HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-04-24 e-packet@6:00Wednesday, April 24, 2019
6:00 PM
City of South San Francisco
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
Municipal Services Building, Council Chambers
33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, CA
Special City Council
Special Meeting Agenda
April 24, 2019Special City Council Special Meeting Agenda
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 54956 of the Government Code of the State of
California, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco will hold a Special Meeting on Wednesday,
April 24, 2019, at 6:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive,
South San Francisco, California.
Purpose of the meeting:
Call to Order.
Roll Call.
Agenda Review.
Public Comments - comments are limited to items on the Special Meeting Agenda.
ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS
Report regarding a Study Session on Senate Bill 50 (Wiener): Planning and Zoning:
housing development incentives. (Christina Fernandez, Assistant to the City Manager)
1.
Report regarding a resolution awarding a construction contract to Flatiron West, Inc.
of Benicia, California for the WQCP Sodium Hypochlorite Storage Tank Replacement
Project (Project No. ss1601) in an amount not to exceed $1,682,000 and authorizing a
total construction budget of $2,020,000 and approve Budget Amendment Number
19.050. (Brian Schumacker, Plant Superintendent and Peter Vorametsanti, Swinerton)
2.
Resolution awarding a construction contract to Flatiron West, Inc. of Benicia,
California for the WQCP Sodium Hypochlorite Storage Tank Replacement Project
(Project No. ss1601) in an amount not to exceed $1,682,000 and authorizing a total
construction budget of $2,020,000.
2a.
Report regarding a resolution approving a consulting services agreement with
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. of Walnut Creek, California for the WQCP
Switchgear & Cogeneration Controls Upgrade Project (Project No. ss1705) in an
amount not to exceed $504,616, authorizing the City Manager to execute the
agreement, and authorizing a total design agreement budget of $555,000. (Brian
Schumacker, Plant Superintendent and Peter Vorametsanti, Consultant)
3.
Resolution approving a consulting services agreement with Kennedy/Jenks
Consultants, Inc. of Walnut Creek, California for the WQCP Switchgear &
Cogeneration Controls Upgrade Project (Project No. ss1705) in an amount not to
exceed $504,616, authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement, and
authorizing a total design agreement budget of $555,000.
3a.
Page 2 City of South San Francisco Printed on 6/6/2019
April 24, 2019Special City Council Special Meeting Agenda
Report regarding a resolution approving a consulting services agreement with EKI
Environment & Water of Burlingame, California for design and construction support
services for the WQCP Plant-Wide Coating and Corrosion Protection Project (Project
No. ss1307) in an amount not to exceed $687,100, authorizing the City Manager to
execute the agreement, and authorizing a total budget of $755,810. (Brian
Schumacker, Superintendent and Peter Vorametsanti, Swinerton)
4.
Resolution approving a consulting services agreement with EKI Environment & Water
of Burlingame, California for the WQCP Plant-Wide Coating and Corrosion
Protection Project (Project No. ss1307) in an amount not to exceed $687,100,
authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement, and authorizing a total budget
of $755,810.
4a.
Adjournment.
Page 3 City of South San Francisco Printed on 6/6/2019
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:19-339 Agenda Date:4/24/2019
Version:1 Item #:1.
Report regarding a Study Session on Senate Bill 50 (Wiener):Planning and Zoning:housing development
incentives.(Christina Fernandez, Assistant to the City Manager)
RECOMMENDATION
This item is informational only.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
San Mateo County’s median home price of $1.3M continues to top nationwide lists as one of the most
expensive counties to purchase a home.The average rent in San Mateo County is $3,453 for a two-bedroom
apartment and $2,695 for a one bedroom.The median monthly mortgage payment in the United States is
$1,030.In order to rent a home in San Mateo County,a renter needs to earn at least $114,823 a year to afford a
typical 2-bedroom apartment,making it difficult for median income families to afford to live in San Mateo
County.Only 24%of San Mateo County residents can afford to purchase an entry level home.That is lower
than the Bay Area’s average of 39% and the United States average of 71%.
It should come as no surprise that Bay Area residents found housing costs to be the top problem facing the
region,with 46%of Bay Area Council poll respondents indicating they were likely to leave the Bay Area in the
next few years.
The Bay Area is rich in jobs and poor in housing.Between 2010 and 2017,San Mateo County has created
83,000 new jobs while only building 7,100 new housing units,a 12:1 ratio.Up until a few years ago,the ratio
was 16:1 so there has been progress made, however a Jobs: Housing imbalance remains.
South San Francisco Housing
South San Francisco’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)estimates the City will need 1,864 units.
The Housing Element does not require that these units are built during the allocation cycle,but it does require a
City to have zoning in place to ensure that RHNA allocation can be constructed.The City has issued 264
building permits for new residential units.Forty permits were finalized this year and included the closeout of
several units within the 1256 Mission Road multifamily development.The City also completed entitlement
approval for 195 units for Cadence Phase Two by Sares Regis and 172 units for 988 El Camino Real by
Summerhill.In 2017,the City issued building permits for 42%of the expected housing units for the City.There
have been 778 units built since 2015 and 1,500 units in the pipeline entitled or deemed complete.
South San Francisco has many tools to incentivize the building of affordable housing including:Density Bonus
Ordinances,Inclusionary Zoning,In-Lieu Fees,Commercial Development Impact Fee,Updated California
Compliant Second Unit Ordinance,Reduced Parking Requirements,Housing Overlay Zones,Affordable
Housing Fund Use Policy, Renter Protections, and Tenant Based Assistance.
South San Francisco’s Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance Chapter 20.380 promotes “the provision of housing by
both public and private sectors for all income groups in the community”.The inclusionary zoning ordinance is
as follows:
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/18/2019Page 1 of 6
powered by Legistar™
File #:19-339 Agenda Date:4/24/2019
Version:1 Item #:1.
Until November 1, 2019:
·Rental developments have a 10% requirement, all low income (up to 80% AMI)
·For-sale developments have a 15% requirement, half low and half moderate (up to 120% AMI)
After November 1, 2019:
·Rental developments have a 15% requirement, 10% low and 5% very low (up to 50% AMI)
·For-sale development remains the same (15% requirement, half low and half moderate (up to 120%
AMI)
A Note about the State’s Density Bonus
The State Density Bonus affords developers that meet the threshold to qualify for the density bonus three
benefits whether or not they choose to build the bonus units. They get 1) waivers of development standards, 2)
one to three incentives or concessions, and 3) automatic parking reductions. Waivers must be proven
architecturally, so if they bonus units cannot fit in the building envelope prescribed by the zoning, developers
can request a waiver of development standards like setbacks and height in order to accommodate the additional
units. We could choose to waive setbacks, private open space requirements, and stepbacks before waiving
height limits in order to preserve lower height restrictions. Incentives and concessions must be proven
financially. Many developers are unwilling to share their pro formas publicly. In these cases, they would have
to demonstrate that the construction of the bonus units makes the project financially infeasible. If it did, the
City would have to consider waiving things like permit and impact fees, or provide financial assistance to these
projects. Finally, the parking reductions are automatic and mostly consistent with our existing parking
requirements, especially in the Downtown near Caltrain.
Senate Bill 50
In December 2018, Senator Wiener introduced Senate Bill 50 to create more homes near public transportation
and jobs. According to Senator Wiener, current patterns encourage development on farmlands and wild open
space while inducing lengthy commutes. Senate Bill 50 would incentivize development of small and medium
sized apartment buildings near public transportation and high opportunity job centers.
Incentives to build denser, multifamily housing near transit and job centers would include requiring local
governments to provide an equitable communities incentive to developers. Equitable communities incentives
include waivers from maximum controls on density, minimum parking requirements, maximum height
requirements, and maximum floor area ratio. Dependent on the project, there is also opportunity for up to three
additional incentives and concessions under the Density Bonus Law.
In order to obtain an equitable communities incentive, the residential development must be in either a jobs-rich
or transit-rich housing project. A transit-rich housing project is defined as “a residential development in which
the parcels are all within a ½ mile radius of a major transit stop or ¼ mile radius of a stop on a high quality bus
corridor.” A high quality bus corridor has 6 to 15 minute headways between the hours of 6-10am and 3-7pm. A
major transit stop was amended to include ferry terminals that are major transit stops. Samtrans services South
San Francisco with high frequency bus routes, specifically on El Camino Real and Grand Avenue.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/18/2019Page 2 of 6
powered by Legistar™
File #:19-339 Agenda Date:4/24/2019
Version:1 Item #:1.
A jobs-rich housing project means a residential development within a jobs-rich area as defined by the
Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and the Office of Planning and Research (OPR).
These areas meet both high opportunity and jobs rich based on regional analysis. The analysis takes into
consideration tracts that enable residents to live in jobs rich area measured by: (1) employment density and job
totals and (2) new housing sited in the tract that allows for shorter commutes.
The Equitable Communities Incentive allows Transit-Rich or Jobs-Rich projects to have no maximum
residential density, a minimum parking requirement of 0.5 spots per unit, with no changes to maximum height
and Floor Area Ratios (FAR). Potential developments located 0-1/4 miles from a major transit stop include no
maximum residential density, no minimum parking requirement, a maximum height limit of 55 feet unless the
current height limit is higher, and 3.25 floor area ratio unless the current maximum FAR is higher. Those
developments ¼ to ½ mile of a major stop will not have a maximum residential density, no minimum parking
requirements, a maximum height limit of 45 feet unless the current height limit is higher and 2.5 floor area ratio
unless the current maximum FAR is higher.
Transit-Rich or Jobs-
Rich Projects
0-1/4 mile of Major
Transit Stop
1/4-1/2 mile of Major
Transit Stop
Density Restriction No maximum
residential density
No maximum
residential density
No maximum
residential density
Parking Requirement Minimum parking
requirement of 0.5
spots per unit (unless
current minimum is
less)
No minimum parking
requirement
No minimum parking
requirement
Maximum Height
Limit
No change 55 feet (unless current
height limit is higher)
45 feet (unless current
height limit is higher)
Maximum FAR No change 3.25 (unless current
max FAR is higher)
2.5 (unless current max
FAR is higher)
In addition to building denser housing in a jobs-rich or transit-rich area, the development must also:
·Locate on a site that is zoned to allow housing an underlying use
·Prohibit sites (1) occupied by tenants within seven years preceding the date of the application and (2) on
any parcel on which an owner of residential real property has exercised their rights to withdraw
accommodations from rent within 15 years prior to the date of the application
·Adhere to all applicable labor, construction, employment, and wage standards required by law
·Complies with relevant standard requirements and prohibitions imposed by local government regarding
architectural design, restrictions on or oversight of demolition, impact fees, and community benefit
agreements
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/18/2019Page 3 of 6
powered by Legistar™
File #:19-339 Agenda Date:4/24/2019
Version:1 Item #:1.
·Remain affordable for 55 years for rental units and 45 years for units offered for sale
Affordable Housing Requirements
Senate Bill requires affordable units remain affordable for 55 years for rental units and 45 years for units
offered for sale. If the local government has adopted an inclusionary housing ordinance, and if the ordinance is
more than 20% for low income and 11% for very low income then the local ordinance will remain in effect. If
the local government has not adopted an inclusionary ordinance or if the ordinance is less than those are
required in Senate Bill 50, then the following Inclusionary Housing Requirement will be compulsory.
Project Size Inclusionary Requirement
1-10 units No affordability requirement.
11-20 units Development proponent may pay an in-lieu fee
where feasible toward housing offsite
affordable to lower income households.
21-200 units 15% low income; or 8% very low income; or
6% extremely low income
201-350 units 17% low income; or 10% very low income; or
8% extremely low income
351 or more units 25% low income; or 15% very low income; or
11% extremely low income
If a development contributes toward housing offsite by paying an in-lieu fee, the local government will make
every effort to ensure that affordable housing is located within ½ mile of the original project location. If no
housing sites are available, the local government will designate a site for affordable housing within the
boundaries of its jurisdiction.
Sensitive Communities
Senate Bill 50 asserts that communities of color and those with high concentrations of poverty are
disenfranchised with the community planning process.In order to provide more flexibility to those
communities,the bill contains a delay for sensitive communities until July 1,2020 as well as a process for
those communities to identify their own plans to encourage multifamily housing development at a range of
income levels to meet unmet needs, protect residents from displacement, and address other identified priorities.
A sensitive community is defined as “those communities where thirty percent or more of the population live
below the poverty line,and the residential racial segregation in the census tract is at least 1.25 as defined by the
Department of Housing and Community Development.In addition,it is an area designated by the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission (MTC)as the intersection of disadvantaged and vulnerable communities.This
designation will be updated every 5 years by the Department of Housing and Community Development.”
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/18/2019Page 4 of 6
powered by Legistar™
File #:19-339 Agenda Date:4/24/2019
Version:1 Item #:1.
Amendments
At the Government and Finance Committee on April 2, 2019, Senator Wiener introduced new amendments
including the inclusion of ferries, setting minimum requirements for low-income housing, defining a jobs-rich
area, and protection of mobile homes.
As of April 2, 2019, ferry terminals and ports are included in new density requirements. “Any area within a
quarter or one half mile of a planned rail or ferry station will also be rezoned to meet new density
requirements.”
Development near transit hubs will also face a minimum inclusionary zoning requirement of 15 to 25 percent
creation of low-income homes depending on the size of the project.
An amendment defining “jobs-rich area” which would allow people to live close to where they work, or new
housing developed that would reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
Mobile homes are also included in displacement protections.
Challenges
The League of California Cities (“League”) is opposing Senate Bill 50 unless amended. In a letter to Senator
Wiener dated March 27, 2019, the League has significant concerns regarding the potential to undermine locally
adopted General Plans and Housing Elements.
According to the League, local zoning is a primary function of cities and is an essential component of home
rule. The process of adoption, implementation, and enforcement of zoning ordinances should be open and fair
to the public and enhance the responsiveness of local decision-makers.
In addition, housing developers and transit agencies would have the power to determine housing densities,
heights up to 55 feet, parking requirements, and design review standards for “transit rich housing projects”.
Senate Bill 50 would require cities to allow greater density in communities that are high opportunity and jobs
rich, but lack access to public transit. This is at odds with state policies that encourage and incentivize more
dense housing near transit.
Further, some communities are exempt and able to provide their constituencies the opportunity to participate in
community led planning. All communities should have this opportunity as long as state objectives are still met.
Support and Opposition
There is no question that housing remains the top problem facing Californians. However, the way to solve this
problem remains a very divisive one. Senate Bill 50 is co-sponsored by California YIMBY and the California
Association of Realtors. Other supporters include apartment associations, associations of students, building and
trades, housing alliances, and chambers of commerce. Opposition includes the AIDS Healthcare Foundation,
American Planning Association, the League of California Cities, resident/homeowners associations, anti-
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/18/2019Page 5 of 6
powered by Legistar™
File #:19-339 Agenda Date:4/24/2019
Version:1 Item #:1.
displacement groups, and anti-growth organizations. For a full list, please see Attachment B.
Next Steps
Senate Bill 50 passed out of the Senate Committee on Housing on April 2, 2019 with a vote of 9-1 (Ayes:
Caballero, Durazo, Moorlach, Morrell, Roth, Skinner, Umberg, Wieckowski, and Wiener - Noes: Bates). Next,
SB 50 will be heard before the Senate Committee on Governance and Finance on April 24, 2019.
FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal impact is unknown.
RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN
This item is informational only.
CONCLUSION
While the majority of Californians agree that housing is the biggest problem facing the state,few can agree on
the right solution.Senate Bill 50 provides incentives for developers to develop denser and more affordable
housing near transit and jobs rich areas.However,residents,cities,and others maintain that the State
overreaches its authority in prescribing density,height,and parking requirements maintained as the prerogative
of cities and counties.
Attachment:
A.Senate Bill 50 (as of 4/2/19)
B.List of Supporters and Opposition
C.Senate Bill 50 PowerPoint Presentation
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/18/2019Page 6 of 6
powered by Legistar™
AMENDED IN SENATE MARCH 11, 2019
SENATE BILL No. 50
Introduced by Senator Wiener
(Coauthors: Senators Caballero, Hueso, Moorlach, and Skinner)
Skinner, and Stone)
(Coauthors: Assembly Members Burke, Diep, Fong, Kalra, Kiley, Low,
Robert Rivas, Ting, and Wicks)
December 3, 2018
An act to amend Section 65589.5 of, and to add Chapter 4.35
(commencing with Section 65918.50) to Division 1 of Title 7 of the
Government Code, relating to housing.
legislative counsel’s digest
SB 50, as amended, Wiener. Planning and zoning: housing
development: equitable communities incentive. incentives.
Existing law, known as the Density Bonus Law, requires, when an
applicant proposes a housing development within the jurisdiction of a
local government, that the city, county, or city and county provide the
developer with a density bonus and other incentives or concessions for
the production of lower income housing units or for the donation of
land within the development if the developer, among other things, agrees
to construct a specified percentage of units for very low, low-, or
moderate-income households or qualifying residents.
This bill would require a city, county, or city and county to grant
upon request an equitable communities incentive when a development
proponent seeks and agrees to construct a residential development, as
defined, that satisfies specified criteria, including, among other things,
that the residential development is either a job-rich housing project or
a transit-rich housing project, as those terms are defined; the site does
98
not contain, or has not contained, housing occupied by tenants or
accommodations withdrawn from rent or lease in accordance with
specified law within specified time periods; and the residential
development complies with specified additional requirements under
existing law. The bill would require that a residential development
eligible for an equitable communities incentive receive waivers from
maximum controls on density and minimum controls on automobile
parking requirements greater than 0.5 parking spots per unit, up to 3
additional incentives or concessions under the Density Bonus Law, and
specified additional waivers if the residential development is located
within a 1⁄2 -mile or 1⁄4 -mile radius of a major transit stop, as defined.
The bill would authorize a local government to modify or expand the
terms of an equitable communities incentive, provided that the equitable
communities incentive is consistent with these provisions.
The bill would include findings that the changes proposed by this bill
these provisions address a matter of statewide concern rather than a
municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter
cities. The bill would also declare the intent of the Legislature to delay
implementation of this bill these provisions in sensitive communities,
as defined, until July 1, 2020, as provided.
By adding to the duties of local planning officials, this bill would
impose a state-mandated local program.
The Housing Accountability Act prohibits a local agency from
disapproving, or conditioning approval in a manner that renders
infeasible, a housing development project for very low, low-, or
moderate-income households or an emergency shelter unless the local
agency makes specified written findings based on a preponderance of
the evidence in the record. That law provides that the receipt of a density
bonus is not a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing
development is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity
with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard,
requirement, or other similar provision of that act.
This bill would additionally provide that the receipt of an equitable
communities incentive is not a valid basis on which to find a proposed
housing development is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in
conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance,
standard, requirement, or other similar provision of that act.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local
agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state.
Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
98
— 2 — SB 50
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act
for a specified reason.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
line 1 SECTION 1. Section 65589.5 of the Government Code is
line 2 amended to read:
line 3 65589.5. (a) (1) The Legislature finds and declares all of the
line 4 following:
line 5 (A) The lack of housing, including emergency shelters, is a
line 6 critical problem that threatens the economic, environmental, and
line 7 social quality of life in California.
line 8 (B) California housing has become the most expensive in the
line 9 nation. The excessive cost of the state’s housing supply is partially
line 10 caused by activities and policies of many local governments that
line 11 limit the approval of housing, increase the cost of land for housing,
line 12 and require that high fees and exactions be paid by producers of
line 13 housing.
line 14 (C) Among the consequences of those actions are discrimination
line 15 against low-income and minority households, lack of housing to
line 16 support employment growth, imbalance in jobs and housing,
line 17 reduced mobility, urban sprawl, excessive commuting, and air
line 18 quality deterioration.
line 19 (D) Many local governments do not give adequate attention to
line 20 the economic, environmental, and social costs of decisions that
line 21 result in disapproval of housing development projects, reduction
line 22 in density of housing projects, and excessive standards for housing
line 23 development projects.
line 24 (2) In enacting the amendments made to this section by the act
line 25 adding this paragraph, the Legislature further finds and declares
line 26 the following:
line 27 (A) California has a housing supply and affordability crisis of
line 28 historic proportions. The consequences of failing to effectively
line 29 and aggressively confront this crisis are hurting millions of
line 30 Californians, robbing future generations of the chance to call
line 31 California home, stifling economic opportunities for workers and
line 32 businesses, worsening poverty and homelessness, and undermining
line 33 the state’s environmental and climate objectives.
98
SB 50 — 3 —
line 1 (B) While the causes of this crisis are multiple and complex,
line 2 the absence of meaningful and effective policy reforms to
line 3 significantly enhance the approval and supply of housing affordable
line 4 to Californians of all income levels is a key factor.
line 5 (C) The crisis has grown so acute in California that supply,
line 6 demand, and affordability fundamentals are characterized in the
line 7 negative: underserved demands, constrained supply, and protracted
line 8 unaffordability.
line 9 (D) According to reports and data, California has accumulated
line 10 an unmet housing backlog of nearly 2,000,000 units and must
line 11 provide for at least 180,000 new units annually to keep pace with
line 12 growth through 2025.
line 13 (E) California’s overall homeownership rate is at its lowest level
line 14 since the 1940s. The state ranks 49th out of the 50 states in
line 15 homeownership rates as well as in the supply of housing per capita.
line 16 Only one-half of California’s households are able to afford the
line 17 cost of housing in their local regions.
line 18 (F) Lack of supply and rising costs are compounding inequality
line 19 and limiting advancement opportunities for many Californians.
line 20 (G) The majority of California renters, more than 3,000,000
line 21 households, pay more than 30 percent of their income toward rent
line 22 and nearly one-third, more than 1,500,000 households, pay more
line 23 than 50 percent of their income toward rent.
line 24 (H) When Californians have access to safe and affordable
line 25 housing, they have more money for food and health care; they are
line 26 less likely to become homeless and in need of
line 27 government-subsidized services; their children do better in school;
line 28 and businesses have an easier time recruiting and retaining
line 29 employees.
line 30 (I) An additional consequence of the state’s cumulative housing
line 31 shortage is a significant increase in greenhouse gas emissions
line 32 caused by the displacement and redirection of populations to states
line 33 with greater housing opportunities, particularly working- and
line 34 middle-class households. California’s cumulative housing shortfall
line 35 therefore has not only national but international environmental
line 36 consequences.
line 37 (J) California’s housing picture has reached a crisis of historic
line 38 proportions despite the fact that, for decades, the Legislature has
line 39 enacted numerous statutes intended to significantly increase the
98
— 4 — SB 50
line 1 approval, development, and affordability of housing for all income
line 2 levels, including this section.
line 3 (K) The Legislature’s intent in enacting this section in 1982 and
line 4 in expanding its provisions since then was to significantly increase
line 5 the approval and construction of new housing for all economic
line 6 segments of California’s communities by meaningfully and
line 7 effectively curbing the capability of local governments to deny,
line 8 reduce the density for, or render infeasible housing development
line 9 projects and emergency shelters. That intent has not been fulfilled.
line 10 (L) It is the policy of the state that this section should be
line 11 interpreted and implemented in a manner to afford the fullest
line 12 possible weight to the interest of, and the approval and provision
line 13 of, housing.
line 14 (3) It is the intent of the Legislature that the conditions that
line 15 would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health and
line 16 safety, as described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) and
line 17 paragraph (1) of subdivision (j), arise infrequently.
line 18 (b) It is the policy of the state that a local government not reject
line 19 or make infeasible housing development projects, including
line 20 emergency shelters, that contribute to meeting the need determined
line 21 pursuant to this article without a thorough analysis of the economic,
line 22 social, and environmental effects of the action and without
line 23 complying with subdivision (d).
line 24 (c) The Legislature also recognizes that premature and
line 25 unnecessary development of agricultural lands for urban uses
line 26 continues to have adverse effects on the availability of those lands
line 27 for food and fiber production and on the economy of the state.
line 28 Furthermore, it is the policy of the state that development should
line 29 be guided away from prime agricultural lands; therefore, in
line 30 implementing this section, local jurisdictions should encourage,
line 31 to the maximum extent practicable, in filling existing urban areas.
line 32 (d) A local agency shall not disapprove a housing development
line 33 project, including farmworker housing as defined in subdivision
line 34 (h) of Section 50199.7 of the Health and Safety Code, for very
line 35 low, low-, or moderate-income households, or an emergency
line 36 shelter, or condition approval in a manner that renders the housing
line 37 development project infeasible for development for the use of very
line 38 low, low-, or moderate-income households, or an emergency
line 39 shelter, including through the use of design review standards,
98
SB 50 — 5 —
line 1 unless it makes written findings, based upon a preponderance of
line 2 the evidence in the record, as to one of the following:
line 3 (1) The jurisdiction has adopted a housing element pursuant to
line 4 this article that has been revised in accordance with Section 65588,
line 5 is in substantial compliance with this article, and the jurisdiction
line 6 has met or exceeded its share of the regional housing need
line 7 allocation pursuant to Section 65584 for the planning period for
line 8 the income category proposed for the housing development project,
line 9 provided that any disapproval or conditional approval shall not be
line 10 based on any of the reasons prohibited by Section 65008. If the
line 11 housing development project includes a mix of income categories,
line 12 and the jurisdiction has not met or exceeded its share of the regional
line 13 housing need for one or more of those categories, then this
line 14 paragraph shall not be used to disapprove or conditionally approve
line 15 the housing development project. The share of the regional housing
line 16 need met by the jurisdiction shall be calculated consistently with
line 17 the forms and definitions that may be adopted by the Department
line 18 of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Section
line 19 65400. In the case of an emergency shelter, the jurisdiction shall
line 20 have met or exceeded the need for emergency shelter, as identified
line 21 pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583. Any
line 22 disapproval or conditional approval pursuant to this paragraph
line 23 shall be in accordance with applicable law, rule, or standards.
line 24 (2) The housing development project or emergency shelter as
line 25 proposed would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public
line 26 health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily
line 27 mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering
line 28 the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income
line 29 households or rendering the development of the emergency shelter
line 30 financially infeasible. As used in this paragraph, a “specific,
line 31 adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and
line 32 unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public
line 33 health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed
line 34 on the date the application was deemed complete. Inconsistency
line 35 with the zoning ordinance or general plan land use designation
line 36 shall not constitute a specific, adverse impact upon the public
line 37 health or safety.
line 38 (3) The denial of the housing development project or imposition
line 39 of conditions is required in order to comply with specific state or
line 40 federal law, and there is no feasible method to comply without
98
— 6 — SB 50
line 1 rendering the development unaffordable to low- and
line 2 moderate-income households or rendering the development of the
line 3 emergency shelter financially infeasible.
line 4 (4) The housing development project or emergency shelter is
line 5 proposed on land zoned for agriculture or resource preservation
line 6 that is surrounded on at least two sides by land being used for
line 7 agricultural or resource preservation purposes, or which does not
line 8 have adequate water or wastewater facilities to serve the project.
line 9 (5) The housing development project or emergency shelter is
line 10 inconsistent with both the jurisdiction’s zoning ordinance and
line 11 general plan land use designation as specified in any element of
line 12 the general plan as it existed on the date the application was
line 13 deemed complete, and the jurisdiction has adopted a revised
line 14 housing element in accordance with Section 65588 that is in
line 15 substantial compliance with this article. For purposes of this
line 16 section, a change to the zoning ordinance or general plan land use
line 17 designation subsequent to the date the application was deemed
line 18 complete shall not constitute a valid basis to disapprove or
line 19 condition approval of the housing development project or
line 20 emergency shelter.
line 21 (A) This paragraph cannot be utilized to disapprove or
line 22 conditionally approve a housing development project if the housing
line 23 development project is proposed on a site that is identified as
line 24 suitable or available for very low, low-, or moderate-income
line 25 households in the jurisdiction’s housing element, and consistent
line 26 with the density specified in the housing element, even though it
line 27 is inconsistent with both the jurisdiction’s zoning ordinance and
line 28 general plan land use designation.
line 29 (B) If the local agency has failed to identify in the inventory of
line 30 land in its housing element sites that can be developed for housing
line 31 within the planning period and are sufficient to provide for the
line 32 jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need for all income
line 33 levels pursuant to Section 65584, then this paragraph shall not be
line 34 utilized to disapprove or conditionally approve a housing
line 35 development project proposed for a site designated in any element
line 36 of the general plan for residential uses or designated in any element
line 37 of the general plan for commercial uses if residential uses are
line 38 permitted or conditionally permitted within commercial
line 39 designations. In any action in court, the burden of proof shall be
line 40 on the local agency to show that its housing element does identify
98
SB 50 — 7 —
line 1 adequate sites with appropriate zoning and development standards
line 2 and with services and facilities to accommodate the local agency’s
line 3 share of the regional housing need for the very low, low-, and
line 4 moderate-income categories.
line 5 (C) If the local agency has failed to identify a zone or zones
line 6 where emergency shelters are allowed as a permitted use without
line 7 a conditional use or other discretionary permit, has failed to
line 8 demonstrate that the identified zone or zones include sufficient
line 9 capacity to accommodate the need for emergency shelter identified
line 10 in paragraph (7) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583, or has failed
line 11 to demonstrate that the identified zone or zones can accommodate
line 12 at least one emergency shelter, as required by paragraph (4) of
line 13 subdivision (a) of Section 65583, then this paragraph shall not be
line 14 utilized to disapprove or conditionally approve an emergency
line 15 shelter proposed for a site designated in any element of the general
line 16 plan for industrial, commercial, or multifamily residential uses. In
line 17 any action in court, the burden of proof shall be on the local agency
line 18 to show that its housing element does satisfy the requirements of
line 19 paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583.
line 20 (e) Nothing in this section shall be construed to relieve the local
line 21 agency from complying with the congestion management program
line 22 required by Chapter 2.6 (commencing with Section 65088) of
line 23 Division 1 of Title 7 or the California Coastal Act of 1976
line 24 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public
line 25 Resources Code). Neither shall anything in this section be
line 26 construed to relieve the local agency from making one or more of
line 27 the findings required pursuant to Section 21081 of the Public
line 28 Resources Code or otherwise complying with the California
line 29 Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section
line 30 21000) of the Public Resources Code).
line 31 (f) (1) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a
line 32 local agency from requiring the housing development project to
line 33 comply with objective, quantifiable, written development standards,
line 34 conditions, and policies appropriate to, and consistent with, meeting
line 35 the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need pursuant to
line 36 Section 65584. However, the development standards, conditions,
line 37 and policies shall be applied to facilitate and accommodate
line 38 development at the density permitted on the site and proposed by
line 39 the development.
