HomeMy Public PortalAbout11 November 6, 1991 Budget & Finance053766
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
BUDGET & FINANCE COMMITTEE
(COMMISSIONERS RUSS BEIRICH, CORKY LARSON, PAT MURPHY)
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1991
1:30 P.M.
LUND & GUTTRY
39-700 BOB HOPE DRIVE, THE BOB HOPE BUILDING
SUITE 309, RANCHO MIRAGE, CA
AGENDA
1 CALL TO ORDER.
2. FINANCIAL ITEMS.
2A. AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND OTHER FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Staff Recommendation
Receive and file.
2B. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL AND COST REPORTS
Staff Recommendation
Receive and file.
2C. DRAFT OF MANAGEMENT LETTER FROM ERNST & YOUNG
Staff Recommendation
Review and discussion.
Page Two
November 6, 1991
Budget & Finance Committee Agenda
3. HIGHWAYS/LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS.
3A. ROUTE 111 MAPPING AND SURVEY CONTRACT PROPOSAL.
Staff Recommendation
That the Commission approve the estimated budget for the Route 111 mapping and
surveying scope of work by Jaykim Engineers Inc. for an amount not to exceed $480,000,
subject to final negotiations. Our standard consultant contract will be used.
3B. CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH LSA FOR CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS STUDIES
REQUIRED FOR THE 60/91/215 INTERCHANGE RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITIONS.
Staff Recommendation
That the Commission approve Amendment No. 3 for LSA to prepare Categorical
Exemption environmental clearances for various parcels acquired under 'hardship and
protection' for a cost not to exceed $35,000.
3C. CONSULTANT AGREEMENT WITH LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES FOR: GEOTECHNICAL
SERVICES FOR ROUTE 91 MEASURE A IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN MAGNOLIA
AVENUE AND THE MARY STREET UNDERCROSSING.
Staff Recommendation
That the Commission approve the contract with Leighton and Associates not exceed
$123,338 with a 15% contingency amount of $18,662 for a maximum contract amount of
$142,000.
3D. WILBUR SMITH CONTRACT FOR TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SERVICES ON ROUTE 60.
Staff Recommendation
That the Commission approve the contract with Wilbur Smith Associates for $226,600 and
an extra work contingency amount of $33,990 for a total base contract plus extra work
contingency of $260,590. The services to be performed will be to provide traffic
engineering services on the Route 60 Measure A Projects. The standard contract
agreement will be used.
3E. PROPERTY IN THE NORTH QUADRANT OF THE ROUTE 60/91/1-215 INTERCHANGE
Staff Recommendation
That the Commission authorize the Executive Director to contract with Harris Fence to
secure the property and engage an individual to secure the building.
Page Three
November 6, 1991
Budget & Finance Committee Agenda
4. GENERAL ITEM.
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT TO CONVERT THE DTIM COMPUTER MODEL FROM MAIN-FRAME
TO PC BASED VERSION.
Staff Recommendation
That the Commission approve RCTC's participation in a program with the Sacramento Area
Council of Governments (SACOG), Fresno COG, Air Resources Board (ARB), Caftrans, FHWA and
other agencies State-wide to convert the present main-frame computer model of DTIM to a PC
version. SACOG will act as the lead agency. RCTC would enter into a Cooperative Agreement
with SACOG, Fresno COG and Caltrans to prepare the final conversion of the DTIM model at a
cost not to exceed $30,000. Staff will pursue other interested agencies to assist RCTC in paying
for this effort.
5. ADJOURNMENT.
:sc
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: November 6, 1991
TO: Budget & Finance Committee
FROM: Dean Martin, Controller
THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Audited Financial Statements and Other Financial Information
Attached are the audited Financial statement for Fiscal year ending June 30, 1991; for the
Riverside County Transportation Commission; Measure A Fund; Local Transportation
Fund; Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE); and State Transit Assistance
Fund.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
LM/DM:sc
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
THROUGH:
SUBJECT:
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
November 6, 1991
Budget and Finance Committee
Dean Martin, Controller
Louie Martin, Project Controls Manager
Jack Reagan, Executive Director
Quarterly Financial and Cost Reports
Attached are Combining Statements of Revenues and Expenditures and Changes in Fund
Balances (Unaudited) for the Quarter Ended September 30, 1991. Also attached are the
RCTC Measure A Highway Projects Budget Report by Route, Contract Commitment,
Contract Amendments, DBE/MBE Utilization Report, and the Contract Status Report
through September 30, 1991 prepared by Bechtel Civil, Inc.
