Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-04-21 e-packetSPECIAL MEETING CITY COUNCIL ~°~~x' S~~'~ OF THE ~. CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO ° P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, California 94083 Meeting to be held at: MUNICIPAL SERVICES I3UILDING COMMUNITY ROOM 33 ARROYO DRIVE SOUrhH SAN FRANCISCO, CA WEDNESDAY, APRIL 21, 2010 6:30 P.M. 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, the 21S` day of April, 2010, at 6:30 p.m., in the Municipal Services Building, Community Room, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, California. Purpose of the meeting: 1. Call to Order. 2. Roll Call. 3. Agenda Review 4. Public Comments -comments are limited to items on the Special Meeting Agenda. 5. Discussion relating to East of 101 Ramp Improvements. 6. Study Session on Climate Change. 7. Resolution Approving An Agreement Between the City of South San Francisco and the Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo. 8. Adjournment. City Clerk, City of South San Francisco DATE: April 21, 2010 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Terry White, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: EAST OF 101 RAMP IMPROVEMENTS RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council review, comment, and provide direction to staff on the alternative analysis and design of East of 101 Ramp Improvements. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The East of 101 Area ("Area") plan established land uses within the area and subsequently the City evaluated the traffic impacts of the plan for the road way net work in the .area. The first East of 101 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) conducted.. a traffic analysis for the area and was completed in 2001. The City council adopted this program which identified a number of key improvements to the roadway network Area. The 2001 analysis identified nineteen (19) projects and the cost associated with each project. This report was updated in 2003 and a total of thirty-two (32) projects were included in the revised report totaling a cost of $19,950,681. This report was the basis for adoption of an impact fee for all development in the Area. The East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) was adopted by City Council in 2005. The East of 101 Area plans had assumed a build out horizon of 2020. When the traffic analysis for 2020 horizon was completed (which includes Genentech Master Plan effects), several new projects were identified. An update of the East of 101 TIF-was completed which indicated a total cost of $32,363,3 80 is needed. The City Council adopted the revised TIF in 2007 and is currently in effect. To date, the City has $8,868,495 available in TIF funds for the specified projects in the plan. Of the approved TIF projects, five (5) are within Caltrans jurisdictions which include: l . Oyster Point 1 O1 North Bound on/off ramp and Oyster Point Blvd. modifications 2. Grand Avenue/101 North Bound off ramp by addition of a new exit lane. 3. Airport Boulevard/101 North Bound off and on ramp. 4. Produce Avenue/LTtah Avenue over crossing/Interchange at 101. 5. Miller Avenue/101 South Bound off ramp and restriction on truck traffic. Staff Report Subject: EAST OF 101 RAMP IMPROVEMENTS Page 2 of 2 The City drafted a Request for Proposal for design services for the East of 101 Ramp Improvements Project in March 2009. On April 29, 2009, staff received proposals from five (5) firms: BKF Engineers, Mark Thomas & Company, T.Y. Lin International, URS Corp, and Wood Roger. A panel consisting of engineering staff and a representative from C/CAG interviewed all five (5) fums. The interview panel selected two (2) firms for further interviews and made the final recommendation to select T.Y. Lin International and URS Corporation to undertake these projects. Both firms were ranked highest based on their proposal, project understanding, qualifications, interview, and experience. T.Y. Lin International's scope of work will include: • Prepare plan and specification for Oyster Point Blvd. off/on ramp modification in an amount of $377,411 and obtain Caltrans encroachment permit. • Prepare plan and specifications for Grand Ave. off ramp in an amount of $ 318,025 and obtain Caltrans encroachment permit. URS Corporations' scope of work will include: • Prepare plan and specification for Airport Blvd. on/offramp modification in an amount of $ 341,737 and obtain Caltrans encroachment permit. • Complete an alternative study to modify the Miller Ave. off ramp and its potential relocation in an amount of $ 90,424. • Complete feasibility study for Produce Ave. Overcrossing/Interchange in an amount of $'77,040. FUNDING These projects will be funded by East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee CONCLUSION Upon City Council review of the East of 101 Ramp Improvements Consultant Services Contracts, staff will incorporate any comments into the proposed Consultant Services Contracts for award at the upcoming City Council meeting. By: s - ~~ ~" Terry Director of Public Works Approv L C M. Nagel City Manager Attachments: Consultant Services Contracts US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER. Document Attachment A Scope of Work for South Airport Blvd Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 3 Applicable Standards :..................................................................................................... 3 Task 1.1 Preliminary Engineering ..................................................................................... 4 Base Mapping ................................................................................................................. 4 Surveying Services .......................................................................................................... 4 Right of Way Verification .............................................................................................. 4 Data Collection and Review ........................................................................................... 5 Travel Demand and Traffic Operations Analysis ........................................................... 5 Preliminary Geometric Refinements ............................................................................... 5 Preliminary Cost Estimate .............................................................................................. 5 Preliminary Utility Coordination .................................................................................... 5 Preliminary Right-of--Way Requirements ....................................................................... 6 Preliminary Stage Construction /Traffic Handling ........................................................ 6 Geometric Approval /Fact Sheets .................................................................................. 6 Task 1.2 Preliminary Engineering Evaluation Report ....................................................... 7 Draft and Final Preliminary Engineering Evaluation Report ......................................... 7 Task 1.3 Final Design ........................................................................................................ 7 Highway Design Plans .................................................................................................... 7 Specifications and Special Provisions ............................................................................ 8 Construction Quantities and Cost Estimate .................................................................... 8 Revised Right-of--Way Certification ............................................................................... 8 Revised Construction Schedule ...................................................................................... 9 QC Review ...................................................................................................................... 9 Independent Check .......................................................................................................... 9 Permits ............................................................................................................................ 9 Submittals ....................................................................................................................... 9 Geotechnical Services ..................................................................................................... 9 Storm Water Data Report (PS&E Phase) ...................................................................... 10 Hazardous Waste Soil Investigation ............................................................................. 10 Final Utility Coordination ............................................................................................. 13 Lane Closure Report ..................................................................................................... 14 Transportation Management Plan ................................................................................. 14 Permits .......................................................................................................................... 15 Cooperative Agreements Support ................................................................................. 15 Task 1.4 Other Services ................................................................................................... 15 Resident Engineer's File ............................................................................................... 15 Survey File .................................................................................................................... 16 Prepared by URS Corporation Last Updated March 26, 2010 Page 1 of 21 -1- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER Document Assumptions ........................................................................................................:......... 16 Task 1.5 Project Management ......................................................................................... 16 Conduct Project Management and Control :.................................................................. 17 Develop & maintain a Quality Control /Quality Assurance Plan ................................ 18 Conduct Project Administration ................................................................................... 18 Provide agency coordination ......................................................................................... 19 Attend meetings ............................................................................................................ 19 Task 1.6 Bid Support ....................................................................................................... 20 Task 1.7 Construction Support ........................................................................................ 20 Limitations .................................................................................................................... 21 Prepared by URS Corporation Last Updated March 26, 201.0 Page 2 of 21 -2- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER Document Introduction Traffic demands on the US 101/South Airport Blvd Northbound On- and Off- Ramps, including South Airport Boulevard between the ramp termini and Utah Avenue has increased over the years. A study prepared for the City of South San Francisco (CITY) by T.Y.Lin International in April 2007, recommends widening, realignment and re- channelization of these ramps and is the basis for this project. The CITY desires services to prepare a Caltrans Encroachment Permit and environmental review document for the needed operational improvements identified in TYLIN's study. This scope of work is to provide the City with transportation planning and design services for the US 101/South Airport Blvd North Bound On- and Off- Ramps, including South Airport Boulevard improvements between the ramp termini and Utah Avenue. Prepare a Caltrans Encroachment Permit and for the US 101/South Airport Blvd Northbound On- and Off- Ramps, including South Airport Boulevard improvements between the ramp termini and Utah Avenue. This task includes preparing Permit Engineering Evaluation Report (PEER) for US 101/South Airport Blvd Northbound On- and Off- Ramps Improvements, and the preparation of contract bid documents. Environmental clearance will be prepared by others. Applicable Standards: The plans, specifications and estimates shall be prepared in accordance with Caltrans' regulations, policies, procedures, manuals and standards. The following items are not all-inclusive, but are intended only to illustrate types of sources. • Roadway design shall be in accordance with the 2006/2008 edition of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, the English Highway Design Standards, Standards for English Plans, English Standard Specification, the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and the California Supplement to the MUTCD, and City of South San Francisco and San Mateo County standards. • Roadway plans shall be prepared in conformance with the 2008 editions of the Caltrans Plans Preparation Manual and the Caltrans CADD Users Manual. • Plans, specifications and estimates shall be prepared in conformance with the 2008/2009 editions of the Caltrans Ready to List (RTL) Guide. • Where applicable, bridge plans, specifications, and calculations shall be in accordance with the 2009 editions of the Caltrans Division of Structures (DOS) Bridge Design Details Manual, Bridge Design Aids Manual, Bridge Memos to Designers, Bridge Design Specifications, Improved Seismic Design Criteria for California Bridges, and Seismic Design Criteria (SDC). All surveys shall conform to the current Caltrans Surveys Manual. Datum for the survey is NAVD88 vertically and NAD 83 Epoch 1991.35 CCS Zone 3, horizontally. Prepared by URS Corporation Last Updated March 26, 2010 Page 3 of 21 -3- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER Document All phases of design of improvements which impact existing or proposed underground utilities shall conform to Caltrans' Policy on High and Low Risk Underground Facilities within Highway Rights of Way. • All right-of-way maps shall conform to the current Caltrans Right of Way Manual. Design of the Project shall be performed in accordance with Caltrans standards and practices. • Any exceptions to applicable design standards shall be approved by Caltrans via the process outlined in Caltrans Highway Design Manual and applicable memoranda and design bulletins published by Caltrans. • CONSULTANT will coordinate with Caltrans staff on the design and incorporation of Traffic Operations System (TOS) and ramp metering improvements. The detailed scope of services is described below. Task 1.1 PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING Base Mapping CONSULTANT shall prepare topographic mapping in accordance with current Caltrans photogrammetric procedures (i.e. Step "A+B+C" method.). A proposed flight plan shall be developed and the location of flight markers shall be submitted to Caltrans for approval (Step A). Ground control surveys shall be performed to lay flight markers and tie them into the state coordinate system (English). Results of the ground control (GPS) survey shall be documented in a Survey Report and submitted to Caltrans for approval (Step B). The site shall then be flown and ground control used to triangulate the mapping models. Caltrans approval of the triangulation calculations completes Step C and preparation of topographic mapping can commence. Mapping shall be prepared in MicroStation format, consistent with Caltrans drafting standards at a map scale of 1 "=50'. Color orthographic photos will be prepared for presentations and development of technical studies. Surveying Services CONSULTANT will provide topographic design surveying services for the project. CONSULTANT will review the available mapping and will perform additional field surveys necessary to confirm mapping accuracy, topographic surveys or complete design, including but not limited to cross sections, verifying utilities and drainage facilities, pavement elevations and locations, potholing, boring locations, conforms, vertical clearances, obstructions, tree survey locations, lighting fixtures, fences, retaining walls, drainage swales and ditches and any other feature necessary to complete the design. Right of Way Verification Prepare Right of Way mapping necessary to confirm that proposed improvements are within State or City right-of-way. This work shall include review of available title reports, map research, field survey verification of existing right of way and property lines within the allocated survey budget. Prepared by URS Corporation Page 4 of 21 Last Updated March 26, 2010 -4- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER Document Data Collection and Review Consultant will review additional information regarding the proposed project provided by the CITY and other agencies and consultants. In addition, previously collected data will be reviewed and utilized. Specifically, Consultant will: • Obtain and review additional information from projects within the study vicinity. The purpose of this review is to identify issues impacting project costs. • Conduct environmental research and review. Travel Demand and Traffic Operations Analysis CONSULTANT will rely on the peak hour counts and 2035 travel demand forecasts generated by the traffic impact fee study update that is currently in progress. Consult will conduct operational analysis based on the forecasted traffic demands and SYNCHRO model to evaluate traffic operational conditions. Based on the analysis consultant will provide recommendations on the lane geometries at the intersections to provide acceptable levels of service. Consultant will prepare technical memorandum summarizing the forecasted traffic demands and operational analysis and submit to City staff for review and approval. Preliminary Geometric Refinements CONSULTANT will develop the preliminary geometrics based on the schematics that were included in the. RFP. CONSULTANT will define the improvements in sufficient detail to obtain agency consensus on the preferred build alternative that will be discussed in the PEER and further detailed in final design during the PS&E phase. Preliminary Cost Estimate CONSULTANT shall prepare preliminary cost estimate to provide and assess construction, and utility relocation costs to establish funding boundaries for the project. Costs will be based on mapping and design data developed by previous studies and individual cost items quantified. Existing and proposed ground surfaces shall be modeled to enable earthwork quantities to be approximated. Potential cost saving measures, and utility relocation alternatives shall be investigated. The preliminary cost estimate will be in English units and presented in the Caltrans 6- pageformat. Preliminary Utility Coordination Utility coordination for the project will follow the CALTRANS ABC process. CONSULTANT will prepare letters for the CITY's signature requesting existing utility information from utility owners within the project vicinity. CONSULTANT will update the existing utility mapping for the Project area, identify utilities that could potentially conflict with the proposed improvements, and develop preliminary utility relocation plans that will be used as the basis of discussions with the affected utility owners. It is assumed that final utility relocation plans will be prepared by each of the affected utility owners. Prepared by URS Corporation Page 5 of 21 Last Updated March 26, 2010 -5- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER Document The CITY shall be the point of contact with private utility companies and for the preparation of agreements. CONSULTANT shall provide support as needed, including but not limited to: Preparing submittal memos, drafting agreements, creating/updating contact lists and attending coordination meetings. CONSULTANT will assess preliminary utility relocation costs for the PEER that will be confirmed by the affected utility owners during the final PS&E phase once the utility relocation plans are developed and finalized by the utility owners. The utility base mapping will be in English units. Preliminary Right-of-Way Requirements It is assumed that no Right of Way acquisition will be needed for this project. CONSULTANT will coordinate right-of-way requirements for the preferred build alternative and prepare the Right of Way Data Sheet per the above assumption. A certified R/W professional will prepare the R/W Cost Estimate and the R/W Data Sheet to be included in the PEER. Preliminary Stage Construction /Traffic Handling CONSULTANT will prepare conceptual plans outlining the stage construction and traffic handling requirements to verify that the project is constructible, that traffic impacts are minimized, and public safety is not compromised. Roadway improvements will be coordinated with existing facilities to assess whether detours are needed to construct the improvements. To ensure that traffic operations are not impacted, detour plans will seek to preserve the same lane capacity as the existing roadway system. CONSULTANT will assist CALTRANS to prepare a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) Data Sheet for inclusion with the PEER. Geometric Approval /Fact Sheets Detailed geometrics of the preferred build alternative will be developed. Geometric refinements will be investigated to assess if any non-standard features can be eliminated. CONSULTANT will prepare the CALTRANS DIB 78 Design Checklist for the Development of Geometric Plans. Once preliminary concurrence on the preferred build alternative geometrics is obtained from CALTRANS, design exceptions for non-standard features that require preparation of a Mandatory and/or Advisory Fact Sheet will be documented by the CONSULTANT in draft Fact Sheets. Coordination meetings with Caltrans Geometricians will be held to discuss non-standard features prior to submittal of the Fact Sheets. Subsequent to coordination meetings, Fact Sheets will be updated and submitted to CALTRANS HQ geometrician and CALTRANS District 4 for review and comment, together with the Draft PEER. CONSULTANT will address any comments on the draft Fact Sheets and submit final Fact Sheets for Caltrans approval, prior to submittal of the Final PEER. Consultant will coordinate with the proposed improvements planned for the NB US 101 off-ramp at Grand Ave. The following is an estimated list of the major submittals for Task 2.1 • Geometric Approval /Fact Sheets • Preliminary Cost Estimate Prepared by URS Corporation Last Updated March 26, 2010 Page 6 of 21 -6- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER Document • Survey Topo Files • Right of Way and Property Lines Task 1.2 PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING EVALUATION REPORT Draft and Final Preliminary Engineering Evaluation Report The CONSULTANT will prepare a draft PEER that documents the need for the Project, summarizes key points from the draft environmental studies, and summarizes scope, cost, schedule and overall impacts to enable an informed decision to be made to proceed toward Draft Categorical Exemption (Draft CE by City). Following review of the Draft PEER and the draft CE by Caltrans and other agencies, the CONSULTANT will revise the draft PEER. The Final CE (by City) is then approved; first by CALTRANS and then by the FHWA to reach environmental clearance. The CONSULTANT will then submit the final PEER to CALTRANS for Project approval. Task 1.3 FINAL DESIGN This task develops draft plans; specifications and quantities for Final PS&E (100%) submittal design completion, and includes responding to comments received from the agencies reviewing preliminary design submittals and identifying and resolving conflicts. CONSULTANT will provide written responses to Preliminary Design review comments received for all documents and provide justification for each comment, which is not incorporated. CONSULTANT will hold meetings with the CITY, CALTRANS and other agencies to resolve issues from Preliminary Design review. CONSULTANT will incorporate the agreed upon comments received from the CITY, CALTRANS, and other agencies, perform final design and prepare Final Design 100% documents. The submittal will consist of all design documents that are required for the Project. CONSULTANTS' 100% PS&E submittal will include, but is not limited to, the following: Highway Design Plans A set of highway design plans