS&E Submittal 30 50 50 100 120 350 $53,017.36 8 Bidding & Construction Admin 50 50 50 30 40 220 $38,664.73 9 Preconstruction Monument Preservation amd RW 4 40 40 20 40 40 20 96 300 $49,200.02 10 Postconstruction Monument Preservation 4 24 24 10 20 20 20 48 170 $27,726.17 Proposal Subtotal 458 158 42 92 770 770 810 104 48 912 204 48 144 150 140 140 360 504 5854 $921,485.92 Sub Services or ODC
A City Rise - Traffic Control Flagmen (Part of Task 3) $14,476 $14,476.00 B.1 CTS - Lab Testing Support $1,932 $1,932.00
B.2 Twining - Lab Testing Support $1,400 $1,400.00
C Potholing, 30 locations assumed (Part of Task 2B) $50,000 $50,000.00 D Precon ROS (Part of Task 9) $2,052 $2,052.00
E Postcon ROS (Part of Task 10) $2,052 $2,052.00
Total Sub Services $71,912 $71,912.00
Total Including Sub Services $993,397.92
Notes:
1 2
3 4
SEI
Overhead Rate 49.38%
Fringe Rate 64.60%
General and Administrative Rate 54.13%
Fee Rate 10.00%
Tasks Labor
Total Labor
Costs
Total
Hours
Task Description (Change task titles as detailed in the scope of work)
Task #
3/10/2025 1/1

Page 613 of 624 ends

Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 10-H1
Cost Proposal
Consultant
Project No. Federal Contract No. Date 3/5/2025

DIRECT LABOR
hours
Actual Hourly Rate Total
458 $85.00 $38,930.00
158 $85.00 $13,430.00
42 $85.00 $3,570.00
92 $74.00 $6,808.00
770 $60.43 $46,531.10
770 $55.29 $42,573.30
810 $41.82 $33,874.20
104 $36.06 $3,750.24
48 $76.32 $3,663.36
912 $45.49 $41,486.88
204 $29.00 $5,916.00
48 $71.13 $3,414.24
144 $62.50 $9,000.00
150 $55.37 $8,305.50
140 $40.00 $5,600.00
140 $38.00 $5,320.00
360 $30.00 $10,800.00
504 $58.49 $29,478.96

LABOR COSTS
a) Subtotal Direct Labor Costs $312,451.78
b) Anticipated Salary Increases (see page 2 for sample) $0.00 c) TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS [(a) + (b)] $312,451.78

INDIRECT COSTS
d) Fringe Benefits (Rate: 64.60% ) e) Total Fringe Benefits 201843.8499 f) Overhead (Rate: 49.38% g) Overhead [(c)x(f)] 154288.689 h) General and Administrative (Rate: 54.13% ) i) Gen & Admin [(c) x (h)] 169130.1485 j) Total Indirect Costs [(e) + (g) + (i)] $525,262.69
FIXED FEE k) TOTAL FIXED PROFIT [(c) + (j)] x fixed fee 10% $83,771.44 1) CONSULTANT'S OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODC) - ITEMIZE (Add additional pages if necessary Description of Item Quantity Unit(s) Unit Cost Total
Mileage Costs
0 $0.575 $0.00
Equipment Rental and Supplies $0.00
Potholing $50,000.00
Precon ROS Fee $2,052.01
Postcon ROS Fee $2,052.01
1) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS $54,104.02
m) SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS (Add additional pages if necessary) Subconsultant 1: City Rise - Traffic Control $14,476.00 Subconsultant 2: CTS - Lab Testing $1,932.00
Subconsultant 3: Twinning - Lab Testing $1,400.00
m) TOTAL SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS: $17,808.00
n) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS INCLUDING SUBCONSULTANTS $71,912.02 TOTAL COST [(c) + (j) + (k) + (p)] $993,397.92
NOTES:
1 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 principals. Subconsultants will provide their own cost proposals. 2 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. 3 Anticipated salary increases calculation (page 2) must accompany.