Detailed supporting material for all contracts and Cooperative Agreements is available
from Bechtel staff.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
LM/DM:sc
COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES
RCTC OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
For the Quarter Ended September 30, 1991
REVENUES
Sales tax allocations
Interest income
Reimbursements
Other
General
780,000
32
TOTAL REVENUES 780,032
EXPENDITURES
Administration:
Salaries and benefits 63,463
Professional services 67,205
Office lease 9,315
Legal services 1,737
Other expenses 9,185
Commissioners Per Diem 630
TOTAL ADMINISTRATION 151,535
Programs:
Local Regional Disbursements
Capital Outlay
TOTAL PROGRAMS
0
4,092
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 155,627
REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES 624,405
FUND BALANCE -July 1, 1991 404,573
FUND BALANCE -September 30, 1991 $1,028,978
DRAFT
COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
For the Quarter Ended September 30, 1991
Actual
Budget % Utilization
REVENUES
Sales tax allocations 5780,000 1,070,000 73%
Interest income 0 30,000 0%
Reimbursements 0 0 ERR
Other income 32 0 ERR
TOTAL REVENUES 780,032 1,100,000 71 %
EXPENDITURES
Administration:
Salaries and benefits 63,463 373,365 17%
Professional services 67,205 484,054 14%
Office lease 9,315 30,013 31%
Legal services 1,737 17,788 10%
Other expenses 9,185 65,195 14%
Commissioners Per Diem 630 5,184 12%
TOTAL ADMINISTRATION 151,535 975,599 16%
Programs:
Ime+1/regional distributions 472,980 0%
TOTAL PROGRAMS 0 472,980 0%
Capital Outlay 4,092 24,417 17%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 155,627 1,472,996 11%
REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES 624,405 (372,996)
FUND BALANCE —July 1, 1991 404,573
FUND BALANCE —September 30, 1991 $1,028,978 ($372,996)
COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES 1N FUND BALANCES
SAFE OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
For the Quarter Ended September 30, 1991
REVENUES
DMV User Fees
Interest income
Reimbursements
Other
General
85,106
TOTAL REVENUES 85,106
EXPENDITURES
Administration:
Salaries and benefits 5,949
Professional services 1,902
Office lease 3,104
Legal services 755
Other expenses 10,692
Commissioners Per Diem 210
TOTAL ADMINISTRATION 22,612
Programs:
Callbox Maintenance 10,377
Callbox Installation
Callbox Operation 6,653
TOTAL PROGRAMS 17,030
Capital Outlay 1,364
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 41,006
REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES 44,100
FUND BALANCE -July 1, 1991 2,224,308
FUND BALANCE -September 30, 1991 $2,268,408
DRAFT
COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES
For the Quarter Ended September 30, 1991
Actual
Budget % Utilization
REVENUES
DMV user fees $85,106 $900,000 9%
Interest income 0 120,000 0%
Reimbursements 0 0 ERR
TOTAL REVENUES 85,106 1,020,000 8%
EXPENDITURES
Administration:
Salaries and benefits 5,949 44,828 13%
Professional services 1,902 105,535 2%
Office lease 3,104 10,004 31 %
Legal services 755 8,149 9%
Other expenses 10,692 30,649 35 %
Commissioners Per Diem 210 1,728 12%
TOTAL ADMINISTRATION 22,612 203,893 11 %
Program:
Call Box Maintenance
Call Box Installation
Call Box Operation
TOTAL PROGRAMS
10,377 175,000 6%
2,498,500 0%
6,653 225,000 3%
17,030 2,898,500 1 %
Capital Outlay 1,364
8,139 17%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 41,006 3,107,532 1 %
REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES 44,100 (2,087,532)
FUND BALANCE -July 1, 1991 2,224,308
FUND BALANCE -September 30, 1991 $2,268,408 ($2,087,532)
800'8176'811$ £I£'VS£'8IS OLO'S01'03 S96.80IS L8£'161171S Z£0'1E0'£IS Ill'ES£'IS
196'ZL17'0E1
EIE'VS£'8I 0SI'16617L
(£S6'VZS'I1) 0
(080'988'0
08C SO9'£ZS 0
SLZ'LIS
Z98'886'ZZS 0
080'988'V
li£'ZZ LV8'OL6'ZI LL9'LOS'ZZ
