Union City City Council
November 22, 2022

FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE
CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT (C5833)
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT (the “First Amendment”) is effective as of this 22nd day of November, 2022 by and between THE CITY OF UNION CITY, a municipal corporation, (“City”) and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc., ("Consultant"), collectively referred to as the "Parties."
W I T N E S S E T H:

WHEREAS, on January 3, 2022, the Parties entered into a Consulting Services Agreement (C5833) (“Agreement”) wherein the Consultant will provide the City with consulting services related to Final Design of Phases (Segments)1 & 2 for Quarry Lakes Parkway, City Project No. 18-04, in the amount of $1,200,000; and
WHEREAS, the Parties desire to amend the Agreement to expand the Scope of Services; and WHEREAS, the City and Consultant desire to enter into this First Amendment.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereto do mutually agree as follows:

1. The “Scope of Services”, as set forth in Exhibit A of the Agreement, is hereby amended to include the services contained in Exhibit A of this First Amendment, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

2. The “Compensation Schedule”, as set forth in Exhibit B of the Agreement, is hereby amended to first sentence of Section 2 "COMPENSATION" of the Agreement is hereby amended to reflect payment based upon a sum increase of Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000.00), as set forth in Exhibit B of this First Amendment. The total compensation under the Agreement including this Amendment shall not exceed a total contract amount of Four Million Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($4,200,000.00).

The first sentence shall now read:

City hereby agrees to pay Consultant a sum not to exceed Four Million Two Hudred Thousand Dollars ($4,200,000.00), notwithstanding any contrary indications that may be contained in Consultant's proposal, for services to be performed and reimbursable costs incurred under this Agreement.

3. All other provisions of the Agreement, remain unchanged except as modified by this First Amendment.

City Council/RSA Agenda 283 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the Consultant have executed this Amendment effective as of the date hereinabove written.

THE CITY OF UNION CITY MARK THOMAS & COMPANY, INC.

By By
Joan Malloy Shawn O’Keefe
City Manager Vice President
Attest:
___________________________
Anna M. Brown
City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
____________________________
Kristopher J. Kokotaylo
City Attorney
City Council/RSA Agenda 284 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES
FINAL DESIGN OF PHASES (SEGMENTS) 1 AND 2 FOR
QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04
Amendment No. 1 includes scope of services for Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phase 1 and 2, to completion of 65% Draft PS&E as follows:

TASK 1. PROJECT MANAGEMENT
The Mark Thomas team will provide project management for each task for the entire duration of the Agreement schedule. It is assumed this amendment will be completed in 6 months.

Task 1.1.1. Supervise, Coordinate and Monitor Design
Mark Thomas will supervise, coordinate and monitor design for conformance with guidelines, standards and policies as noted herein.

Task 1.1.2. Coordination
The Mark Thomas team will coordinate with the other design consultants, utility providers and affected agencies for timely flow of information for each task activity.

Task 1.1.4. Maintain Project Files
Mark Thomas will maintain project files and provide a file repository for final documents in the Microsoft Teams environment.

Task 1.1.5. Update Project CPM Schedule
Mark Thomas will coordinate with the City to update the Project CPM schedule on a monthly basis.

Task 1.1.6. Meetings
The Mark Thomas team will attend monthly design coordination check-in meetings. This task also includes up to 10 stakeholder/agency meetings to resolve engineering issues and one presentation to City Council. This may include meetings with AC Transit, Union City Transit, Caltrans, East Bay Regional Park District, ACFC&WCD and RWQCB.

Task 1.1.7. City Meetings
Mark Thomas will present at two (2) quarterly, City publicly noticed design update meeting for the benefit of the public, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit advocates. These meetings will be combined with BPAC meetings. The purpose of this meeting is to present updates to the public City Council/RSA Agenda 285 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

during the entire design phase and to receive feedback and answer questions from the public about the design elements.

Task 1.1.8. Invoice and Progress Reports
Mark Thomas will prepare and submit budgets, monthly progress and performance reports and invoices.

Task 1.1.9. Correspondence
Mark Thomas will prepare and submit correspondence and memos, including all meeting minutes.

Task 1.1.10. Quality Control / Quality Assurance
The Mark Thomas team will implement quality control and quality assurance procedures for design activities, perform in-house quality control reviews for each report and other task deliverables. Quality Control documentation can be submitted to the City upon request.

Task 1.1.11. Design Coordination Meetings
The Mark Thomas team will hold monthly Project Development Team (PDT) design coordination meetings. The location for the meetings will be a location to be determined by City of Union City and meetings shall include a video capable conference link for remote attendance.

Mark Thomas will prepare and submit an agenda, status of submittals register, data request log of information requested from and provided to others and meeting minutes after each meeting.

The agenda outline shall cover cost, schedule and scope issues. The submittal register and data request log shall be presented and reviewed at each meeting to highlight due dates and prevent schedule slippage. The submittal register shall highlight all outstanding issues and responses to action items.

DELIVERABLES
• Meeting agendas and minutes (up to 16 meetings)
• Union City BPAC Meeting attendance (up to 2)
• Invoice and Progress Reports (monthly)
• Project Schedule Updates (monthly)
• All deliverables will be in .pdf format unless specified otherwise TASK 4. ENGINEERING REPORTS
Task 4.1. Engineering Reports – All Phases
Task 4.1.3. Hydromodification
As part of the Mark Thomas team, HDR|WRECO will add the following scenarios to the base scope analysis and document in the Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP):

City Council/RSA Agenda 286 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

1. Sizing the basin to provide stormwater treatment and hydromodification management for the project site and the new development, assuming medium density development.

2. Using Old Alameda Creek (OAC) for hydromodification management for the Project site

3. Using Old Alameda Creek for hydromodification management for the Project site and the new development, assuming medium density.

Updated basin sizing calculations will be performed for each alternative in addition to the base Project analysis. The calculations will be included in the SWMP.

Task 4.1.5. Drainage
As part of the Mark Thomas team, HDR|WRECO will prepare a Basis of Design Memorandum detailing the pump type and wet well requirements for the two proposed pump stations. The memorandum will include pump sizing calculations based on the conceptual design parameters, document the required storage volume of the upstream storm drain system, and wet well dimensions. The memo will include one example pump cut sheet with pump curve for each sized pump. The pump stations will be discussed as two stand-alone elements that accommodate the gravity flows into the wet well chamber and discharges against the total dynamic head of the outfalls. Pump selection criteria will be based on submersible centrifugal pumps operated through a standard four-float control. We assume that submersible centrifugal pumps with a railtype installation mounts will be used. The first pump station is anticipated to have a peak flow of up to 22 cfs and static head of approximately 33 ft. The second pump station is anticipated to have a peak flow of up to 50 cfs and static head of approximately 11 ft. The design will be performed per Caltrans pump design criteria.

As part of the Mark Thomas team, HDR|WRECO will add the following scenarios to the base scope analysis and document them in the Drainage Report.

1. Sizing the basin to provide stormwater treatment and hydromodification management for the project site and the new development, assuming medium density development.

2. Using Old Alameda Creek for hydromodification management for the Project site

3. Using Old Alameda Creek for hydromodification management for the Project and the new development, assuming medium density.

HDR|WRECO will update the PCSWMM models prepared for the pump station design with the new basin sizing alternatives.

Old Alameda Creek will be evaluated to determine if the potential improvements cause objectionable backwater for the on-site and off-site systems or increase flow rates to Alameda Creek in the 100-year and 15-year events. An existing condition model will be needed in addition to the proposed condition models to establish a baseline for objectionable backwater and increased flow rates.

City Council/RSA Agenda 287 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

HDR|WRECO will update the Hydrologic Engineering Center's Hydrologic Modeling System (HEC-HMS) hydrologic model developed in the previous phase of the Project using current methods per the Alameda County Hydrology & Hydraulics Manual (2018).

HDR|WRECO will model the system function in a 1-dimensional unsteady flow PCSWMM model for use as inputs to the Hydrologic Engineering Center's River Analysis System (HECRAS) model of Old Alameda Creek. The PCSWMM models will include major on-site drainage facilities, proposed pump stations, and the detention basin. Tailwater for the PCSWMM models will assume free outfall to Old Alameda Creek.

The discharges from the PCSWMM models and the HEC-HMS hydrographs to Old Alameda Creek will be used as inflows to the HEC-RAS hydraulic model of Old Alameda Creek. The Old Alameda Creek hydraulic model will be an unsteady 2-dimensional HEC-RAS model. The tailwater boundary condition will be set to the Alameda Creek design water surface elevation at the discharge point for each design event. This model will be used to check if the hydromodification features in Old Alameda Creek cause objectionable backwater, backwater to the Project basin’s underdrain system, or increased flows to Alameda Creek.

These additional analyses will be documented in the Drainage Report.

Task 4.2. Engineering Reports Phases 1 & 2
Task 4.2.1. Hazardous Materials
As part of the Mark Thomas team, Fugro will develop a hazardous materials boundary and identify other pertinent areas of concern within QLP. This file will be provided as a GIS layer and referenced in the plans.

Task 4.2.2. Materials/Geotechnical
As a part of the Mark Thomas team, Parikh Consultants, Inc (PARIKH) will prepare a Geotechnical Design Report (GDR) and Pavement Design & Materials Report (PD&MR) or Pavement Memo for final design. For roadway design of Phases 1 & 2, we will summarize the findings, soil data, engineering recommendations, and review comments/updates in a final Geotechnical Design Report (GDR) for the City and agencies to review. At the junction of future QLP and Mission Blvd. (Caltrans jurisdiction), the latest Caltrans guidelines require preparation of either a Pavement Design & Materials Report (PD&MR) or a Pavement Memo (this has been accepted in our recent experience if the involvement is not significant). The soil boring logs will be prepared in Caltrans Logs of Test Boring (LOTB), 11” x 17” format.

The geotechnical work will include interaction with the designer and agencies, incorporating review comments/updates from the preliminary design, inclusion of the available soil data, engineering analyses, design coordination, and submittal of final reports.

City Council/RSA Agenda 288 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

Task 4.2.4. Drainage Report
As a part of the Mark Thomas team, HDR|WRECO will utilize PDR Report prepared during 30% design phase as the basis for final design to prepare draft drainage report, which will include calculations to assess the need for any drainage modifications and any updated drainage design criteria. The results and design recommendations will be summarized in the Drainage Report and will include construction implementation of the drainage systems.

The hydraulic evaluation of the Old Alameda Creek hydromodification management alternative will be documented in the report for the 15- and 100-year events. The calculations will be performed building on the conceptual design’s HEC-HMS, EPA SWMM 5, and HEC-RAS models. Old Alameda Creek will be evaluated to determine if the potential improvements cause objectionable backwater for the on-site and off-site systems or increase flow rates to Alameda Creek in the 15-year and 100-year events. The tailwater boundary condition will be set to the Alameda Creek design water surface elevation at the discharge point for each design event.

The report is expected to include an evaluation of the existing facilities and proposed conditions, unusual and special conditions, drainage mapping, hydraulic analyses, and documentation of the drainage design decision made as part of Pre-Design Report (PDR) Process.

Task 4.2.5. Stormwater Management Plan and Hydromodification Report As a part of the Mark Thomas team, HDR|WRECO will prepare Stormwater Management Plan summarizing the Project impacts to water quality, recommended BMPs and Hydromodification Management measures for only Phases 1 and 4. HDR|WRECO will use the EWC Project’s 95% Draft Stormwater Management Plan, dated June 2011, and PDR updated data developed during 30% design phase as a reference and finalize the report per updated permitting and innovative solutions to limit right-of-way requirements within Project limits. Our study will address the impacts from roadway improvements, and we will utilize guidance from the City, Alameda Countywide Clean Water Program, and San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Hydromodification management measures will be evaluated by updating the calculations prepared for the 30% conceptual design in Bay Area Hydrology Model (BAHM).

The hydraulic design of the measures will be briefly mentioned and documented in the Drainage report.

HDR|WRECO will perform a risk assessment for the Project, update the Stormwater Management Plan to document the risk of the Project and the new BMPs to be implemented; and provide preliminary cost estimates for additional Inspections/Monitoring/Sampling/Rain Event Action Plan, as applicable, based on the risk assessment of the Project.

Task 4.2.6. Pump Station Design Report
As a part of the Mark Thomas team, HDR|WRECO will finalize the Pump Station Design Report detailing the pump type, wet well requirements, and layouts for the two proposed pump stations based on PDR 30% design as the basis for final design. The report will include pump hydraulic and sizing calculations based on the conceptual design parameters, document the required City Council/RSA Agenda 289 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

storage volume of the upstream storm drain system, wet well dimensions, and stormwater treatment basin locations. When possible, standardization of the two proposed pump stations will be examined in addition to combining the proposed pump stations. The report will include system and pump curves, major equipment cut sheets, opinion of probable construction costs (OPCC), and operations and maintenance (O&M) costs.

As part of the final report, HDR|WRECO will update and finalize the design criteria, OPCCs, and O&M costs for the following alternatives: 1) BMP Pump Station (PS) minimum, 2) BMP PS upsized, 3) Depressed PS, 4) standardized BMP PS and Depressed PS, and 5) combined BMP and Depressed PS for the Project Team’s considerations. Each alternative will have up to two drawings and accompanied by a 20-25 page report. The City will direct HDR|WRECO on their preferred alternative for further developments.

DELIVERABLES
• Draft and Final Pump Station Basis of Design Memorandum (PDF) • Hazardous Materials Boundary (in GIS)
• Draft and Final GDR and PD&MR or Pavement Memo
• Draft and Final Drainage Report
• Draft and Final Stormwater Management Plan and Hydromodification Report • Draft and Final Pump Station Design Report
• All deliverables will be in .pdf format unless specified otherwise TASK 5. SURVEY AND RIGHT OF WAY ENGINEERING
Task 5.1. Topographic Survey
The Mark Thomas team will perform additional field survey required for the project. With an approval from City, perform all additional topographic survey required for Phase 1 and 2 of QLP. It is assumed additional topographic surveys are limited to fifteen (15) days of field time and the City will provide all access and necessary permits at no cost to Mark Thomas.

Task 5.2. R/W Engineering – Parcel Map
Mark Thomas will perform a field survey to locate and verify found monumentation used to establish the boundary for the Parcel Map. Once the monuments have been verified, they will be added to the newly configured Parcel Map. Mark Thomas will review and verify preliminary Title Reports for the Parcels associated with the Parcel Map. Mark Thomas will then reconfigure the Parcels and Right-of-Way needed and prepare the Parcel Map and closures for submittal to the County for review and comment. It is assumed the City will provide Preliminary Title Reports for the affected APN's.

DELIVERABLES
• Topographic Survey (up to 15 days)
• Tentative and Final Parcel Map
City Council/RSA Agenda 290 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

• All deliverables will be in .pdf format unless specified otherwise TASK 6. 35% LEVEL OF DESIGN COMPLETION
Task 6.1. 35% Level Plans
As part of the Mark Thomas team, HDR|WRECO will determine the conceptual layout of the wet well and orientation of the pumps and piping. For each pump station, the sheets are anticipated to include:
• 1 plan/profile sheet
• 1 sheet with typical sections of the wet well
• 1 sheet with typical details of the storage facility (if needed) Task 6.2. Engineers Estimate
HDR|WRECO will prepare a conceptual engineer’s estimate for the construction of the two pump stations. The estimate will include costs for the pumps and controls based on manufacturer’s estimates. HDR|WRECO will coordinate with the Project’s structural engineers to develop an estimate of the wet well cost. It is assumed that the 35% design will not include structural, mechanical, electrical, or control elements. Pump specifications will also not be provided.

DELIVERABLES
• Draft 35% level Plan sheets and Engineer’s Estimate (PDF) • Final 35% level Plan sheets and Engineer’s Estimate (PDF) • All deliverables will be in .pdf format unless specified otherwise TASK 7. DEVELOPER COORDINATION
Task 7.1. ENA Support Services
The Mark Thomas team will perform ENA support services and coordinate with the Gateway Site developer on an on-going and as-needed basis. Tasks may include reviewing conceptual development proposal plans and providing design input for consistence and in conformance with the goals of Quarry Lakes Parkway, general coordination and correspondence with the developer’s consultant team and meeting attendance including preparing exhibits. As the specific deliverables required for this task are unknown at this time, this task will be billed on a time and materials basis up to the budgeted amount. If additional support is needed over and above the provided budget, an amendment will be required to continue support services.

DELIVERABLES
• TBD (as-needed and directed by the City)
• All deliverables will be in .pdf format unless specified otherwise City Council/RSA Agenda 291 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

TASK 8. FINAL DESIGN (UP TO 65% PS&E)
The Mark Thomas team will develop the final design for Phases 1 & 2 up to 65% Plans, Specifications and Estimate (PS&E). After review of the 65% design with the City and key stakeholders it will be determined what project elements will be moved forward into bid documents as the available project construction budget should be established at that point. The remaining final design submittals (95%, 100% and Final) will be provided under a separate scope and budget.

Task 8.1. Utility Coordination
Task 8.1.1. Utility Mapping
As a part of the Mark Thomas team, CSW will use the information obtained from the utility companies and field reviews to map the existing utilities over a topographic survey to reflect the existing conditions.

Task 8.1.2. Utility Conflict Evaluation
As a part of the Mark Thomas team, CSW will identify utility conflicts with the proposed work.

Utility information will be compiled into an overall utility composite drawing. This task will include preparing Utility “B” and “C” letters to notify the utility agencies of any conflicts and request relocations or abandonment of existing utilities.

Task 8.2. 65% PS&E (combined set for Phases 1 and 2)
The Mark Thomas team will prepare 65% design based on comments received on the 35% design documents. The 65% PS&E will be prepared as a detailed, complete set of plans, technical specifications and estimate. The Mark Thomas team shall provide responses to comments and attend a comment review/ resolution meeting at the outset of the 65% PS&E task.

The following sheet count is anticipated:

Sheet
Count
Sheet Type
1 Title (Mark Thomas)
5 Typical Sections (Mark Thomas)
2 Survey Control Diagram (Mark Thomas)
10 Demolition Plan
10 Roadway Plan and Profile (Mark Thomas)
20 Construction Details (Mark Thomas)
15 Retaining Wall Plans and Details (AECOM)
15 Water Pollution Control Plans and Details (HDR|WRECO) 10 Drainage Layouts (HDR|WRECO)
7 Drainage Profiles (HDR|WRECO)
8 Drainage Details (HDR|WRECO)
10 Erosion Control (HDR|WRECO)
City Council/RSA Agenda 292 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

30 Pump Station Design and Details (HDR|WRECO)
10 Utility Plan and Profile (CSW)
10 Utility Details (CSW)
6 Stage Construction (Mark Thomas)
10 Traffic Handling (Mark Thomas)
3 Construction Area Signs (Mark Thomas)
10 Sign Plans (Mark Thomas)
4 Sign Details (Mark Thomas)
10 Pavement Delineation (Mark Thomas)
22 Electrical Plans and Details (Y&C)
8 Temporary Electrical Plans and Details (Y&C)
30 Landscape and Irrigation Plans and Details (PGA)
10 Structure Plans (Mark Thomas)
276 Total
It is possible that changes in construction timing or budgets will occur and the phases may need to be split into two separate PS&E packages. If a split is required, this will happen at the 95% PS&E submittal phase.

Mark Thomas – Civil and Structures Design
Mark Thomas will prepare the general civil and structures elements of the project. It is assumed the Green Street Bridge (Br. No. 33C0421) utility opening will not be in the correct location for the proposed design. We will design the abutment modifications at the Green St Overcrossing to accommodate the installation of the 54" storm drain. It is anticipated that the existing wingwalls and structure approach slab at Abutment 3 will need to be removed and reconstructed. The design and analysis will be limited to the work at the abutment and no retrofitting of the structure is anticipated. We will also design the Line M box culvert and headwalls that goes under QLP using Caltrans standard plans.

CSW – Utility Design
As a part of the Mark Thomas team, CSW will prepare utility plans to current City Public Works and Caltrans standards using Civil 3D and AutoCAD. Telephone service drop locations will be verified and coordinated with the telephone service company. Any connection or application fees for electrical and telephone service shall be paid for by the City.

For the dry utility plans & details, all specific details necessary for the relocation of any affected utilities will be designed and provided to CSW by the utility owner (i.e. PG&E, AT&T, Comcast, etc) for reference in the design documents. The scope includes design and drafting of the sewer and water systems and all other utilities will be graphically shown and coordinated with each Utility company.

AECOM – Retaining Wall Design
City Council/RSA Agenda 293 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

As a part of the Mark Thomas team, AECOM will provide retaining wall design and construction document production services in support of the Phase 1 construction of the M-line bypass pipeline and the drainage channel relocation. The design of the walls, for both Phase 1 features, will require close coordination with the overall design team. Wall type, design height and surcharge requirements will be determined based on plan, profile and typical section(s) of each feature developed by others. The limits of the walls and the wall types will be shown on the plan and elevation sheets developed by AECOM.

M-line Bypass Pipeline Retaining Walls
It is understood that construction of the M-line bypass pipeline will be on the south side of the planned Quarry Lakes Parkway (QLP) and may include conventional cantilever, secant pile, and cement deep soil mix (CDSM) soldier pile wall types. Wall types will be determined in coordination with the M-line bypass pipeline and roadway design teams during the preliminary design phase (35%). It is assumed that the walls will generally conform to those shown in the East-West Connector (EWC) Segment C plan set issued in 2011. • The M-line bypass pipeline wall(s) is(are) anticipated to be approximately 1800 feet in length, beginning approximately 200 feet East of Alvarado-Niles Road (approximate QLP Line Sta 5675+00) and extending to approximately 200 feet West of 7th Street (approximate QLP Line Sta 7700+00) as required.
• The wall design will consider project phasing. The addition of tiebacks during Phase 3 & 4 may be required.
• A typical section showing the relationship between the proposed roadway, the M-line bypass pipeline, abutting properties and the bench or work area required to construct the pipeline will be provided by others.

Drainage Channel Relocation Retaining Walls
It is understood that the retaining wall(s) supporting the drainage channel will be on the roadway side of the channel and may include conventional cantilever, secant pile, and CDSM soldier pile types. Wall types will be determined in coordination with the channel and roadway design teams during the preliminary design phase (35%). It is assumed that the walls will generally conform to those shown in the East-West Connector (EWC) Segment C plan set issued in 2011. • The drainage channel wall(s) is(are) anticipated to be approximately 760 feet in length, beginning near the 7th Street side of the box culvert headwall (approximate channel Sta 2078+56) and extending past the turn in the channel (approximate channel Sta 2071+00) as required.
• The wall design will consider project phasing. The addition of tiebacks during Phase 3 & 4 may be required.
• A typical section showing the relationship between the proposed roadway and the relocated drainage channel, with related maintenance access and the City’s corporate yard, will be provided by others.

City Council/RSA Agenda 294 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

Cement Deep Soil Mix (CDSM) Cutoff/Retaining Walls
It is understood that the project requires installation of groundwater control for the depressed roadway section due to high ground water which is anticipated to be approximately 20 feet below original ground level. Based on the East-West Connector Segment C plans from 2011, the CDSM cutoff walls extend from approximate Station 5725+00 to Station 7200+00. It is anticipated that a portion of the required cutoff walls will be installed in Phase 1, while the remainder will be constructed in other Phases of the work.

The Phase 1 design will include the preliminary layout of the CDSM cutoff walls and the design of those required to be constructed in Phase 1. Where there is not space to construct both conventional cantilever retaining walls and a CDSM cutoff wall, CDSM soldier pile walls will be considered and incorporated in the design.

HDR|WRECO – Drainage and Pump Station Design
As a part of the Mark Thomas team, HDR|WRECO will revise the drainage plans, erosion control plans, water pollution control plans, and pump station plans (mechanical and electrical) based on the comments received on the 35% submittal. HDR|WRECO will add profiles, details and advance the plans to the 65% level of design. HDR|WRECO will provide written responses to each comment pertaining to drainage, pump station and erosion control elements of work.

This work includes all drainage facilities, including the realignment of the Line M channel, new water quality basin and outfalls into Old Alameda Creek. It is assumed the outfalls will be standard structures with simple rock slope protection.