98
— 8 — SB 50
line 1 (2) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a local
line 2 agency from requiring an emergency shelter project to comply
line 3 with objective, quantifiable, written development standards,
line 4 conditions, and policies that are consistent with paragraph (4) of
line 5 subdivision (a) of Section 65583 and appropriate to, and consistent
line 6 with, meeting the jurisdiction’s need for emergency shelter, as
line 7 identified pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (a) of Section
line 8 65583. However, the development standards, conditions, and
line 9 policies shall be applied by the local agency to facilitate and
line 10 accommodate the development of the emergency shelter project.
line 11 (3) This section does not prohibit a local agency from imposing
line 12 fees and other exactions otherwise authorized by law that are
line 13 essential to provide necessary public services and facilities to the
line 14 housing development project or emergency shelter.
line 15 (4) For purposes of this section, a housing development project
line 16 or emergency shelter shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and
line 17 in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance,
line 18 standard, requirement, or other similar provision if there is
line 19 substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to
line 20 conclude that the housing development project or emergency
line 21 shelter is consistent, compliant, or in conformity.
line 22 (g) This section shall be applicable to charter cities because the
line 23 Legislature finds that the lack of housing, including emergency
line 24 shelter, is a critical statewide problem.
line 25 (h) The following definitions apply for the purposes of this
line 26 section:
line 27 (1) “Feasible” means capable of being accomplished in a
line 28 successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into
line 29 account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors.
line 30 (2) “Housing development project” means a use consisting of
line 31 any of the following:
line 32 (A) Residential units only.
line 33 (B) Mixed-use developments consisting of residential and
line 34 nonresidential uses with at least two-thirds of the square footage
line 35 designated for residential use.
line 36 (C) Transitional housing or supportive housing.
line 37 (3) “Housing for very low, low-, or moderate-income
line 38 households” means that either (A) at least 20 percent of the total
line 39 units shall be sold or rented to lower income households, as defined
line 40 in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or (B) 100
98
SB 50 — 9 —
line 1 percent of the units shall be sold or rented to persons and families
line 2 of moderate income as defined in Section 50093 of the Health and
line 3 Safety Code, or persons and families of middle income, as defined
line 4 in Section 65008 of this code. Housing units targeted for lower
line 5 income households shall be made available at a monthly housing
line 6 cost that does not exceed 30 percent of 60 percent of area median
line 7 income with adjustments for household size made in accordance
line 8 with the adjustment factors on which the lower income eligibility
line 9 limits are based. Housing units targeted for persons and families
line 10 of moderate income shall be made available at a monthly housing
line 11 cost that does not exceed 30 percent of 100 percent of area median
line 12 income with adjustments for household size made in accordance
line 13 with the adjustment factors on which the moderate-income
line 14 eligibility limits are based.
line 15 (4) “Area median income” means area median income as
line 16 periodically established by the Department of Housing and
line 17 Community Development pursuant to Section 50093 of the Health
line 18 and Safety Code. The developer shall provide sufficient legal
line 19 commitments to ensure continued availability of units for very low
line 20 or low-income households in accordance with the provisions of
line 21 this subdivision for 30 years.
line 22 (5) “Disapprove the housing development project” includes any
line 23 instance in which a local agency does either of the following:
line 24 (A) Votes on a proposed housing development project
line 25 application and the application is disapproved, including any
line 26 required land use approvals or entitlements necessary for the
line 27 issuance of a building permit.
line 28 (B) Fails to comply with the time periods specified in
line 29 subdivision (a) of Section 65950. An extension of time pursuant
line 30 to Article 5 (commencing with Section 65950) shall be deemed to
line 31 be an extension of time pursuant to this paragraph.
line 32 (i) If any city, county, or city and county denies approval or
line 33 imposes conditions, including design changes, lower density, or
line 34 a reduction of the percentage of a lot that may be occupied by a
line 35 building or structure under the applicable planning and zoning in
line 36 force at the time the application is deemed complete pursuant to
line 37 Section 65943, that have a substantial adverse effect on the viability
line 38 or affordability of a housing development for very low, low-, or
line 39 moderate-income households, and the denial of the development
line 40 or the imposition of conditions on the development is the subject
98
— 10 — SB 50
line 1 of a court action which challenges the denial or the imposition of
line 2 conditions, then the burden of proof shall be on the local legislative
line 3 body to show that its decision is consistent with the findings as
line 4 described in subdivision (d) and that the findings are supported by
line 5 a preponderance of the evidence in the record. For purposes of this
line 6 section, “lower density” includes any conditions that have the same
line 7 effect or impact on the ability of the project to provide housing.
line 8 (j) (1) When a proposed housing development project complies
line 9 with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision
line 10 standards and criteria, including design review standards, in effect
line 11 at the time that the housing development project’s application is
line 12 determined to be complete, but the local agency proposes to
line 13 disapprove the project or to impose a condition that the project be
line 14 developed at a lower density, the local agency shall base its
line 15 decision regarding the proposed housing development project upon
line 16 written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence on
line 17 the record that both of the following conditions exist:
line 18 (A) The housing development project would have a specific,
line 19 adverse impact upon the public health or safety unless the project
line 20 is disapproved or approved upon the condition that the project be
line 21 developed at a lower density. As used in this paragraph, a “specific,
line 22 adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and
line 23 unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public
line 24 health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed
line 25 on the date the application was deemed complete.
line 26 (B) There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or
line 27 avoid the adverse impact identified pursuant to paragraph (1), other
line 28 than the disapproval of the housing development project or the
line 29 approval of the project upon the condition that it be developed at
line 30 a lower density.
line 31 (2) (A) If the local agency considers a proposed housing
line 32 development project to be inconsistent, not in compliance, or not
line 33 in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance,
line 34 standard, requirement, or other similar provision as specified in
line 35 this subdivision, it shall provide the applicant with written
line 36 documentation identifying the provision or provisions, and an
line 37 explanation of the reason or reasons it considers the housing
line 38 development to be inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in
line 39 conformity as follows:
98
SB 50 — 11 —
line 1 (i) Within 30 days of the date that the application for the housing
line 2 development project is determined to be complete, if the housing
line 3 development project contains 150 or fewer housing units.
line 4 (ii) Within 60 days of the date that the application for the
line 5 housing development project is determined to be complete, if the
line 6 housing development project contains more than 150 units.
line 7 (B) If the local agency fails to provide the required
line 8 documentation pursuant to subparagraph (A), the housing
line 9 development project shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and
line 10 in conformity with the applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance,
line 11 standard, requirement, or other similar provision.
line 12 (3) For purposes of this section, the receipt of a density bonus
line 13 pursuant to Section 65915 or an equitable communities incentive
line 14 pursuant to Section 65918.51 shall not constitute a valid basis on
line 15 which to find a proposed housing development project is
line 16 inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity, conformity
line 17 with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard,
line 18 requirement, or other similar provision specified in this subdivision.
line 19 (4) For purposes of this section, a proposed housing development
line 20 project is not inconsistent with the applicable zoning standards
line 21 and criteria, and shall not require a rezoning, if the housing
line 22 development project is consistent with the objective general plan
line 23 standards and criteria but the zoning for the project site is
line 24 inconsistent with the general plan. If the local agency has complied
line 25 with paragraph (2), the local agency may require the proposed
line 26 housing development project to comply with the objective
line 27 standards and criteria of the zoning which is consistent with the
line 28 general plan, however, the standards and criteria shall be applied
line 29 to facilitate and accommodate development at the density allowed
line 30 on the site by the general plan and proposed by the proposed
line 31 housing development project.
line 32 (5) For purposes of this section, “lower density” includes any
line 33 conditions that have the same effect or impact on the ability of the
line 34 project to provide housing.
line 35 (k) (1) (A) The applicant, a person who would be eligible to
line 36 apply for residency in the development or emergency shelter, or
line 37 a housing organization may bring an action to enforce this section.
line 38 If, in any action brought to enforce this section, a court finds that
line 39 either (i) the local agency, in violation of subdivision (d),
line 40 disapproved a housing development project or conditioned its
98
— 12 — SB 50
line 1 approval in a manner rendering it infeasible for the development
line 2 of an emergency shelter, or housing for very low, low-, or
line 3 moderate-income households, including farmworker housing,
line 4 without making the findings required by this section or without
line 5 making findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence,
line 6 or (ii) the local agency, in violation of subdivision (j), disapproved
line 7 a housing development project complying with applicable,
line 8 objective general plan and zoning standards and criteria, or imposed
line 9 a condition that the project be developed at a lower density, without
line 10 making the findings required by this section or without making
line 11 findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence, the court
line 12 shall issue an order or judgment compelling compliance with this
line 13 section within 60 days, including, but not limited to, an order that
line 14 the local agency take action on the housing development project
line 15 or emergency shelter. The court may issue an order or judgment
line 16 directing the local agency to approve the housing development
line 17 project or emergency shelter if the court finds that the local agency
line 18 acted in bad faith when it disapproved or conditionally approved
line 19 the housing development or emergency shelter in violation of this
line 20 section. The court shall retain jurisdiction to ensure that its order
line 21 or judgment is carried out and shall award reasonable attorney’s
line 22 fees and costs of suit to the plaintiff or petitioner, except under
line 23 extraordinary circumstances in which the court finds that awarding
line 24 fees would not further the purposes of this section. For purposes
line 25 of this section, “lower density” includes conditions that have the
line 26 same effect or impact on the ability of the project to provide
line 27 housing.
line 28 (B) (i) Upon a determination that the local agency has failed
line 29 to comply with the order or judgment compelling compliance with
line 30 this section within 60 days issued pursuant to subparagraph (A),
line 31 the court shall impose fines on a local agency that has violated this
line 32 section and require the local agency to deposit any fine levied
line 33 pursuant to this subdivision into a local housing trust fund. The
line 34 local agency may elect to instead deposit the fine into the Building
line 35 Homes and Jobs Fund, if Senate Bill 2 of the 2017–18 Regular
line 36 Session is enacted, or otherwise in the Housing Rehabilitation
line 37 Loan Fund. The fine shall be in a minimum amount of ten thousand
line 38 dollars ($10,000) per housing unit in the housing development
line 39 project on the date the application was deemed complete pursuant
line 40 to Section 65943. In determining the amount of fine to impose,
98
SB 50 — 13 —
line 1 the court shall consider the local agency’s progress in attaining its
line 2 target allocation of the regional housing need pursuant to Section
line 3 65584 and any prior violations of this section. Fines shall not be
line 4 paid out of funds already dedicated to affordable housing,
line 5 including, but not limited to, Low and Moderate Income Housing
line 6 Asset Funds, funds dedicated to housing for very low, low-, and
line 7 moderate-income households, and federal HOME Investment
line 8 Partnerships Program and Community Development Block Grant
line 9 Program funds. The local agency shall commit and expend the
line 10 money in the local housing trust fund within five years for the sole
line 11 purpose of financing newly constructed housing units affordable
line 12 to extremely low, very low, or low-income households. After five
line 13 years, if the funds have not been expended, the money shall revert
line 14 to the state and be deposited in the Building Homes and Jobs Fund,
line 15 if Senate Bill 2 of the 2017–18 Regular Session is enacted, or
line 16 otherwise in the Housing Rehabilitation Loan Fund, for the sole
line 17 purpose of financing newly constructed housing units affordable
line 18 to extremely low, very low, or low-income households.
line 19 (ii) If any money derived from a fine imposed pursuant to this
line 20 subparagraph is deposited in the Housing Rehabilitation Loan
line 21 Fund, then, notwithstanding Section 50661 of the Health and Safety
line 22 Code, that money shall be available only upon appropriation by
line 23 the Legislature.
line 24 (C) If the court determines that its order or judgment has not
line 25 been carried out within 60 days, the court may issue further orders
line 26 as provided by law to ensure that the purposes and policies of this
line 27 section are fulfilled, including, but not limited to, an order to vacate
line 28 the decision of the local agency and to approve the housing
line 29 development project, in which case the application for the housing
line 30 development project, as proposed by the applicant at the time the
line 31 local agency took the initial action determined to be in violation
line 32 of this section, along with any standard conditions determined by
line 33 the court to be generally imposed by the local agency on similar
line 34 projects, shall be deemed to be approved unless the applicant
line 35 consents to a different decision or action by the local agency.
line 36 (2) For purposes of this subdivision, “housing organization”
line 37 means a trade or industry group whose local members are primarily
line 38 engaged in the construction or management of housing units or a
line 39 nonprofit organization whose mission includes providing or
line 40 advocating for increased access to housing for low-income
98
— 14 — SB 50
line 1 households and have filed written or oral comments with the local
line 2 agency prior to action on the housing development project. A
line 3 housing organization may only file an action pursuant to this
line 4 section to challenge the disapproval of a housing development by
line 5 a local agency. A housing organization shall be entitled to
line 6 reasonable attorney’s fees and costs if it is the prevailing party in
line 7 an action to enforce this section.
line 8 (l) If the court finds that the local agency (1) acted in bad faith
line 9 when it disapproved or conditionally approved the housing
line 10 development or emergency shelter in violation of this section and
line 11 (2) failed to carry out the court’s order or judgment within 60 days
line 12 as described in subdivision (k), the court, in addition to any other
line 13 remedies provided by this section, shall multiply the fine
line 14 determined pursuant to subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of
line 15 subdivision (k) by a factor of five. For purposes of this section,
line 16 “bad faith” includes, but is not limited to, an action that is frivolous
line 17 or otherwise entirely without merit.
line 18 (m) Any action brought to enforce the provisions of this section
line 19 shall be brought pursuant to Section 1094.5 of the Code of Civil
line 20 Procedure, and the local agency shall prepare and certify the record
line 21 of proceedings in accordance with subdivision (c) of Section 1094.6
line 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure no later than 30 days after the
line 23 petition is served, provided that the cost of preparation of the record
line 24 shall be borne by the local agency, unless the petitioner elects to
line 25 prepare the record as provided in subdivision (n) of this section.
line 26 A petition to enforce the provisions of this section shall be filed
line 27 and served no later than 90 days from the later of (1) the effective
line 28 date of a decision of the local agency imposing conditions on,
line 29 disapproving, or any other final action on a housing development
line 30 project or (2) the expiration of the time periods specified in
line 31 subparagraph (B) of paragraph (5) of subdivision (h). Upon entry
line 32 of the trial court’s order, a party may, in order to obtain appellate
line 33 review of the order, file a petition within 20 days after service
line 34 upon it of a written notice of the entry of the order, or within such
line 35 further time not exceeding an additional 20 days as the trial court
line 36 may for good cause allow, or may appeal the judgment or order
line 37 of the trial court under Section 904.1 of the Code of Civil
line 38 Procedure. If the local agency appeals the judgment of the trial
line 39 court, the local agency shall post a bond, in an amount to be
98
SB 50 — 15 —
line 1 determined by the court, to the benefit of the plaintiff if the plaintiff
line 2 is the project applicant.
line 3 (n) In any action, the record of the proceedings before the local
line 4 agency shall be filed as expeditiously as possible and,
line 5 notwithstanding Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure or
line 6 subdivision (m) of this section, all or part of the record may be
line 7 prepared (1) by the petitioner with the petition or petitioner’s points
line 8 and authorities, (2) by the respondent with respondent’s points and
line 9 authorities, (3) after payment of costs by the petitioner, or (4) as
line 10 otherwise directed by the court. If the expense of preparing the
line 11 record has been borne by the petitioner and the petitioner is the
line 12 prevailing party, the expense shall be taxable as costs.
line 13 (o) This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the
line 14 Housing Accountability Act.
line 15 SECTION 1.
line 16 SEC. 2. Chapter 4.35 (commencing with Section 65918.50) is
line 17 added to Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code, to read:
line 18
line 19 Chapter 4.35. Equitable Communities Incentives
line 20
line 21 65918.50. For purposes of this chapter:
line 22 (a) “Affordable” means available at affordable rent or affordable
line 23 housing cost to, and occupied by, persons and families of extremely
line 24 low, very low, low, or moderate incomes, as specified in context,
line 25 and subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least 55
line 26 years.
line 27 (b)
line 28 (a) “Development proponent” means an applicant who submits
line 29 an application for an equitable communities incentive pursuant to
line 30 this chapter.
line 31 (c)
line 32 (b) “Eligible applicant” means a development proponent who
line 33 receives an equitable communities incentive.
line 34 (d)
line 35 (c) “FAR” means floor area ratio.
line 36 (e)
line 37 (d) “High-quality bus corridor” means a corridor with fixed
line 38 route bus service that meets all of the following criteria:
line 39 (1) It has average service intervals of no more than 15 minutes
line 40 during the three peak hours between 6 a.m. to 10 a.m., inclusive,
98
— 16 — SB 50
line 1 and the three peak hours between 3 p.m. and 7 p.m., inclusive, on
line 2 Monday through Friday.
line 3 (2) It has average service intervals of no more than 20 minutes
line 4 during the hours of 6 a.m. to 10 a.m., p.m., inclusive, on Monday
line 5 through Friday.
line 6 (3) It has average intervals of no more than 30 minutes during
line 7 the hours of 8 a.m. to 10 p.m., inclusive, on Saturday and Sunday.
line 8 (e) (1) “Jobs-rich area” means an area identified by the
line 9 Department of Housing and Community Development in
line 10 consultation with the Office of Planning and Research that is both
line 11 high opportunity and jobs rich, based on whether, in a regional
line 12 analysis, the tract meets the following:
line 13 (A) The tract is higher opportunity and its characteristics are
line 14 associated with positive educational and economic outcomes for
line 15 households of all income levels residing in the tract.
line 16 (B) The tract meets either of the following criteria:
line 17 (i) New housing sited in the tract would enable residents to live
line 18 in or near a jobs-rich area, as measured by employment density
line 19 and job totals.
line 20 (ii) New housing sited in the tract would enable shorter commute
line 21 distances for residents, compared to existing commute levels.
line 22 (2) The Department of Housing and Community Development
line 23 shall, commencing on January 1, 2020, publish and update, every
line 24 five years thereafter, a map of the state showing the areas identified
line 25 by the department as “jobs-rich areas.”
line 26 (f) “Job-rich housing project” means a residential development
line 27 within an area identified as a jobs-rich area by the Department of
line 28 Housing and Community Development and in consultation with
line 29 the Office of Planning and Research, based on indicators such as
line 30 proximity to jobs, high area median income relative to the relevant
line 31 region, and high-quality public schools, as an area of high
line 32 opportunity close to jobs. A residential development shall be
line 33 deemed to be within an area designated as job-rich if both of the
line 34 following apply:
line 35 (1) All parcels within the project have no more than 25 percent
line 36 of their area outside of the job-rich area.
line 37 (2) No more than 10 percent of residential units or 100 units,
line 38 whichever is less, of the development are outside of the job-rich
line 39 area.
98
SB 50 — 17 —
line 1 (g) “Local government” means a city, including a charter city,
line 2 a county, or a city and county.
line 3 (h) “Major transit stop” means a site containing an existing rail
line 4 transit station or a ferry terminal served by either bus or rail transit
line 5 service. that is a major transit stop pursuant to subdivision (b) of
line 6 Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code.
line 7 (i) “Residential development” means a project with at least
line 8 two-thirds of the square footage of the development designated
line 9 for residential use.
line 10 (j) “Sensitive community” means an either of the following:
line 11 (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), an area identified by
line 12 the Department of Housing and Community Development, which
line 13 identification shall be updated every five years, in consultation
line 14 with local community-based organizations in each metropolitan
line 15 planning region, as an area vulnerable to displacement pressures,
line 16 based on indicators such as percentage of tenant households living
line 17 at, or under, the poverty line relative to the region. where both of
line 18 the following apply:
line 19 (A) Thirty percent or more of the census tract lives below the
line 20 poverty line, provided that college students do not compose at
line 21 least 25 percent of the population.
line 22 (B) The location quotient of residential racial segregation in
line 23 the census tract is at least 1.25 as defined by the Department of
line 24 Housing and Community Development.
line 25 (2) In the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa,
line 26 Santa Clara, San Francisco, San Mateo, Solano, and Sonoma,
line 27 areas designated by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission
line 28 on December 19, 2018, as the intersection of disadvantaged and
line 29 vulnerable communities as defined by the Metropolitan
line 30 Transportation Commission and the San Francisco Bay
line 31 Conservation and Development Commission, which identification
line 32 of a sensitive community shall be updated at least every five years
line 33 by the Department of Housing and Community Development.
line 34 (k) “Tenant” means a person residing in who does not own the
line 35 property where they reside, including residential situations that
line 36 are any of the following:
line 37 (1) Residential real property rented by the person under a
line 38 long-term lease.
line 39 (2) A single-room occupancy unit.
98
— 18 — SB 50
line 1 (3) An accessory dwelling unit that is not subject to, or does
line 2 not have a valid permit in accordance with, an ordinance adopted
line 3 by a local agency pursuant to Section 65852.22.
line 4 (4) A residential motel.
line 5 (5) A mobilehome park, as governed under the Mobilehome
line 6 Residency Law (Chapter 2.5 (commencing with Section 798) of
line 7 Title 2 of Part 2 of Division 2 of the Civil Code), the Recreational
line 8 Vehicle Park Occupancy Law (Chapter 2.6 (commencing with
line 9 Section 799.20) of Title 2 of Part 2 of Division 2 of the Civil Code),
line 10 the Mobilehome Parks Act (Part 2.1 (commencing with Section
line 11 18200) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code), or the
line 12 Special Occupancy Parks Act (Part 2.3 (commencing with Section
line 13 18860) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code).
line 14 (5)
line 15 (6) Any other type of residential property that is not owned by
line 16 the person or a member of the person’s household, for which the
line 17 person or a member of the person’s household provides payments
line 18 on a regular schedule in exchange for the right to occupy the
line 19 residential property.
line 20 (l) “Transit-rich housing project” means a residential
line 21 development the parcels of which are all within a one-half mile
line 22 radius of a major transit stop or a one-quarter mile radius of a stop
line 23 on a high-quality bus corridor. A project shall be deemed to be
line 24 within a one-half mile the radius of a major transit stop or a
line 25 one-quarter mile radius of a stop on a high-quality bus corridor if
line 26 both of the following apply:
line 27 (1) All parcels within the project have no more than 25 percent
line 28 of their area outside of a one-half mile radius of a major transit
line 29 stop or a one-quarter mile radius of a stop on a high-quality bus
line 30 corridor.
line 31 (2) No more than 10 percent of the residential units or 100 units,
line 32 whichever is less, of the project are outside of a one-half mile
line 33 radius of a major transit stop or a one-quarter mile radius of a stop
line 34 on a high-quality bus corridor.
line 35 65918.51. (a) A local government shall, upon request of a
line 36 development proponent, grant an equitable communities incentive,
line 37 as specified in Section 65918.53, when the development proponent
line 38 seeks and agrees to construct a residential development that
line 39 satisfies the requirements specified in Section 65918.52.
98
SB 50 — 19 —
line 1 (b) It is the intent of the Legislature that, absent exceptional
line 2 circumstances, actions taken by a local legislative body that
line 3 increase residential density not undermine the equitable
line 4 communities incentive program established by this chapter.
line 5 65918.52. In order to be eligible for an equitable communities
line 6 incentive pursuant to this chapter, a residential development shall
line 7 meet all of the following criteria:
line 8 (a) The residential development is either a job-rich housing
line 9 project or transit-rich housing project.
line 10 (b) The residential development is located on a site that, at the
line 11 time of application, is zoned to allow housing as an underlying
line 12 use in the zone, including, but not limited to, a residential,
line 13 mixed-use, or commercial zone, as defined and allowed by the
line 14 local government.
line 15 (c) (1) If the local government has adopted an inclusionary
line 16 housing ordinance requiring that the development include a certain
line 17 number of units affordable to households with incomes that do not
line 18 exceed the limits for moderate-income, lower income, very low
line 19 income, or extremely low income specified in Sections 50079.5,
line 20 50093, 50105, and 50106 of the Health and Safety Code, and that
line 21 ordinance requires that a new development include levels of
line 22 affordable housing in excess of the requirements specified in
line 23 paragraph (2), the residential development complies with that
line 24 ordinance. The ordinance may provide alternative means of
line 25 compliance that may include, but are not limited to, in-lieu fees,
line 26 land dedication, offsite construction, or acquisition and
line 27 rehabilitation of existing units.
line 28 (2) (A) If the local government has not adopted an inclusionary
line 29 housing ordinance, as described in paragraph (1), and the residential
line 30 development includes ____ or more residential units, the residential
line 31 development includes onsite an affordable housing contribution
line 32 for households with incomes that do not exceed the limits for
line 33 extremely low income, very low income, and low income specified
line 34 in Sections 50093, 50105, and 50106 of the Health and Safety
line 35 Code. It is the intent of the Legislature to require that any
line 36 development of ____ or more residential units receiving an
line 37 equitable communities incentive pursuant to this chapter include
line 38 housing affordable to low, very low or extremely low income
line 39 households, which, for projects with low or very low income units,
line 40 are no less than the number of onsite units affordable to low or
98
— 20 — SB 50
line 1 very low income households that would be required pursuant to
line 2 subdivision (f) of Section 65915 for a development receiving a
line 3 density bonus of 35 percent.
line 4 (B) For purposes of this paragraph, the residential development
line 5 is subject to one of the following:
line 6 (i) If the project has 10 or fewer units, no affordability
line 7 contribution is imposed.
line 8 (ii) If the project has 11 to 20 residential units, the development
line 9 proponent may pay an in-lieu fee to the local government for
line 10 affordable housing, where feasible, pursuant to subparagraph (C).
line 11 (iii) If the project has more than 20 residential units, the
line 12 development proponent shall do either of the following:
line 13 (I) Make a comparable affordability contribution toward
line 14 housing offsite that is affordable to lower income households,
line 15 pursuant to subparagraph (C).
line 16 (II) Include units on the site of the project that are affordable
line 17 to extremely low income, as defined in Section 50105 of the Health
line 18 and Safety Code, very low income, or low-income households, as
line 19 defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, as
line 20 follows:
line 21
line 22 Inclusionary Requirement Project Size
line 23 15% low income; or
line 24 8% very low income; or
21– 200 units
line 25 6% extremely low income
line 26 17% low income; or
line 27 10% very low income; or
201–350 units
line 28 8% extremely low income
line 29 25% low income; or
line 30 15% very low income; or
351 or more units
line 31 11% extremely low income
line 32
line 33 (C) The development proponent of a project that qualifies
line 34 pursuant to clause (ii) or subclause (I) of clause (iii) of
line 35 subparagraph (B) may make a comparable affordability
line 36 contribution toward housing offsite that is affordable to lower
line 37 income households, as follows:
line 38 (i) The local government collecting the in-lieu fee payment shall
line 39 make every effort to ensure that future affordable housing will be
line 40 sited within one-half mile of the original project location within
98
SB 50 — 21 —
line 1 the boundaries of the local government by designating an existing
line 2 housing opportunity site within a one-half mile radius of the project
line 3 site for affordable housing. To the extent practicable, local housing
line 4 funding shall be prioritized at the first opportunity to build
line 5 affordable housing on that site.
line 6 (ii) If no housing opportunity sites that satisfy clause (i) are
line 7 available, the local government shall designate a site for affordable
line 8 housing within the boundaries of the local government and make
line 9 findings that the site for the affordable housing development
line 10 affirmatively furthers fair housing, as defined in Section 8899.50.
line 11 (D) Affordability of units pursuant to this paragraph shall be
line 12 restricted by deed for a period of 55 years for rental units or 45
line 13 years for units offered for sale.
line 14 (d) The site does not contain, or has not contained, either of the
line 15 following:
line 16 (1) Housing occupied by tenants within the seven years
line 17 preceding the date of the application, including housing that has
line 18 been demolished or that tenants have vacated prior to the
line 19 application for a development permit.
line 20 (2) A parcel or parcels on which an owner of residential real
line 21 property has exercised his or her their rights under Chapter 12.75
line 22 (commencing with Section 7060) of Division 7 of Title 1 to
line 23 withdraw accommodations from rent or lease within 15 years prior
line 24 to the date that the development proponent submits an application
line 25 pursuant to this chapter.
line 26 (e) The residential development complies with all applicable
line 27 labor, construction employment, and wage standards otherwise
line 28 required by law and any other generally applicable requirement
line 29 regarding the approval of a development project, including, but
line 30 not limited to, the local government’s conditional use or other
line 31 discretionary permit approval process, the California
line 32 Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section
line 33 21000) of the Public Resources Code), or a streamlined approval
line 34 process that includes labor protections.
line 35 (f) The residential development complies with all other relevant
line 36 standards, requirements, and prohibitions imposed by the local
line 37 government regarding architectural design, restrictions on or
line 38 oversight of demolition, impact fees, and community benefits
line 39 agreements.
98
— 22 — SB 50
line 1 (g) The equitable communities incentive shall not be used to
line 2 undermine the economic feasibility of delivering low-income
line 3 housing under the state density bonus program or a local
line 4 implementation of the state density bonus program, or any locally
line 5 adopted program that puts conditions on new development
line 6 applications on the basis of receiving a zone change or general
line 7 plan amendment in exchange for benefits such as increased
line 8 affordable housing, local hire, or payment of prevailing wages.
line 9 65918.53. (a) A residential development Any transit-rich or
line 10 jobs-rich housing project that meets the criteria specified in Section
line 11 65918.52 shall receive, upon request, an equitable communities
line 12 incentive as follows:
line 13 (1) Any eligible applicant shall receive the following:
line 14 (A)
line 15 (1) A waiver from maximum controls on density.
line 16 (B)
line 17 (2) A waiver from maximum minimum automobile parking
line 18 requirements greater than 0.5 automobile parking spots per unit.
line 19 (C)
line 20 (3) Up to three incentives and concessions pursuant to
line 21 subdivision (d) of Section 65915.
line 22 (2)
line 23 (b) An eligible applicant proposing a residential development
line 24 that is located within a one-half mile radius, but outside a
line 25 one-quarter mile radius, of a major transit stop and includes no
line 26 less than ____ percent affordable housing units shall receive, in
line 27 addition to the incentives specified in paragraph (1), subdivision
line 28 (a), waivers from all of the following:
line 29 (A)
line 30 (1) Maximum height requirements less than 45 feet.
line 31 (B)
line 32 (2) Maximum FAR requirements less than 2.5.
line 33 (C)
line 34 (3) Notwithstanding subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1), any
line 35 maximum automobile parking requirement.
line 36 (3)
line 37 (c) An eligible applicant proposing a residential development
line 38 that is located within a one-quarter mile radius of a major transit
line 39 and includes no less than ____ percent affordable housing units
98
SB 50 — 23 —
line 1 stop shall receive, in addition to the incentives specified in
line 2 paragraph (1), subdivision (a), waivers from all of the following:
line 3 (A)
line 4 (1) Maximum height requirements less than 55 feet.
line 5 (B)
line 6 (2) Maximum FAR requirements less than 3.25.
line 7 (C)
line 8 (3) Notwithstanding subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1), (1) of
line 9 subdivision (b), any maximum minimum automobile parking
line 10 requirement.
line 11 (4)
line 12 (d) Notwithstanding any other law, for purposes of calculating
line 13 any additional incentive or concession in accordance with Section
line 14 65915, the number of units in the residential development after
line 15 applying the equitable communities incentive received pursuant
line 16 to this chapter shall be used as the base density for calculating the
line 17 incentive or concession under that section.
line 18 (5)
line 19 (e) An eligible applicant proposing a project that meets all of
line 20 the requirements under Section 65913.4 may submit an application
line 21 for streamlined, ministerial approval in accordance with that
line 22 section.
line 23 (b)
line 24 (f) The local government may modify or expand the terms of
line 25 an equitable communities incentive provided pursuant to this
line 26 chapter, provided that the equitable communities incentive is
line 27 consistent with, and meets the minimum standards specified in,
line 28 this chapter.
line 29 65918.54. The Legislature finds and declares that this chapter
line 30 addresses a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal
line 31 affair as that term is used in Section 5 of Article XI of the
line 32 California Constitution. Therefore, this chapter applies to all cities,
line 33 including charter cities.
line 34 65918.55. (a) It is the intent of the Legislature that
line 35 implementation Implementation of this chapter shall be delayed
line 36 in sensitive communities until July 1, 2020.
line 37 (b) It is further the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation
line 38 that does all of the following:
line 39 (1)
98
— 24 — SB 50
line 1 (b) Between January 1, 2020, and ____, allows a local
line 2 government, in lieu of the requirements of this chapter, to may opt
line 3 for a community-led planning process in sensitive communities
line 4 aimed toward increasing residential density and multifamily
line 5 housing choices near transit stops. stops, as follows:
line 6 (2) Encourages sensitive
line 7 (1) Sensitive communities to opt for that pursue a
line 8 community-led planning process at the neighborhood level to
line 9 develop shall, on or before January 1, 2025, produce a community
line 10 plan that may include zoning and any other policies that encourage
line 11 multifamily housing development at a range of income levels to
line 12 meet unmet needs, protect vulnerable residents from displacement,
line 13 and address other locally identified priorities.
line 14 (3) Sets minimum performance standards for community plans,
line 15 such as minimum
line 16 (2) Community plans shall, at a minimum, be consistent with
line 17 the overall residential development capacity and the minimum
line 18 affordability standards set forth in this chapter. chapter within the
line 19 boundaries of the community plan.
line 20 (4) Automatically applies the
line 21 (3) The provisions of this chapter shall apply on January 1,
line 22 2025, to sensitive communities that do have not have adopted
line 23 community plans that meet the minimum standards described in
line 24 paragraph (3), (2), whether those plans were adopted prior to or
line 25 after enactment of this chapter.
line 26 SEC. 2.
line 27 SEC. 3. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to
line 28 Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because
line 29 a local agency or school district has the authority to levy service
line 30 charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or
line 31 level of service mandated by this act, within the meaning of Section
line 32 17556 of the Government Code.
O
98
SB 50 — 25 —
Support Oppose
CA Association of Realtors
CA YIMBY
Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern CA
6Beds, Inc.
American Association of Retired Persons
Associated Students of the University of CA
Associated Students of the University of CA –
Irvine
Bay Area Council
Black American Political Association of CA
Bridge Housing Corp
Building Industry Association of the Bay Area
Burbank Housing Development Corp
CalAsian Chamber of Commerce
CA Apartment Association
CA Building Industry Association
CA Chamber of Commerce
CA Community Builders
CA Downtown Association
CA Foundation for Independent Living Centers
CA Housing Alliance
CA Labor Federation, AFL-CIO
CA League of Conservation Voters
CA Renters Legal Advocacy and Education Fund
CA Public Interest Research Group
Circulate San Diego
Council of Infill Builders
Eah Housing
East Bay for Every One
Environment California
Facebook, Inc.