9V£'Ll£ 178L'9817'I
VS9'98 065'0W ( (St9'9LV'6)
I£Z'SL 9ZL'E16'I U17'1517'91
080'988'V
LS17'SV1'1S
09L'OSS
VII'V9S
OS
0E8'6V0'ES
S90'68£'£S
9E9'68Z'SIS
080'988'V
IEZ'SL 9ZL'£161 SZS'EI1'91
000'601'I LS17'9£
906'17 VS8'SV
Vl1'19
CZ' SC. OZ8'66L 6LL'VLl'Z
S90'68£'E
9SS'£OV'OI
I661 'OE JaqurAdas-3ONVIV9 aNnd
E99'9Z9'I 1661 '1 AP'f-3ONV'IVa aNnd
(ono) ul sia3sueil 8upgiad0
(sasn) SHDIMOs DNIONVNId 1131-1.1.0
(ZSS'ELZ)
OZE'6LZ
SLZ'LI
S311n11C1N3dX3 (113aNr1) 113A0 S3nN3A311
S311 n.LIQN3dX3 Td LO L
depn0 PrI1den
s1^IV1I0o11a 1V1.01
usuan/'dsuan prods
iammroO
aouar!ggd JorunuoD
sr polig letuu8as
spgot pug 33421111 praO'I
uoptglnbav AeM i>plRI
:madam
£179'66SS 0 0 0 0 86S'L£E St0Z9Z NOI.LN/NISINIWaV "IVIOI
099'ZS 099'Z mom Jad siauolsslmmoO
6LL'8£S 6LL'8£ saguadYa iagp0
V09'VLS 1709'n g=oinias 1e8ri
SZ£'6£S 8ZE'6£ 31313'31 *01330
I80'59$ 00'£ 119'19 saNAlas leuoiss=30id
Z8Z'NZ$ 9ZZ'OOZ 9S0OS wara8gugm V alumni/4
606'8ZIS 86Z'6S 119'69 sugauaq pug saueles
: uo9nrIsnnmpd
S311fILLlaN3dX3
LZ8'080'ZIS 0 0 S88'I91 ZI9'I5V'£ Z9S'19V'8 89L'S
IL0'SVE'1S £9V'9EZ V178'LOI'I 179L
117V81$ Ott £I VOO'S
OS
ZIS'LIL'OIS S88'191 6171'51Z'E 8L17'017£'L
Fri
8urutquro0
'BOO
gllagoeo�
luuoO 91313A "IPA AunoO
*AD isaM opld glpagogo0 uraasaM
.LAVIIQ
lelava0
s3nN3A31I IV LOL
Jayn0
quarasmqunali
=room tsaialui
suoneoolle xai sales
sanN3AMI
1661 'OE i99111049S P=1193 inrent) oviod
NOISSIYHWOO NOI LV L1IOdSNV1i L AiNnOO 3aIS1I3AR1 3H L dO V 311nSV3141
S30NV1d_ __ _nd NI S3ONVHO aNV S31In.LIaN3JX3 aNV SanN3A311 d0 IN31#131""" 1:13N18WOO
STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES
BUDGET VS. ACTUAL
MEASURE A OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
For the Quarter Ended September 30, 1991
REVENUES
Remaining Percent
Actual Budget Balance Utilization
Sales tax allocations $10,717,512 $50,880,000 $40,162,488 21 %
Interest income 5,940,000 5,940,000 0%
Reimbursements 18,244 4,770,000 4,751,756 0%
Other income 1,345,071 0 (1,345,071) ERR
TOTAL REVENUES 12,080,827 61,590,000 49,509,173 20%
EXPENDITURES
Administration:
Salaries and benefits 128,909 765,766 636,857 17%
Measure A management 250,282 1,750,000 1,499,718 14%
Professional services 65,081 374,888 309,807 170/o
Office lease 39,328 126,722 87,394 31 %
Legal services 74,604 324,063 249,459 23%
Other expenses 38,779 272,462 233,683 14%
Commissioners Per Diem 2,660 21,889 19,229 12%
TOTAL ADMINISTRATION 599,643 3,635,790 3,036,147 16%
Programs:
Right of Way Acquisition 15,289,636 25,700,000 10,410,364 590/o
Highways 3,389,065 49,198,600 45,809,535 7%
Local street and roads 3,049,830 19,366,962 16,317,132 160/o
Regional arterials 5,587,845 5,587,845 0%
Commuter rail 64,114 11,703,200 11,639,086 1 %
Commuter assistance 50,760 2,016,693 1,965,933 30/o
Special transp./transit 1,145,457 3,248,380 2,102,923 35%
TOTAL PROGRAMS 22,988,862 116,821,680 93,832,818 20%
Capital Outlay 17,275 103,092 85,817 179/o
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 23,605,780 120,560,562 96,954,782 20%
REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES (11,524,953) (58,970,562) (47,445,609) 20%
FUND BALANCE -July 1, 1991 130,472,961 (130,472,961)
FUND BALANCE -September 30, 1991
$118,948,008
($58,970,562) (177,918,570)
RCTC MEASURE A HIGHWAY PROJECTS
BUDGET REPORT BY ROUTE
COMMISSION CONTRACTURAL PERCENTAGE EXPENDITURE FOR
PROJECT EXPENDITURE AUTHORIZED COMMITMENTS OF BUDGET QUARTER ENDED EXPENDITURES
DESCRIPTION PLAN ALLOCATION TO DATE COMMITED September 30, 1991 TO DATE
Corona Cooperative
$14,605,000
(3)
(3)
$1,455,525.00
$5,507,681.00
Agreement
(2)
(Smith,Maple,Lincoln)
Route 74 Perris
$6,000,000
$3,000,000
$2,467,736.00
82%
$362,386.00
$1,475,272.00
Cooperative Agreement
(2)
(4)
Route 91-OCTC/RCTC
$2,626,628
$2,234,275
$2,234,275.00
100%
$2,234,275.00
Memo Of Understanding
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
For Envir. 8 Prelim.