will contain some or all of the following sheets. CONSULTANT will use the following code letters and sheet names and arrange sheets in the order shown. ID Code Letter Sheet Name -- Title Sheet X Typical Cross Sections CS Construction Staking Survey Control Data K Key Map and Line Index L Layouts C Construction Details Prepared by URS Corporation Last Updated March 26, 2010 Page 7 of 21 -~- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER Document WPC Water Pollution Control Plans and Details EC Erosion Control Plans and Details G Contour Grading/Pavement Elevations D Drainage Plan, Profiles, Details, and Quantities U Utility Plans SC Stage Construction Plans TH Traffic Handling Plans DE Detour Plans CS Construction Area Signs and Quantities PD/PDD/PDQ Pavement Delineation Plans, Details, and Quantities S/SD/SQ Sign Plans, Details, and Quantities Q Summary of Quantities E Signal, Lighting, TOS, Sign Illumination, etc. Specifications and Special Provisions CONSULTANT will incorporate all agreed upon comments into the Special Provisions and prepare Special Provisions which are specific to the Project for use with CALTRANS' Standard Specifications, latest edition. SSP's will be submitted in MS Word format. CONSULTANT will assure that every construction work item for the Project has a method of payment stated in the Specifications and is accounted for in the Construction Cost Estimate. Construction Quantities and Cost Estimate CONSULTANT will update the Construction Quantity Estimate submitted in preliminary engineering task. CONSULTANT will submit quantity calculations showing all sketches, diagrams and dimensions necessary for their use by field inspectors. All quantity calculations will be independently checked. CONSULTANT will update the Construction Cost Estimate submitted in preliminary engineering design task. Revised Right-of-Way Certification CONSULTANT will update Project right-of-way and utility requirements, update the Right-of-Way Certification and submit to CALTRANS' Right-of-Way for final review. Prepared by URS Corporation Page 8 of 21 Last Updated March 26, 2010 -$- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER Document Revised Construction Schedule CONSULTANT will update the Construction Schedule that was prepared for the preliminary engineering phase and will promptly notify the CITY of any differences between the update and the Construction Schedule for the Project in the most recent CITY's schedule. CONSULTANT will coordinate all mitigation, highway and structures construction schedule information to prepare the Project Construction Schedule. QC Review CONSULTANT will perform an in-house Final Design - QC review. Independent Check CONSULTANT will perform an independent check of all drawings and calculations per CALTRANS Standard procedure. CONSULTANT will prepare independent quantity calculations and review the special provisions independently. Permits For all permits required from permitting agencies, CONSULTANT will prepare draft documents and supply required Project design and construction information to the CITY and CALTRANS to ensure conditions are resolved, and include these permits as part of the Bid Documents. All PS&E documents will be consistent with permit requirements. Submittals CONSULTANT assumes a total of 3 submittals of the PS&E package will be required as shown below to get the final approval of the PEER: • 65% Design - PS&E Unchecked -Submittal to the City • 95% Design - PS&E Checked -Submittal to the City and to Caltrans • 100% Final Design - PS&E Bid Set -Submittal to the City and to Caltrans Geotechnical Services CONSULTANT will prepare a technical memorandum consistent with the requirements of a Caltrans Geotechnical Design and Materials Report (GDMR) for the proposed pavement improvements. The proposed roadway sections include approximately 800 feet of U.S. 101 Northbound off-ramp at South Airport Boulevard and about 500 feet of City street (South Airport Boulevard) (See attached Figure 5). The GDMR technical memorandum will be prepared in accordance with Caltrans Guidelines for Geotechnical Design Reports, version 1.3, December 2006, as well as Topic 114, Materials Report in the Highway Design Manual, pertaining to the design of structural pavement sections. Specific tasks and/or work items: Review as-built data including LOTBs, laboratory soil test results, Geotechnical Design Reports, Materials Reports, if available. Prepared by URS Corporation Last Updated March 26, 2010 Page 9 of 21 -9- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER Document • Engineering analysis for the design of structural pavement sections based on a subgrade R-value = 5; • Discuss construction considerations for the proposed pavement improvement. Submit 5 draft copies and 10 final copies of GDMR technical memorandum. Assumptions: • Field explorations or laboratory testing are not required. • Life cycle analysis of pavement alternative is not required. • Design traffic index is to be provided by others. • Caltrans/CITY will provide Geotechnical Design Reports and Materials Reports from their project files. Storm Water Data Report (PS&E Phase) A Storm Water Data Report (SWDR) is required on all projects with improvements within CALTRANS highway right-of-way and focuses on the storm water quality issues to construct the project and implementation of appropriate temporary and permanent Best Management Practices (BMPs). The CONSULTANT will prepare a final SWDR (PS&E Phase) summarizing project impacts to water quality, general mitigation measures, and recommend best management practices. The SWDR (PS&E Phase) will address only the impacts from roadway improvements and CONSULTANT will utilize CALTRANS standard SWDR checklists. CONSULTANT will address the needs for erosion control measures and recommend BMPs for the Project. It is assumed that the right-of-way within the current project limits is sufficient to provide room for potential permanent treatment BMPs. CONSULTANT will consider various types of BMP measures utilizing CALTRANS Storm Water Manuals and Checklists. CONSULTANT will recommend appropriate BMP measures such as grassy swales, detention basins, or infiltration basins, to minimize or mitigate water quality impacts. CONSULTANT will assess the right-of-way needs to address the required BMP applications. The SWDR (PS&E Phase) scope is based on the following deliverables: • One draft report • One revised draft report • One final report • Written responses to comments Hazardous Waste Soil Investigation For this project, an Initial Site Assessment will not be performed However, CONSULTANT will contract with Environmental Data Resources (EDR) to perform a historical database, aerial photograph, and topographical map survey search. Prepared by URS Corporation Last Updated March 26, 2010 Page 10 of 21 -10- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER Document CONSULTANT will also perform a search of publically-available records sources and perform adrive-by reconnaissance of the study limits will be performed to verify that the right-of-way directly adjacent to the freeway (where limited project construction activities might occur) does not contain any obvious signs of use that might be associated with contamination or hazardous materials. Based on the results of this preliminary review, modification to the proposed sampling plan may be required. This historical review will be briefly documented in the final hazardous materials site investigation report. In addition, the Caltrans Initial Site Assessment checklist will be completed. A preliminary search of the State Water Resources Control Board Geotracker database has indicated that there are a significant. number of open, leaking underground storage tank (LUST) sites in the immediate vicinity of the project site. CONSULTANT's proposed sampling plan assumes that sampling for petroleum hydrocarbons and related constituents will be required, due to the presence of these LUST sites. Based on the description of the project it is assumed that no new right of way is required for this project. CONSULTANT will prepare a workplan and Health and Safety Plan for CALTRANS' review and approval. CONSULTANT will perform borings to collect soil samples for initial hazardous materials testing. CONSULTANT will perform laboratory testing for constituents as described below and prepare a Hazardous Materials Site Investigation Report that will be submitted to CALTRANS for review and approval. The evaluation results of initial hazardous materials soil investigation would be used for the following identification purposes: • Unrestricted soil to be used on-site or off-site for fill. • Restricted soil to be used on-site for fill under the CALTRANS ADL impacted soil variance, from the DTSC, in force during the construction period. • Hazardous waste that must be removed from the site for off-site disposal at a hazardous waste landfill. • Non-hazardous soils to be taken off-site for disposal due to excess soils generated by the project or soils that cannot be used for fill due to its poor compaction characteristics. • Notification of on-site workers, if potential contaminant levels warrant it. • Guidance for development of follow-up soil and groundwater investigations, if needed. For the purpose of this Scope of Work, CONSULTANT will collect samples and perform laboratory testing for lead & CAM 17 Metals using EPA Test Method 6010, and 200.7, PH using EPA Test Method 9045, 5 Gas Oxygenates using EPA Test Method 8260/624, TPH Gas using EPA Test Method 80156, PCBs & Pesticides using EPA Test Method 8081/8082, asbestos using PLM, and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as diesel and motor oil (TPH-d/mo) using EPA Test Method 80156, WET, DI-WET, and TCLP procedures are assumed to be necessary on up to 40%, 40%, and 20% of samples initially evaluated for lead, respectively. Groundwater samples will not be collected. Because it is not known at this time where fill material may be placed, an evaluation of depth to groundwater to allow compliance with the DTSC lead variance is not included in this scope of work, and additional groundwater evaluation may be required prior to completion of soil reuse construction drawings. Prepared by URS Corporation Page 11 of 21 Last Updated March 26, 2010 -11- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER Document Assumptions: • Widening of approximately 600' on South Airport Blvd, on both the northern and southern edge of traveled way • Widening of an approximately 100' stretch of the current exit ramp, where it bends southward from 101 towards South Airport Blvd. • Sampling at 6 inches, 12 inches, and 18 inches, 24 inches, and 36 inches at all locations. • One boring approximately every 200-300 feet along each edge of travelled way • Based on the preceding assumptions, up to 9 borings will be advanced, with 45 samples collected, which will be analyzed according to the schedule detailed below. • All samples (40) will be analyzed for lead. 10% (5) of these samples will be analyzed for Cam 17 metals, which includes lead. • Up to 40% of the number of samples initially analyzed for lead will be analyzed for lead using WET and DI-WET procedures (18 each), and up to 20% of the number of samples initially analyzed for lead will be analyzed for lead using TCLP procedures (9). • Up to 10 % of the number of samples analyzed will be analyzed for asbestos (5). • Up to 10% of the number of samples analyzed will be analyzed for pH (5). • Up to 10% of the number of samples analyzed from the top 6 inches of soil will be analyzed for PCBs & Pesticides (1). • Due to the known presence of petroleum contamination, up to 20% of the number of samples analyzed from below the top 6 inches of soil will be analyzed for 5 gas oxygenates, TPH_d/mo, and TPH-G (7 each). • Caltrans will provide encroachment permits and waive all fees for field work within State right-of-way. Access permits to private properties will also be provided by the CITY. • Off-Site Management of up to 1 drum assumes that Caltrans and/or the CITY will act as generator and obtain and provide EPA Generator ID. CONSULTANT will assist in the sampling, profiling, and arranging for disposal of drums but will not obtain EPA Generator ID. • CONSULTANT will be responsible for the traffic control required for all borings • Analysis of samples for constituents not listed above, or at quantities above those listed above, not included in this Scope of Work. This includes sampling resulting from any findings during the preparation of the Initial Site Assessment. • The hazardous waste soil investigation scope is based on the following deliverables: Prepared by URS Corporation Page 12 of 21 Last Updated March 26, 2010 -12- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER Document • One draft report for unchecked submittal (15 copies) • One final report for checked submittal (15 copies) • Written responses to comments No sampling within right of way acquisition areas, or right of way certifications, is included. If requested by the City, sampling within right of way could be provided as an additional scope of work item. Final Utility Coordination CONSULTANT will be responsible for interfacing utility design coordination with the CITY, CALTRANS' Right-of-Way Utility Coordinator and CALTRANS' Right-of-Way Project Coordinator. CONSULTANT will perform utility surveys to .accurately map the existing utilities in the project area, positively locating underground utilities that potentially conflict with the proposed improvements, and developing relocation plans for conflicting utilities that will be coordinated with the utility owners. This level of effort will minimize construction costs and ensure the correct placement of the proposed improvements. CONSULTANT will: • Review and update as-built utility information for the project area that was obtained during the preliminary design phase • Review and update existing utility mapping • After the preliminary design phase, prepare Pothole Request Maps identifying locations where positive location (horizontally and vertically) of existing underground utilities is needed in accordance with CALTRANS Policy on High and Low Risk Underground Facilities within Highway Rights-of-Way • After the preliminary design phase, arrange for up to twenty (20) underground utility locations to be positively located in the field by potholing or other acceptable method approved by CALTRANS • Confirm potential utility conflicts based upon positive location data collected from the field and revise the preliminary utility relocation plans developed during the preliminary design phase • At the Final Unchecked PS&E milestone, prepare "B" letters for CITY's signature to be sent to the utility owners with the revised preliminary utility relocation plans • Coordinate with the utility owner who will prepare their own utility relocation plans and costs. Review utility relocation plans and costs prepared by the utility owners. • Prepare final notices ("C" letters) for CITY's signature to be sent to the utility owners confirming the request to relocate utility facilities • Attend meetings with affected utility companies (up to 5 meetings assumed) Prepared by URS Corporation Last Updated March 26, 2010 Page 13 of 21 -13- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER Document • Assist the CITY in the preparation and execution of any needed agreements with utility owners that are required to relocate their facilities Provides copies of the "A", "B" and "C" letter correspondence to CALTRANS as part of the Utility Certification process • Communicate with CALTRANS Right-of-Way Utility Coordinator and CALTRANS' Right-of-Way Project Coordinator to ensure inclusion of the proper utility permit requirements and other utility data for R/W certification and design • Prepare a Utility Certification CONSULTANT assumes that all needed utility relocation plans will be prepared by the owner of the utility requiring relocation and that the utility owners will undertake the work to relocate their facilities with their own forces. CONSULTANT assumes there are no utility longitudinal encroachments into the highway right-of-way for the Project that would require coordination with CALTRANS to grant exceptions to their policy on longitudinal encroachments. The final utility coordination scope is based on the following deliverables: • Pothole Request Maps • Results of field verification of underground utilities • "B" Letters for CITY's signature with preliminary utility relocation plans • Final notices "C" Letters for CITY's signature • Utility Certification at Final PS&E Lane Closure Report CONSULTANT will collect 7 day 24 hour traffic counts along the mainline and on/off- ramps from CALTRANS where closures are required, including local streets. CONSULTANT will perform lane closure calculations per CALTRANS' standard methodology and submit a Lane Closure Report to CALTRANS for review. This will also include Late Lane Closure Pickup and Road User Delay calculations. The lane closure report scope is based on the following deliverables: • One draft report for Final Unchecked submittal • One revised draft report for Final Checked submittal • One final report for 95% submittal • Written responses to comments Transportation Management Plan CONSULTANT will prepare a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) in accordance with CALTRANS current requirements. The TMP is a specialized program tailored to prevent and mitigate the impacts of a construction project by applying a variety of techniques including Motorist Information, Incident Management, Construction Prepared by URS Corporation Page 14 of 21 Last Updated March 26, 2010 -14- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER Document Strategies, and Public Information Strategies. The major objectives of the TMP are to maintain efficient and safe movement of vehicles through the construction zone; and to provide intensive public awareness of potential impacts in the vicinity of the project site. The transportation management plan scope is based on the following deliverables: • One draft report for Final Unchecked submittal • One final report for Final Checked submittal • Written responses to comments Permits CONSULTANT will prepare drafts of all permit applications and correspondence for the Project that will be reviewed by CALTRANS' Project Development. The Preliminary Design submittal will be used in preparing necessary environmental assessments and/or conceptual re-vegetation plans to accompany draft permit applications. Permits include those required for conducting all field investigations and final permits for construction. The permit applications will include all attachments and exhibits and will fulfill all applicable conditions identified in the permits to meet CALTRANS requirements as indicated in the RTL Guide, and Cover Memorandum Attachment A. Other applicable permits may include California Department of Fish and Game, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the California Water Quality Control Board, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, and San Mateo County drilling permits, and others. After receipt of permits from the permitting agencies, CONSULTANT will review conditions of all Project permits, determine if conditions can be accommodated in the Project, and update the design documents accordingly, if necessary. The permits scope is based on the following deliverables: -Draft permit applications (5 copies) -Final permit applications (5 copies) Cooperative Agreements Support CONSULTANT will assist the CITY to prepare drafts of all Cooperative Agreements needed for the Project that will be reviewed by CALTRANS' Project Development. Final Cooperative Agreements will be prepared based on a consensus reaching process between the CITY and CALTRANS. Task 1.4 OTHER SERVICES Resident Engineer's File CONSULTANT will prepare and submit a Resident Engineer's file in accordance with CALTRANS' Project Development Activities Guide, OSFP Information and Procedures Guide, Bridge Memo to Designers and include all project relevant items identified in the Resident Engineer's file check-off list. Prepared by URS Corporation Page 15 of 21 Last Updated March 26, 2010 -15- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER Document CONSULTANT will insure that the appropriate Resident Engineers' File items are in ENGINEERING SERVICES format and assure consistency of all the design documents. The following items, as applicable, will also be included: • Copies of final permits and agreements • Design cross sections • Slope staking notes • Final Design and Materials Report • Final Drainage Report • R/W Hardcopy Maps including information on Temporary Construction Easements and Permits to Enter • Utility correspondence including contact information, ,record maps, and relocation plans (if available) Survey File CONSULTANT will prepare a survey file and submit it to CALTRANS Project Development and the CITY. The Survey File is due to CALTRANS 30 days prior to construction contract advertisement. The Survey File submittal will conform to CALTRANS' Project Development Activities Guide and include: • Control traverses and bench circuits used to design the project. • Alignment traverses of all center lines. Assumptions • The scope assumes that no structural widening will be required to accommodate the proposed improvements and therefore an Advance Planning Study (APS) will not be required. • It is assumed that design of overhead sign structures will meet the criteria established in the Caltrans Standard Plans and additional overhead sign structural design work is not required. • The necessary environmental document and all its supporting technical studies (air quality, noise, biological, cultural, visual, water quality and hydraulics, geotechnical, hazardous soil, etc..) will be prepared by the CITY • CONSULTANT assumes that the PS&E for the Highway Landscaping and Irrigation for the Project will be done by others at a later date and under a separate construction contract. The landscaping planning that will be done as part of this contract will be minimal and will include the minimum design necessary to determine Irrigation Crossovers and Maintenance Vehicle Pullout locations. • The scope assumes RW acquisitions and title reports are not needed. Task 1.5 PROJECT MANAGEMENT Prepared by URS Corporation Last Updated March 26, 2010 Page 16 of 21 -16- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER Document CONSULTANT, under this Agreement, will provide project management for each task for the entire duration of the schedule. Management activities will consist of administration, coordination, attending meetings and quality control as stated in the following: Conduct Project Management and Control • Supervise, coordinate and monitor activities and product development for conformance with CALTRANS and CITY standards and policies. • Assure compliance with other codes and standards as acceptable to Caltrans and approved by the CITY. • Prior to start of any work, CONSULTANT shall interface with Caltrans staff to assure format consistency of all Deliverable(s). • Coordinate in-house design staff and sub-consultants to assure free and timely flow of information for each task activity. • Maintain Project files in accordance with CALTRANS' Uniform Filing System. • Not perform any extra work without prior written authorization from the CITY. • Coordinate the planning and design effort with project team and the . following: - The CITY - CALTRANS. - San Mateo County and the various cities along the corridor - Utility Companies. • Prepare a detailed Critical Path Method (CPM) schedule and submit an updated electronic file schedule on a monthly basis. • Prepare for and attend the following meetings: - Monthly PDT meetings. CONSULTANT will arrange meetings, provide discussion material, and prepare minutes (up to 7 meetings assumed) - Bi-weekly project coordination conference calls (up to 28 conference calls) - As needed coordination meetings with the CITY, CALTRANS, and other agencies to resolve technical issues (up to 14 meetings assumed) - If needed, prepare and submit meeting agenda. Prepare and distribute draft meeting minutes within ten (10) working days after each meeting allowing two weeks for receipt of any comments. Prepare and distribute final meeting minutes Prepared by URS Corporation Last Updated March 26, 2010 Page 17 of 21 -17- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER Document incorporating relevant comments