Fair Housing Advocates of Northern CA
Fieldstead And Company, Inc
First Community Housing
Fossil Free CA
Habitat for Humanity CA
Homeless Services Center
House Sacramento
Housing Leadership Council of San Mateo County
Indivisible Sacramento
LA Business Council
Monterey Peninsula YIMBY
Natural Resources Defense Council
New Way Homes
Nextgen Marin
North Bay Leadership Council
Orange County Business Council
AIDS Healthcare Foundation
American Planning Association, CA Chapter
Beverly Hills; City of
Chino Hills; City of
Coalition for San Francisco Neighborhoods
Coalition to Preserve LA
Cow Hollow Assn
Dolores Heights Improvement Club
Glendora; City of
Homeowners of Encino
Lakewood; City of
League of California Cities
Livable California
Mira Loma Park Improvement Club
Mission Economic Development Agency
Pasadena; City of
Rancho Palos Verdes; City of
Redondo Beach; City of
San Mateo; City of
Santa Clarita; City of
Sherman Oaks Homeowners Assn
South Bay Cities Council of Governments
Sunnyvale; City of
Sutro Avenue Block Club/Leimart Park
Telegraph Hill Dwellers
Toluca Lake Homeowners Assn
West Mar Vista Residents Assn
5 Individuals
People for Housing- Orange County
Related CA
San Francisco BART
San Jose Associated Students
Santa Cruz County Business Council
Santa Cruz YIMBY
Silicon Valley At Home
Silicon Valley Community Foundation
Silicon Valley Leadership Group
Silicon Valley Young Democrats
Spur
State Building and Construction Trades Council of
CA
State Council on Developmental Disabilities
Technology Network
TMG Partners
University of CA Student Association
Up For Growth National Coalition
Valley Industry and Commerce Assn
YIMBY Democrats of San Diego County
1198 Individuals
SenateBill50
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
STUDY SESSION
APRIL 24, 2019
Housing by the Numbers
Housing
83,000
7100
46%
$3,453
$114,283
24%
South San Francisco Housing
778 units
1,500 pipeline
42% of RHNA Complete
Housing Near
Transit
Equitable Communities Incentive
Jobs-Rich housing project
Transit-Rich housing project
Complies with locally adopted
inclusionary housing ordinance (if
more than 20% for low income and
11% for very low income)
Transit-Rich or Jobs-Rich
Projects
0-1/4 mile of Major
Transit Stop
1/4-1/2 mile of
Major Transit Stop
Density
Restriction
No maximum residential
density
No maximum
residential density
No maximum
residential density
Parking
Requirement
Minimum parking
requirement of 0.5 spots
per unit (unless current
minimum is less)
No minimum
parking requirement
No minimum
parking
requirement
Maximum
Height Limit
No change 55 feet (unless
current height limit
is higher)
45 feet (unless
current height limit
is higher)
Maximum
FAR
No change 3.25 (unless current
max FAR is higher)
2.5 (unless current
max FAR is higher)
Sensitive
Communities
An area defined by HCD every 5 years, in
consultation with local community based
organizations in each metropolitan planning
region
30% or more of the census tract lives
below the poverty line
Local quotient of residential racial
segregation in the census tract is at least
1.25 as defined by HCD
Amendments (4/2/19)
Ferries are added
Minimum Inclusionary Zoning Requirements
Defines “Jobs-Rich” area
Protects Mobile Homes
Challenges
League of California Cities:
Locally adopted General Plans & Housing Elements
Housing Developers & Transit Agencies determine
densities
Difficult to define “Jobs-Rich” area
Greater density but no public transit
Some communities exempt
CA Realtors
CA YIMBY
Chambers
Housing Alliance
Cities
League of Cities
Council of Govt’s
Planning AssociationSupport Oppose
Next Steps
1st House
• Policy
• Fiscal
• Floor
2nd House
• Policy
• Fiscal
• Floor
Governor
• Enrolled
• Vetoed?
• Chaptered
Thank you!
CHRISTINA FERNANDEZ
ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER
CHRISTINA.FERNANDEZ@SSF.NET
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:19-32 Agenda Date:4/24/2019
Version:1 Item #:2.
Report regarding a resolution awarding a construction contract to Flatiron West,Inc.of Benicia,California for
the WQCP Sodium Hypochlorite Storage Tank Replacement Project (Project No.ss1601)in an amount not to
exceed $1,682,000 and authorizing a total construction budget of $2,020,000 and approve Budget Amendment
Number 19.050. (Brian Schumacker, Plant Superintendent and Peter Vorametsanti, Swinerton)
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution awarding a construction contract to Flatiron
West,Inc.of Benicia,California for the WQCP Sodium Hypochlorite Storage Tank Replacement Project
(Project No.ss1601)in an amount not to exceed $1,682,000 and authorizing a total construction budget
of $2,020,000.In addition,staff recommends that the City Council approve Budget Amendment Number
19.050,amending the Fiscal Year 2018-19 Capital Improvement Program budget by appropriating
$1,320,000 in Sewer Enterprise funds into the project budget to cover the planned expenditure.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
The City of South San Francisco operates the South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant
(WQCP or Plant),located at 195 Belle Air Road.This critical facility provides secondary wastewater treatment
for the Cities of South San Francisco and San Bruno,Town of Colma,and portions of City of Daly City,a
population of over 110,000.Treatment processes call for dosing the wastewater with 12.5%sodium
hypochlorite disinfectant solution at various points in the treatment train.The existing system,consisting of
three 8,300 gallon vertical fiberglass-reinforced plastic sodium hypochlorite storage tanks in a spill containment
enclosure,metering pumps,and a pump room control building,was constructed in 1996 and these components
have reached the end of their operational life.In additional,due to the corrosive properties of sodium
hypochlorite,OSHA code requirements require upgrading the process piping and emergency eyewash/shower
stations.
The City commissioned Woodard &Curran to design the tank replacement project.The project includes
providing and replacing the three storage tanks,various metering pumps,and fused plastic process piping;and
providing and installing heated safety eyewash stations.As the WQCP must remain in continuous operation
during construction,the work also includes design,construction,operation,monitoring,maintenance,and
procurement of all items needed for a temporary sodium hypochlorite delivery system.
Staff advertised a notice inviting new bids for the project on January 28,2019.On February 26,2019,staff
received two (2)bids in response.The lowest responsive and responsible bidder was Flatiron West,Inc.of
Benicia,California.Staff has verified the low bidder’s current contractor’s license with the California State
Licensing Board and found it to be in good standing.
Public Works contracts are awarded to the lowest responsible bidder whose bid is responsive to the solicitation.
(Public Contract Code §20166.)
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/29/2019Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:19-32 Agenda Date:4/24/2019
Version:1 Item #:2.
The following is a summary of all bids received:
Base Bid Amount
Flatiron West, Inc. of Benicia, California $1,682,000
D.W. Nicholson of Hayward, California $2,101,300
The Engineer’s estimate is $1,200,000
The project budget is:
Flatiron West Construction Contract $1,682,000
Construction Contingency (20%)$338,000
Total Project Budget $2,020,000
The construction contingency will be used for any additional costs related to design changes during the
construction operations.There are no Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE)requirements since no federal
funds are being utilized on the project.
FUNDING
This project is included in the City of South San Francisco’s Fiscal Year 2018-19 Capital Improvement
Program (Project No.ss1601)and is funded by the Sewer Enterprise Fund.Staff also requests the approval of
Budget Amendment number 19.050 to transfer an additional $1,320,000 from the Sewer Enterprise Fund into
the project budget to cover this project.The City’s adopted sewer rate plan provides revenue to accommodate
this transfer.
RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN
Receiving this presentation will contribute to the City’s Strategic Plan outcome of improved Quality of Life by
maintaining the WQCP.
CONCLUSION
Awarding the construction contract to Flatiron West,Inc.of Benicia,California,for the WQCP Sodium
Hypochlorite Storage Tank Replacement Project will replace the aging essential components of the WQCP
sodium hypochlorite treatment system.
Attachments:
1.Vicinity Map
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/29/2019Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
Attachment 1 – Vicinity Map
South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant
Consulting Agreement for WQCP Sodium Hypochlorite Storage Tank Replacement (Project No. ss1601)
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO-SAN BRUNO WATER QAULITY CONTROL PLANT SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE FACILITY REHABILITATION Removal and Replacement of Sodium Hypochlorite Tanks 1-3 New Concrete Pad and Replacement of ALL Sodium Hypochlorite Secondary Containment Piping, Valves, Safety Apparatus, & Equipment Replacement of ALL Sodium Hypochlorite Pumps, Flow Meters, Conduit, PLC, SCADA System, and associated electrical equipment in the Hypo Building. Replacement of (2) Double-Contained Sodium Hypochlorite Supply Feed Lines to Disinfection Tanks
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:19-33 Agenda Date:4/24/2019
Version:1 Item #:2a.
Resolution awarding a construction contract to Flatiron West,Inc.of Benicia,California for the WQCP Sodium
Hypochlorite Storage Tank Replacement Project (Project No.ss1601)in an amount not to exceed $1,682,000
and authorizing a total construction budget of $2,020,000.
WHEREAS,The City of South San Francisco operates the South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality
Control Plant (WQCP or Plant),a critical facility located at 195 Belle Air Road that provides secondary
wastewater treatment for the Cities of South San Francisco and San Bruno,Town of Colma,and portions of
City of Daly City, a population of over 110,000; and
WHEREAS,treatment processes call for dosing the wastewater with 12.5%sodium hypochlorite disinfectant
solution at various points in the treatment train; and
WHEREAS,the existing disinfection system,consisting of three 8,300 gallon vertical fiberglass-reinforced
plastic sodium hypochlorite storage tanks with a spill containment enclosure,metering pumps,and a pump
room control building, was constructed in 1996 and has reached the end of its operational life; and
WHEREAS,due to the corrosive properties of the disinfectant,OSHA code requirements require upgrading the
sodium hypochlorite process piping and emergency eyewash/shower stations; and
WHEREAS,City commissioned Woodard &Curran to design the tank replacement project which consists of
providing and replacing the three tanks storage tanks,various metering pumps,and fused plastic process
piping; and providing and installing heated safety eyewash stations; and
WHEREAS,the City advertised a notice inviting new bids for the project on February 28,2019 and on April 2,
2019, received two (2) bids in response; and
WHEREAS,Flatiron West,Inc.of Benicia,California submitted the lowest responsive bid and was determined
to be a responsible bidder; and
WHEREAS,this project is funded by the sanitary sewer fund and the project is included in the City of South
San Francisco’s Fiscal Year 2018-19 Capital Improvement Program (Project No. ss1601).
WHEREAS,approval of Budget Amendment number 19.050 is requested to transfer an additional $1,320,000
from the Sewer Enterprise Fund into the project budget to cover this planned expenditure.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City
Council hereby awards a construction contract,a draft of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A,for the WQCP
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/29/2019Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:19-33 Agenda Date:4/24/2019
Version:1 Item #:2a.
Council hereby awards a construction contract,a draft of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A,for the WQCP
Sodium Hypochlorite Project to Flatiron West,Inc.,of California,in an amount not to exceed $1,682,000
conditioned on Flatiron West,Inc.timely execution of the Project contract and submission of all required
documents,including but not limited to,certificates of insurance and endorsement,in accordance with the
Project documents.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the City Council authorizes a total Project construction budget of $2,020,000
and authorizes the City Manager to utilize unspent amount of the total Project,if necessary,towards additional
construction contingency budget.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the City Council authorizes the Finance Department to establish the Project
Budget consistent with the information contained in the staff report.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the City Council approves Budget Amendment 19.050,appropriating
$1,320,000 in Sewer Enterprise funds to this project and amending the Fiscal Year 2018-19 Capital
Improvement Program.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the agreement and any
other related documents on behalf of the City upon timely submission by Flatiron West,Inc.of the signed
contract and all other documents, subject to approval by the City Attorney.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council authorizes the City Manager to take any other related
actions consistent with the intention of the resolution.
*****
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/29/2019Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
WQCP SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE STORAGE TANK REPLACEMENT
ENGINEERING FILE NO. SS-15-1, PROJECT NO. ss1601, BID NO. 2620
FORM OF AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
INDEX
Page No.
1. Scope of Work A-1
2. The Contract Documents A-1
3. Equipment - Performance of Work A-2
4.Contract Price A-2
5. Rights of City to Increase Working Days A-2
6.Option of City to Terminate Agreement in Event
of Failure to Complete Work A-2
7. Termination of Contract for Convenience A-3
8.Performance by Sureties A-5
9.Hold-Harmless Agreement and Contractor's Insurance A-6
10. Insurance A-6
11.Proof of Carriage of Insurance A-8
12. Provisions Cumulative A-8
13.Notices A-8
14. Interpretation A-8
Attachment A – Escrow Agreement for Security Deposits in Lieu of Retention A-10
Exhibit A
City of South San Francisco Bid No. 2620
WQCP Sodium Hypochlorite Tank Replacement City Project ss1601
A-1
FORM OF AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this 24th, day of April, 2019, between the CITY OF
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of California,
hereinafter called “CITY”, and Flatiron West, Inc., hereinafter called “CONTRACTOR”1.
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, City has taken appropriate proceedings to authorize construction of the public work
and improvements herein provided and execution of this contract.
WHEREAS, a notice was duly published for bids for the contract for the improvements
hereinafter described.
WHEREAS, on April 24, 2019, notice duly given, the City Council (“Council”) of said City
awarded the contract for the construction of the improvements hereinafter described to the Contractor,
which Contractor said Council found to be the lowest responsible bidder for said improvements.
WHEREAS, City and Contractor desire to enter into this agreement for the construction of said
improvements pursuant to the terms, definitions, and conditions set forth in the General Provisions and
other Contract Documents.
IT IS AGREED as follows:
1. Scope of Work. Contractor shall perform the Work described briefly as follows:
The Work consists of the furnishing of all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services
necessary for the construction of the WQCP Sodium Hypochlorite Storage Tank Replacement
Project; in accordance with the Contract Documents.
Also included are any such other items or details not mentioned above that are required
by the Contract Documents, which are to be constructed or furnished and installed as shown on
the plans, as specified herein and as directed by the Engineer.
The aforementioned improvements are further described in the "Contract Documents"
hereinafter referred to.
2. The Contract Documents. The complete Contract consists of the following
documents:
(A) Notice Inviting Bids.
(B) Part I – Submitted Proposal (as accepted).
(C) This Agreement, including Contractor’s Payment Bond, Faithful Performance
Bond and Guaranty Bond.
1. 1The term "Contractor" as used herein is employed without distinction as to either number or gender and shall
include whenever the context shall permit all agents, representatives, employees, servants, subcontractors and
business or social invitees.
City of South San Francisco Bid No. 2620
WQCP Sodium Hypochlorite Tank Replacement City Project ss1601
A-2
(D) Part II – General Conditions. Note that the General Conditions make the
Caltrans Standard Specifications and Standard Plans, dated 2015, part of the
contract documents.
(E) Part III – Special Provisions: Contains Special Conditions and Technical
Specifications
(F) Part IV – Contract Drawings, prepared by Woodard and Curran, dated February
2019.
All rights and obligations of City and Contractor are fully set forth and described in the
contract documents.
3. All of the above-named documents are intended to cooperate, so that any work
called for in one and not mentioned in the other, or vice versa, is to be executed the same as if
mentioned in all said documents. The documents comprising the complete contract will
hereinafter be referred to as “the Contract Documents.”
4. Equipment - Performance of Work. Contractor shall furnish all tools, equipment,
apparatus, facilities, labor, and materials necessary to perform and complete in a good and
workmanlike manner the Work of general construction as called for, and for the manner
designated in, and in strict conformity with, the plans and specifications for said Work entitled:
WQCP SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE TANK REPLACEMENT.
The equipment, apparatus, facilities, labor, and materials shall be furnished and said
Work performed and completed as required in said plans and specifications under the direction
and supervision and subject to the approval of the Engineer of said City or the Engineer’s
designated assistant.
5. Contract Price. City shall pay, and Contractor shall accept, in full payment for
the Work agreed to be done the sum of One Million Six Hundred and Eighty Two Thousand
Dollar ($1,682,000). Said price is determined by the lump sum price contained in Contractor's
bid proposal (“Bid”). The lump sum price and unit prices are set forth in the completed Bid
forms attached hereto and made a part hereof as if set forth herein verbatim. In the event work is
performed or materials furnished in addition to those set forth in Contractor's bid and the
specifications herein, such work and materials will be paid for at the unit prices therein contained.
Said amount shall be paid in installments as hereinafter provided.
6. Rights of City to Increase Working Days. If such Work is not completed within
the time specified, the Engineer shall have the right to increase the number of working days in the
amount it may determine will best serve the interest of the City. If it desires to increase said
number of working days, it shall have the further right to charge to Contractor and deduct from
the final payment for the Work the actual cost of engineering, inspection, superintendence, and
other overhead expenses which are directly chargeable to Contractor and which accrue during the
period of such extension, except that the cost of the final service and preparation of the final
estimates shall not be included in such charges, provided, however, that no extension of time for
the completion of such Work shall be allowed unless at least twenty (20) calendar days prior to
the time herein fixed for the completion thereof or the time fixed by the Engineer for such
completion as extended, Contractor shall have filed application for extension thereof, in writing
with the Engineer.
City of South San Francisco Bid No. 2620
WQCP Sodium Hypochlorite Tank Replacement City Project ss1601
A-3
7. Option of City to Terminate Agreement in Event of Failure to Complete Work.
If at any time in the opinion of the Engineer, the Contractor has refused or failed to prosecute the
Work or any severable part thereof, with such diligence as will insure its work, or any completion
within the time specified, or any extensions thereof, or shall have failed to complete said work
within such time, or if Contractor should be adjudged a bankrupt, or if Contractor should make a
general assignment for the benefit of Contractor's creditors, or if a receiver should be appointed in
the event of Contractor's insolvency, or if Contractor, or any Subcontractor, should violate any of
the provisions of this Agreement, the Engineer may give written notice to Contractor, and
Contractor's sureties of its intention to terminate this Agreement, such notice to contain the
reasons for such intention to terminate this Agreement, and unless within five calendar (5) days
after the serving of such notice, such violation shall cease and satisfactory arrangements for the
correction thereof be made, this Agreement may, at the option of City, upon expiration of said
time, cease and terminate. Any excess of cost arising therefrom over and above the contract price
will be charged against the Contractor and the Contractor’s sureties who will be liable therefore.
In the event of such termination, all money due the Contractor or retained under the terms of this
contract shall be forfeited to the City; but such forfeiture will not release the Contractor or the
Contractor’s sureties from liability or failure to fulfill the contract. The Contractor and the
Contractor’s sureties will be credited with the amount of money so forfeited toward any excess of
cost over and above the contract price, arising from the suspension termination of the operations
of the contract and the completion of the Work by the City as above provided, and the Contractor
will be so credited with any surplus remaining after all just claims for such completion have been
paid.
In the determination of the question whether there has been any such noncompliance with
the contract as to warrant the suspension termination or annulment thereof, the decision of the
Engineer shall be binding on all parties to the contract.
8. Termination of Contract for Convenience. The City also reserves the right to
terminate the contract at any time upon a determination by the Engineer in the Engineer's sole
discretion that termination of the contract is in the best interest of the City. If the City elects to
terminate the contract for convenience, the termination of the contract and the total compensation
payable to the Contractor shall be governed by the following:
(A) The City will issue the Contractor a written notice signed by the
Engineer, specifying that the contract is terminated. Upon receipt of said written notice,
the Contractor will be relieved of further responsibility for damage to the Work
(excluding materials) as specified in Section VII-17, "Contractor's Responsibility for the
Work," of the General Conditions and, except as otherwise directed in writing by the
Engineer, the Contractor shall:
(1) Stop all work under the contract except that specifically directed to be completed
prior to acceptance.
(2) Perform work the Engineer deems necessary to secure the project for termination.
(3) Remove equipment and plant from the site of the Work.
(4) Take such action as is necessary to protect materials from damage.
(5) Notify all subcontractors and suppliers that the contract is being terminated and
that their contracts or orders are not to be further performed unless otherwise authorized
in writing by the Engineer.
City of South San Francisco Bid No. 2620
WQCP Sodium Hypochlorite Tank Replacement City Project ss1601
A-4
(6) Provide the Engineer with an inventory list of all materials previously produced,
purchased or ordered from suppliers for use in the Work and not yet used in the Work,
including its storage location, and such other information as the Engineer may request.
(7) Dispose of materials not yet used in the Work as directed by the Engineer. It
shall be the Contractor's responsibility to provide the City with good title to all materials
purchased by the City hereunder, including materials for which partial payment has been
made as provided in Section IX-2, “Progress Payments,” of the General Conditions and
with bills of sale or other documents of title for such materials.
(8) Subject to the prior written approval of the Engineer, settle all outstanding
liabilities and all claims arising out of subcontracts or orders for materials terminated
hereunder. To the extent directed by the Engineer, the Contractor shall assign to the City
all the right, title, and interest of the Contractor under subcontracts or orders for materials
terminated hereunder.
(9) Furnish the Engineer with the documentation required to be furnished by the
Contractor under the provisions of the contract, including, on projects as to which Federal
and State funds are involved, all documentation required under the Federal and State
requirements included in the contract.
(10) Take such other actions as the Engineer may direct.
(B) Acceptance of the contract as hereinafter specified shall not relieve the
Contractor of responsibility for damage to materials. The Contractor shall continue to be
responsible for damage to materials after issuance of the Notice of Termination, except as
follows:
(1) The Contractor’s responsibility for damage to materials for which partial
payment has been made as provided in Section IX-2, “Progress Payments,” of the
General Conditions and for materials furnished by the City for use in the Work and
unused shall terminate when the Engineer certifies that such materials have been stored in
the manner and at the locations the Engineer has directed.
(2) The Contractor’s responsibility for damage to materials purchased by the City
subsequent to the issuance of the notice that the contract is to be terminated shall
terminate when title and delivery of such materials has been taken by the City.
(3) When the Engineer determines that the Contractor has completed the Work under
the contract directed to be completed prior to termination and such other work as may
have been ordered to secure the project for termination, the Contractor will recommend
that the Engineer formally accept the contract to the extent performed, and immediately
upon and after such acceptance by the Engineer, the Contractor will not be required to
perform any further Work thereon and shall be relieved of the Contractor's contractual
responsibilities for injury to persons or property which occurs after the formal acceptance
of the project by the Engineer.
(C) Termination of the contract shall not relieve the surety of its obligation
for any just claims arising out of the work performed.
(D) The total compensation to be paid to the Contractor shall be determined
by the Engineer on the basis of the following:
City of South San Francisco Bid No. 2620
WQCP Sodium Hypochlorite Tank Replacement City Project ss1601
A-5
(1) The reasonable cost to the Contractor, without profit, for all work performed
under the contract, including mobilization, demobilization and work done to secure the
project for termination. In determining the reasonable cost, deductions will be made for
the cost of materials to be retained by the Contractor, amounts realized by the sale of
materials, and for other appropriate credits against the cost of the work. When, in the
opinion of the Engineer, the cost of a contract item of work is excessively high due to
costs incurred to remedy or replace defective or rejected work, the reasonable cost to be
allowed will be the estimated reasonable cost of performing such work in compliance
with the requirements of the plans and specifications and the excessive actual cost shall
be disallowed.
(2) A reasonable allowance for profit on the cost of the work performed as
determined under Subsection (1), provided the Contractor establishes to the satisfaction
of the Engineer that it is reasonably probable that the Contractor would have made a
profit had the contract been completed and provided further, that the profit allowed shall
in no event exceed four (4) percent of said cost.
(3) The reasonable cost to the Contractor of handling material returned to the vendor,
delivered to the City, or otherwise disposed of as directed by the Engineer.
(4) A reasonable allowance for the Contractor’s administrative costs in determining
the amount payable due to termination of the contract.
(5) A reasonable credit to the City for defective or incomplete work not corrected.
All records of the Contractor and subcontractors necessary to determine compensation in
accordance with the provisions of this Section 5 shall be open to inspection or audit by representatives of
the City at all times after issuance of the Notice of Termination and for a period of three (3) years,
thereafter, and such records shall be retained for that period.
After acceptance of the Work by the Engineer, the Engineer may make payments on the basis of
interim estimates pending issuance of the Final Estimate in accordance with Section IX-7, “Final
Payment,” of the General Conditions when, in the Engineer's opinion, the amount thus paid, together with
all amounts previously paid or allowed, will not result in total compensation in excess of that to which the
Contractor will be entitled. All payments, including payment upon the Final Estimate shall be subject to
deduction for prior payments and amounts, if any, to be kept or retained under the provisions of the
contract.
If this contract is terminated by the City for cause, and it is later determined that the proper basis
for a termination for cause did not exist, the termination shall be deemed to have been a termination for
convenience and governed by the terms of this contract dealing with such termination.
If the contract is terminated by the City for cause or convenience, such termination shall neither
act as a waiver by the City of its right to require the Contractor to correct defects in the Work performed
by the Contractor nor void any warranties applicable to the Work performed under the contract.
The provisions of this Section 5 shall be included in all subcontracts.
In the event of conflict between the termination provisions of this Section 8 and any other
provision or the contract, this Section 5 shall prevail.
9. Performance by Sureties. In the event of any termination as herein before
provided, City shall immediately give written notice thereof to Contractor and Contractor's
City of South San Francisco Bid No. 2620
WQCP Sodium Hypochlorite Tank Replacement City Project ss1601
A-6
sureties and the sureties shall have the right to take over and perform the Agreement, provided,
however, that if the sureties, within five (5) working days after giving them said notice of
termination, do not give the City written notice of their intention to take over the performance of
the Agreement and do not commence performance thereof within five (5) working days after
notice to the City of such election, City may take over the Work and prosecute the same to
completion by contract or by any other method it may deem advisable, for the account, and at the
expense, of Contractor, and the sureties shall be liable to City for any excess cost or damages
occasioned City thereby; and, in such event, City may, without liability for so doing, take
possession of and utilize in completing the Work such materials, appliances, plant, and other
property belonging to Contractor as may be on the site of the Work and necessary therefore.
Should Contractor contract in an individual capacity, the surety bond shall contain the following
provision: “Should Contractor contract in the Contractor’s individual capacity, the death of the
Contractor shall not relieve the surety of its obligations.”
10. Hold-Harmless Agreement and Contractor's Insurance. Contractor agrees to, and
shall, hold City, its elective and appointive boards, officers, agents, and employees harmless from
any liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injury, including death, as well as from
claims for property damage which may arise from Contractor's or any of Subcontractor's
operations under this Agreement, whether such operations be by Contractor or by any
Subcontractor or Subcontractors, or by any one or more persons directly or indirectly employed
by, or acting as agent for, Contractor or any Subcontractor or Subcontractors. Contractor agrees
to, and shall, defend City and its elective and appointive boards, officers, agents, and employees
from any suits or actions at law or in equity for damages caused, or alleged to have been caused,
by reason of any of the aforesaid operations, provided as follows:
(A) The City does not, and shall not, waive any rights against Contractor which it may have
by reason of the aforesaid hold-harmless agreement, because of the acceptance by City, or the
deposit with City by Contractor, of any of the insurance policies hereinafter described in
Paragraph 15, “Insurance” hereof.
(B) That the aforesaid hold-harmless agreement by Contractor shall apply to all damages and
claims for damages of every kind suffered, or alleged to have been suffered, by reason of any of
the aforesaid operations of Contractor or any Subcontractor, regardless of whether or not such
insurance policies shall have been determined to be applicable to any of such damages or claims
for damages.
11. Insurance. The Contractor shall take out and maintain during the life of this
Agreement the following policies of insurance:
(A) Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability Insurance providing
full statutory coverage.
In signing this Agreement, the Contractor makes the following certification, required by
Section 1861 of the California Labor Code:
"I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which
require every employer to be insured against liability for Workers' Compensation
or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and
I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the
work of this contract".
City of South San Francisco Bid No. 2620
WQCP Sodium Hypochlorite Tank Replacement City Project ss1601
A-7
(B) Comprehensive General Liability Insurance.
Public Liability Insurance (includes premises, elevator - if applicable, products,
completed operations, personal injury and contractual):
(1) Bodily Injury Liability:
$ 500,000 each person
$1,000,000 each occurrence
(2) Property Damage Liability [includes XCU (explosion, collapse,
and underground damage); water damage and broad form property
damage or third party liability]:
$ 500,000 per occurrence
(C) Comprehensive Automobile Liability Insurance (includes owned, non-
owned, and hired vehicles):
(1) Bodily Injury Liability:
$ 500,000 per person
$1,000,000 each occurrence
(2) Property Damage Liability:
$ 500,000 each occurrence
(D) It is agreed that the insurance required by Subsections B and C, in an
aggregate amount of not less than ONE MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS
($1,500,000), shall be extended to include as additional insured the City of South San Francisco,
its elective and appointive boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees, with respect to
operations performed by the Contractor, as described herein. Evidence of this insurance
described above shall be provided to City upon execution of this Agreement and shall be subject
to approval of the City Attorney as to form, amount, and carrier. The policy of insurance shall
also contain a provision indicating that such insurance shall not be reduced or cancelled except
upon thirty (30) calendar days written notice to City. In addition, the following endorsement
shall be made on said policy of insurance:
"The following are named as additional insured on the above policies: The City of South
San Francisco, its elective and appointive boards, officers, agents, and employees."
"Notwithstanding any other provision in this policy, the insurance afforded hereunder to
the City of South San Francisco shall be primary as to any other insurance or re-insurance
covering or available to the City of South San Francisco, and such other insurance or
reinsurance shall not be required to contribute to any liability or loss until and unless the
approximate limit of liability afforded hereunder is exhausted."
The above requirements that the City be named as additional insured, that the insurance
shall be primary to any other, and that the insurance not be cancelled without notice, shall be provided in
the form of an endorsement signed by an authorized representative of the insurance company providing
coverage, who shall declare his or her authority to sign on behalf of the insurer.
City of South San Francisco Bid No. 2620
WQCP Sodium Hypochlorite Tank Replacement City Project ss1601
A-8
12. Proof of Carriage of Insurance. Contractor shall furnish City through the
Engineer, concurrently with the execution hereof, with satisfactory proof of carriage of the
insurance required and that each carrier shall give City at least thirty (30) calendar days prior
notice of the cancellation or change of any policy during the effective period of this contract.
Further, if the Contractor’s insurance policy includes a self-insured retention that must be paid by
a named insured as a precondition of the insurer’s liability, or which has the effect of providing
that payments of the self-insured retention by others, including additional insureds or insurers do
not serve to satisfy the self-insured retention, such provisions must be modified by special
endorsement so as to not apply to the additional insured coverage required by this agreement so
as to not prevent any of the parties to this agreement from satisfying or paying the self-insured
retention required to be paid as a precondition to the insurer’s liability. Additionally, the
certificates of insurance must note whether the policy does or does not include any self-insured
retention and also must disclose the deductible.
13. Provisions Cumulative. The provisions of this Agreement are cumulative, and in
addition to and not in limitation of, any other rights or remedies available to City.
14. Notices. All notices shall be in writing and delivered in person or transmitted by
certified mail, postage prepaid.
Notices required to be given to City shall be addressed as follows:
City Clerk
City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue
South San Francisco, California 94080
Notices required to be given to Contractor shall be addressed as follows:
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
Notices required to be given sureties of Contractor shall be addressed as follows:
_________________________________________________________________________
Notices required to be given to the Escrow Agent of Contractor, if any, shall be addressed as
follows:
_________________________________________________________________________
15. Interpretation. As used herein, any gender includes each other gender, the
singular includes the plural, and vice versa.
City of South San Francisco Bid No. 2620
WQCP Sodium Hypochlorite Tank Replacement City Project ss1601
A-9
IN WIT NESS WHEREOF, two (2) identical counterparts of this Agreement, consisting of twelve
(12) pages (being pages A-1 through A-12), each of which counterparts shall for all purposes be deemed
an original of said Agreement, have been duly executed by the parties hereinabove named, on the day and
year first hereinabove written.
ATTEST: CITY: City of South San Francisco,
a municipal corporation
By:
City Clerk Mike Futrell, City Manager
CONTRACTOR:
ATTEST: By:
(If Contractor is an individual, so state.)
If Contractor is a Corporation, a corporate seal
or signatures of the President or Vice President
and the Secretary Treasurer are required).
City of South San Francisco Bid No. 2620
WQCP Sodium Hypochlorite Tank Replacement City Project ss1601
A-10
ATTACHMENT A
ESCROW AGREEMENT FOR SECURITY DEPOSITS IN LIEU OF RETENTION
THIS ESCROW AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the City of South San
Francisco whose address is 400 Grand Ave., P.O. Box 711, South San Francisco, CA 94083, hereinafter
referred to as "City," and ________________________________________,whose address is
___________________________________________________________, hereinafter called “Contractor” and
______________________________________________________________,whose address is
___________________________________________________________, hereinafter called “Escrow Agent.”
For the consideration hereinafter set forth, the Owner, Contractor, and Escrow Agent agree as follows:
1. Pursuant to Section 22300 of the Public Contract Code of the State of California, Contractor
has the option to deposit securities with Escrow Agent as a substitute for retention earnings required to be
withheld by Owner pursuant to the Construction Contract entered into between the Owner and Contractor for
__________________ in the amount of _______________dollars ($_____) dated ___________ (hereinafter
referred to as the “Contract”). Alternately, on written request of the Contractor, the Owner shall make
payments of the retention earnings directly to the Escrow Agent. When the Contractor deposits the securities
as a substitute for Contract earnings, the Escrow Agent shall notify the Owner within 10 working days of the
deposit. The market value of the securities at the time of the substitution shall be at least equal to the cash
amount then required to be withheld as retention under the terms of the Contract between the Owner and
Contractor. Securities shall be held in the name of _______________, and shall designate the Contractor as
the beneficial owner.