Design
City of Riverside Loan
$1,650,000
$1,650,000
$1,500,000
91 %
Eastridge Overcrossing
(1)
(1)
1-215
Loan To Moreno Valley
$800,000
$800,000
$0
For Interchange ROW
(1)
(1)
RT60/91/215/1nterchange
$32,760,000
$20,010,000
$1,515,430
8%
$1,515,430.00
Right -Of -Way Acquisition
Route 91 Final Design
$37,820,000
$10,799,690
$10,603,731
93%
$79,361.00
$2,804,258.00
And Construction
(2)
(6-Separate Contracts)
Route 86 Construction
$25,087,400
$21,035,400
$1,900,000
9%
$1,471,933.00
4 Lane Expressway
(2)
(4)
(4)
Sanderson Ave. Bridge
$6,720,000
$915,000
$802,567
88%
$235,800.00
And 4 Lane Highway
Bechtel -Project
$2,869,000
$2,869,000
$2,869,000
10096
$133,197.00
$2,453,483.00
Management Services
Caltrans Environmental
$180,000
$180,000
$138,766
77%
$113,860.00
Assistance
Page 1 of 3
RCTC MEASURE A HIGHWAY PROJECTS
BUDGET REPORT BY ROUTE
COMMISSION CONTRACTURAL PERCENTAGE EXPENDITURE FOR
PROJECT EXPENDITURE AUTHORIZED COMMITMENTS OF BUDGET QUARTER ENDED EXPENDITURES
DESCRIPTION PLAN ALLOCATION TO DATE COMMITED September 30, 1081 TO DATE
1-15 Corridor
$65,000
$65,000
$65,000
100%
Analysis
Route 111 -Loan
$600.000
$600.000
$600,000
100%
To Cathedral City
Traffic Modeling
$1,268,757
$1,268,757
$1,268,757
100%
$1,109,473
For Measure "A" Project
Cajalco Corridor
$375,540
$375,540
$361,806
96%
$79,821.00
$434,278
Analysis
1-215 Mapping
$2,429,360
$2,429,360
$2,168,875
89%
$114,836.00
$1,774,659
Alternative Analysis
$320,648
$320,648
$320,648
100%
$18,384.00
$189,999
Measure "A"
Environmental
Route 111
$438,354
$438,354
$399,359
91%
$23,069
$342,382
Corridor Study
Page 2 of 3
RCTC MEASURE A HIGHWAY PROJECTS
BUDGET REPORT BY ROUTE
COMMISSION CONTRACTURAL PERCENTAGE EXPENDITURE FOR
PROJECT EXPENDITURE AUTHORIZED COMMITMENTS OF BUDGET QUARTER ENDED EXPENDITURES
DESCRIPTION PLAN ALLOCATION TO DATE COMMITED September 30, 1991 TO DATE
Route 215
Prel. Proj. Dev. Phase
(RCTC/SanBAG)
Route 91
Prel. Design/Envir.
Magnolia to IC (HOV)
Route 111 - Loan
Rancho Mirage @ Bob
Hope to Frank Sinatra
Route 79
Prelim. Design/mapping
and Traffic
PSR's (Interchange)
Interstate 10
Route 60 and Route 91
Park & Ride
$4,400,000
(5)
$2,053,188
$300,000
$24,842,094
$336,505
$66,500
$4,400,000
(5)
$2,053,188
$300,000
$1,118,107
$336,505
$66,500
$4,052,667
$1,858,916
$972,267
$336,505
$66,500
92%
91%
87%
100%
100%
$245,188
$339,839
$53,251
$92,556
$8,849
cie
................