received on draft meeting minutes. - Meetings beyond the number of meetings listed above are considered out of scope. • Prepare and maintain a Data. Request Log. • Prepare and maintain a Submittals Registry including scheduled and actual submittal dates, review periods and receipt of comments, • Prepare and submit monthly invoices with progress reports. • Establish and implement a quality control procedure for planning and design activities, perform in-house quality control reviews for each task, and submit deliverables to the CITY for review in accordance with the approved schedule. Develop & maintain a Quality Control /Quality Assurance Plan CONSULTANT shall develop and establish a Quality Control /Quality Assurance (QC/QA) Plan and Procedures and conduct independent Quality Review of reports, plans, specifications, estimate and design documents. The CONSULTANT shall • Assure promulgation of and strict adherence to the QC/QA Plan and Procedures in the conduct of the work. Sub-CONSULTANTs can either subscribe to the CONSULTANT'S QC/QA Plan or have their own QC/QA Plan approved by the CONSULTANT. • Convene and document Quality Reviews, and make findings and corrective actions available for CITY's review. Documentation of compliance with Project QA/QC plan is provided to the CITY upon request or during project audits. • Assure quality Control procedures are strictly adhered to and properly documented throughout the entire course of the work. • Assure widest dissemination of information to all affected disciplines and individuals. • Perform a thorough review and verification of corrections by an Independent Reviewer are performed. • Documentation of compliance with Project QA/QC plan is provided to the CITY upon request or during project audits. • CONSULTANT conducts periodic reviews /audits to verify compliance to above requirements. • Take corrective actions to rectify findings of non-compliance by a QA/QC audit. Conduct Project Administration CONSULTANT will perform the following project administrative duties: Prepared by URS Corporation Last Updated March 26, 2010 Page 18 of 21 -18- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER Document • Prepare and submit monthly progress reports that will identify work performed on each task the preceding month. Percent complete compared to percentages billed for each task will be shown. • Prepare a monthly summary of total charges made to each task. This summary shall present the contract budget for each task, reallocated budget amounts, prior billing amount, current billing, total billed to date, and a total percent billed to date. • Provide a summary table indicating the amount of firm participation each month based upon current billing and total billed to date. • Provide a monthly invoice by task that will present charges by staff member at agreed to hourly rates, expense charges, and sub-consultant charges. Support documentation for Consultant direct expenses and sub- consultant charges will be attached. Provide agency coordination CONSULTANT will perform coordination with Agencies as required for project development. Coordinate planning and design effort with team members, including the following: - San Mateo C/CAG - San Mateo County - Caltrans - Affected utility companies - The CITY - FHWA (as needed) - Environmental Resource Agencies (as required) - Local Water Agency Attend meetings CONSULTANT will attend the following meetings: • Workshop meetings with the CITY, Caltrans and other agencies to resolve outstanding issues. • Planning and design coordination meetings with members of the project team • Design coordination meetings with in-house design team and sub- consultants. • Conduct regular monthly Project Development Meetings (PDT). The CITY will determine the location for the meetings. • Conduct milestone update meetings with the CITY's committees and executive level Caltrans meeting. Required activities include the following: • Preparation and submittal of agenda for PDT Meetings. Prepared by URS Corporation Last Updated March 26, 2010 Page 19 of 21 -19- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER Document • Preparation and submittal of Status of Submittals Register, Design Log, Data Request Log, and Schedule updates. • Preparation and distribution of meeting minutes within ten (10) days after each PDT Meetings. Task 2.6 Deliverables • Detailed CPM design schedule • Meeting agendas and draft/final meeting minutes • Data Request Log • Submittal Registry • Invoices and progress reports • QA/QC Plan Task 1.6 BID SUPPORT It is assumed that construction contract advertisement will be the responsibility of the CITY. CONSULTANT will provide the following bidding support services to support the Project advertisement and bidding phase: • Provide information to the CITY for responses to bidders' .questions regarding the bid documents • Attend the Pre-bid Meeting, if required • Prepare one addenda for minor revisions to the bid documents that are approved by Caltrans and the CITY. • Review bid estimates, compare to engineers estimate.and make an award recommendation Task 1.7 CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT Construction administration will be undertaken by the CITY. CONSULTANT shall provide design support services during construction of the Project as described below on an "as needed" basis. For the purposes of this Scope of Services the construction schedule is assumed to last 180 calendar days. The following types of services are anticipated under this task: • Respond to Requests For Information (RFI) from the Construction Manager and maintain log of RFI responses (up to 30 RFIs) • Provide technical support and design advice to the CITY and Construction Manager, as requested. • Conduct site visits and attend construction meetings (up to 10 meetings and/or field visits). • Review shop drawings and other contractor technical submittals for conformance with bid documents, and recommend for acceptance, denial or resubmittal (up to 30 submittals) Prepared by URS Corporation Page 20 of 21 Last Updated March 26, 2010 -20- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -PEER Document • Prepare as-built plans. Construction Manager shall provide redlines of revised bid plans to CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT shall update as-built plans in compliance with Caltrans current CAD standards and submit hard-copy (11" x 17") plans for CM signature. CONSULTANT shall submit approved as-built plans to the CITY and Caltrans in hard copy and electronic (TIF) format. Limitations The following tasks are not included in this Scope of Services: • Performance of a field or construction surveys. • Conduct biological preconstruction surveys in accordance with special provisions. • Conduct archaeological monitoring in accordance with special provisions. • Collection and/or analysis of environmental samples including for lead and/or asbestos • Establishment of a construction trailer • Construction support services beyond the 180 days Prepared by URS Corporation Last Updated March 26, 2010 Page 21 of 21 -21- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -Miller Ave Off-Ramp Feasibility Study Attachment A Scope of Work for Miller Avenue Off-Ramp Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 2 Applicable Standards :..................................................................................................... 2 Project Management ....................................................................................................... 4 Project Administration .................................................................................................... 4 Data Collection and Review ........................................................................................... 5 Base Mapping ................................................................................................................. 5 Kick Off Meeting ............................................................................................................ 5 Alternatives Assessment ................................................................................................. 5 Travel Demand Forecast and Traffic Operations Analysis ............................................. 6 Conceptual Cost Estimate ............................................................................................... 7 Coordination Meetings and City Council Study Session ................................................ 7 Feasibility Study Report ................................................................................................. 7 Final Cost Estimate ......................................................................................................... 7 Final Coordination Meeting ............................................................................................ 7 Milestone Schedule ......................................................................................................... 7 List of Submittals ............................................................................................................ 7 List of Assumptions ........................................................................................................ 7 8Prepared by URS Corporation Last Updated March 26, 2010 Page 1 of 8 _22_ US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -Miller Ave Off-Ramp Feasibility Study Introduction Traffic demands throughout the City of South San Francisco is projected to increase over the next few years. As a result, the City of South San Francisco (CITY) has identified the need for improvements along US 101/Miller Ave off-ramp and the need for a new east-west overcrossing across US 101 connecting Utah Ave on the East side of US 101 to San Mateo Ave on the west side of US 101. A study prepared for the City of South San Francisco (CITY) by T.Y.Lin International in April 2007, recommends widening of the Miller Ave off-ramp. Under this scope of work, Consultant will also provide the CITY with planning and design services needed to prepare conceptual plans, cost estimates and a feasibility analysis, for the following: Improvements to the US 101 .Southbound Off Ramp to Miller Avenue: This task includes preparing a Feasibility Study to identify study objectives, viable alternatives for further study, conceptual costs for funding requirements, and seek agency consensus on the next steps for project development of improvements to the US 101 Southbound Off Ramp to Miller Avenue. Alternatives to be evaluated include modifications to the existing off-ramp geometry, reconfiguration of the NB on-ramp, Dubuque Avenue, SB off-ramp and the Grand Ave/Airport Blvd intersection, and limiting or eliminating truck traffic on the off-ramp. Applicable Standards: The plans, specifications and estimates shall be prepared in accordance with Caltrans' regulations, policies, procedures, manuals and standards. The following items are not all-inclusive, but are intended only to illustrate types of sources. Roadway design shall be in accordance with the 2006/2008 edition of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, the English Highway Design Standards, Standards for English Plans, English Standard Specification, the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and the California Supplement to the MUTCD, and City of South San Francisco and San Mateo County standards. • Roadway plans shall be prepared in conformance with the 2008 editions of the Caltrans Plans Preparation Manual and the Caltrans CADD Users Manual. • Plans, specifications and estimates shall be prepared in conformance with the 2008/2009 editions of the Caltrans Ready to List (RTL) Guide. • Where applicable, bridge plans, specifications, and calculations shall be in accordance with the 2009 editions of the Caltrans Division of Structures (DOS) Bridge Design Details Manual, Bridge Design Aids Manual, Bridge Memos to Designers, Bridge Design Specifications, Improved Seismic Design Criteria for California Bridges, and Seismic Design Criteria (SDC). BPrepared by URS Corporation Last Updated March 26, 2010 Page 2 of 8 -23- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -Miller Ave Off-Ramp Feasibility Study • All surveys shall conform to the current Caltrans Surveys Manual. Datum fOr the survey is NAVD88 vertically and NAD 83 Epoch 1991.35 CCS Zone 3, horizontally. • All phases of design of improvements which impact existing or proposed underground utilities shall conform to Caltrans' Policy on High and Low Risk Underground Facilities within Highway Rights of Way. • All right-of-way maps shall conform to the current Caltrans Right of Way Manual. Design of the Project shall be performed in accordance with Caltrans standards and practices. • Any exceptions to applicable design standards shall be approved by Caltrans via the process outlined in Caltrans Highway Design Manual and applicable memoranda and design bulletins published by Caltrans. • CONSULTANT will coordinate with Caltrans staff on the design and incorporation of Traffic Operations System (TOS) and ramp metering improvements. 8Prepared by URS Corporation Page 3 of 8 Last Updated March 26, 2010 -24- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -Miller Ave Off-Ramp Feasibility Study The detailed scope of services is described below. Project Management CONSULTANT, under this Agreement, will provide project management for the entire duration of the schedule. Management activities will consist of administration, coordination, attending meetings and quality control as stated in the following: • Supervise, coordinate and monitor activities and product development for conformance with CALTRANS and CITY standards and policies. • Assure compliance with other codes and standards as acceptable to Caltrans and approved by the CITY. • Coordinate in-house design staff and sub-consultants to assure free and timely flow of information for each task activity. • Maintain Project files in accordance with CALTRANS' Uniform Filing System. • Not perform any extra work without prior written authorization from the CITY. • Prepare for and attend meetings as listed in the scope • Prepare and submit monthly invoices with progress reports. • Establish and implement a quality control procedure for planning and design activities, perform in-house quality control reviews • Develop & maintain a Quality Control /Quality Assurance Plan Project Administration CONSULTANT will perform the following project administrative duties: • Prepare and submit monthly progress reports that will identify work performed on each task the preceding month. Percent complete compared to percentages billed for each task will be shown. • Prepare a monthly summary of total charges made to each task. This summary shall present the contract budget for each task, reallocated budget amounts, prior billing amount, current billing, total billed to date, and a total percent billed to date. • Provide a summary table indicating the amount of firm participation each month based upon current billing and total billed to date. • Provide a monthly invoice by task that will present charges by staff member at agreed to hourly rates, expense charges, and sub-consultant charges. Support documentation for Consultant direct expenses and sub- consultant charges will be attached. Prepared by URS Corporation Page 4 of 8 Last Updated March 26, 2010 - 2 5 - US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -Miller Ave Off-Ramp Feasibility Study Data Collection and Review CONSULTANT shall coordinate with the CITY, San Mateo County C/CAG, San Mateo County, Caltrans, utility companies and other affected stakeholders to identify and collect data relevant to the project such as as-built plans, details of previous studies and planned development projects affecting the project area, related technical reports, right of way records, traffic and accident data, and existing utility information. Specifically, Consultant will: • Obtain and review additional information from projects within the study vicinity. The purpose of this review is to identify issues impacting project costs. Base Mapping CONSULTANT shall prepare topographic mapping in accordance with current Caltrans photogrammetric procedures (i.e. Step "A+B+C" method.). A proposed flight plan shall be developed and the location of flight markers shall be submitted to Caltrans for approval (Step A). Ground control surveys shall be performed to lay flight markers and tie them into the state coordinate system (English). Results of the ground control (GPS) survey shall be documented in a Survey Report and submitted to Caltrans for approval (Step B). The site shall then be flown and ground control used to triangulate the mapping models. Caltrans approval of the triangulation calculations completes Step C and preparation of topographic mapping can commence. Mapping shall be prepared in MicroStation format, consistent with Caltrans drafting standards at a map scale of 1 "=50'. Color orthographic photos will be prepared for presentations and development of technical studies. Kick Ofif Meeting CONSULTANT shall prepare for and conduct akick-off meeting to discuss previous studies, project constraints, funding sources, project purpose and need, project objectives, and to brainstorm improvement alternatives. Alternatives Assessment CONSULTANT shall assess the geometric and operational characteristics of the existing network, within the feasibility study limits identified above, and develop conceptual alternatives in sufficient detail so that an evaluation and subsequent selection of the following intersection and/or ramp improvements for further study can be made. This task is further defined as follows: • Miller Ave Southbound Off-Ramp: CONSULTANT shall identify up to a total of three alternative improvements as follows • ramp termini intersection operational improvements including adding one turn lane as was identified in the RFP • re-configuration of On-ramp and Dubuque Avenue, and extending the off-ramp to create afive-legged intersection at Grand Ave/ Airport Blvd intersection, and • limiting or eliminating truck traffic and developing associated geometry improvements Prepared by URS Corporation Page 5 of 8 Last Updated March 26, 2010 - 2 6 - US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -Miller Ave Off-Ramp Feasibility Study Schematic layouts of each alternative will be developed that generally show the scope of the improvements and to a sufficient detail to enable conceptual cost estimates to be developed. Viable and non- viable alternatives will be documented. Viable alternatives will be assessed for their potential to achieve the following goals: • Improve traffic operations and safety • Minimize non-standard design features • Minimize environmental impacts • Improve access and minimize private property take • Minimize utility conflicts • Ability to satisfy the purpose and need of the project Travel Demand Forecast and Traffic Operations Analysis CONSULTANT will rely on the peak hour counts and 2035 travel demand forecasts generated by the traffic impact fee study update (TJKM Model) that is currently in progress. CONSULTANT will conduct additional observations of existing turning patterns of vehicles departing the Miller Avenue SB off-ramp. CONSULTANT will observe the vehicles making WB to SB left turns at Miller Avenue to determine what movements they make at the Grand Avenue intersection -left, through or right. This will help in the reassignment of the Miller traffic in the revised half-diamond configuration. CONSULTANT will manually reassign the forecasts to the new network and prepare a new model run with a revised network to reflect the proposed modifications to Dubuque Ave. Also, if needed, CONSULTANT will get new counts that may be needed at the Dubuque/Grand intersection to reflect the recent start up of a Lowe's Store along Dubuque. CONSULTANT will produce new a.m. and p.m. peak hour volumes for all movements at each study intersection and all links in the study area. Consult will conduct operational analysis based on the forecasted traffic demands and SYNCHRO model to evaluate traffic operational conditions. Based on the analysis consultant will provide recommendations on the lane geometries at the intersections to provide acceptable levels of service. Consultant will also develop SimTRAFFIC simulation model for the recommendations, to illustrate effectiveness of the proposed recommendations. Consultant will prepare technical memorandum summarizing the forecasted traffic demands and operational analysis and submit to City staff for review and approval. CONSULTANT would produce traffic forecasts for all movements at each study intersection plus all links in the study area based on the Traffic Impact Fee Study model (TJKM model). CONSULTANT will conduct operational analysis based on the forecasted traffic demands and SYNCHRO model to evaluate traffic operational conditions for the various intersections within the study area. Based on the analysis consultant will provide recommendations on the lane geometries at the intersections to provide acceptable Prepared by URS Corporation Page 6 of 8 Last Updated March 26, 2010 _ 2 ~ _ US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -Miller Ave Off-Ramp Feasibility Study levels of service. Consultant will also develop SimTRAFFIC simulation model for the recommendations, to illustrate effectiveness of the proposed recommendations. Consultant will prepare technical memorandum summarizing the forecasted traffic demands and operational analysis and submit to City staff for review and approval. Conceptual Cost Estimate CONSULTANT shall develop concept level cost estimates including assessment of right- of-way and utility relocation requirements (with appropriate contingency costs) for viable alternatives. The intent of the cost estimates will be to identify funding needs for the project. Coordination Meetings and City Council Study Session CONSULTANT shall prepare for and conduct up to three coordination meetings with the CITY and various stakeholders to present and review. viable alternatives. The goal of the meetings will be to select a single viable alternative to carry forward into future phases. CONSULTANT shall prepare for and conduct one City Council study session for the Miller Ave Southbound Off-Ramp proposed. Feasibility Study Report CONSULTANT shall prepare a draft report to document the findings of the feasibility study and recommend the appropriate process to obtain ~ project approval and environmental clearance. The format of the report will be similar to PSR format in order to facilitate the next phase of project development. The report will identify next steps to be taken during future phases of the project, including an assessment of the technical studies required. The report will be submitted to the CITY and other stakeholders for review and comment. CONSULTANT shall address two rounds of comments and prepare the final report. Final Cost Estimate CONSULTANT shall update the final conceptual level cost estimates including assessment of right-of-way and utility relocation requirements (with appropriate contingency costs) for viable alternatives. The intent of the cost estimates will be to identify funding needs for the project. Final Coordination Meeting CONSULTANT shall prepare for and conduct a final meeting to review the study findings and reconcile review comments. Milestone Schedule No Milestone Submittal Date 1 Execute Contract and Issue NTP TBD 2 Draft Feasibility Study Report 12 weeks after NTP 3 Final Feasibility Study Report 2 weeks after receipt of Prepared by URS Corporation Page 7 of 8 Last Updated March 26, 2010 _ 2 8 _ US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -Miller Ave Off-Ramp Feasibility Study comments List of Submittals The following is the anticipated list of submittals: • Meeting materials (including exhibits and meeting minutes) • Feasibility Study Report (draft and final) • Cost Estimates (Draft and Final) List of Assumptions The estimate of labor hours and time scheduled to perform the work is limited by the following assumptions and as may be noted elsewhere. Coordination Meetings • A total of threecoordination meetings (including meetings with Caltrans) and one City Council Study Session are included. Study Alternatives • Up to three improvement alternatives for Miller Avenue will be developed for further evaluation during the next phase of the project. Non-viable alternatives will be documented as well. Units • All project deliverables shall be prepared in English units. Feasibility Study Report • A draft and final document will be provided. Materials and information provided by others • Relevant data from previous studies in the project area • Utility record drawings • As-built construction plans • Right-of-way record maps Prepared by URS Corporation Page 8 of 8 Last Updated March 26, 2010 - 2 9 - US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -Produce Ave Overcrossing Feasibility Study Attachment A Scope of Work for Produce Avenue Overcrossing Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 2 Applicable Standards :..................................................................................................... 