2. The Owner shall make progress payments to the Contractor for those funds which otherwise
would be withheld from progress payments pursuant to the Contract provisions, provided that the Escrow
Agent holds securities in the form and amount specified above.
3. When the Owner makes payment of retentions earned directly to the Escrow Agent, the
Escrow Agent shall hold them for the benefit of the Contractor until the time that the escrow created under this
contract is terminated. The Contractor may direct the investment of the payments into securities. All terms
and conditions of this agreement and the rights and responsibilities of the parties shall be equally applicable
and binding when the Owner pays the Escrow Agent directly.
4. Contractor shall be responsible for paying all fees for the expenses incurred by Escrow Agent
in administering the Escrow Account and all expenses of the Owner. These expenses and payment terms shall
be determined by the Owner, Contractor, and Escrow Agent.
5. The interest earned on the securities or the money market accounts held in escrow and all
interest earned on that interest shall be for the sole account of Contractor and shall be subject to withdrawal by
Contractor at any time and from time to time without notice to the Owner.
6. Contractor shall have the right to withdraw all or any part of the principal in the Escrow
Account only by written notice to Escrow Agent accompanied by written authorization from the Owner to the
Escrow Agent that Owner consents to the withdrawal of the amount sought to be withdrawn by Contractor.
7. The Owner shall have a right to draw upon the securities in the event of default by the
Contractor. Upon seven day’s written notice to the Escrow Agent from the Owner of the default, the Escrow
Agent shall immediately convert the securities to cash and shall distribute the cash as instructed by the Owner.
City of South San Francisco Bid No. 2620
WQCP Sodium Hypochlorite Tank Replacement City Project ss1601
A-11
8. Upon receipt of written notification from the Owner certifying that the Contract is final and
complete, and that the Contractor has complied with all requirements and procedures applicable to the
Contract, Escrow Agent shall release to Contractor all securities and interest on deposit less escrow fees and
charges of the Escrow Account. The escrow shall be closed immediately upon disbursement of all moneys and
securities on deposit and payments of fees and charges.
9. Escrow Agent shall rely on the written notifications from the Owner and the Contractor
pursuant to Sections (5) to (8), inclusive, of this Agreement, and the Owner and Contractor shall hold Escrow
Agent harmless from Escrow Agent’s release and disbursement of the securities and interest as set forth above.
10. The names of the persons who are authorized to give written notice or to receive written
notice on behalf of the Owner and on behalf of Contractor in connection with the foregoing, and exemplars of
their respective signatures are as follows:
On behalf of Owner: On behalf of Contractor:
Title Title
Name Name
Signature Signature
Address Address
On behalf of Escrow Agent:
Title
Name
Signature
Address
At the time the Escrow Account is opened, the Owner and Contractor shall deliver to the Escrow
Agent a fully executed counterpart of this Agreement.
City of South San Francisco Bid No. 2620
WQCP Sodium Hypochlorite Tank Replacement City Project ss1601
A-12
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement by their proper officers on the
date first set forth above.
Owner: Contractor:
Title Title
Name Name
Signature Signature
Approved as to form: Attest:
City Attorney Date City Clerk
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:18-1064 Agenda Date:4/24/2019
Version:2 Item #:3.
Report regarding a resolution approving a consulting services agreement with Kennedy/Jenks Consultants,Inc.
of Walnut Creek,California for the WQCP Switchgear &Cogeneration Controls Upgrade Project (Project No.
ss1705)in an amount not to exceed $504,616,authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement,and
authorizing a total design agreement budget of $555,000.(Brian Schumacker,Plant Superintendent and Peter
Vorametsanti, Consultant)
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution approving a consulting services agreement
with Kennedy/Jenks Consultants,Inc.of Walnut Creek,California for the WQCP Switchgear &
Cogeneration Controls Upgrade Project (Project No.ss1705)in an amount not to exceed $504,616,
authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement,and authorizing a total design agreement budget
of $555,000.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
Modern wastewater treatment plants rely on complex electronics and controls such as automatic switchgears
and motor control centers (MCC).Most of the Plant’s switchgear and MCC electrical components are over 25
years old and have reached the end of their design life.Manufactures design these types of electrical
components to last fifteen to twenty five years depending on manufacture support and parts availability.The
electronic controls technology is becoming outdated,safety standards have improved,and the components have
experienced normal wear and tear, which increases the frequency of maintenance needs.
In 2017,Plant Management completed a plant electrical systems condition assessment.The condition
assessment determined that,for reliability and operational cost effectiveness,Plant’s major electrical
components should be replaced.The electrical components in need of replacement include the plants original
main power service (1950’s vintage),upgrading and adding circuit breakers to the switchboards,upgrading and
interconnecting several of the motor control centers,and replacing the cogeneration control panel.This new,
upgraded equipment will be integrated into the Plant’s communication that is more modern and process control
networks,thus reducing the need for manual operation.Because the proposed upgrade of this equipment will
supplement and enhance the major Wet Weather and Digester Improvements project currently underway,staff
recommends beginning the design of this project as soon as possible so that the installation of the new
electrical equipment can be completed alongside the digester improvement project.
On November 29,2018,staff issued a Request for Proposals (RFP)for professional design and construction
services on the eBidboard and the City’s websites.The project manager also contacted the eight engineering
firms in Northern California known to do this type of design work to solicit that they submit proposals.All
eight firms (HDR,AECOM,Kenny/Jenks,West Yost,Brown Caldwell,Zeiger,TJC,and A Teem)expressed
interest.Three firms visited the Plant to view the equipment and spoke with staff.The remaining firms
declined our RFP,explaining that they generally do not accept smaller jobs,or that their current heavy
workloads prevented them from committing the necessary resources.Staff spoke with several other agencies
with treatment plants and confirmed that the Bay Area providers of this type of design work are
overwhelmingly busy and it is difficult to stimulate much interest for these types of projects in the currently
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/29/2019Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™
File #:18-1064 Agenda Date:4/24/2019
Version:2 Item #:3.
overloaded San Francisco Bay economic climate.
On January 25,2019,the City received proposals from AECOM,Kennedy Jenks,Lee &Ro and Zeiger
Engineers.Staff convened a panel to review the submitted proposals and then interviewed the firms on March
12,2019.The panel,consisted of 6 staff members and they independently rated the firms’proposals and
interviewed 3 firms according to the weighted criteria established established before receipt of the proposals.
The panel found all firms to be responsive to the RFP requirements and qualified to perform this scope of work,
but ranked Kennedy/Jenks as best qualified.Kennedy/Jenks demonstrates that they have the staffing
availability and expertise to provide the required design and construction support for the WQCP switchgear and
cogeneration controls upgrades.
Selection of consulting services is not based on the lowest bidder,but on the firm’s expertise,experience,and
references.Staff negotiated a fee proposal and refined the scope of work to obtain a reasonable cost for the
design effort. Staff found these fees to be consistent with industry standards.
The scope of services of this agreement is to provide engineering design and construction support for the
switchgear and cogeneration controls upgrade project.Major tasks include field verifying the condition of the
existing equipment,developing design criteria,and designing replacement components for deficient equipment
to produce the construction plans and specifications,and providing bidding and construction engineering phase
support.All design work will need to be developed in close coordination with plant operators and the designers
for the Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project.
Specific items of work include:
·designing a new Main Power Service
·designing replacements for MCC-B
·designing replacements Switchboard K-2
·designing replacements Cogeneration Controls
·designing upgrades to Switchboard K
·designing the interconnection of MCC-S with MCC-S1
·designing the installation of a new power meter network for Switchboard K-3
The designer needs to sequence this work to minimize shutdowns and outages.Design personnel must be
qualified electrical,mechanical,and civil engineers with knowledge and experience with treatment plant
operations.
Because this project is locally funded, there are no Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) requirements.
Therefore,staff recommends that the City enter into Professional Services Agreement with Kennedy/Jenks
Consultants,Inc.for design of the WQCP Switchgear &Cogen Controls Upgrade Project based upon the firm’s
expertise,experience,resources,project understanding and positive references.The initial term of this
agreement is from April 24, 2019 to April 23, 2021, the expected project completion.
FISCAL IMPACT
This project is included in the City of South San Francisco’s Fiscal Year 2018-19 Capital Improvement
Program (Project No.ss1705)and is funded by the Sewer Enterprise Fund.The City’s adopted sewer rate plan
provides revenue to accommodate this project.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/29/2019Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™
File #:18-1064 Agenda Date:4/24/2019
Version:2 Item #:3.
Sufficient funding for this project is included in the City of South San Francisco 2018-19 Capital Improvement
Program (CIP):
Design Consulting Services with Kennedy Jenks $504,616
Design Contingency (10%)$50,384
Total Project Design Funding $555,000
Available Total Project Budget $3,507,630
RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN
This project will contribute to the City’s Strategic Plan outcome of improved Quality of Life by maintaining the
WQCP per discharge permit requirements.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a consulting
services agreement with Kennedy Jenks based on their qualifications,expertise,experience,resources,project
understanding, positive references, and immediate availability.
Attachments:
1.Vicinity Map
2.Interview Evaluation
3.Kennedy Jenks Project Team Sheet
4.Kennedy Jenks Firm Experience with Project Similar to the Subject Project
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/29/2019Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™
Attachment 1 – Vicinity Map
South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant
Consulting Agreement for WQCP Switchgears & Cogen Controls Update (Project No. ss1705)
FINAL DESIGN AND CONTRACT DOCUMENT PREPARATION SERVICES
FINAL RATING SUMMARY
DESIGN FOR WQCP SWITCHGEAR MOTOR/COGEN CONTROL UPGRADE
PROJECT
INTERVIEW DATE MARCH 12, 2019.
FIRM NAME
Average
Proposal
Score
(75 Max.)
Average
Interview
Score
(25 Max.)
Total
(100 Max.)
Interview
Scores Interview
Score Average
Kennedy Jenks 72.0 21.67 93.67
20
23
22
21.67
Lee & Ro 67.75 21 88.75
20
20
23
21
AECOM 66.25 24 90.25
25
23
24
24
Zeiger Engineer 56 Not
Interviewed
Attachment 2: Interview Evaluation
PROJECT TEAM AND KEY STAFF
PROPOSAL | CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
DESIGN OF THE WQCP SWITCHGEAR, MOTOR CONTROL AND COGENERATION CONTROL UPGRADE PROJECT
PAGE 8
AN EXPERIENCED DESIGN TEAM ORGANIZED FOR EFFICIENT DELIVERY,
STEAMLINED COMMUNICATION, AND ACCESS TO ESSENTIAL EXPERTISE AND
RESOURCES
The most effective tool for keeping the project on schedule is collaborative communication, established
relationships, and building a high performing team among all project participants.
Kennedy Jenks leverages the experience of our staff to deliver the project on time and within budget. Our Project
Manager, Jeff Mohr, has practical experience managing teams to provide innovative and cost-effective solutions to
meet project objectives. Jeff will be supported by specialists with extensive EI&C expertise to successfully complete your
project within budget and on schedule. Our team organization is illustrated below, and resumes for key staff follow.
PRINCIPAL ENGINEER
Richard Cho, PE
An experienced Project
Manager who brings over
20 years of experience
managing large electrical
generator installation projects
and electrical equipment
replacements on existing
facilities, while maintaining
continuous operation during the
construction process.
Our team is local and has
worked on neighboring
facilities. Our team have
and continue to design
electrical improvements for
facilities nearby. This ongoing
work enables us to design
with a better understanding
of the construction cost
impacts.
Why the Kennedy Jenks Team
PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE
Peter Symonds, PE
Key Team Member
Parts of our team are
already on site. We will
leverage our construction
team to streamline interfaces
and coordination of ongoing
work to especially support
maintenance of plant
operation during construction.
DEPUTY PM
Alex Page, PE, QSP
Electrical/I&C
Inspection
Jorge Luna
ENGINEERING TEAM
Electrical
Zach Devlin, PE
Sandy Schuler, PE
I&C
Paul Post, PE
Marcus Spain
Constructability
John Bergen, PE
John is currently providing
Construction Management
services at the City's plant and
can provide real-time input on
the design phase.
PROJECT MANAGER
Jeff Mohr, PE, CEM
Attachment 3 - Kennedy Jenks Project Team Sheet
PROJECT TEAM AND KEY STAFF
Representative Experience
Get To Know Kennedy Jenks' Project Manager
You joined Kennedy Jenks less than a year ago. Why did you choose Kennedy Jenks?
I wanted to be happy at work. Specifically, I wanted to be employed at a firm that had a family-like culture centered on the success of
its employees, which flows into clients getting the best service and solutions because the people are energized and excited to be a part
of something so great. Kennedy Jenks has allowed me the best balance between work and life, applying my technical expertise while
fostering close client relationships.
What excites you about this project for the City of South San Francisco?
The biggest challenge this project presents is finding the most economical solution to the construction sequencing such that the plant
remains online. This project is electrical in nature but an exciting component is working with plant operations staff to determine proper
scheduling of downtime such that interruptions to the plant are kept at a minimum. Pairing our electrical experience with plant operators
expertise will be the driving factors for the project’s success. Accomplishing the project goals with our proposed approach is an exciting
challenge that I look forward to accomplishing collaboratively with the City and the Kennedy Jenks team.
PROPOSAL | CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
DESIGN OF THE WQCP SWITCHGEAR, MOTOR CONTROL AND COGENERATION CONTROL UPGRADE PROJECT
PAGE 9
JEFF MOHR, PE, CEM
Project Manager
Jeff will be the primary day-to-day point of contact, engaged in managing and performing
the required engineering services. He oversee and direct the project, and track specific
project milestones and objectives to ensure assignments stay on task, and the budget
and schedule are met.
Jeff has over 20 years of experience in the design and construction administration of
power, control, and instrumentation systems for various water and wastewater projects. His
designs have included low- and medium-voltage power generation and distribution systems,
variable frequency drives, indoor and outdoor lighting, solid state power system monitoring
and protection, hardwired relay and programmable logic controller (PLC) control systems,
and various data acquisition and other instrumentation systems. Jeff has managed several
large electrical generator installation projects and electrical equipment replacements
on existing facilities, while maintaining continuous operation during the construction
process, improving electrical safety and optimizing existing facilities to save
construction costs.
Employed by
Kennedy Jenks Consultants
Years of experience
with Kennedy Jenks/
other firms
1/19 (over 20 years total)
Education
BS, Electrical Engineering,
California Polytechnic State
University, 1998
Registrations
Professional Electrical
Engineer, CA (2009), CO
(2015), NM (2015), NV
(20182), OR (2012), WA
(2011), ND (2014), TX (2015),
AK (2013)
Last 5 years to present
Firm: Kennedy Jenks
Office location: Pasadena, CA
(60 minute flight)
Time period at location:
8 months
Previous employment/time
period: MWH (Stantec) May
2016-May 2018, Montgomery
Watson Harza Jan. 2014-May
2016
Rosamond
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
Rehabilitation
Rosamond
Community Services
District
Lead Electrical
Engineer
Pure Water
Monterey, Advanced
Water Treatment
Facility
Monterey One Water
Electrical Engineer
Santa Ana Water
Treatment Plant
Expansion
Pueblo of Santa
Ana
Electrical Engineer
BNR MBR Advanced
Water Treatment
Plant
Confidential Client
Lead Electrical
Engineer
202020172019
PROJECT TEAM AND KEY STAFF
PROPOSAL | CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
DESIGN OF THE WQCP SWITCHGEAR, MOTOR CONTROL AND COGENERATION CONTROL UPGRADE PROJECT
PAGE 10
Rosamond Wastewater Treatment Plant Rehabilitation, Rosamond, CA | Ongoing
The project scope includes the expansion of the facilities aeration system and associated equipment
to bring this WWTP back online to serve Rosamond Community. The existing plant is being expanded
from 0.5 MGD to 1.27 MGD. Tasks include analyzing the existing 750kW optional standby generator
to determine if it’s sufficient to supply backup power for the overall expansion and then engineer
solutions that provide the client the most reliability and flexibility while optimizing costs. As the lead
electrical engineer for Kennedy Jenks, Jeff is responsible for the electrical design.
Pure Water Monterey Advanced Water Treatment Facility, Monterey, CA | Ongoing
The Advanced Water Treatment Facility was designed to receive two power feeds through its
21kV Main-Tie-Main switchgear. To meet construction schedules, the 21kV primary service was
coordinated with Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E). The design of the alternate 21kV power supply
from Waste Management District is currently being finalized and coordinated with PG&E. The final
power distribution arrangement will provide the client with a reliable power distribution system
while optimizing energy usage costs. Construction is estimated to be complete in June 2019. As
the electrical engineer for Kennedy Jenks, Jeff's responsibilities included assisting the team with engineering
services during construction and coordinating the incoming electric utility service with PG&E.
Owner
Brach Smith
Rosamond Community
Services District
3179 35th Street West
Rosamond, CA 93560
(661) 256-3411
Santa Ana Wastewater Treatment Plant, Pueblo of Santa Ana, NM | 2017
This MBR plant design/build project included the design of electrical infrastructure to support a
new Headworks Facility, Anoxic Basins, Pre-Aeration Basins, MBR Basins and Dewatering/Solids
Handling Systems for the Pueblo of Santa Ana WWTP. Tasks included utility coordination, design and
preparation of single line diagrams, electrical control schematics, a standby emergency generator
system, access control system and modifications to the existing SBR facility to accommodate the
process changes to the facility. MBR process includes installation of pumps and blowers requiring
variable frequency drives and a 100A harmonic filter was designed for harmonic mitigation. Design
was tailored to minimize downtime to the existing plant and maintain plant operations. Working for
MWH (now a part of Stantec), Jeff was the lead electrical engineer for the design/build task for the MBR plant.
Schedule of Commitment
Jeff has the availability for this project
and will be commited to its success. The
table to the right includes his current
projects and their duration.
Project/Owner 2019 2020
Food Waste FacilityOrange County Sanitation District
Well 59 Treatment FacilitiesEastern Municipal Water District design construction
design construction
Owner
Bob Holden
Monterey One Water
14811 Del Monte Blvd.
Marina, CA 93933
(831) 883-6132
Owner
Kevin Montoya
Pueblo of Santa Ana
1518 Chenna Road
Santa Ana Pueblo, NM
87004
(505) 206-6435
Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR) Membrane Bioreactor (MBR) Advanced Water
Treatment Plant, Hillsboro, OR | 2017
The double ended 4.16kV feeders were distributed around the site to the six (6) double-ended
substations varying in size from 1MVA to 3MVA. A 3MVA emergency generator system (expandable
to 6MVA) was designed to interface with the Main Plant Switchgear with paralleling capabilities. This
approach was to meet the very strict uptime requirements for the facility such that it could meet its
stringent discharge requirements. Electrical design elements also included Medium Voltage Motor
Control Centers, Low Voltage Switchgear, Low Voltage Motor Control Centers, Variable Frequency
Drives, Panelboards and Dry-Type Transformers, including Cast Coil transformers. Working for MWH (now
a part of Stantec), Jeff was the lead electrical engineer and designed the electrical distribution system tieing into
the clients 35kV switchgear and bringing a double ended power feed to two (2) 15/20/25MVA 34.5-4.16kV liquid
filled transformers.
Owner
Confidential Client
PROPOSAL | CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
DESIGN OF THE WQCP SWITCHGEAR, MOTOR CONTROL AND COGENERATION CONTROL UPGRADE PROJECT
PAGE 11
PROJECT TEAM AND KEY STAFF
Pure Water Monterey Groundwater Replenishment Project, Advanced Water
Treatment Facility And Pump Station, Phase 5 Final Design | Ongoing
Served as the Project Engineer during the construction of this $50M Advanced Water
Purification Facility (AWPF). The Monterey One Water AWPF will provide 5 mgd of purified
water to be injected into the Seaside Groundwater Basin for recharge. During construction,
coordinated and/or provided submittal reviews, responded to Requests for Information
(RFIs), and design clarifications. Was the main point of contact with PG&E,and worked to
coordinate the construction and energization of the AWPF’s 21kV Switchgear. Project work
included coordination with technical subcontractors and the construction manager. Role:
Deputy Project Manager/Project Engineering for ESDC with Kennedy Jenks.
Denniston Treated Water Pump Station And Transmission Pipeline - CM &
Engineering Services During Construction, Half Moon Bay, CA | 2017
Performed as both the Construction Manager and on-site Inspector for this $3.7 million
project. This project included the installation of over 1,000-feet of ductile iron pipe and the
construction of a new treated water pump station. Construction of the pump station include
concrete pile driving, CMU Masonry Construction, and the installation and start-up of two
vertical turbine pumps. Role: Construction Manager and Inspector with Kennedy Jenks.
48-Inch Force Main Reliability Improvements Project: Unit 1 – Maple Street
To Bair Island, Redwood City, CA | 2014
Project Engineer for this $17.2 million project. This project is one of four units in a larger
program to replace 2.5 miles of existing sanitary sewer force main. Unit 1 replaced the
older failing pipeline segment with approximately 3,300 linear feet of 48-inch HDPE pipeline
between Redwood City and San Carlos pump stations. The project installed over 1,000
linear feet below grade using shored open-trench construction methods and 2,300 linear
feet via microtunneling construction methods. This program required substantial public
outreach, sequencing, and coordination. Role: Project Engineer with The Covello Group.
Drying Beds Improvement Project, Redwood City, CA | 2016
Project Engineer for this $3.7 million project. The scope included soil stabilization via lime
treatment, 13.5 acres of reinforced concrete placement, 12-in diameter HDPE process pipe
installation in soft clay soil (Bay Mud), installation of decant structures, 65-ft sheet pile
driving, installation of a 28-ft deep decant pump station, pump programming and start-up.
Role: Project Engineer for engineering services during construction with The Covello Group.
ALEX PAGE, PE, QSP
Deputy Project Manager
Alex's responsibilities include scheduling, planning and holding coordination meetings,
internally and externally, preparing agendas and minutes in coordination with Jeff,
reviewing project budget status, work complete, and drafting status updates, and
maintaining and updating the project Decision log in support of Jeff.
Alexandria (Alex) Page is an environmental engineer and registered Professional Civil
Engineer with six years of experience in the planning, design, and construction management
of potable, non-potable, and tertiary water projects throughout California. She has
contributed to successful planning and feasibility studies, engineering design, construction
inspection and management projects involving various infrastructure, including pump
stations, pipelines, and treatment facilities. As an environmental engineer, Alex has a
distinct perspective of understanding the environmental impacts of projects and serves an
integral role in providing insight to teams from planning through construction.
Employed by
Kennedy Jenks Consultants
Years of experience
with Kennedy Jenks/
other firms
3/3 (6 years total)
Education
BS, Environmental
Engineering, California
Polytechnic State University,
2013
Registrations
Professional Civil Engineer,
California (2016)
Last 5 years to present
Firm: Kennedy Jenks
Office location:
Santa Clara, CA
Time period at location:
3 years
Previous employment/time
period:
The Covello Group 2013-2016
PROJECT TEAM AND KEY STAFF
PROPOSAL | CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
DESIGN OF THE WQCP SWITCHGEAR, MOTOR CONTROL AND COGENERATION CONTROL UPGRADE PROJECT
PAGE 12
PETER SYMONDS, PE
Principal-in-Charge
Peter will provide creative and innovative perspectives as part of our Quality Assurance
and Quality Control process to deliver high value additional benefits through collaboration
and a broad spectrum of technical review. He will hold regular meetings with Jeff to
confirm that the project is moving forward in a timely manner and the project is on budget.
Peter is a civil engineer whose primary area of experience is in structural analysis and design
of buildings and tank structures in earthquake regions. His experience includes analysis,
design and rehabilitation of water containing structures subjected to static and hydrodynamic
loads, notably from earthquakes. His experience also includes steel, concrete, wood and
concrete masonry and composite building and non-building structure design for single and
multistory buildings. He has performed detailed modeling of complicated structures for
tanks and buildings, including nonlinear time-history analysis of structures under earthquake
loading. He has written several of the guide specifications used by Kennedy Jenks and
manages the technical development program for the structural group.
Employed by
Kennedy Jenks Consultants
Years of experience
with Kennedy Jenks/
other firms
14/0 (14 years total, all at
Kennedy Jenks)
Education
BS, Civil Engineering,
University of California,
Berkeley, 2003
MS, Civil Engineering,
University of California, Davis,
2004
Registrations
Professional Engineer, CA
(2007), WA (2008), OR
(2011), NV (2011), SD (XXXX),
TX (2014)
Last 5 years to present
Firm: Kennedy Jenks
Office location: Walnut Creek,
CA
Time period at location: 14
years
Primary Sedimentation and Electrical Rehabilitation, Palo Alto, CA |
Ongoing
Kennedy Jenks is currently rehabilitating the Primary Sedimentation Tanks (PSTs) and
the Top-Deck electrical infrastructure for the City of Palo Alto, consisting of Motor Control
Centers (MCCs) E, F, and G to address system failures, partial process outages and high
maintenance attention. Electrical design involved extensive planning to maximize uptime
for each system, which led to an 8-step sequencing plan to place and prepare distribution
equipment for transition with a minimum of disruption. Role: Structural Discipline Lead with
Kennedy Jenks.
WWTP Reliability Improvements, Redwood City, CA | 2017
For this reliability improvement project involving design of process improvements, new
MCC’s and VFD’s for pumps and blowers, new instrumentation and controls. Role: Structural
Designer with Kennedy Jenks.
Filter Rehabilitation and Electrical Upgrades, San Jose, CA | Ongoing
The Filter Rehabilitation Upgrades will repair and rehabilitate the largest filtration tertiary
system in the U.S., which is designed to treat an average of 167MGD and a peak of
271MGD. This $33M improvement will deliver $4.95M of services encompassing condition
assessment, design and construction-phased services to extend the useful service life of
the entire tertiary system comprising the filter influent pump station (FIPS), secondary FIPS,
16 dual-media filtration batteries, filter building, backwash storage and treatment, chlorine
contact basins for disinfection, and auxiliary equipment and systems. Role: Structural Designer
with Kennedy Jenks.
Pleasant Grove Wastewater Treatment Expanion, Roseville, CA | 2018
This $50M expansion project will add four primary clarifiers, two gravity belt thickeners,
sludge thickening building, two anaerobic digesters, digester control building, and auxiliary
systems, controls and process piping. The project will be delivered under a design-assist
procurement and includes services for planning, design, contractor procurement, and
engineering services during design. Role: Strutural Designer with Kennedy Jenks.
PROJECT TEAM AND KEY STAFF
PROPOSAL | CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
DESIGN OF THE WQCP SWITCHGEAR, MOTOR CONTROL AND COGENERATION CONTROL UPGRADE PROJECT
Plant 2 Consolidated Demolition and Utility Improvements, Orange County,
CA | 2017
Evaluation of several existing unused facilities at OCSD’s Plant 2. Construction sequencing
for demolition was developed, including re-feeding several motor control centers from
alternate sources, and demolishing unused digester, clarifier, and pump station equipment.
Construction of a new utility building to house three 125hp plant air compressors, and a
125kVA regional UPS system to replace several separate smaller systems spread throughout
the plant. Role: Lead Electrical Engineer while employed at MWH (Stantec).
Digester Gas Utilization Upgrade, San Francisco, CA | 2017
The project consisted of replacement of two existing 550 kW digester gas cogeneration units
with three new 600 kW units, relocating an existing boiler system, as well as replacement
of the digester gas conditioning system. The project involved upgrades to protective
relaying to comply with utility interconnection requirements. Zach produced drawings and
specifications. Role: Lead Electrical Engineer while employed at MWH (Stantec).
Garnet Valley Water System, NV | 2017
Portable water system consisting of three wells, and two 2MG steel reservoirs, and all
associated instrumentation and controls, and power distribution equipment. Each well
site was provided with a 450hp 4160V submersible pump motor, iron removal treatment
system, and a chlorine dosing system. One well site was provided with a 1000 kW 4160V
diesel generator to provide standby power. Role: Lead Electrical Engineer while employed at MWH
(Stantec).
Digester Condition Assessment and Rehabilitation, Las Vegas, NV | 2016
This project included an evaluation of twelve anaerobic digesters and subsequent
development of a detailed design to correct various operational difficulties and repair and
replace aging and failing components. The project included replacement of sludge and
hot water pumps, installation of a pumped mixing system, modifications to several existing
motor control centers, and design of three new motor control centers. Role: Lead Electrical
Engineer while employed at MWH (Stantec).
PAGE 13
ZACH DEVLIN, PE
Electrical
Zach will lead the electrical design effort and will serve as engineer of record. He will work
in close coordination with the I&C design team and City operations staff to deliver an
accurate and comprehensive set of construction documents that will accomplish the City’s
objectives.
Zach has 13 years of electrical engineering experience. His background includes design
of electrical projects for water and wastewater treatment plants, pumping stations, and
hydropower generating stations, including new construction and rehabilitation of existing
facilities.Employed by
Kennedy Jenks Consultants
Years of experience
with Kennedy Jenks/
other firms
0.2/12 (13 years total)
Education
BS, Electrical Engineering,
University of Nevada Las
Vegas, Las Vegas, Nevada,
2006
BA, Computer Science,
University of Nevada Las
Vegas, Las Vegas, Nevada,
2006
MS, Arizona State University,
Tempe, Arizona, 2011
Registrations
Professional Engineer, CA
(2015), MN (2015), ID
(2015), UT (2015), MO
(2012), NV (2010), AZ (2015),
HI ( 2010)
Last 5 years to present
Firm: Kennedy Jenks
Office location:
Henderson, NV
Time period at location: 2
months
Previous employment/time
period:
MWH (Stantec), Las Vegas,
NV, 2015-2018
Black & Veatch, Kansas City,
MO, 2012-2014
PROJECT TEAM AND KEY STAFF
PROPOSAL | CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
DESIGN OF THE WQCP SWITCHGEAR, MOTOR CONTROL AND COGENERATION CONTROL UPGRADE PROJECT
PAGE 14
PAUL POST, PE
I&C
Paul will be responsible for the Instrumentation and Controls (I&C) portion of the project.
Paul recently joined Kennedy Jenks from Carollo Engineers, bringing over 25 years electrical
and electronics engineering experience. He has worked in the water/wastewater industry
since 2002, and his background offers an outstanding combination of consulting, design,
testing, and manufacturing experience. In addition to water/wastewater industry consulting,
he has worked as an electrical engineer for a water/wastewater controls systems integrator,
an elevator controls company, and a manufacturer of electronic payment terminals. With the
primary goal of delivering projects in a timely manner, Paul offers a comprehensive approach
that ensures successful projects and satisfied customers. Paul is proficient in low voltage
switchgear, standby generator systems, variable frequency drives, motor control systems,
PLC controls, instrumentation, interconnection diagrams, and testing plans. He is skilled at
analyzing complex functions, procedures, and problems to find creative, logical, and effective
solutions. He is experienced with numerous facets of engineering concepts, products, control
processes, instrumentation, and practices and procedures within the industry. He has
designed and reviewed interconnection diagrams, PLC control systems, testing plans, startup
plans, and cost proposals.
Employed by
Kennedy Jenks Consultants
Years of experience
with Kennedy Jenks/
other firms
0.2/25 (over 25 years total)
Education
BS, Electronic Engineering,
California State University,
Sacramento, 1992
Registrations
Professional Electrical
Engineer, CA (2003)
Last 5 years to present
Firm: Kennedy Jenks
Office location:
Rancho Cordova, CA
Time period at location: 2
months
Previous employment/time
period:
Carollo Engineers,
Sacramento, CA, 2015-2018
Frisch Engineering, Folsom,
CA, 2005-2015
Pump Station Condition and Performance Assessment, Sacramento, CA |
2015
Participated in a detailed evaluation of six pumping stations for safety, efficiency concerns,
cost of maintenance, reliability and good neighbor criteria. As part of the Carollo assessment
team, performed in-field condition assessments to identify deficiencies at each pump
station. Conducted the electrical and controls portion of an evaluation to recommend four
alternatives for each pump station. Role: Electrical Engineer while at Carollo Engineers (Carollo).