$1,118,933
$884,434
$295,519
$117,094
$38,212
NOTE: (1) Loan against interchange improvement programs.
(2) May be reduced by passage of SB 300 funds.
(3) RCTC project to determine share value allocated to Route 91 and portion allocated to IC Improvement Program (loan).
(4) RCTC portion only of Caltrans Contract
(5) SanBAG responsible for 25%
All values are for total Project/Contract and not related to fiscal year budgets.
Status On. Ending 09/33/91
"age 3 of 3
PAGE NO. 1 REPORT MPR001
10/30/91
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
CONTRACT STATUS REPORT
(All Dollars X S1000)
CONTRACT NO./ CURRENT EXPENDED PERCENT TOTAL DBE AS %
AMENDMENT #/ START COMPLETION AUTHORIZED AGAINST CONTRACT PAID OF ACTUAL
CONSULTANT SCOPE/DESCRIPTION DATE DATE CONTRACT VALUE CONTRACT EXPENDED TO DBE'S EXPENDED
REMARKS
IMPREST - 0 SET IMPREST FUND/ACCOUNT 01/10/91 06/30/91 5.00 4.54 91% 0.00 0%
SECURITY PACIFIC
R08801 - 2 Environmental Studies 12/02/88 08/30/90 79.53 65.02 82% 0.00 O% PROJECT COMPLETE
RCTC/OCTC MOU with the Keith companies
(Environmental Studies)
R08900 - 0 Project Management 02/15/89 06/30/89 170.00 170.00 100% 0.00 O% THIS CONTRACT 1S CLOSED
Bechtel Corporation
R08901 - 2 Rt. 91 Conceptual Design 12/02/88 04/30/91 2,234.28 2, 234.2 3 91% 1,204.96 59% PROJECT COMPLETE
Parsons Brinkerhoff, Services
Wade and Douglas, Inc.
R08902 - 2 Rt. 91 Final design - 04/07/89 / / 739.00 697.94 94% 0.00 O% Converted to a lump sum contract. Approved
Parsons, Brinkerhoff, converted to a lump sum by RCTC on 5/9/90.
Wade and Douglas, Inc. contract PROJECT COMPLETE
R08905 - 2 Commuter Rails Consulting 06/30/89 06/30/92 336.00 195.68 58% 0.00 O%
Schiermeyer Consulting Services
Services
R08907 - 0
Route 86 Cooperative
Agreement
Construct 4 lane
expressway at Rt. 86
06/12/89 06/30/94 21,035.40 1,210.11 6% 0.00 O% Contract value is RCTC portion only and doe:
not include administration cost for Caltran
PAGE NO. 2 REPORT MPR001
10/30/91
CONTRACT NO./
AMENDMENT B/
CONSULTANT
R08908 - 1
City of Corona
R09000 - 2
Bechtel Corporation
R09001 - 5
NBS/Lowry
R09002 - 5
KaWes and Associates
SCOPE/DESCRIPTION
START
DATE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
CONTRACT STATUS REPORT
(All Dollars X S1000)
CURRENT
COMPLETION AUTHORIZED
DATE CONTRACT VALUE
Cooperative Agreement 07/19/89 06/30/94 14,605.00
Program Management
07/01/89 06/30/90 1,291.00
Final Design Svcs for Rt 10/01/89 06/01/91
91 bet. Serfas Club li
Main St.
982.90
Professional and 09/14/89 09/30/91 1,499.00
Technical Design Svcs for
Rt 91
R09003 - 0 Right -of -Way Mapping for 10/10/89 10/01/90
J.F. Davidson Associates RT 60/91/215 IC
R09004 - 0
Caltrans
R09006 - 0
Southern California
Association of
Governments (SCAG)
Agreement for Rt
60/91/215 IC
8.50
07/01/89 07/01/99 20,000.00
Planning and Support 07/01/89 06/30/92 105.00
EXPENDED PERCENT
AGAINST CONTRACT
CONTRACT EXPENDED
TOTAL DBE AS %
PAID OF ACTUAL
TO DBE'S EXPENDED
REMARKS
6,113.93 42% 0.00 0% The indicated cost is an estimate for design,
construction and construction management.
RCTC's share is 67% of total cost.
1,059.10 82% 44.16 4% This contract is closed.