Surveyor II
Surveyor I
Survey Tech III
Dani Cano
Manny DaBranca
Scott Soares
Daniel Duran
Engineer I Alejandro Aguilera
Technician I RJ Teel
Project Land Surveyor
Kevin Genasci
Principal Geotechnical Engineer Brad Quon
EXHIBIT 10-H1 COST PROPOSAL PAGE 1 OF 3

ACTUAL COST-PLUS-FIXED FEE OR LUMP SUM (FIRM FIXED PRICE) CONTRACTS (DESIGN, ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES)
Siegfried Engineering
Classification/Title Name
Note: Mark-ups are Not Allowed Prime Consultant Subconsultant 2nd Tier Subconsultant PIC/PM/Civil Lead Adam Merrill
Principal Survey Manager
Nathan Berend
Party Chief Diego Moreno
Technician (PW) RJ Teel
Engineer II Jose Ruvalcaba
Senior Technician Mike Kincaid
Survey Tech II Dalton Reed
Project Engineer Harpreet Chohan
Engineer I Alejandro Aguilera
Senior Associate Geotech Charley Scott
Associate Civil
January 2020

Page 614 of 624 ends

Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 10-H1
Cost Proposal

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
$312,451.78 = $53.37 Year 1 Avg Hourly Rate

2. Calculate hourly rate for all years (Increase the Average Hourly Rate for a year by proposed escalation %) Avg Hourly Rate
Year 1 $53.37 + = $53.37 Year 2 Avg Hourly Rate
Year 2 $53.37 + = $53.37 Year 3 Avg Hourly Rate
Year 3 $53.37 + = $53.37 Year 4 Avg Hourly Rate
Year 4 $53.37 + = $53.37 Year 5 Avg Hourly Rate
Total Hours
per Year
Year 1 100.00% * = 5854.0 Estimated Hours Year 1
Year 2 0.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours Year 2
Year 3 0.00% * = 0.0 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% = 5854.0
Year 1 $53.37 * = $312,451.78 Estimated Hours Year 1
Year 2 $53.37 * = $0.00 Estimated Hours Year 2
Year 3 $53.37 * = $0.00 Estimated Hours Year 3
= $312,451.78
= $312,451.78
= $0.00 Transfer to Page 1
NOTES:
1 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. 2 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) 3 This assumes that one year will be worked at the rate on the cost proposal before salary increases are granted. 4 Calculations for anticipated salary escalation must be approved.

3. Calculate estimated hours per year (Multiply estimate % each year by total hours) 5854.0
5854.0
0%
0%
Total Hours
per Cost Proposal Completed Each Year
Estimated %
5854.0
5854.0
Cost per Year
Total Direct Labor Cost with Escalation
Direct Labor Subtotal before Escalation

4. Calculate Total Costs including Escalation (Multiply Average Hourly Rate by the number of hours) 5854.0
Total
Estimated total of Direct Labor Salary Increase
0 (calculated above)
Avg Hourly Rate
(calculated above)
5854
0 Estimated hours
(CALCULATIONS FOR ANTICIPATED SALARY INCREASES)
0%
Direct Labor Subtotal
per Cost Proposal per Cost Proposal
Total Hours
5854
Proposed Escalation
0%
EXHIBIT 10-H1 COST PROPOSAL PAGE 2 OF 2

ACTUAL COST-PLUS-FIXED FEE OR LUMP SUM (FIRM FIXED PRICE) CONTRACTS January 2020

Page 615 of 624 ends

Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 10-H1
Cost Proposal
Certification of Direct Costs:

1. Generally Accepted Accounting Principals (GAAP)

2. Terms and conditions of the contract

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

4. 48 Code of Federal Regulations Part 31 - Contract Cost Principals and Procedures

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

6. 48 Code of Federal Regulations Part 9904 - Cost Accouting 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 approved or Caltrans accepted Indirect Cost Rate(s).

Prime Consultant or Subconsultant Certifying:

Name: Title:

Signature: Date of Certification (mm/dd/yyyy):

Email: Phone Number:

Address:
*An individual executive or financial officer of the consultant’s or subconsultant’s organization at a levelno 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.