2 Project Management ....................................................................................................... 4 Project Administration .................................................................................................... 4 Data Collection and Review ........................................................................................... 4 Base Mapping ................................................................................................................. 5 Kick Off Meeting ............................................................................................................ 5 Alternatives Assessment ................................................................................................. 5 Travel Demand Forecast and Traffic Operations Analysis ............................................. 6 Conceptual Cost Estimate ............................................................................................... 7 Coordination Meetings and City Council Study Session ................................................ 7 Feasibility Study Report ................................................................................................. 7 Final Cost Estimate ......................................................................................................... 7 Final Coordination Meeting ............................................................................................ 7 Milestone Schedule ......................................................................................................... 7 List of Submittals ............................................................................................................ 8 List of Assumptions ........................................................................................................ 8 Prepared by URS Corporation Last Updated March 26, 2010 Page 1 of S -30- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -Produce Ave Overcrossing Feasibility Study Introduction Traffic demands throughout the City of South San Francisco is projected to increase over the next few years. As a result, the City of South San Francisco (CITY) has identified the need for improvements along US 101/Miller Ave off-ramp and the need for a new east-west overcrossing across US 101 connecting Utah Ave on the East side of US 101 to San Mateo Ave on the west side of US 101. A study prepared for the City of South San Francisco (CITY) by T.Y.Lin International in April 2007, recommends widening of the Miller Ave off-ramp. Under this scope of work, Consultant will also provide the CITY with planning and design services needed to prepare conceptual plans, cost estimates, feasibility analysis, for the following: A proposed overcrossing between Utah Avenue/South Airport Boulevard / Produce Avenue and San Mateo Avenue.: This task includes preparing a Feasibility Study to identify study objectives, viable alternatives for further study, conceptual costs for funding requirements, and seek agency consensus on the next steps for the project development of a proposed overcrossing between Utah Avenue/South Airport Boulevard and San Mateo Avenue. Applicable Standards: The plans, specifications and estimates shall be prepared in accordance with Caltrans' regulations, policies, procedures, manuals and standards. The following items are not all-inclusive, but are intended only to illustrate types of sources. • Roadway design shall be in accordance with the 2006/2008 edition of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, the English Highway Design Standards, Standards for English Plans, English Standard Specification, the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and the California Supplement to the MUTCD, and City of South San Francisco and San Mateo County standards. • Roadway plans shall be prepared in conformance with the 2008 editions of the Caltrans Plans Preparation Manual and the Caltrans CADD Users Manual. • Plans, specifications and estimates shall be prepared in conformance with the 2008/2009 editions of the Caltrans Ready to List (RTL) Guide. • Where applicable, bridge plans, specifications, and calculations shall be in accordance with the 2009 editions of the Caltrans Division of Structures (DOS) Bridge Design Details Manual, Bridge Design Aids Manual, Bridge Memos to Designers, Bridge Design Specifications, Improved Seismic Design Criteria for California Bridges, and Seismic Design Criteria (SDC). • All surveys shall conform to the current Caltrans Surveys Manual. Datum for the survey is NAVD88 vertically and NAD 83 Epoch 1991.35 CCS Zone 3, horizontally. • All phases of design of improvements which impact existing or proposed underground utilities shall conform to Caltrans' Policy on High and Low Risk Underground Facilities within Highway Rights of Way. Prepared by URS Corporation Last Updated March 26, 2010 Page 2 of 8 -31- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -Produce Ave Overcrossing Feasibility Study • All right-of-way maps shall conform to the current Caltrans Ripht of Way Manual. Design of the Project shall be performed in accordance with Caltrans standards and practices. • Any exceptions to applicable design standards shall be approved by Caltrans via the process outlined in Caltrans Highway Design Manual and applicable memoranda and design bulletins published by Caltrans. • CONSULTANT will coordinate with Caltrans staff on the design and incorporation of Traffic Operations System (TOS) and ramp metering improvements. Prepared by URS Corporation Last Updated March 26, 2010 Page 3 of 8 -32- US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -Produce Ave Overcrossing Feasibility Study The detailed scope of services is described below. Project Management CONSULTANT, under this Agreement, will provide project management for the entire duration of the schedule. Management activities will consist of administration, coordination, attending meetings and quality control as stated in the following: • Supervise, coordinate and monitor activities and product development for conformance with CALTRANS and CITY standards and policies. • Assure compliance with other codes and standards as acceptable to Caltrans and approved by the CITY. • Coordinate in-house design staff and sub-consultants to assure free and timely flow of information for each task activity. • Maintain Project files in accordance with CALTRANS' Uniform Filing System. • Not perform any extra work without prior written authorization from the CITY. • Prepare for and attend meetings as listed in the scope • Prepare and submit monthly invoices with progress reports. • Establish and implement a quality control procedure for planning and design activities, perform in-house quality control reviews • Develop & maintain a Quality Control /Quality Assurance Plan Project Administration CONSULTANT will perform the following project administrative duties: • Prepare and submit monthly progress reports that will identify work performed on each task the preceding month. Percent complete compared to percentages billed for each task will be shown. • Prepare a monthly summary of total charges made to each task. This summary shall present the contract budget for each task, reallocated budget amounts, prior billing amount, current billing, total billed to date, and a total percent billed to date. • Provide a summary table indicating the amount of firm participation each month based upon current billing and total billed to date. • Provide a monthly invoice by task that will present charges by staff member at agreed to hourly rates, expense charges, and sub-consultant charges. Support documentation for Consultant direct expenses and sub- consultant charges will be attached. Data Collection and Review CONSULTANT shall coordinate with the CITY, San Mateo County C/CAG, San Mateo County, Caltrans, utility companies and other affected stakeholders to identify and Prepared by URS Corporation Page 4 of 8 Last Updated March 26, 2010 - 3 3 - US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -Produce Ave Overcrossing Feasibility Study collect data relevant to the project such as as-built plans, details of previous studies and planned development projects affecting the project area, related technical reports, right of way records, traffic and accident data, and existing utility information. Specifically, Consultant will: • Obtain and review additional information from projects within the study vicinity. The purpose of this review is to identify issues impacting project costs. Base Mapping CONSULTANT shall prepare topographic mapping in accordance with current Caltrans photogrammetric procedures (i.e. Step "A+B+C" method.). A proposed flight plan shall be developed and the location of flight markers shall be submitted to Caltrans for approval (Step A). Ground control surveys shall be performed to lay flight markers and tie them into the state coordinate system (English). Results of the ground control (GPS) survey shall be documented in a Survey Report and submitted to Caltrans for approval (Step B). The site shall then be flown and ground control used to triangulate the mapping models. Caltrans approval of the triangulation calculations completes Step C and preparation of topographic mapping can commence. Mapping shall be prepared in MicroStation format, consistent with Caltrans drafting standards at a map scale of 1 "=50'. Color orthographic photos will be prepared for presentations and development of technical studies. Kick Off Meeting CONSULTANT shall prepare for and conduct akick-off meeting to discuss previous studies, project constraints, funding sources, project purpose and need, project objectives, and to brainstorm improvement alternatives. Alternatives Assessment CONSULTANT shall assess the geometric and operational characteristics of the existing network, within the feasibility study limits identified above, and develop conceptual alternatives in sufficient detail so that an evaluation and subsequent selection of the following intersection and/or ramp improvements for further study can be made. This task is further defined as follows: • Proposed Overcrossing between Utah Avenue/South Airport Boulevard intersection east of US 101 to Produce Avenue and it's continuation to San Mateo Avenue west of US 101: CONSULTANT shall determine the typical cross section of the overcrossing based on 2035 traffic forecasts and geometric constraints, develop the overcrossing horizontal alignment alignment ,profile and cross sections, develop up to two overcrossing and interchange alternatives that will be identified for further evaluation in future phases. Interchange configuration will include on- and off- ramps to SB US 101. The geometrics developed for S. Airport Blvd off- and on- ramps under the PEER task will be incorporated into the interchange geometrics and will act as the NB off- and on- ramps of the interchange. Bridge type and alternatives will be evaluated. Phased construction opportunities will also be identified. Schematic layouts of each alternative will be developed that generally show the scope of the improvements and to a sufficient detail to enable conceptual cost estimates to be developed. Prepared by URS Corporation Page 5 of 8 Last Updated March 26, 2010 - 3 4 - US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -Produce Ave Overcrossing Feasibility Study Viable and non-viable alternatives will be documented. Viable alternatives will be assessed for their potential to achieve the following goals: • Improve traffic operations and safety • Minimize non-standard design features • Minimize environmental impacts • Improve access and minimize private property take • Minimize utility conflicts • Ability to satisfy the purpose and need of the project Travel Demand Forecast and Traffic Operations Analysis Miller Avenue/Grand Avenue Improvements CONSULTANT will rely on the peak hour counts and 2035 travel demand forecasts generated by the traffic impact fee study update (TJKM Model) that is currently in progress. CONSULTANT will conduct additional observations of existing turning patterns of vehicles departing the Miller Avenue SB off-ramp. CONSULTANT will observe the vehicles making WB to SB left turns at Miller Avenue to determine what movements they make at the Grand Avenue intersection -left, through or right. This will help in the reassignment of the Miller traffic in the revised half-diamond configuration. CONSULTANT will manually reassign the forecasts to the new network and prepare a new model run with a revised network to reflect the proposed modifications to Dubuque Ave. Also, if needed, CONSULTANT will get new counts that may be needed at the Dubuque/Grand intersection to reflect the recent start up of a Lowe's Store along Dubuque. CONSULTANT will produce new a.m. and p.m. peak hour volumes for all movements at each study intersection and all links in the study area. Consult will conduct operational analysis based on the forecasted traffic demands and SYNCHRO model to evaluate traffic operational conditions. Based on the analysis consultant will provide recommendations on the lane geometries at the intersections to provide acceptable levels of service. Consultant will also develop SimTRAFFIC simulation model for the recommendations, to illustrate effectiveness of the proposed recommendations. Consultant will prepare technical memorandum summarizing the forecasted traffic demands and operational analysis and submit to City staff for review and approval. CONSULTANT would produce traffic forecasts for all movements at each study intersection plus all links in the study area based on the Traffic Impact Fee Study model (TJKM model).. CONSULTANT will conduct operational analysis based on the forecasted traffic demands and SYNCHRO model to evaluate traffic operational conditions for the overcrossing and the interchange. Based on the analysis consultant will provide recommendations on the lane geometries at the intersections to provide acceptable levels of service. Consultant will also develop SimTRAFFIC simulation model for the recommendations, to illustrate effectiveness of the proposed recommendations. Prepared by URS Corporation Page 6 of 8 Last Updated March 26, 2010 - 3 5 - US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -Produce Ave Overcrossing Feasibility Study Consultant will prepare technical memorandum summarizing the forecasted traffic demands and operational analysis and submit to City staff for review and approval. Conceptual Cost Estimate CONSULTANT shall develop concept level cost estimates including assessment of right- of-way and utility relocation requirements (with appropriate contingency costs) for viable alternatives. The intent of the cost estimates will be to identify funding needs for the project. Coordination Meetings and City Council Study Session CONSULTANT shall prepare for and conduct up to two coordination meetings with the CITY and various stakeholders to present and review viable alternatives. The goal of the meetings will be to select a single viable alternative to carry forward into future phases. CONSULTANT shall prepare for and conduct one City Council study session for the Utah Avenue/South Airport Boulevard and San Mateo Ave overcrossing. Feasibility Study Report CONSULTANT shall prepare a draft report to document the findings of the feasibility study and recommend the appropriate process to obtain project approval and environmental clearance. The format of the report will be similar to PSR format in order to facilitate the next phase of project development. The report will outline all of non standard features of the project. The report will identify next steps to be taken during future phases of the project, including an assessment of the technical studies required. The report will be submitted to the CITY and other stakeholders for review and comment. CONSULTANT shall address two rounds of comments and prepare the final report. Final Cost Estimate CONSULTANT shall update the final conceptual level cost estimates including assessment of right-of-way and utility relocation requirements (with appropriate contingency costs) for viable alternatives. The intent of the cost estimates will be to identify funding needs for the project. Final Coordination Meeting CONSULTANT shall prepare for and conduct a final meeting to review the study findings and reconcile review comments. Milestone Schedule No Milestone Submittal Date 1 Execute Contract and Issue NTP TBD 2 Draft Feasibility Study Report 12 weeks after NTP 3 Final Feasibility Study Report 2 weeks after receipt of comments Prepared by URS Corporation Page 7 of 8 Last Updated March 26, 2010 - 3 6 - US 101 Ramps Improvements City of South San Francisco Final Scope of Work -Produce Ave Overcrossing Feasibility Study List of Submittals The following is the anticipated list of submittals: • Meeting materials (including exhibits and meeting minutes) • Feasibility Study Report (draft and final) • Cost Estimates (Draft and Final) List of Assumptions The estimate of labor hours and time scheduled to perform the work is limited by the following assumptions and as may be noted elsewhere. Coordination Meetings • A total of two coordination .meetings (including meetings with Caltrans) and one City Council Study Session are included. Study Alternatives • Up to two interchange configurations for the Produce Ave site will be developed for further evaluation during the next phase of the project. Non-viable alternatives will be documented as well. Units • All project deliverables shall be prepared in English units. Feasibility Study Report • A draft and final document will be provided. Materials and information provided by others • Relevant data from previous studies in the project area • Utility record drawings • As-built construction plans • Right-of-way record maps Prepared by URS Corporation Page 8 of 8 Last Updated March 26, 2010 _ 3 ~ _ 0 0 N r M O '~ d a a N ca J 7 0 ~ c ^ O V' N ~ N N N N N N CO V' N N N ~ N V . + ~ N o0 O '+ 'd' V ~ ~ O ~ N OOi .N. o~ N W 00 00 ' 'V r N .-. N 'O c+l r ~ V' . d' O d~ N N 7 a 7 ~ m t N N o0 7 v N ~ O ~ a n ~ ~~+ ~ 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N H ~ N N ~ ~ ~ fR ~ `~~ '~ oOC ~ 000 ~' ° ~ i- ~ R o ~~ ~ O G o ~n O ~ o ~ N gq 01 Eft O O O N ~ k~3 69 O O O O m O N ~ T O M O N N ~ ~ N !fl O O O N ~ ~ ~ oo ~O fA O O O O N N, O d' E9 N R! O .~ •~ w .~ ~~ a° ' 0 ~x .. a x 0 H N O 0 W +~. ~ ~ .~ ~ C ~ Yi ~ ~ n ~ ~ o .~ ~ c a o ~ v ,3 Go A W ~ ~ ° , ~ ~ c a v ~ ~ 6 a '~ .n a' ~ o G UU ~ ~ ~ y o X eU ~ G ~ v ~ .~ ~a~ u ;; . ~A ~ D w [ ~ is '"c ~' ~ a~i ~ O ~ . ~ _ - () ~ O~ ~ ~ q A ~ ~¢ F~ [-~ U U w w W ~ R~+ d .~-~ O~ q~. - _ U ~ ~ H LL L `, Q N ~ o ~ ~ t EA ER (f3 fR w~;.l Q _. • t. ;r ; -38- O T N M O d a N J © O V' ~ M ~ ~ N ~ N N .. N ~.N ..N. N W ~ ery ~' y N N . -+ , ., er V' N ~ pp lV O '" ~ ~} 'r ~O o0 O N N M N a0 N W W 00 ~O d ' ' ., C G\ O '. O~ .--~ H ~ 7 N ct N N V' ~ d' N 00 i' ~ ! s i i i N a0 at V p j cV 3 O ti .~. ~ ~ M ~ H ~ ~ ~ tV ~ NN eH e~ N ~ tNV e~ ~ ~ tMry yy N 3 et 7 pOj N O - n N ~ ai vi .i aOO °~+'+° ~ C V ~ ~ a ~ a y ca ~ p ~~ O '-'' O ~ O ~-" N ~ Off u~f N fH O N QO~pp T O O O ~ '" N N °, l0 N fR O N pp `t 01 ~ O N d? O O O r ~ ar ~ iA O O O N N O N O 7 F O N q ;; o •n w •~ _~ a° ~ 0 ~; x 0 x 0 H ;x~: tit <. 5 y T~~ ~ ~ ~ O 1 t ' ~ °~ v O 0.~. ~ C iv 5 .n .~0 ~~.• O C v C - ~ ~C uvi ~ ~ o W ~v+ ~ ~ ~ .a ~ ~~ H .a v °' v c~ v~ o~ W `~ ~ .~°o a v ~ ~ X ~~ ; W C O .~ U V ~~ C u d~ ~~:~. .! yfL ~, O t7 O l9 E W O N O U U O L O c 0 U 7 O y ~ a > ~ F`- ti O O O O N ~ ~ ~ -39- S. Airport Blvd PEER Documents, Draft Cost Estimate -y;: 's x ti. s Tnsis/s,~aTAsxs... r` Taek 1.1 PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING Base mapping .. Data CoOection and Review Right of Way Verification Supplemental Surveying Services Preliminary Geometric Refinements - Preliminary Cost Estimate Preliminary Utility Coordination Preliminary Right of Way Requirements Preliminary Stage Construction/Ttaffic Handling - Geometric Approval/Fact Sheers TnEfic Operarions Analysis TACK 2.1 T(7TAL Task 1.2 PEER " Draft Preliminary Engineering Evaluation Report Final Preliminary Engineering Evaluation Report TACK 2 2 TOTAL Task 1.3 PLNAL DESIGN Roadway Design Plans Signal Modifications Plans Specifirations and Special Provisions Construction Quantifies and Cost Estimate Updated Rightof--Way Ccrd6cadon Construction Schedule QC Review/Independrnt Check Pccmits Georechniral Services Huardous Soil Waste Investigation Final Utility Coordination Lane Closure Report Transportation Management Plan Cooperadve Agreement Support TACK 2.i TOTAL TASK 1.4 OTHBR SERVICES Resident Engineei s File Survey File TACK 24TOTAJ, :. _ ~ ._ :. TASK 1.5 PROJECT MANAGEMENT Project Administration - Budget and Schedule Control Agrncy/Caltnns Coordination Meetings n#) Invoices/Progress Repotts QA/QC Project Files/Distribution T 1~K 2.5 TOTAL Total Hours By Position Hourly Rate Task 1.1 Preliminary Engineering Task 1.2 Final Design Task 1.3 PEER Document Task 1.4 Other Services Task 1.5 Project Management Other Direct Costs (ODCj $700 Reproduction $300 Travel $150 Fedex $1,150 Assumptions: - Permit Application Fees Not Included - Construction Inspection Not Included - No Hydromodifications will be required 3/11/2010 .0 '~' ko o c .~ .~ ~ .°~ S .S°y p, ~~ A ~ n, y a r _~%` : - -e:r fr. t _ 0 p (, 12 12 1' 20 8 12 2f so so se 72 $ 8 40 1G T 20 4 1 G 2(:~ 48 8 . 40 4F 12 _ 4 8 12i 80 16 40 24 80 G8 4 24 40 68 104 4 40 60 - tOa 51G 12 76 0 40 268 0 0 ...40 0 80 516 12 ;''~ I ,.t, ,;gnu -- 2t?u~ " - tax 80 24 , 48 8(~ RO 24 : 46 1(0 16 48 0 u -% 0 0 0 0 0 1G0 .. ~~'~~;,~: h~~v"(~S.tF~w ~~ ~ _'::'E~' ,. :E~e7u~~1, i%r. :.~.^~ n%t~-!"w ,F a4~,. •:::: : ~ .-:~ ~~ 516 ' tb 40 40 240 160 : 51(. 160 100 60 1G0 48 8 40 4F 32 8 24 32 12 4 8 12 4 4 4 16 ' 6 8 tb 8 a 8 80 80 80 225 225 225. 3G 12 24 3Gi 76 20 5G 7G GO 20 40 60~.. I6 -8 8 16 1289 40 132 80 80 492 225 0 240 0 0 1289 8 8 0 8 8 f. 1G 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1G~ -, ., Y 48 - 48 48 12 12 12 96 12 GO 24 96 30 30 30 32 8 ~ 24 32 i2 12 I2 40 40 40 270 12 110 0 0 3G 0 0 0 172 0 270 ~~at.o: av.v $200 .ia~.v $170 au.v $167 tur.o $142 516 $2,400 $12,920 $0 $5,680 1289 $8,000 $22,440 $13,360 $11,360 160 $3,200 $8,160 $0 $0 16 $0 $2,720 $0 $0 270 $2,400 $18,700 $0 $0 Subtotal $16,000 $64,940 $13,360 $17,040 ayc.o ....,.v au zeu.o ru.u nu.u $130 $t65 $100 $105 $85 $225 $34,840 $0 $0 $4,200 $0 $18,000 $78,040 $63,960 $37,125 $0 $25,200 $0 $0 $181,445 $12,480 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $23,840 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,720 $4,680 $0 $0 $0 $9,520 $0 $35,300 $115,960 $37,125 50 $29,400 59,520 518,000 $321,345 Base Mapping 519,242 ODCs 51,150 Total Estimate 5341,737 3 of3 -40- i i ~~ ~ .~ g ,~ ~ ~ ~.=y ~ ~ ~ N R ,. • -. , ' ~ ,. ;' , ~ 4 ~. ~ ;, r ,~ ~ ` ~ / ~ ~ ~ ~,;~ ~ ,,y ~ ~ tt1 ' i' ", f Eis t i~ili r ~., :. ~ t `Y" A. r` Q =a, ~ ~~ ~. r _ ~ } O O ~ { ~~ ~ ~` + ~{,. .. ~ ~~ ram. ~ - r ~ ~ Y ~ ~-;~ ~ - {~ , q r. .. ~•r __ ,; +. r ,? ;9 ~ 'ww, .a'~ -- ~ ~'• ' M,. ,: ~,~ _. ,~ ~~ ~. ~ _ i r ter y,x ~;~, f: - -+r .. ~, `~`~~ / ~ ~ / / 4 '~ ~ '~ ` ~. ,,; ,. ~ n ~~~ ~ ,~ ~ ~; .,:, ~', .'";~~ ~ Iii !3 i i~ ,.~ ~ ~L ~ f, u ~ ~'' >o ~^ ~ ',t e ti t.: ~ Lr 4 / , ~ ~ - S "" s ~ ~~ ~ ~ t ~ ' ~ ~"R , e i i '~ ~~.. '~ ' :. ' 7~ j I ,+ .~ ~'~ n' .. ~ -~ .. , ~., .. ~ . -.., e~ nT . f: 5 F 0 0 i i i w i f f R IIL 4 :' ~ -ti 4 w i 'T ~! ~~'i', r .i ~, ; ~,. L a~ r 9I ^~ ~~ I ~+ ~ , ~ 'I I. ,~ ~ .I~ r ~ < ~ ;~ _' i 1 ~ I -- I I I ,i • ^ 4S~ _ ~ ~~ "1 -_ ~- ` .,_ • a ~ '+ ~ ..~ 3 ti'_ 7^ 'off' :~ - t .I: F' y,F / ~. ~' ~,,y~ ~ ,~~ f ~ 4 1 ~ ' +- fq f 4 ~ (i ~ ^,: ~j .i ~.i ~ y ~ 't 9 Y`p~ ~ F~1 r a~. ;~ :,~ ~~ ~ _. .~ ~~ '$l a' ~~ ~y «r ,, 1 l i 1. ~ i ,'l { f y rl~ { ~ y i7 a~ ~7~'+pyi~~ l T ~.~ fit ~' ~, . ,~~/Q~ .~ ' ~~~r __ "'~ h'T+,u, ~' ' x -,. - . ~ 9r1.~yti;a~ <~ V` .