Y&C – Signal and Lighting Design
As a part of the Mark Thomas team, Y&C will prepare 65% plans, specifications, and cost estimates (PS&E) for electrical items including permanent street lighting along west side of Mission Blvd between QLP and Holly Leaf Lane, along QLP between Mission Blvd and 7th Street, for the QLP/7th Street parking lot, along QLP between Alvarado-Niles Rd and Quarry Lakes Drive, along Alvarado-Niles Rd and Lotus Pond Common and along Quarry Lakes Drive between QLP and the Quarry Lakes Regional Park parking lot. Permanent traffic signal modifications at QLP/Mission Blvd, QLP/7th St, 7th St/Parking Lot Entrance, QLP/AlvaradoNiles Rd, Alvarado-Niles Rd/Osprey Drive and QLP/Quarry Lakes Drive. Temporary street lighting along west side of Mission Blvd between QLP and Holly Leaf Lane, along QLP between Alvarado-Niles Rd and Quarry Lakes Drive and along Quarry Lakes Drive between QLP and end of project for construction staging. Temporary traffic signal modification at QLP/Mission Blvd and at Alvarado-Niles Rd/Osprey Drive for construction staging PGA Design – Landscape Architecture and Urban Design
As a part of the Mark Thomas team, PGA Design will prepare the urban design, landscape architecture and irrigation elements of the project. The design will be based upon the landscape design report prepared as a part of the PDR process.

City Council/RSA Agenda 295 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

The Mark Thomas team will prepare specifications in City standard format and provide the technical special provisions. Front end “boilerplate” and contract documentation will be provided by the City.

The Mark Thomas team will prepare an opinion of probable construction costs broken down into unit costs as appropriate for the design and items of work.

As a part of the Mark Thomas team, Toole Design group and Kittelson & Associates will perform a peer review of the 65% design and provide comments for review by the team and the City.

Task 8.3. Hazardous Materials Consultation
As a part of the Mark Thomas team, Fugro will review and consult with the design team regarding project drawings and specifications to confirm that our recommendations regarding management of contaminated and hazardous materials have been incorporated into the design packages. In addition, for each PS&E package Fugro will review assumptions regarding soil, groundwater and hazardous material quantities, and consult with the design team regarding generalized costs for the management and disposal of contaminated and hazardous soils and groundwater assumed to be generated as part of construction.

Task 8.4. Corporation Yard Building Programming
As a part of the Mark Thomas team, Group 4 Architecture will prepare a building program for the new Union City Transit building at the City’s Corporation Yard at the corner of QLP and 7th Street. The building program will require coordination with City public works, maintenance and Union City Transit staff and assumes a building size of approximately 2,000 square feet. The building will include space for public interface and will likely include a training room, bathrooms and lockers, offices, storage and general open workspaces. The building program is conceptual in nature and intended to inform the final design elements and a rough order of magnitude construction cost. Final design services can be provided as a supplemental service.

No renderings or elevations are included in this scope.

Task 8.5. General Urban Design Consulting
As a part of the Mark Thomas team, ROMA will provide general urban design consulting services. Tasks may include reviewing final design drawings, meeting attendance and coordination and correspondence. As the specific deliverables required for this task are unknown at this time, this task will be billed on a time and materials basis up to the budgeted amount. If additional support is needed over and above the provided budget, an amendment will be required to continue consulting services.

DELIVERABLES
• Utility Conflict Mapping
• 35% Comment Response Matrix
City Council/RSA Agenda 296 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

• 65% PS&E
• Peer Review
• Draft and Final Corporation Yard Building Program
• Urban Design Deliverables (as-needed)
• All deliverables will be in .pdf format unless specified otherwise TASK 9. ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING
As a part of the Mark Thomas team, ICF will prepare and obtain environmental permitting from the California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Army Corps of Engineers, and Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Task 9.1. Environmental Permitting
Based on prior discussions with environmental permitting agencies, this scope presumes that Phases 1 through 4 would be permitted together including City the owned 25-acre development parcel adjacent to QLP. Through 65% design, draft permit applications will be prepared in accordance with the following table:

Agency
Required Permits,
Approvals or
Other Entitlements
Responsible
Party Reason Required
California
Department of Fish
and Game
Section 1602 Streambed
Alteration Agreement
ICF Disturbance to Old Alameda
Creek and Line M.

Section 2081(b)
Endangered Species
Consultation
ICF California tiger salamander
California State
Historic
Preservation Office
Section 106 Consultation ICF Potential impacts on the
Peterson Farm
Regional Water
Quality Control
Board
Section 401 Water
Quality Certification;
possible Waste
Discharge Requirements
Section 402/NPDES
permit
ICF Discharge to Old Alameda
Creek and fill within
jurisdictional wetlands/ waters
of the United States and State
(Old Alameda Creek, Basin 2C,
New Basin, and Line M)
U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers
Section 404 Permit ICF Disturbance to jurisdictional
waters and wetlands of the
United States (Old Alameda
Creek, Basin 2C, and Line M)
U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service
Section 7 Consultation
under Federal
Endangered Species Act
ICF Potential impacts on California
tiger salamander and California
red-legged frog.

City Council/RSA Agenda 297 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

Regional Water Quality Control Board – Section 401 Water Quality Certification, Waste Discharge Requirements, and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permits
This scope assumes that the 404(b)(1) Alternatives Analysis to be prepared for the Corps would address concerns of the RWQCB. This scope assumes that the mitigation necessary for RWQCB will be through off-site mitigation and/or use of a waters/wetlands bank. ICF will consult with potential partners for off-site mitigation including EBRPD, Zone 7, and the South Bay Salt Ponds project. ICF has confirmed there are sufficient available wetland credits at the San Francisco Wetland Mitigation Bank, but the cost to mitigate wetlands only (not waters) could approach $16 million.

ICF will consult with other partners to determine if there are viable options to mitigate waters and wetlands through funding of other projects. This scope presumes viable off-site options will be identified for waters mitigation and wetland mitigation will be done either via partnership with others or through the San Francisco Wetland Mitigation Bank. This scope does not include design of on-site or off-site waters or wetland mitigation, but a scope for such design is included as an optional task if needed.

The remaining work includes the following:
• Consultation with EBRPD, Zone 7, and South Bay Salt Ponds • Reengagement with RWQCB on the 401/WQC permit.
• Negotiation with RWQCB to determine mitigation ratio for Basin 2C. • Prepare the Habitat Management and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) and review by RWQCB (see below).
• Completion of HMMP addressing RWQCB permit
• Draft Permit issuance by RWQCB
• Review of Draft Permit by team and ACTC
• Final Permit issuance
This scope presumes that RWQCB will be able to pick up the permitting process where it was previously, that the project team and RWQCB can quickly resolve the outstanding issues, and that agency requirements do not require substantial additional documentation or mitigation revisions or extensive levels of review.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife – Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement Documentation
This scope presumes that CDFW will be able to pick up the permitting process where it was previously, that the project team and CDFW can quickly resolve the outstanding issues, and that agency requirements do not require substantial additional documentation or mitigation revisions or extensive levels of review.

City Council/RSA Agenda 298 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

This scope includes the following:
• Reengagement with CDFW on the Section 1600 SAA.
• Negotiation with CDFW to resolve necessary mitigation. • Prepare the Habitat Management and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) and review by CDFW (see below).
• Completion of the HMMP addressing CDFW comments.
• Resolution of CTS 2081 issues (see below).
• Draft SAA issuance by CDFW.
• Review of Draft SAA by team and ACTC.
• Final SAA issuance.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife – Section 2081 California Endangered Species Act Incidental Take Permit
This scope presumes that CDFW will be able to pick up the permitting process where it was previously, that the project team and CDFW can quickly resolve the outstanding issues, and that agency requirements do not require substantial additional documentation or mitigation revisions or extensive levels of review.

This scope includes the following:
• Reengagement with CDFW on the Section 2081 permit process. • Negotiation with CDFW to resolve necessary mitigation location and amounts. This scope includes securing of CTS credits from approved mitigation banks. This scope does not include identification, design, or other effort associated with CTS mitigation; if that is necessary, additional budget may be required.
• Prepare formal Section 2081 permit application.
• Response to any CDFW queries.
• Draft 2081 permit issuance by CDFW.
• Review of Draft 2081 permit by team and ACTC.
• Final 2081 permit issuance.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers – Section 404 Clean Water Act Individual Permit An individual permit (rather than a nationwide permit) is required from the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) because more than 0.5 acres of waters of the United States would be impacted. This scope presumes that USACE will be able to pick up the permitting process where it was previously, that the project team and USACE can quickly resolve the outstanding issues, and that agency requirements do not require substantial additional documentation or mitigation revisions or extensive levels of review.

This scope includes the following:
• Reengagement with USACE on the Section 404 IP.
• Completion of the Draft 404(b)(1) Alternatives Analysis.

City Council/RSA Agenda 299 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

• Revision of the 404(b)(1) Alternatives Analysis per USACE comments. • Confirmation with USACE of necessary mitigation.
• Response to any USACE queries.
• Prepare Habitat Management and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) and review by USACE (see below).
• Completion of HMMP addressing USACE comments.
• Completion of NHPA Section 106 process (see below).
• Completion of ESA Section 7 consultation with USFWS (see below). • Completion of 401 WQC process with SF RWQCB (see above). • Preparation of Environmental Assessment/Decision Document (EA/DD) by USACE • Preparation of Public Notice.
• Response to any public comments on Public Notice.
• Draft Individual Permit issuance by USACE.
• Review of Draft IP by team and ACTC.
• Final IP issuance.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Section 7 ESA Consultation This scope presumes that USFWS will be able to pick up the permitting process where it was previously, that the project team and USFWS can quickly resolve the outstanding issues, and that agency requirements do not require substantial additional documentation or mitigation revisions or extensive levels of review.

This scope includes the following:
• Reengagement with USFWS on the Section 7 Consultation (minimum 180-day consultation turnaround).
• Negotiation with USFWS to resolve necessary mitigation location and amounts. • Securing CTS and CRLF credits from approved mitigation banks. This scope does not include identification, design, or other effort associated with CTS or CRLF mitigation; if that is necessary, additional budget may be required.
• Response to any USFWS queries.
• Draft BO issuance by CDFW.
• Review of Draft BO permit by team and ACTC.
• Final BO issuance.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers – Section 106 Cultural Resources Report This scope presumes that USACE will be able to pick up the permitting process where it was previously, that the City Team and USACE can quickly resolve the outstanding issues, and that agency requirements do not require substantial additional documentation or mitigation revisions or extensive levels of review.

This scope includes the following:

City Council/RSA Agenda 300 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

• Reengagement with USACE on cultural resource issues.
• Preparation of an archaeology survey report (ASR) including a survey of all project areas, update of prior research, a new records search, and preparation of the report. • Preparation of an historic architecture survey report (HASR) including a survey of all project areas, update of prior research, a new records search, and preparation of the report.
• Consultation with USACE and SHPO.
• Only substantive issue presumed to be indirect effects to Peterson Ranch historic building.
• Resolution on special conditions concerning discoveries.

Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP)
The HMMP (for impacts to biological resources, including waters of the state and United States) will be based the presumed mitigation through off-site partnerships and habitat mitigation banks and further developed in coordination with the RWQCB and other permitting agencies, such as the USACE and CDFW, as well as potential partnering agencies such as EBRPD, Zone 7, or the South Bay Salt Ponds project. This scope presumes agency (RWQCB, CDFW, and USACE) review of the HMMP. ICF will prepare four versions of the HMMP (Administrative Draft for internal review, Draft for Agency review, Revised Draft responsive to agency comments, and Final Draft). Additional drafts or substantial revision to the mitigation plan would require additional budget.

DELIVERABLES
• Agency meeting agendas, minutes and participation in meetings • Draft and Final RWQCB Section 401 Water Quality Certification • Draft and Final RWQCB Waste Discharge Requirements
• Draft and Final RWQCB National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit • Draft and Final CDFW Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement • Draft and Final CDFW Section 2081 California Endangered Species Act Incidental Take Permit
• Draft and Final USACE Section 404 Clean Water Act Individual Permit • Draft and Final USFWS Section 7 ESA Consultation
• Draft and Final USACE Section 106 Cultural Resources Report • Draft and Final Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan • All deliverables will be in .pdf format unless specified otherwise

SCOPE ASSUMPTIONS/EXCLUSIONS
• Segment 5 will not be included in this analysis and existing East West Connector (EWC) design soffit elevations will be used.
• The Line M diversion pipe will drain to OAC (includes 82 cubic feet per second [cfs] from Line M and 30 cfs from Tract 7405)
City Council/RSA Agenda 301 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

• The tailwater elevations (one each for 100-year and 15-year) to be used at Alameda Creek will be provided by Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. • HDR|WRECO will not model the Standard Project Flood (SPF) event, Alameda Creek, or offsite drainage systems. • The best available survey will be provided at the start of the modeling process and HDR|WRECO will not obtain supplemental survey.
• No Conditional Letter of Map Revision/Letter of Map Revision applications, no-rise certifications, or analyses for 408 permits under this scope. • Final design past 65% PS&E is not included
• One PS&E package will be prepared for Phases 1 & 2
• Bid support and design support during construction is not included • Preparation of a SWPPP is assumed to be completed by the successful contractor • Retrofit of the existing Green Street Bridge is not required • Preparation of General Cross-Sections is not included • The retaining wall and cutoff wall design will consider potential tie-in to a Deep Soil Mix (DSM) seal course under the BART and UPRR structures as recommended by the geotechnical engineering report. The design of the DSM seal course under the BART and UPRR is by others.
• The retaining wall design will account for tie-in connections to the BART and UPRR (both the Oakland and Niles Subdivisions) underpass substructures as well as the existing Green Street Bridge.
• The retaining wall design will need to avoid impacting the hazardous materials slag along the PSSC site between the BART/UPRR corridor and 11th Street. • The section of the M-line bypass pipeline crossing the BART/UPRR structures and right-ofway is anticipated to be bored & jacked, so the wall will not be required as a part of this design
• HDR|WRECO assumes that for stormwater treatment and hydromodification management, one scenario will be selected out of the four scenarios analyzed during the preliminary design phase. No additional alternatives will be analyzed or designed under this scope. • The tailwater elevations (one each for 15-year and 100-year) to be used at Alameda Creek will be provided by ACFC&WCD.
• HDR|WRECO will not model the Standard Project Flood (SPF) event, Alameda Creek, or offsite drainage systems • A Conditional Letter of Map Revision/Letter of Map Revision applications, no-rise certifications, or analyses for 408 permits are not included • The stormwater pump station will have a portable generator connection. Procurement of a portable generator is not included.
• The Corporation Yard building will be programmed but final design is not included • It is assumed a Caltrans DEER will be required for Caltrans project approval • City will be responsible for preparing/providing any Caltrans maintenance agreements • A Caltrans Cooperative Agreement is not required
• Right of way acquisition and/or temporary construction easements are not required City Council/RSA Agenda 302 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

• Right of way services related to the abandonment/relocation of existing Quarry Lakes Drive • Caltrans Design Standard Decision Document is not required.

This scope assumes that required habitat mitigation will be acquired through partnerships with other agencies and through purchase of credits from mitigation banks. However, if that cannot be achieved and the project has to develop the design for off-site mitigation, we can provide these design services as supplemental services.

City Council/RSA Agenda 303 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

EXHIBIT B

COMPENSATION (COST PROPOSAL)
Task
No. Task Description Task Budget
1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT $457,946.42

1.1.1 Supervise, Coordinate and Monitor Design $24,488.81

1.1.2 Coordination with Design Consultants $73,857.96

1.1.3 Codes/Standards Compliance $0.00

1.1.4 Maintain Project Files $8,539.55

1.1.5 Update Project CPM Schedule $7,105.71

1.1.6 Meetings $99,729.72

1.1.7 City Meetings $48,434.00

1.1.8 Invoices, Progress Reports $34,663.36

1.1.9 Correspondence $25,784.60

1.1.10 Quality Control/Quality Assurance $65,159.88

1.1.11 Design Coordination Meetings $70,182.82
2 DATA GATHERING & REVIEW $0.00

2.1 Data Gathering & Review $0.00
3 PRE-DESIGN REPORT (PDR) PROCESS $0.00

3.1 PDR Process $0.00
4 ENGINEERING REPORTS $299,721.26

4.1 Engineering Reports - All Phases $0.00

4.1.1 Landscape Concept $0.00

4.1.2 Hydrology $0.00

4.1.3 Hydromodification $4,704.01

4.1.4 Water Quality $0.00

4.1.5 Drainage $86,433.65

4.1.6 Utility Requirement $0.00

4.1.7 Permit Requirement $0.00

4.1.8 Design Deviation/Exception $0.00

4.2 Engineering Reports - Phase 1 & 2 $0.00

4.2.1 Hazardous Materials $1,944.45

4.2.2 Materials/Geotechnicals $35,396.27

4.2.3 Lighting $0.00

4.2.4 Drainage Report $71,268.98
City Council/RSA Agenda 304 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

4.2.5 Stormwater Management Plan and Hydromofication
Report $51,302.84

4.2.6 Pump Station Design Report $48,671.07

4.2.7 Utility Coordination $0.00

4.2.8 Utility Mapping and Conflict evaluation $0.00
5 SURVEY AND RIGHT OF WAY
ENGINEERING $118,616.46

5.1 Topographic Survey $96,521.25

5.2 R/W Engineering - Parcel Map $22,095.21
6 35% LEVEL OF DESIGN COMPLETION $34,090.48

6.1 35% Level Plans $25,925.01

6.2 Engineers Estimate $8,165.47

6.3 Environmental Clearance $0.00

6.4 Environmental Monitoring $0.00

6.5 Scope, Fee and Schedule $0.00
7 DEVELOPER COORDINATION $377,483.72

7.1 ENA Support Services $377,483.72
8 FINAL DESIGN TO 65% PS&E $1,214,859.35

8.1 Utility Coordination $0.00

8.1.1 Utility Mapping $22,359.36

8.1.2 Utility Conflict Evaluation $65,978.28

8.2 65% PS&E $989,737.09

8.3 Hazardous Materials Consultation $45,593.89

8.4 Corp Yard Building Programming $40,584.84

8.5 General Urban Design Consulting $50,605.88
9 ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING $497,282.30

9.1 Environmental/Permitting $497,282.30
TOTAL $3,000,000.00
City Council/RSA Agenda 305 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

Hourly Rate Schedule by Firm
Vendor Name Personnel Name Title and/or Role
Fixed
Hourly
Rate
($)
Effective
Period
01/01/22-
12/13/22
Fixed
Hourly
Rate
($)
Effective
Period
01/01/23-
12/31/23
Fixed
Hourly
Rate
($)
Effective
Period
01/01/24-
12/31/24
Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. Sasha Dansky* Principal-in-Charge $401.83 $421.92 $443.02 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. Shawn O'Keefe* Principal-in-Charge/ Project Manager $374.12 $392.82 $412.46 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. Etty Mercurio* Sr. Engineering Manager $354.38 $372.10 $390.71 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. Danielle Sanchez* Deputy Project Manager $189.83 $199.32 $209.29 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD Sr. Project Engineer $159.35 $167.31 $175.68 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD Project Engineer $145.49 $152.76 $160.40 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD Design Engineer II $113.62 $119.30 $125.27 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD Design Engineer I $103.92 $109.12 $114.57 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD Sr. Project Manager $280.00 $294.00 $308.70 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD Sr. Project Engineer $197.00 $206.85 $217.19 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD Project Engineer $172.50 $181.13 $190.18 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD Design Engineer II $150.00 $157.50 $165.38 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD Sr. Technician $152.00 $159.60 $167.58 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD Deputy District Manager $259.39 $272.36 $285.97 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD CM Division Manager $268.14 $281.55 $295.63 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD Operations Manager $200.80 $210.84 $221.39 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD LAUD Division Manager $217.90 $228.80 $240.24 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD Sr. Engineering Manager $363.61 $381.79 $400.88 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD Survey Division Manager $304.84 $320.08 $336.08 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD Survey Manager $199.53 $209.50 $219.98 City Council/RSA Agenda 306 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD Sr. Project Surveyor $171.82 $180.41 $189.43 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD Sr. Sruveyor $146.88 $154.22 $161.93
Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD Lead Survey Technician $166.27 $174.59 $183.32 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD Sr. Survey Technician $119.16 $125.12 $131.38 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD 2 Person Field Crew $310.57 $326.10 $342.41 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD Sr. Project Coordinator $133.02 $139.67 $146.65 Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. TBD Sr. Project Assistant $105.31 $110.57 $116.10 AECOM Tom Barnard Lead Sturctures Eng $308.08 $323.48 $339.65 AECOM TBD Track Eng $203.02 $213.17 $223.83
AECOM TBD Structures Eng $203.02 $213.17 $223.83
AECOM Millette Litzinger Project Manager $302.39 $317.51 $333.39 AECOM Alan Boone Track Lead $258.82 $271.76 $285.35
AECOM TBD Project Controls Lead $241.08 $253.14 $265.79 AECOM TBD Project Controls
Analyst $142.11 $149.22 $156.68
AECOM TBD Administrator $126.89 $133.23 $139.89
AECOM TBD Sr. Administrator $164.95 $173.20 $181.86
AECOM TBD Staff Structurs
Engineer $144.65 $151.88 $159.48
AECOM TBD St. Structures Engineer $241.08 $253.14 $265.79 AECOM TBD CADD Technician $139.57 $146.55 $153.88
AECOM TBD Sr. CADD Technician $177.64 $186.52 $195.85
Associated Right of Way
Services, Inc. Steve Castellano* Managing Consultant $180.42 $189.44 $198.91 Associated Right of Way
Services, Inc. James Richards Managing Consultant $213.28 $223.94 $235.14 Associated Right of Way
Services, Inc. Matthew Schock Managing Consultant $213.14 $223.80 $234.99 Associated Right of Way
Services, Inc. TBD Consultant III $187.63 $197.01 $206.86 Associated Right of Way
Services, Inc. TBD Consultant II $134.02 $140.72 $147.76 Associated Right of Way
Services, Inc. TBD Consultant I $107.21 $112.58 $118.20 Associated Right of Way
Services, Inc. TBD Appraiser III $201.03 $211.08 $221.63 Associated Right of Way
Services, Inc. TBD Appraiser II $174.22 $182.94 $192.08 City Council/RSA Agenda 307 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

Associated Right of Way
Services, Inc. TBD Appraiser I $134.02 $140.72 $147.76
Associated Right of Way
Services, Inc. TBD Right of Way Technician $93.81 $98.50 $103.43 Associated Right of Way
Services, Inc. TBD Administrative Support $93.81 $98.50 $103.43 CSW|ST2 Michael Vidra Sr. Project Manager $211.74 $222.32 $233.44 CSW|ST2 Robert Stevens Sr. Project Manager $211.74 $222.32 $233.44 CSW|ST2 Cristopher Ethier Engineer II $151.78 $159.37 $167.34 CSW|ST2 Alisson Avancini Engineer I $103.21 $108.37 $113.79 CSW|ST2 Joseph Gebre Engineer I $100.18 $105.19 $110.45 CSW|ST2 Zhihong Huang Engineer II $115.36 $121.12 $127.18 Fugro USA Land, Inc. Jeriann Alexander
Principal
Engineer/Hazardous
Materials Specialist $297.70 $312.58 $328.21
Fugro USA Land, Inc. Karen EmeryTonkovich
Principal
Geologist/Hazardous
Materials Specialist $234.02 $245.72 $258.01
Fugro USA Land, Inc. Ecem Isleyen Senior Geologist/GIS
Specialist $154.32 $162.04 $170.14
Fugro USA Land, Inc. Marissa McCallum Senior Editor/Word Processing $116.86 $122.70 $128.84
Guida Surveying, Inc. Lisa Spivak Survey Manager $328.08 $344.48 $361.71 Guida Surveying, Inc. Justin Height Sr. Project Surveyor $248.65 $261.08 $274.13 Guida Surveying, Inc. Jonathon Correa Sr. Project Surveyor $224.47 $235.70 $247.48 Guida Surveying, Inc. Project Surveyor Project Surveyor $189.94 $199.44 $209.41 Guida Surveying, Inc. Joe Vargas Field Supervisor $188.21 $197.62 $207.50 Guida Surveying, Inc. Sr. Survey Analyst Sr. Survey Analyst $172.67 $181.31 $190.37 Guida Surveying, Inc. Survey Analyst Survey Analyst $155.41 $163.18 $171.33 Guida Surveying, Inc. Survey Technician Survey Technician $120.87 $126.91 $133.26 Guida Surveying, Inc. Survey Clerical Survey Clerical $103.60 $108.78 $114.22 Guida Surveying, Inc. Party Chief† Party Chief† $174.99 $183.74 $192.92 Guida Surveying, Inc. Chainman† Chainman† $150.78 $158.32 $166.23 Guida Surveying, Inc. Apprentice† Apprentice† $120.63 $126.66 $132.99 HDR Engineering, Inc. Han-Bin Liang Principal Engineer $313.56 $329.24 $345.70 HDR Engineering, Inc. Analette Ochoa Principal Engineer $290.06 $304.56 $319.79 HDR Engineering, Inc. TBD Supervising Engineer $252.17 $264.78 $278.02 HDR Engineering, Inc. Jennifer Abrams Senior Lead Civil Engineer $196.00 $205.80 $216.09
HDR Engineering, Inc. Raja Periketi,
Kazuya Tsurushita Senior Civil Engineer $197.44 $207.31 $217.68 HDR Engineering, Inc. Andrew Chin Senior Civil Designer $149.47 $156.94 $164.79 City Council/RSA Agenda 308 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

HDR Engineering, Inc. Patrick Yim Staff Civil EIT II $122.29 $128.41 $134.83 HDR Engineering, Inc.