List of services the consultant is providing under the proposed contract:

Adam Merrill
[email protected]
100 Sycamore Ave, #100, Modesto, CA 95354
Principal/Vice President
3/5/2025
(209) 499-8239
January 2020

Page 616 of 624 ends

Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 10-H1
Cost Proposal
Prime Consultant X Subconsultant 2nd Tier Subconsultant Consultant:

Project No. Contract No. Date 3/5/2025
Hours Actual Hourly Rate Total
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$

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

INDIRECT COSTS

74.02% ) e) Total Fringe Benefits [(c) x (d)] -$

60.71% ) included g) Overhead [(c) x (f)] -$

5.00% ) i) Gen & Admin [(c) x (h)] -$
j) TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS [(e) + (g) + (i)] -$
FIXED FEE 10.00% k) TOTAL FIXED FEE [(c) + (j)] x fixed fee: -$ l) CONSULTANT'S OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODC) - ITEMIZE (Add additional pages if necessary) Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total

4.00 350.000$ 1,400.00$
-$
-$
l) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS 1,400.00$
m) SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS (Add additional pages if necessary) -$
-$
-$
m) TOTAL SUBCONSULTANTS' COSTS -$
n) TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS INCLUDING SUBCONSULTANTS [(l) + (m)] 1,400.00$ TOTAL COST [(c) + (j) + (k) + (n)] 1,400.00$
NOTES:

1. 2.

Page 1 of 3 ends

b) Anticipated Salary Increases (see page 2 for calculation) Name
Note: Mark-ups are Not Allowed
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.

Subconsultant 4:
d) Fringe Benefits (Rate:
f) Overhead & G&A (Rate:
h) General & Admin (Rate:

Description of Item
R-Value
Subconsultant 1:

Classification/Title
Twining, Inc

DIRECT LABOR
Subconsultant 2:

Subconsultant 3:

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.

Anticipated salary increases calculation (page 2) must accompany. a) Subtotal Direct Labor Costs
25-0272 - City of Turlock Task 3
- R-Value Testing
X

Page 617 of 624 ends

Consultant
Project No. Contract No. Date 3/5/2025

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
$ - = #DIV/0! Year 1 Avg Hourly Rate Avg Hourly Rate
Year 1 #DIV/0! + = #DIV/0! Year 2 Avg Hourly Rate
Year 2 #DIV/0! + = #DIV/0! Year 3 Avg Hourly Rate
Year 3 #DIV/0! + = #DIV/0! Year 4 Avg Hourly Rate
Year 4 #DIV/0! + = #DIV/0! Year 5 Avg Hourly Rate
Total Hours
per Year
Year 1 25.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours Year 1
Year 2 25.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours Year 2
Year 3 25.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours Year 3
Year 4 25.00% * = 0.0 Estimated Hours Year 4
Total 100% = 0.0
Year 1 #DIV/0! * = #DIV/0! Estimated Hours Year 1
Year 2 #DIV/0! * = #DIV/0! Estimated Hours Year 2
Year 3 #DIV/0! * = #DIV/0! Estimated Hours Year 3
Year 4 #DIV/0! * = #DIV/0! Estimated Hours Year 4
= #DIV/0!
= $ -
= #DIV/0! Transfer to Page 1
NOTES:

1. 2.

3. 4.

Page 2 of 3 ends

Direct Labor Subtotal
Twining, Inc

CALCUATIONS FOR ANTICIPATED SALARY INCREASES
- City of Turlock Task 3 - R-Value
Total Hours
3%

0.0 3. Calculate estimated hours per year (Multiply estimate % each year by total hours) 3%
3%
3%
0 2. Calculate hourly rate for all years (Increase the Average Hourly Rate for a year by proposed escalation %) Proposed Escalation
per Cost Proposal per Cost Proposal
0 Avg Hourly Rate Estimated hours
Cost per Year
(calculated above) (calculated above)
Estimated %

4. Calculate Total Costs including Escalation (Multiply Average Hourly Rate by the number of hours) Total Hours

0.0 per Cost Proposal

0.0 0.0
Total
Completed Each Year
0 0
0 Total Direct Labor Cost with Escalation
Calculations for anticipated salary escalation must be provided.