~y,,~ ~~~ ~~ ~ r: _ . ~ ~ -, i g. ~ ~~f .: i 1 I .yam; ~ ~4 .._: t ^E}~~. ~ i z .. _. _~ . a r°~ ' - ~ i ~-- i #. `_ I ~ ~ i I I I i i i m I i _. I I p 7 I i i I I ~ 1 I I I I I I I I I ~ r-------------------- i i I I ~ I i I i I I I ~ I I .. ~ _~ i i ~~ i i F ~ ~ ~,., I I I~ ~ i v 1 ~ I ________________._-` ~.~ \ 4' I --~- l ' ~~ l ~ r~ , rlt I' ~ - I - } I~ V~~ I ~ ` ~ 1 ~ l 1 \~ ~ 4' ~ ~ ~` ~ . l I ,,: _ . ~ ~ ~a I - ~ , ~w~`~. ~ ~ t ..' ~ ~, ~ E ~~ft . I' ~ ~ I ~ N.: .3. I ~ ~ \ ,~ , y \- \~ ~ 1 ~ ~ `r I ~ I ,~~ ~ » ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ i t A~ ~ ~ ---~ ~ I ~~ i '\ ` ~, ., ~ 1 1. 1 1 1 ~ .f ~ 1 ~~ ,~~i 1 I ~ ~ ~ i `4. I' ` f ~: ~ ~CI ~ I - -, I ~ -~, .. r ,.,, 1 , ' ~ ~ y kE ~ §~ ~-'~ ~ ~~ ~~ • ""114, ~ - "~ ~ -, ~? ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ 4 I ~ ~r V~~ `3 Iw T ,> ~ 4 I- ~ ~~ f ~ ~, ~„ ~ ,'~ ~. yw 4 ~ ~ ' ~ ~ `. ~ I ,, ~; ~ ' Y ., ~ , ~ ~ .., _.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~* ~ ~ y. ~ - ~. - NB 101 Off-Ramp -East Grand Avenue January 7, 2010 ATTACHMENT B SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR NB 101 Off-Ramp -East Grand Avenue T.Y. Lin International (CONSULTANT) shall provide to the City of South San Francisco engineering design services and preparation of construction bid documents for improvements to the NB 101 off ramp at East Grand Avenue (PROJECT). The project for this Scope of Services will include improvements within the State and City right-of--way. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES: The basis of the proposed PROJECT improvements for this Scope of Services are those identified in the "Traffic Impact Fee Study for the East of 101 Area", prepared by CCS Planning and Engineering in 2001. Note that these proposed PROJECT improvements do not necessarily provide for those improvements necessary to satisfy future (2035) traffic volumes. Improvements provided for in this Scope of Services include: • Adding an additional lane and restriping for the NB 101 Off-Ramp to East Grand Avenue (length of 800 ft +/-) • Restriping of Grand Avenue between the NB US 101 Off-ramp/Executive Drive intersection and East Grand Avenue (length of 800 ft +/-) • Replacement landscaping and irrigation for the areas disturbed by construction activities • Modify the roadway lighting to conform to the revised NB US 101 Off-Ramp to east Grand Avenue • Other facilities and appurtenances that are typically required for a roadway project of this type, including signing, metal beam guard railing, and erosion control The proposed work may require the design and inclusion of retaining walls along a portion of the length of the proposed ramp widening. The proposed design will minimize impacts to recently constructed work for an adjacent CALTRAIN project. The intersection of E. Grand Avenue and Grand Avenue will also be evaluated for traffic impacts to the intersection resulting from improvements to the E. Grand Avenue off- ramp. The project development and design included in this Scope-of-Services assumes: • Caltrans Project approval document will be a Permit Engineering Evaluation Report (PEER), including the following documentation: o Traffic Operations Analyses o Right-of--Way Certification o Utility Certification o Design Exception Fact Sheets o Environmental Clearance Document (to be provided by the City) o Storm Water Data Report (SWDR) o Geotechnical Recommendation o Hazardous Materials Investigation (ADL) The Consultant shall prepare a complete set of construction bid documents; including City provided contract terms and bidding requirements (boiler plate), plans, technical specifications, contract quantities, -46- Pagel NB 101 Off-Ramp -East Grand Avenue January 7, 2010 and estimate of probable construction cost. The Consultant shall prepare the Application for the Construction Encroachment Permit for signature by the City and submission to Caltrans. • It is assumed that the proposed ramp improvements can be constructed within Caltrans or City owned right of way • The proposed ramp improvement project does not require federal funding (local funds only) and no federal approvals will be required. • The City shall prepare the necessary Environmental Clearance Document required for the Project. The approved Environmental Clearance Document shall be provided to the Consultant for attachment to the PEER. Responsibilities and activities that are Not Included in this Scope of Services are: • Activities or costs related to the environmental clearance process or document • Preparation of apost-construction Record of Survey map or the setting of any additional property/right-of--way corner monumentation • Negotiations for, or acquisitions of any rights-of--way • Additional Traffic Studies or Analyses beyond those described within this scope DETAILED SCOPE OF SERVICES: TASK 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 1.1 Administration and Oversight Project administration and oversight responsibilities and activities will include the following: • Administer the project • Manage tasks and deliverables • Ensure conformance with Caltrans and City standards and requirements • Oversee Coordination with the City, Caltrans, and other affected agencies 1.2 Coordination Project Coordination will be established and maintained throughout the design process. Agencies will include at least the following: • City of South San Francisco As the project sponsor, close coordination with the City will be maintained. Of particular interest will be identifying potential cost and/or scheduling impacts at a very early stage, so that resolutions can be incorporated in a timely manner and with resulting minimum impacts on the project. Meetings will occur with City every two (2) months. _ 4 7 _ Page 2 NB 101 Off=Ramp -East Grand Avenue January 7, 2010 • State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Extensive coordination with Caltrans will be required to ensure that all the necessary requirements and procedures are followed in order to ensure that all the necessary requirements and procedures are followed in order to achieve the required Caltrans clearances and approvals. Coordination will include, at a minimum: o Regular PDT meetings o Environmental Clearance o Right-of--Way certification o Conceptual geometrics • Other Design Consultants Since CALTRAIN design plans have been prepared for the intersection of E. Grand Avenue and Executive Drive, close coordination between the off-ramp CONSULTANT and the CALTRAlN consultant will be required. In addition, the City has contracted with a Traffic Engineering consultant (TJKM) to provide citywide traffic analysis. Close coordination between the off-ramp CONSULTANT and TJKM will also be required. • Permitting Agencies Depending upon the identified environmental impacts associated with this Project, if any, coordination may be required with the various Resource Agencies in order to obtain the necessary permits for construction. 1.3 Meetings The CONSULTANT shall organize, schedule, and prepare agenda and meeting minutes for the following meetings: 1. Project Kick-off meeting with the City 2. Project Progress/Status 3. Design Coordination with the City, Caltrans, Consultant for the intersection of E. Grand Avenue and Executive Drive, and the City's Traffic Engineering consultant 4. Design submittal review 5. City Council presentation meeting This Scope-of-Services and corresponding fee provides for up to 3 meetings with the Caltrans, up to 3 Technical Meetings with the City and/or other Consultants, and 1 City Council presentation. As part of Caltrans Permit Engineering Evaluation Report (PEER) process, regular Caltrans Project Development Team (PDT) meetings are not scheduled. CONSULTANT will meet with the Caltrans permits department and selected functional units at strategic times during the design process. _ 4 g _ Page 3 NB 101 Off-Ramp -East Grand Avenue January 7, 2010 TASK 2 PRELIMINARY DESIGN 2.1 Develop Base Mapping and Ground Surveys Aerially flown digital base mapping will be developed in Microstation format at 1-foot contour intervals. This mapping will be suitable for PS&E level design in addition to being used in developing PEER (Encroachment Permit) level exhibits. Field (ground) surveys will be used to establish the survey control and locate right of way monumentation. Mapping will be developed under Caltrans guidelines in accordance with the Checklist A, B & C Procedures in the Caltrans Right-of--Way Manual. 2.2 Field Investigation CONSULTANT will conduct field investigation and review with team members to observe the site for the proposed improvements. Two site visits by Consultant Team Members are anticipated. (Note that site visits for this East Grand Avenue Project will be conducted at the same time as the site visits for the Oyster Point Boulevard Project). 2.2.1 Potholing For the portion of the project for which final design and construction bid documents are to be prepared, the various utility facilities that may be impacted by the proposed work will be potholed to determine their precise horizontal and vertical locations. CONSULTANT will pothole up to (4) locations. 2.3 Obtain Utility and Right of Way Data To assist the roadway designers in identifying existing right-of--way, available GIS and recorded information will be used to provide an early indication of the existing right-of--way limits. This will be refined once additional mapping work is performed. CONSULTANT shall contact all utility owners that have utilities in the project are for utility records. Identified utilities will be plotted on plan sheets from the record information. 2.4 Traffic Engineering Traffic Data Collection The City has retained TJKM to prepare the East of 101 Traffic Modeling Study, which includes collection of existing traffic counts at locations throughout the South San Francisco area. This scope of work and fee assumes the Traffic Modeling Study will provide AM and PM peak hour existing intersection counts at the study locations included in this project. Study intersections are: • U.S. 101 Northbound Off-ramp /Industrial way /East Grand Avenue • East Grand Avenue / Sylvester Road At the study intersections, field observations will determine existing geometric features, lane configurations, traffic control, and vehicle queuing that will be used to develop, calibrate, and validate the Synchro/SimTraffic models.. Traffic Engineering Responsibilities and activities that are Not Included in this Scope of Services are: - 4 9 - Page 4 NB 101 Off-Ramp -East Grand Avenue January 7, 2010 • Existing Conditions Intersection Analysis (Study intersections) • Existing Conditions Freeway Ramp Junction Analysis (NB US 101 Ramps In addition, CONSULTANT will assume that TJKM will coordinate directly with Caltrans to obtain approval of the Year 2015 traffic forecasts for the study intersections included in this project. CONSULTANT will use these approved forecasts, provided by TJKM, to complete the traffic operations analysis in the subsequent tasks. 2.4.1 Existing Conditions Analysis Intersection Analysis CONSULTANT will analyze the study intersections for the AM and PM peak hour conditions using the Synchro/SimTraffic software. A traffic simulation analysis (such as that allowed using the SimTraffic software) will more accurately model the effects of vehicle queues on intersection capacity. Peak hour factors will be based on traffic counts. Peak hour delay and level of service will be calculated for each intersection consistent with 2000 HCM analysis procedures. • Freeway Ramp Junction Analysis CONSULTANT will analyze the US 101 northbound ramp junctions at Grand Avenue off-ramp according to HCM procedure using the HCS+ software. • Collision Analysis CONSULTANT will prepare a collision summary based on Caltrans TASAS data for the most recent available three-year period at the US 101 northbound off-ramp to Grand Avenue. The results will be summarized. by collision type in tabular form and compared to state-wide averages for similar facilities. 2.4.2 Existing With Project Conditions Analysis CONSULTANT will analyze the study intersections using the Synchro/SimTraffic models. The study intersections will be evaluated under existing With Project conditions for the AM and PM peak hour. Average intersection delay, intersection level of service, and 95~' percentile queues for critical movements will be reported. US 101 off-ramp junctions will also be evaluated with the Project using the HCS model developed. Density and level of service will be reported. 2.4.3 Year 2015 Without Project Conditions CONSULTANT will analyze study intersection using the Synchro/SimTraffic models developed. The study intersection will be evaluated under the Year 2015 Without Project conditions for the AM and PM peak hour. Average intersection delay, intersection level of service, and 95~' percentile queues for critical movements will be reported. US 101 off-ramp junctions will also be evaluated without the Project using the HCS model. Density and level of service will be reported. 2.4.4 Year 2015 With Project Conditions CONSULTANT will analyze the study intersection listed using the Synchro/SimTraffic models developed. The same traffic forecasts will be used as in Task 2.4.2, but the proposed new intersection configurations resulting from the Project will be applied and evaluated. Average intersection delay, intersection level of service, and 95`~ percentile queues for critical movements will be reported. _ 5 ~ _ Page 5 NB 101 Off-Ramp -East Grand Avenue January 7, 2010 US 101 off-ramp junctions will also be evaluated with the Project using the HCS model developed. Density and level of service will be reported. 2.4.5 Sensitivity Analysis Based on Task 2.4.3, if the study intersections operate acceptably with the implementation of the project during Year 2015 conditions, the forecasts will be increased incrementally until intersections no longer operate acceptably. Based on those results, CONSULTANT will estimate the number of years beyond 2015 that the proposed improvements will continue to accommodate the future traffic demand. If the study intersections do not operate acceptably with the implementation of the Project during Year 2015 conditions, the forecasts will be reduced incrementally until the study intersections operate acceptably. This will allow us to estimate the useful life of the Project between existing conditions and the Year 2015. 2.4.6 Documentation CONSULTANT will prepare an Administrative Draft Traffic Operations Report (TOR) that summarizes the existing conditions analysis results, Year 2015 conditions analysis results, and sensitivity analysis results, and will submit it for one round of review and comment by the City. After written comments are received, CONSULTANT will prepare a Draft TOR for submittal to Caltrans. CONSULTANT will respond to one round of written comments from Caltrans to prepare the Final TOR. 2.4.7 Meetings CONSULTANT will attend up to 4 Traffic Related Team meetings, (1) kick-off meeting, and (1) City Council meeting. 2.5 Preliminary Geotechnical Report The studies required for the PEER level of work will be a preliminary geotechnical report. Proposed scope of the work will be to review readily available materials and prepare a Preliminary Geotechnical Report. No field exploration work is proposed for this phase, however site review and data research is proposed. The review will be based on readily available data including as-built Log of Test Borings from any existing projects and other Agency records (if available). The potential geotechnicaUgeologic impacts and mitigations will be discussed on a broad basis including but not limited to slope stability, geology, seismic impacts, erosion, groundwater conditions, etc. for the proposed culverts, pavement sections, cuts and embankments. Generally, the geotechnical issues relevant to the proposed project are presented in a qualitative manner with no specific design recommendations. Certain design assumptions are made as to the type of retaining wall, type of foundations, approximate pile lengths and approximate slope angles, etc. The potential mitigation measures are also provided in a discussion format in order to define the overall design program and evaluate cost impacts. 2.6 Geotechnical Design and Materials Report A Geotechnical Design and Materials Report will be developed to provide recommendations for preparation of the final design. Based on the available information, widening will be required for about 400' for East Grand Avenue, and there may be a need to design a retaining wall for the East Grand Avenue off ramp. - 51 - Page 6 NB 101 Off-Ramp -East Grand Avenue January 7, 2010 Geotechnical studies will be prepared based on Caltrans guidelines for preparation of Geotechnical Design and Materials Reports. Borings are required for the retaining walUembankments at a general spacing of 3 00' . This scope of work will include preparation of a combined Geotechnical Report for the roadway, embankment, and retaining walls. 2.6.1 Research and Data Collection Review of available geologic and soil literature in the vicinity of the site. Permits/LTSA Clearances: CONSULTANT will comply with local permit requirements and will assume that a Caltrans encroachment permit will be provided by the client. CONSULTANT will field locate the borings and call for USA clearance. 2.6.2 Field Exploration CONSULTANT has data from one boring drilled at the foot of the ramp within the Caltrain property. One additional boring will be required for the retaining wall to 40 feet depth. The boring location will depend upon the available access and permit. A truck mounted drill rig is anticipated to do the work. 2.6.3 Laboratory Testing Perform laboratory tests on representative soil samples such as moisture density, unconfined compression, consolidation, gradation analyses, corrosion tests and Plasticity Index test, as necessary. 2.6.4 Soils Analysis/Evaluation CONSULTANT shall perform engineering analyses and develop design recommendations for the embankment and/or retaining wall design. 2.6.5 Prepare Draft Geotechnical Design and Materials Report CONSULTANT shall prepare preliminary recommendations for embankment, retaining wall and pavement design. 2.6.6 Prepare Final Geotechnical Design and Materials Report CONSULTANT shall prepare detailed report including design recommendations. 2.7 Phase I Initial Site Assessment CONSULTANT will prepare a Phase I Initial Site Assessment for the proposed ramp improvements. The ISA study will be prepared to identify potential hazardous waste sites and evaluate environmental factors that may have impacted the soil groundwater quality within the project limits. The study will include data collection and documents research including historical land use based on study of aerial photographs and other relevant documents. The data research will be ordered from Environmental Data Research Inc. (EDR Inc.) for the proposed project. No field exploration and/or testing are included in this phase of the work. 2.8 Storm Water Data Report & Water Quality Studies 2.8.1 Hydrology, Water Quality and Drainage Review CONSULTANT will review available data on hydrology, hydraulics, and drainage. 5 2 - Page 7 NB 101 Off-Ramp -East Grand Avenue January 7, 2010 CONSULTANT will review as-built drainage plans and conduct a 1-day field drainage review of the proposed project area. (Note that site visits for this East Grand Avenue Project will be conducted at the same time as the site visits for the Oyster Point Boulevard Project). 2.8.2 Location Hydraulic Study CONSULTANT will perform a floodplain risk assessment for the proposed project. CONSULTANT will research FEMA information and coordinate with the City of South San Francisco and the County of San Mateo to identify major floodplain issues. 2.8.3 Storm Water Data Report CONSULTANT will prepare a Storm Water Data Report for the proposed project. The report will address the project's storm water impacts and the needs for BMP implementation.. CONSULTANT will coordinate with Caltrans District 4 Office of Water Quality to determine the design approach. 2.9 Hazardous Materials Investigation (ADL) CONSULTANT shall prepare a work plan for approval by Caltrans and a Health and Safety Plan prior to start of work. At the proposed sample locations, a total of 3 samples per bore hole will be collected, up to a depth of 2 feet below ground surface. Each sample will be analyzed for lead by EPA Method 6010. The test results will be used to develop the necessary procedures for identifying the extent of the contaminated soil, potential removal, and potential reuse of aerial lead impacted soil with the State right of way. 2.10 Right-of--Way Engineering The right-of--way engineering tasks shall include preparing the right-of--way certification, identifying existing right-of--way lines, and providing legal descriptions of any temporary easements that may be required. 2.11 E. Grand Avenue/Grand Avenue Intersection Analysis Due to the uncertain nature of the ramp improvements to the E. Grand Avenue/Grand Avenue Intersection, CONSULTANT has allocated an estimated amount in the fee proposal for conceptual analysis at the intersection of E. Grand Avenue and Grand Avenue. TASK 3 PREPARATION OF PEER/ENCROACHMENT PERMIT 3.1 Preliminary Geometrics 3.1.1 Roadway The preliminary geometrics for the ramp widening will be developed and shown on the project plans. These "skeleton" plans will be used as the basis for development of the full set of construction plans and to identify limits of retaining walls. 3.2 65% PS&E Submittal 3.2.1 Roadway (65%) Assumptions: - 5 3 - Page 8 NB 101 Off=Ramp -East Grand Avenue January 7, 2010 • Plans will be developed using U.S. Customary Units (English) • Within the existing State right of way, plans will be developed per the 2006 Highway Design Manual (HDM), the 2006 Standard Plans, and the 2006 Standard Specifications and Standard Special Provisions (SSP). • Outside of State right of way, plans will be developed per City standards and details as directed by the City. • Plans will be prepared in the Microstation format. • Project specifications will not be included in the 65% Submittal. • Planting and irrigation contract documents will be prepared for improvements along the ramps. • The number of Submittal sets will be per the requirements of each reviewing agency. 3.2.2 Quantities & Estimates CONSULTANT shall prepare contract quantities and corresponding construction cost estimates and update them for this submittal. Contract quantities will be developed for each discrete item of work and per the Caltrans BEES system. The estimated unit or lump sum cost for each new bid item will be developed and actual bid prices will be used for common items with recently bid comparable projects. 3.2.3 QA/QC CONSULTANT will perform an independent check on the design plans, specifications, and cost estimate on all project elements, including the various technical reports, as a matter of course throughout the design process. For the submittals, the CONSULTANT shall submit the plans, specifications, quantities, and cost estimate to various reviewing agencies after completion of its own in-house QA/QC review. 3.2.4 Structures (65%) It is assumed that the retaining wall will be a Standard Caltrans Wall, which will not require Structure Type Selection Meeting with Caltrans or independent design. If a non- standard wall type is chosen or is determined to be required, the effort and cost to prepare for and attend a Structure Type Selection Meeting with Caltrans and to design the non- standard wall is not included or provided for in this Scope of Work. All work and costs associated with a Structure Type Selection Meeting and non-standard wall design shall be considered as Extra Work. 3.3 100% PS&E Submittal 3.3.1 Roadway (100%) Collect and respond to comments from the 65% Submittal. • Meeting with reviewers, if necessary, for clarification of comments and concurrence with resolution approach • Finalize roadway plans and update plans to incorporate review comments, as appropriate • Finalize Planting and irrigation contract documents • Submit 100% PS&E Submittal package and Encroachment Permit to Caltrans, City, and any other reviewing agencies. 