Alejandra
Rodriguez Coss Y
Leon
Staff Civil EIT I
$108.71 $114.14 $119.85
HDR Engineering, Inc. TBD Staff Civil EIT $108.71 $114.14 $119.85 HDR Engineering, Inc. Christine Boschen Senior Env. Scientist $124.01 $130.21 $136.72 HDR Engineering, Inc. Ashley Chan, Jada
Golland Env. Scientist II $108.71 $114.14 $119.85
HDR Engineering, Inc. Mei Du Senior Technician $92.62 $97.25 $102.11 HDR Engineering, Inc. TBD
Technical
Editor/Project
Coordinator $87.48 $91.86 $96.45
ICF Rich Walter Project Director $284.00 $298.20 $313.11 ICF Danielle Tannourji Project
Manager/Permit Lead $156.26 $164.07 $172.28
ICF Lindsay
Christensen CEQA Lead $135.68 $142.47 $149.59
ICF Jennifer Ostner Deputy Project
Manager $117.06 $122.91 $129.06
ICF Jennifer Haire Wildlife Biology $176.76 $185.59 $194.87 ICF Torrey Edell Botany $135.94 $142.74 $149.87
ICF Kevin Mackay Restoration Design $257.13 $269.98 $283.48 ICF James Elder Archaeology $176.90 $185.75 $195.04
ICF Jennifer Wildt Archaeology $150.34 $157.85 $165.75
ICF Jonathon Rusch Architectural History $120.51 $126.53 $132.86 ICF Alan Barnard Graphics $146.27 $153.58 $161.26
ICF Melissa Johnson GIS $119.66 $125.65 $131.93
ICF Heather
Hammermeister Editing $123.95 $130.14 $136.65
ICF Anthony Ha Word Processing $116.09 $121.89 $127.99
Kittelson & Associates,
Inc.

Damian Stefanakis
*
Principal Planner $239.40 $251.37 $263.94
Kittelson & Associates,
Inc. Aaron Elias * Associate Engineer $184.01 $193.21 $202.87 Kittelson & Associates,
Inc. TBD Senior Principal Engineer/Planner $306.21 $321.52 $337.60 Kittelson & Associates,
Inc. TBD Principal Engineer/Planner $244.18 $256.39 $269.20 Kittelson & Associates,
Inc. TBD Associate Engineer/Planner $218.07 $228.97 $240.42 Kittelson & Associates,
Inc. TBD Senior Engineer/Planner $183.64 $192.82 $202.46 Kittelson & Associates,
Inc. TBD Engineer/Planner $157.56 $165.44 $173.71
City Council/RSA Agenda 309 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

Kittelson & Associates,
Inc. TBD Transportation Analyst $120.57 $126.60 $132.93 Kittelson & Associates,
Inc. TBD Technician I $102.61 $107.74 $113.12
Kittelson & Associates,
Inc. TBD Technician II $134.86 $141.60 $148.68
Kittelson & Associates,
Inc. TBD Senior Technician $146.78 $154.12 $161.82
Kittelson & Associates,
Inc. TBD Associate Technician $164.24 $172.45 $181.08
Kittelson & Associates,
Inc. TBD Office Support $88.28 $92.70 $97.33
Kittelson & Associates,
Inc. TBD Software Technician $81.30 $85.37 $89.64
Kittelson & Associates,
Inc. TBD Data Analyst/Software Developer $119.33 $125.30 $131.57 Kittelson & Associates,
Inc. TBD Data Scientist/Developer $164.34 $172.56 $181.19 Kittelson & Associates,
Inc. TBD Senior Data Scientist/Developer $200.67 $210.70 $221.24 PARIKH
CONSULTANTS, INC. G. PARIKH * PIC $299.11 $314.06 $329.77 PARIKH
CONSULTANTS, INC. D. WANG *

PROJECT
MANAGER & QAQC $216.79 $227.63 $239.01
PARIKH
CONSULTANTS, INC. F. WANG * SEN. PROJECT ENGINEER $200.23 $210.24 $220.75 PARIKH
CONSULTANTS, INC. J. TURBAY Project Engineer $165.84 $174.13 $182.84 PARIKH
CONSULTANTS, INC. Staff Engineer Staff Engineer $111.02 $116.57 $122.40 PARIKH
CONSULTANTS, INC. Field Engineer Field Engineer $147.01 $154.36 $162.08 PARIKH
CONSULTANTS, INC. C. Langbein Project Geologist $133.98 $140.68 $147.72 PARIKH
CONSULTANTS, INC. Lab. Technician Lab. Technician $106.20 $111.51 $117.08 PARIKH
CONSULTANTS, INC.

DraftspersonCADD Draftsperson-CADD $116.59 $122.42 $128.54 PGAdesign Christopher Kent* Principal $270.44 $283.96 $298.16 PGAdesign Kari Tanaka* Senior Landscape
Architect $152.83 $160.47 $168.49
PGAdesign Charla Kaul* Landscape Architect $113.20 $118.86 $124.81 PGAdesign Adrienne Newton* Landscape Designer $107.54 $112.92 $118.57 PGAdesign Robert Towar* Irrigation Designer $129.47 $135.95 $142.75 ROMA Collaborative Ivana Micic * Principal in Charge $239.95 $251.95 $264.55 ROMA Collaborative Mimi Ahn Senior Landscape
Architect $220.19 $231.20 $242.76
City Council/RSA Agenda 310 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
between City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

ROMA Collaborative Erika Cesarino Designer $87.52 $91.90 $96.49 ROMA Collaborative Esther Sam Graphics $142.39 $149.51 $156.99 TDG Engineering Jeremy Chrzan Principal-in-Charge $217.14 $228.00 $239.40 TDG Engineering Cindy Zerger* Project Manager &
Design Lead $193.88 $203.58 $213.76
TDG Engineering Jason Fong
Project
Manager/Senior
Engineer $216.97 $227.82 $239.21
TDG Engineering Dylan Passmore Principal Engineer $183.35 $192.52 $202.15 TDG Engineering Andrew Kotalik Engineer III $140.67 $147.70 $155.08 Y&C Transp Consultants,
Inc Daniel Yau Engineer XII $213.60 $224.28 $235.49
Y&C Transp Consultants,
Inc Kin Chan Engineer XI $197.99 $207.89 $218.29
Y&C Transp Consultants,
Inc Spencer Lee Engineer VII $135.23 $141.99 $149.09
Y&C Transp Consultants,
Inc Jessica Wu Engineer VI $130.03 $136.53 $143.35
Y&C Transp Consultants,
Inc Meng Yang Engineer VI $120.66 $126.70 $133.03
Y&C Transp Consultants,
Inc Shannon Liao Engineer III $74.90 $78.64 $82.57
Y&C Transp Consultants,
Inc J. Nguyen Engineer I $66.57 $69.90 $73.40
Y&C Transp Consultants,
Inc A, Huynh Engineer I $66.57 $69.90 $73.40
Y&C Transp Consultants,
Inc Teresa Chan Technician III $55.76 $58.54 $61.47
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00
City Council/RSA Agenda 311 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
First Amendment to Consulting Service
Agreement with Mark Thomas &
Company, Inc. for Final Design of
Phases 1 and 2 for Quarry Lakes
Parkway (East West Connector)
Joan Malloy, City Manager Item 7a. - November 22, 2022
City Council/RSA Agenda 312 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
2 Quarry Lakes Parkway - Overview
• Backbone Infrastructure for
Build-Out of Station District
• 2,000 Housing Units
• Multimodal Opportunities
• Bike Connectivity
• Enhances transit service
• Supports future ACE Rail
Station
City Council/RSA Agenda 313 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
3 Quarry Lakes Parkway (Union City)
Decoto Complete Streets (Fremont)
B
City Council/RSA Agenda 314 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
4 Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1-4
City Council/RSA Agenda 315 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
5 East West Connector (Quarry Lakes Parkway) Drainage System City Council/RSA Agenda 316 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
6 Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1 & 2
City Council/RSA Agenda 317 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
7 Quarry Lakes Parkway
Alameda CTC Project Funding Agreement #A22-0053
Nov. 2020: Alameda CTC Commission approves allocation of $4.2M for final design of QLP, Phases 1 and 2.

Sept./Oct. 2021: City Council executes and accepts Project Funding Agreement (PFA) A22-0053 for $4.2 million for Final Design of QLP, Phases 1 and 2 Jan. 2022: City Council awards Consulting Service Agreement with Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. for Final Design (30% Design) for QLP, Phases 1 and 2 for $1.2M ($3M remaining)
City Council/RSA Agenda 318 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
8 Quarry Lakes Parkway
Phases 1 and 2 Design Status Update

COMPLETE STREETS-MULTIMODAL DESIGN
• Updated Plans to latest standards for bicycle, trails/sidewalk, ADA and transit. • Coordinated with BPAC, Fremont, BART, AC Transit

ROADWAY DRAINAGE STRATEGY AND DESIGN
• Redesigned roadway drainage, Old Alameda Creek outfall structures, Line M bypass • Coordinated with ACFCD, other regulatory and permitting agencies

GATEWAY (CALTRANS PROPERTY) DEVELOPMENT SITE
• Refined geometric alignment and street sections for Quarry Lakes Parkway, Quarry Lakes Drive
• Relocated water quality treatment basins for improved residential development site City Council/RSA Agenda 319 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
9 Quarry Lakes Parkway – Right-of-Way Design
Multimodal Corridor Design: NACTO, Complete Streets Design Public Engagement: City Council, BPAC, Bike Advocates
Project Partners: Alameda CTC, Fremont, AC Transit, BART, MTC, ACE, Alameda County Flood Control, East Bay Regional Park City Council/RSA Agenda 320 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
10 • Extend Line M Bypass Outfall
north of QLP to Old Alameda
Creek
• Relocated local stormwater
collection/water quality treatment
basins to upland of Old Alameda
Creek
• Created Trail Systems connecting
Open Space
• Opportunity for Creek
Restoration
QLP Drainage Plan
City Council/RSA Agenda 321 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
11 Phase 1: 7th Street Connection
(Mission Blvd to 7th Street)
▪ Realign 7th Street along Corp
Yard; connect to Chesapeake Dr.
▪ Install and modify utilities
▪ Modify and realign the Line M
Channel
▪ Construct a new parking lot
▪ Supports Station East (Integral)
Phase 1 Project Cost: $ 16.7 Million Mixed-Used Development City Council/RSA Agenda 322 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
12 Phase 2- Gateway Connection (Gateway Site)
(Old Alameda Creek to Alvarado-Niles Road)
▪ Construct storm water quality
treatment basin, outfall
structures in Old Alameda
Creek
▪ Realign existing Quarry Lakes
Drive
▪ Install and modify utilities
▪ Install new traffic signal and
street lighting
▪ Coordinate w/ City Ventures
(Gateway Developer)
Phase 2 Project Cost: $ 20.3 Million
City Council/RSA Agenda 323 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
13 Quarry Lakes Parkway - Timeline
City Council/RSA Agenda 324 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
14 Quarry Lakes Parkway
Recommendation
Adopt resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute the First Amendment to Consulting Service Agreement
with Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. for Final Design of
Phases (Segments) 1 and 2 of Quarry Lakes Parkway
(East West Connector), City Project No. 18-04, in the
amount of $3,000,000 (totaling $4.2 million).

City Council/RSA Agenda 325 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Agenda Item
DATE: 11/22/2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MARILOU AYUPAN, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE A CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MARK
THOMAS & COMPANY, INC., FOR PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING (30%

FINAL DESIGN) OF EAST WEST CONNECTOR (QUARRY LAKES
PARKWAY, PHASES 3 AND 4) PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04, IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,087,600, AND APPROPRIATING $208,760 FROM THE UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE OF THE SB-1 FUND
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consulting Services Agreement with Mark Thomas & Company, Inc., for Preliminary Engineering (30% Final Design) of the East West Connector (Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 3 and 4) Project, City Project No. 18-04, in the amount of $2,087,600, and appropriating $208,760 from the unassigned fund balance of the SB-1 Fund. The Agreement is included as Exhibit B of the resolution.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
This agenda item is in alignment with the following:

Goal C, Strategy 3: Facilitate the build out of the greater Station District Area through the construction of Quarry Lakes Parkway, upgrades to the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Station, completion of the pedestrian railcrossing and sale and development of City-owned land.

BACKGROUND
Quarry Lakes Parkway project was previously known as the East West Connector roadway, which traversed Fremont and Union City from Mission Boulevard to I-880 and was sponsored by Alameda County Transportation Commission (Alameda CTC). On March 22, 2018, Alameda CTC approved the request from the City of Union City to be the project sponsor of the former East West Connector Project and identified the following tasks for the City to complete:

City Council/RSA Agenda 326 Tuesday, November 22, 2022

1. Complete the final design of the current 2011 roadway design plans;

2. Prepare a traffic study update;

3. Determine if an update, amendment or addendum is required for the approved 2009 East West Connector EIR;

4. Coordinate with transit agencies (BART, Alameda County Transit (AC Transit), Dumbarton Express & Union City Transit), adjacent cities, and pedestrian and bicycle advocate groups to ensure the design meets the needs of those interests, in terms of connectivity, safety and related concerns;

5. Execute project (design review) agreements with BART and Union Pacific for the grade separations at BART, Oakland Subdivision and Niles Subdivision;

6. Update the overall project cost estimate in the amount of $2.5 million; and

7. Report back to the Commission upon completion of this work Union City became the Project Sponsor, responsible for the design, right-of-way certification and construction of the project. To manage the project more easily, it was also broken into segments, or phases as shown in Attachment 1. Phases 1-4 are in Union City and extend from Mission Boulevard to Old Alameda Creek.

Phase 5 extends from Old Alameda Creek to Paseo Padre, crossing both Union City and Fremont. The portion of the project known as Decoto Complete Streets is solely within Fremont and is managed by Fremont. Union City and Fremont are now working together to implement each portion of the project that is in their respective city.

As the first step in meeting the tasks outlined by Alameda CTC, in August 2018, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5374-18, which authorized the City Manager to execute the East West Connector Project Funding Agreement (PFA) No. A18-0046 in the amount of $2.5 million with Alameda CTC. The $2.5 million would be used to update the cost estimate and complete the other tasks.

Once Union City assumed the project, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5444-19, which authorized renaming the I-880 to Mission Boulevard/East West Connector Project to the Quarry Lakes Parkway (QLP) Project. This was done to reflect the roadways updated purpose as a local, multimodalcorridor.

Union City continued to work on the tasks requested by Alameda CTC at the March 2018 meeting, and on November 19, 2020, City staff, in partnership with Alameda CTC staff, presented a detailed progress report to Alameda CTC. Staff conveyed how each of the tasks had been completed, except for the finalizing the East West Connector plans. The outdated 2011 East West Connector plans that the City was to complete did not meet current design standards for bicyclists and pedestrians. Nor did the plans meet the most recent design and engineering criteria for roadway design, seismic structures, railroad design and other project elements.

Extensive redesign and engineering analysis would be needed to bring the plans up to date.

As a result of the presentation in November 2020, and based on Alameda CTC staff recommendations, the Alameda CTC adopted a resolution to allow the East West Connector/Quarry Lakes Parkway Project to move forward with the following funding parameters:

1. Commit the remaining balance of 1986 Measure B funding for the East West Connector (I-880 to Mission Blvd) Project to the Quarry Lakes Parkway Project ($69.0 million) sponsored by Union City and acknowledging that the commitment fulfills the 1986 Measure B funds from the 1986 Transportation Expenditure Plan;

2. Allocate $4.2 million of 1986 Measure B funds to design phases of Phase 1 (7 th Street Connection)
and Phase 2 (Gateway Connection);

3. Allocate $17.8 million of 1986 Measure B funds to design Phase 3 (11 th Street Connection) and
Phase 4 (Grade Separations & Alvarado-Niles Connection) with the condition that full funding for all phases of the segment will be identified in the funding agreement; and City Council/RSA Agenda 327 Tuesday, November 22, 2022

4. Authorize the Executive Director to execute appropriate funding agreements with Union City for the design phases of Phases 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the Quarry Lakes Parkway Project up to the amount allocated in the design phases for each segment.

With these criteria from Alameda CTC, the City has continued to move the project ahead. On October 12, 2021, City Council adopted Resolution No. 5841-21, accepting the $4.2 million grant from Alameda CTC’s PFA No. A22-0053 and authorizing the use of those funds for Final Design of Phases 1 and 2 for the Quarry Lakes Parkway (East West Connector) Project, City Project No. 18-04. This is the second Project Funding Agreement. The first Project Funding Agreement awarded $2.5 million for 2018 East West Connector, as described above.

On January 11, 2022, City Council adopted Resolution No. 5878-22, authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consultant Services Agreement, C5833, with Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. (Mark Thomas) for the Preliminary Engineering (30% Final Design) of Phases 1 and 2 for the Quarry Lakes Parkway (East West Connector), City Project No. 18-04, in the amount of $1,200,000, funded from the $4.2 million Alameda CTC grant.

Staff is now seeking Council authorization to use $1,878,840 from the existing 2018 East West Connector Project Funding Agreement No. A18-0046 for East West Connector (Quarry Lakes Parkway), City Project No. 18-04, and a 10% local match of $208,760 from the SB-1 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account for a total cost of $2,087,600 to fund preliminary engineering and project cost updates for Phases 3 and 4 of QLP.

DISCUSSION
The 2011 East West Connector project identified a comprehensive storm drainage solution to address storm water capacity concerns in the Line M channel that runs from the hillside area to the Alameda Flood Control Channel. To solve the capacity concerns, the East West Connector project incorporated a gravity flowing bypass pipe from Line M near the corporation yard on 7th Street to Old Alameda Creek near Arroyo Park.

Several large detention basins were also proposed for stormwater treatment within the East West Connector right-of-way.

Since the City has assumed the project, the storm drain system has been reevaluated to reduce costs, improve creek restoration, and conserve land; however, the Line M bypass is still required. To prepare an updated cost estimate for Phases 1-4 as requested by Alameda CTC, and to secure project permits from the regulatory agencies for wetland mitigation, stream alteration permits and storm water treatment, additional engineering and design is required for Phases 3 and 4. Additionally, the portions of the Line M bypass, the outfall structure into the Old Alameda Creek, and the entire roadway storm water treatment basins must be constructed in Phase 2, located adjacent to Arroyo Park and one of the first phases of the QLP project. Therefore, design of Phases 3 and 4 must be understood to ensure that:

Updated project cost estimates can be prepared;
The City has adequate information to proceed with permit applications to the regulatory agencies for the entire QLP project, and
Portions of the Line M bypass, outfall structure, and stormwater systems can be constructed as part of Phase 2.

Outreach to RegulatoryAgencies and Bicycle PedestrianAdvisory Committee The revised drainage design was presented on September 8, 2022, at an US Army Corp of Engineers interCity Council/RSA Agenda 328 Tuesday, November 22, 2022 agency meeting for initial consultation. The project presentation is included as Attachment 2. The regulatory agencies attending the meeting provide initial concurrence and support and directed the project team to report back with the draft federal and state permit applications for their review, discussion and consultation when the Phase 1-4 project plans are updated. The revised design was also presented to the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC), who also supported the new concept, see Attachment 3.

Scope of Services
With the support of Alameda CTC, Union City staff are seeking to use the remaining funds from the 2018 East West Connector PFA No. A18-0046 for preliminary engineering and project cost updates for Phases 3 and 4. Alameda CTC recommended that once the preliminary engineering plans for Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1-4, have been updated that Union City report back to the Alameda CTC in late spring 2023 on the overall status of the project with the revised cost estimates and potential phasing, along with a proposed full funding plan.

Mark Thomas & Company, in coordination with City staff and other agencies’ representatives, have developed a Scope of Services for the Preliminary Engineering (30% Design) for the East West Connector (Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 3 and 4), City Project No. 18-04. This engineering effort will allow Mark Thomas to provide a detailed, extensive review of the outdated 2011 East West Connector Project Plans (65%), with a focus on overall drainage system within Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 3 and 4. This will include the proposed large, gravity flowing Line M bypass pipeline drainage structure system, the proposed pump station, the retaining wall structures, the Newark Aquifer concrete slab protection and the major BART and Union Pacific railroad underpass structures from Alvarado-Niles Road to 7th Street. The engineering work will include evaluating CAD drawing files, engineering and structural calculations and technical reports (geotechnical, hazardous waste, biological, etc.) to prepare the updated 30% Final Design Plans to current design standards and technical reports using the most current engineering criteria and policies and to update Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 3 and 4 project cost estimates.

The cost proposal for Preliminary Engineering (30% Final Design) of East West Connector (Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 3 and 4) Project is $2,087,600.

FISCAL IMPACT
There will be no fiscal impact to the General Fund to prepare Preliminary Engineering of East West Connector (Quarry Lakes Parkway), Phases 3 and 4.

The remaining project funds are estimated to be about $2.0 million from the $2.5 million Alameda CTC-East West Connector PFA No. A18-0046 grant funds. For the proposed BART underpass structure, Union City will enter into a Preliminary Engineering Review Agreement with BART estimated at $100,000 for their oversight costs, leaving approximately $1.9 million available for the Preliminary Engineering (30% Final Design) Phase.

On June 14, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5951-22 adopting a List of Projects for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 funded by SB-1: The Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, estimated at $1,658,973, and the List of Projects includes the Quarry Lakes Parkway Project, City Project No. 18-04. Staff is recommending that a portion of SB-1 funds be used for preliminary engineering of Phases 3 and 4.

The Consulting Services Agreement with Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. for Preliminary Engineering (30% Final Design) of East West Connector (Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phase 3 and 4), in the amount $2,087,600, will be funded with $1,878,840 from the East West Connector Project Funding Agreement No. A18-0046 in the Capital Projects Fund (Account Number 4100-3199-91804-54110) for East West Connector (Quarry Lakes City Council/RSA Agenda 329 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Parkway), City Project No. 18-04, and a 10% local match of $208,760 from the SB-1 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA) Fund (Account Number 2515-3199-91804-54110) for the East West Connector (Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 3 and 4) Project, City Project No. 18-04. The state funds will allow Mark Thomas the option and flexibility to utilize Alameda CTC’s Local Business Enterprise (LBE) Program requirement.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consulting Services Agreement with Mark Thomas & Company, Inc., for Preliminary Engineering (30% Final Design) of East West Connector (Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 3 and 4) Project, City Project No. 18- 04, in the amount of $2,087,600, and appropriating $208,760 from the unassigned fund balance of the SB-1 Fund to account number 2515-3199-91804-54110.