Echo Water - Tertiary Treatment Facilities, Sacramento, CA | 2018 (Design
Complete)
This $400 million Tertiary Treatment Facilities Project (TTF) provided filtration and
disinfection of secondary effluent to a level equivalent to Title 22 requirements for tertiary
disinfected recycled water for unrestricted reuse. Tertiary facilities include a 330-mgd
filter influent pump station, 217 mgd of granular media filters, backwash equalization and
treatment, chemical feed systems, covered disinfection contact basin, and a new area
control center. Role: Instrumentation and Control Engineer while at Carollo.
Echo Water - Project Return Activated Sludge Pumping Project | 2018
This $40 million project will replace existing RAS pumps with new pumps designed to
deliver the higher flow and head conditions required by the new BNR process. The RAS
pumping system will have a capacity of over 200 mgd and includes 48 pumps located at 24
secondary sedimentation tanks. Role: Instrumentation and Control Engineer while at Carollo.
Wells 275 and 294, CWSC, Dominguez, CA | 2014
The project included a 50-hp well pump, strainer, air stripper, gas scrubber, ion exchange
system, brine system, chemical feed system, 480-VAC switchgear with automatic transfer
switch and power distribution, motor control center, and solid state soft starters used for the
50-hp well pump and 30-hp air stripper blowers. Role: Electrcal Engineer at Frisch Engineering.
FIRM EXPERIENCE
PROPOSAL | CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
DESIGN OF THE WQCP SWITCHGEAR, MOTOR CONTROL AND COGENERATION CONTROL UPGRADE PROJECT
PAGE 16
Owner Reference
Ms. Siew Ching Chin
Project Manager
City of Palo Alto
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
(650) 838-2917
Project Size
$12M
Team Members
•Jeff Mohr, PE
•Peter Symonds, PE
•Sandy Schuler, PE
•Marcus Spain
Primary Sedimentation and Electrical Rehabilitation,
Palo Alto, CA | Ongoing
The City of Palo Alto (City) identified a significant need to rehabilitate existing
facilities at the Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP), which have
been subject to failures, leading to partial process outages and expensive
maintenance. These facilities consist of the Primary Sedimentation
Tanks (PSTs) and what the City has referred to as the Top-Deck electrical
infrastructure, consisting of Motor Control Centers (MCCs) E, F, and G. To
address these deteriorating systems, the City developed the current Project
and hired Kennedy Jenks with the goal of rehabilitating and upgrading these
systems to provide reliable service for at least the next 20 years.
Electrical design involved extensive planning to maximize uptime for each
system. This led to an 8-step sequencing plan to place and prepare distribution
equipment for transition with a minimum of disruption.
Instrumentation and control was designed to be compatible with the City’s
existing SCADA and PLC systems. Control will utilize local PLCs via the existing
SCADA system and automation of PST equipment control will be used where
most appropriate.
Relevant features included:
•Evaluation of electrical and instrumentation systems
•Alternative analysis for replacement of new MCCs, F, G, H
•Integration of new equipment into electrical system
•Control scheme to integrate new equipment into existing Plant SCADA
•MCC load transfers
•Removal of MCCs
•Installation and connection of new MCCs, including two small 1200A
MCCs
•Relocation of existing loads to new MCCs
•Addition of new distribution panels
•Provisions for future switchboards to replace obsolete substations
1
Owner
Attachment 4 - Kennedy Jenks Firm Experience
FIRM EXPERIENCE
PROPOSAL | CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
DESIGN OF THE WQCP SWITCHGEAR, MOTOR CONTROL AND COGENERATION CONTROL UPGRADE PROJECT
PAGE 17
Owner Reference
Teresa Herrera
Plant Manager
Silicon Valley Clean Water
1400 Radio Road
Redwood City, CA 94065
(650) 591-7121
Project Size
$8M
Team Members
• Peter Symonds, PE
• Sandy Schuler, PE
• Marcus Spain
WWTP Reliability Improvements, Redwood City, CA |
2017
Silicon Valley Clean Water (SVCW) wass undertaking improvements to the
reliability of the WWTP serving the cities of Belmont, Redwood City, San Carlos
and the West Bay Sanitary District. SVCW is currently engaged in a multi-year
CIP to address aging systems and to improve reliability of the treatment works
and the conveyance system.
This project included the installation of new MCC's and VFD's for both pumps
and blowers and new Instrumentation and control systems for several process
areas to provide reliability improvements. Kennedy Jenks served as owner's
representative, helping SVCW prepare preliminary design and a Basis of Design
Report and creating bridging documents to bring on a Design Build team for
final completion.
Power and electrical distribution system upgrades included:
• Existing MCCs including new VFDS associated with new Aeration Blowers
• Existing MCCs and new VFDs associated with Dewatering System
Improvements
• Existing MCCs associated with a new backup water system for the Plant’s
Standby Generator System
Instrumentation and control system upgrades included:
• Existing PLCs and SCADA associated with Aeration Blowers
• Existing PLCs, SCADA and various specialty control panels associated with
the Dewatering System Improvements
• Existing PLCs and SCADA associated with the new backup water system
for the Plant’s Standby Generator System
2
Owner
FIRM EXPERIENCE
PROPOSAL | CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
DESIGN OF THE WQCP SWITCHGEAR, MOTOR CONTROL AND COGENERATION CONTROL UPGRADE PROJECT
PAGE 18
Owner Reference
Ms. Tina Pham
Senior Engineer
City of San Jose
700 Los Esteros Road
San Jose, CA 95134
(408) 635-2099
Project Size
$31M
Team Members
• Jeff Mohr, PE, CEM
• Peter Symonds, PE
• Sandy Schuler, PE
• Marcus Spain
Filter Rehabilitation and Electrical Upgrades, San Jose,
CA | Ongoing
The City of San Jose City is rehabilitating the entire tertiary process
comprising the Influent Pump Station, Filtration Process, Chlorine Contact
Basins, Backwash Process and auxiliary systems. Of the estimated $31M
construction, over 40% comprise electrical and instrumentation upgrades.
EI&C improvements are closely coordinated to mitigate impacts on other
projects overlapping in area, scope and construction window. Construction of
improvements will require extensive construction sequencing and phasing.
Relevant features include:
• Improvements addressed aging infrastructure and will result in enhanced
reliability, process efficiency, safety, and operability
• Involved over 12-months of planning and coordination with the program
O&M staff given construction would require a full-plant shutdown for
extended periods of time
• Provided extensive condition assessment, conceptual, and preliminary
design
• Currently beginning design-phase services
• Replacing Transformers S6-T1 and S6-T2, S12-T1 and S12-T2 including
medium voltage cable feeds
• Replacing LV Switchgear S6 and MV Switchgear S12
• Replacing MCCs AF1, AF2, AD1, AD2, AE1, AE2
• Rebalancing switchgear loads
3
Owner
FIRM EXPERIENCE
PROPOSAL | CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
DESIGN OF THE WQCP SWITCHGEAR, MOTOR CONTROL AND COGENERATION CONTROL UPGRADE PROJECT
PAGE 19
Owner Reference
Ken Glotzbach
Wastewater Utility Manager
City of Roseville
2005 Hilltop Circle
Roseville, CA 95747
(916) 774-5754
Project Size
$80M
Team Members
• Jeff Mohr, PE, CEM
• Peter Symonds, PE
• Sandy Schuler, PE
• Marcus Spain
Pleasant Grove Wastewater Treatment Expansion,
Roseville, CA | 2018
The City of Roseville is expanding capacity of the Pleasant Grove WWTP by 40%
to address accelerated regional growth by adding new processes comprising
primary clarifiers, gravity belt thickeners, anaerobic digestion, odor control and
auxiliary system. The $80M improvements, of which 20% were EI&C, were
delivered using the Design-Assist Delivery method.
Kennedy Jenks provided planning, predesign and design services for all
disciplines. Construction of improvements will be sequenced to allow the WWTP
to remain fully functional. Partial shutdowns are planned for critical tie-ins and
power bus modifications, which require a power outage at each Switchgear.
Power and electrical distribution system upgrades included:
• Modification of existing Switchgear 1 to add two new feeder breakers
• Modification of Switchgear 2 to add a new feeder breaker
• New MCCs to handle the power loads from the primary clarifiers, digesters
and solids thickening processes
Instrumentation and control system modifications were tailored to the City's
Process Control System Standards and included:
• New and modifications of existing PLCs and SCADA and expansion
of fire alarm system, security system, fiber optic network, and data
communication
• New technologies comprising: conductivity probes, radar level probes, and
SCADA-accessible video surveillance
4
Owner
FIRM EXPERIENCE
PROPOSAL | CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
DESIGN OF THE WQCP SWITCHGEAR, MOTOR CONTROL AND COGENERATION CONTROL UPGRADE PROJECT
PAGE 20
Owner Reference
Mr. Paul Sciuto
General Manager
Monterey One Water
5 Harris Court, Building D
Monterey, CA 93940
(831) 645-4600
Project Size
$115M
Team Members
• Jeff Mohr, PE, CEM
• Alex Page, PE, QSP
• Peter Symonds, PE
• Sandy Schuler, PE
• Marcus Spain
Monterey One Water Advanced Water Purification
Facility, Monterey, CA | Ongoing
The Monterey One Water Agency (M1W) and Monterey Peninsula Water
Management District partnered to create Pure Water Monterey, a $115M
groundwater replenishment project.
The 4 MGD Advanced Water Purification Facility (AWPF) is the first Indirect
Potable Reuse (IPR) facility in Northern California and uses ozone pre-oxidation,
microfltration, reverse osmosis, UV advanced oxidation, and post-treatment
stabilization processes.
Kennedy Jenks led the planning, permitting and design, successfully delivering
the 30% design for the AWPF in 12 weeks.
Power and electrical distribution system upgrades included:
• 21kVA Switchgear with provisions to tie into Waste Management Co-gen
Facility one half mile away
• Two 3720kVA transformers at 21kV:480V
• Two 4000A LV Main-Tie Switchboards and Smart-MCCs all with power
monitors communicating to SCADA
Instrumentation and control system upgrades included:
• Communication system consisted of Control System, Corporate System,
and SCADA System separated by isolated managed switches
• Control system included the remote control panels and local control
stations
5
Owner
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO-SAN BRUNO WATER QAULITY CONTROL PLANT
ELECTRICAL SWITCHGEAR AND MCC -B REPLACEMENT
Removal and Replacement of ALL 480
Volt MCC-B Power Supply Panels
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:18-1065 Agenda Date:4/24/2019
Version:1 Item #:3a.
Resolution approving a consulting services agreement with Kennedy/Jenks Consultants,Inc.of Walnut Creek,
California for the WQCP Switchgear &Cogeneration Controls Upgrade Project (Project No.ss1705)in an
amount not to exceed $504,616,authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement,and authorizing a total
design agreement budget of $555,000.
WHEREAS,the City of South San Francisco co-owns and operates the South San Francisco/San Bruno Water
Quality Control Plant (WQCP),located at 195 Belle Air Road to provide secondary wastewater treatment for
the Cities of South San Francisco and San Bruno,Town of Colma,and portions of City of Daly City,a
population over 110,000, and
WHEREAS,the WQCP obtains power from PG&E via a 12-kilovolt (kV)main service,as supplemented by an
on-site 410 kilowatt cogeneration system fueled by digester gas,and distributes this power via four 480-volt
switchboards to various motor control centers to operating equipment throughout the plant, and,
WHEREAS,for reliability and operational cost effectiveness,it is beneficial to upgrade the WQCP’s aging
electrical components,including replacing the main power service,upgrading and adding circuit breakers to the
switchboards,upgrading and interconnecting several of the motor control centers,and replacing the
cogeneration control panel, and
WHEREAS,on November 29,2018,the City issued a Request for Proposals for professional design and
construction services and received proposals from AECOM, Kennedy Jenks, Lee & Ro, and Zeiger Engineers.
WHEREAS,staff convened a panel of qualified technical staff to review the submitted proposals and then to
interview three firms on March 12, 2019, and
WHEREAS,the panel found the firms to be responsive to the Request for Proposal requirements and qualified
to perform this scope of work,but ranked Kennedy Jenks to be best qualified for the desired scope of services,
and
WHEREAS,staff recommends approving the consulting services agreements for design of the WQCP
Switchgear &Cogeneration Controls Upgrade Project for the City of South San Francisco’s Capital
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/29/2019Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:18-1065 Agenda Date:4/24/2019
Version:1 Item #:3a.
Improvement Program in the total amount not to exceed $504,616, and
WHEREAS,funding for this agreement is provided in the 2018/2019 Capital Improvement Program Project
ss1705.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City
Council hereby approves a consulting services agreement,attached herewith as Exhibit A,with Kennedy Jenks
of Walnut Creek,California in an amount not to exceed $504,616,conditioned on Kennedy Jenks’s timely
execution of the consulting services agreement and submission of all required documents,including but not
limited to, certificates of insurance and endorsements, in accordance with the Project documents.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco authorizes the Finance
Department to establish the Project budget consistent with the information contained in the staff report.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the agreement and any
other related documents on behalf of the City upon timely submission by Kennedy Jenks of the signed contract
and all other documents, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to take any other required actions
consistent with the intent of this resolution, that do not materially increase the City’s obligations.
*****
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/29/2019Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. Page 1 of 19
CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND KENNEDY/JENKS CONSULTANTS, INC.
THIS AGREEMENT for consulting services (“Agreement”) is made by and between the City of
South San Francisco (“City”) and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. (“Consultant”) (together sometimes
referred to as the “Parties”) as of April 24, 2019 (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 Work attached as Exhibit A, attached hereto
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, the Agreement shall
prevail.
1.1 Term of Services. The term of this Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date and shall
end on April 23, 2021, or the date of completion specified in Exhibit A, and Consultant
shall complete the work described in Exhibit A prior to 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 provided for in Section 8.
1.2 Standard of Performance. Consultant shall perform all services required pursuant to this
Agreement in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent
practitioner of the profession in which Consultant is engaged in the geographical area in
which Consultant practices its profession. Consultant shall prepare all work products
required by this Agreement in a professional manner and shall conform to the standards of
quality normally observed by a person practicing in Consultant's profession.
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. Consultant shall devote such time to the performance of services pursuant to this
Agreement as may be reasonably necessary to meet the standard of performance
provided in Sections 1.1 and 1.2 above and to satisfy Consultant’s obligations hereunder.
Section 2. COMPENSATION. City hereby agrees to pay Consultant a sum not to exceed Five
Hundred Four Thousand Six Hundred and Sixteen Dollars ($504,616.00), notwithstanding any contrary
indications that may be contained in Consultant’s proposal, for services to be performed and reimbursable
costs incurred under this Agreement. In the event of a conflict between this Agreement and Consultant’s
proposal, attached as Exhibit A, or Consultant’s compensation schedule 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
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. Page 2 of 19
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, 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 per 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.);
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, as well as a separate notice when the total number of hours of work by
Consultant and any individual employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant
reaches or exceeds eight hundred (800) hours, which shall include an estimate of
the time necessary to complete the work described in Exhibit A;
The amount and purpose of actual expenditures for which reimbursement is
sought;
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 thirty (30) days from the receipt of an invoice that complies with all of the
requirements above to pay Consultant. City shall have no obligation to pay invoices
submitted ninety (90) days past the performance of work or incurrence of cost.
2.3 Final Payment. City shall pay the last ten percent (10%) of the total sum due pursuant to
this Agreement within sixty (60) days after completion of the services and submittal to City
of a final invoice, if all services required have been satisfactorily performed.
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. Page 3 of 19
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 Fees. Fees for work performed by Consultant on an hourly basis shall not exceed
the amounts shown on the compensation schedule attached hereto and incorporated
herein as Exhibit B.
2.6 Reimbursable Expenses. The following constitute reimbursable expenses authorized by
this Agreement: reprographics, mailing and deliveries. Reimbursable expenses shall not
exceed $21,915. Expenses not listed above are not chargeable to City. Reimbursable
expenses are included in the total amount of compensation provided under Section 2 of
this Agreement that shall not be exceeded.
2.7 Payment of Taxes, Tax Withholding. Consultant is solely responsible for the payment of
employment taxes incurred under this Agreement and any similar federal or state taxes.
To be exempt from tax withholding, Consultant must provide City with a valid California
Franchise Tax Board form 590 (“Form 590”), as may be amended and such Form 590
shall be attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit D. Unless Consultant provides
City with a valid Form 590 or other valid, written evidence of an exemption or waiver from
withholding, City may withhold California taxes from payments to Consultant as required
by law. Consultant shall obtain, and maintain on file for three (3) years after the termination
of this Agreement, Form 590s (or other written evidence of exemptions or waivers) from all
subcontractors. Consultant accepts sole responsibility for withholding taxes from any non-
California resident subcontractor and shall submit written documentation of compliance
with Consultant’s withholding duty to City upon request. .
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 in order to verify costs incurred to that date.
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 Prevailing Wage. Where applicable, the wages to be paid for a day's work to all classes
of laborers, workmen, or mechanics on the work contemplated by this Agreement, shall be
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. Page 4 of 19
not less than the prevailing rate for a day’s work in the same trade or occupation in the
locality within the state where the work hereby contemplates to be performed as
determined by the Director of Industrial Relations pursuant to the Director’s authority under
Labor Code Section 1770, et seq. Each laborer, worker or mechanic employed by
Consultant or by any subcontractor shall receive the wages herein provided for. The
Consultant shall pay two hundred dollars ($200), or whatever amount may be set by Labor
Code Section 1775, as may be amended, per day penalty for each worker paid less than
prevailing rate of per diem wages. The difference between the prevailing rate of per diem
wages and the wage paid to each worker shall be paid by the Consultant to each worker.
An error on the part of an awarding body does not relieve the Consultant from
responsibility for payment of the prevailing rate of per diem wages and penalties pursuant
to Labor Code Sections 1770 1775. The City will not recognize any claim for additional
compensation because of the payment by the Consultant for any wage rate in excess of
prevailing wage rate set forth. The possibility of wage increases is one of the elements to
be considered by the Consultant.
a. Posting of Schedule of Prevailing Wage Rates and Deductions. If the schedule of
prevailing wage rates is not attached hereto pursuant to Labor Code Section 1773.2, the
Consultant shall post at appropriate conspicuous points at the site of the project a
schedule showing all determined prevailing wage rates for the various classes of laborers
and mechanics to be engaged in work on the project under this contract and all
deductions, if any, required by law to be made from unpaid wages actually earned by the
laborers and mechanics so engaged.
b. Payroll Records. Each Consultant and subcontractor shall keep an accurate
payroll record, showing the name, address, social security number, work week, and the
actual per diem wages paid to each journeyman, apprentice, worker, or other employee
employed by the Consultant in connection with the public work. Such records shall be
certified and submitted weekly as required by Labor Code Section 1776.”
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 facility that may involve
incurring any direct expense, including but not limited to computer, long-distance telephone or other
communication charges, vehicles, and reproduction facilities.
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. Page 5 of 19
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 Certificates of Insurance, attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit C, indicating that
Consultant has obtained or currently maintains insurance that meets the requirements of this section and
under forms of insurance satisfactory, in all respects, to 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).
4.1 Workers’ Compensation. Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, maintain
Statutory Workers’ Compensation Insurance and Employer’s Liability Insurance for any
and all persons employed directly or indirectly by Consultant. The Statutory Workers’
Compensation Insurance and Employer’s Liability Insurance shall be provided with limits of
not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) per accident. In the alternative,
Consultant may rely on a self-insurance program to meet those requirements, but only if
the program of self-insurance complies fully with the provisions of the California Labor
Code. Determination of whether a self-insurance program meets the standards of the
Labor Code shall be solely in the discretion of the Contract Administrator (as defined in
Section 10.9). The insurer, if insurance is provided, or the Consultant, if a program of self-
insurance is provided, 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.
4.2 Commercial General and Automobile Liability Insurance.
4.2.1 General requirements. Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall maintain
commercial general and automobile liability insurance for the term of this
Agreement in an amount not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00)
per occurrence, combined single limit coverage for risks associated with the work
contemplated by this Agreement. If a Commercial General Liability Insurance or an
Automobile Liability form or other form with a general aggregate limit is used,
either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work to be
performed under this Agreement or the general aggregate limit shall be at least
twice the required occurrence limit. Such coverage shall include but shall not be
limited to, protection against claims arising from bodily and personal injury,
including death resulting there from, and damage to property resulting from
activities contemplated under this Agreement, including the use of owned and non-
owned automobiles.
4.2.2 Minimum scope of coverage. Commercial general coverage shall be at least as
broad as Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability occurrence form
CG 0001 or GL 0002 (most recent editions) covering comprehensive General
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. Page 6 of 19
Liability and Insurance Services Office form number GL 0404 covering Broad
Form Comprehensive General Liability. Automobile coverage shall be at least as
broad as Insurance Services Office Automobile Liability form CA 0001 (ed. 12/90)
Code 8 and 9. No endorsement shall be attached limiting the coverage.
4.2.3 Additional requirements. Each of the following shall be included in the
insurance coverage or added as a certified endorsement to the policy:
a. The insurance shall cover on an occurrence or an accident basis, and not
on a claims-made basis.
b. Any failure of Consultant to comply with reporting provisions of the policy
shall not affect coverage provided to City and its officers, employees,
agents, and volunteers.
4.3 Professional Liability Insurance.
4.3.1 General requirements. Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall maintain
for the period covered by this Agreement professional liability insurance for
licensed professionals performing work pursuant to this Agreement in an amount
not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) covering the licensed
professionals’ errors and omissions. Any deductible or self-insured retention shall
not exceed ONE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS $150,000 per claim.
4.3.2 Claims-made limitations. The following provisions shall apply if the professional
liability coverage is written on a claims-made form:
a. The retroactive date of the policy must be shown and must be before the
date of the Agreement.
b. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be
provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the Agreement or
the work, so long as commercially available at reasonable rates.
c. 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 provide extended reporting coverage for
a minimum of five (5) years after completion of the Agreement or the work.
The City shall have the right to exercise, at the Consultant’s sole cost and
expense, any extended reporting provisions of the policy, if the Consultant
cancels or does not renew the coverage.
d. A copy of the claim reporting requirements must be submitted to the City
prior to the commencement of any work under this Agreement.
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. Page 7 of 19
4.4 All Policies Requirements.
4.4.1 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.
4.4.2 Verification of coverage. Prior to beginning any work under this Agreement,
Consultant shall furnish City with complete copies of all policies delivered to
Consultant by the insurer, including complete copies of all endorsements attached
to those policies. All copies of policies and certified endorsements shall show the
signature of a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. If
the City does not receive the required insurance documents prior to the Consultant
beginning work, it shall not waive the Consultant’s obligation to provide them. The
City reserves the right to require complete copies of all required insurance policies
at any time.
4.4.3 Notice of Reduction in or Cancellation of Coverage. A certified endorsement
shall be attached to all insurance obtained pursuant to this Agreement stating that
coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, or reduced in
coverage or in limits, except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified
mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. In the event that any
coverage required by this section is cancelled by the insurer, Consultant shall
provide written notice to City at Consultant’s earliest possible opportunity and in no
case later than ten (10) working days after Consultant is notified of the change in
coverage.
4.4.4 Additional insured; primary insurance. City and its officers, employees, agents,
and volunteers shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to each of the
following: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of Consultant,
including the insured’s general supervision of Consultant; products and completed
operations of Consultant, as applicable; premises owned, occupied, or used by
Consultant; and automobiles owned, leased, or used by the Consultant in the
course of providing services pursuant to this Agreement. The coverage shall
contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to City or its
officers, employees, agents, or volunteers.
A certified endorsement must be attached to all policies stating that coverage is
primary insurance with respect to the City and its officers, officials, employees and
volunteers, and that no insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City shall be
called upon to contribute to a loss under the coverage.
4.4.5 Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Consultant shall disclose to and
obtain the 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.
Further, if the Consultant’s insurance policy includes a self-insured retention that
must be paid by a named insured as a precondition of the insurer’s liability, or
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. Page 8 of 19
which has the effect of providing that payments of the self-insured retention by
others, including additional insureds or insurers do not serve to satisfy the self-
insured retention, such provisions must be modified by special endorsement so as
to not apply to the additional insured coverage required by this agreement so as to
not prevent any of the parties to this agreement from satisfying or paying the self-
insured retention required to be paid as a precondition to the insurer’s liability.
Additionally, the certificates of insurance must note whether the policy does or
does not include any self-insured retention and also must disclose the deductible.
During the period covered by this Agreement, only upon the prior express written
authorization of Contract Administrator, Consultant may increase such deductibles
or self-insured retentions with respect to City, its officers, employees, agents, and
volunteers. The Contract Administrator may condition approval of an increase in
deductible or self-insured retention levels with a requirement that Consultant
procure a bond, guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim
administration, and defense expenses that is satisfactory in all respects to each of
them.
4.4.6 Subcontractors. Consultant shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its
policies or shall furnish separate certificates and certified endorsements for each
subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the
requirements stated herein.
4.4.7 Wasting Policy. No insurance policy required by Section 4 shall include a
“wasting” policy limit except for the professional liability insurance policy.
4.4.8 Variation. The City may approve a variation in the foregoing insurance
requirements, upon a determination that the coverage, scope, limits, and forms of
such insurance are either not commercially available, or that the City’s interests
are otherwise fully protected.
4.5 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:
a. Obtain such insurance and deduct and retain the amount of the premiums for such
insurance from any sums due under the Agreement;
b. 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
c. Terminate this Agreement.
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. Page 9 of 19
Section 5. INDEMNIFICATION AND Consultant’s RESPONSIBILITIES. To the fullest extent
permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify, defend with counsel selected by the City, and hold harmless
the City and its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers from and against any and all losses,
liability, claims, suits, actions, damages, and causes of action arising out of any personal injury, bodily
injury, loss of life, or damage to property, or any violation of any federal, state, or municipal law or
ordinance, to the extent caused, in whole or in part, by the willful misconduct or negligent acts or omissions
of Consultant or its employees, subcontractors, or agents, by acts for which they could be held strictly
liable, or by the quality or character of their work. The foregoing obligation of Consultant shall not apply
when (1) the injury, loss of life, damage to property, or violation of law arises wholly from the gross
negligence or willful misconduct of the City or its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers and (2) the
actions of Consultant or its employees, subcontractor, or agents have contributed in no part to the injury,
loss of life, damage to property, or violation of law. It is understood that the duty of Consultant to indemnify
and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code.
Acceptance by City of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not
relieve Consultant from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This indemnification
and hold harmless clause shall apply to any damages or claims for damages whether or not such insurance
policies shall have been determined to apply. By execution of this Agreement, Consultant acknowledges
and agrees to the provisions of this Section and that it is a material element of consideration.
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.
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. Page 10 of 19
6.2 Consultant No 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 or 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.
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, including from City, of what-so-ever 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.
Section 8. TERMINATION AND MODIFICATION.
8.1 Termination. City may cancel this Agreement at any time and without cause upon written
notification to Consultant.
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. Page 11 of 19
Consultant may cancel this Agreement for cause upon 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 date of notice of termination; City, however, may condition payment of
such compensation upon Consultant delivering to City all materials described in Section
9.1.
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. Consultant understands and
agrees that, if City grants such an extension, City shall have no obligation to provide
Consultant with compensation beyond the maximum amount provided for in this
Agreement. Similarly, unless authorized by the Contract Administrator, City shall have no
obligation to reimburse Consultant for any otherwise reimbursable expenses incurred
during the extension period.
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 assign or 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.
8.4.1 Subcontracting
A. Nothing contained in this Agreement or otherwise, shall create any contractual
relationship between City and any subconsultant(s), and no subcontract shall
relieve Consultant of its responsibilities and obligations hereunder. Consultant
agrees to be as fully responsible to City for the acts and omissions of its
subconsultant(s) and of persons either directly or indirectly employed by any of
them as it is for the acts and omissions of persons directly employed by
Consultant. Consultant’s obligation to pay its subconsultant(s) is an
independent obligation from City’s obligation to make payments to the
Consultant.
B. Consultant shall perform the work contemplated with resources available within
its organization and no portion of the work pertinent to this contract shall be
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. Page 12 of 19
subcontracted without written authorization by City’s Contract Administrator,
except that, which is expressly identified in the approved Scope of Work.
C. Consultant shall pay its subconsultants within ten (10) calendar days from
receipt of each payment made to Consultant by City.
D. Any subcontract in excess of $25,000 entered into as a result of this contract
shall contain all the provisions in this contract to be applicable to subconsultants.
E. Any substitution of subconsultant(s) must be approved in writing by City’s
Contract Administrator prior to the start of work by the subconsultant(s).
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 not
finished by Consultant; or
8.6.4 Charge Consultant the difference between the cost to complete the work
described in Exhibit A 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.
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
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. Page 13 of 19
confidential and will not be released to third parties without prior written consent of both
parties unless required by law.
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 three (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 TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($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 three (3) years after final
payment under the Agreement.
9.3.1 Retention of Records/Audit
For the purpose of determining compliance with Public Contract Code 10115, et
seq. and Title 21, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 21, Section 2500 et seq.,
when applicable and other matters connected with the performance of the contract
pursuant to Government Code 8546.7; Consultant, subconsultants, and City shall
maintain and make available for inspection all books, documents, papers,
accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to the performance of the
Agreement, including but not limited to, the costs of administering the Agreement.
All parties shall make such materials available at their respective offices at all
reasonable times during the term of the Agreement and for three years from the
date of final payment under the Agreement. The state, State Auditor, City, FHWA,
or any duly authorized representative of the Federal Government shall have access
to any books, records, and documents of Consultant and its certified public
accountants (CPA) work papers that are pertinent to the contract and indirect cost
rates (ICR) for audit, examinations, excerpts, and transactions, and copies thereof
shall be furnished if requested. Subcontracts in excess of $25,000 shall contain the
provision.
9.3.2 Audit Review Procedures.
A. Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under an interim or post audit
of this Agreement that is not disposed of by agreement, shall be reviewed by
City’s Finance Director.
B. Not later than 30 days after issuance of the final audit report, Consultant may
request a review by City’s Finance Director of unresolved audit issues. The
request for review will be submitted in writing.
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. Page 14 of 19
C. Neither the pendency of a dispute nor its consideration by City will excuse
Consultant from full and timely performance, in accordance with the terms of this
contract.
9.4 Records Submitted in Response to an Invitation to Bid or Request for Proposals. All
responses to a Request for Proposals (RFP) or invitation to bid issued by the City become
the exclusive property of the City. At such time as the City selects a bid, all proposals
received become a matter of public record, and shall be regarded as public records, with
the exception of those elements in each proposal that are defined by Consultant and
plainly marked as “Confidential,” "Business Secret" or “Trade Secret."
The City shall not be liable or in any way responsible for the disclosure of any such
proposal or portions thereof, if Consultant has not plainly marked it as a "Trade Secret" or
"Business Secret," or if disclosure is required under the Public Records Act.
Although the California Public Records Act recognizes that certain confidential trade secret
information may be protected from disclosure, the City may not be in a position to establish
that the information that a prospective bidder submits is a trade secret. If a request is
made for information marked "Trade Secret" or "Business Secret," and the requester takes
legal action seeking release of the materials it believes does not constitute trade secret
information, by submitting a proposal, Consultant agrees to indemnify, defend and hold
harmless the City, its agents and employees, from any judgment, fines, penalties, and
award of attorneys fees awarded against the City in favor of the party requesting the
information, and any and all costs connected with that defense. This obligation to
indemnify survives the City's award of the contract. Consultant agrees that this
indemnification survives as long as the trade secret information is in the City's possession,
which includes a minimum retention period for such documents.
Section 10 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
10.1 Attorneys’ Fees. If a party to this Agreement brings any action, including arbitration or 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 San Mateo 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
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. Page 15 of 19
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.
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 twelve (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 (12) 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’s
Engineering Division ("Contract Administrator"). All correspondence shall be directed to or
through the Contract Administrator or his or her designee.
10.10 Notices. All notices and other communications which are required or may be given under
this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given (i) when
received if personally delivered; (ii) when received if transmitted by telecopy, if received
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. Page 16 of 19
during normal business hours on a business day (or if not, the next business day after
delivery) provided that such facsimile is legible and that at the time such facsimile is sent
the sending Party receives written confirmation of receipt; (iii) if sent for next day delivery
to a domestic address by recognized overnight delivery service (e.g., Federal Express);
and (iv) upon receipt, if sent by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested. In
each case notice shall be sent to the respective Parties as follows:
Consultant:
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants
1676 North California Boulevard, Suite 430
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Attention: Peter Symonds
City:
City Clerk
City of South San Francisco
400 Grand Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94080
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 all Exhibits attached hereto, and incorporated
herein, represents the entire and integrated agreement between City and Consultant and
supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements, either written or oral
pertaining to the matters herein.