3.3.2 Specifications Page 9 -54- NB 101 Off-Ramp -East Grand Avenue January 7, 2010 The project specifications and special provisions will be developed using the 2006 Standard Specifications and the 2006 Standard Special Provisions and will be prepared in standard Caltrans format. City specific technical specifications will be incorporated into the project set of special provisions, as required. Technical specifications, corresponding to Section 10-Construction Details of Caltrans Special Provisions, will be prepared using standard Caltrans formats and standard special provisions. These technical specifications shall provide for all necessary material and installation requirements and measurement and payment clauses for each contract item. The developed technical specifications shall be combined with a City provided "boiler plate" to create the required bid documents. The Consultant shall provide necessary project specific inputs as required by the individual "boiler plate" sections. 3.3.3 Quantities & Estimates CONSULTANT shall prepare contract quantities and corresponding construction cost estimates and update them for this submittal. Contract quantities will be developed for each discrete item of work and per the Caltrans BEES system. The estimated unit or lump sum cost for each new bid item will be developed and actual bid prices will be used for common items with recently bid comparable projects. 3.3.4 QA/QC CONSULTANT will perform an independent check on the design plans, specifications, and cost estimate on all project elements, including the various technical reports, as a matter. of course throughout the design process. For the submittals, the CONSULTANT shall submit the plans, specifications, quantities, and cost estimate to various reviewing agencies after completion of its own in-house QA/QC review. 3.3.5 Caltrans Encroachment Permit Caltrans Encroachment permit application will be prepared including all required attachments. 3.4 Design Exception Fact Sheets It is anticipated that a limited number (not to exceed four) of Design Exception Fact Sheets will be prepared for identified design elements that do not conform to current Caltrans Standards. 3.5 Final Submittal • Finalize roadway plans and update plans to incorporate review comments, as appropriate • Update the Draft Cost Estimate 3.6 Bid Set Submittal The final checked and approved set of Bid Documents (PS&E) will be assembled and transmitted to the City. All plans, specifications, and estimates shall be submitted in hard copy and electronic formats. The City shall provide the contract terms and bidding requirements ("boiler plate") to the Consultant for incorporation into the final Bid Document. 3.7 Support Services During Bidding - 5 5 - Page 10 NB 101 Off-Ramp -East Grand Avenue January 7, 2010 CONSULTANT will provide the City with bid documents, ,prepare addenda to bid package as necessary and assist in distribution of addenda, and other tasks as necessary. • Respond to Bidder Inquires • Attend Pre-Bid Meeting TASK 4 PREPARE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT The City shall perform all activities related to obtaining environmental clearance for the Project and shall provide to the Consultant the approved Environmental Clearance Document, that is a required attachment to the PEER. Therefor any Consultant activities or costs associated with the environmental clearance process or document are not included or provided for in this Scope of Services. TASK 5 CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT ACTIVITIES All work associated with Construction Support Activities is NOT included in this Scope of Work. All work and costs associated with Construction Support Activities shall be considered as Extra Work. 5.1 Construction Support Services • This task will be limited to providing responses to questions or clarifications from the Resident Engineer • Attending Meetings, as requested by the Resident Engineer. 5.2 Prepare Construction Record Drawings (As-Builts) • Prepare Construction Record Drawings (As-Builts) based on marked-up plans provided by the Resident Engineer. - 5 6 - Page 11 NB 101 Off-Ramp -East Grand Avenue January 7, 2010 APPENDICES _ 5 7 _ Page 12 wdgf ~Z 'O LOZ '6Z IoW 6MP'~PI4S II~~ ~I~~509 pNVa`J3067!Q!4x~00V~SS0660 :d :6u!,wo~p NB 101 Off=Ramp -East Grand Avenue January 7, 2010 LIST OF SUBCONSULTANTS Subconsultant T e of Work WRECO Draina e Fehr & Peers Traffic Parikh Geotech PGA Desi Landsca e Radman Aerial Surve Aerial Ma in Ru eri-Jensen-Azar & Associates (RJA) Surve Geocon Hazardous Materials - 5 9 - Page 13 NB 101 Off-Ramp -East Grand Avenue January 7, 2010 PROJECT SCHEDULE -60- Page 14 &I a NB 101 Off-Ramp -East Grand Avenue January 7, 2010 STAFF HOUR & FEE PROPOSAL -62- Page 15 Fee Proposal Summary For NB 101 Off-Ramp -East Grand Avenue January 7, 2010 PS&E Fee. Proaos~l: Task 1 Project Management $ 29,460 Task 2 (Excluding Survey & Geotech) Conceptual Preliminary Plans $ 86,395 Task 3 Preparation of PEER/Encroachment Permit 130 970 Total Fee PS&E (Excluding Surveying and Geotechnical Engineering (Tasks 1- 2) $246,825 SurvevinQ & Geo~gehnic~l,F,~n~gerig Task 2.1 Develop Base Mapping & Ground Surveys Task 2.5 Prepaze Geoetchnical Report Task 2.6 Geotechnical Design & Materials Report Task 2.7 Phase I Initial Site Assessment $ 25,860 $ 12,584 $22,156 10 600 Total Fee Surveying &Geotechnical Engineering $ 71,200 Total Fee PS&E, Surveying &Geotechnical Engineering $ 318,025 -63- ~ ~ o o ro 4 e e r 3 ~ ~U ~ ~ U w W W d d b W 'a0 A4 v O w ~ 1 W ~k O V H o W .9~ O z ~ W z p W a 0 s~ .~ w O U Q~ a° a ~y W F a. N O N N N "~ - 0 M Q V N i N N N N .av I ° ~ N N N N N N N N N h N h N a F ~ Y ~ ~ I 0 V N 0 P M ' N M I n ~ ~p ry P ~ P ~ ro ~ N ~ N O. ^ 1 1 1 1 O O P N O (V w~j N O O P p 'O b O H o a0 I ~ i I I I I _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I E I I I ! ! I l l i I I ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~N ll i l I I li fl ~ tt I$ ~~ I ~ R~ ~& ~i5i ! I ! I Nrx ~g +g H I m b d I 0 0 0 o y o i I i i ~ p V V .~ O N ! W I f~l il I'- I l l i i IwN ~ I l i il~ I NI I II I b I I ~ I I I I C. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ `(yy(~ ixJ y Er SG! M s" Vd ~ ~ a ~ , 4L ~ ~~ O F :~ ~ ,~g ~ 9 X~ ~ [Y - N M H x~ ag ~~ h N NyII ~ ~+ Y a ri a ~ ~ ~ 86~Xj N b N ~ s o b C {~ .5 hi ffVli ~ ~ •~ ~ fi ~ ~ h f~ g +3¢} ~ ~ 4 Y ~ Q ~~ g.3 3 3 3 Q m r7i r ~ ~ ~ ec ~ ~ 3 $E ey M m ni N ~ ~. ~ C o <. ~@ O 4 ,5k V 111777 LS N I t 1 N N V~ f`~ b r Ot ry A /~ - eJ. -64- QQN '~i n N N N N N M N H h F F N y~ F F 3 E 0 d ~ O N a 4` ~ ~ ~ y~ ~ t e =v ~ ~; Z U N < b a ~ - ~ I $ ~ I $ m awe N ~ h N fn H h H pN N r H M H g „ O E ~ M y~ k F N N 0 N N N ~O~pp O. V1 N h H N h h N N H C C 'A y O F -65- s y O d C C yC pe c CS , 4j 4'~ V ~ ~$ ~ ~~ ~- fj N M M 0 0 0 D D D D ~ ry n q ~ ~ N .. N .. O ro O _~ N 00 M H N ,~ N N ~~ L V h a ~ y H c N 9 K ~Zi y ~ .1 g e s H .~i C N q( e ~ ~ H ~ y~ F D M s 9 F ~ y F~ v -66- .h o~Vi O v ~ N 0. ~ ~ = v 3 `~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ o V 1~ W U a o d y •~ ~ W ,w,, q ~ r~~..y7 ~«, o ~, ~' O U ~ rl a °a a w °'~ d z 0 U U w E^ W a a x w O ~, U x ~ O ~' f" ~ ~ N ~ (~ (" .y. 3 ~ b N N ~ ~ ~ .r N v1 ~O M O O M N N N r t` s~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O~ ~D O~ O~ 00 N N N N ~ N N ~ 69 to 64 V9 V9 fiR 69 o M ~ ~ D N . Vi ~~ y ~ im f R i/} V! 6 /i V ! ni v a ~c ~t °v .`~i N N ri N +7 ~t `o ao •t o0 00 00 ~ N ~ v v ~ ao N N N ~t rI ~ h 'p C O a U ~ O p V aI O U eL w O ~ O ~ _ 'fl O -•~p3 3 '~ ~q O ~~ F" ~ ., ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ N COI > E _ ~ ~ u7 W y! ~ -. ~ ri ~ K; ~ a ~+ ~o r• ri ri ri ~ ri ri ri H N N ~ ~ r N H O 7' ~~ K n GA N ... 0 °o ~o N :~ S v1 o `~ ~ ~ +. H ~ ~ ~ N ~y H -67- h ~ O v ~ N C ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ W U b as ~ ~ H b b ~ W A ~ C% W ~ ~ a ~ ~ ox .~ o U ~ 0 a O a a W W W °~ W ~+ d a q ~ O U F H a z 0 U -68- h ~ O U ~ ^O1 n ~. ~ ~ ~ C 3 •~ , U u~ r w~ H p aaa ~r~w 0 az ~ ~Oo~ '"~d w ~, a s p O ~w~~ '~ a. W 0 0 .~ow~ U ° L7 zWz F p U W a ~ 0 z a V I Q °e~ o ~. N ry -69- v h •1 p v i0 N n 4 ~ ~ ~' `~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ e `~ C~ ~+ W U a w~ app Ho a ~~a ~ W W o ~ I~+i ~bz .~ ~~~ ~~~~ w~ d ~i~O ~w~x '~ a W ~I~I z .~' WO w U ° p~q ~ ZWv~ H p ~U a~ r h L 0 F N H 0 q N Q F -70- ti V h '1 Q ~U ~ N 0 4 ~ ~ ~ v S ~ ~ ~0 0 ti~ ~~ U Z H .~ D rr~ ~ 1~1 Q ~ r } (n Y+M ~ ' +~ a ~ ~ o ~. O e-r ~' w U c Q a a a w F"~w~/l 1~ W H z 0 U -zr a z c~ w A G7 a -71- h ~ O .~ ~ H GL ~ r [ C ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ V ~, w U b 0 d ~ ~ •~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ a ~ ad w ~1 +~+ G o ~ w .~'~' O U o =1 ~t 0 a a w H F O U w Q 0 O z 0 0 w _72_ o ~ o ~~ O N a ~ ~ ~i ~ Q ? _ b ~ [ aU Z+ U Z a 0 o d y b •~ w ~ r , ~ a o i~^.~ V V -~ Q z a ~~ Ho a a a a w z w O Q V W F rM F~ V z ~, w z Ho U a N F ~ 15 ~ H F' N a F ~+ y ~' F F x a U u r0 V d V M M Y nl y ? ,O DO M b ~ 4 ~ y, fA V/ V1 x v! M ~, N M w ~ 'O a E ~ d R ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~ 7 b ~ op C! -~ n ~ ~ ~~ ( _ T .~ - C x ~ C y C yy a .G ~yi 9 L ~ ~ ~ g F' ~ Ti ' ~ u ~ _ 'O '~ ~ ~ N tR K ~0 b ~ !L b ~ ~'1 ~ f`1 h f`! -73- 0 N 3 ~ d e N b 00 h. V J~ N a M c°OJ N ~: N n H h N 0 Q N d' M o0 N v x_ ~ a+ a F rj N k m F F NB 101 Off-Ramp -Oyster Point Blvd January 7, 2010 ATTACHMENT B SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR NB 101 Off-Ramp -Oyster Point Blvd T.Y. Lin International (CONSULTANT) shall provide to the City of South San Francisco engineering design services and preparation of construction bid documents for improvements to the NB 101 off ramp at Oyster Point Blvd (PROJECT). The project for this Scope of Services will include improvements within the State and City right-of--way. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES: The basis of the proposed PROJECT improvements for this Scope of Services are those identified in the "Traffic Impact Fee Study for the East of 101 Area", prepared by CCS Planning and Engineering in 2001. Note that these proposed PROJECT improvements do not necessarily provide for those improvements necessary to satisfy future (2035) traffic volumes. Improvements provided for in this Scope of Services include: • Adding an additional lane to north side of Dubuque Avenue and striping between NB 101 off- ramp and Oyster Point Blvd. • Minor widening to the north side of the SB US 101 on-ramp from Dubuque (length of 100 ft +/-) • Improvements and restriping for the NB 101 on-ramp from Oyster Point Blvd. (length of 420 ft +/-) • Restriping Oyster Point Boulevard From Gateway Blvd to north side of Oyster Point/Dubuque Intersection (length of 1100 ft +/-) • Modification of existing traffic signal systems (2 locations: Dubuque Ave/US 101 Ramps intersection & Dubuque Ave/Oyster Point Boulevard intersection) • Replacement landscaping and irrigation for the areas disturbed by construction activities • Other facilities and appurtenances that are typically required for a roadway project of this type, including curb & gutter, concrete barrier, metal beam guard railing, storm drainage system, signing, metal beam guard railing, and erosion control The proposed work may require the design and inclusion of retaining walls along a portion of the length of the proposed PROJECT. In order to minimize project cost, the proposed design will minimize any bridge widenings. The project development and design included in this Scope-of-Services assumes: Caltrans Project approval document will be a Permit Engineering Evaluation Report (PEER). Attachments to the PEER include Traffic Operations Analyses, Right-of--Way Certification, Utility Certification, Design Exception Fact Sheets, Environmental Clearance Document (to be provided by the City), Storm Water Data Report (SWDR), Geotechnical Recommendation, and Hazardous Materials Investigation (ADL). The Consultant shall prepare a complete set of construction bid documents; including City provided contract terms and bidding requirements (boiler plate), plans, technical specifications, contract quantities, and estimate of probable construction cost. The Consultant shall prepare the Application for the Construction Encroachment Permit for signature by the City and submission to Caltrans. -74- Pagel NB 101 Off-Ramp -Oyster Point Blvd January 7, 2010 It is assumed that the proposed ramp improvements can be constructed within Caltrans or City owned right of way and the proposed ramp improvement project does not require federal funding (local funds only) and no federal approvals will be required. The City shall prepare the necessary Environmental Clearance Document required for the Project. The approved Environmental Clearance Document shall be provided to the Consultant for attachment to the PEER. DETAILED SCOPE OF SERVICES: TASK 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 1.1 Administration and Oversight Project administration and oversight responsibilities and activities will include the following: • Administer the project • Manage tasks and deliverables • Ensure conformance with Caltrans and City standards and requirements • Oversee Coordination with the City, Caltrans, and other affected agencies 1.2 Coordination Project Coordination will be established and maintained throughout the design process. Agencies will include at least the following: • City of South San Francisco As the project sponsor, close coordination with the City will be maintained. Of particular interest will be identifying potential cost and/or scheduling impacts at a very early stage, so that resolutions can be incorporated in a timely manner and with resulting minimum impacts on the project. • State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Extensive coordination with Caltrans will be required to ensure that all the necessary requirements and procedures are followed in order to ensure that all the necessary requirements and procedures are followed in order to achieve the required Caltrans clearances and approvals. Coordination will include, at a minimum: o Caltrans meetings with Functional Units and Permits Department o Environmental Clearance o Right-of--Way certification o Conceptual geometrics • Other Design Consultants The City has contracted with a Traffic Engineering consultant (TJKM) to provide citywide traffic analysis. Close coordination between the off-ramp CONSULTANT and TJKM will also be required. 7 5 _ Page 2 NB 101 Off-Ramp -Oyster Point Blvd January 7, 2010 • Permitting Agencies Depending upon the identified environmental impacts associated with this Project, if any, coordination may be required with the various Resource Agencies in order to obtain the necessary permits for construction. 1.3 Meetings The CONSULTANT shall organize, schedule, and prepare agenda and meeting minutes for the following meetings: Project Kick-off meeting with the City 2. Project Progress/Status 3. Design Coordination with the City, Caltrans, and TJKM 4. Design submittal review 5. City Council presentation meeting This Scope-of-Services and corresponding fee provides for up to 3 meetings with the Caltrans, up to 3 Technical Meetings with the City and/or other Consultants, and 1 City Council presentation. As part of Caltrans Permit Engineering Evaluation Report (PEER) process, regular Caltrans Project Development Team (PDT) meetings are not scheduled. CONSULTANT will meet with the Caltrans permits department and selected functional units at strategic times during the design process. TASK 2 PRELIMINARY DESIGN 2.1 Develop Base Mapping and Ground Surveys Aerially flown digital base mapping will be developed in Microstation format at 1-foot contour intervals. This mapping will be suitable for PS&E level design in addition to being used in developing PEER (Encroachment Permit) level exhibits. Field (ground) surveys will be used to establish the survey control and locate right of way monumentation. Mapping will be developed under Caltrans guidelines in accordance with the Checklist A, B & C Procedures in the Caltrans Right-of--Way Manual. 2.2 Field Investigation CONSULTANT will conduct field investigation and review with team members to observe the site for the proposed improvements. Two site visits by Consultant Team Members are anticipated. (Note that site visits for this Oyster Point Project will be conducted at the same time as the site visits for the E. Grand Avenue Project). 2.2.1 Potholing For the portion of the project for which final design and construction bid documents are to be prepared, the various utility facilities that may be impacted by the proposed work will be potholed to determine their precise horizontal and vertical locations. CONSULTANT will pothole up to (3) locations. _ 7 6 _ Page 3 NB 101 Off-Ramp -Oyster Point Blvd January 7, 2010 2.3 Obtain Utility and Right of Way Data To assist the roadway designers in identifying existing right-of--way, available GIS and recorded information will be used to provide an early indication of the existing right-of--way limits. This will be refined once additional mapping work is performed. CONSULTANT shall contact all utility owners that have utilities in the project are for utility records. Identified utilities will be plotted on plan sheets from the record information. 2.4 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING Traffic Data Collection The City has retained TJKM to prepare the East of 101 Traffic Modeling Study, which includes collection of existing traffic counts at locations throughout the South San Francisco area. This scope of work and fee assumes the Traffic Modeling Study will provide AM and PM peak hour existing intersection counts at the study locations included in this project. Study intersections are: • U.S. 101 Ramps /Dubuque Avenue • Sister Cities Boulevard /Airport Boulevard • Oyster Point Boulevard /Dubuque Avenue • Oyster point Boulevard /Gateway Boulevard At the study intersections, field observations will determine existing geometric features, lane configurations, traffic control, and vehicle queuing that will be used to develop, calibrate, and validate the Synchro/SimTraffic models. Traffic Engineering Responsibilities and activities that are Not Included in this Scope of Services are: • Existing Conditions Intersection Analysis (Study intersections) • Existing Conditions Freeway Ramp Junction Analysis (NB US 101 Ramps) In addition, CONSULTANT will assume that TJKM will coordinate directly with Caltrans to obtain approval of the Year 2015 traffic forecasts for the study intersections included in this project. CONSULTANT will use these approved forecasts, provided by TJKM, to complete the traffic operations analysis in the subsequent tasks. 2.4.1 Existing Conditions Analysis Intersection Analysis CONSULTANT will analyze the study intersections for the AM and PM peak hour conditions using the Synchro/SimTraffic software. A traffic simulation analysis (such as that allowed using the SimTraffic software) will more accurately model the effects of vehicle queues on intersection capacity. Peak hour factors will be based on traffic counts. Peak hour delay and level of service will be calculated for each intersection consistent with 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) analysis procedures. • Freeway Ramp Junction Analysis _77_ Page4 NB 101 Off-Ramp -Oyster Point Blvd January 7, 2010 CONSULTANT will analyze the US 101 northbound ramp junctions at Oyster Point Boulevard off-ramp according to HCM procedure using the HCS+ software. • Collision Analysis CONSULTANT will prepare a collision summary based on Caltrans TASAS data for the most recent available three-year period at the US 101 northbound off-ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard. The results will be summarized by collision type in tabular form and compared to state-wide averages for similar facilities. 2.4.2 Existing With Project Conditions Analysis CONSULTANT will analyze the study intersections using the Synchro/SimTraffic models. The study intersections will be evaluated under "Existing With Project" conditions for the AM and PM peak hour. Average intersection delay, intersection level of service, and 95t'' percentile queues for critical movements will be reported. US 101 off-ramp junctions will also be evaluated with the Project using the HCS model developed. Density and level of service will be reported. 2.4.3 Year 2015 Without Project Conditions CONSULTANT will analyze study intersection using the Synchro/SimTraffic models developed. The study intersections will be evaluated under the Year 2015 Without Project conditions for the AM and PM peak hour. Average intersection delay, intersection level of service, and 95`'' percentile queues for critical movements will be reported. US 101 off-ramp junctions will also be evaluated without the Project using the HCS model. Density and level of service will be reported. 2.4.4 Year 2015 With Project Conditions CONSULTANT will analyze the study intersections using the Synchro/SimTraffic models developed. The same traffic forecasts will be used as in Task 2.4.2, but the proposed new intersection configurations resulting from the Project will be applied and evaluated. Average intersection delay, intersection level of service, and 95th percentile queues for critical movements will be reported. US 101 off-ramp junctions will also be evaluated with the Project using the HCS model developed. Density and level of service will be reported. 2.4.5 Sensitivity Analysis Based on Task 2.4.3, if the study intersections operate acceptably with the implementation of the project during Year 2015 conditions, the forecasts will be increased incrementally until intersections no longer operate acceptably. Based on those results, CONSULTANT will estimate the number of years beyond 2015 that the proposed improvements will continue to accommodate the future traffic demand. If the study intersections do not operate acceptably with the implementation of the Project during Year 2015 conditions, the forecasts will be reduced incrementally until the study intersections operate acceptably. This will allow us to estimate the useful life of the Project between existing conditions and the Year 2015. 2.4.6 Documentation _ 7 8 _ Page S NB 101 Off-Ramp -Oyster Point Blvd January 7, 2010 CONSULTANT will prepare an Administrative Draft Traffic Operations Report (TOR) that summarizes the existing conditions analysis results, Year 2015 conditions analysis results, and sensitivity analysis results, and will submit it for one round of review and comment by the City. After written comments are received, CONSULTANT will prepare a Draft TOR for submittal to Caltrans. CONSULTANT will respond to one round of written comments from Caltrans to prepare the Final TOR. 2.4.7 Meetings CONSULTANT will attend up to four (4) traffic related Team meetings, (1) kick-off meeting, and (1) City Council meeting. 2.5 Preliminary Geotechnical Report The studies required for the PEER level of work will be a preliminary geotechnical report. Proposed scope of the work will be to review readily available materials and prepare a Preliminary Geotechnical Report. No field exploration work is proposed for this phase, however site review and data research is proposed. The review will be based on readily available data including as-built Log of Test Borings from any existing projects and other Agency records (if available). The potential geotechnicaUgeologic impacts and mitigations will be discussed on a broad basis including but not limited to slope stability, geology, seismic impacts, erosion, groundwater conditions, etc. for the proposed culverts, pavement sections, cuts and embankments. Generally, the geotechnical issues relevant to the proposed project are presented in a qualitative manner with no specific design recommendations. Certain design assumptions are made as to the type of retaining wall, type of foundations, approximate pile lengths and approximate slope angles, etc. The potential mitigation measures are also provided in a discussion format in order to define the overall design program and evaluate cost impacts. 2.6 Geotechnical Design and Materials Report A Geotechnical Design and Materials Report will be developed to provide recommendations for preparation of the final design. This scope of work will include preparation of a combined Geotechnical Report for the roadway, embankment, and retaining wall. 2.6.1 Research and Data Collection CONSULTANT will use existing as-built Log of Test Borings (LOTB) and reports for the interchange project. 2.6.2 Field Exploration: No field work will be performed. CONSULTANT will use existing as-built LOTB and reports for the interchange project. Therefore NO NEW BORINGS are proposed. 2.6.3 Laboratory Testing CONSULTANT will use existing as-built LOTB and reports for the interchange project. Therefore NO NEW BORINGS or laboratory testing are proposed. 