Prepared by:

Marilou Ayupan, Public Works Director
Submitted by:

Marilou Ayupan, Public Works Director
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Attachment 1 - QLP Project Limits and Phases Attachment Attachment 2 - US Corps of Eng Interagency Meeting Sept 8, 2022 FINALV2
Attachment
Attachment 3 - BPACQLP Update, Flood Control-Creek-Trails-Parks Presentation (Sept. 20, 2022)
Attachment
Resolution Resolution
Exhibit A - QLP Project Delivery Plan (07.14.20) Exhibit Exhibit B- Mark Thomas CSA for EWC(QLP Phases 3 4)(11.14.22) Exhibit Power Point Attachment
City Council/RSA Agenda 330 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
1 QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY (Union City)
DECOTO COMPLETE STREETS (Fremont)
City Council/RSA Agenda 331 Tuesday, November 22, 2022

QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY
Presentation to Corps’ Interagency Coordination
September 8, 2022
City Council/RSA Agenda 332 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
2 Seeking Concurrence on Key Aspects of Storm Water
Management prior to Formal Permit Applications
 Extension of Line M Bypass Channel to outfall north of QLP to Old Alameda Creek
 Local stormwater collection system that brings water to upland bioretention water quality treatment areas to
discharge into Old Alameda Creek
 Use of Old Alameda Creek for hydro-modification
Project Team will consult separately with agencies regarding mitigation for loss of federal and state waters/wetland.

City Council/RSA Agenda 333 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
3 Agenda:
• General Project Overview and Design Status
• Quarry Lakes Parkway
• Purpose of Meeting: Elicit input on approach to
stormwater treatment/ management and restoration
of Old Alameda Creek
• Basic Premise: Old Alameda Creek need
additional water to restore and enhance its riparian
environment
Quarry Lakes Parkway – September 8, 2022
City Council/RSA Agenda 334 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
4 Project Overview and Design Status
 Former Alameda CTC East-West Connector (EWC) Project – Corps File No. 2008-00012  Environmental Approval with 2009 East-West Connector EIR (ACTIA)  Preliminary permit discussions with USACE, USFWS, RWQCB, and CDFW regarding EWC from 2011 to 2016
 EWC Design Team prepared 65% 2011 EWC Plans and Project put on-hold  In 2018, ACTC transferred ownership of the project to Cities of Union City and Fremont  Union City renamed the project – Quarry Lakes Parkway  In 2021, State transferred the 30 acre parcel to Union City  Fremont: Decoto Complete Streets, Phases A & B (2018)  Union City: Quarry Lakes Parkway (QLP), Phases 1-5 (2018)  EWC redesigned to meet local multimodal & complete street designs  QLP footprint within the approved EWC Environmental Document City Council/RSA Agenda 335 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
5 Quarry Lakes Parkway Phasing Plan
 Decoto, Phase A
90% Design Status
 QLP, Phases 1 & 2
35% Design Status
 QLP, Phases 3 & 4
(Consultant late 2022)
 QLP, Phase 5
Future
City Council/RSA Agenda 336 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
6 Quarry Lakes Parkway Redesign Approach
City Council/RSA Agenda 337 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
7 Old Alameda Creek Vision
Proposed
Water Quality
Basin
Use Old Alameda Creek for
hydro-modification, Line M
bypass discharge and storm
discharges from QLP and
adjacent development
Existing Aerial View
Drainage Design
City Council/RSA Agenda 338 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
8 Old Alameda Creek Existing Conditions
City Council/RSA Agenda 339 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
9 Old Alameda Creek Cross Section
City Council/RSA Agenda 340 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
10 Potential Effects to Biological Resources
 Potential disturbance to California Red-Legged Frogs, California Tiger Salamanders and Western Pond Turtle
 Potential Loss of Nesting Migratory Birds
 Temporary or permanent Loss of Willow Riparian Woodland and Shrub Data Source:

Final Environmental Impact Report
(SCH#2007102078)
Section 3.3 “Biological Resources
Dated: April 2009
City Council/RSA Agenda 341 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
11 Historic Resources
 Previously CEQA Clearance only
 Historic Peterson Farm, adjacent
but not physically affected by the
project
 Federal compliance to Section
106 of NHPA because of federal
agencies’ permitting
Peterson House from driveway, north elevation, facing south City Council/RSA Agenda 342 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
12 Permit Requirements
 Corps Section 404 Clean Water Act for Phases 1-4
 Basin 2C
 Line M
 Old Alameda Creek outfalls
 Old Alameda Creek restoration (if fill involved)
 Consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Section 7) re: California red-legged frog and California tiger salamander
 Consultation with State Historic Preservation Officer (Section 106)  California Department of Fish & Wildlife – Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement Documentation (Line M and Old Alameda Creek)
 California Department of Fish & Wildlife – Section 2081 Incidental Take Permit (California Tiger Salamander)
 Regional Water Quality Control Board – Section 401 Water Quality Certification/Waste Discharge Requirements (Basin 2C, Line M, New Basin and Old Alameda Creek)  SF Bay Area Air Quality Management District Demolition Permit (Silva farmhouse complex) City Council/RSA Agenda 343 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
13 City’s Vision for QLP and Old Alameda Creek
• Promote safe, efficient, and
convenient multimodal travel
corridor to achieve beneficial public
life, neighborhood livability and
economic vitality
• Joint planning process
o Flood control facility
o Support future affordable housing
o Enhance natural resources
o Open space and recreation
opportunities
o Complete trail connectivity
City Council/RSA Agenda 344 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
14 Seeking Concurrence on Key Aspects of Storm Water
Management prior to Formal Permit Applications
 Extension of Line M Bypass Channel to outfall north of QLP to Old Alameda Creek
 Local stormwater collection system that brings water to upland bioretention water quality treatment areas to
discharge into Old Alameda Creek
 Use of Old Alameda Creek for hydro-modification
QUESTIONS?
City Council/RSA Agenda 345 Tuesday, November 22, 2022

BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Quarry Lakes Parkway Update
September 20, 2022
City Council/RSA Agenda 346 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
2 Quarry Lakes Parkway
is also a Major Flood Control Project (Storm Management) • Line M Bypass System (ACFC&WCD)
• Major outfall structure into Old Alameda Creek
• Roadway and development storm water runoff
• Major Water Treatment & Detention Basins
• Secondary outfall into Old Alameda Creek
• Creek Restoration
• Regulatory Agency Permits
Quarry Lakes Parkway Update
City Council/RSA Agenda 347 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
3 Quarry Lakes Parkway Phases 1-4:

Quarry Lakes Parkway Upate
City Council/RSA Agenda 348 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
4 Quarry Lakes Parkway Update
City Council/RSA Agenda 349 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
5 Quarry Lakes Parkway Study Session – July 12, 2022
City Council/RSA Agenda 350 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
6 Quarry Lakes Parkway Study Session – July 12, 2022
City Council/RSA Agenda 351 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
7 Quarry Lakes Parkway Study Session – July 12, 2022
City Council/RSA Agenda 352 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
8 Creek History
• Under-utilitize Waterway
• Unsheltered Housing
• Illegal Dumping
• Encampment Fires
• Criminal Activities
• Invasive trees & plants
Restoration Opportunities
Quarry Lakes Parkway Update
City Council/RSA Agenda 353 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
9 Old Alameda Creek Existing Conditions
Quarry Lakes Parkway Update
City Council/RSA Agenda 354 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
10 Old Alameda Creek Property Owners
Quarry Lakes Parkway Update
City Council/RSA Agenda 355 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
11 Old Alameda Creek Restoration Vision
Quarry Lakes Parkway Update
City Council/RSA Agenda 356 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
12 Old Alameda Cross Section
Quarry Lakes Parkway Update
City Council/RSA Agenda 357 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
13 Bioretention Open Space Amenity
Quarry Lakes Parkway Update
City Council/RSA Agenda 358 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
14 Parks and Trails
• Re-Organize Open Space
• Ex. Parks (Arroyo & Quarry
Lakes)
• Prop. Parks (Isherwood)
• Prop. Water Treatment
Basin
• Existing Trails
• Proposed Trails
Quarry Lakes Parkway Update
City Council/RSA Agenda 359 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
15 Summary of Review
• Flood Control Improvements
• Old Alameda Creek Restoration
• Re-Organization of Open Spaces
• New Trail Connections
Quarry Lakes Parkway Update
City Council/RSA Agenda 360 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
16 Quarry Lakes Parkway Update
Next Steps
City Council/RSA Agenda 361 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
RESOLUTION NO.

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MARK THOMAS & COMPANY, INC., FOR THE
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING (30% FINAL DESIGN) OF THE EAST WEST CONNECTOR (QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY, PHASES 3 AND 4) PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04, IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,087,600, AND APPROPRIATING $208,760 FROM THE UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE OF THE SB-1 FUND WHEREAS, a transportation corridor (formerly Route 84 and formerly East West Connector) from Mission Boulevard (SR 238) to I-880/Decoto Road Interchange in the cities of Union City and Fremont was planned over 30 years ago and was an identified project in the original Alameda County’s Measure B half-cents sales tax measure; and WHEREAS, for the past three decades this transportation project was managed by Caltrans and various Alameda County’s transportation agencies, most recently Alameda County Transportation Commission (Alameda CTC); and
WHEREAS, the East West Connector project prepared an approved Environmental Impact Report (EIR) under CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) in 2009, a draft set of project plans (65% Final Design) in 2011 and lacked the necessary right of way acquisitions, easements, utility agreements, regulatory agency permits, BART permits, and railroad construction permits in the cities of Union City and Fremont; and WHEREAS, on March 22, 2018, the Alameda County Transportation Commission (Alameda CTC) approved the request from the City of Union City to be the project sponsor of the former East West Connector Project to complete the final design of the current 2011 roadway design plans, to prepare a traffic study update, to determine if an update, amendment or addendum is required for the approved 2009 East West Connector EIR, to coordination with transit agencies (BART, AC Transit, Dumbarton Express & Union City Transit), adjacent cities, pedestrian and bicycle advocate groups to ensure the design meets the needs of those interests, in terms of connectivity, safety and related concerns, to executing project (design review) agreements with BART and Union Pacific for the grade separations at BART, Oakland Subdivision and Niles Subdivision and to update the overall project cost estimate in the amount of $2.5 million and then report back to the Commission upon completion of this work; and WHEREAS, at the August 14, 2018, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5374-18 which authorized the City Manager to execute the East West Connector Project Funding Agreement (PFA) No. A18-0046 in the amount of $2.5 million with AlaCTC and became the Project Sponsor, responsible for the design, right of way certification and construction of the project estimated at $320 million, which included Fremont’s Decoto Complete Streets Project; and
WHEREAS, on February 12, 2019, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5444-19, which authorized renaming the I-880 to Mission Boulevard/East West Connector Project to the City Council/RSA Agenda 362 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Quarry Lakes Parkway Project; and
WHEREAS, on November 19, 2020, at the AlaCTC Commission Meeting, Union City presented an update of the Quarry Lakes Parkway project as a new local four-lane, multimodal corridor with landscaped medians, sidewalks, buffer Class II bike lanes with a separated, generous Class I multi-use trail. Project management also included coordination meetings with bicycle and transit advocates, City of Fremont, BART, AC Transit and East Bay Regional Park District. The project task deliverables included the completion of the Traffic Transportation Memorandum identifying reduction in VMT (Vehicle Miles Travel), the CEQA determination that no update of the 2009 EIR is required, and completion of a high-level cost estimate for Quarry Lakes Parkway (Phases 1-5) and Fremont’s Decoto Complete Street project using the East West Connector project quantities. The only task not completed was finalizing the East West Connector plans because these outdated 2011 plans did not meet current Complete Streets, Multimodal Corridor Policies, NACTO (National Association of City Traffic Officials) Design Criteria and did not meet most recent design standard and engineering criteria for roadway design, seismic structures, railroad design and other project elements as outlined in the Quarry Lakes Parkway’ Project Delivery Memorandum dated July 14, 2020 (Exhibit t A); and WHEREAS, at the same meeting, Union City presented the City’s recommended project phasing implementation plan with usable segments for Quarry Lakes Parkway project that included Phase 1: 7
th Street Connection (7th Street to Mission Boulevard), Phase 2: Gateway Connection (Old Alameda Creek to Alvarado-Niles Road), Phase 3: 11 th Street Connection (11th
Street to 7th Street), Phase 4: Alvarado-Niles Connection & Grade Separations (BART and Oakland Subdivision) and Phase 5: Paseo Padre Parkway & Bike Trail Connection (Paseo Padre Parkway in Fremont to Old Alameda Creek in Union City); and WHEREAS, at the same meeting, the Alameda CTC Commission adopted Resolution No. 20-013 that approved $4.2 million for Quarry Lakes Parkway to complete the Final Design of Phases 1 and 2 with 1986 Measure B funds and approval by the Executive Director in the amount of $ 17.8 million to complete the Final Design of Phases 3 and 4 when a full-funding plan has been approved to complete the Right of Way and Construction of Phases 1-4; and WHEARAS, at the same meeting, Alameda CTC staff presented a proposed full funding plan totaling $288.0 million for Decoto Compete Streets in Fremont and Quarry Lakes Parkway in Union City that included $ 69.0 million of 1986 Measure B funds, $14.3 million of CMA-TIP funds, $32.8 million of LATIP (Local Agency Transportation Improvement Plan) funds from the sale of the Caltrans property in Union City with a total shortfall of $172.0 million and a shortfall for Phases 3 and 4 of $112.0 million; and
WHEREAS, on March 9, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution Nos. 5720-21 and 5721-21, authorizing commitments of Measure BB TEP 21, Dumbarton Corridor Improvement funds of $40.0 million and TEP 22, Union City Intermodal District funds of $72.0 million to Quarry Lakes Parkway Project for Phases 3 and Phase 4 to close the funding gap of the $112.0 million shortfall; and
City Council/RSA Agenda 363 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
WHEREAS, on June 24, 2021, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) approved the conveyance of excess Caltrans parcels (originally reserved for Route 84) appraised at $86.0 million to the City of Union City and the City is now responsible to select a residential developer; and
WHEREAS, the $86.0 million from the sale of the Caltrans parcels for residential development will fund the Local Agency Transportation Improvement Program (LATIP) with estimated LATIP obligations of about $58.0 million to Quarry Lakes Parkway and Decoto Road Complete Streets; and
WHEREAS, on September 7, 2021, Union City received a $4.2 million grant in 1986 Measure B funds in the executed Alameda CTC Project Funding Agreement No. A22-0053 to fund the cost of Final Design Services of Phases (Segments) 1 and 2 for Quarry Lakes Parkway (East West Connector), City Project No. 18-04 and released a Request for Proposal (RFP) for an Engineering Consultant team on October 19, 2021; and
WHEREAS, on December 9, 2021, an Evaluation Panel determined that Mark Thomas and their subconsultant team presented a well-organized, technical presentation and provided highly qualified responses to engineering issues related to Complete Streets design, roadway drainage, hydrology, hydromodification, water quality, understanding of utilities within Public Right of Way and coordination with adjacent developments and unanimously made the recommendation to select Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. for Final Design of Quarry Lakes Parkway, City Project No. 18-04; and
WHEREAS, on January 11, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5878-22 authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consulting Services Agreement, C5833 with Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. for the Preliminary Engineering (30% Design) of Phases (Segments) 1 and 2 of the Quarry Lakes Parkway (East West Connector) in the amount $1,200,000 and was funded from Alameda CTC’s Project Funding Agreement No. A22-0053; and WHEREAS, the 2011 East West Connector project identified large outfall structures into Old Alameda Creek for the proposed Line M Bypass pipeline originating at the existing Line M Channel near 7th Street, and a second outfall structure into Old Alameda Creek for roadway drainage from Quarry Lakes Parkway during non-peak flow of two (2) deep water treatment bioretention/hydromodification basins within the Caltrans Property about 5.0 acres along Osprey Drive across the street from the existing residential housing; and WHEREAS, within the past several months, Mark Thomas, City staff and Alameda County Flood Control & Water Conservation District (ACFC&WCD) have collaborated to revise the overall Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1-4 roadway drainage strategy and design from Line M Flood Control channel located in Phase 1 to the outfall structures into Old Alameda Creek in Phase 2 by relocating the water quality bio-retention/hydromodification basins to the upland area along east side of Old Alameda Creek, thus making the area along Osprey Drive available for development, modifying the locations of the two (2) Old Alameda Creek outfall drainage structures to support drainage design and the new basin location and added overflow City Council/RSA Agenda 364 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
stormwater runoff from the Line M Flood Control Channel directly into under-utilized Old Alameda Creek with the opportunity to revitalize and restore biological resources within Old Alameda Creek and create trail networks connecting Arroyo Park in Union City to Quarry Lakes Regional Park and the proposed Isherwood Park in Fremont; and WHEREAS, on June 24, 2022, the Consultant Team, city staff and Alameda County Flood Control & Water Conservation District staff met with San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board staff at the Old Alameda Creek for a site visit meeting, walked along bottom of the dry abandon creek to discussed the proposed roadway drainage design strategy along with opportunity to revitalize and restore Old Alameda Creek, received initial agency support for proposed design and discussed the next step was to meet with regulatory agencies for their initial review comments the design was a change to the East West Connector; and WHEREAS, the Consultant Team, city staff and Alameda County Flood Control & Water Conservation District staff on September 8, 2022 at an Inter-Agency meeting hosted by U.S. Army Corp of Engineers with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services and San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board staff, presented the overall revised Quarry Lakes Parkway (Phases 1-4) roadway drainage strategies and design along with the opportunity to revitalize Old Alameda Creek for their early consultation and regulatory agencies initial support for the design; and
WHEREAS, at the same meeting, the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers acknowledged that the East West Connector project was assigned Corp File No. 2008-00012 for all the required federal and state permits including Army Corp, Section 404 Clean Water Act (federal) for removal of the existing Basin 2C wetland, the re-alignment of the Line M Channel and proposed outfall structures into the Old Alameda Creek outfall structures, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement (state) for the re-alignment of Line M flood control channel and proposed Old Alameda Creek outfall structures and Regional Water Quality Control Board, Section 401 Water Quality Certification/Waste Discharge (state) for removal of Basin 2C wetland and New Basin seasonal wetland, the re-alignment of the Line M flood control channel and the proposed outfall structures into Old Alameda Creek; and WHEREAS, at the same meeting the regulatory agencies stated that the once the Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1-4 project plans have been revised and updated to reflect the proposed roadway drainage design strategy for the project team to report back to the agencies at a future Inter-Agency meeting with the all the draft federal and state permit applications for their review, discussion and consultation and will only issue the required federal and state permits for the entire Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1-4 corridor; and
WHEREAS, on September 20, 2022, at the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) meeting, Mark Thomas presented the proposed roadway drainage strategy and design including the opportunity to revitalize and restore biological resources within Old Alameda Creek and create trail networks connecting Arroyo Park in Union City to Quarry Lakes Regional Park and the proposed Isherwood Park in Fremont. The BPAC members and the public City Council/RSA Agenda 365 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
expressed their support for the proposed trail network system along the creek, connecting existing and proposed parks in Union City and Fremont and revitalizing Old Alameda Creek; and WHEREAS, the proposed Scope of Services in the Consulting Services Agreement with Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. is for Preliminary Engineering (30% Final Design) of East West Connector (Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 3 and 4), City Project No. 18-04, in the amount of $2,087,600, will allow Mark Thomas to provide a detailed, extensive review of outdated 2011 East West Connector Project Plans (65% Final Design) between Alvarado-Niles Road and 7th Street with a focus on overall drainage system within Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 3 and 4, including the proposed large, gravity flowing Line M Bypass pipeline drainage structure system, the proposed Pump Station, retaining wall structures, the Newark Aquifer roadway slab protection and the major BART and Union Pacific railroad underpass structures from AlvaradoNiles Road to 7th Street. The design work will include evaluating CAD drawing files, engineering and structural calculations and technical reports (geotechnical, hazardous waste, biological, etc.) to prepare updated 30% Design Plans to current roadway design and seismic earthquake standards using the most current engineering criteria and policies, to revised technical/engineering reports and to refine Cost Estimates and to evaluate construction phases based on available funding; and.

WHEREAS, the current cost estimates for Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phase 3: 11th Street Connection and Niles Subdivision Grade Separation is at $91.6 million and Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 4: Alvarado-Niles Connection and Grade Separations (BART and Oakland Subdivision) is at $79.6 million, which includes final design, right of way and construction phases; and
WHEREAS, on June 14, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5951-22 adopting a List of Projects for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 funded by SB-1: The Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, estimated at $1,658,973, and the List of Projects includes the Quarry Lakes Parkway Project, City Project No. 18-04; and
WHEREAS, the Consulting Services Agreement with Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. for Preliminary Engineering (30% Final Design), in the amount $2,087,600, will be funded with $1,878,840 from the East West Connector Project Funding Agreement No. A18-0046 in the Capital Projects Fund (Account Number 4100-3199-91804-54110) for East West Connector (Quarry Lakes Parkway), City Project No. 18-04, and a 10% local match of $208,760 from the SB-1 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA) Fund (Account Number 2515- 3199-91804-54110) for the East West Connector (Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 3 and 4) Project, City Project No. 18-04.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Union City hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute a Consulting Services Agreement with Mark Thomas & Company, Inc., for Preliminary Engineering (30% Final Design) of East West Connector (Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 3 and 4), City Project No. 18-04, in the amount of $2,087,600 (Exhibit B); and
City Council/RSA Agenda 366 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Union City does hereby appropriate $208,760 from the Unassigned Fund Balance in the SB-1 Fund (Fund 2515) to Account Number 2515-3199-91804-54110.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Union City at a regular meeting held on the 22nd day of November 2022, by the following vote:

City Council/RSA Agenda 367 Tuesday, November 22, 2022

QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY
Connecting Parks, Trails & Transit

Report

PROJECT DELIVERY PLAN
Prepared by

MARK THOMAS
City Project No.
# 18-04

Date
JULY 2020

City Council/RSA Agenda 368 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Quarry Lakes Parkway Project #AL‐18109
July 14, 2020 Page 2
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.   Oakland, California

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In August 2018, Union City and Alameda CTC executed the East West Connector’s Project Funding Agreement (PFA). Union City became project sponsor/lead agency, responsible for the remaining project phases (Final PS&E, R/W & Construction). Union City in partnership with Fremont and in coordination with transportation and transit agencies this past year have developed a Project Delivery Plan (Plan) to proceed with project implementation. The former East West Connector was renamed Quarry Lakes Parkway (QLP) to create a defined gateway into Quarry Lakes Regional Park, connects the neighbors, parks, schools and jobs in Fremont and Union City and completes the build‐out of the Station District area at the Union City BART Station.

The Project Delivery Plan (Plan) documents Union City’s effort this past year of the review, evaluation and findingsin design, right of way engineering and the construction segments of the former East West Connector project and the best approach for Union City to complete the remaining project. In partnership with Fremont, Union City has presented the Quarry Lakes Parkway, a multimodal local streets and road project to BART, AC Transit, Alameda CTC and Cross Bay Transit/DB Rail to better understand and coordinate their planned multimodal, transit or rail projects that compliment QLP.

These coordination meetings are documented in the Quarry Lakes Parkway Transportation Memorandum dated June 2020 prepared by Kittelson Associates, Inc.

Union City’s and Fremont’s lead in delivering the QLP provides more flexibility, expediency, and cost for completing project delivery than the East West Connector in the following areas presented in this report including:
 Project Development Procedures;
 Construction Phasing and the ability to deliver useful segments as construction funding becomes available;
 Consistency with Complete Streets Design Standards; and  Significant cost reduction in delivery of project

INTRODUCTION
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. (Mark Thomas) has prepared this Project Delivery Plan (Plan) to document the required design criterial for roadway projects, the Public Works process, updated construction costs, identify project phases and associated costs and the  expenditure plan proposal with the proposed Quarry Lakes Parkway (QLP1) project which spans across the cities of Union City and Fremont. As the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was certified in 2009, the proposed QLP project 1 The QLP project was formerly known as the East‐West Connector.

City Council/RSA Agenda 369 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Quarry Lakes Parkway Project #AL‐18109
July 14, 2020 Page 3
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.   Oakland, California
does not propose variations to the existing alignment or add new project elements that would require additional environmental studies.  The QLP project is not expected to be fully funded for all phases at this time.   As such, this Plan intends to identify a logical and phased approach to infrastructure improvements that will provide local and land‐use benefits by phase while reducing upfront capital expenditures to more manageable levels.