10.13 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts and/or by facsimile or
other electronic means, and when each Party has signed and delivered at least one such
counterpart, each counterpart shall be deemed an original, and, when taken together with
other signed counterpart, shall constitute one Agreement, which shall be binding upon and
effective as to all Parties..
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. Page 17 of 19
10.14 Construction. The headings in this Agreement are for the purpose of reference only and
shall not limit or otherwise affect any of the terms of this Agreement. The parties have had
an equal opportunity to participate in the drafting of this Agreement; therefore any
construction as against the drafting party shall not apply to this Agreement.
10.15 No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made solely for the benefit of the
Parties hereto with no intent to benefit any non-signatory third parties.
10.16 Cost Principles and Administrative Requirements.
A. Consultant agreed that the Contract Cost Principles and Procedures, 48 CFR, Federal
Acquisition Regulations System, Chapter 1, Part 31.000 et seq., shall be used to
determine the cost allowability of individual items not otherwise identified in the Scope of
Work.
B. Consultant also agrees to comply with federal procedures in accordance with 49 CFR,
Part 18, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to
State and Local Governments.
C. Any costs for which payment has been made to Consultant that are determined by
subsequent audit to be unallowable under 49CFR, Part 18 and 48 CFR, Federal
Acquisition Regulations System, Chapter 1, Part 31.000 et seq., are subject to repayment
by Consultant to City.
D. All subcontracts in excess of $25,000 shall contain the above provisions.
10.17 Rebates, Kickbacks or Other Unlawful Consideration. Consultant warrants that this
Agreement was not obtained or secured through rebates, kickbacks or other unlawful
consideration, either promised or paid to any City employee. For breach or violation of this
warranty, City shall have the right in its discretion; to terminate the Agreement without
liability; to pay only for the value of the work actually performed; or to deduct from the total
compensation stated in this Agreement; or otherwise recover the full amount of such
rebate, kickback or other unlawful consideration.
10.18 Statement of Compliance.
A. Consultant’s signature affixed herein, and dated, shall constitute a certification under
penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that Consultant has, unless
exempt, complied with the nondiscrimination program requirements of Government
Code Section 12990 and Title 2, California Administrative Code, Section 8103.
B. During the performance of this Agreement, Consultant and its subconsultants shall not
unlawfully discriminate, harass or allow harassment against any employee or applicant
for employment because of sex, race, color, ancestry, religious creed, national origin,
physical disability (including HIV and AIDS), mental disability, medical condition (e.g.,
cancer), age (over 40), marital status, and denial of family care leave. Consultant and
subconsultants shall insure that the evaluation and treatment of their employees and
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. Page 18 of 19
applicants for employment are free from such discrimination and harassment.
Consultants and subconsultants shall comply with the provisions of the Fair
Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code §12990 (a-f) et seq.) and the applicable
regulations promulgated there under (California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section
7285 et seq.). The applicable regulations of the Fair Employment and Housing
Commission implementing Government Code §12990 (a-f), set forth in Chapter 5 of
Division 4 of Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations, are incorporated into this
Contract by reference and made a part hereof as if set forth in full. Consultant and its
subconsultants shall give written notice of their obligations under this clause to labor
organizations with which they have a collective bargaining or other Agreement.
C. The Consultant shall comply with regulations relative to Title VI (nondiscrimination in
federally-assisted programs of the Department of Transportation – Title 49 Code of
Federal Regulations, Part 21 – Effectuation of Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act).
Title VI provides that the recipients of federal assistance will implement and maintain a
policy of nondiscrimination in which no person in the State of California shall, on the
basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age, disability, be excluded from
participation in, denied the benefits of or subject to discrimination under any program or
activity by the recipients of federal assistance of their assignees and successors in
interest.
D. The Consultant, with regard to the work, performed by it during the Agreement shall act
in accordance with Title VI. Specifically, the Consultant shall not discriminate on the
basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age, or disability in selection and
retention of Subconsultants, including procurement of materials and leases of
equipment. The Consultant shall not participate either directly or indirectly in the
discrimination prohibited by Section 21.5 of the U.S. DOT’s Regulations, including
employment practices when the Agreement covers a program whose goal is
employment.
10.19 Debarment and Suspension Certification.
A. Consultant’s signature affixed herein, shall constitute a certification under penalty of
perjury under the laws of the State of California, that Consultant has complied with Title
2 CFR, Part 180, “OMB Guidelines to Agencies on Government wide Debarment and
Suspension (nonprocurement)”, which certifies that he/she or any person associated
therewith in the capacity of owner, partner, director, officer, or manager, is not currently
under suspension, debarment, voluntary exclusion, or determination of ineligibility by
any federal agency; has not been suspended, debarred, voluntarily excluded, or
determined ineligible by any federal agency within the past three (3) years; does not
have a proposed debarment pending; and has not been indicted, convicted, or had a
civil judgment rendered against it by a court of competent jurisdiction in any manner
involving fraud or official misconduct within the past three (3) years. Any exceptions to
this certification must be disclosed to City.
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. Page 19 of 19
B. Exceptions will not necessarily result in denial of recommendation for award, but will be
considered in determining Consultant responsibility. Disclosures must indicate to whom
exceptions apply, initiating agency, and dates of action.
C. Exceptions to the Federal Government Excluded Parties List System maintained by the
General Services Administration are to be determined by the Federal Highway
Administration.
The Parties have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date.
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO Consultants
____________________________ _____________________________________
City Manager NAME:
TITLE:
Attest:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
____________________________
City Attorney
2729962.1
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Project Understanding
This project is an Electrical and Controls systems upgrade at the City of South San Francisco
(City) Water Quality Control Plan (WQCP). The WQCP is currently undergoing major wet
weather capacity improvements. Design and construction of this electrical and control systems
project will need to be done in coordination with this major wet weather project.
The Plant obtains power from PG&E via a 12-kilovolt (kV) main service. In 1992, the Plant
installed four 480-volt switchboards to distribute this power to various Motor Control Centers
operating equipment throughout the plant. In addition, the Plant meets a portion of its power
needs via a 410-kilowatt cogeneration system fueled by digester gas. The Plant relies on
emergency backup generators in the event of PG&E power outages. Many of the Plant electrical
components are over 25-years old and are reaching the end of their design lives.
Task 1 - Project Management and QA/QC
The objective of Task 1 is to develop and implement the appropriate management procedures
and actions to facilitate timely and cost-effective delivery of quality services and products to the
Owner. This task shall consist of project monitoring and administration and project quality
assurance/quality control (QA/QC) activities.
Task 1.1 - Project Set-Up
Kennedy/Jenks shall set up the project within Kennedy/Jenks’ accounting system and issue a
Project Initiation Plan to our design team, outlining the scope and budget, and develop a baseline
schedule. Kennedy/Jenks shall prepare a Project Plan (PWP) prepared as part of the tunnel
project development efforts. The PWP shall include a project HARP that will identify and
address potential hazards to Kennedy/Jenks’ staff during the Project. The HARP shall include
potential hazards that may occur during field activities.
Task 1.2 - Project Management and Administration
Kennedy/Jenks shall provide project management services needed to execute the design work.
This shall consist of project administration related to schedule, budget, and scope management,
and communication of project activities with the Owner. This task is assumed to run through
the anticipated duration of the design and construction of the project, ending September 30,
2020.
Deliverables:
1. Major Decisions Log updates (electronic, Adobe Acrobat format).
2. Monthly Progress Status Reports (electronic, Adobe Acrobat format).
Task 1.3 - Quality Assurance and Quality Control
Each deliverable will receive a Quality Control review prior to submission to the Owner from a
Senior Kennedy/Jenks engineer, not directly associated with the project, so that it is an
independent review.
Kennedy/Jenks shall prepare a Quality Management Plan (QMP) for the project that identifies
procedures, compliance methods, lines of communications and responsibilities, methods of
checking and correcting the work, formats and procedures for responding to Owner’s comments
on deliverables, and record keeping requirements. The QMP shall also identify personnel and
schedules to complete QA/QC reviews of the work and deliverables.
Kennedy/Jenks shall conduct an in-house Concept and Criterion (C&CR) meeting early in the
project to obtain focused technical input from senior Kennedy/Jenks staff based on their
experience from other similar projects. The C&CR meeting will be held at Kennedy/Jenks’s
Walnut Creek office and will be attended by up to 5 key project team members.
The Project Manager, or their designee, will monitor the QA/QC activities and will notify the
team of any detected noncompliance with the QMP. All draft technical memoranda, the draft
preliminary design report, Construction Document Submittals (e.g. 30%, 60%, 90%), and other
deliverables included in the scope of work will be reviewed. Reviews will be performed by
senior Kennedy/Jenks staff as identified in the QMP. A coordination check shall be performed at
the end of the Preliminary Design phase of the project. In addition, interdiscipline checks shall
be performed during the Final Design phase of the project (50% and 90% submittal stages).
Task 1.4 - Meetings
Kennedy/Jenks shall prepare for and participate in the following meetings with the Owner at the
plant. The meetings are anticipated to have a 2-hour duration and will be attended by 2
Kennedy/Jenks staff.
1. Kick-off meeting
2. Design Criteria Review Meeting
3. 50% Design Review meeting
4. 90% Design Review meeting
Deliverables:
5. Agenda and meeting minutes (Electronic, Adobe format).
Task 1.5 - Health and Safety
Kennedy/Jenks shall prepare and implement a Hazard Appraisal & Recognition Plan (HARP) for
the work. In the event that a Kennedy/Jenks employee needs to visit the site where ongoing field
investigation activities are ongoing, they will implement the requirements of the HARP.
Subconsultants will prepare HARPs for field activities they plan as part of the Project and submit
them to Kennedy/Jenks prior to performing the field activities.
Task 2 – Field Verify and Confirm Findings of the Technical
Memoranda
Task 2.1 – Collect and Review Data
Kennedy/Jenks will independently verify and confirm the condition of the components identified
in the applicable Technical Memoranda to review the City and Memorandum Writers opinion of
their condition and rehabilitation. If findings differ from that described in the Technical
Memoranda, develop an independent assessment and description of deficiencies and make
recommendations for improvement. Meet with and discuss recommendations with project key
personnel to come to consensus on what is to be achieved. Final decisions from this meeting will
be documented in the Decision Log.
Task 3 – Design Criteria
Task 3.1 – Design Criteria Memo
Prepare a draft version of a design criteria memorandum documenting design criteria to address
deficiencies, incorporating the input from key project staff gained in the prior task. Submit the
design criteria for key project staff review. Incorporate all applicable comments and submit the
final design criteria.
Upon completion of the preliminary design phase Kennedy/Jenks shall incorporate the Owner’s
comments and preferences and then issue a design freeze notification. The design will proceed
to completion on the basis of the agreements reached at this stage of the project. Redesign after
notification of Kennedy/Jenks’s design freeze, or redesign to meet the Owner’s budget
requirements or changed conditions will be accommodated by amendment to this contract.
Task 4 – Final Design
Final Design shall include the following task.
Task 4.1 – 50% Design
Based on the design concepts and criteria established in the Basis of Design Report,
Kennedy/Jenks shall prepare a 50% design submittal package for Owner review. The 50%
design submittal shall involve the following tasks. Kennedy/Jenks shall prepare a contract
documents and planned technical specifications table of contents required for the work.
Task 4.1.1 - 50% Design Drawings
Kennedy/Jenks shall prepare the 50% design drawings submittal package for the proposed
facilities.
Task 4.1.2 - 50% Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
Kennedy/Jenks shall prepare an opinion of probable construction cost (OPCC) for the 60 percent
design submittal. The OPCC shall include a detailed breakdown to show the estimated cost for
the major components of the design by CSI construction discipline. The OPCC will be projected
to the anticipated midpoint of construction. Cost estimates will be developed based on standards
set forth by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Estimating (AACE) for Class 3.
Task 4.2 – 90% Design
Kennedy/Jenks will incorporate District review comments on the 50% Design package and
prepare the 90% design submittal package for Owner review. The 90% phase will include
further detailed design and refinement of the project elements developed in the preliminary and
50% design stages of the project.
Task 4.2.1 - 90% Design Drawings
Kennedy/Jenks shall incorporate the responses to the comments from the 50% design review and
prepare the 90% design models.
Task 4.2.2 - 90% Design Specifications and Control Strategies
Kennedy/Jenks shall incorporate the responses to the comments from the 50% design review and
prepare 90% design level specifications and front-end documents. The Contract Documents shall
be prepared using the Owner’s standard General Requirements and bidding forms and
supplemental requirements.
Task 4.2.3 - 90% Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
Kennedy/Jenks shall incorporate the responses to the comments from the 50% design review and
prepare OPCC for the 90 percent design submittal. The OPCC shall include a detailed
breakdown to show the estimated cost for the major components of the design by CSI
construction discipline. The OPCC will be projected to the anticipated midpoint of construction.
Cost estimates will be developed based on standards set forth by the Association for the
Advancement of Cost Estimating (AACE) for Class 2.
Task 4.3 – 100% Design
Kennedy/Jenks shall incorporate Owner review comments on the 90% Design packages, and
prepare the 100% design package for the Owner. The 100% design phase will respond to,
address and incorporate the Owner’s comments from the 90% design stage of the project, and be
the final submittal.
The 100% design submittal shall involve the following tasks.
Task 4.3.1 - 100% Design Drawings
Kennedy/Jenks shall provide written responses to the Owner’s comments on the 90% design.
Kennedy/Jenks shall incorporate the responses to the comments from the 90% design review.
Deliverables shall be in a signed pdf copy.
Task 4.3.2 – 100% Design Specifications
Kennedy/Jenks shall incorporate the responses to the comments from the 90% design review and
prepare 100% design specifications. The Contract Documents will be updated using the Owner’s
standard General Requirements and bidding forms and supplemental requirements. Deliverables
shall be in a signed pdf copy.
Task 4.3.3 - - 100% Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
Kennedy/Jenks shall incorporate the responses to the comments from the 60% design review and
prepare OPCC for the 100 percent design submittal. The OPCC shall include a detailed
breakdown to show the estimated cost for the major components of the design by CSI
construction discipline. The OPCC will be projected to the anticipated midpoint of construction.
Cost estimates will be developed based on standards set forth by the Association for the
Advancement of Cost Estimating (AACE) for Class 2.
This task includes effort to coordinate with the City Building department to obtain a building
permit. The City will prepare the application and pay the fee.
List of Drawings
WPCF Electrical Improvements - Proposed Drawing List
SHEET DESCRIPTION
50%
Design
90%
Design
100%
Design
GENERAL
G1.1 Title Sheet and Project Location X x x
E1.1 General Electrical Symbols X x x
E1.2 General Electrical Details X x x
E1.3 Overall Electrical Site Plan X x x
E2.1 Single Line Diagram - Overall Demolition and
Temporary Power
X x x
E2.2 Single Line Diagram - Switchgear K Modifications X x x
E2.3 Single Line Diagram - Switchgear K1 Modifications X x x
E2.4 Single Line Diagram - Switchboard K2 x x
E2.5 Single Line Diagram - Switchgear K3 Modifications X x x
E2.6 Single Line Diagram - Switchboard EMS X x x
E2.7 Single Line Diagram - MCC-B X x x
E2.8 Single Line Diagram - MCC-S and S1 Modifications X x x
E3.1 Electrical Equipment Elevations - 1 X x x
E3.2 Electrical Equipment Elevations - 2 X x x
I1.1 Control Schematics - 1 X x x
I1.2 Control Schematics - 2 X x x
I1.3 Control Schematics - 3 X x x
I1.4 Conduit Block Diagrams - 1 X x x
I1.5 Conduit Block Diagrams - 2 x x
E4.1 Conduit and Cable Schedule - 1 x X
E4.2 Conduit and Cable Schedule - 2 x X
E5.1 Blower Building No.1 Electrical Plan x X
E5.2 Standby Generator Building No. 1 Electrical Plan x X
E5.3 Standby Generator Building No. 2 Electrical Plan x x
E5.4 Blower Building No. 2 Electrical Plan x x
STRUCTURAL
S1.1 Structural General Notes and Abbreviations X x x
S1.2 Structural Special Inspections I X x x
S1.3 Structural Reinforced Concrete Notes and Standard Details X x x
I
S1.4 Equipment installation Details. x x
Task 4.4 – Preprocurement package
Kennedy/Jenks shall create an early procurement package for major equipment, anticipated to
include switchgear, switchboards and MCC’s as featured in the design. The draft package will
be prepared to accompany the 50% submittal and the final package will be prepared to facilitate
selection of a vendor prior to the 100% package. This task will also include time to coordinate
with vendors regarding available equipment and current pricing prior to the issuance of the
package.
The package will be issued by the city contracting staff as a separate bid. This task does not
include instructions to bidders, advertisement or procurement contract documents other than
technical specifications.
Task 4.5 – PG&E Communication
Kennedy/Jenks will communicate with PG&E regarding the project when requested by the owner.
This task is an allowance of $20,000 to be used at the written request of the City. If the request for
services exceeds the task budget, Kennedy/Jenks will request a change to this task prior to
exceeding the allowance amount.
Task 5 – Bid and Award
TASK 5.1 - PRE-BID/PROPOSAL CONFERENCE
Kennedy/Jenks shall organize, prepare the agenda, and conduct the pre-bid/proposal conference
and site tour for the construction contractors to allow acquaintance of potential contractors with
the work for the Project. A meeting summary will be prepared to document the questions,
comments, and responses provided during the pre-bid conference and site visit. This task does
not include advertisement or preparation of contract document sets.
Task 5.2 - Addenda and Clarifications
Kennedy/Jenks shall prepare addenda during the bid period to clarify the design documents, with
distribution of all addenda by the Owner. Kennedy/Jenks shall also provide answers to written
questions submitted to the Owner by bidders and provided in writing to Kennedy/Jenks.
Contract requirements which are changed as a result of questions and answers will be included in
the issued addenda. It is assumed that Kennedy/Jenks shall prepare up to two (2) addenda.
Task 5.3 - Attend Bid Opening
Kennedy/Jenks shall attend the bid opening and will prepare the bid tabulation summary,
documenting the bids received and the preliminary bid amounts.
Task 6 – Engineering Services During Construction
Kennedy/Jenks shall assist the Owner during the construction phase of the project by performing
the following tasks:
Task 6.1 - Requests for Information
Kennedy/Jenks shall provide responses to the Contractor’s Requests for Information (RFIs).
RFIs shall be furnished to Kennedy/Jenks by the Owner, and written responses shall be provided
to the Owner for dissemination to the Contractor within an average of 10 working days of receipt
of an RFI. It is assumed that up to 20 RFIs will be reviewed by Kennedy/Jenks.
Task 6.2 – Submittals
Kennedy/Jenks shall review submittals and shop drawings and provide review comments to the
Owner. Submittals shall be furnished to Kennedy/Jenks by the Owner. Kennedy/Jenks shall
promptly review submittals and provide written comments and recommended submittal review
disposition within an average of 15 working days of receipt of a submittal. The term submittal
used herein includes technical submittals, shop drawings, samples, operations and maintenance
manuals, and product data required to be submitted by the Contractor. It is assumed that up to 28
submittals, including resubmittals, will be reviewed by Kennedy/Jenks.
Task 6.3 - Attendance at Construction Progress Meetings
Kennedy/Jenks shall attend regularly organized construction coordination/progress meetings
organized by the Owner. A total of 10 meetings, assumed to be up to 1 hrs duration, will be
attended by up to 2 Kennedy/Jenks staff. Meeting agenda and minutes shall be prepared by the
Owner and reviewed by Kennedy/Jenks. Attendance is anticipated to be by telephone for 8 of the
meetings.
Task 6.4 – Site Observation
Kennedy/Jenks shall make up to 3 visits to the construction site to review the progress and
quality of the construction work. The visits shall observe the general quality of the work at the
time of the visit. For each site visit, Kennedy/Jenks shall prepare a site observation report
documenting the areas observed and comments regarding general conformance with the design
requirements. Kennedy/Jenks’ observation of the work is not an exhaustive observation or
inspection of all work performed by the Contractor. Kennedy/Jenks shall review items of
concern with Owner’s construction inspector before leaving the site.
Task 6.5 – Change Order Reviews
Kennedy/Jenks shall support the Owner, as requested, with evaluation of change orders or
potential change orders. It is assumed that the Owner’s construction management staff will have
primary responsibility for evaluation of and responses to Contractor-issues notices and
correspondence. This task provides as-needed support for up to 10 change order or potential
change order reviews.
Task 6.6 – Record Drawings
Kennedy/Jenks shall prepare Record Drawings for the Project using the drawing markups of
construction changes provided by the Contractor. Kennedy/Jenks shall provide one electronic
and one full sized (22”x34”) paper hard copy of the Record Drawing set.
Responsibilities of the Owner
1. Provide existing geotechnical information, site plans, utility record drawings in the Owner’s
possession, as-built utility records, and other relevant project information.
2. Pot-holing of utilities.
3. Provide title reports.
4. Provide AutoCAD drafting standards including drawing sheet Title and Border, in
AutoCAD.
5. Provide an electronic copy of a sample Project Manual including Bidding Requirements,
Agreement, General Requirements, Technical specifications, Wage Rates and Standard
Details.
6. Provide an electronic copy of Client guide technical specifications.
7. Owner will provide adjudicated and consolidated review comments in a matrix format on
Kennedy/Jenks’ deliverables within 5 working days of receipt of deliverable, as indicated in
the baseline schedule.
8. Prepare Bidding Requirements (except that Consultant will provide bid items and quantities),
Agreement, Divisions 1, and Wage Rates for the Project Manual.
9. Provide access to Owner’s personnel and plant, as needed.
10. Participate in decision-making and provide a best-faith effort to make key decisions in a
timely manner.
11. Review and provide comments on the Contract Documents at the 50% and 90% levels of
design completion. Review the 100% contract documents to determine that the 90%
comments have been adequately addressed. Review comments will be consolidated, will be
non-contradictory and will be provided within ten working days of document receipt.
Provide a best faith effort to make review comments as early in the design process as
possible.
12. Print additional copies of the review documents for distribution to reviewers.
13. Print the Contract Document Bid Sets and distribute to prospective bidders.
14. Provide Construction Management, inspection and materials testing.
15. Conduct the advertisement for bidding, reproduce and distribute plans, act as the point of
contact for contractors, organize bid opening, award the construction contract, and arrange
Pre-Bid meetings.
16. Coordinate and process RFIs, shop drawings and change orders, and distribute them to the
Consultant in a timely manner.
Assumptions and Exclusions
17. Unless specifically noted otherwise, deliverables will be electronically in Adobe PDF format.
18. AutoCAD and AutoCAD Civil 3D 2014 will be used to prepare the drawings.
19. Geotechnical investigation is not required. Client will provide the Consultant with any
existing geotechnical information already existing, and the Consultant may reasonably rely
on this information. Client understands that this increases the likelihood of related change
orders during construction.
20. The existing electrical supply is adequate for adding proposed new facilities. Three phase
480 volt power is available.
21. The design is noted to be an “in-kind” replacement which does not require substantial
additional loads or systems to be added. Should additional loads or systems be required, the
fee and scope assumptions within this agreement would require revision to accommodate the
work necessary for the additional loads.
22. Programming of PLC and instrumentation is not included.
23. The island mode for cogeneration facilities mentioned in the prior Technical Memoranda will
not be evaluated or included.
24. Existing utility relocations are not included in this scope of work.
25. Responses to comments will be developed for an average of 50 comments per design
milestone review.
26. The review of the 100% documents will not include new comments.
27. Three half-size (11-inch by 17-inch) sets of 60%, and 90% plans and construction cost
estimates will be submitted for review. Draft specifications will also be included in the 90%
submittal package.
28. 100% design documents for bidding will include five bound half-size sets, five bound sets of
specifications, one loose half-size set, one loose set of specifications, one loose full-size set,
and a final construction cost estimate. Drawing sets will be printed on bond.
29. Paper copies of the Bid Documents are the official copies not the electronic copies. The
Owner will not release electronic copies to the Bidders or Contractor.
30. There will not be an extended delay during the design, bidding or construction periods.
31. There will be one construction bid package and one equipment pre-procurement package.
32. Construction surveying is not included in this scope of work.
33. The scope of work does not include services for bid disputes or rebidding the project.
34. Inspection services and materials testing is not included.
35. Construction support budget is an allowance only. Effort for this task is limited to the costs
identified in the Consultant Fee Estimate. Additional effort will only be provided as
authorized through a contract modification.
EXHIBIT B
COMPENSATION SCHEDULE
EXHIBIT C
INSURANCE CERTIFICATES
EXHIBIT D
FORM 590
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:18-1146 Agenda Date:4/24/2019
Version:1 Item #:4.
Report regarding a resolution approving a consulting services agreement with EKI Environment &Water of
Burlingame,California for design and construction support services for the WQCP Plant-Wide Coating and
Corrosion Protection Project (Project No.ss1307)in an amount not to exceed $687,100,authorizing the City
Manager to execute the agreement,and authorizing a total budget of $755,810.(Brian Schumacker,
Superintendent and Peter Vorametsanti, Swinerton)
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution approving a consulting services agreement
with EKI Environment &Water of Burlingame,California for design and construction support services
for the WQCP Plant-Wide Coating and Corrosion Protection Project (Project No.ss1307)in an amount
not to exceed $687,100,authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement,and authorizing a total
budget of $755,810.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
Capital Improvement Program (CIP)project ss1307 calls for design and construction (application)of new
protective paint and coatings for the metal components of the Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP or Plant)and
sanitary sewer pump stations (see Attachment 1).
The purpose of this project is to prolong the useful life of the system components,meet service expectations
and regulatory requirements,and safeguard the system’s safety and reliability.Constant moisture and hydrogen
sulfide common at a wastewater treatment plants create corrosive conditions that impact metal and concrete
structures.
The wastewater system consists of nearly 120 miles of gravity sewer line,6 miles of force mains and 13 sewer
pump stations.All sewage flows are conveyed to the South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control
Plant (WQCP),which is jointly owned by the City and the City of San Bruno.The City of South San Francisco
operates the South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP or Plant),located at 195
Belle Air Road.This is a critical facility providing secondary wastewater treatment for the Cities of South San
Francisco and San Bruno, Town of Colma, and portions of City of Daly City, a population over 110,000.
In 2016,engineers completed a comprehensive condition assessment of the facilities.Staff also completed an
asset inventory to prioritize rehabilitation needs based off the condition assessment.The condition assessment
included over 1,000 individual components,including buildings,structural supports,equipment,electrical
boards and wiring,pumps,pipes,valves,and vaults in 46 buildings/process units and 13 pump stations.Staff
inspected the assets and evaluated them for their condition,exposure,vulnerability,criticality to operations,and
safety.Engineers rated the overall condition of these assets at a level 2,based on the Metal Corrosion Index
Rating System.A level 2 rating represents a fair condition.Additionally,engineers rated many of individual
assets at a level 3.A level 3 rating describes metal assets exhibiting layers of corrosion byproduct,known as
scaling or foliation. Metal assets rated at level 3 include electrical, plumbing, and process equipment.
Design of coatings includes specifying materials and preparation/application methods such as corrosion-
inhibiting epoxy-based paints for metal structures,urethane-based materials for components exposed to harshCity of South San Francisco Printed on 4/29/2019Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™
File #:18-1146 Agenda Date:4/24/2019
Version:1 Item #:4.
inhibiting epoxy-based paints for metal structures,urethane-based materials for components exposed to harsh
outdoor conditions,and migrating corrosion inhibitors for concrete structures to produce a protective layer on
embedded steel.Coating operations at the active Plant are logistically complicated because much of the
equipment needs to be taken off line during treatment.Therefore,the scope of this project includes design of
temporary facilities and development of sequencing plans to minimize disruption to Plant operations.All design
work will need to be developed in close coordination with Plant operators and the designers for the Wet
Weather and Digester Improvements Project.
On December 12,2018 staff presented Staff Report No.18-959 recommending City Council adopt a resolution
approving a consulting services agreement with EKI Environment &Water,Inc.of Burlingame,California for
design and construction support services for the WQCP Plant-Wide Coating and Corrosion Protection Project
(Project No.ss1307).City Council did not approve the item because only one firm responded to the request for
proposal.
At City Council’s direction,staff reissued a request for proposals for design and construction support services
for the project on February 14,2019 on the eBidboard website.Additionally,the engineering division
conducted outreach about the proposal opportunity.Staff contacted EKI,AECOM,Kennedy Jenks and
Corrosion Protection Engineers.These firms are known to be qualified to provide design and construction
support consulting services.All of the firms contacted by staff acknowledged that this is their line of work.A
pre-proposal conference was held on March 8,2019 and two firms attended.Representatives from the two
interested firms viewed the equipment and spoke with staff.
Staff received one proposal from EKI Environment &Water by the due date of March 15,2019.EKI
Environment &Water’s proposal amount did not increase from when they proposed on the work in December
of 2018.
A rating panel from the engineering and Plant divisions rated the proposals for project understanding,firm and
staff qualifications,and experience with similar projects.The rating panel found EKI Environment &Water’s
proposal to be complete.The South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC)provides that when entering into
professional services agreement,the knowledge and expertise of the entity or person performing the services is
a key component of the selection criteria.The selection was therefore basis of demonstrated competence,
overall value to the city,and on the professional qualifications necessary for the satisfactory performance of the
services required.Cost is only one factor in determining the selection.EKI Environment &Water is well
qualified to undertake the design and construction support task.The panel review summary is included with this
staff report as Attachment 2.
In accordance with the SSFMC,staff evaluated the most qualified firm’s cost proposal and negotiated to obtain
a fair and reasonable cost for the desired product.Unlike public works construction,contracts that are based on
the lowest bid price,professional services agreements specify that costs be paid on a time and materials basis;
that is,the consultant is only paid for its actual incurred labor and materials,regardless of its prior estimated
level of effort cost.Staff found the fees proposed by EKI Environment &Water in line with industry standards.
Staff’s independent assessment of a fair and reasonable cost for this work is in the range of $650,000 to
$750,000.
Staff also contacted some of the firms that choose not to propose.Staff learned that other firms declined to
propose because they generally do not accept jobs this small in scope;their current heavy workload prevented
them from committing the necessary key personnel,or their disinterest in working at wastewater treatment
plant equipment due to their complexity.Staff also spoke with other agencies with treatment plants and
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/29/2019Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™
File #:18-1146 Agenda Date:4/24/2019
Version:1 Item #:4.
plant equipment due to their complexity.Staff also spoke with other agencies with treatment plants and
confirmed that providers of this type of design work in the San Francisco Bay Area are overwhelmingly busy
and it is difficult to stimulate interest for these types of projects given the overheated economy in the State.
This project will span three years because coating can only be done during the summer months and there are
numerous assets to be re-coated.The elements will have to be taken off-line in a managed fashion necessitating
more time to complete the work.EKI will prepare three separate construction bid packages for each of the three
years under this agreement.
FISCAL IMPACT
Coating facilities and equipment to protect them from corrosion damage will extend their useful lives.
Sufficient funding for this design project is included in the City of South San Francisco 2018-19 Capital
Improvement Program (CIP):
EKI Design and Construction Support Consulting Services $687,100
Contingency (10%)$68,710
Total Project Agreement Funding $755,810
Available Total Project Budget in FY 2018/19 (Project No. ss1307) CIP $4,129,100
The current five-year CIP plan calls for additional appropriations in FY 2019/20 and FY 2020/21 such that,if
approved, will provide a total project budget of $7,379,100.
RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN
This project will contribute to the City’s Strategic Plan outcome of improved Quality of Life by maintaining the
WQCP per discharge permit requirements.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a consulting
services agreement with EKI Environment &Water based on the firm’s qualifications,experience,references
and understanding of the project.
Attachments:
1.Vicinity Map
2.Panel Review Summary
3.EKI Environment & Water Profile and Project Team Sheet
4.Example Project Similar to the Subject Project
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/29/2019Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™
Attachment 2 - Panel Review Summary
Engineering Services for Design and Construction Support of WQCP Coating and Corrosion Protection Project (ss1307)
April 9, 2019
Reviewer 1 Reviewer 2 Reviewer 3 Reviewer 4
Maximum
Score
EKI
Environment &
Water
EKI
Environment &
Water
EKI
Environment &
Water
EKI
Environment
& Water
Project Understanding 25 24 24 25 25
Qualifications of Firm and Staff.25 25 25 24 25
Experience with similar projects.25 25 25 25 23
Total 75 74 74 74 73
8CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR DESIGN OF WQCP COATING AND CORROSION PROTECTION PROJECT (CIP PROJECTS SS1307 & SS1901)
SECTION 3: PROJECT TEAM
EKI has assembled a team of engineers with the experience, technical expertise and deep understanding
of the unique challenges associated with coating projects in the Bay Area that can provide integrated. project
delivery from design through construction and efficient coordination with the constraints of the WWDIP
construction. The reporting relationships and roles of the key professionals are illustrated below, with
qualifications, professional history and experience summarized in the resumes on the following pages.