2.6.4 Soils Analysis/Evaluation: CONSULTANT shall perform engineering analyses and develop design recommendations for the roadway widening and possible retaining walls. Pavement is anticipated in embankment material. _ 7 9 _ Page 6 NB 101 Off-Ramp -Oyster Point Blvd January 7, 2010 2.6.5 Prepare Draft Geotechnical Design and Materials Report: CONSULTANT shall prepare preliminary recommendations for pavement design and general embankment/retainingtyall design. 2.6.6 Prepare Final Geotechnical Design and Materials Report: CONSULTANT shall prepare detailed report including design recommendations for embankment slope, retaining walls and pavement design. 2.7 Phase I Initial Site Assessment CONSULTANT will prepare a Phase I Initial Site Assessment for the proposed ramp improvements. The ISA study will be prepared to identify potential hazardous waste sites and evaluate environmental factors that may have impacted the soil groundwater quality within the project limits. The study will include data collection and documents research including historical land use based on study of aerial photographs and other relevant documents. The data research will be ordered from Environmental Data Research Inc. (EDR Inc.) for the proposed project. No field exploration and/or testing are included in this phase of the work. 2.8 Storm Water Data Report & Water Quality Studies 2.8.1 Hydrology, Water Quality and Drainage Review CONSULTANT will review available data on hydrology, hydraulics, and drainage. CONSULTANT will review as-built drainage plans and conduct a 1-day field drainage review of the proposed project area. (Note that site visits for this Oyster Point Project will be conducted at the same time as the site visits for the E. Grand Avenue Project). 2.8.2 Location Hydraulic Study CONSULTANT will perform a floodplain risk assessment for the proposed project. CONSULTANT will research FEMA information and coordinate with the City of South San Francisco and the County of San Mateo to identify major floodplain issues. 2.8.3 Storm Water Data Report CONSULTANT will prepare a Storm Water Data Report for the proposed project. The report will address the project's storm water impacts and the needs for BMP implementation. CONSULTANT will coordinate with Caltrans District 4 Office of Water Quality to determine the design approach. 2.9 Hazardous Materials Investigation (ADL) CONSULTANT shall prepare a work plan for approval by Caltrans and a Health and Safety Plan prior to start of work. At the proposed sample locations, a total of 3 samples per bore hole will be collected, up to a depth of 2 feet below ground surface. Each sample will be analyzed for lead by EPA Method 6010. The test results will be used to develop the necessary procedures for -g~- Page7 NB 101 Off-Ramp -Oyster Point Blvd January 7, 2010 identifying the extent of the contaminated soil, potential removal, and potential reuse of aerial lead impacted soil with the State right of way. 2.10 Right-of--Way Engineering The right-of--way engineering tasks shall include preparing the right-of--way certification, identifying existing right-of--way lines, and providing legal descriptions of any temporary easements that may be required. TASK 3 PREPARATION OF PEER/ENCROACHMENT PERMIT 3.1 Preliminary Geometrics 3.1.1 Roadway The preliminary geometrics for the ramp widening will be developed and shown on the project plans. These "skeleton" plans will be used as the basis for development of the full set of construction plans and to identify limits of retaining walls. 3.1.2 Structures -Type Selection It is likely that, due to the existing soil conditions, a Retaining Wall Type Selection Report for the proposed retaining wall will be required, which would require a Structure Type Selection Meeting with Caltrans. This will include: • Type Selection Memo (Caltrans format) documenting the considerations discussed in the type selection process, including aesthetics, construction impacts, costs and type of retaining walls considered • Vicinity Map • General Plan and Estimate • Preliminary Geotechnical information • Recommendation 3.2 65% PS&E Submittal 3.2.1 Roadway (65%) Assumptions: • Plans will be developed using U.S. Customary Units (English) • Within the existing State right of way, plans will be developed per the 2006 Highway Design Manual (HDM), the 2006 Standard Plans, and the 2006 Standard Specifications and Standard Special Provisions (SSP). • Outside of State right of way, plans will be developed per City standards and details as directed by the City. • Plans will be prepared in the Microstation format. • Project specifications will not be included in the 65% Submittal. - 81 - Page 8 NB 101 Off=Ramp -Oyster Point Blvd January 7, 2010 • Planting and irrigation contract documents will be prepared for improvements along the ramp. • The number of Submittal sets will be per the requirements of each reviewing agency. 3.2.2 Quantities & Estimates CONSULTANT shall prepare contract quantities and corresponding construction cost estimates and update them for this submittal. Contract quantities will be developed for each discrete item of work and per the Caltrans Basic Engineering Estimating System (BEES). The estimated unit or lump sum cost for each new bid item will be developed and actual bid prices will be used for common items with recently bid comparable projects. 3.2.3 QA/QC CONSULTANT will perform an independent check on the design plans, specifications, and cost estimate on all project elements, including the various technical reports, as a matter of course throughout the design process. For the submittals, the CONSULTANT shall submit the plans, specifications, quantities, and cost estimate to various reviewing agencies after completion of its own in-house QA/QC review. 3.2.4 Structures (65%) Based on the approved structure type, CONSULTANT will prepare structure plans and details sheet for each retaining wall. The design will be according to current Caltrans Bridge Design Specifications. The drawings will be prepared to Caltrans drafting standards. The Draft (65%) Structure Plans will be submitted to both District 04 and the Office of Special Funded Projects (OSFP) in Caltrans-Sacramento for review. 3.3 100% PS&E Submittal 3.3.1 Roadway (100%) Collect and respond to comments from the 65% Submittal. • Meeting with reviewers, if necessary, for clarification of comments and concurrence with resolution approach • Finalize roadway plans and update plans to incorporate review comments, as appropriate • Finalize Planting and irrigation contract documents • Submit 100% PS&E Submittal package and Encroachment Permit to Caltrans, City, and any other reviewing agencies. 3.3.2 Specifications The project specifications and special provisions will be developed using the 2006 Standard Specifications and the 2006 Standard Special Provisions and will be prepared in standard Caltrans format. City specific technical specifications will be incorporated into the project set of special provisions, as required. Technical specifications, corresponding to Section 10-Construction Details of Caltrans Special Provisions, will be prepared using standard Caltrans formats and standard special _ 8 2 _ Page 9 NB 101 Off-Ramp -Oyster Point Blvd January 7, 2010 provisions. These technical specifications shall provide for all necessary material and installation requirements and measurement and payment clauses for each contract item. The developed technical specifications shall be combined with a City provided "boiler plate" to create the required bid documents. The Consultant shall provide necessary project specific inputs as required by the individual "boiler plate" sections. 3.3.3 Quantities & Estimates CONSULTANT shall prepare contract quantities and corresponding construction cost estimates and update them for this submittal. Contract quantities will be developed for each discrete item of work and per the Caltrans BEES system. The estimated unit or lump sum cost for each new bid item will be developed and actual bid prices will be used for common items with recently bid comparable projects. 3.3.4 QA/QC CONSULTANT will perform an independent check on the design plans, specifications, and cost estimate on all project elements, including the various technical reports, as a matter of course throughout the design process. For the submittals, the CONSULTANT shall submit the plans, specifications, quantities, and cost estimate to various reviewing agencies after completion of its own in-house QA/QC review. 3.3.5 Structures (100%) CONSULTANT will perform the independent check of each retaining wall utilizing the unchecked details from 65% PS&E. An independent set of structural calculations will verify structure layout, geometry and conformance with the Caltrans bridge design criteria. The mark-ups on the plans will follow Caltrans procedures regarding back checks and resolving differences with the designer: The 100% Structure Plans will be submitted to both District 04 and the Office of Special Funded Projects (OSFP) in Caltrans-Sacramento for review. 3.3.6 Prepare Encroachment Permit Caltrans Encroachment permit application will be prepared including all required attachments. 3.4 Design Exception Fact Sheets It is anticipated that a limited number (not to exceed four) of Design Exception Fact Sheets will be prepared for identified design elements that do not conform to current Caltrans Standards. 3.5 Final Submittal • Finalize roadway plans and update plans to incorporate review comments, as appropriate • Update the Draft Cost Estimate 3.6 Bid Set Submittal The final checked and approved set of Bid Documents (PS&E) will be assembled and transmitted to the City. All plans, specifications, and estimates shall be submitted in hard copy and electronic formats. The City shall provide the contract terms and bidding requirements ("boiler plate") to the Consultant for incorporation into the final Bid Document. _83_ Page 10 NB 101 Off-Ramp -Oyster Point Blvd January 7, 2010 3.7 Support Services During Bidding CONSULTANT will provide the City with bid documents, ,prepare addenda to bid package as necessary and assist in distribution of addenda, and other tasks as necessary. • Respond to Bidder Inquires • Attend Pre-Bid Meeting TASK 4 PREPARE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT The City shall perform all activities related to obtaining environmental clearance for the Project and shall provide to the Consultant the approved Environmental Clearance Document, that is a required attachment to the PEER. Therefor any Consultant activities or costs associated with the environmental clearance process or document are not included or provided for in this Scope of Services. Responsibilities and activities that are Not Included in this Scope of Services, Tasks 1-4, are: • Activities or costs related to the environmental clearance process or document • Preparation of apost-construction Record of Survey map or the setting of any additional. property/right-of--way corner monumentation • Negotiations for, or acquisitions of any rights-of--way • Additional Traj~c Studies or Analyses beyond those described within this scope TASK 5 CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT ACTIVITIES All work associated with Construction Support Activities is NOT included in this Scope of Work. All work and costs associated with Construction Support Activities shall be considered as Extra Work. 5.1 Construction Support Services • This task will be limited to providing responses to questions or clarifications from the Resident Engineer • Attending Meetings, as requested by the Resident Engineer. 5.2 Prepare Construction Record Drawings (As-Builts) • Prepare Construction Record Drawings (As-Builts) based on marked-up plans provided by the Resident Engineer. - 8 4 - Page 11 NB 101 Off-Ramp -Oyster Point Blvd January 7, 2010 APPENDICES Page 12 -85- wd9l b bIOZ '6Z IoW 6MP'3lVOS OS ld ~e}s6p\s}igiy~3\OOtlO\SSO66\ d :6uiMO~O NB 101 Off-Ramp -Oyster Point Blvd January 7, 2010 LIST OF SUBCONSULTANTS Su6consultant T e of Work WRECO Draina e Fehr & Peers Traffic Parikh Geotech PGA Desi Landsca e Radman Aerial Surve Aerial Ma in Ru eri-Jensen-Azar & Associates (RJA) Field Surve Geocon Hazardous Materials _87_ Page 13 s I ~ y a I ~ ~ A y 4 A ~ ~ ~~ ~ z g 3 ~ ~ ~ a li E c ~ 3 g 8 ~ g ! ~ m S n SSE ~~g= s g~ m~ qq ~ O p J ~ W a ~ T m ~ ~ m ~IS ~~ ~ ~ ~~4 W g L o y N g Eg ~ 3 s ~ x ~ 25 ~ ~ c7 `a ~ o ~ i d I' R tl ~ FO E a° E ~ W E E ~+ d '6 ~ a ~ E ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ t 9_ tW mm~ s ~ ; s f~a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d @~ C¢ ~ a 24 ~ S~ a~ c ~ a "! S~ m a~ 8 a~~ i N O~ N 1-~ ~ L~DL7C1D~ _ _L7 © ~ --~- ~ -- I o N W ~< m m M m 'Ol ~~N ~N ~ ~~ -e im ~m 1~ m ~ ~. r ~N f7 ~Q ,m m ^ m OI ~ I'. ~ ` I N IN N N N IN ' i i _ YV n Ul r y fq p z ~ 8 c o 8 3 ~ ,. ~ ~ 0 Ca ~N~ ~g • ~ ~ $ ~ e 3 ~ ~ ~ 8 N ~ e m ~~~ y a a$~ $ n a ~ IL E e~~ ~ g~~ e e o d .~a a ~ ~ LL W Q U ~ U ~ (~ ~ 'O ~`pa ~" ~ a b ~ Tr R_m' --- s ~~ ~m ~ jc`9i ~r°'i i°a a la a ~ I~ o c Ha NB 101 Off-Ramp -Oyster Point Blvd January 7, 2010 STAFF HOUR & FEE PROPOSAL _89_ Page 15 Fee Proposal Summary For NB 101 Off-Ramp -Oyster Point Blvd PS&E Fee ProDOSaI: Task 1 Project Management $ 29,460 Task 2 (Excluding Survey & Geotech) Conceptual Preliminary Plans $ 85,135 Task 3 Preparation ofPEER/Encroachment Permit 183 150 Total Fee PS&E (Excluding Surveying and Geotechnical Engineering {Tasks 1-2) $ 297,745 Surveying & Geotechnical EnQineerin~ ~~~i~i r~~r i ^ Survevina,~ Geotechnical EnQineerin~ ~.~ ~,~~ Task 2.1 Develop Base Mapping & Ground Surveys Task 2.5 Prepare Geoetchnical Report Task 2.6 Geotechnical Design & Materials Report Task 2.7 Phase I Initial Site Assessment $ 39,744 $ 12,584 $16,738 10 600 Total Fee Surveying & Geotechnical Engineering $ 79,666 Total Fee PS&E, Surveying & Geotechnical Engineering S 377,411 -90- d V L N d ~ n d n 4 ~ 'y d ~ 3 j y ~` >~> 4` V ~1 sw~ u ++ .~ Q u a w ~ h ~. ~ O 0 ~ a 0 8 ~' a U 0 O z a d O 0 w w O.I W Gwi, d F ~~ ~1 » O v F 0 0 0 $ v. o o $ ~ $ .q o$ g 0o n l I Illl N N N N N N N N N M M M N N I~ I I C I{ s N I ~ N ~ H g N l ° » » » g M » f i i l g N s M s M s iq ~ N l m ~o ° i o 0 0 0 ~o o I I I I ~o v a a $ I ~ I f l f l I < ~ I i l i l ~ l . N < I I l l ! v I N I i l i l ° ! I I I I E o N h F o ~ m ,~yy a v ~ .^~ '^m FYl ~ sp^ p; a Chi b ~ 3 '•F3 ~ tl v n c ~ 5 E ~ 3 ~1 _ 3 y ' ' •c •n $ 4 a ~ ~ ~ ` r Qg Z ; ' F ~ ~ ~ s a - •c ~ ' s g ~~ ~ ~ •a ~ 9 ~ ~ ~ a ? ~ .~ t~ U '° ~~pp c x ~ ~ zN N ~ ~ N a 'R •L H 9 8 .0 ~ 8 0 ~ • _4 8 e y = ~ $ - ~ 3 ~ _ _ ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ 7 g •~ f~ 3 `o . illllliiiiii N O ~ W ~ v ? ? Y 0 0 < E ~ 44 & V Y p ~ 5 N m r i N 2 oZ - N ry N r q ,n ~o h c~ N m N a N ~ N N I -91- ~~ ° ~ N ,• T ~ S Q~ •ii f N H ~ w' N N w N~ y p 8 N 1 n $ N X N N N 1 N V a ~ N y 9 a 4 I N q C a ~j H ~L C f LL N ~~ H a ~ ~I sl Isl ,Isl$I ~ .N~i 00 h M N H N N e N T N L a N N : $ N M ~p N N 8 M N N N ~ ~ o `v u ~ ro a 4 ti° s v y a v° C7 o Z U 0 q 5~ 0 5~ °m 5~ o W o y N y ~; N e end, 25 0 ~ 25 ~ 25 r 8 .Tj ~_ X y n ~ b ~ 1 i I ~ ~ ^ °' N ~_ r M M N N M M N N N N N M M N N N eH ~ y( n 8 G N I °a N I ~ m I $ ~~ Q s x W N H ~ N O y~ ~ N a ~ N F C y y ~ N F N o ~, ~ ! i~ !~ ~ ea Z a N H y 4 I I I N N ~ F i I i r N H I I I N N H }" !L ~ ~ O '~/i N Vl ~ N J. N J ~ d ~ w~ ~ ~ ~z~ a s .. p ~ ~ ~ ~_ ~ F ~o t~ N ~ N p E~ ~ R '° ,~ N C in o T .7 w ~ ~+ z 0 tt ~ x ~~~ m~ ~ `~' u ~ Y' 6. C N Q ~ M F_ a ~ s W pwp U ~ a ~ a ~ z E ~' ~ e x Y W ~ ~ S 0. F E ; O w F F {d C d M -92- I ~ $ I ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ $ ~ ~ $ ~ ~ ~ ~ h ~ ~ N w h ~ ~ w C{ ~ N l ~ ~ I ~ ~ e a i x :~ ~ ~ e ° ~ s ° = I ~° f m ~~ I I ~ $ i ~ ~= .S I n =~ y a I ~ I ~ ~ I ~ T m I b ~ I d N ~ ~0 I b ~ N tl O N N Y I N I T I N N o _~ ~. ~ ~~ ~ X u"S ~ S ~ ~ ~ ~ 6 '~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ E a ~ ~ ' K y OC O~ ~ y 4' a Y y ~ N v 8 a en ~ e. ~ ~ N H R ^~ "1 '~'~ "~1 n n ~ $ b IC fII m vi - ^ M M f M N of b M F M O O U y '~ .U ~ N c v '~' O 0., ~ ~ d "C ~ o U ~ o o r ~~ Irs F N M s ~ ~ g S a ~ ~ p~ ~ io ~ ~T ~yy+~~ 3 ~ M < OiL r ~ ~ I z ~ 9 C F O m h w a N s N 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ _ f N N N M N N M f py` ~ ~ H N N M N~ N H N 'd, n J o 0 0 o e v n ,n., F N Y F s f -93- 'r R n M H 8 4 w H F ~ ? OqH P a a H ~ ~~ ~~ `~ y ~ < N N 55 V 3 N ~ N xx ~ r d H h Y ^I b5 N ~ 0. N ~ C F H N O~ O H N Y ~ i- en 0 • a $ ~o 'o H ~~~ .~ ~ ~as r 1 3 C o' ~z U b ~. b p O w F+ W ~„ c a a ~ U O 0 ., as z W V~ ~ a a a a a~ w w z w O ~ di ~' O w z H W F z ~ w z o a ~' w a w a °~ w o ~, ,~ N fl ,~ r N h ~O ~ O O ~+1 N N N h h H H H VI VI i9 H O~ ~G O. Q~ 00 N N try /1 ~ ~ H H H Vl H e ?5 ~ ~ ~ a v n rii H Vi Li ~- i~ y s a ~o •- Q .g, 'a ao ~t ae df eo .~ N N N 4 Ci ~ C~ c . 8 ~ ~ 6 ~ ~ ~~ 3 3 u ~ ~ w ~ e a ;~ 9 i~ ~ y ~ } ~ P a .i ~ i ++ ~ N ~ .- .r f [` ~n .i ~ {^ ~p v t P h a; 1 N NI N H N bA h r H -94- o ~ o •~ o v i N ~ n ~ ~ ~a ~y~ ~~ o~ b 0 ~~ ~ a ~ w ~ a~ ,~ O a o ~. V O W W v~ ~ a ~' O a w W W O ~3 d O p~ ~ ~ A w ~ O ~ ~, U F a ~ ~ W v' ~ O U a -95- •~ o V ` N A' C V h ~_ V nti ~ F Q a y, ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ O ~! ~ y ~ y o ~, U , e ~ ~ O ° > ~ ~ W ~ O ~ ~ F ~ ~ ~ i z a, ~' -96- ~' o u ` rv n ~ Y y o CV 0 .. N W V O 0 y z co 5 U v n 00 00 ~` _o h 7 fA O v O a F y vv~~~ F [d, -97- u ~~ ~O N ry ~. ~4 V ~~ o Z U W ~ w ^ p d ~ a '~ ~ w y ~ ~ ' z . ~ ~ ~ p w . a ~ ~ a ~ ~ p O W ~ 4 ~ o ~ ~ U O w z z w o U a C7 a A a ~ F ~ ~ ~+- . a ~ ~ ~ b H -98- v ~ O H ~_ n .~ ~ 40 '^Z~ r v] ~~ U W ~ W a' o ~i ~ Q a ~ W , z W . o ~ . ~ ` ~ w °; ~ ~ o O ~ ~ s o w a ~ c~ w e H ~ N O z U F ~ ~ .°, C5 ~ O z w z V W r h M ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'e 6. d -99- N sr [~ rI P N N O ~ o !- y N ~ F+ `v ~ ~ N O ~ n ~ ~ gC~g ~° °~ 2 ~~ o ~+ o 2~ U QW ~../ b a o ~ a ~ ~ w y '~ z w 'b a O ~ w ~ O ~ o ~ w ' w ~ y ~ ~ O ~ ~ U ~ W O ~ ~ W ~ z ~ o a ~' W 0 a M x N W ~ F ~... N ~ N g 4 ~"' S N N tl N e N a N p N ~ ~ N Q O O Q O M ~ a h ~ '~ K rt ~ M ~ 7 ~ N r~ Ob d ~, ~ ,, _ ~, C Q . ~ C ~ q Q .g ,9 Gi h i ~ ~ ~ ss k ~ gg c5 g g t5 W ~ ~~ ~ v ~ ~ .d ni w N ~o n~ .d ~t ~o Fi ~e, ~~ .p (~~ r N N N y .. H ~_ n Ni C ~ Q X1 K °I ~ 0 o~ ~ N w 0 h ~ w Q W N ~. H a y N N k k y F [<. -100- DATE: Apri121, 2010 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Marty Van Duyn, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: STUDY SESSION ON CLIMATE CHANGE RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council receive the presentation regarding climate change and provide staff with feedback and further direction. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The City has been actively responding to climate change for the past several years, addressing the challenge by launching 100 initiatives in 2008 designed to reduce energy consumption, take advantage of new "green" technology, and conserve valuable resources. During the past several years, the State has also taken several major steps to respond to global warming and climate change. These include two major legislative initiatives that engage cities and counties in a partnership with the State to create long-term solutions. Like our neighboring cities, we have been exploring new ways to fulfill that partnership at the local, regional and, ultimately, at the State level. CONCLUSION This evening's Study Session will provide the Council with an overview of key State-wide initiatives and possible strategic actions the City might take to continue to meet the challenge of addressing climate change. By: Approv ~ s Marty Van Duy M. Nag Assistant City ager City Manager Attachment: Copy of April 21st power point presentation, "Climate Change is a Global Problem with Local Solutions" 0 n ?• o c~LIFOR~~~ a ego DATE: April 21, 2010 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Steven T. Mattas, City Attorney SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEN$ENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN MATED RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving an agreement with the Superior Court of California, Cnunlty of San Mateo concerning the processing of refunds For fines and fees previously paid'on citations under the red-light photo enforcement program. BACKGROUND/DISCUS SION On March 25, 2009 and March 29, 2009, the Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo ~"Court") issued court orders dismissing all traffic citations issued pursuant to the red light photo enforcement program. T1~ese court orders encompassed aIl' citations issued between August 14, 2009 and February 28, 2010. In addition to ordering dismissal of all citations issued, the Court ordered that motorists be refunded all fines and fees paid under the red ]light photo enforcement program. In order to facilitate prompt refund of fines paid, the City negotiated an agreement with the Court to advance the funds necessary to issue the refunds and then fbr the City to recover those advanced funds from the portion of future traffic citation revenues that wodld otherwise be payable to the State and County. The Court does not retain fine revenues for more than a month. By law, those fine revenues must be distributed to designated state and local government agencies. Thus, the majority of the fines previously paid have already been sent to the respective state and local agencies. In order to begin issuing refunds soon, the agreement provides that the City will advance tha Court $1,500,000 ("Advance Payment"). This Advance Payment will be used by the Court to pay refunds to motorists who received citations and paid fines for the citations that were later dismissed as part'of the two court orders referenced above. The Advance Payment funds will be used to fund the portion of the fine refund allocated to payments made to the State and County. The Court will return the full Advance Payment to the City after the Court has withheld fine and fee distributions otherwise payable to the County and State from future traffic citations. The City will also continue to receive its normal portion of any traffic citations fines for citations issued in the future. Staff Report Subject: Resolution Approving Agreement Between the City and the Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo Page 2 The City will also return to the Court the portion of the fines that it has previously received related to the dismissed citations. This amount is $237,T43. Pursuant to the agreement, the Court will "use all reasonable efforts" to issue the refunds within sixty (60) days of receipt of the Advance Payment from the City,... the initial payment for court administrative costs and the City's refund of the portion of the citations fines previously sent to the City. Staff will make these payments to the Court within f ve days of apprgval of this agreement. The agreement also provides that the City is responsible for paying the motorists directly for interest payments required by Iaw on any Court-issued refund. However, in order to facilitate this, the Court will, at least on a monthly basis, provide the City with a list of each refixnded amount, the date of the refund, the name of the person receiving the refund and the, applicable citation number. The agreement also contains a provision that the City pay refunds for traffiic school costs incurred by the motorists. The City is already processing these refunds. The City is also responsible for any "actual and necessary" administrative costs connected with the issuance of the refunds. Under the agreement the City will provide an initial payment of $250,000 to cover administrative costs associated with the Court refunding the fines aad fees. Within forty-five (45) business days the Court will provide the City with an accounting of administrative costs incurred, and a monthly written accounting thereafter. If, the administrativie costs exceed the initial $250,000 reimbursement, the City will be invoiced monthly, if adnu:pistrative costs do not reach $250,000, the difference will be refunded to the City. CONCLUSION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the agreement with the Superior Court of California, San Mateo. By: r ~~~~ ~~.;~ Steven T. Mattas ~5 - City Attorney Apiproved: ~ ~ ~'~ ~, Barry M. Nagel City Manager Attachments: Resolution Agreement 1410276.1. RESOLUTION NO. CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AC7REEMENT BETWEEN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN MATED AND THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO WHEREAS, the City instituted ared-light photo enforcement program, and began issuing citations on August 14, 2009 as part of that program; and WI~REAS, the People of