DESIGN REFINEMENT AND MODERNIZATION
The 2011 East West Connector (EWC) Plans were reviewed and evaluated by Union City and Fremont.

Both cities concurred that 9+ year old design required design refinement & modernization to meet current design criteria and standards.  The 2011 EWC design did not meet recent “Complete Streets” policies and multimodal goals, did not consider adjacent land‐use opportunities and did not coordinate the design with local and regional transportation projectsled by Fremont, Union City, Alameda CTC and AC Transit.

To successfully complete the Final PS&E, the design would need to be refined to meet the latest Design Criteria and Standards. These updated design standards are required for all Construction Permits especially for proposed bridge structures over Alameda Creek Flood Control Channel, Old Alameda Creek and the grade separations/railroad underpasses at BART/Oakland Subdivision and the Niles Subdivision.  Below are critical structural and roadway design manuals that have changed since 2011:
 Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria Manual‐ 2019
 Union Pacific Railroad‐BNSF Railway, Guidelines for Railroad Grade Separation Project ‐ 2016  AREMA (American Railway Engineering & Maintenance‐of‐Way Association) ‐2019  Caltrans Highway Design Manual (HDM) ‐2016
 California Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) ‐2014  Caltrans DIB 89‐01 Class IV Bikeways Guidance ‐ 2018
 Other design guidelines include Union City and Fremont’s Public Works Design Standards, AASHTO, Public Works Greenbook, ADA, Cal/OSHA, latest Caltrans Standards Plans and Specifications, etc.

Typical for Public Works roadway projects to avoid of trenching of a newly constructed  streets, the QLP should include all local utilities such as sanitary sewer, watermain system, communication/fiber and joint trench system (gas, primary & secondary power, telephone and cable) under the street to accommodate future development and to support utility master plans. The EWC roadway design only included water supply for the fire hydrants and irrigation system and electrical power for the new streetlights, traffic signals, pump station and irrigation timing system.

Finally, design refinement will allow the opportunity to apply value‐engineering principles to design and construction activities for potential project costs savings through design changes, permitting process, advance construction phases or recent acceptable construction techniques.

City Council/RSA Agenda 370 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Quarry Lakes Parkway Project #AL‐18109
July 14, 2020 Page 4
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.   Oakland, California

PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS
When Union City became project sponsor/lead agency, responsible for the remaining project phases (Final PS&E, R/W & Construction), we reviewed the project plans to understand ACTIA’s approach for the East West Connector project for design, construction phasing, right of way engineering and construction. Below is Comparison Table of Project Development Procedures for Alameda CTC projects and for Public Works municipal engineering projects(a more streamline process) to better clarify Union City’s project approach.

COMPARISON TABLE OF PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES Alameda CTC (ACTIA)

EAST WEST CONNECTOR
Union City

QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY
Design Standards Expressway Standards:

Caltrans Highway Design Manual
(HDM) for EWC & Local Street
Standards
Local Streets & Roads: Union City
Design Standards, Complete
Streets/MUTCD
Authority to approve Environmental Documentation
(CEQA)
Yes Yes
Authority to manage, approve and sign Final PS&E and
Technical Studies   Yes Yes
Authority to Purchase & Condemn Public Right of Way
(Roadway), Land Swaps, Preserve R/W & Hold Title   No Yes Right of Way Acquisition Process and Timeline Caltrans Right of Way Manual Procedures (18‐24 months)
Municipal Code
(About 12 months)
Participates in Franchise Agreements & Accommodates
All Utilities within public roads
No Yes
Authority to execute Development Agreements including
Purchase and Sale Agreement with Caltrans/State for
Excess Route 84 Property, followed by RFQ for housing
developer (For LATIP revenue incl. up $ 74.9 Million for EWC/QLP project).

No Yes
Authority to Advertise, Award and Administer (AAA)
Roadway Construction Projects
No Yes
Maintains Public Streets & Roads, Traffic Signals and
Trails Systems and participates in Maintenance
Agreements with other public agencies incl. Alameda
County Public Works/Flood Control, Caltrans and BART.

No Yes
For over 25 years, Union City has planned, supported and accommodated the former Caltrans’ Route 84 (highway) and the later ACTIA’s East West Connector (expressway) projects by reserving the public right of way between Alvarado‐Niles Road and Mission Boulevard/SR 238 through the remediation and City Council/RSA Agenda 371 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Quarry Lakes Parkway Project #AL‐18109
July 14, 2020 Page 5
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.   Oakland, California
development of the former Pacific State Steel Corporation (PSSC) site. Union City also managed, designed and funded the Union City Intermodal Station, Phase 1 & 2 projects ($ 100 Million) that modernized a 1974 BART Station and purchased and reserved development parcels ($ 25 Million) on a former PG&E pipe storage yard to support planned the Station District area. Finally, Public Works design and constructed the 11th Street Extension (incl. all the major utilities), 11th Street Enhancement and BART parking lots ($ 20 Million).  Expenditure plans for these past City projects included transportation and transit funds from various Alameda County’s Measure B programs (ACTA/ACTIA and ACCMA).

Most recently, Union City and State of California (STATE) have entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement (PSA) in August 2019 for the development of the State‐owned parcels reserved for the former Route 84 known as the Gateway site.  Revenues from the sale of the State parcels to a future housing developer will provide transportation funds for the list of projects identified by the approved CTC August 2010 Local Agency Transportation Improvement Projects (LATIP).   Caltrans is currently preparing parcel assessment evaluation documents before appraisal of these parcels.  Shortly after Union City plans to release an RFQ for potential nonprofit (per AB 1486) housing developer.  The public right of way the Quarry Lakes Parkway project will not be include in the development parcels.

To summarize, Public Works roadway projects are typically prioritized and phased based on budget revenue generation, land‐use/development needs, project funding opportunities and local access requirements.

City Council/RSA Agenda 372 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Quarry Lakes Parkway Project #AL‐18109
July 14, 2020 Page 6
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.   Oakland, California

CONSTRUCTION PHASING
The QLP project provides many benefits to the local communities of Union City and Fremont, including local circulation and connections to park, trails and transit.  The QLP provides the opportunity for more efficient phasing as construction funding becomes available as opposed to the East West Connector.

The differences in phasing approaches are described below:

East West Connector: Phasing Plan
The East West Connector project segregated the construction into four (4) phases.  The phases were:
 Segment A: In Fremont along Decoto Road from Cabrillo Court to just east of Paseo Padre Parkway and along Paseo Padre Parkway from just north of Decoto Road to Isherwood Way  Segment B: In Fremont and Union City along new roadway from Paseo Padre Parkway to just east of Alvarado Niles Road
 Segment C: In Union City along new roadway from just east of Alvarado Niles Road to just west of Mission Boulevard
 Segment D: In Union City at the intersection of new roadway and Mission Boulevard Quarry Lakes Parkway: Phasing Plan
The phasing as described above forthe East West Connector does not provide the proposedQLP project enough flexibility or the desired independent benefit by phase. By splitting the project into seven phases, five within Union City and two within Fremont, implementation of the QLP project will be able to achieve those goals. It is possible that phases could be combined should funding become available to construct multiple phases at once. A map detailing the proposed seven phases of the QLP project can be seen in Figure 1.

City Council/RSA Agenda 373 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Quarry Lakes Parkway Project #AL‐18109
July 14, 2020 Page 7
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.   Oakland, California
The physical improvements to be constructed as a part of each phase are detailed below.

Phase 1: 7th Street Connection
Phase 1 is located between 7th Street and Mission Boulevard (Route 238) and will realign 7th Street to intersect directly with the new Parkway, next to the City’s Transit/ Corporation Maintenance Yard and Drigon Dog Park. The 7th Street alignment fronting the Maintenance Yard allows Union City Transit to complete the planned EV Fueling Station that serves Union City Transit and AC Transit buses.

All streetscape and traffic improvements within this limit will be completed, including all project work along Mission Boulevard, 7th Street, and the Maintenance Yard at 7th Street. The new intersection at 7th Street‐Chesapeake Drive/QLP will only be three legs, with no westbound travel allowed until later phases. In addition, Phase 1 will accommodate the proposed 900‐unit housing development at Decoto Road and complete the 7th Street bikeway system. Phase 1 could be constructed within the next five years.

All stormwater infrastructure to accommodate Phase 1 improvements will be completed. The Phase 1 project will conflict with the existing drainage channel that currently carries stormwater northbound.

The new drainage design will intercept this flow, take it through the QLP, and outlet it back into the existing channel. The existing bridge/culvert at Chesapeake Drive will be demolished and replaced with a new culvert that runs below/through QLP. A new concrete‐lined channel will be constructed along QLP to receive the flow from the culvert, and then released into the existing drainage channel near the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) Niles Subdivision tracks. A new diversion structure at the south opening of the new culvert will be also be constructed. This structure will divert a portion of the drainage flow through a 72‐inch diversion line (built at a later phase) and released into Old Alameda Creek.

Figure 1 ‐ Quarry Lakes Parkway Project Phasing Exhibit City Council/RSA Agenda 374 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Quarry Lakes Parkway Project #AL‐18109
July 14, 2020 Page 8
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.   Oakland, California
All miscellaneous utility improvements within the phasing limits will be completed. This includes the water main and gas main realignments from 7th Street to Chesapeake Drive.

A 900‐unit housing development is planned along Decoto Road and 7th Street just north of the project.

The proposed QLP connection will support and enhance the increase of pedestrian and bicycle travel along the realigned 7th Street and through the new neighborhood streets, 8th Street and 9th Street for a more direct access to the Union City BART Station on 11th Street.

Phase 2: Gateway Connection
Phase 2 will construct QLP roadway improvements between Old Alameda Creek/Fremont boundary and Alvarado‐Niles Road.  The new segment will provide access and utility infrastructure to the City’s Gateway (State parcels) development site and will create a new, defined entrance into Quarry Lakes Regional Park. All streetscape and traffic improvements within this limit will be completed, including all work along Alvarado Niles Road and replacing existingQuarry Lakes Drive with a new realigned street connecting directly to Isherwood Drive in Fremont. No Old Alameda Creek bridge work or grade separation work west of Alvarado‐Niles Road will be constructed during this phase. Phase 2 could be constructed within the next five years, simultaneously with Phase 1.

All stormwater infrastructure to accommodate Phase 2 improvements will be built. This includes two detention basins directly north of QLP and west of Alvarado Niles Road, and the 72‐inch “Line M” diversion outfall structure (as detailed in Phase 1) will be constructed. The portion of the 72‐inch diversion culvert within the phasing limits will be placed and connection to the diversion structure will be completed at a later phase.

All utility improvements within the phasing limits will be completed. This includes the construction of the new water main that runs along QLP and connected into the existing system at Alvarado Nile Road.

Utility work consists of installing the new water main that runs along Quarry Lakes Drive and connected into the QLP mainline.

City Council/RSA Agenda 375 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Quarry Lakes Parkway Project #AL‐18109
July 14, 2020 Page 9
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.   Oakland, California
The proposed 26‐acre Gateway housing site along QLP, next door to Quarry Lakes Regional Park is within the Station District area and in walking distance to the Union City BART Station.

Phase 3: 11th Street Connection
Phase 3 is located between 7th Street and 11th Street.  Phase 3 requires the construction of a railway structure to grade separate and depress the new Parkway under the Union Pacific Railroad (Niles Subdivision) tracks to connect to 11th Street.  This important connection will provide the much‐needed secondary access to the Station District area, the Union City BART Station, and other areas of Union City, thus avoiding the heavily‐congested Decoto Road. Union City Transit and AC Transit will finally be able to provide service to the East Plaza/Transit Center along 11th Street on the east side of BART Station.  Because of the lengthy timeline to secure a Union Pacific Railroad construction permit, the segment will be constructed within the next 10 years.

All streetscape and traffic improvements within this limit will be completed, including all work along 11th Street and conforming QLP to the 7th street intersection completed during Phase 1. A significant portion of Phase 3 is completing the grade separation work to separate the new roadway from the UPRR Niles Road Subdivision. A new bridge structure will be built to span both Green Street and the railroad tracks across QLP. Heavy earthwork with retaining structures and Cement Deep Soil Mixing (CDSM) walls will be built to significantly reduce the grade of QLP. The masonry wall, which is adjacent to the concrete drainage channel completed in Phase 1, will be formed and constructed during Phase

3. No grade separation work across the UPRR Oakland Subdivision or BART tracks will be completed during this phase.

City Council/RSA Agenda 376 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Quarry Lakes Parkway Project #AL‐18109
July 14, 2020 Page 10
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.   Oakland, California
All stormwater infrastructure to accommodate Phase 3 improvements will be completed. This includes the detention basin and pump station east of Alvarado Nile Road. Jack and bore methods will be implemented to connect the drainage lines east of the Oakland Subdivision and BART tracks to the pump station. The pump station is required to be fully functional during this phase. No diversion line work will be completed in Phase 3.

All miscellaneous utility improvements within the phasing limits will be completed. No utility mains work is required during Phase 3.

The completion of the 11th Street connection from QLP to Decoto Road finally providing a much‐needed secondary multimodal access road to Mission Blvd for the 60‐acre Station District area and support completion of the planned housing (Windflower 2) and office (Woodstock) development sites.

Phase 4: Alvarado‐Niles Road Connection & grade separations Phase 4 is located between 11th Street and Alvarado‐Niles Road. Phase 4 requires the construction of railway structures to grade separate and depress the new Parkway under the BART tracks and Union Pacific Railroad (Oakland Subdivision) tracks.  This segment will complete the link between Mission Boulevard and the Gateway development site and provide full access to 7th Street, 11th Street and Alvarado‐Niles Road. This last Quarry Lakes Parkway segment will complete the secondary access to and from the Station District area, including the Union City BART Station, benefiting both Union City and northern Fremont BART commuters. When completed, Quarry Lakes Parkway will provide an alternative route that will avoid the existing at‐grade railroad crossings along Decoto Road and provide a new multimodal corridor serving pedestrians, bicyclists, transit and vehicles. Similar to the Phase 3 permit process, Phase 4 will be constructed within 10 years.

All streetscape and traffic improvements within this limit will be completed. As with Phase 3, a significant portion of the work for Phase 4 is completing the grade separation for the new roadway from the UPRR Oakland Subdivision and BART tracks. Therefore, similar structures and construction (earthwork,retaining walls, CDSM, etc.) will be implemented to achieve this grade separation, including a new bridge structure to span the railroad tracks across QLP. All roadway improvements required to connect QLP from Alvarado Niles Road to Mission Blvd will be completed with the completion of Phase

4. All stormwater infrastructure to accommodate Phase 3 improvements will be built. The 72‐inch diversion line will be connected at both ends to allow drainage to be diverted from the diversion structure (completed during Phase 1) and released into Old Alameda Creek.

All miscellaneous utility improvements within the phasing limits will be completed. No utility main work is required during Phase 4.

City Council/RSA Agenda 377 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Quarry Lakes Parkway Project #AL‐18109
July 14, 2020 Page 11
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.   Oakland, California
Phase 5 – Paseo Padre Parkway & Bicycle Trail Connection Phase 5 islocated in both Fremont and Union City and will complete the Quarry Lakes Parkway between the Gateway site in Union City and Paseo Padre Parkway in Fremont.  This segment of the Parkway includes new bridges that cross Alameda Creek Flood Control Channel and Old Alameda Creek and provide the opportunity to revegetate and preserve the creek systems.  Thisinitialsegment would build the northern half of the Parkway, including the multi‐use bikeway and trail system between Mission Boulevard and Paseo Padre Parkway.  The multi‐use path will connect directly to the existing Alameda Creek trail.  The southern half of Quarry Lake Parkway with the two additional lanes will be constructed later. It is anticipated that these phases are 10 to 20 years out.

Phase 5 is separated into two sub‐phases, 5A and 5B. Phase 5A improvements consist of all grading for QLP up to the bridge abutments and roadway and streetscape improvements for the northern two lanes and multi‐use path.  With the exception to the Alameda County Flood Control (ACFC) Channel bridge at Paseo Padre Parkway, the additional Old Alameda Creek bridge structures will be built as independent structures and completed during the appropriate subphase. The ACFC bridge will be a single structure and completed during Phase 5a. The bridge will conform to the new Paseo Padre Parkway intersection (assumed to have been constructed by the City of Fremont before this phase, see below for more details). All roadway improvements required to connect QLP from Paseo Padre to Mission Blvd will be completed at the end of Phase 5.

All stormwater infrastructure to accommodate Phase 5 improvements will be built in the same subphases as described above. Both detention basins within the phasing limits and the ACFC Channel outlet structure will be constructed during Phase 5a.

All utility improvements within the phasing limits will be completed. This work includes the construction of the new water main that connects the system built during Phase 2 to the existing system at Paseo Padre Parkway.

The Union City and Fremont city‐limit boundary are currently defined or delineated by the centerline of Old Alameda Creek.  Unfortunately, the creek alignment has shifted over past several decades making it challenging for land surveyors to delineate this boundary.   Unlike all the other County waterways and creeks, Old Alameda Creek rights of way does not belong to Alameda County Flood Control.  In Phase 5, there is opportunity to re‐define the Union City‐Fremont city‐limit boundaries and for Alameda County Flood Control to take ownership of the creek system with plans to replant and reestablish this natural biological resource.

The completion of Phase 5 willsupport the development of the Alameda County Water District (ACWD) just east of the Alameda Flood Control Channel and is currently zone for housing in Union City.

Decoto “Complete Streets” Corridor(Fremont)
This phase includes work along Decoto Road corridor from Cabrillo Court near Interstate 880 to Paseo Padre Parkway.   These “Complete Streets” improvements include reduce lane widths and Class IV City Council/RSA Agenda 378 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Quarry Lakes Parkway Project #AL‐18109
July 14, 2020 Page 12
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.   Oakland, California
bikeways/buffer bike lanes with a focus to improved transit operations with potential queu‐jump lanes and Transit Signal Priority (TSP) system upgrades for AC Transit, UC Transit and Dumbarton Express service.   All streetscape, traffic, drainage, and utility improvements within phasing limits will be completed.  Intersection work at Paseo Padre Parkway is not included as part of the Decoto Road phase.

Fremont is moving forward with the Final PS&E phase and should be ready for construction in 2022.

Paseo Padre Parkway (Fremont)
This phase includes work along Paseo Padre Parkway from Decoto Road to Isherwood Way. This work includes the earthwork required to raise the grade of Paseo Padre for the future ACFC bridge connection in phase 5a detailed above. All streetscape, traffic, drainage, and utility improvements within phasing limits will be completed.

As noted above, City of Fremont is moving forward with the Final Design of the Decoto “Complete Streets” Corridor project and will lead agency for future improvement along Paseo Padre Parkway.

Union City and Fremont have concurred thatthe localstreetimprovementsidentified in the QLP project should be the responsibility of each jurisdiction except for Phase 5 where the city boundaries need to be re‐defined.

PROJECT COSTS
The QLP project costs were developed using the existing project plans and other pertinent documents.

No new features or elements were added to the estimate in order to present a reasonable comparison of the previous project to the QLP project. As detailed above in the Construction Phasing section, the QLP project has a different phasing approach a phase by phase comparison is not appropriate or required for this Plan. A high‐level estimate is provided in Table 1 showing a total project cost comparison between the escalated 2018 project costs and the QLP project costs.

Table 1 ‐ Project Cost Comparison
Description of Cost Element Previous Project (2018 Estimate) Quarry Lakes Parkway 1 Planning / Design   $23,334,000 $31,004,0006
Right of Way3 $78,230,000 $4,840,0004
Environmental Mitigation5 $15,850,000 $18,432,000
Construction Cost $178,971,000 $203,350,0002
Construction Management $23,475,000 $30,504,0007
TOTAL COST $319,860,000 $288,130,000

1. Prices shown are 2020 dollars.

2. Includes a 10% mobilization cost and a 25% contingency.

3. Includes estimated damages, relocation assistance, title/escrow Costs, and owner appraisal costs

4. Assumed all public property would be dedicated for the project including Union City, Fremont and Caltrans parcels.  Private property acquisition and easements are included.

5. Includes mitigation for Waters of the US, Offsite Habitat, Offsite Water Quality and Wetland Mitigation.

City Council/RSA Agenda 379 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Quarry Lakes Parkway Project #AL‐18109
July 14, 2020 Page 13
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.   Oakland, California

6. Includes Right of Way Support, Environmental Permits and Final Design at 15% of construction cost.

7. Includes Construction Management and Engineering Support during Construction at 15% of construction cost.

While most costs have increased from the previous project, the overall QLP project cost has gone down.

The main difference between the two projects is the previous project had assumed large right of way purchases from public agencies, including Union City, Fremont and Caltrans.  Now that the QLP project has been transferred to the local agencies it is assumed the required right of way will be dedicated instead of purchased.  Private property acquisition is still assumed to be required as a part of the QLP project.

The QLP project costs broken down by phase have been provided in Table 2.  The assumptions provided in Table 1 remain for the breakdown shown in Table 2.

Table 2 ‐ Quarry Lakes Parkway Project Cost by Phase
PHASES Final PS&E Right of Way Environmental
Mitigation Construction
Construction
Management /
DSDC
TOTAL
Union City‐Local Streets &
Roads
Phase 1: 7TH Street
Connection   $2,023,000 $1,899,000 $1,088,000 $10,150,000 $1,523,000 $16,683,000 Phase 2: Gateway
Connection $2,198,000 $ 100,000 $1,111,000 $14,650,000 $2,198,000 $20,257,000 Phase 3: 11TH Street
Connection $9,165,000 $561,000 $11,527,000 $61,100,000 $9,165,000 $91,518,000 Phase 4: Alvarado‐Niles
Connection & Grade
Separations
$8,640,000 $1,453,000 $948,000 $57,600,000 $8,640,000 $77,281,000 Phase 5: Paseo Padre & Trail
Connection $5,940,000 $100,000 $3,148,000 $39,600,000 $5,940,000 $54,728,000 Fremont‐Local Streets &
Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Decoto “Complete Streets”
Corridor $1,410,000 $717,000 $310,000 $9,400,000 $1,410,000 $13,247,000 Paseo Padre Parkway $1,628,000 $10,000 $300,000 $10,850,000 $1,628,000 $14,416,000 Total Per Phases $31,004,000 $4,840,000 $18,432,000 $203,350,000 $30,504,000 Total Project Cost $288,130,000
The QLP project costs were developed using the existing project plans and other pertinent documents.

No new features or elements were added to the estimate in order to present a reasonable comparison of the previous project to the QLP project. As detailed above in the Construction Phasing section, the QLP project has a different phasing approach so a phase by phase comparison is not appropriate or required for this Plan. A high‐level estimate is provided in Table 1 showing a total project cost comparison between the escalated 2018 project costs and the QLP project costs.

Total Project Cost for the Quarry Lakes Parkway is approximately $ 288 Million compared the East West Connector cost of about $ 320 Million. The $ 34 Million difference in overall project costs includes City Council/RSA Agenda 380 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Quarry Lakes Parkway Project #AL‐18109
July 14, 2020 Page 14
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.   Oakland, California
subtracting of the completed $ 20 Million PA/ED and Draft PS&E Phases and eliminating Right of Way costs for the Union City, State and Fremont parcels for public rights of way (incl. TCE’s) for proposed roadway.   Also note that roadway unit costs have increased and Final PS&E phases still need to be revisited as required for design refinements to meet latest design criteria/standards along with securing challenging UP, BART, regulatory agencies (Section 401 and 404), Alameda County Flood Control, Regional Water Quality Control Board and Caltrans construction permits.

EXPENDITURE PLAN PROPOSAL
Approximately $ 600,000 of $ 2.5 Million in the Union City’s East West Connector Project Funding Agreement (PFA) has been expended to date for consultant service agreements for conceptual design, project coordination, engineering evaluation, traffic analysis, environmental evaluation and project cost updates. Approximately $ 900,000 was programmed but not expended for the Union Pacific Railroad Design Oversight Agreements for the Niles and Oakland Subdivision grade separations and a BART Project Coordination Agreement for the BART grade separation.  Unfortunately, the remaining $

1.0 Million to complete Final PS&E for Segments A, B, C and D and to update the Project Costs as identified in the August 2018 PFA for the East West Connector was not adequate or sufficient budget.