CONSULTING PROJECT MANAGER
S. Peter Vorametsanti
PROJECT ENGINEER
Nelson Schlater, PE
Melody Eldridge, PE
PROJECT MANAGER
Nelson Schlater, PE
COATING & LINING LEAD (DESIGN & INSPECTION)
Ed Darrimon
COATING INSPECTOR
Armando Austria
PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE
& QA/QC
Steve Tarantino, PE
ENGINEERING & CIP MANAGER
Matthew Ruble, PE
PLANT SUPERINTENDENT
Brian Schumacker
SECTION 3
PROJECT TEAM
9CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR DESIGN OF WQCP COATING AND CORROSION PROTECTION PROJECT (CIP PROJECTS SS1307 & SS1901)
Nelson Schlater, PE
Project Manager/Project Engineer
Mr. Schlater brings over 31 years of engineering experience, 20 of which has
focused primarily on wastewater and other municipal infrastructure projects. He
has managed projects ranging from planning to complex design and construction
support. Mr. Schlater developed RFPs, scopes, budgets, schedules, and contracts.
He has led multi-office project teams, managed subconsultants, and supervised
staff and collaborated with owners and presented findings to Boards and
stakeholders. He was the lead author of the equipment procurement chapter and
co-authored the design chapter in the Water Environment Federation (WEF), Manual
of Practice (MOP) 36: Membrane Bioreactors.
Relevant Experience
WQCP and Pump Station Coatings Project, City of South San Francisco, CA. Mr.
Schlater served as Deputy Project Manager/Project Engineer on the Project whose
goal was to develop a multi-year, phased program to perform coatings for the WQCP
and Pump Stations. Mr. Schlater reviewed the prior work; toured WQCP and Pump
Station facilities; prepared detailed maps summarizing prior work recommendation;
and conducted workshops with City staff. The outcome of the workshops was a
multi-year, phased coating improvement program that will meet City-identified
needs.
WQCP Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project – Program Management,
City of South San Francisco, CA. Mr. Schlater served as lead technical consultant
as part of the Program Management Team. Mr. Schlater supported evaluation
of the sole-source proprietary digester equipment and how to best represent the
performance (process warranty) and guarantees in the bid documents. Working
directly with Mr. Tarantino, EKI’s Program Manager, Mr. Schlater proposed options
for contractual language and supported meetings with City staff to determine
how to proceed. Mr. Schlater also supported Mr. Tarantino in the evaluation of the
supplier’s proposal and cost components.
Digester Improvements and FOG/Food Waste-to-Energy (F2E) Facility Project,
Central Marin Sanitation Agency, CA. With a previous employer, Mr. Schlater
designed and provided multidiscipline coordination of construction documents for
digester improvements, which consisted of new digester membrane covers; digester
pump mixing; digester gas sulfide removal; and FOG/F2E facilities. FOG/F2E
facilities consisted of a collection tank with mixing system, an equipment bay with
pumping and conditioning equipment. and coatings and painting associated with
plant facilities.
Gloria Way Well Groundwater Treatment Project, City of East Palo Alto, CA.
Mr. Schlater served as Project Manager and Project Engineer for developing
construction documents which includes a 300 gpm well pump iron and manganese
treatment system, chemical amendments, Hetch-Hetchy blending system, high
service pump station with surge tank, and coatings and painting associated with
plant facilities.
Consolidated Treatment Facility Membrane Bioreactor Expansion Project, Program
Management, City of Lathrop, CA. Mr. Schlater served as lead technical consultant
as part of the City’s Program Management team which oversaw the expansion
project. He employed a pre-selection procurement strategy for the Project’s
Membrane Bioreactor (MBR) Equipment and Blower equipment which consolidated
FIRM
EKI Environment & Water, Inc.
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
EKI: 4 years
Total Years Experience:
31 years.
PROFESSIONAL PROFILE
EKI Environment & Water,
Inc., Burlingame, CA, 2015–
Present
SRT, San Francisco, 2013–
2014
EDUCATION
Kansas University, M.S.
Environmental Engineering,
1995
Stanford University, M.S.
Aerospace Engineering, 1986
Pennsylvania State University,
B.S. Aerospace Engineering,
1982
REGISTRATIONS
Professional Civil Engineer, CA
(#66547), 2004
SECTION 3
PROJECT TEAM
10CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR DESIGN OF WQCP COATING AND CORROSION PROTECTION PROJECT (CIP PROJECTS SS1307 & SS1901)
the SOQ/RFP into a single submittal, reducing procurement time by approximately 4 to 6 weeks. Mr. Schlater reviewed
and provided significant input on the MBR pre-selection and Blower bid documents including incorporation of
operations and maintenance-related cost factors into the evaluation. Mr. Schlater reviewed the Project bid documents
at the 60%, 90%, and 100% design levels including coatings and painting associated with plant facilities.
7.0-MGD Water Recycling Facility Expansion Project, Rancho California Water District, CA. With a previous employer,
Mr. Schlater served as the Deputy Project Manager/Project Engineer for the water recycling expansion project
and managed a multidiscipline design team across three offices to produce construction documents for plant
improvements. The work included: new 22-MGD headworks screening and grit removal facilities; new screenings
and grit removal equipment building; 10-MGD tertiary treatment system including secondary pumping and cloth disk
filtration retrofit; tertiary storage; yard piping; detailed construction sequencing to maintain plant operations during
construction; and coatings and painting associated with plant facilities.
3.4-MGD Santa Paula Water Recycling Facility Project, City of Santa Paula, CA. With a previous employer, Mr.
Schlater designed and provided multidiscipline coordination of construction documents for a membrane bioreactor
(MBR) plant. His work included oversight and coordination of: headworks; wet weather equalization basin designed
to invert dry weather flow diurnal pattern to lower power costs; MBR; UV disinfection; recycle water pump station;
and percolation pond disposal facilities. He also coordinated membrane pre-selection procurement document
development and design with selected MBR membrane equipment supplier.
7.0-MGD Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion Project, City of Tulare, CA. With a previous employer, Mr.
Schlater was the Project Manager that represented the Tulare Dairy Industry Group (TDIG) in reviewing preliminary
design documents and final construction documents to minimize TDIG operations costs. Managed and coordinated a
multidiscipline design team that reviewed all work products for conformance to conventional design and operations
standards. Attended all design reviews and participated in value engineering workshop with owner and owner’s design
engineer.
Wastewater Plant Improvements Project, Sausalito Marin City Sanitary District With a previous employer, Mr.
Schlater was the Project Engineer for the wastewater plant improvement project. He designed and provided
multidiscipline coordination of construction documents for the following facilities: primary clarifier sludge pumping;
anaerobic digester pumping; digester pump mixing; and coatings and painting associated with plant facilities.
Availability & Current Projects
City of South San Francisco, WQCP Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project – Program Management.. Lead
Technical Consultant.Mr. Schlater supported evaluation of the sole-source proprietary digester equipment and how to
best represent the performance (process warranty) and guarantees in the bid documents. Working directly with Mr.
Tarantino, EKI’s Program Manager, Mr. Schlater proposed options for contractual language and supported meetings
with City staff to determine how to proceed. Mr. Schlater also supported Mr. Tarantino in the evaluation of the
supplier’s proposal and cost components. Completion date: Ongoing. Commitment: 2.5%. Firm(s): EKI Environment
& Water, Inc. Reference: S. Peter Vorametsanti, PE, CCM, 315 Maple Avenue, South San Francisco, CA 94080,
(650) 740-7368.
Town of Hillsborough, Final Design Sandra/Hayne Stormdrain Replacement. Project Manager. Mr. Schlater leads
this project that will develop bid documents for: new headwall and bar screen; 200 lineal feet of 24” to 54” storm
drain and junction boxes; and creek restoration (construction cost estimate: $1.8M – design schedule: 11/18-2/20).
Completion date: 2020. Commitment: 10%. Firm(s): EKI Environment & Water, Inc. Reference: Daniel Gonzales, PE,
Deputy Director of Public Works, 1320 La Honda Rd, Hillsborough, CA 94010, (650) 375-7444
Oro Loma Sanitary District, Digester Energy Evaluation Study. Project Manager. The Project performs a digester
energy audit and system evaluation to help plan for replacement of aging facilities. Scope includes developing a cost-
benefit analysis for two alternatives will be performed: 1) two new 0.6 MG Digesters with membrane covers; and 2) an
Omnivore retrofit of existing 1 MG Digesters plus separate gas storage). Completion date: 2019.
Commitment: 10%. Firm(s): EKI Environment & Water, Inc. Reference: Jimmy Dang, Engineering Manger, 2655 Grant
Avenue, San Lorenzo, CA 95073, (510) 481-6981
SECTION 3
PROJECT TEAM
11CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR DESIGN OF WQCP COATING AND CORROSION PROTECTION PROJECT (CIP PROJECTS SS1307 & SS1901)
Steve Tarantino, PE
Principal-in-Charge and QA/QC
During over 40 years of professional experience, Mr. Tarantino has led the
implementation of a wide range of projects, with a specialization in program
management contracts. His work includes planning, design, cost estimation,
and construction supervision for potable water, domestic wastewater, industrial
wastewater, groundwater, and remediation projects including excavation and
removal of contaminated soil, soil vapor extraction, and groundwater treatment
systems. Mr. Tarantino has a proven history of demonstrating both the technical and
management expertise needed to ensure that projects meet client needs and are
performed on time and within budget.
Relevant Experience
WQCP Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project – Program Management,
City of South San Francisco, CA. Mr. Tarantino is serving as Program Manager
for the Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project at the WQCP. Prior to
commencement of construction, Mr. Tarantino supported contract negotiations
with proprietary digester equipment/process to establish process warranty and the
terms and conditions governing purchase, installation, and operation; prepared
the Construction Management (CM) Services RFP, reviewed CM RFP responses,
interviewed candidates, and participated in selection of construction manager; and
evaluated Contractor bids. Throughout the Project construction phase, Mr. Tarantino
will serve as Program Manager, acting on behalf of the City to facilitate decision
making, participate in weekly construction meetings, and coordinate with WQCP
staff as needed to keep the project moving during WQCP operation.
WQCP and Pump Station Coatings Project, City of South San Francisco, CA. Mr.
Tarantino served as Project Manager on the Project whose goal was to develop a
multi-year, phased program to perform coatings for the WQCP and Pump Stations.
Mr. Tarantino supported Mr. Schlater during the review of prior work and preparation
of maps summarizing prior work recommendation; and participated workshops
with City staff. The outcome of the workshops was a multi-year, phased coating
improvement program that will meet City-identified needs.
WWTP Expansion Program Management, City of Lathrop, CA. Mr. Tarantino served
as the City of Lathrop’s program manager for the expansion of the City’s existing
MBR wastewater treatment plant from 1.0 MGD to 2.5 MGD. The project also
involved the closure of the City’s wastewater treatment plant that treats wastewater
from the Crossroads area of the City. As program manager he is responsible for
assisting the City with the selection of the design engineer, the management of the
selected engineer in performing the design (including the technical review of the
design engineers work products) and construction of the expansion. He was also
responsible for the coordination of this process with the project stake holders which
include both the City and the developers that are funding the planning design and
construction of the plant expansion.
He also performed program management tasks when the MBR plant was originally
put online in . His tasks included management and coordination of eight consulting
engineering firms and fifteen developers on behalf of the City for the 5-Year Project.
He was responsible for preparation and maintenance of detailed project schedules,
technical review of engineering documents, interfacing with regulatory agencies and
oversight of various strategic, managerial, and technical tasks for the City including
overseeing of City and consultant staff in compliance actions.
FIRM
EKI Environment & Water, Inc.
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
EKI: 28 years
Total Years Experience:
40+years.
PROFESSIONAL PROFILE
EKI Environment & Water,
Inc., Burlingame, CA, 1990–
Present
EDUCATION
University of Santa Clara, B.S.
in Civil Engineering, 1970
REGISTRATIONS
Professional Civil Engineer, CA
(#28308), 1977
CERTIFICATIONS
Forty-hour HAZWOPER
Training Course
SECTION 3
PROJECT TEAM
12CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR DESIGN OF WQCP COATING AND CORROSION PROTECTION PROJECT (CIP PROJECTS SS1307 & SS1901)
Clean Water Program Development, City of Foster City, CA. Mr. Tarantino is serving as Foster City’s representative
in its participation with the City of San Mateo in their Clean Water Program. The Clean Water Program is a
comprehensive plan to upgrade the aging wastewater collection and treatment system with advanced infrastructure
that will provide reliable services for years to come. The Wastewater Treatment Plant components of the Clean Water
Program are a joint effort between the City of San Mateo and City of Foster City/Estero Municipal Improvement District
(EMID). The City of Foster City is a partial owner of the Wastewater Treatment Plant. The Goals of the Clean Water
Program are to: replace aging infrastructure and facilities, build wet weather sewer system capacity assurance, and
meet current and future regulatory requirements, align with the City of San Mateo and Foster City’s sustainability
goals. As Foster City’s representative, Mr. Tarantino participates in the selection of planning and design consultants,
review of technical reports, assisting with the evaluation of Foster City’s share of the cost for the Clean Water Program,
as well making presentations to the Foster City Council regarding the progress of the program.
Water System Capital Improvements Program and Various Water System Projects, City of Burlingame, CA. Mr.
Tarantino served as the Program Director for the City of Burlingame’s 10-year water system capital improvements
program to replace aging potable water distribution system infrastructure. The project included developing a 10-year
water system capital improvement plan that was funded from bond proceeds, the planning, cost estimating, and
budgeting of selected capital improvements; issuing RFPs and managing the consultant selection process; managing
the design and construction process; community outreach efforts in advance of construction; updating City staff
and Council members on progress and budget expenditures. Other projects for the City on which he managed the
EKI team included assisting Burlingame in preparing for the system-wide conversion from chlorine to chloramines
as the disinfectant by SFPUC, the City’s only water source. Projects related to the conversion include, developing a
unidirectional flushing program, evaluating the mixing occurring within the City’s potable water storage tanks, and
mastering planning the City’s potable water distribution system to facilitate water movement.
Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrades, Merced, CA. Mr. Tarantino was retained by the City of Merced to act as the
City’s program manager for the upgrade and expansion of the City’s wastewater treatment plant. As project manager,
Mr. Tarantino’s responsibilities included development of RFPs and the management of the entire process for the
selection of the design consultant as well as the construction manager. Mr. Tarantino also lead the EKI team in the
review of technical documents, management of the SRF loan process to obtain financing for the project, and provide
liaison with regulatory agencies for the City’s NPDES permit. In addition, Mr. Tarantino lead the EKI team in the the
investigation and groundwater monitoring of the City’s land application area that takes waste directly from a tomato
processing facility as part of the program to identify and remediate impacts to the local shallow groundwater from the
use of unlined sludge drying beds.
Water System Improvements, Calistoga, CA. The City of Calistoga has completed upgrading its water system utilizing
funding from the United States Department of Agriculture Rural Development Program targeted to small communities.
As project manager, Mr. Tarantino assisted in securing planning, designing and construction funding from the USDA
and was the City’s liaison with USDA. He was also the project manager for the design and construction oversight of
the upgrade projects. In addition, Mr. Tarantino’s responsibilities included managing the preparation of environmental
documents and a water rate study required by the USDA, while evaluating the need to treat groundwater containing
elevated levels of arsenic. The project included City water system upgrades including replacement of approximately
15,000 feet of distribution system pipelines, and improvements to the City’s Kimball Water Treatment Plant chemical
mixing system, clarifier, and the addition of a third filter bank.
John Jones Water Treatment Plant Expansion, Tracy, CA. Mr. Tarantino was retained by the City of Tracy to act as
the City’s project manager for the planning, design, and construction oversight of the expansion of the City of Tracy’s
John Jones Water Treatment Plant from 15 mgd to 45 mgd and the design of the first phase 15 mgd expansion.
Also included in this project is preparation of an application for an SRF loan and liaison with DHS regarding the City
loan. The planning portion of the project included an evaluation of alternative disinfection, clarification and filtration
processes and pilot testing of the selected process. The selected process included deep bed GAC filtration and
UV disinfection. The project also included negotiations with the State of California Department of Health Services
regarding the changing the source of water for the JJWTP from the Delta Mendota Canal to the California Aqueduct.
The City collected water quality data from both conveyance facilities to determine if there is a significant difference in
the source water quality. Data indicated that the water quality from both sources was highly variable but similar with
respect to treatment needs. Based on these data, DHS did not require that the City change its water source.
SECTION 3
PROJECT TEAM
13CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR DESIGN OF WQCP COATING AND CORROSION PROTECTION PROJECT (CIP PROJECTS SS1307 & SS1901)
Melody Eldridge, PE
Staff Engineer
Ms. Eldridge is a civil and environmental engineer with over six years of experience
in both the public and private sectors, including stormwater management, capital
improvement program management (CIP), remedial action work plans (RAW), and
quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) of analytical data. She also has extensive
expertise in database management and Geographic Information System (GIS)
mapping, modeling, and analysis.
Ms. Eldridge has managed over a dozen stormwater compliance projects for
industrial facilities, including coordinating implementation of best management
practices (BMPs) and production of appropriate documentation and reports. In
addition, she has assisted in a range of activities supporting municipal capital
improvement programs, from initial system modeling through to making project
recommendations and identifying priorities, coordinating bid walks, managing
construction projects, tracking submittals, conducting inspections, planning ribbon-
cutting ceremonies, and incorporating the subsequent as-builts into the city’s
infrastructure tracking system.
Relevant Experience
Municipal Storm Drain CIP Project Management, Pipeline Modeling, CIP
Recommendations, City of Burlingame, CA.. Ms. Eldridge has assisted with project
management for a municipal storm drain CIP, including coordinating a RFP for
engineering design improvements to two lift stations, coordinating site walks and
investigation into potential biological constraints and regulatory permitting, and
assisting with evaluation of proposed storm drain infrastructure projects. She also
modeled water pipeline replacement alternatives and made recommendations
based on feasibility, water needs, and fire flow requirements.
Capital Improvement Project Management, City of Morro Bay, CA. Prior to
joining EKI, Ms. Eldridge worked for the City and assisted with the City’s capital
improvement program. Projects included headworks improvements at the City’s
waste water treatment plant (WWTP), WWTP digester re-coating, sewer lift station
improvements, and citywide pavement repair projects. Ms. Eldridge assisted with
coordinating meetings, tracking and reviewing submittals, maintaining project logs,
and performing inspections, among other tasks.
CIP Prioritization, City of Morro Bay, CA. Ms. Eldridge maintained the City’s GIS
database for all infrastructure networks (notably roadways, water, sanitary sewer,
and stormwater), and implemented changes to improve condition assessment and
project tracking capabilities. Ms. Eldridge conducted GIS analyses to assist in the
prioritization of capital improvement projects based on a variety of factors including
condition assessments, network impacts, costs, and feasibility.
Master Plan Development. City of Brisbane, CA. Ms. Eldridge modeled water
pipeline replacement alternatives for a municipality and made recommendations
based on feasibility, water needs, and fire flow requirements. She has assisted with
the development of water and sewer municipal master plans.
Stormwater Permitting for a WWTP, City of Morro Bay, CA. She performed the
preliminary evaluation to permit the WWTP under the State Water Resources
Control Board’s (SWRCB’s) General Permit for Stormwater Discharges associated
with Industrial Activities (IGP), including mapping of the onsite stormwater system,
identification of sampling locations and parameters, and discussions with facility
staff to investigate options to reduce stormwater discharges.
FIRM
EKI Environment & Water, Inc.
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
EKI: 3 years
Total Years Experience:
6 years.
PROFESSIONAL PROFILE
EKI Environment & Water,
Inc., Burlingame, CA, 2015–
Present
City of Morro Bay, Morro Bay,
CA, 2014– 2015
City of Davis, Davis, CA,
2013– 2013
EDUCATION
University of California, Davis,
B.S. Civil and Environmental
Engineering, 2011
REGISTRATIONS
Professional Civil Engineer, CA
(#88130), 2017
SECTION 3
PROJECT TEAM
14CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR DESIGN OF WQCP COATING AND CORROSION PROTECTION PROJECT (CIP PROJECTS SS1307 & SS1901)
Ed Darrimon
Coating & Lining Lead (Design & Inspection)
As President and CEO of Bay Area Coating Consultants, Inc. (BACC), Mr. Darrimon
administers the daily operations and provides high performance technical coating
and lining specifications, failure analysis, surveys, and technical consulting.
Mr.Darrimon was employed by East Bay Municipal Utility District for eleven years
in the Engineering & Maintenance Departments as supervising coating specialist.
Mr. Darrimon designed and developed the District’s physical coating and lining
testing lab for accelerated testing and the Districts Rehabilitation program of 170
reservoirs, water treatment plants, and two hydroelectric plants including penstocks.
Relevant Experience
PSEP Program – So. Cal Gas Pipeline
SFPUC – Numerous pipeline, penstock, treatment plant and tank projects
City of Livermore Bernal Bridge Inspection
County of Sacramento– Technical Consulting Zone 7
County of San Francisco– Technical consulting, specifications, and inspection
Numerous projects the past 19 years.
County of Butte Technical consulting, specifications, and inspection
Modesto Irrigation District– Technical Consulting and Inspection
Numerous Water Districts in California/Nevada– Technical Consulting,
FIRM
Bay Area Coating Consultants Inc.
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
BACC: 31 years
Total Years Experience:
42 years.
PROFESSIONAL PROFILE
Bay Area Coating Consultings,
inc., Modesto, CA, 1987–Present
SECTION 3
PROJECT TEAM
15CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR DESIGN OF WQCP COATING AND CORROSION PROTECTION PROJECT (CIP PROJECTS SS1307 & SS1901)
Armando Austria
Coating Inspector
Mr. Austria has been involved in coatings work on pipelines, water tank, waste
water treatment plants, hydroelectric plants, treatment plants, refineries and other
structures for various utilities, agencies and owners. He is responsible for written
documentation, photo documentation and verbal communication. Testing coating
systems evaluate coating projects, destructive and non-destructive failure analysis.
Armando’s experience as a coating inspector includes work with inorganic zincs,
epoxies, coal tar enamels, vinyl’s, urethanes, alkyds, Fiberglass, Galvanizing,
metalizing, fusion bonded epoxies, rubber lining, acrylics, tape wrap systems, and
numerous other generic types of coatings that include 100% solids epoxies and
urethanes on concrete and steel structures.
Armando also has extensive experience with coating inspection instrumentation;
including pull-off adhesion testers, surface contaminate meters, ultrasonic gages,
moisture meters, holiday detectors, hardness gages, and PH instrumentations.
Armando’s experiences include surface preparation techniques that include power
tool cleaning, abrasive blasting, ultra-high-pressure hydro blasting, and in both shop
and field operations on substrates that include steel, Stainless Steel concrete and
other. This experience includes operations involving airless, conventional, and plural
component applications. Armando is intimately familiar with numerous NACE, SSPC,
AWWA, and ASTM standard practices. -Confined space. Fall protection, lead safety,
hazard communication, respiratory protection certified training,
Relevant Experience
Santa Clara Valley Water District /Major plant upgrade
City of Livermore/Plant upgrade
City of Palo Alto/ Reservoir rehabilitation and wet well upgrade
SFPUC Harry Tracy WTP – Plant upgrade
Dublin San Ramon Services District/Plant upgrade
Kuwait Refineries & Oil Companies – Texaco
SFPUC – Hetch Hetchy Pipeline East and Western segments
27 miles of 78” water pipe. Shop and field. (Two years)
SFPUC Harry Tracy WTP upgrade (Two years)
Ora Loma Sanitation District Coating upgrade project
FIRM
Bay Area Coating Consultants Inc.
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
BACC: 8 years
Total Years Experience:
20 years.
PROFESSIONAL PROFILE
Bay Area Coating Consultants,
Modesto, CA, 2010–Present
REGISTRATIONS
NACE Level 3, (#48374)
AFFILIATIONS
NACE International
SSPC
ASTM International
American Water Works Assocation
SECTION 3
PROJECT TEAM
16CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR DESIGN OF WQCP COATING AND CORROSION PROTECTION PROJECT (CIP PROJECT SS1307)
SECTION 4: FIRM EXPERIENCE
EKI provides comprehensive engineering services from program management and planning to engineering,
design, and construction management for public and private utilities including potable water, wastewater,
recycled water, and storm water utilities. Our team is experienced in review and prioritization of CIPs
and establishing project prioritization criteria that address human safety, water supply reliability, aging
infrastructure and needs for future growth.
Our engineers’ experience providing technical management, planning, designing and construction oversight
services for wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) improvements such as new aeration basins, secondary
clarifier, additional sodium hypochlorite feed system, electrical system improvements, addition of the
supervisor control and data acquisition (SCADA) system, new headworks and influent pump station, the
addition of disk filters and ultraviolet (UV) disinfection, new outfall, and upgrades to the operations buildings,
will be valuable to your project. Our capabilities also include developing tracking tool to track water
demands and wastewater flow generation rates relative to developer agreements, assisting with wastewater
rate studies, regulatory agency interaction and grant funding assistance and management.
Our team’s recent wastewater experience related to this project in California is summarized in the table
below. Detailed relevant experience of our team is presented at the end of this section.
CLIENT/PROJGECT Master PlanHydraulic Model/AnalysisCIP Development/PrioritizationProgram ManagementDesign/Design ReviewConstruction OversightCoating InspectionRegulatory Agency InterfaceFacility Expansion/UpgradePermitting AssistanceGrant Funding Assistance/ManagmentCITY OF LATHROP •Wastewater and Recycled Water Program Management •MBR wastewater treatment plant Expansion •Five-year Wastewater Capacity Project •Integrated Water Supply Master Plan
l l l l l l l
CITY OF MERCED •Wastewater Treatment Plant
Performance Improvement Projects •Wastewater Treatment Plant
Tertiary Treatement and Solids Handling Facilities Upgrades •Wastewater Treatment Related to Tomato Processing Plant
l l l l l l l
CITY OF BRISBANE •Sewer System Master Plan Update l l l
CITY OF SAN FRANCSICO •Southeast and Oceanside WWTP l
ORO LOMA SANITARY DISTRICT •Oro Loma Water Pollution Control Plant l
Project management and engineering services will be performed in EKI’s corporate headquarters located at
577 Airport Blvd., Suite 500 in Burlingame, California, less than eight miles from the City’s Engineering Office
and ten minutes away from plant and pump station facilities.
SECTION 4
FIRM EXPERIENCE
17CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR DESIGN OF WQCP COATING AND CORROSION PROTECTION PROJECT (CIP PROJECT SS1307)
Gloria Way Iron and Manganese Groundwater
Treatment System and Pad D Municipal Supply Well
East Palo Alto, CA
Eki is providing technical and design services to the City as part of
the implementation of the City’s groundwater projects, including the
rehabilitation of the Gloria Way well and construction of the Pad D
well. We have:
•Performed design services for the construction of a municipal
supply well and above ground disinfection and distribution compo-
nents at the Pad D well site.
•Conducted a hydrogeologic investigation and installation of a well
in support of the Pad D well design. The investigation included test
well design and construction, aquifer testing, water quality sam-
pling, groundwater modeling, preliminary design and cost estima-
tion.
•Prepared design documents for a manganese treatment system at
the existing Gloria Way Well in the City.
•Assisted with permitting of the Gloria Way Well and Pad D Munici-
pal Supply Well.
•Updated the City’s water system hydraulic model to include the
two groundwater wells.
We assisted the City in securing $1.5 million dollars in Proposition 84
grant funding to support the City in its conjunctive groundwater use
and management efforts. Grant funds will be used for design and
construction of the Gloria Way Well Project, and design of the Pad D
Well Project.
We also reviewed and developed a prioritization of the various CIPs
and established project prioritization criteria that addressed human
safety, water supply reliability, as well as those addressing aging
infrastructure and needs for future growth.
RefeRence: Kamal Fallaha, Director Of Public Works
960 Tate Street, East Palo Alto, CA 94303
(650) 853-3117
Date of SeRviceS: 2014 to present
conStRuction coSt: $3.1 million
SECTION 4
FIRM EXPERIENCE
18CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR DESIGN OF WQCP COATING AND CORROSION PROTECTION PROJECT (CIP PROJECT SS1307)
Digester Improvements and FOG/Food Waste-to-
Energy (F2E) Facility Project
Central Marin Sanitation Agency, CA
With a previous employer, Mr. Schlater designed and provided
multidiscipline coordination of construction documents for digester
improvements, which consisted of new digester membrane covers;
digester pump mixing; digester gas sulfide removal; and FOG/
F2E facilities. FOG/F2E facilities consisted of a collection tank
with mixing system, and an equipment bay with pumping and
conditioning equipment. Processed FOG/food waste is conveyed
to the digesters which will increase digester gas production
and corresponding digester energy production via the existing
cogeneration system.
RefeRence: Chris Finton, Treatment Plant Manager
130 Anderson Drive, San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 459-1455 x 101
Date of SeRviceS: 2011 - 2013
conStRuction coSt: $5 million
Oro Loma Water Pollution Control Plant
Oro Loma Sanitary District, San Lorenzo, CA
BACC has been providing failure analysis, specifications, coating
and lining inspection and consulting services on a yearly basis
for over twelve years (annual contract). The project invovles six
clarifiers, four digesters, head works, wet wells. The District has
not experienced a cost overrun or failure since employing BACC.
RefeRence:
Jimmy Dang, Engineering Manger
2655 Grant Avenue, San Lorenzo, CA 95073
(510) 481-6981
Date of SeRviceS: 2006 - Present
conStRuction coSt: Varies
-
SECTION 4
FIRM EXPERIENCE
19CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR DESIGN OF WQCP COATING AND CORROSION PROTECTION PROJECT (CIP PROJECT SS1307)
Southeast and Oceanside WWTPs
City of San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
BACC has completed numerous projects for the City of San
Francisco over the past 19 years including the ongoing work
at the Southeast and Oceanside plants. BACC has provided
coating and lining inspection, failure analysis, coating surveys
and consulting. Completed projects include reservoir linings and
coating inspection, pipeline inspection, inspection of penstocks
and water and wastewater treatment plants and failure analysis.
Facilities include six steel tanks, wastewater treatment plants,
three digesters, fourteen clarifiers, contact basins and outfalls.
RefeRence:
Elmer Cheung, PE,
875 Stevens Street, San Francisco CA 94103
(415) 551-4668
Date of SeRviceS: 1999 - Present
conStRuction coSt: Varies
Fresno/Clovis Regional Wasterwater Facility
City of Fresno, Fresno, CA
BACC has been providing failure analysis, specifications, inspection
and consulting services on a yearly basis for over twenty years.
Facilities include three clarifiers, five digesters, head works, and
dafts. The City has not experienced a cost overrun or failure since
employing BACC.
RefeRence:
Kevin Nogard/Orlando Gonzalez, Engineering Manger
5607 Jensen Avenue, Fresno, CA 95073
(559) 621-5216 or (559) 621-5297
Date of SeRviceS: 1998 - Present
conStRuction coSt: Varies
99
22
22
36
27
30
42
99
30
101
101
101
101
101
99 FLARE
22 FLOW SPLITTING
STRUCTURE NO. 1 AND NO. 2
36 RAS SPLITTING STRUCTURE
FS4
27 FLOW SPLITTING STUCTURE
NO. 3
30
WET WEATHER STORAGE
POND AND 3 WATER PUMP
STATION
42 SEPTAGE RECEIVING
STATION
PROCESS AREA CODES
NOTES
1. TREATMENT PLANT AREA NUMBERS HAVE
BEEN ASSIGNED PER THE 'WET WEATHER
AND DIGESTER IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT'
2. PROCESS AREA CODES HAVE BEEN
ASSIGNED PER THE 'TECHNICAL
MEMORANDUM NO. 2 PLANT CONDITION
ASSESSMENT AND PRIORITIZATION' DATED
AUGUST 2016.
3. PROCESS AREA CODES SHOWN ON THIS
DRAWING ARE ITEMS REFERRED TO IN THE
TECHNICAL MEMO NO. 2 BUT NOT IN THE
'WET WEATHER AND DIGESTER
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT'
PROJECTS UNDER THE WET WEATHER
AND DIGESTER IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT
C:\Users\ricasata\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_11520\Rehab Priority Exhibit_Plant.dwg 8-27-18COATINGS IMPROVEMENTS OF METALLIC ASSETS
THROUGHOUT WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT
REV DESCRIPTION APPR'D DATE
577 AIRPORT BOULEVARD, SUITE 500
BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010-5306
(650) 292-9100 FAX (650) 552-9012
PLANT COATINGS IMPROVEMENT
SOURCE:
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO/ SAN BRUNO WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT WET WEATHER
AND DIGESTER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, APRIL 2017, BY CAROLLO ENGINEERS.