983.09 100%
1,323.94 88%
8.50 100%
1,500.00 8%
11.35 11%
112.44 11% Scope was amended to include geotechnical
services for soundwalls (total cost =
S6046.00) to be covered by extra work funds
so total authorized contract value remains
the same.
139.32 11% Include extra work authorization for West
Prado Overhead Seismic Analysis.
0.00 0% This contract is closed.
0.00 0% This is a capital account.
0.00 0%
PAGE NO. 3 REPORT MPR001
10/30/91
CONTRACT NO./
AMENDMENT X/
CONSULTANT
R09007 - 2
PSOMAS
R09008 - 1
NBS/Lowry
R09009 - 0
Chicago Title
R09010 - 1
LSA
R09011 - 0
County of Riverside
R09012 - 0
City of Perris
R09013 - 1
DKS and Associates
R09014 - 0
County of Riverside /
Wilbur Smith Associates
R09015 - 0
Cathedral City
SCOPE/DESCRIPTION
START
DATE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
CONTRACT STATUS REPORT
(All Dollars X $1000)
CURRENT
COMPLETION AUTHORIZED
DATE CONTRACT VALUE
Surveying Control 03/15/90 11/04/91 2,429.36
Rt. 215 Surveying Work 02/01/91 02/01/92 676.67
Escrow and Title Fees for 01/23/90 07/01/99 1,092.43
ROW procured for
60/91/215 IC
EXPENDED PERCENT
AGAINST CONTRACT
CONTRACT EXPENDED
TOTAL DBE AS %
PAID OF ACTUAL
TO DBE'S EXPENDED
REMARKS
2,173.36 89% 0.00 0%
321.56 48% 0.00 O%
1,092.43 100% 0.00 O%
Environmental Study (APA) 01/31/90 12/12/91 176.65 138.65 78% 0.00 O%
Cooperative Agreement
(Sanderson Project)
03/30/90 06/30/92 802.57 296.49 37% 0.00 O% Reimbursement to county for consultant
contract and contract administration.
Rt. 74 - Phase 0,2 and 01/31/90 07/30/92 3,000.00
Phase 9 Work
PAA Traffic Engineering 02/02/90 09/30/91 1,295.10
Cooperative Agreement for 02/20/90 01/31/91
1-15 Galena PSR (Loan)
Rt. 111 Construction
(Loan) - Perez St.
/ / / /
663.28 22% 0.00 0%
1,109.47 86% 0.00 O%
62.00 0.00 0% 0.00 O%
Capital project, and this amount is RCTC's
share of total project costs.
This will not be a cooperative agreement but
will be a loan agreement per Jack Reagan.
The county is in charge of this study.
600.00 0.00 O% 0.00 O% This contract may be signed as a cooperative
agreement or a loan arrangement with
PAGE NO. 44 REPORT MPR001
10/30/91
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
CONTRACT STATUS REPORT
(All Dollars X S1000)
CONTRACT NO./ CURRENT EXPENDED PERCENT TOTAL DBE AS %
AMENDMENT */ START COMPLETION AUTHORIZED AGAINST CONTRACT PAID OF ACTUAL
CONSULTANT SCOPE/DESCRIPTION DATE DATE CONTRACT VALUE CONTRACT EXPENDED TO DBE'S EXPENDED
REMARKS
Intersection Cathedral City. Details need to be discusse
with BB&K. Negotiations are on going.
R09016 - 0 Traffic Engineering 03/05/90 06/30/90 438.35 356.76 81% 0.00 O%
Wilbur Smith Associates Services for Rt. 111
Corridor Study
R09017 - 2 Cajalco Corridor Study 03/19/90 01/01/92 474.80 0.00 0% 0.00 O%
P & D Technologies
R09018 - 1 Preliminary 08/17/90 / / 4,077.70 941.62 23% 0.00 0%
Parsons Brinkerhoff Guade Engineering/Environmental
& Douglas /Traffic/for 1215
R09020 - 0 Prelimminary Project / / / / 5,800.00 0.00 0% 0.00 0%
RCTC/SANBAG (RT 215) Developement Phase
R09021 - 2 PERFORM COMMUTER RAIL 03/02/90 06/30/92 671.79 679.99 101% 0.00 0%
MORRISON-KNUDSEN STUDY FOR RCTC
ENGINEERS
R09100 - 1 ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT 07/01/90 06/30/91 1,701.00 1,587.47 93% 0.00 O% TOTAL AUTHORIZED VALUE INCLUDES S109,000 FOR
Bechtel Corporation CALTRANS WORK TO PERFORM ENVIR. STUDIES.