Also, all approved construction permits are necessary to complete Final Plans, to complete Specifications with permit conditions and to complete an Engineers Estimate ready for advertisement.

In general, the draft QLP Expenditure Plan Proposal is similar to the EWC Expenditure Plan Proposal presented at the March 2018 Commission Meeting.   The QLP Plan now includes anticipated LATIP revenue for the sale of the State parcels and has modified funding program fundsidentified in the 2014 Transportation Expenditure Plan (TEP) that now strongly supports the development of PDA (Priority Development Areas), multimodal designs and completes gap closures for trails connections and projects such as the East Bay Greenway in Southern Alameda County.

EXPENDITURE PLAN PROPOSAL
Proposed Funds (PS&E, R/W and
CON Phases)
EWC Expenditure Plan
Proposal (March 2018)
QLP Expenditure Plan
Proposal Notes
1986 Measure B $ 65,500,000 $ 65,500,000 Includes $ 2.5 M of PFA CMA‐TIP   $ 14,300,000 $ 14,300,000 No Change
Route 84 LATIP $ 0 $ 33,150,000 EWC/QLP is # 4 and #5 LATIP Projects
TEP 22: Union City Intermodal
Station
$ 75,000,000 $ 0   Reserves $$ for ACE, DB Rail or
other transit connections
TEP 21: DB Corridor Transportation
Improvements (Decoto Road)
$ 40,000,000 $ 40,000,000 No change. Total of Union City’s share
TEP 23: Railroad Corridor Right of
Way Preservation
$ 32,000,000 $ 32,000,000 No Change
TEP 45: Community Development
Investments Program
(Infrastructure to Union City BART‐
PDA)
$ 9,500,000 $ 34,220,000  Increase $$‐Improves Transit
connection to jobs & schools
City Council/RSA Agenda 381 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Quarry Lakes Parkway Project #AL‐18109
July 14, 2020 Page 15
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.   Oakland, California
Proposed Funds (PS&E, R/W and
CON Phases)
EWC Expenditure Plan
Proposal (March 2018)
QLP Expenditure Plan
Proposal Notes
TEP 26: Congestion Relief, Local
Bridge Seismic Safety (South County
incl. EWC)
$ 25,000,000 $ 41,500,000 Increase $$‐ Added $ 16.5 M for Rte 84 Relinquishment (LATIP #3)
TEP 44: Bicycle and Pedestrians
Path and Safety (Gap Closure)
$10,000,000 $ 10,000,000 No change. Project now includes East Bay Greenway‐Bay Trail
Connection.

Union City LOCAL (SB1, DLED,
DIPSA)
$ 0 $ 4,460,000 About 18.0 acres of City’s R/W is
dedicated to QLP + 14.0 acres of
State Parcels. Will seek other
funding opportunities when Final
PS&E/RW Cert is near completion &
project is shelf‐ready.

Fremont LOCAL (86 MB, DLED, TIF,
LATIP)
$ 0 $ 8,000,000 Incl. $ 3.5 M (PFA)
OTHER Local and State Funds (RM3‐
Bay Trail SR2 Transit & DB Corridor,
SB‐1 LPP CON Funds & other)
$ 0 $ 5,000,000 Will seek other funding
opportunities when Final PS&E/RW
Cert is near completion & project is
shelf‐ready.

TOTAL EWC COST   $271,300,000
TOTAL QLP COST   $288,130,000
Union City’s local funds identified in above Expenditure Plan Proposal appears to be a minimum amount. However, it should be noted the City has already dedicated the entire QLP roadway right of way between Alvarado‐Niles Road to Mission Boulevard, which is approximately 18.0 acres to the project. Union City is also managing and administering the RFQ forthe development of the State Parcels (Excess Route 84 property) and land sale to a future housing developer will generate the fund revenue for the Alameda County’s LATIP projects on behalf of Alameda County CTC. Through this development process, the City will reserve about 14.0 acres of public right of way to QLP project, totally 32.0 acres.

FINDINGS
Union City’s findings of the review and evaluation of 2011 East West Connector project, in general are as follows:
 Plans need to be updated and modernized to meet current “Complete Streets” designs and Multimodal Goals
 Design refinement is required to meet current design guidelines, criteria and standards especially for bridges and structures to successfully secure all construction permits  Design refinement creates an opportunity to “value‐engineer” the project for potential cost savings in design and construction
 Ongoing coordination with transit/transportation agencies and related projects is important  Phasing of the project segments will be based on available funding, right of way certification (secure right of way and permits) and land‐use/developer opportunities  $2.5 Million in the 2018 PFA was not efficient budget to complete the Final PS&E  It was unrealistic for all project segments to begin construction by January 2021 City Council/RSA Agenda 382 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Quarry Lakes Parkway Project #AL‐18109
July 14, 2020 Page 16
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.   Oakland, California
 A successful Expenditure Plan requires ongoing funding strategies and opportunities with Alameda CTC staff

FUNDING REQUEST AND SCHEDULE
Union City continues to proceed with the planning and development of the Station District area, which includes 1,700 new housing units built or entitled and the 1.2 million square feet of planned office space near and around the Union City BART Station. The completion of the QLP in Union City is instrumental for the success of this Priority Development Area (PDA) build‐out.

At this time, Union City respectively request   as lead agency/project sponsor for the QLP the programming  of approximately $ 69.3 million of 1986 Measure B funds and CMA‐TIP including our local funds.  The goal would be to complete the construction of the 7th Street Connection and Gateway Connection phases and to complete PS&E, right of way and environmental mitigations for the 11th Street Connection and Alvarado‐Niles Connection including securing all grade separation construction agreements for Union Pacific Railroad (for both Oakland and Niles Sub) and BART construction agreement. Once these construction contracts are almost completed and shelf‐ready, Union City will continue to aggressively seek and secure LATIP, local and regional transportation funds to complete an critical link of QLP from Alvarado‐Niles Road to Mission Blvd, parallel to Decoto Road a major transit corridor in Union City and Fremont. See below the funding plan.

Funding Plan
Project Segments Costs
7th Street Connection – All Project Phases $ 16,683,000 Gateway Connection – All Project Phases $ 20,257,000
11th Street Connection‐ Design, R/W‐Permits & Mitigation $ 21,253,000 Alvarado‐Niles Connection & Grade Separations ‐Design, R/W‐ Permits & Mitigation
$ 11,041,000
Total Programming Request   $69,234,000
Similar to Fremont recent project approach for the Decoto “Complete Streets” Corridor project, Union City plans to prepare RFP to select consultants to lead these project segments with experience in Complete Streets/multi‐modal design, municipal engineering design and grade separations designs.

We anticipate two or three consultant contracts.  Below is a proposed projectschedule for the roadway segments:

City Council/RSA Agenda 383 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Quarry Lakes Parkway Project #AL‐18109
July 14, 2020 Page 17
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.   Oakland, California
Union City looks forward to coordinate with Alameda CTC staff to strategize and present this Project Delivery Plan at an upcoming Commission meeting in late 2020.

City Council/RSA Agenda 384 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Quarry Lakes Parkway Project #AL‐18109
July 14, 2020 Page 18
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.   Oakland, California

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This Implementation Plan has been prepared for the City of Union City with acknowledgments to:

Contributors
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.

Shawn O’Keefe, PE, QSD
Sasha Dansky, PE, QSD
Bobby Lin, PE
AECOM
Etty Mecurio, P.E.

WRECO
Analette Ochoa
ICF
Rich Walter
Apex Strategies
Eileen Goodwin
Gray Bowen Scott
Matt Todd
City of Union City
Joan Malloy, City Manager
Mark Evanoff, Deputy City Manager
Marilou R. Ayupan, Interim Public Works
Director
Carmela Campbell, Economic and Community
Development Director
Farooq Azim, City Engineer
Project Partners
City of Fremont
Hans Larsen, Public Works Director
Noe Veloso, Assistant City Engineer
Matt Bomberg, Senior Transportation Engineer
Alameda CTC
Saravana Suthanthira, Principal Transportation
Planner
Aleida Andrino‐Chavez, AICP, PTP; Associate
Transportation Planner
City Council/RSA Agenda 385 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 1 of 32

CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN

THE CITY OF UNION CITY
AND
MARK THOMAS & COMPANY, INC.

FOR PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING (30% FINAL DESIGN) OF THE
EAST WEST CONNECTOR (QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY, PHASES 3 AND 4) PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04
This Agreement for consulting services is made by and between the City of Union City, a municipal corporation, (“City”) and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc., a California corporation, with offices located at 1970 Broadway, Suite 760, Oakland, CA 94612, (“Consultant”), (together referred to as the “Parties”) as of November 22, 2022 (the “Effective Date”).

Section 1. Services. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Consultant shall provide to City the services described in the Scope of Services attached as Exhibit A-1 and incorporated herein, at the time and place and in the manner specified therein. In the event of a conflict in or inconsistency between the terms of this Agreement and Exhibit A-1, the Agreement shall prevail.

1.1 Term of Services. The term of this Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date and shall end on December 31, 2023, and Consultant shall complete the work described in Exhibit A-1 on or before that date, unless the term of the Agreement is otherwise terminated or extended, as provided for in Section 8. The time provided to Consultant to complete the services required by this Agreement shall not affect the City’s right to terminate the Agreement, as referenced in Section 8.

1.2 Standard of Performance. Consultant shall perform all services required pursuant to this Agreement according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of the profession in which Consultant is engaged.

1.3 Assignment of Personnel. Consultant shall assign only competent personnel to perform services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that City, in its sole discretion, at any time during the term of this Agreement, desires the reassignment of any such persons, Consultant shall, immediately upon receiving notice from City of such desire of City, reassign such person or persons.

1.4 Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence. Consultant shall devote such time to the performance of services pursuant to this Agreement as may be reasonably necessary to timely finish the Scope of Work, to meet the standard of performance provided in Section 1.1 above and to satisfy Consultant’s obligations hereunder.

1.5 Public Works Requirements. Because the services described in Exhibit A-1 include “work performed during the design and preconstruction phases of construction including, but not limited to, inspection and land surveying work,” the services constitute a public works within the definition of Section 1720(a)(1) of the California Labor Code. As a result, Consultant is required to comply with the provisions of the Labor Code applicable to public works, to the extent set forth in Exhibit C. Consultant shall waive, indemnify, hold harmless, and defend City concerning any liability arising out of Labor Code Section 1720 et seq.

Section 2. COMPENSATION. The compensation for this agreement is a “specific rate of compensation” not to exceed maximum dollar amount. City hereby agrees to pay Consultant a sum not to exceed Two Million Eighty-Seven Thousand Six Hundred Dollars ($2,087,600), notwithstanding City Council/RSA Agenda 386 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 2 of 32 any contrary indications that may be contained in Consultant’s proposal for services to be performed and reimbursable costs incurred under this Agreement. In the event of a conflict between this Agreement and Consultant’s proposal, attached as Exhibit B, regarding the amount of compensation, the Agreement shall prevail. City shall pay Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement at the time and in the manner set forth herein. The payments specified below shall be the only payments from City to Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall submit all invoices to City in the manner specified herein. Except as specifically authorized by City in writing, Consultant shall not bill City for duplicate services performed by more than one person.

Consultant and City acknowledge and agree that compensation paid by City to Consultant under this Agreement is based upon Consultant’s estimated costs of providing the services required hereunder, including salaries and benefits of employees and subcontractors of Consultant. Consequently, the parties further agree that compensation hereunder is intended to include the costs of contributions to any pensions and/or annuities to which Consultant and its employees, agents, and subcontractors may be eligible. City therefore has no responsibility for such contributions beyond compensation required under this Agreement.

2.1 Invoices. Consultant shall submit invoices, not more often than once a month during the term of this Agreement, based on the cost for services performed and reimbursable costs incurred prior to the invoice date. Invoices shall contain the following information:
• Serial identifications of progress bills; i.e., Progress Bill No. 1 for the first invoice, etc.; • Project name & number if applicable;
• Per Item 1.1, Terms of Service expiration date;
• Purchase Order number to expedite payment;
• The beginning and ending dates of the billing period; • A task summary containing the original contract amount, the amount of prior billings, the total due this period, the balance available under the Agreement, and the percentage of completion;
• At City’s option, for each work item in each task, a copy of the applicable time entries or time sheets shall be submitted showing the name of the person doing the work, the hours spent by each person, a brief description of the work, and each reimbursable expense;
• The total number of hours of work performed under the Agreement by Consultant and each employee, agent, and subcontractor of Consultant performing services hereunder; • The Consultant’s signature;

2.2 Monthly Payment. City shall make monthly payments, based on invoices received, for services satisfactorily performed, and for authorized reimbursable costs incurred. City shall have 30 days from the receipt of an invoice that complies with all of the requirements above to pay Consultant.

City Council/RSA Agenda 387 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 3 of 32

2.3 Final Payment. City shall pay the last 10% of the total sum due pursuant to this Agreement within 60 days after completion of the services and submittal to City of a final invoice, if all services required have been satisfactorily performed.

2.4 Total Payment. City shall pay for the services to be rendered by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement. City shall not pay any additional sum for any expense or cost whatsoever incurred by Consultant in rendering services pursuant to this Agreement. City shall make no payment for any extra, further, or additional service pursuant to this Agreement.

In no event shall Consultant submit any invoice for an amount in excess of the maximum amount of compensation provided above either for a task or for the entire Agreement, unless the Agreement is modified prior to the submission of such an invoice by a properly executed change order or amendment.

2.5 Hourly Rate/Fees. Unless the services provided are for a lump sum or flat fee, fees for work performed by Consultant on an hourly basis shall not exceed the amounts shown on the compensation cost proposal attached hereto as Exhibit B. In the event of a conflict in or inconsistency between the terms of this Agreement and Exhibit B, the Agreement shall prevail.

2.6 Reimbursable Expenses. Not applicable.

2.7 Payment of Taxes. Consultant is solely responsible for the payment of employment taxes incurred under this Agreement and any similar federal or state taxes.

2.8 Payment upon Termination. In the event that the City or Consultant terminates this Agreement pursuant to Section 8, the City shall compensate the Consultant for all outstanding costs and reimbursable expenses incurred for work satisfactorily completed as of the date of written notice of termination. Consultant shall maintain adequate logs and timesheets to verify costs incurred to that date. Additional costs may be incurred after the date of written termination in order to package up files and complete other pertinent project close-out procedures.

2.9 Authorization to Perform Services. The Consultant is not authorized to perform any services or incur any costs whatsoever under the terms of this Agreement until receipt of authorization from the Contract Administrator.

2.10. Business License. The Consultant is not authorized to perform services or incur costs whatsoever under the terms of this Agreement until Consultant applies for and has been issued a business license from the City pursuant to Title 5 of the Union City Municipal Code.

Section 3. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT. Except as set forth herein, Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, provide all facilities and equipment that may be necessary to perform the services required by this Agreement. City shall make available to Consultant only the facilities and equipment listed in this section, and only under the terms and conditions set forth herein.

City shall furnish physical facilities such as desks, filing cabinets, and conference space, as may be reasonably necessary for Consultant’s use while consulting with City employees and reviewing records and the information in possession of the City. The location, quantity, and time of furnishing those facilities shall be in the sole discretion of City. In no event shall City be obligated to furnish any City Council/RSA Agenda 388 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 4 of 32 facility that may involve incurring any direct expense, including but not limited to computer, longdistance telephone or other communication charges, vehicles, and reproduction facilities.

Section 4. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Before beginning any work under this Agreement, Consultant, at its own cost and expense, unless otherwise specified below, shall procure the types and amounts of insurance listed below against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant and its agents, representatives, employees, and subcontractors. Consistent with the following provisions, Consultant shall provide proof satisfactory to City of such insurance that meets the requirements of this section and under forms of insurance satisfactory in all respects, and that such insurance is in effect prior to beginning work for the City. Consultant shall maintain the insurance policies required by this section throughout the term of this Agreement. The cost of such insurance shall be included in the Consultant's bid. Consultant shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any subcontract until Consultant has obtained all insurance required herein for the subcontractor(s) and provided evidence to the City that such insurance is in effect. Verification of the required insurance shall be submitted and made part of this Agreement prior to execution.

4.1 Required Coverage. Consultant shall maintain all required insurance listed herein for the duration of this Agreement.

COVERAGE TYPE OF INSURANCE MINIMUM LIMITS
A Commercial General
Liability
Premises Liability; Products
and Completed Operations;
Contractual Liability; Personal
Injury and Advertising Liability
$1,000,000 per occurrence;
Bodily Injury and Property
Damage
$2,000,00 in the aggregate;
Commercial general coverage
shall be at least as broad as
Insurance Services Office
Commercial General Liability
occurrence form CG 0001
(most recent edition) covering
comprehensive General
Liability on an “occurrence”
basis.

B Commercial or Business
Automobile Liability
All owned vehicles, hired or
leased vehicles, non-owned,
borrowed and permissive uses.

Personal Automobile Liability
is acceptable for individual
contractors with no
transportation or hauling
related activities
$2,000,000 per occurrence;
Any Auto; Bodily Injury and
Property Damage. Automobile
coverage shall be at least as
broad as Insurance Services
Office Automobile Liability
form CA 0001 (most recent
edition), Code 1 (any auto). No
endorsement shall be attached
limiting the coverage.

City Council/RSA Agenda 389 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 5 of 32 C Workers’ Compensation
(WC) and Employers
Liability (EL)
Required for all contractors
with employees
WC: Statutory Limits
EL: $100,000 per accident for
bodily injury or disease.

Consultant may rely on a selfinsurance program to meet those requirements, but only if
the program of self-insurance
complies fully with the
provisions of the California
Labor Code. The insurer shall
waive all rights of subrogation
against the City and its officers,
officials, employees, and
volunteers for loss arising from
work performed under this
Agreement.

D Professional Liability/Errors
& Omissions
Includes endorsements of
contractual liability
$5,000,000 per occurrence
$5,000,000 policy aggregate;
Any deductible or self-insured
retention shall not exceed
$200,000 per claim.

4.2 Additional requirements. Each of the following shall be included in the insurance coverage or added as a certified endorsement to the policy:
a. All required insurance shall be maintained during the entire term of the Agreement with the following exception: Insurance policies and coverage(s) written on a claims-made basis shall be maintained during the entire term of the Agreement and until three (3) years following termination and acceptance of all work provided under the Agreement, with the retroactive date of said insurance (as may be applicable) concurrent with the commencement of activities pursuant to this Agreement b. All insurance required above with the exception of Professional Liability, Personal Automobile Liability, Workers’ Compensation and Employers Liability, shall be endorsed to name as additional insured: City of Union City, its City Council, and all City officers, agents, employees, volunteers and representatives.
c. For any claims related to this Agreement or the work hereunder, the Consultant’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant’s insurance and shall not contribute with it. d. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled by either party, except after 30 days’ prior written notice has been provided to the City.
e. Certificates of Insurance: Before commencing operations under this Agreement, Consultant shall provide Certificate(s) of Insurance and applicable insurance endorsements, in form City Council/RSA Agenda 390 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 6 of 32 and satisfactory to City, evidencing that all required insurance coverage is in effect. The City reserves the rights to require the Consultant to provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies.
f. Subcontractors: Consultant shall include all subcontractors as an insured (covered party) under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor.

All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein. g. Claims-made limitations. The following provisions shall apply if the professional liability coverage is written on a claims-made form:
i. The retroactive date of the policy must be shown and must be before the date of the Agreement.
ii. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five years after completion of the Agreement or the work, so long as commercially available at reasonable rates.
iii. If coverage is canceled or not renewed and it is not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a retroactive date that precedes the date of this Agreement, Consultant must purchase an extended period coverage for a minimum of three (3) years after completion of work under this Agreement.
iv. A copy of the claim reporting requirements must be submitted to the City for review prior to the commencement of any work under this Agreement.

4.3 All Policies Requirements.
a. Acceptability of insurers. All insurance required by this section is to be placed with insurers with a Bests' rating of no less than A:VII. Insurance shall be maintained through an insurer with a minimum A.M. Best Rating of A- or better, with deductible amounts acceptable to the City. Acceptance of Consultant’s insurance by City shall not relieve or decrease the liability of Consultant hereunder. Any deductible or self-insured retention amount or other similar obligation under the policies shall be the sole responsibility of the Consultant. b. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Consultant shall disclose to and obtain the written approval of City for the self-insured retentions and deductibles before beginning any of the services or work called for by any term of this Agreement. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, employees, and volunteers; or the Consultant shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to the City guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses.
c. Wasting Policies. No policy required by this Section 4 shall include a “wasting” policy limit (i.e. limit that is eroded by the cost of defense). d. Waiver of Subrogation. Consultant hereby agrees to waive subrogation which any insurer or contractor may require from vendor by virtue of the payment of any loss.

Consultant agrees to obtain any endorsements that may be necessary to affect this waiver of City Council/RSA Agenda 391 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 7 of 32 subrogation. The Workers’ Compensation policy shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the entity for all work performed by the consultant, its employees, and subcontractors.

4.4 Remedies. In addition to any other remedies City may have if Consultant fails to provide or maintain any insurance policies or policy endorsements to the extent and within the time herein required, City may, at its sole option exercise any of the following remedies, which are alternatives to other remedies City may have and are not the exclusive remedy for Consultant’s breach:
• Obtain such insurance and deduct and retain the amount of the premiums for such insurance from any sums due under the Agreement;
• Order Consultant to stop work under this Agreement or withhold any payment that becomes due to Consultant hereunder, or both stop work and withhold any payment, until Consultant demonstrates compliance with the requirements hereof; and/or • Terminate this Agreement.

Section 5. INDEMNIFICATION AND CONSULTANT’S RESPONSIBILITIES.

A. Consultant shall, to the extent permitted by law, indemnify, hold harmless and assume the defense of, in any actions at law or in equity, the City, its employees, agents, volunteers, and elective and appointive boards, from all claims, losses, and damages (excluding claims arising from a professional error or omission), including property damage, personal injury, death, and liability of every kind, nature and description, arising out of, pertaining to or related to the negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of Consultant or any person directly or indirectly employed by, or acting as agent for, Consultant, during and after completion of Consultant’s work under this Agreement.

B. With respect to those claims arising from a professional error or omission, Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City (including its elected officials, officers, employees, and volunteers) from all claims, losses, and damages to the extent caused by the professionally negligent acts, errors or omissions of Consultant. Consultant has no obligation to pay for any of City Indemnitees defense related cost prior to a final determination of liability by either a Court of law or third party neutral, or to pay any amount that exceeds Consultant’s finally determined percentage of liability based upon the comparative fault of Consultant, except as provided in Civil Code Section 2782.8(a) and (e).

C. Consultant's obligation under this section does not extend to that portion of a claim caused in whole or in part by the active negligence or willful misconduct of the City.

D. Consultant shall also indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City from all suits or claims for infringement of any patent rights, copyrights, trade secrets, trade names, trademarks, service marks, or any other proprietary rights of any person or persons because of the City or any of its officers, employees, volunteers, or agents use of articles, products things, or services supplied in the performance of Consultant’s services under this Agreement.

E. Notwithstanding the forgoing, to the extent this Agreement is a “construction contract” as defined by California Civil Code Section 2782, as may be amended from time to time, such duties of consultant to indemnify shall not apply when to do so would be prohibited by California Civil Code Section 2782.

City Council/RSA Agenda 392 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 8 of 32 F. In the event that Consultant or any employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant providing services under this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) to be eligible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of City, Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for the payment of any employee and/or employer contributions for PERS benefits on behalf of Consultant or its employees, agents, or subcontractors, as well as for the payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise be the responsibility of City.

Section 6. STATUS OF CONSULTANT.

6.1 Independent Contractor. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall be an independent contractor and shall not be an employee of City. City shall have the right to control Consultant only insofar as the results of Consultant's services rendered pursuant to this Agreement and assignment of personnel pursuant to Subparagraph 1.3; however, otherwise City shall not have the right to control the means by which Consultant accomplishes services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other City, state, or federal policy, rule, regulation, law, or ordinance to the contrary, Consultant and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors providing services under this Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to, and hereby agree to waive any and all claims to, any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by City, including but not limited to eligibility to enroll in the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) as an employee of City and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by City for employer contributions and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits.