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.

Direct Labor Subtotal before Escalation
Estimated total of Direct Labor Salary Increase

Page 618 of 624 ends

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 requirements are not eligible for reimbursement.

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

List services the consultant is providing under the proposed contract:

Geotechnical Engineering, Materials Testing and Special Inspections 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 Vic e President or a Chief Financial Officer, or equivalent, who has authority to represent the financial information utilized to establish t he cost proposal for the contract.

Name: Steve Schiffer
Signature: _________________________________________________ Email: [email protected]
Title *: Chief Revenue Officer
Date of Certification: 3/5/2025
Phone number: 510-967-1323
Address: 4811 Airport Plaza Drive, Suite 220, Long Beach, CA 90815

Page 619 of 624 ends

Page 620 of 624 ends

Page 621 of 624 ends

SAMPLE COST PROPOSAL 3

SAMPLE COST PROPOSAL
Sample Only - Required Cost Proposal Template To Be Determined By Agency

COST PER UNIT OF WORK CONTRACTS
(GEOTECHNICAL AND MATERIAL TESTING)
Note: Mark-ups are Not Allowed □ Prime Consultant □ Subconsultant □ 2nd Tier Subconsultant Consultant __________________ _
Project No. _________ _ Contract No. --------- Date ------ - Unit/Item of Work:
(Example: Log of Test Boring for Soils Report, or ADL Testing for Hazardous Waste Material Study} Include as many Items as necessary.

DIRECT LABOR Hours Billing Hourly Rate {$) Total{$)
Professional {Classification)*
Sub-professional/Technical**
EQUIPMENT 1 {with Operator)
EQUIPMENT 2 {with Operator)
Consultant's Other Direct Costs (ODC)- Itemize:

Description of Item Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total
Subconsultant 1:

Subconsultant 2:

Subconsultant 3:

Subconsultant 4:

Subconsultant 5:

Nole: Attach addtllonal pages if necessary.

TOTAL COST PER UNIT OF WORK
NOTES:

1. 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.

2. Hourly billing rates should include prevailing wage rates and be consistent with publicly advertised rates charged to all clients (Commercial, Private or Public).

3. Mobilization/De-mobilization is based on site location and number and frequency of tests/items.

4. ODC items shall be based on actual costs and supported by historical data and other documentation.

5. ODC items that would be considered "tools of the trade' are not reimbursable.

6. Billing Hourly Rates must be actual, allowable, and reasonable.

Page 1 of 2 ends

City Rise Safety
✔
14,476
129.25
112
Mileage Costs
$ 0.00
Equipment Rental and Supplies
$ 0.00
Permit Fees
$ 0.00
Plan Sheets
$ 0.00
Test
$ 0.00

Page 622 of 624 ends

________________________________ _
___
_ _

SAMPLE COST PROPOSAL
Sample Only - Required Cost Proposal Template To Be Determined By Agency SAMPLE COST PROPOSAL 3
Certification of Direct Costs:

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:

13. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles {GAAP)

14. Terms and conditions of the contract

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

16. 48 Code of Federal Regulations Part 31 - Contract Cost Principles and Procedures

17. 23 Code of Federal Regulations Part 172 - Procurement, Management, and Administration of Engineering and Design Related Service

18. 48 Code of Federal Regulation Part 9904 - Cost Accounting Standards Board {when applicable)
All costs must be applied consistently and fair1y 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.

Prime Consultant or Subconsultant Certifying:

Name:_______________ Title*: _____________
Signature: _____________ _ Date of Certification {mm/dd/yyyy...._ : __ Email: ______________ _ Phone Number,_,_: __________
Address:
* 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.