the State of California, ors behalf of the City, in the furtherance of justice and equity, filed motions requesting dismissal of tho citations; and `NI~REAS, on March ZS, 2010, the Superior Court of California, San Mateo ordered that all citations be dismissed, and motorists be refunded all fins and fees paid on citations issued from August ] 4, 2009 through January 27, 2010. On March 29, 2010, the Superior Court of California, San Mateo ordered that all citations be dismissed, and motorists be refunded all fines and fees paid on citations from 3anuary 2$, 2010 through February 2S, 2310; and WHEREAS, staff recommends that the City Council approve the attached agreement between the City and the Superior Court of California, San Mateo ccancerning the processing of refunds for fines and fees paid on citations under the red-light photo enforcement program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of floe City of South San Francisco that the City Council hereby approves the agreement with the Superior Court of California, San Mateo attached hereto as Exhibit A. -1- I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting held on the day of 2010 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: z4xo28~.i ATTEST: City Clerk -2- agreement Concerning Traffic Refunds Related to Red-Light Photo enforcement This Agreement Concerning Traffic Refunds Related to Red-Light Photo Enforcement (the "Agreement") is made by, and entered into between, the 5uperiar Court of California, County of San Mateo (the "Court") and City of South San Francisco, ~ political subdivision of the State of California, (the "City"} {each, a "Party" and both collectively the "Parties"), on April 22, 2010 {the "Effective Date"}. Recitals City instituted ared-light photo enforcement program at the intersections of (1) Hickey Boulevard and El Camino Real, and (2} Westborough Boul~vard/Chestnut Avenue and El Camino Real. As part of that program, on August 14, 2009, City began issuing citations to motorists for allegedly violating Vehicle Code section 21453 by failing to stop for a red traffic light. Subsequently City determined that its contract with the red-light photo enforcement vendor, American Traffic Solutions, Inc. ("ATS"), had not been formally ratified by the City Council as required by State law_ The City Council ratif ed City's contract with ATS at a public meeting on January 27, 2010. By January 27, 2010, however, City's red-light photio enforcement program had generated over b,000 citations to matorists. Since these citations had been issued before the City Council formally ratified the ATS Contract, the People of the State of California, on behalf of City, filed a motion requesting their dismissal in furtherance of justice. Qn March 25, Court granted that motion and ordered dismissal of the citations. Cow~t also ordered that motorists be refunded all fines and fees paid under the red--light photo enforcement program for citations issued from August 14, 2009 through January 27, 2010. Qn March 29, 2010, the People of the State of California, on behalf of City, fled a second motion requesting disnssal of more than 800 red-light :photo enforcement citations that were issued between January 28, 2010 through February 28, 2010. The Motion sought dismissal in the fiutherance of justice on equity grounds because City's police department had decided to stop issuing citations and, instead issue warning notices pending a City hearing on whether to continue the red light photo enforcement program, and in ii~ht of alleged legal deficiencies concerning the program. Court granted the second motion on March 29, 2010 and ordered that motorists be refunded all fines and fees paid on citations iss~zed under the red-light photo enforcement program from Jaauary 28, 2010 through February 28, 2010. l Agreement Conccming Traffic Refunds Relnled to Red-Light Photo Enforcement -3- Court, however, does not retain fine and fee revenues for more than a month. Bylaw, those fine and fee revenues must be distributed to designated recipients in local and state government. Court therefore does not have sufficient funds available to make the requested refunds. In addition, the Parties acknowledge that the work that will be required of Court to process the dismissals and issue refunds will create a significant financial and administrative burden, at a time when its resources already are severely stretched from recent statewide funding cuts to the judicial branch budget and related staff lay-offs. Preliminarily, Court has had to invest considerable personne] time in (1} communicating with City, to evaluate the scope ofthe problems and discuss the steps needed to remedy them, (2} communicating with county and state officials to arrange the return of distributions of citation payments that Court made to those entities or reach agreement about offsetting Court's distributions against future distributions, and (3) responding to members of the public, who have called, written, and visited Court with questions about the status of their traffic citations. To process the dismissals and related refunds, Court will have to incur (1}vendor programuning costs to identify affected traffic cases and delay their processing so that further financial charges are not assessed and there is no further impacfi on motorists' driving records, and (2) staff casts, including overtime and possible part-tine temporary work, to, among other things, identify affected cases, retrieve case files, enter dismissals in Court's case management system, generate and mail dismissal letters as necessary, crate and provide reports and updated abstracts to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV}, mamually update certain DMV records, determine and verify refund amounts (including the amounts of the citation payments and any application fees or bank financial charges incurred as a result of on-line or credit card payments), and generate and mail refund checks. In addition, issuance pf the unauthorized citations caused Court unnecessary expense, in the amount of a $4.81-per-~itatian financial charge, which it paid the vendor that ordinarily processes its traffic citations. The Parties now seek to ensure that necessary dismissals are entered and refunds provided as promptly as possible, and that Court is properly compensated for the described financial and administrative burdens that result from City's decision to seek dismissal of the citations issued under the program from August 14, 2009 through February 28, 2010. Agreement In consideration of the recitals above, and the mutual promises contained in this Agreement, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree, voluntarily and with the advice of counsel, as follows: 1. Defined Terms. The following defined (capitalized} terms in this section 1 apply to the performance obligations of the Parties as set forth in section 2 ("Obligations of the 2 A~rcement Concerning Trn~ic Refunds Relolcd to Red-Liglit Photo Enforcement -4- Parties"). All other capitalized terms in this Agrieement have the meanings set forth in the respective provisions in which they first appear. a. "Advance Payment" means City's payment of $I,500,000 to Court to enable Court to refund to motorists that portion of Distributed Funds that currently are in the possession of County and the state. b_ "ATS" means American Traffic Solutions, Inc., City's red-light photo enforcement vendor. c. "County" means the County of San Mateo. d. "Court Administrative Costs" means ail actual and necessary administrative costs, described above in paragraphs ~~ of the Recitals, that the Court or its paymentlprocessing agents actually incurred with respect to the Dismissed Citations and associated refunds, including, but not limited to, all vendor programrning/processing costs and court personnel costs. "Court Administrative Costs" does not include court's actual refund payments to motorists but only any actual and necessary administrative costs. e. "Dismissed Citations" means citations that City issued to motorists between August I4, 2009 and February 28, 2010 ~s part of its Program {see definition below in paragraph 1 h}, collectively dismissed by Court orders issued on March 25 and 29, 2010. f. "Distributed Funds" means free and fee distributions that motorists paid Court on Dismissed Citations, which Court distributed to local and state government recipients as required by law. g. "Effecfive Date" means the date on which the Parties entered into this Agreement. h. "Program" means the red-light photo enforcement program implemented by City at the intersections of (1) Hickey Boulevard and El Camino Real, and {2) Westborough BouIevard/Chestnut Avenue and El Camino Real, pursuant to which City issued citations to motorists between August 14, 2009 and Febnzary 28, 2010. 2. Obligations of the Parties a. City has provided to the Court lists of citations that City issued as part of its Program between August 14, 2009 and )~ebruary 2$, 2010, with the following information. citation numbers; citation dates; and the names and addresses of the cited motorists. These lists are contained in Exhibit A to the Motions To Dismiss filed under seal on March 15, 2010 and March 29, 2010. Court acknowledges that it has copies of the exhibits filed with said Motions to Dismiss. In the event there are discrepancies between the City's lists and the Court's records regarding the citations at issue, the parties will cooperate to 3 Agreement Concerning Traffic Refunds Related io Red-Light Photo Enforcement -5- provide each other sufficient information to ensure all eligible cases are dismissed and any related refunds are made. b. City shall provide a financial statement showing all Distributed Funds that it received from Court for the Dismissed Citations. c. Within five (5}business days of execution of this Agreement, City shall return to Court the Distributed Funds that it received from Court, because the law does not permit City to retain those funds following dismissal of the underlying citations. Additionally, Court shall hold any current or future fne and fee payments that it receives on the Dlismissed Citations, and will not distribute those payments to the City. The Court shall pay to the City its share of any fiiture fine and fee payments that the Court receives on future citations other than the Dismissed Citations. d. To assist Court in refunding to motorists that portion of Distributed Funds currently held by the County and the stag, City shall transfer the Advance Payment to Court within five (S} business days of execution of this Agreement. Court agrees that it will return the full Advance Payment to City after Court has withheld fine and fee distributions corresponding to that portion of the Distributed Funds that originally vwas forwarded to the County and the state. The parties acknowledge and agree that the City transfer of the Advance Payment to the Court shall not constitute, and shall not be interpreted or implied as, any admission by the City than it is financially responsible for the refund of the Distributed Amounts in any amount greater than the One Hundred and Thirty-Nine Dollars and Seventy-five Cents ($139.75} per each Dismissed Citation for which funds have been distributed by the Court to the City. e. City agrees that it will be financially liable for, and will directly pay to the motorists, any interest payments required by law on any Court-refunded bail forfeiture/fine, penalties, fees and assessments including traffic administrative fee distributions, including interest that is payable under Vehicle Code section 4220L6(c). Court shall not be responsible for making any such interest payments. However, Court shall provide City, on not less than a monthly basis, a list of each refunded amiount, the date of the refund, the name of the person receiving the refund and the applicable citation number. f. City shall, following City's receipt of the executed release form from the affected motorist, reimburse motorists v~vho were issued Dismissed Citations for any fee or tuition that the motorists paid directly to a traffic school, plus 9 Agreement Concerning Traffic Refunds Reinted to Red-Light Photo Enforcement -(- interest at seven percent per annum for the period between the date of the original payment to the traffiic school and the date of the City refund. g. Finally, City agrees to reimburse Court for all Court Administrative Costs. Within five (5) business days of the Effective Date, City shall advance $250,000 to Court as partial reimbursemlent for initial Court Administrative Costs incurred prior to the Effective Dane of this Agreement and during the fast month of the term of this Agreement. Within forty-five (4S) business days of the Effective Date, Court shall provide a written accounting to City of Court Administrative Casts incurred by that date, with sufficient detail, and any supporting documentation, to substantiate the costs. Court shall hold any remaining portion of the advance paymennt of $250,000 paid by City for Court Administrative Costs, to be applied as payment to Court Administrative Costs accrued after the fret month of this Agreement and shall provide to the City a monthly written accounting of such cosh in accordance with the above provision. If the total Court Administrative Costs under this Agreement are less than $250,000, Court shall reimburse City an amount equal to the difference between $250,000 and the Couurt Administrative Costs. To the extent that City's initial advance paymeiat of X250,000 has been depleted and there are further Court Administrative Costs, Court shall provide City an invoice each month listing the Court Administrative costs that Court incurred in the prior month. Court shall ensure that each such invoice provides sufficient detail and attaches any supporting documentation to substantiate included costs. City agrees to pay such unvoiced costs within thirty (30} calendar days of receiving Court's invoi~e_ City's liability for any invoiced but unpaid Court Administrative Costs shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. h. Court will be responsible for requesting reimbursement of the Distributed Funds or withholding future distributions in amounts equal to the total of the Distributed Funds that it paid to the state and County and will provide an accounting to City of such received reunbursements thirty days prior to the expu-ation of this Agreement. City, and all its departments and divisions (including but not limited to the City's Police Department), shall obtain Court's written consent before issuing any public statement, correspondence durected to motorists, or press release that mentions the Court. City shall provide Court with any such draft text at least three (3) business days before the communication is to be released, for Court's review and written approval. Court's written approval or disapproval 5 Agreement Concerning Traffic Refunds Related to Red-Light Photo Enforcement -7- will only address the acceptability of the communication's reference to the Court, and shall not constitute legal adviice. j. Court shall use all reasonable efforts to issue refunds to motorists of all payments made under the Dismissed Citations within sixty (60) days of receipt of the Advance Payment, the initfal Court Administrative Costs payment, and reimbursement of Distributed Funds {under Section 2.c.) from the City. 3. General Terms and Conditions a. Term. This Agreement has a term comxrnencin.g on the Effective Date, and expiring an Apri123, 2011. This Agreement may be terminated by Court, without cause, upon thirty days prior written notice, provided however that any termination without cause shall not telieve the Court of its obligation to issue refunds of a1I payments made under the Dismissed Citations pursuant to Court order and return the Advanced Fu~tds to the City in accordance with Section 2.d. A party may terminate this Agreement far cause, in whole or in part, if the other party materially breaches any provision of this Agreement and does not cure such breach within thirty days after receipt of a notice of breach stating the party's intent to termiipate. The Parties agree to use all reasonable efforts to fulfill their respective obligations under this Agreement, within the term. b. Indemnification. City shall, and hereby does, protect, defend, indemnify and hold harmless Court and the Administrative Office of the Courts {AOC}, and their officers, agents, and employees (collectively "lndemnitees") from and against any and all Loss, cost, damage, expense, and liability of any and every kind or nature, including without iimitat~on, attorney fees and court costs (herein "Claims") arising from or in any way connected with the subject matter of this Agreement and the perforrpance or nonperformance by City of its obligations under this Agreement exclept to the extent that such claims arise out of or relates to the gross negligence ~r willful misconduct of the Indemnitees. In the event any Iegal actien{s} or any other proceedings} may be brough# against the Indernnitees by mason of any such Claims, City, upon written notice from Court, shall promptly defend Indemnitees at City's sole cost and expense, subject to the requirerments of rule 10.201-10.203 of the California Rules of Court. The foregoing indemnity obligations shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. 6 Agreement Concerning Traffic Refunds Related to Red-Lig}tt Phola Enforcement -$- c. Dispute Resolution i. Continued Performance. Whe>~ever City and Court disagree as to any matter governed by this Agreement, the dispute resolution process set forth herein shall govern. While the dispute is pending, the Parties sha11 continue fie perform their respective obligations as set forth herein. ii. Request for Meeting. The Parties shall cooperate and use their best efforts to promptly resolve any dispute. If, after seven (7} days, Court and City cannot informally resolve any dispute, either Party may give the other Party a written request for a meeting between Court's designated representative and City's designated representative for the purpose of resolving a disagreement between the Parties_ Such meeting shall be held within ten (10} days of the receipt of such request. If the meeting fails to rosolve the disagreement, nothing in this Agreement shall preclude thi; Parties from exercising their legal remedies. d. Jurisdiction and Venue. Any legal proceeding commenced by either party shall be filed and heard in the Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo. e_ Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including any exhibits, schedules or attachments to this Agreement, contains 1the entire and complete understanding of the Parties hereto and supersedes any and all. other previous agreements, negotiations or discussions oral or written. f Amendment. No addition to or alteratign of the terms of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in the form of a written amendment to this Agreement, approved and executed by the Parties' Designated Representatives, as provided in section 3.s. g. Time of Performance. Unless specifically stated to the contrary, all references to days herein shall be deemed to refer to calendar days. If the final date for payment of any amount or performance of any act falls on a Saturday, Sunday or Court holiday, such payment shall be made or act performed on the next-succeeding business day. h. Further Assurances. Each Party hereto agrees to cooperate with the other, and to execute and deliver, or cause to b~ executed and delivered, all such other instruments and documents, and to .take all such other actions as may be reasonably requested of it from time to titae, in order to effectuate the provisions and purposes of this Agreement. 7 Agreement Concerning Tral~ic Refunds Related io Red-Light Photo Lnfarcement -9- i. Time of fihe Essence. Time is of the essience in each and all of the provisions of this Agreement. j. Assignment. City and Court agree that neither party shall assign any interest in this Agreement, or subcontract any of'the obligations that either is to perform hereunder without the prior written consent from the other Party. k. Notices. Any notices requixed or permitted hereunder shall be in writing and maybe (a) personally delivered; {b) maned by depositing such notice in the United States mail, first class postage prepaid; or {c) sent by overnight delivery service; addressed as follows or to such other place as each Party hereto may designate by subsequent written notice #o the other Party: If to City: City of South San Francisco Attention: City Manager Address: 400 Grand Avenue City of South San Francisco, CA 94080 Phone: 650-877-$S00 With a copy to: Steven T. Ma~ttas, City Attorney, 400 Grand Avenue, City of South San Francisco, CA 94080 If to Court: Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo Attention: Mr. John Fitton, Court Executive t~fficer Address: 400 County Center Redwood City, CA 94063 Phone: 650-599-1763 With a copy to: Ms. Rodina Catalano, Deputy Court Executive Officer of Conzrt Operations, 400 County Center, Redwood City, CA 94063 Phone: 650-363-4863 8 Agreement Concerning Traffic Refunds Related to Red-Light Photo Enforcement _~~_ 1. Waiver_ Any waiver by either Party hereto of a breach of any of the terms of this Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver of any succeeding breach of the same or other term of this Agreement. m. Binding. This Agreement shall be bindiing upon the successors and permitted assigns of Court and City. n. Counsel and Drafting. Each Party hereto, by its due execution of this Agreement, represents to the other Party that it has reviewed each term of this Agreement with its counsel, or has had tl~e opportunity for such review with its counsel. No Party shall deny the validity of this Agreement on the ground that such Party did not have the advice of counsel. Each Party hereto has had the opportunity to participate in drafting and preparation of this Agreement. The provisions and terms of this Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with the plain meaning thereof, and shall not be construed in favor or against either Party. o. Counterparts. This Agreement maybe executed in one or more counterparts, all of which together shall constitute one and the same Agreement. p. Severability. in the event any provision. of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, or is otherwise inconsistent with the Governing Law (as that term is defined in the next paragraph), then upon the request of either Party, the Parties shall promptly meet and confer to determine how to amend the affected term or terms of this Agreement in a manner consistent with fine Governing Law, but in any event, alI parts of this Agreement not affected shall remain in full force and effect. q. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed under the laws of the State of California, without regard. to its conflict of law provisions. r. Certification, Representation and Warranty of Authority to Execute this Agreement. City and Court each certifies, represents and warrants that the individual(s) signing below on its behalf, has authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Party, and miay legally bind the Party to the terms and conditions of this Agreement and any attachments hereto. s. Designated Representatives. Court and City shall each identify and appoint a designated representative who shall ha~re the authority to bind Court and City, respectively, for all matters and approvals related to this Agreement. As of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the designated representative for Court is: 9 Agreement Concerning'1'ra13'ic Refunds Related to Red-I..ight Phata Enforcement -11- John Fitton Court Executive Officer Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo ("Court Designated Representative") and the designated representative for City is: Name: Barry M. Nagel Title: City Manager ("City Designated Representative") Court and City each may change its respective Designated Representative by written notice to the other in accordance with the notice provisions set forth in this Agreement. 1N WITNESS WI~REOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN MATED By: Name: John Fitton CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, apolitical subdivision of the State of California By: Name: Bairy M. Nagel Title: Court Executive Officer 1410536.1 Title: City Manager 10 Agreement Concerning Tru#~ic Refunds Refuted to Reef-Light Photo Enforeemenc _I2_