6.2 Consultant Not an Agent. Except as City may specify in writing, Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent.

Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement to bind City to any obligation whatsoever.

Section 7. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS.

7.1 Governing Law. The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement.

7.2 Compliance with Applicable Laws. Consultant and any subcontractors shall comply with all laws applicable to the performance of the work hereunder.

7.3 Other Governmental Regulations. To the extent that this Agreement may be funded by fiscal assistance from another governmental entity, Consultant and any subcontractors shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations to which City is bound by the terms of such fiscal assistance program. Specifically, the requirements of the Alameda CTC are as follows:

ALAMEDA CTC Local Business Contract Equity Program

1. Consultant shall comply with all applicable provisions of Alameda County Transportation Commission’s (ALAMEDA CTC’s) Local Business Contract Equity (LBCE) Program, incorporated herein by reference as if attached hereto. City shall provide a copy of the LBCE PROGRAM to Consultant upon request.

2. If the Consultant or any subconsultant is a Local Business Enterprise (“LBE”), Small Local Business Enterprise (“SLBE”), and/or Very Small Local Business Enterprise (“VSLBE”) firm, the certificate for that firm shall be attached to this AGREEMENT.

3. No substitution of a listed LBE, SLBE, or VSLBE subconsultant on a contract can be City Council/RSA Agenda 393 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 9 of 32 made without the prior written approval of City with agreement of ALAMEDA CTC. If an LBE, SLBE, or VSLBE subconsultant is unable to perform successfully, the City or Consultant shall submit a written request to ALAMEDA CTC for approval to replace such firm. Consultant must make good faith efforts to replace such LBE, SLBE, or VSLBE with another LBE, SLBE, or VSLBE, respectively. ALAMEDA CTC may investigate the circumstances surrounding the substitution request.

4. Consultant agrees that within ten (10) calendar days’ receipt of payment from City, Consultant shall pay to its subconsultants all amounts due from such payment for satisfactory performance of its contract, subject to such legal requirements under federal or state law regarding withholding of disputed payments and applicable penalties. Any delay or postponement of payment over thirty (30) days may take place only for good cause and with ALAMEDA CTC’s prior written approval. This requirement shall not be construed to limit or impair any contractual, administrative, or judicial remedies, otherwise available to the Consultant or subconsultant in the event of a dispute involving late payment or nonpayment by the Consultant, deficient subconsultant performance, and/or noncompliance by a subconsultant. This clause applies to LBE, SLBE, and VSLBE and non- LBE, SLBE, and VSLBE subconsultants.

5. Consultant agrees to include any subconsultant’s acceptable invoices with each Payment Request Form that it submits to Sponsor Agency no later than thirty (30) calendar days after receipt of such invoice from the subconsultant. This clause applies to LBE, SLBE, and VSLBE and non- LBE, SLBE, and VSLBE subconsultants.

6. Consultant agrees further to release retainage payments, if any, to each subconsultant within thirty (30) calendar days after the subconsultant’s work is completed and accepted. Any delay or postponement of payment over thirty (30) days may take place only for good cause and with ALAMEDA CTC’s prior written approval. This clause applies to Prime Consultant.

7.4 Licenses and Permits. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant and its employees, agents, and any subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications, and approvals of whatsoever nature that are legally required to practice their respective professions. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant and its employees, agents, any subcontractors shall, at their sole cost and expense, keep in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals that are legally required to practice their respective professions. In addition to the foregoing, Consultant and any subcontractors shall obtain and maintain during the term of this Agreement valid Business Licenses from City.

7.5 Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity. Consultant shall not discriminate, on the basis of a person’s race, religion, color, national origin, age, physical or mental handicap or disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, or sexual orientation, against any employee, applicant for employment, subcontractor, bidder for a subcontract, or participant in, recipient of, or applicant for any services or programs provided by Consultant under this Agreement. Consultant shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, policies, rules, and requirements related to equal opportunity and nondiscrimination in employment, contracting, and the provision of any services that are the subject of this Agreement, including but not limited to the satisfaction of any positive obligations required of Consultant thereby.

Consultant shall include the provisions of this Subsection in any subcontract approved by the Contract Administrator or this Agreement.

City Council/RSA Agenda 394 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 10 of 32 Section 8. TERMINATION AND MODIFICATION.

8.1 Termination. City, or Consultant, may cancel this Agreement at any time and without cause upon written notification to Consultant. Consultant may cancel this Agreement upon thirty (30) days’ written notice to City and shall include in such notice the reasons for cancellation.

In the event of termination, Consultant shall be entitled to compensation for services performed to the effective date of termination; Additional costs may be incurred after the date of written termination in order to package up and complete other pertinent project closeout procedures. City, however, may condition payment of such compensation upon Consultant delivering to City any or all work product, including, but not limited to documents, photographs, computer software, video and audio tapes, and other materials provided to Consultant or prepared by or for Consultant or the City in connection with this Agreement.

8.2 Extension. City may, in its sole and exclusive discretion, extend the end date of this Agreement beyond that provided for in Subsection 1.1. Any such extension shall require a written amendment to this Agreement, as provided for herein.

8.3 Amendments. The parties may amend this Agreement only by a writing signed by all the parties.

8.4 Assignment and Subcontracting. City and Consultant recognize and agree that this Agreement contemplates personal performance by Consultant and is based upon a determination of Consultant’s unique personal competence, experience, and specialized personal knowledge.

Moreover, a substantial inducement to City for entering into this Agreement was and is the professional reputation and competence of Consultant. Consultant may not assign this Agreement or any interest therein without the prior written approval of the Contract Administrator. Consultant shall not subcontract any portion of the performance contemplated and provided for herein, other than to the subcontractors noted in the proposal, without prior written approval of the Contract Administrator.

8.5 Survival. All obligations arising prior to the termination of this Agreement and all provisions of this Agreement allocating liability between City and Consultant shall survive the termination of this Agreement.

8.6 Options upon Breach by Consultant. If Consultant materially breaches any of the terms of this Agreement, City’s remedies shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

8.6.1 Immediately terminate the Agreement;

8.6.2 Retain the plans, specifications, drawings, reports, design documents, and any other work product prepared by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement;

8.6.3 Retain a different consultant to complete the work described in Exhibit A-1 not finished by Consultant; or

8.6.4 Charge Consultant the difference between the cost to complete the work described in Exhibit A-1 that is unfinished at the time of breach and the amount that City would have paid Consultant pursuant to Section 2 if Consultant had completed the work.

City Council/RSA Agenda 395 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 11 of 32 Section 9. KEEPING AND STATUS OF RECORDS.

9.1 Records Created as Part of Consultant’s Performance. All reports, data, maps, models, charts, studies, surveys, photographs, memoranda, plans, studies, specifications, records, files, or any other documents or materials, in electronic or any other form, that Consultant prepares or obtains pursuant to this Agreement and that relate to the matters covered hereunder shall be the property of the City. Consultant hereby agrees to deliver those documents to the City upon termination of the Agreement. It is understood and agreed that the documents and other materials, including but not limited to those described above, prepared pursuant to this Agreement are prepared specifically for the City and are not necessarily suitable for any future or other use. City and Consultant agree that, until final approval by City, all data, plans, specifications, reports and other documents are confidential and will not be released to third parties without prior written consent of both parties.

9.2 Consultant’s Books and Records. Consultant shall maintain any and all ledgers, books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or relating to charges for services or expenditures and disbursements charged to the City under this Agreement for a minimum of 3 years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to the Consultant to this Agreement.

9.3 Inspection and Audit of Records. Any records or documents that Section 9.2 of this Agreement requires Consultant to maintain shall be made available for inspection, audit, and/or copying at any time during regular business hours, upon oral or written request of the City. Under California Government Code Section 8546.7, if the amount of public funds expended under this Agreement exceeds $10,000.00, the Agreement shall be subject to the examination and audit of the State Auditor, at the request of City or as part of any audit of the City, for a period of 3 years after final payment under the Agreement.

Section 10 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.

10.1 Attorneys’ Fees. If a party to this Agreement brings any action, including an action for declaratory relief, to enforce or interpret the provision of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees in addition to any other relief to which that party may be entitled. The court may set such fees in the same action or in a separate action brought for that purpose.

10.2 Venue. In the event that either party brings any action against the other under this Agreement, the parties agree that trial of such action shall be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Alameda or in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

10.3 Severability. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement is invalid, void, or unenforceable, the provisions of this Agreement not so adjudged shall remain in full force and effect. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this Agreement.

10.4 No Implied Waiver of Breach. The waiver of any breach of a specific provision of this Agreement does not constitute a waiver of any other breach of that term or any other term of this Agreement.

City Council/RSA Agenda 396 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 12 of 32

10.5 Successors and Assigns. The provisions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall apply to and bind the successors and assigns of the parties.

10.6 Use of Recycled Products. Consultant shall prepare and submit all reports, written studies and other printed material on recycled paper to the extent it is available at equal or less cost than virgin paper.

10.7 Conflict of Interest. Consultant may serve other clients, but none whose activities within the corporate limits of City or whose business, regardless of location, would place Consultant in a “conflict of interest,” as that term is defined in the Political Reform Act, codified at California Government Code Section 81000 et seq.

Consultant shall not employ any City official in the work performed pursuant to this Agreement. No officer or employee of City shall have any financial interest in this Agreement that would violate California Government Code Sections 1090 et seq. Consultant hereby warrants that it is not now, nor has it been in the previous 12 months, an employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City. If Consultant was an employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City in the previous twelve months, Consultant warrants that it did not participate in any manner in the forming of this Agreement.

Consultant understands that, if this Agreement is made in violation of Government Code § 1090 et seq., the entire Agreement is void and Consultant will not be entitled to any compensation for services performed pursuant to this Agreement, including reimbursement of expenses, and Consultant will be required to reimburse the City for any sums paid to the Consultant. Consultant understands that, in addition to the foregoing, it may be subject to criminal prosecution for a violation of Government Code § 1090 and, if applicable, will be disqualified from holding public office in the State of California.

10.8 Solicitation. Consultant agrees not to solicit business at any meeting, focus group, or interview related to this Agreement, either orally or through any written materials.

10.9 Contract Administration. This Agreement shall be administered by the City Manager, or his designee, identified as Marilou Ayupan, Public Works Director ("Contract Administrator"). All correspondence, meeting documation, invoices and project deliverables shall be directed to or through the Contract Administrator.

Marilou Ayupan, P.E.

Public Works Director
City of Union City
34009 Alvarado-Niles Road
Union City, CA 94587
[email protected]

10.10 Notices. Any written notice to Consultant shall be sent to:

Shawn O’Keefe, P.E.

Vice President/Principal
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc.
1970 Boradway, Suite 760
Oakland, CA 94612
[email protected]
City Council/RSA Agenda 397 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 13 of 32 All other written notices to City shall be sent to:

Joan M. Malloy Kristopher J. Kokotaylo,
City Manager City Attorney
City of Union City City of Union City
34009 Alvarado Niles Rd. with a copy to 34009 Alvarado Niles Rd.

Union City, CA 94587 Union City, CA 94587

10.11 Professional Seal. Where applicable in the determination of the contract administrator, the first page of a technical report, first page of design specifications, and each page of construction drawings shall be stamped/sealed and signed by the licensed professional responsible for the report/design preparation. The stamp/seal shall be in a block entitled "Seal and Signature of Registered Professional with report/design responsibility," as in the following example. _________________________________________
Seal and Signature of Registered Professional with
report/design responsibility.

10.12 Integration. This Agreement, including the scope of work attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibits A, B, and C represents the entire and integrated agreement between City and Consultant and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements, either written or oral.

Exhibit A-1 Scope of Services
Exhibit A-2 Schedule
Exhibit A-3 Team Organization
Exhibit B Compensation/Fee
Exhibit C Public Works Requirements

10.13 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one agreement.

SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE
City Council/RSA Agenda 398 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 14 of 32 The Parties have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date.

CITY OF UNION CITY MARK THOMAS & COMPANY, INC.
_______________________________ ______________________________ JOAN MALLOY, CITY MANAGER SHAWN O’KEEFE, VICE PRESIDENT ATTEST:
______________________________
ANNA M. BROWN, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
KRISTOPHER J. KOKOTAYLO

CITY ATTORNEY
City Council/RSA Agenda 399 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 15 of 32 EXHIBIT A-1

SCOPE OF SERVICES
FOR PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING (30% DESIGN) OF THE
EAST WEST CONNECTOR (QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY, PHASES 3 AND 4) PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04
City of Union City has now renamed the East West Connector project to Quarry Lakes Parkway (QLP) and this agreement covers preliminary engineering for QLP, Phases 3 and 4, City Project No. 18-04, as follows:

Phase 3: 11th Street Connection (11th Street to 7th Stree) Construct QLP from 7th Street to 11th Street. Construct cement deep soil mix interior walls, retaining walls and grade separation structure between QLP and UPRR (Niles Subdivision) including railroad shoofly. Construct cement deep mix protection slab and pump station with drainage facilities Extend 11th Street and install a new traffic signal at QLP/11th Street.

Phase 4: Alvarado-Niles Connection & Grade Separations (Alvarado-Niles Rd. to 11th St.) Construct QLP from 11th Street to Alvarado-Niles Road. Construct cement deep soil mix interior walls, retaining walls and grade separations between QLP and BART, and QLP and UPRR (Oakland Subdivision) including BART track shoofly/bus bridge and UPRR railroad shoofly. Complete the pump station system. Construct conforms along Alvarado-Niles Road and modify the traffic signal at the intersection of QLP/Alvarado-Niles Blvd and Monterra Terrace/Osprey Drive/Alvarado-Niles Road.

TASK 1. PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Mark Thomas shall provide project management for each task for the entire duration of the Agreement schedule. It is assumed this contract will last up to 6 months. The management functions are described in detail below:

Task 1.1. Supervise, Coordinate and Monitor Design
Mark Thomas will supervise, coordinate and monitor design for conformance with guidelines, standards and policies as noted herein.

Task 1.2. Team Coordination
Mark Thomas will coordinate with the other design consultants for timely flow of information for each task activity.

Task 1.3. BART, UP and ACWD Interface/Coordination
Mark Thomas will review and become knowledgeable with the most current guidelines/criteria for BART, UP and ACWD. Mark Thomas will interface/coordinate with BART, UP and ACWD to seek preliminary acceptance of the design approach including up to three meetings each with BART and UP and one meeting with ACWD.

City Council/RSA Agenda 400 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 16 of 32 Task 1.4. Codes/Standard Compliance
Mark Thomas will confirm compliance with other codes and standards as acceptable to City.

Any deviation from these standards and codes shall be documented as “Design Deviation”.

Task 1.5. Maintain Project Files
Mark Thomas will maintain project files and provide a file repository in the Microsoft Teams environment.

Task 1.6. Update Project CPM Schedule
Mark Thomas will update the Project CPM schedule on a monthly basis and submit a PDF file at the end of each month.

Task 1.7. Meetings
Mark Thomas will attend monthly design coordination check-in meetings. This task also includes up to 8 City meetings to resolve engineering issues and one presentation to City Council. Project Manager shall participate and attend City’s weekly meeting up to 10 meetings.

Task 1.8. Invoices and Progress Reports
Mark Thomas will prepare and submit budgets, monthly progress and performance reports and invoices.

Task 1.9. Correspondence
Mark Thomas will prepare and submit correspondence and memos, including all meeting minutes.

Task 1.10. Quality Control / Quality Assurance
Mark Thomas will establish and implement a quality control and quality assurance procedures for design activities, perform in-house quality control reviews for each report and other task deliverables. Quality Control documentation can be submitted to the City upon request. For the purposes of this initial Phase of work, the QA/QC procedures from Phase 1 & 2 will be used.

Task 1.11. Design Coordination Meetings
Mark Thomas will conduct bi-monthly Project Development Team (PDT) design coordination meetings. The location for the meetings will be a location to be determined by City of Union City and meetings shall include a video capable conference link for remote attendance. Mark Thomas will prepare and submit an agenda, data request log of information requested from and provided to others and meeting minutes after each meeting. The agenda outline shall cover cost, schedule and scope issues.

City Council/RSA Agenda 401 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 17 of 32

DELIVERABLES
• Meeting agendas and minutes (up to 24 meetings)
− 3 BART
− 3 UP
− 1 ACWD
− 8 City for resolution
− 10 weekly
• Monthly Invoice, progress report and project schedule updates • Presentation Materials for Project Coordination Meetings • All deliverables will be in .pdf format unless specified otherwise TASK 2. DATA COLLECTION AND REVIEW
Mark Thomas shall obtain, and review readily available data and information related to the design the project. This information may be obtained from the City, CALTRANS, Alameda CTC, utilities, and other agencies and organizations.

Data to be gathered and review include, but is not limited to the following:
• Environmental Document and Mitigation Monitoring Plan • East West Connector (EWC) Segment 3 Design Plans dated 2010 • Current BART Facilities Standards (BFS) that includes their design guidelines • UP current design guidelines
• As-built plans
• Utility information
• Aerial photos and available mapping, including digital topography • Survey - assumes no new field investigations are included in this scope of work • Right of Way information
• Historical correspondence

DELIVERABLES
• List of additional information gathered
• List of additional information required for final design • All deliverables will be in .pdf format unless specified otherwise TASK 3. ROADWAY AND BRIDGE PLAN UPDATE
Task 3.1. 30% Level Plans
Mark Thomas will utilize the plans prepared as part of the 2010 EWC plan set as a basis to update the roadway and bridge plans to 30% level engineering. The level of detail shall be sufficient to develop realistic quantities and costs for a construction cost estimate that will be used to establish funding for the Project moving forward and will become the basis of design for final design. This effort will identify any updated criteria needed for today’s design and City Council/RSA Agenda 402 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 18 of 32 estimate its impact on the current design. It is anticipated that this Plan Set will consist of the following subtasks:

Task 3.1.1. Roadway, Utilities, and Landscaping
Title Sheet, Roadway Typical Cross Sections, Roadway Plan and Profile, Utilities and Underground Improvement, Conceptual Landscaping based on the Plan Set developed under Phase 1 & 2 (Mark Thomas / CSW / with a placeholder for PGA and ROMA) will be updated if the UP and BART structures impacts the roadway layout.

Task 3.1.2. Roadway and Track Drainage
Roadway and track drainage plans and profiles based on initial EWC concept with updates for current design criteria and risks (HDR)
Task 3.1.3. Retaining Walls
Retaining Walls plan, profile and typical sections (AECOM / Fugro) Task 3.1.4. BART Underpass Bridge General Plan
BART Underpass Bridge general plan that includes plan, profile, staging (temporary shoofly and/or other approach developed per Task 3.1.7) and typical section (OPAC) Task 3.1.5. UPRR Oakland Subdivision Underpass Bridge General Plan UPRR Oakland Subdivision Underpass Bridge general plan that includes plan, profile, staging (temporary shoofly and/or other approach developed per Task 3.1.7) and typical section (Mark Thomas)
Task 3.1.6. UPRR Niles Subdivision Underpass Bridge General Plan UPRR Niles Subdivision Underpass Bridge general plan that includes plan, profile, staging (temporary shoofly and/or other approach developed per Task 3.1.7) and typical section (Mark Thomas)
Task 3.1.7. Construction Staging – BART and UPRR Oakland Subdivision Construction Staging for BART and UPRR Oakland and Niles Subdivisions including shoofly design for BART and UPRR tracks based on initial EWC concept with updates for current design criteria and risks (AECOM).

Task 3.1.8. BART and UPRR Oakland Subdivisions Permanent Track Alignment City Council/RSA Agenda 403 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 19 of 32 BART and UPRR Oakland Subdivisions permanent track alignment plan, profile and typical sections with an evaluation for using a design speed of 79 mph above what was shown in the EWC at 50 mph for BART and 25 mph for UPRR (AECOM)
Task 3.1.9. UPRR Niles Subdivision Permanent Track Alignment UPRR Niles Subdivision permanent track alignment plan, profile and typical sections (Mark Thomas)
Task 3.1.10. Pump Station
Pump Station plan, profile and typical section as part of the overall drainage evaluation (HDR) Task 3.1.11. Ground Improvement
Ground improvement plan, profile and typical section as part of the retaining wall evaluation (Mark Thomas / AECOM / Parikh / Fugro)
Task 3.1.12. Creek Restoration
Creek restoration concept design (Balance)
Task 3.1.13. PDR (Predesign Report)
If there are alternatives or optional design approaches for above tasks (Task 3.1.1 thru 3.1.12), Mark Thomas will prepare PDR Reports for City’s review and input and then finalize and document the decisions made. PDR will be sequentially numbered and will become the basis for final design.

Assumptions:
■ No surveys will be conducted at this phase but areas to be survey will be identified for subsequent phases of the project
■ No field investigation will be conducted such as geotechnical investigation or hazardous materials. Estimates will be based on available data collected to date Task 3.2. Engineer’s Estimate
Mark Thomas will prepare an updated engineering estimate broken down by bid items based on quantities and unit prices as appropriate based on the Hybrid Plan Set. Estimate will list assumptions and potential risks along with contingencies and escalation.

DELIVERABLES
• PDR Reports
• 30% level engineering plans
City Council/RSA Agenda 404 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 20 of 32 • Bridge General Plans
• Engineers Cost Estimate
• All deliverables will be in .pdf format unless specified otherwise TASK 4. Design Guidelines
Task 4.1. Design Guidelines
As a part of the Mark Thomas team, PGA Design will prepare design guidelines for Phases 1 through 5 of QLP from Mission Boulevard to Paseo Padre Parkway. The guidelines will include items such as lighting, planting, cross-sections, setbacks, concrete colors, monumentation and wall and bridge aesthetics. This task includes up to three coordination meetings with the City and one with the City of Fremont. It is assumed no public outreach or public comments will be needed or required for preparation of the guidelines. After the draft guidelines are prepared and submitted it is anticipated that the Cities will provide one set of consolidated comments. After those comments are received and addressed the Design Guidelines will be finalized.