R09101 - 1 ROUTE 91 PRLIMINARY 09/11/90 06/15/92 907.34 535.32 59% 0.00 0%
GREINER, INC ENGINEERING
PAGE NO. S REPORT MPR001
10/30/91
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
CONTRACT STATUS REPORT
(All Dollars X $1000)
CONTRACT NO./ CURRENT EXPENDED PERCENT TOTAL DBE AS X
AMENDMENT #/ START COMPLETION AUTHORIZED AGAINST CONTRACT PAID OF ACTUAL
CONSULTANT SCOPE/DESCRIPTION DATE DATE CONTRACT VALUE CONTRACT EXPENDED TO DBE'S EXPENDED
REMARKS
R09102 - 0 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 09/12/90 12/31/91 179.32 34.26 19% 0.00 OX
ALBERT A WEBB 8 RT91 MAG-SR60/215 INTER
ASSOCIATES MED WIDE
R09103 - 0 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING D9/27/90 09/13/91 335.70 216.45 64% 0.00 0%
JHK AND ASSOCIATES SERVICES ON ROUTE
91/MAGNOLIA-INTER
R09105 - 0
NOLTE 8 ASSOCIATES
R09106 - 0
RICK ENGINEERING
R09107 - 0
CITY MORENO VALLEY
ROUTE 91 MAPPING 8 FIELD 11/02/90 06/30/92 273.67
SURVEY SERVICES
ROUTE 74 MAPPING FIELD 09/11/90 09/01/91 352.10
SURVEYING
Interchange Improvement
"Loan" Day/Fredrick at
Rt-91
/ /
/ / 800.00
57.65 21% 0.00 0%
133.21 38% 0.00 0%
0.00 0% 0.00 O%
R09108 - 0 UPDATE/S.E.D. 8 NETWORK 04/01/90 07/30/92 20.00 6.71 34% 0.00 O%
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PANNING DATA FOR RIVSAN TRAFFIC
DEPT. MODEL
R09109 - 1
VALLEY RESEARCH 8
PLANNING ASSOC.
DEVELOPMENT OF CONGESTION 07/12/90 07/31/92 50.00
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
R09110 - 0 Study the need for new 10/27/90 10/31/90 10.00
MGA (MOHLE, GROVER 8 facilities to relieve
54.36 109% 0.00 O%
8.69 87%
0.00 OX Complete.
PAGE NO.
10/30/91
CONTRACT NO./
AMENDMENT it/
CONSULTANT
ASSOCIATES) CITY OF
PERRIS
R09111 - 0
DAMES & MOORE
R09112 - 0
Centennial Civil
Engineers, Inc.
R09113 - 0
INLAND TRANSPORTATION
SERVICES
R09114 - 0
STEVENS/GARLAND
ASSOCIATES, INC.
R09115 - 0
DANIEL, MANN, JOHNSON &
MENDENHALL
R09116 - 0
ROBERT BEIN, WILLIAM
FROST AND ASSOCIATES
R09117 - 0
Tudor Engineering Corp.
SCOPE/DESCRIPTION
START
DATE
REPORT MPR001
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
CONTRACT STATUS REPORT
(Alt Dollars X $1000)
CURRENT
COMPLETION AUTHORIZED
DATE CONTRACT VALUE
congestion
PRELIM ENG. & ENVIRON. 01/07/91 04/01/92 1,053.40
SVCS RT. 79 LAMBS CANYON
Preliminary Engineering
Services for Route 79
NEGOTIATE PARK-N-RIDE
LEASE NEGOTIATIONS
NEGOTIATE PARK-N-RIDE
LEASE AGREEMENTS
11/26/90 12/01/92
08/10/90 06/30/91
08/10/90 06/30/91
573.21
25.00
25.00
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING 11/02/90 07/28/92 1,315.66
ROUTE 74
SURVEYING & DIGITAL
MAPPING ROUTE 79
11/02/90 06/30/92 376.31
Traffic Engineering 01/07/91 04/01/92
Services on (3 projects)
201.43
EXPENDED PERCENT
AGAINST CONTRACT
CONTRACT EXPENDED
192.44 18%
159.10 28%
22.56 90%
10.40 42%
407.02 31%
133.61 36%
128.45 64%
TOTAL DBE AS %
PAID OF ACTUAL
TO DBE'S EXPENDED
REMARKS
0.00 0%
0.00 0%
0.00 0%
0.00 OX
0.00 0%
0.00 OX
0.00 0%
PAGE NO.