List services the consultant is providinq under the proposed contract:

Page 2 of 2 ends

Manager
Joey Hanna
$ 1.00
03/05/2025
[email protected]
510-506-7189
44800 Industrial ave Fremont CA
Traffic control. (C-31 Traffic control company)

Page 623 of 624 ends

ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecessors
1 City of Turlock Roads Program CIP 409 days Tue 3/25/25 Fri 10/16/26 2 City Issues NTP 0 days Tue 3/25/25 Tue 3/25/25
3 Project Management Services 236 days Tue 3/25/25 Tue 2/17/26 4 Monthly Progress Reports 236 days Tue 3/25/25 Tue 2/17/26 2 5 Monthly Status Meetings with City Staff 236 days Tue 3/25/25 Tue 2/17/26 2 6 Background Research 45 days Tue 3/25/25 Mon 5/26/25
7 Obtain Historical Documents and Review 20 days Tue 3/25/25 Mon 4/21/25 2 8 Geotechnical Testing 40 days Tue 3/25/25 Mon 5/19/25 2 9 Prepare Utility A Letters 10 days Tue 3/25/25 Mon 4/7/25 2 10 Perform Topographic Surveys 45 days Tue 3/25/25 Mon 5/26/25 2 11 Construction Documents and Cost Estimates 183 days Tue 5/27/25 Thu 2/5/26 12 30% Submittal 56 days Tue 5/27/25 Tue 8/12/25
13 Prepare for 30% Submittal 40 days Tue 5/27/25 Mon 7/21/25 10 14 City Review 15 days Tue 7/22/25 Mon 8/11/25 13
15 City Review after field meeting 1 day Tue 8/12/25 Tue 8/12/25 14 16 60% Submittal 61 days Wed 8/13/25 Wed 11/5/25
17 Prepare for 60% Submittal 40 days Wed 8/13/25 Tue 10/7/25 15 18 City Review 20 days Wed 10/8/25 Tue 11/4/25 17
19 Meeting with City to Review Comments 1 day Wed 11/5/25 Wed 11/5/25 18 20 90% Submittal 46 days Thu 11/6/25 Thu 1/8/26
21 Prepare for 90% Submittal 30 days Thu 11/6/25 Wed 12/17/25 19 22 City Review 15 days Thu 12/18/25 Wed 1/7/26 21
23 Meeting with City to Review Comments 1 day Thu 1/8/26 Thu 1/8/26 22 24 100% and Final Submittals 20 days Fri 1/9/26 Thu 2/5/26 25 Prepare for 100% Submittal 15 days Fri 1/9/26 Thu 1/29/26 23 26 Agency Review and Last Revisions 5 days Fri 1/30/26 Thu 2/5/26 25 27 Advertise and Contract Award 101 days Fri 2/6/26 Fri 6/26/26 28 Final Plan Approvals & Bid Package Prep 15 days Fri 2/6/26 Thu 2/26/26 26 29 Advertise Project to Bidders 30 days Fri 2/27/26 Thu 4/9/26 28 30 Bid Opening 1 day Fri 4/10/26 Fri 4/10/26 29
31 Final Staff Report 25 days Mon 4/13/26 Fri 5/15/26 30 32 City Authorization 0 days Fri 5/15/26 Fri 5/15/26 31 33 Biology Pre-Construction Survey 15 days Mon 5/18/26 Fri 6/5/26 32 34 Award Contract 30 days Mon 5/18/26 Fri 6/26/26 32
35 Issue Notice to Proceed 0 days Fri 6/26/26 Fri 6/26/26 34 36 Construction 80 days Mon 6/29/26 Fri 10/16/26 35
Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct 2026
Task
Critical Task
Milestone
Summary
Rolled Up Task
Rolled Up Critical Task
Rolled Up Milestone
Rolled Up Progress
Split
External Tasks
Project Summary
Group By Summary
Inactive Task
Inactive Milestone
Inactive Summary
Manual Task
Duration-only
Manual Summary Rollup
Manual Summary
Start-only
Finish-only
Progress
Deadline
Manual Progress

PROJECT SCHEDULE
City of Turlock Roads Program CIP Task #3

TURLOCK, CALIFORNIA
Fri 3/7/25
Project : City of Turlock
Roads Program CIP Task #2
Date: Fri 3/7/25

Page 624 of 624 ends

Turlock City CouncilMarch 25, 2025

Turlock City Council
March 25, 2025