DELIVERABLES
• Draft and Final Design Guidelines
• All deliverables will be in .pdf format unless specified otherwise City Council/RSA Agenda 405 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 21 of 32 EXHIBIT A-2

SCHEDULE

1. Notice to Proceed November 22, 2022

2. Kick-off Meeting November 29, 2022

3. Complete Review of Data December 20, 2022

4. Update Engineering Drawings Hybrid Plans with Exhibits February 1, 2023

5. Complete General Plans February 20, 2023

6. First Meeting with BART and UP February 27, 2023

7. Follow-up Meetings with BART and UP March 30, 2023

8. First Submittal of Cost Estimates March 30, 2023

9. Follow-up Meeting with BART and UP April 1, 2023

10. Finalize Cost Estimates and draft presentation to ACTC April 10, 2023

11. Alameda CTC Programs and Policy Sub-Committee May 8, 2023

12. Alameda CTC Board Meeting May 25, 2023
City Council/RSA Agenda 406 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 22 of 32 EXHIBIT A-3

CONSULTANT DESIGN TEAM ORGANZIATION
City Council/RSA Agenda 407 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 23 of 32

EXHIBIT B

COMPENSATION/FEE
FEE BREAKDOWN BY TASK:

Task
No. Task Description Task Budget
1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT $337,443.59

1.1 Supervise, Coordinate and Monitor Design $106,920.13

1.2 Monthly Invoices, Progress Reports and Schedule
Updates $41,813.88

1.3 Meetings $153,811.71

1.4 Quality Control/Quality Assurance $34,897.88
2 DATA GATHERING & REVIEW $51,141.02

2.1 Data Gathering & Review $51,141.02
3 CONSTRUCTION COST VALIDATION $1,570,385.14

3.1.1 Roadway, Utilities, and Landscaping $218,268.92

3.1.2 Roadway and Track Drainage $41,871.75

3.1.3 Retaining Walls $238,159.15

3.1.4 BART Underpass Bridge General Plan $100,468.95

3.1.5 UPRR Oakland Subdivision Underpass Bridge General Plan $95,362.81

3.1.6 UPRR Niles Subdivision Underpass Bridge General
Plan $95,362.81

3.1.7 Construction Staging - BART and UPRR Oakland
Subdivision $186,017.27

3.1.8 BART and UPRR Oakland Subdivisions Permanent
Track Alignment $30,736.62

3.1.9 UPRR Niles Subdivision Permanent Track Alignment $99,775.12

3.1.10 Pump Station $34,211.70

3.1.11 Ground Improvement $35,569.68

3.1.12 Creek Restoration $55,512.92

3.1.13 PDR (Predesign Report) $206,005.59

3.2 Engineer's Estimate $133,061.86
4 Design Guidelines $128,630.25
TOTAL $2,087,600.00
City Council/RSA Agenda 408 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 24 of 32 FEE BREAKDOWN BY FIRMS:

Consultant Tier
Certification
(LBE, SLBE,
VSLBE and/or
DBE)
Budget

NON-CONTINGENCY

TASKS/DELIVERABLES
Mark Thomas & Company,
Inc.*† Prime LBE $1,018,147.37
AECOM Technical
Services, Inc. Tier 1 LBE $303,599.63
Balance Hydrologics, Inc. Tier 1 SLBE $77,807.85
Bonnie Fisher Tier 2 under ROMA None $36,400.00
Boris Dramov Tier 2 under ROMA None $36,400.00
CSW | ST2 Tier 1 LBE, SLBE $33,648.35
Fugro USA Land, Inc. Tier 1 LBE $55,721.35
HDR Engineering, Inc. Tier 1 LBE $90,428.09
OPAC Engineering Tier 1 DBE $194,794.27
Parikh Consultants, Inc. Tier 1 LBE, SLBE, DBE $74,584.32 PGA Design Inc. Tier 1 LBE, SLBE,
VSLBE $113,067.15
ROMA Collaborative Tier 1 DBE $10,077.95
Y&C Transportation
Consultants Tier 1 LBE, SLBE, VSLBE, DBE $42,923.68

CONTINGENCY TASKS/DELIVERABLES
TOTAL: $2,087,600.00
DBE Total
(excluding on-call
or optional
budget):

15.44%
LBE Total
(excluding on-call
or optional
budget):

86.70%
SLBE Total
(excluding on-call
or optional
budget):

16.38%
City Council/RSA Agenda 409 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 25 of 32 MARK THOMAS & CO. RATE SCHEDULE
Engineering Surveying
Design Engineer I $88 - $145 Surveyor $109 - $155
Design Engineer II $109 - $177 Sr. Surveyor $123 - $187 Project Engineer $147 - $184 Project Surveyor $144 - $219 Sr. Project Engineer $158 - $216 Sr. Project Surveyor $167 - $226 Sr. Technical Engineer $158 - $216 * Single Chief $153 - $203 Technical Lead $182 - $248 * Single Instrumentman $144 - $181 Sr. Technical Lead $217 - $316 * Single Chainman $135 - $177 Engineering/Design Manager $282 - $361 * Apprentice $81 - $139 Sr. Engineering Manager $311 - $452 * 1 Person Field Crew $153 - $203 * 2 Person Field Crew $288 - $407
Construction Management * 3 Person Field Crew $369 - $584 Office Engineer $109 - $207
* Asst. Resident Engineer $155 - $284 Technicians
* Inspector - CM $150 - $284 Intern $47 - $103
RE/Structural Representative $205 - $345 Technician/Office/Survey Technician $62 - $129 Area Manager - CM $308 - $452 Sr. Technician/Survey Technician $91 - $177 Planning
Lead Technician/Survey Technician $123 - $200
Planner I $82 - $106 Project Management & Oversight
Planner II $106 - $132 Project/Survey Manager $182 - $258 Sr. Planner $120 - $165 Sr. Project/Survey Manager $217 - $345 Division Manager $244 - $381
Landscape Architecture/Urban Design Principal $390 - $461 Landscape Designer I $76 - $113
Landscape Designer II $94 - $142 Project Support
Landscape Architect $109 - $190 Technical/Sr. Technical Writer $59 - $171 Sr. Landscape Architect $117 - $213 Project/Sr. Project Assistant $70 - $132 Project/Sr. Project Coordinator $94 - $168
Grant Writing Graphic/Sr. Graphic Designer $100-$187
Funding Specialist $109 - $210 Project/Sr. Project Accountant $103 - $177 Sr. Funding Specialist $147 - $226 Sr. Graphic Manager $141 - $207 Funding Manager $249 - $326 Project Accountant Manager $155 - $216 District Management Special Services
* Inspector - Apprentice $59 - $106 Expert Witness $470 * Inspector/Sr. Inspector $97 - $158 Strategic Consulting $470 Associate Sanitary Engineer $138 - $207
Sr. Sanitary Project Engineer $161 - $281
Deputy District Manager $223 - $339
District Manager-Engineer $305 - $368
Fee expires June 30, 2023
City Council/RSA Agenda 410 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 26 of 32

FIXED HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE BY FIRM
Consultant Personnel Name Title and/or Role
Fixed
Hourly
Rate
($)
Effective
Period
01/01/22-
12/13/22
Fixed
Hourly
Rate
($)
Effective
Period
01/01/23-
12/31/23
Fixed
Hourly
Rate
($)
Effective
Period
01/01/24-
12/31/24
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Shawn O'Keefe* Principal/Strategic Advisor $390.98 $410.53 $431.06 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Etty Mercurio* Project Manager $352.73 $370.36 $388.88 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Danielle Sanchez* Civil Lead $202.18 $212.29 $222.90 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Technical Lead $217.98 $228.88 $240.33 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Sr. Project Engineer $189.71 $199.20 $209.16 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Project Engineer $164.20 $172.41 $181.03 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Design Engineer II $150.68 $158.22 $166.13 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Design Engineer I $123.10 $129.26 $135.72 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Sr. Project Manager (Structures - Various) $280.00 $294.00 $308.70
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Sr. Project Engineer (Structures - Various) $197.00 $206.85 $217.19
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Project Engineer
(Structures - Various) $172.50 $181.13 $190.18
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Design Engineer II
(Structures - Various) $150.68 $158.22 $166.13
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Sr. Technician (Structures - Various) $152.06 $159.67 $167.65
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Deputy District Manager $303.77 $318.95 $334.90 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various CM Division Manager $310.39 $325.91 $342.20 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Operations Manager $273.15 $286.81 $301.15 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various LAUD Division Manager $250.67 $263.20 $276.36 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Sr. Engineering Manager $391.67 $411.26 $431.82 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Survey Division Manager $334.71 $351.45 $369.02 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Survey Manager $226.18 $237.49 $249.36 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Sr. Project Surveyor $198.59 $208.52 $218.95 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Sr. Sruveyor $160.94 $168.99 $177.44 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Lead Survey Technician $170.05 $178.55 $187.48 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Sr. Survey Technician $146.55 $153.87 $161.57 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various† 2 Person Field Crew $354.38 $372.10 $390.70 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Sr. Project Coordinator $147.29 $154.66 $162.39 Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Various Sr. Project Assistant $152.75 $160.39 $168.41 AECOM Tom Barnard Lead Sturctures Eng $308.08 $323.48 $339.65 AECOM TBD Track Eng $203.02 $213.17 $223.83
AECOM TBD Structures Eng $203.02 $213.17 $223.83
City Council/RSA Agenda 411 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 27 of 32 Consultant Personnel Name Title and/or Role
Fixed
Hourly
Rate
($)
Effective
Period
01/01/22-
12/13/22
Fixed
Hourly
Rate
($)
Effective
Period
01/01/23-
12/31/23
Fixed
Hourly
Rate
($)
Effective
Period
01/01/24-
12/31/24
AECOM Daniel Villanueva Systems Lead $239.51 $251.48 $264.06 AECOM Millette Litzinger Project Manager $302.39 $317.51 $333.39 AECOM Alan Boone Track Lead $258.82 $271.76 $285.35
AECOM TBD Sr. Signal Engineer $256.31 $269.12 $282.58
AECOM TBD Sr. Traction Power
Engineer $256.31 $269.12 $282.58
AECOM TBD Project Controls Lead $241.08 $253.14 $265.79 AECOM TBD Project Controls Analyst $142.11 $149.22 $156.68 AECOM TBD Administrator $126.89 $133.23 $139.89
AECOM TBD Sr. Administrator $164.95 $173.20 $181.86
AECOM TBD Staff Structures Engineer $144.65 $151.88 $159.48 AECOM TBD Sr. Structures Engineer $241.08 $253.14 $265.79 AECOM TBD CADD Technician $139.57 $146.55 $153.88
AECOM TBD Sr. CADD Technician $177.64 $186.52 $195.85
Balance Hydrologics, Inc. Peter Kulchawik Principal II $170.16 $178.67 $187.60 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. Tarick Abu-Aly Senior Professional $155.65 $163.43 $171.60 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. Zan Rubin Project Professional $149.62 $157.10 $164.95 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. Camille Pauley Staff Professional $110.69 $116.23 $122.04 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. Johnny Caspers Staff Professional $114.80 $120.54 $126.57 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. Jessalyn Siu Staff Professional $119.08 $125.04 $131.29 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. Dana Jepsen GIS/CADD Senior Analyst $131.64 $138.22 $145.13 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. Rachel Boitano Senior Project Administrator $157.92 $165.82 $174.11
Balance Hydrologics, Inc. Tylor Christopher Report Specialist $116.14 $121.95 $128.04 CSW | ST2 Kirk Bovitz Sr. Project Manager $211.74 $222.32 $233.44 CSW | ST2 Robert Stevens Sr. Project Manager $211.74 $222.32 $233.44 CSW | ST2 Cristopher Ethier Engineer II $151.78 $159.37 $167.34 CSW | ST2 Lorenzo Jimenez Engineer I $103.21 $108.37 $113.79 CSW | ST2 Alan Garcia Engineer I $100.18 $105.19 $110.45 CSW | ST2 Zhihong Huang Engineer II $115.36 $121.12 $127.18 Fugro USA Land, Inc. Jeriann Alexander
Principal
Engineer/Hazardous
Materials Specialist $297.70 $312.58 $328.21
Fugro USA Land, Inc. Karen EmeryTonkovich
Principal
Geologist/Hazardous
Materials Specialist $234.02 $245.72 $258.01
Fugro USA Land, Inc. Ecem Isleyen Senior Geologist/GIS
Specialist $154.32 $162.04 $170.14
City Council/RSA Agenda 412 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 28 of 32 Consultant Personnel Name Title and/or Role
Fixed
Hourly
Rate
($)
Effective
Period
01/01/22-
12/13/22
Fixed
Hourly
Rate
($)
Effective
Period
01/01/23-
12/31/23
Fixed
Hourly
Rate
($)
Effective
Period
01/01/24-
12/31/24
Fugro USA Land, Inc. Marissa McCallum Senior Editor/Word Processing $116.86 $122.70 $128.84
HDR Engineering, Inc. $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
OPAC Engineering Vivian Chang Principal Engineer $231.83 $243.42 $255.59 OPAC Engineering Francis Drouillard Principal Engineer $227.17 $238.53 $250.45 OPAC Engineering Matthew Etchepare Project Manager $203.64 $213.82 $224.52 OPAC Engineering Erik Lin Senior Engineer $179.69 $188.67 $198.11 OPAC Engineering Saurabh Ghag Engineer $102.91 $108.05 $113.46 OPAC Engineering Miguel Lamagna CADD Technician $115.94 $121.74 $127.83

PARIKH CONSULTANTS,
INC. G. PARIKH * PIC $299.11 $314.06 $329.77

PARIKH CONSULTANTS,
INC. D. WANG * PROJECT MANAGER & QA-QC $216.79 $227.63 $239.01

PARIKH CONSULTANTS,
INC. F. WANG * SEN. PROJECT ENGINEER $200.23 $210.24 $220.75

PARIKH CONSULTANTS,
INC. J. TURBAY Project Engineer $165.84 $174.13 $182.84

PARIKH CONSULTANTS,
INC. Staff Engineer Staff Engineer $111.02 $116.57 $122.40

PARIKH CONSULTANTS,
INC. Field Engineer Field Engineer $147.01 $154.36 $162.08

PARIKH CONSULTANTS,
INC. C. Langbein Project Geologist $133.98 $140.68 $147.72

PARIKH CONSULTANTS,
INC. Lab. Technician Lab. Technician $106.20 $111.51 $117.08

PARIKH CONSULTANTS,
INC.

DraftspersonCADD Draftsperson-CADD $116.59 $122.42 $128.54 PGAdesign Christopher Kent* Principal $270.44 $283.96 $298.16 PGAdesign Kari Tanaka* Senior Landscape Architect $152.83 $160.47 $168.49 PGAdesign Charla Kaul* Landscape Architect $113.20 $118.86 $124.81 PGAdesign Adrienne Newton* Landscape Designer $107.54 $112.92 $118.57 PGAdesign Robert Towar* Irrigation Designer $129.47 $135.95 $142.75 ROMA Collaborative Ivana Micic * Principal in Charge $239.95 $251.95 $264.55 ROMA Collaborative Mimi Ahn Senior Landscape Architect $220.19 $231.20 $242.76 ROMA Collaborative Erika Cesarino Designer $87.52 $91.90 $96.49 ROMA Collaborative Esther Sam Graphics $142.39 $149.51 $156.99 Y&C Transportation
Consultants, Inc. Daniel Yau Engineer XII $213.60 $224.28 $235.49 Y&C Transportation
Consultants, Inc. Kin Chan Engineer XI $197.99 $207.89 $218.29 Y&C Transportation
Consultants, Inc. Spencer Lee Engineer VII $135.23 $141.99 $149.09 City Council/RSA Agenda 413 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 29 of 32 Consultant Personnel Name Title and/or Role
Fixed
Hourly
Rate
($)
Effective
Period
01/01/22-
12/13/22
Fixed
Hourly
Rate
($)
Effective
Period
01/01/23-
12/31/23
Fixed
Hourly
Rate
($)
Effective
Period
01/01/24-
12/31/24
Y&C Transportation
Consultants, Inc. Jessica Wu Engineer VI $130.03 $136.53 $143.35 Y&C Transportation
Consultants, Inc. Meng Yang Engineer VI $120.66 $126.70 $133.03 Y&C Transportation
Consultants, Inc. Shannon Liao Engineer III $74.90 $78.64 $82.57 Y&C Transportation
Consultants, Inc. J. Nguyen Engineer I $66.57 $69.90 $73.40 Y&C Transportation
Consultants, Inc. A. Huynh Engineer I $66.57 $69.90 $73.40 Y&C Transportation
Consultants, Inc. Teresa Chan Technician III $55.76 $58.54 $61.47 City Council/RSA Agenda 414 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 30 of 32

EXHIBIT C

PROVISIONS REQUIRED FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS
PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA LABOR CODE SECTION 1720 ET SEQ.

HOURS OF WORK:

A. In accordance with California Labor Code Section 1810, 8 hours of labor in performance of the services described in Exhibit A shall constitute a legal day’s work under this contract.

B. In accordance with California Labor Code Section 1811, the time of service of any worker employed in performance of the services described in Exhibit A is limited to eight hours during any one calendar day, and forty hours during any one calendar week, except in accordance with California Labor Code Section 1815, which provides that work in excess of eight hours during any one calendar day and forty hours during any one calendar week is permitted upon compensation for all hours worked in excess of eight hours during any one calendar day and forty hours during any one calendar week at not less than one-and-one-half times the basic rate of pay.

C. The Consultant and its subcontractors shall forfeit as a penalty to the City $25 for each worker employed in the performance of the services described in Exhibit A for each calendar day during which the worker is required or permitted to work more than 8 hours in any one calendar day, or more than 40 hours in any one calendar week, in violation of the provisions of California Labor Code Section 1810 and following.

WAGES:

A. In accordance with California Labor Code Section 1773.2, the City has determined the general prevailing wages in the locality in which the services described in Exhibit A are to be performed for each craft or type of work needed to be as published by the State of California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Statistics and Research, a copy of which is on file in the City Public Works Office and shall be made available on request. The Consultant and subcontractors engaged in the performance of the services described in Exhibit A shall pay no less than these rates to all persons engaged in performance of the services described in Exhibit A.

B. In accordance with Labor Code Section 1775, the Consultant and any subcontractors engaged in performance of the services described in Exhibit A shall comply Labor Code Section 1775, which establishes a penalty of up to $50 per day for each worker engaged in the performance of the services described in Exhibit A that the Consultant or any subcontractor pays less than the specified prevailing wage. The amount of such penalty shall be determined by the Labor Commissioner and shall be based on consideration of the mistake, inadvertence, or neglect of the Consultant or subcontractor in failing to pay the correct rate of prevailing wages, or the previous record of the Consultant or subcontractor in meeting applicable prevailing wage obligations, or the willful failure by the Consultant or subcontractor to pay the correct rates of prevailing wages. A mistake, inadvertence, or neglect in failing to pay the correct rate of prevailing wages is not excusable if the Consultant or subcontractor had knowledge of their obligations under the California Labor Code. The Consultant or subcontractor shall pay the difference between the prevailing wage rates and the amount paid to each worker for each calendar day or portion thereof for which each worker was paid less than the prevailing wage City Council/RSA Agenda 415 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 31 of 32 rate. If a subcontractor worker engaged in performance of the services described in Exhibit A is not paid the general prevailing per diem wages by the subcontractor, the Consultant is not liable for any penalties therefore unless the Consultant had knowledge of that failure or unless the Consultant fails to comply with all of the following requirements:

1. The contract executed between the Consultant and the subcontractor for the performance of part of the services described in Exhibit A shall include a copy of the provisions of California Labor Code Sections 1771, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1813, and 1815.

2. The Consultant shall monitor payment of the specified general prevailing rate of per diem wages by the subcontractor by periodic review of the subcontractor’s certified payroll records.

3. Upon becoming aware of a subcontractor’s failure to pay the specified prevailing rate of wages, the Consultant shall diligently take corrective action to halt or rectify the failure, including, but not limited to, retaining sufficient funds due the subcontractor for performance of the services described in Exhibit A.

4. Prior to making final payment to the subcontractor, the Consultant shall obtain an affidavit signed under penalty of perjury from the subcontractor that the subcontractor has paid the specified general prevailing rate of per diem wages for employees engaged in the performance of the services described in Exhibit A and any amounts due pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1813.

C. In accordance with California Labor Code Section 1776, the Consultant and each subcontractor engaged in performance of the services described in Exhibit A shall keep accurate payroll records showing the name, address, social security number, work, straight time and overtime hours worked each day and week, and the actual per diem wages paid to each journeyman, apprentice, worker, or other employee employed in performance of the services described in Exhibit A. Each payroll record shall contain or be verified by a written declaration that it is made under penalty of perjury, stating both of the following:

1. The information contained in the payroll record is true and correct.

2. The employer has complied with the requirements of Sections 1771, 1811, and 1815 for any work performed by the employer’s employees on the public works project.

The payroll records required pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1776 shall be certified and shall be available for inspection by the Owner and its authorized representatives, the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, the Division of Apprenticeship Standards of the Department of Industrial Relations and shall otherwise be available for inspection in accordance with California Labor Code Section 1776.

D. In accordance with California Labor Code Section 1777.5, the Consultant, on behalf of the Consultant and any subcontractors engaged in performance of the services described in Exhibit A, shall be responsible for ensuring compliance with California Labor Code Section 1777.5 governing employment and payment of apprentices on public works contracts.

City Council/RSA Agenda 416 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Union City and Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. Page 32 of 32 E. In case it becomes necessary for the Consultant or any subcontractor engaged in performance of the services described in Exhibit A to employ for the services described in Exhibit A any person in a trade or occupation (except executive, supervisory, administrative, clerical, or other non manual workers as such) for which no minimum wage rate has been determined by the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations, the Contractor shall pay the minimum rate of wages specified therein for the classification which most nearly corresponds to services described in Exhibit A to be performed by that person. The minimum rate thus furnished shall be applicable as a minimum for such trade or occupation from the time of the initial employment of the person affected and during the continuance of such employment.

DIR REGISTRATION
Consultant shall be currently registered with the Department of Industrial Relations and qualified to perform public work consistent with Labor Code section 1725.5, except in limited circumstances as set forth in Labor Code section 1771.1. No contractor or subcontractor may be awarded a contract for public work on a public works project unless registered with the Department of Industrial Relations pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1725.5. Consultant agrees, in accordance with Section 1771.4 of the California Labor Code, that if the work under this Agreement qualifies as public work, it is subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the Department of Industrial Relations.

City Council/RSA Agenda 417 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
Consulting Service Agreement with
Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. for
30% Final Design of East West
Connector (Quarry Lakes Parkway,
Phases 3 and 4)
Joan Malloy, City Manager Item 7b. - November 22, 2022
City Council/RSA Agenda 418 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
2 Union City became the Lead Agency March 15, 2018.

Entered into Project Funding Agreement (PFA) #A18-0046 for $2.5 million to:
• Evaluate need for additional environmental work
• Prepare a traffic analysis
• Work with transit, pedestrian, and bicycle groups
• Submit updated cost estimate
• Report back upon completion of design work
• Secure regulatory permits (railroad, BART, environmental permits) • Complete design work
About $2.0 million remaining in PFA #A18-0046
Alameda CTC consented to use of grant funds for 30% design Phases 3 & 4 East West Connector (Quarry Lakes Parkway) Background
City Council/RSA Agenda 419 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
3 East West Connector (Quarry Lakes Parkway) Phases 3 & 4 City Council/RSA Agenda 420 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
4 East West Connector (Quarry Lakes Parkway) Drainage System City Council/RSA Agenda 421 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
5 • Extend Line M bypass outfall north
of QLP to Old Alameda Creek
• Relocated local stormwater
collection/water quality treatment
basins to upland of Old Alameda
Creek
• Initial design concept support from
regulatory agencies
• One regulatory permit for entire
corridor - need refined design of
Phases 3 and 4
EWC (QLP) Drainage
Update
City Council/RSA Agenda 422 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
6 Phase 3: 11th Street Connection
(11th Street to 7th Street)
▪ Construct Niles grade
separation structure
▪ Construct retaining walls and
concrete slab protection over
Aquifer
▪ Wetland mitigation Basin 2C
▪ Construct Line M bypass
▪ Install new traffic signal
▪ Extend 11th Street to QLP
▪ Install utilities
Phase 3 Project Cost: $ 91.5 Million
City Council/RSA Agenda 423 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
7 Phase 4: Alvarado-Niles Connection
(11th Street to Alvarado-Niles Road)
▪ Construct BART and Niles
railroad grade separation
structures
▪ Construct temporary railroad
shoofly (detour)
▪ Construct Retaining Walls
▪ Construct Line M bypass
▪ Wetland mitigation–New Basin
▪ Install and modify utilities
▪ Install new traffic signal and
street lighting
Phase 4 Project Cost: $79.7 Million
City Council/RSA Agenda 424 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
8 • Update Grade Separation Structures to current seismic criteria, railroad design standards
• Evaluate proposed railroad shoofly concepts
• Coordinate with Union Pacific and BART
• Design of gravity flowing Line M bypass
• Continued coordination with ACFCD, regulatory agencies • Identify wetland mitigation requirements for permit applications • Update Cost Estimates
REPORT TO ALAMEDA CTC COMMISSION IN MAY 2023
Need for 30% Design of Phases 3 and 4
City Council/RSA Agenda 425 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
9 East West Connector (Quarry Lakes Parkway)
Funds for 30% Design
• $ 1,878,840 - 2018 East West Connector Project
Funding Agreement No. A18-0046
• SB-1 will fund $208,760
• SB-1 funds will allow City to engage design experts that may not be in Alameda County - Flexibility
City Council/RSA Agenda 426 Tuesday, November 22, 2022
10 East West Connector (Quarry Lakes Parkway)
Recommendation
Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to
execute a Consulting Service Agreement with Mark
Thomas & Company, Inc. for Preliminary Engineering
(30% Final for East West Connector (Quarry Lakes
Parkway, Phases 3 and 4), City Project No. 18-04, in the amount of $2,087,600 and appropriate $208,760 from the
unassigned fund balance of SB-1 fund
City Council/RSA Agenda 427 Tuesday, November 22, 2022