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NO.2 PLANT CONDITION ASSESSMENT AND PRIORITIZATION,
AUGUST 2016, BY CAROLLO ENGINEERS.
101 PLANT ELECTRICAL
REHABILITATION PROJECT PRIORITY 1:
ASSET RISK PER AREA
PROPOSED WORK AREAS
99
27
30
42
99
30
101
101
101
101
101
22
22
36
99 FLARE
22 FLOW SPLITTING
STRUCTURE NO. 1 AND NO. 2
36 RAS SPLITTING STRUCTURE
FS4
27 FLOW SPLITTING STUCTURE
NO. 3
30
WET WEATHER STORAGE
POND AND 3 WATER PUMP
STATION
42 SEPTAGE RECEIVING
STATION
PROCESS AREA CODES
SOURCE:
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO/ SAN BRUNO WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT WET WEATHER
AND DIGESTER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, APRIL 2017, BY CAROLLO ENGINEERS.
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NO.2 PLANT CONDITION ASSESSMENT AND PRIORITIZATION,
AUGUST 2016, BY CAROLLO ENGINEERS.
101 PLANT ELECTRICAL
MATCHLINE THIS SHEET
C:\Users\ricasata\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_7792\Rehab Priority Exhibit_Plant.dwg 8-27-18COATINGS IMPROVEMENTS OF METALLIC ASSETS
THROUGHOUT WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT
REV DESCRIPTION APPR'D DATE
577 AIRPORT BOULEVARD, SUITE 500
BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010-5306
(650) 292-9100 FAX (650) 552-9012
PLANT COATINGS IMPROVEMENT
REHABILITATION PROJECT PRIORITY 2:
ASSET RISK PER AREA
NOTES
1. TREATMENT PLANT AREA NUMBERS HAVE
BEEN ASSIGNED PER THE 'WET WEATHER
AND DIGESTER IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT'
2. PROCESS AREA CODES HAVE BEEN
ASSIGNED PER THE 'TECHNICAL
MEMORANDUM NO. 2 PLANT CONDITION
ASSESSMENT AND PRIORITIZATION' DATED
AUGUST 2016.
3. PROCESS AREA CODES SHOWN ON THIS
DRAWING ARE ITEMS REFERRED TO IN THE
TECHNICAL MEMO NO. 2 BUT NOT IN THE
'WET WEATHER AND DIGESTER
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT'
PROJECTS UNDER THE WET WEATHER
AND DIGESTER IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT
PROPOSED WORK AREAS
99
27
30
42
99
30
101
101
101
101
101
22
22
36
161k
99 FLARE
22 FLOW SPLITTING
STRUCTURE NO. 1 AND NO. 2
36 RAS SPLITTING STRUCTURE
FS4
27 FLOW SPLITTING STUCTURE
NO. 3
30
WET WEATHER STORAGE
POND AND 3 WATER PUMP
STATION
42 SEPTAGE RECEIVING
STATION
PROCESS AREA CODES
C:\Users\ricasata\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_7792\Rehab Priority Exhibit_Plant.dwg 8-27-18COATINGS IMPROVEMENTS OF METALLIC ASSETS
THROUGHOUT WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT
REV DESCRIPTION APPR'D DATE
577 AIRPORT BOULEVARD, SUITE 500
BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010-5306
(650) 292-9100 FAX (650) 552-9012
PLANT COATINGS IMPROVEMENT
SOURCE:
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO/ SAN BRUNO WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT WET WEATHER
AND DIGESTER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, APRIL 2017, BY CAROLLO ENGINEERS.
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NO.2 PLANT CONDITION ASSESSMENT AND PRIORITIZATION,
AUGUST 2016, BY CAROLLO ENGINEERS.
101 PLANT ELECTRICAL
MATCHLINE
THIS SHEET
REHABILITATION PROJECT PRIORITY 3:
ASSET RISK PER AREA
NOTES
1. TREATMENT PLANT AREA NUMBERS HAVE
BEEN ASSIGNED PER THE 'WET WEATHER
AND DIGESTER IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT'
2. PROCESS AREA CODES HAVE BEEN
ASSIGNED PER THE 'TECHNICAL
MEMORANDUM NO. 2 PLANT CONDITION
ASSESSMENT AND PRIORITIZATION' DATED
AUGUST 2016.
3. PROCESS AREA CODES SHOWN ON THIS
DRAWING ARE ITEMS REFERRED TO IN THE
TECHNICAL MEMO NO. 2 BUT NOT IN THE
'WET WEATHER AND DIGESTER
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT'
PROJECTS UNDER THE WET WEATHER
AND DIGESTER IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT
PROPOSED WORK AREAS
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:18-1147 Agenda Date:4/24/2019
Version:1 Item #:4a.
Resolution approving a consulting services agreement with EKI Environment &Water of Burlingame,
California for the WQCP Plant-Wide Coating and Corrosion Protection Project (Project No.ss1307)in an
amount not to exceed $687,100,authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement,and authorizing a total
budget of $755,810.
WHEREAS,Capital Improvement Program (CIP)project ss1307 calls for the design and construction
(application)of new protective paint and coatings for the to extend the service life of the buildings,equipment,
and pipes,meet service expectations and regulatory requirements,and improve the system’s safety and
reliability; and
WHERAS,a 2016 comprehensive condition assessment of the treatment system asset inventory completed of
over 1000 individual components,including buildings,structural supports,equipment,electrical boards and
wiring,pumps,pipes,valves,and vaults in 46 buildings/process units and 13 pump stations,were inspected and
evaluated for their condition,exposure,vulnerability,criticality to operations,and safety.The overall condition
of these assets is considered as fair;however,there are over 350 localized areas and individual assets in poor to
severe condition
WHEREAS,the City advertised a request for proposals for the final design and construction support services
on February 14,2019 on the eBidboard website and received one proposal from EKI Environment &Water of
Burlingame, California; and
WHEREAS,staff convened an evaluation panel to review and rate the proposal which finds that EKI
Environment & Water is well qualified to perform this scope of work; and
WHEREAS,after completing this qualifications evaluation,staff negotiated a fee proposal of $687,100 which
is a reasonable cost for the specified scope of work, and
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City
Council hereby approves a consulting services agreement,attached herewith as Exhibit A,with EKI
Environment &Water of Burlingame,California in an amount not to exceed $687,100,conditioned on the
consultant’s timely execution of the consulting services agreement and submission of all required documents,
including but not limited to,certificates of insurance and endorsements,in accordance with the Project
documents.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/29/2019Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:18-1147 Agenda Date:4/24/2019
Version:1 Item #:4a.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco authorizes the Finance
Department to establish the Project budget consistent with the information contained in the staff report.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the agreement and any
other related documents on behalf of the City upon timely submission by EKI Environment &Water’s signed
contract and all other documents, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to take any other required actions
consistent with the intent of this resolution that do not materially increase the City’s obligations.
*****
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/29/2019Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and EKI Environmental & Water, Inc. Page 1 of 19
EXHIBIT A - CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND EKI Environment & Water, Inc.
THIS AGREEMENT for consulting services is made by and between the City of South San
Francisco (“City”) and EKI Environment & Water, Inc., of Burlingame. (“Consultant”) (together sometimes
referred to as the “Parties”) as of April 24, 2019 (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 Work attached as Exhibit A, attached hereto
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, the Agreement shall
prevail.
1.1 Term of Services. The term of this Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date and shall
end on June 30, 2022, the date of completion specified in Exhibit A, and Consultant shall
complete the work described in Exhibit A prior to 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 provided for in Section 8.
1.2 Standard of Performance. Consultant shall perform all services required pursuant to this
Agreement in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent
practitioner of the profession in which Consultant is engaged in the geographical area in
which Consultant practices its profession. Consultant shall prepare all work products
required by this Agreement in a substantial, first-class manner and shall conform to the
standards of quality normally observed by a person practicing in Consultant's profession.
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. Consultant shall devote such time to the performance of services pursuant to this
Agreement as may be reasonably necessary to meet the standard of performance
provided in Sections 1.1 and 1.2 above and to satisfy Consultant’s obligations hereunder.
Section 2. COMPENSATION. City hereby agrees to pay Consultant a sum not to exceed $687,100,
notwithstanding 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 A, or Consultant’s compensation schedule
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
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and EKI Environmental & Water, Inc. Page 2 of 19
pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall submit all invoices to City in the manner specified herein.
Except as specifically authorized by City, 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 per 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.);
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, as well as a separate notice when the total number of hours of work by
Consultant and any individual employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant
reaches or exceeds eight hundred (800) hours, which shall include an estimate of
the time necessary to complete the work described in Exhibit A;
The amount and purpose of actual expenditures for which reimbursement is
sought;
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 thirty (30) days from the receipt of an invoice that complies with all of the
requirements above to pay Consultant. City shall have no obligation to pay invoices
submitted ninety (90) days past the performance of work or incurrence of cost.
2.3 Final Payment. City shall pay the last ten percent (10%) of the total sum due pursuant to
this Agreement within sixty (60) days after completion of the services and submittal to City
of a final invoice, if all services required have been satisfactorily performed.
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and EKI Environmental & Water, Inc. Page 3 of 19
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 Fees. Fees for work performed by Consultant on an hourly basis shall not exceed
the amounts shown on the compensation schedule attached hereto and incorporated
herein as Exhibit B.
2.6 Reimbursable Expenses. The following constitute reimbursable expenses are authorized
by this Agreement: mileage, parking, tolls, printing, out of area travel, conference calls,
postage, express mail, delivery. Reimbursable expenses shall not exceed $1,000.00.
Expenses not listed above are not chargeable to City. Reimbursable expenses are
included in the total amount of compensation provided under Section 2 of this Agreement
that shall not be exceeded.
2.7 Payment of Taxes, Tax Withholding. Consultant is solely responsible for the payment of
employment taxes incurred under this Agreement and any similar federal or state taxes.
To be exempt from tax withholding, Consultant must provide City with a valid California
Franchise Tax Board form 590 (“Form 590”), as may be amended and such Form 590
shall be attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit D. Unless Consultant provides
City with a valid Form 590 or other valid, written evidence of an exemption or waiver from
withholding, City may withhold California taxes from payments to Consultant as required
by law. Consultant shall obtain, and maintain on file for three (3) years after the termination
of this Agreement, Form 590s (or other written evidence of exemptions or waivers) from all
subcontractors. Consultant accepts sole responsibility for withholding taxes from any non-
California resident subcontractor and shall submit written documentation of compliance
with Consultant’s withholding duty to City upon request. .
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 in order to verify costs incurred to that date.
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.
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and EKI Environmental & Water, Inc. Page 4 of 19
2.10 Prevailing Wage. Where applicable, the wages to be paid for a day's work to all classes
of laborers, workmen, or mechanics on the work contemplated by this Agreement, shall be
not less than the prevailing rate for a day’s work in the same trade or occupation in the
locality within the state where the work hereby contemplates to be performed as
determined by the Director of Industrial Relations pursuant to the Director’s authority under
Labor Code Section 1770, et seq. Each laborer, worker or mechanic employed by
Consultant or by any subcontractor shall receive the wages herein provided for. The
Consultant shall pay two hundred dollars ($200), or whatever amount may be set by Labor
Code Section 1775, as may be amended, per day penalty for each worker paid less than
prevailing rate of per diem wages. The difference between the prevailing rate of per diem
wages and the wage paid to each worker shall be paid by the Consultant to each worker.
An error on the part of an awarding body does not relieve the Consultant from
responsibility for payment of the prevailing rate of per diem wages and penalties pursuant
to Labor Code Sections 1770 1775. The City will not recognize any claim for additional
compensation because of the payment by the Consultant for any wage rate in excess of
prevailing wage rate set forth. The possibility of wage increases is one of the elements to
be considered by the Consultant.
a. Posting of Schedule of Prevailing Wage Rates and Deductions. If the schedule of
prevailing wage rates is not attached hereto pursuant to Labor Code Section
1773.2, the Consultant shall post at appropriate conspicuous points at the site of
the project a schedule showing all determined prevailing wage rates for the
various classes of laborers and mechanics to be engaged in work on the project
under this contract and all deductions, if any, required by law to be made from
unpaid wages actually earned by the laborers and mechanics so engaged.
b. Payroll Records. Each Consultant and subcontractor shall keep an accurate
payroll record, showing the name, address, social security number, work week,
and the actual per diem wages paid to each journeyman, apprentice, worker, or
other employee employed by the Consultant in connection with the public
work. Such records shall be certified and submitted weekly as required by Labor
Code Section 1776.”
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 facility that may involve
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and EKI Environmental & Water, Inc. Page 5 of 19
incurring any direct expense, including but not limited to computer, long-distance 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 Certificates of Insurance, attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit C, indicating that
Consultant has obtained or currently maintains insurance that meets the requirements of this section and
under forms of insurance satisfactory, in all respects, to 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).
4.1 Workers’ Compensation. Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, maintain
Statutory Workers’ Compensation Insurance and Employer’s Liability Insurance for any
and all persons employed directly or indirectly by Consultant. The Statutory Workers’
Compensation Insurance and Employer’s Liability Insurance shall be provided with limits of
not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) per accident. In the alternative,
Consultant may rely on a self-insurance program to meet those requirements, but only if
the program of self-insurance complies fully with the provisions of the California Labor
Code. Determination of whether a self-insurance program meets the standards of the
Labor Code shall be solely in the discretion of the Contract Administrator (as defined in
Section 10.9). The insurer, if insurance is provided, or the Consultant, if a program of self-
insurance is provided, 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.
4.2 Commercial General and Automobile Liability Insurance.
4.2.1 General requirements. Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall maintain
commercial general and automobile liability insurance for the term of this
Agreement in an amount not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00)
per occurrence, combined single limit coverage for risks associated with the work
contemplated by this Agreement. If a Commercial General Liability Insurance or an
Automobile Liability form or other form with a general aggregate limit is used,
either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work to be
performed under this Agreement or the general aggregate limit shall be at least
twice the required occurrence limit. Such coverage shall include but shall not be
limited to, protection against claims arising from bodily and personal injury,
including death resulting there from, and damage to property resulting from
activities contemplated under this Agreement, including the use of owned and non-
owned automobiles.
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and EKI Environmental & Water, Inc. Page 6 of 19
4.2.2 Minimum scope of coverage. Commercial general coverage shall be at least as
broad as Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability occurrence form
CG 0001 or GL 0002 (most recent editions) covering comprehensive General
Liability and Insurance Services Office form number GL 0404 covering Broad
Form Comprehensive General Liability. Automobile coverage shall be at least as
broad as Insurance Services Office Automobile Liability form CA 0001 (ed. 12/90)
Code 8 and 9. No endorsement shall be attached limiting the coverage.
4.2.3 Additional requirements. Each of the following shall be included in the
insurance coverage or added as a certified endorsement to the policy:
a. The insurance shall cover on an occurrence or an accident basis, and not
on a claims-made basis.
b. Any failure of Consultant to comply with reporting provisions of the policy
shall not affect coverage provided to City and its officers, employees,
agents, and volunteers.
4.3 Professional Liability Insurance.
4.3.1 General requirements. Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall maintain
for the period covered by this Agreement professional liability insurance for
licensed professionals performing work pursuant to this Agreement in an amount
not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) covering the licensed
professionals’ errors and omissions. Any deductible or self-insured retention shall
not exceed ONE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS $150,000 per claim.
4.3.2 Claims-made limitations. The following provisions shall apply if the professional
liability coverage is written on a claims-made form:
a. The retroactive date of the policy must be shown and must be before the
date of the Agreement.
b. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be
provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the Agreement or
the work, so long as commercially available at reasonable rates.
c. 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 provide extended reporting coverage for
a minimum of five (5) years after completion of the Agreement or the work.
The City shall have the right to exercise, at the Consultant’s sole cost and
expense, any extended reporting provisions of the policy, if the Consultant
cancels or does not renew the coverage.
d. A copy of the claim reporting requirements must be submitted to the City
prior to the commencement of any work under this Agreement.
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and EKI Environmental & Water, Inc. Page 7 of 19
4.4 All Policies Requirements.
4.4.1 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.
4.4.2 Verification of coverage. Prior to beginning any work under this Agreement,
Consultant shall furnish City with complete copies of all policies delivered to
Consultant by the insurer, including complete copies of all endorsements attached
to those policies. All copies of policies and certified endorsements shall show the
signature of a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. If
the City does not receive the required insurance documents prior to the Consultant
beginning work, it shall not waive the Consultant’s obligation to provide them. The
City reserves the right to require complete copies of all required insurance policies
at any time.
4.4.3 Notice of Reduction in or Cancellation of Coverage. A certified endorsement
shall be attached to all insurance obtained pursuant to this Agreement stating that
coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, or reduced in
coverage or in limits, except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified
mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. In the event that any
coverage required by this section is reduced, limited, cancelled, or materially
affected in any other manner, Consultant shall provide written notice to City at
Consultant’s earliest possible opportunity and in no case later than ten (10)
working days after Consultant is notified of the change in coverage.
4.4.4 Additional insured; primary insurance. City and its officers, employees, agents,
and volunteers shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to each of the
following: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of Consultant,
including the insured’s general supervision of Consultant; products and completed
operations of Consultant, as applicable; premises owned, occupied, or used by
Consultant; and automobiles owned, leased, or used by the Consultant in the
course of providing services pursuant to this Agreement. The coverage shall
contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to City or its
officers, employees, agents, or volunteers.
A certified endorsement must be attached to all policies stating that coverage is
primary insurance with respect to the City and its officers, officials, employees and
volunteers, and that no insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City shall be
called upon to contribute to a loss under the coverage.
4.4.5 Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Consultant shall disclose to and
obtain the 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.
Further, if the Consultant’s insurance policy includes a self-insured retention that
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and EKI Environmental & Water, Inc. Page 8 of 19
must be paid by a named insured as a precondition of the insurer’s liability, or
which has the effect of providing that payments of the self-insured retention by
others, including additional insureds or insurers do not serve to satisfy the self-
insured retention, such provisions must be modified by special endorsement so as
to not apply to the additional insured coverage required by this agreement so as to
not prevent any of the parties to this agreement from satisfying or paying the self-
insured retention required to be paid as a precondition to the insurer’s liability.
Additionally, the certificates of insurance must note whether the policy does or
does not include any self-insured retention and also must disclose the deductible.
During the period covered by this Agreement, only upon the prior express written
authorization of Contract Administrator, Consultant may increase such deductibles
or self-insured retentions with respect to City, its officers, employees, agents, and
volunteers. The Contract Administrator may condition approval of an increase in
deductible or self-insured retention levels with a requirement that Consultant
procure a bond, guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim
administration, and defense expenses that is satisfactory in all respects to each of
them.
4.4.6 Subcontractors. Consultant shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its
policies or shall furnish separate certificates and certified endorsements for each
subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the
requirements stated herein.
4.4.7 Wasting Policy. No insurance policy required by Section 4 shall include a
“wasting” policy limit.
4.4.8 Variation. The City may approve a variation in the foregoing insurance
requirements, upon a determination that the coverage, scope, limits, and forms of
such insurance are either not commercially available, or that the City’s interests
are otherwise fully protected.
4.5 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:
a. Obtain such insurance and deduct and retain the amount of the premiums for such
insurance from any sums due under the Agreement;
b. 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
c. Terminate this Agreement.
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and EKI Environmental & Water, Inc. Page 9 of 19
Section 5. INDEMNIFICATION AND CONSULTANT’S RESPONSIBILITIES. To the fullest extent
permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify, defend with counsel selected by the City, and hold harmless
the City and its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers from and against any and all losses,
liability, claims, suits, actions, damages, and causes of action arising out of any personal injury, bodily
injury, loss of life, or damage to property, or any violation of any federal, state, or municipal law or
ordinance, to the extent caused, in whole or in part, by the willful misconduct or negligent acts or omissions
of Consultant or its employees, subcontractors, or agents, by acts for which they could be held strictly
liable, or by the quality or character of their work. The foregoing obligation of Consultant shall not apply
when (1) the injury, loss of life, damage to property, or violation of law arises wholly from the gross
negligence or willful misconduct of the City or its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers and (2) the
actions of Consultant or its employees, subcontractor, or agents have contributed in no part to the injury,
loss of life, damage to property, or violation of law. It is understood that the duty of Consultant to indemnify
and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code.
Acceptance by City of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not
relieve Consultant from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This indemnification
and hold harmless clause shall apply to any damages or claims for damages whether or not such insurance
policies shall have been determined to apply. By execution of this Agreement, Consultant acknowledges
and agrees to the provisions of this Section and that it is a material element of consideration.
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.
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and EKI Environmental & Water, Inc. Page 10 of 19
6.2 Consultant No 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 or 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.
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, including from City, of what-so-ever 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.
Section 8. TERMINATION AND MODIFICATION.
8.1 Termination. City may cancel this Agreement at any time and without cause upon written
notification to Consultant.
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and EKI Environmental & Water, Inc. Page 11 of 19
Consultant may cancel this Agreement for cause upon 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 date of notice of termination; City, however, may condition payment of
such compensation upon Consultant delivering to City all materials described in Section
9.1.
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. Consultant understands and
agrees that, if City grants such an extension, City shall have no obligation to provide
Consultant with compensation beyond the maximum amount provided for in this
Agreement. Similarly, unless authorized by the Contract Administrator, City shall have no
obligation to reimburse Consultant for any otherwise reimbursable expenses incurred
during the extension period.
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 assign or 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.
8.4.1 Subcontracting
A. Nothing contained in this Agreement or otherwise, shall create any contractual
relationship between City and any subconsultant(s), and no subcontract shall
relieve Consultant of its responsibilities and obligations hereunder. Consultant
agrees to be as fully responsible to City for the acts and omissions of its
subconsultant(s) and of persons either directly or indirectly employed by any of
them as it is for the acts and omissions of persons directly employed by
Consultant. Consultant’s obligation to pay its subconsultant(s) is an
independent obligation from City’s obligation to make payments to the
Consultant.
B. Consultant shall perform the work contemplated with resources available within
its organization and no portion of the work pertinent to this contract shall be
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and EKI Environmental & Water, Inc. Page 12 of 19
subcontracted without written authorization by City’s Contract Administrator,
except that, which is expressly identified in the approved Scope of Work.
C. Consultant shall pay its subconsultants within ten (10) calendar days from
receipt of each payment made to Consultant by City.
D. Any subcontract in excess of $25,000 entered into as a result of this contract
shall contain all the provisions in this contract to be applicable to subconsultants.
E. Any substitution of subconsultant(s) must be approved in writing by City’s
Contract Administrator prior to the start of work by the subconsultant(s).
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 not
finished by Consultant; or
8.6.4 Charge Consultant the difference between the cost to complete the work
described in Exhibit A 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.
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
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and EKI Environmental & Water, Inc. Page 13 of 19
confidential and will not be released to third parties without prior written consent of both
parties unless required by law.
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 three (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 TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($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 three (3) years after final
payment under the Agreement.
9.3.1 Retention of Records/Audit
For the purpose of determining compliance with Public Contract Code 10115, et
seq. and Title 21, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 21, Section 2500 et seq.,
when applicable and other matters connected with the performance of the contract
pursuant to Government Code 8546.7; Consultant, subconsultants, and City shall
maintain and make available for inspection all books, documents, papers,
accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to the performance of the
Agreement, including but not limited to, the costs of administering the Agreement.
All parties shall make such materials available at their respective offices at all
reasonable times during the term of the Agreement and for three years from the
date of final payment under the Agreement. The state, State Auditor, City, FHWA,
or any duly authorized representative of the Federal Government shall have access
to any books, records, and documents of Consultant and its certified public
accountants (CPA) work papers that are pertinent to the contract and indirect cost
rates (ICR) for audit, examinations, excerpts, and transactions, and copies thereof
shall be furnished if requested. Subcontracts in excess of $25,000 shall contain the
provision.
9.3.2 Audit Review Procedures.
A. Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under an interim or post audit
of this Agreement that is not disposed of by agreement, shall be reviewed by
City’s Finance Director.
B. Not later than 30 days after issuance of the final audit report, Consultant may
request a review by City’s Finance Director of unresolved audit issues. The
request for review will be submitted in writing.
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and EKI Environmental & Water, Inc. Page 14 of 19
C. Neither the pendency of a dispute nor its consideration by City will excuse
Consultant from full and timely performance, in accordance with the terms of this
contract.
9.4 Records Submitted in Response to an Invitation to Bid or Request for Proposals. All
responses to a Request for Proposals (RFP) or invitation to bid issued by the City become
the exclusive property of the City. At such time as the City selects a bid, all proposals
received become a matter of public record, and shall be regarded as public records, with
the exception of those elements in each proposal that are defined by Consultant and
plainly marked as “Confidential,” "Business Secret" or “Trade Secret."
The City shall not be liable or in any way responsible for the disclosure of any such
proposal or portions thereof, if Consultant has not plainly marked it as a "Trade Secret" or
"Business Secret," or if disclosure is required under the Public Records Act.
Although the California Public Records Act recognizes that certain confidential trade secret
information may be protected from disclosure, the City may not be in a position to establish
that the information that a prospective bidder submits is a trade secret. If a request is
made for information marked "Trade Secret" or "Business Secret," and the requester takes
legal action seeking release of the materials it believes does not constitute trade secret
information, by submitting a proposal, Consultant agrees to indemnify, defend and hold
harmless the City, its agents and employees, from any judgment, fines, penalties, and
award of attorneys fees awarded against the City in favor of the party requesting the
information, and any and all costs connected with that defense. This obligation to
indemnify survives the City's award of the contract. Consultant agrees that this
indemnification survives as long as the trade secret information is in the City's possession,
which includes a minimum retention period for such documents.
Section 10 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
10.1 Attorneys’ Fees. If a party to this Agreement brings any action, including arbitration or 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 San Mateo 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
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and EKI Environmental & Water, Inc. Page 15 of 19
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.
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 twelve (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 (12) 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 Richard Cho
("Contract Administrator"). All correspondence shall be directed to or through the Contract
Administrator or his or her designee.
10.10 Notices. All notices and other communications which are required or may be given under
this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given (i) when
received if personally delivered; (ii) when received if transmitted by telecopy, if received
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and EKI Environmental & Water, Inc. Page 16 of 19
during normal business hours on a business day (or if not, the next business day after
delivery) provided that such facsimile is legible and that at the time such facsimile is sent
the sending Party receives written confirmation of receipt; (iii) if sent for next day delivery
to a domestic address by recognized overnight delivery service (e.g., Federal Express);
and (iv) upon receipt, if sent by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested. In
each case notice shall be sent to the respective Parties as follows:
Consultant
EKI Water & Environmental
577 Airport Boulevard, Suite 500
Burlingame, CA 94010
City:
City Clerk
City of South San Francisco
400 Grand Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94080
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 all Exhibits attached hereto, and incorporated
herein, represents the entire and integrated agreement between City and Consultant and
supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements, either written or oral
pertaining to the matters herein.
10.13 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts and/or by facsimile or
other electronic means, and when each Party has signed and delivered at least one such
counterpart, each counterpart shall be deemed an original, and, when taken together with
other signed counterpart, shall constitute one Agreement, which shall be binding upon and
effective as to all Parties..
10.14 Construction. The headings in this Agreement are for the purpose of reference only and
shall not limit or otherwise affect any of the terms of this Agreement. The parties have had
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and EKI Environmental & Water, Inc. Page 17 of 19
an equal opportunity to participate in the drafting of this Agreement; therefore any
construction as against the drafting party shall not apply to this Agreement.
10.15 No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made solely for the benefit of the
Parties hereto with no intent to benefit any non-signatory third parties.
10.16 Cost Principles and Administrative Requirements.
A. Consultant agreed that the Contract Cost Principles and Procedures, 48 CFR, Federal
Acquisition Regulations System, Chapter 1, Part 31.000 et seq., shall be used to
determine the cost allowability of individual items not otherwise identified in the Scope of
Work.
B. Consultant also agrees to comply with federal procedures in accordance with 49 CFR,
Part 18, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to
State and Local Governments.
C. Any costs for which payment has been made to Consultant that are determined by
subsequent audit to be unallowable under 49CFR, Part 18 and 48 CFR, Federal
Acquisition Regulations System, Chapter 1, Part 31.000 et seq., are subject to repayment
by Consultant to City.
D. All subcontracts in excess of $25,000 shall contain the above provisions.
10.17 Rebates, Kickbacks or Other Unlawful Consideration. Consultant warrants that this
Agreement was not obtained or secured through rebates, kickbacks or other unlawful
consideration, either promised or paid to any City employee. For breach or violation of this
warranty, City shall have the right in its discretion; to terminate the Agreement without
liability; to pay only for the value of the work actually performed; or to deduct from the total
compensation stated in this Agreement; or otherwise recover the full amount of such
rebate, kickback or other unlawful consideration.
10.18 Statement of Compliance.
A. Consultant’s signature affixed herein, and dated, shall constitute a certification under
penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that Consultant has, unless
exempt, complied with the nondiscrimination program requirements of Government
Code Section 12990 and Title 2, California Administrative Code, Section 8103.
B. During the performance of this Agreement, Consultant and its subconsultants shall not
unlawfully discriminate, harass or allow harassment against any employee or applicant
for employment because of sex, race, color, ancestry, religious creed, national origin,
physical disability (including HIV and AIDS), mental disability, medical condition (e.g.,
cancer), age (over 40), marital status, and denial of family care leave. Consultant and
subconsultants shall insure that the evaluation and treatment of their employees and
applicants for employment are free from such discrimination and harassment.
Consultants and subconsultants shall comply with the provisions of the Fair
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and EKI Environmental & Water, Inc. Page 18 of 19
Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code §12990 (a-f) et seq.) and the applicable
regulations promulgated there under (California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section
7285 et seq.). The applicable regulations of the Fair Employment and Housing
Commission implementing Government Code §12990 (a-f), set forth in Chapter 5 of
Division 4 of Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations, are incorporated into this
Contract by reference and made a part hereof as if set forth in full. Consultant and its
subconsultants shall give written notice of their obligations under this clause to labor
organizations with which they have a collective bargaining or other Agreement.
C. The Consultant shall comply with regulations relative to Title VI (nondiscrimination in
federally-assisted programs of the Department of Transportation – Title 49 Code of
Federal Regulations, Part 21 – Effectuation of Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act).
Title VI provides that the recipients of federal assistance will implement and maintain a
policy of nondiscrimination in which no person in the State of California shall, on the
basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age, disability, be excluded from
participation in, denied the benefits of or subject to discrimination under any program or
activity by the recipients of federal assistance of their assignees and successors in
interest.
D. The Consultant, with regard to the work, performed by it during the Agreement shall act
in accordance with Title VI. Specifically, the Consultant shall not discriminate on the
basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age, or disability in selection and
retention of Subconsultants, including procurement of materials and leases of
equipment. The Consultant shall not participate either directly or indirectly in the
discrimination prohibited by Section 21.5 of the U.S. DOT’s Regulations, including
employment practices when the Agreement covers a program whose goal is
employment.
10.19 Debarment and Suspension Certification.
A. Consultant’s signature affixed herein, shall constitute a certification under penalty of
perjury under the laws of the State of California, that Consultant has complied with Title
2 CFR, Part 180, “OMB Guidelines to Agencies on Government wide Debarment and
Suspension (nonprocurement)”, which certifies that he/she or any person associated
therewith in the capacity of owner, partner, director, officer, or manager, is not currently
under suspension, debarment, voluntary exclusion, or determination of ineligibility by
any federal agency; has not been suspended, debarred, voluntarily excluded, or
determined ineligible by any federal agency within the past three (3) years; does not
have a proposed debarment pending; and has not been indicted, convicted, or had a
civil judgment rendered against it by a court of competent jurisdiction in any manner
involving fraud or official misconduct within the past three (3) years. Any exceptions to
this certification must be disclosed to City.
B. Exceptions will not necessarily result in denial of recommendation for award, but will be
considered in determining Consultant responsibility. Disclosures must indicate to whom
exceptions apply, initiating agency, and dates of action.
Consulting Services Agreement between [Rev:5.23.2017] April 24, 2019
City of South San Francisco and EKI Environmental & Water, Inc. Page 19 of 19
C. Exceptions to the Federal Government Excluded Parties List System maintained by the
General Services Administration are to be determined by the Federal Highway
Administration.
The Parties have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date.
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO Consultants
____________________________ _____________________________________
Mike Futrell, City Manager NAME:
Attest:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
____________________________
City Attorney
2729962.1
EXHIBIT B
COMPENSATION SCHEDULE
INSURANCE CERTIFICATES
EXHIBIT D
FORM 590
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISC
SPEAKER CARD 9
To address the City Council, please complete this card (and submit
it to the City Clerk
Speaker comments are limited to three (3) minutes
Please indicate which item you'd like to speal: on:
1 Public Commerits, or
2) Agenda Item
Name: Date:
Pronounced:
Address (optional