10/30/91
7
CONTRACT NO./
AMENDMENT */
CONSULTANT
SCOPE/DESCRIPTION
START
DATE
REPORT MPR001
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
CONTRACT STATUS REPORT
(All Dollars X S1000)
CURRENT
COMPLETION AUTHORIZED
DATE CONTRACT VALUE
Route 74
R09118 - 0 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ON 01/07/91 09/30/91 168.58
KORVE ENGINEERING, INC. (TWO PROJECTS) ROUTE 79
R09119 - 0
JHK AND ASSOCIATES
R09120 - 0
P i D TECHNOLOGIES
NORTH/SOUTH -TRANS.
CORRIDOR STUDY
R09121 - 2
LOMA LINDA
UNIVERSITY/DONALD C. VAN
OM AM
R09122 - 0
ENGINEERING SCIENCE, INC.
R09123 - 0
COAST SURVEYING INC.
R09124 - 0
TAMS CONSULTANTS INC.
ASSIST TO SOUTHERN CA
ASSOC OF GOVERNMENT
RIVSAN MODEL
FEASIBILITY STUDY -
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
PARK 8 RIDE LOT LEASE
AGREEMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
FOR ROUTE 74
10/16/90 10/16/91 128.30
02/01/91 08/30/91 117.50
10/15/90 08/01/91 35.63
01/01/91 06/30/92 310.09
SURVEYING RT 91 FROM PM 01/09/91 10/18/91 616.95
0.0-11.1
ENGINEERING FOR PROJ 02/22/91 12/31/91
STUDY REPORTS INTER(4) ON
SR60
231.77
EXPENDED PERCENT
AGAINST CONTRACT
CONTRACT EXPENDED
71.63 42%
85.83 67%
0.00 O%
22.88 64%
115.02 37%
166.34 27%
97.65 42%
TOTAL DBE AS %
PAID OF ACTUAL
TO DBE'S EXPENDED
REMARKS
0.00 0%
0.00 0%
0.00 0%
0.00 0%
0.00 0%
0.00 0%
0.00 0%
PAGE NO. 8 REPORT MPR001
10/30/91
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
CONTRACT STATUS REPORT
(All Dollars X $1000)
CONTRACT NO./ CURRENT EXPENDED PERCENT TOTAL DBE AS %
AMENDMENT B/ START COMPLETION AUTHORIZED AGAINST CONTRACT PAID OF ACTUAL
CONSULTANT SCOPE/DESCRIPTION DATE DATE CONTRACT VALUE CONTRACT EXPENDED TO DBE'S EXPENDED
R09125 - 0
ENG SCVS FOR PROJ STUDY 02/22/91 12/31/91 154.73
ICF KAISER ENGINEERS ON SR91 i 110
R09126 - ' 0
CH2M HILL
PSR'S INTERCHANGE ALONG 03/04/91 12/04/92 524.07
SR60/215
REMARKS
62.52 40% 0.00 0%
30.63 6% 0.00 0%
R09127 - 0 PSR'S INTERCHANGES ALONG 03/04/91 12/04/92 456.06 85.93 19% 0.00 0%
DELEUY CATHER i COMPANY RT91
R09128 - 0 PRELIMINARY
KaWES AND ASSOCIATES ENGINEERING/PROJECT
REPORT
05/01/91 07/05/94 1,779.25
0.00 0% 0.00 0%
R09129 - 0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 04/23/91 08/04/93 401.11 18.11 5% 0.00 0%
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. RT91 OUTSIDE HIDING
R09130 - 0
JHK i ASSOCIATES
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING RT91 04/10/91 07/10/92 449.84
FR RT71 TO 1-15
129.20 29% 0.00 0%
R09131 - 0 CO-OP AGREEMENT / / / / 108.79 108.79 100% 0.00 0% This Contract is closed.
CITY OF CORONA CONSTRUCTION COST OF
PROMENADE OC SR91
R09132 - 0
CO-OP AGREE CONST
CITY OF RIVERSIDE EASTRIDGE OC ON I-215
/ / / / 1,500.00
0.00 0% 0.00 0%
PAGE NO. 9 REPORT MPR001
10/30/91
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
CONTRACT STATUS REPORT
(All Dollars X $1000)
CONTRACT NO./ CURRENT EXPENDED PERCENT TOTAL DBE AS %
AMENDMENT #/ START COMPLETION AUTHORIZED AGAINST CONTRACT PAID OF ACTUAL
CONSULTANT SCOPE/DESCRIPTION DATE DATE CONTRACT VALUE CONTRACT EXPENDED TO DBE'S EXPENDED
REMARKS
R09133 - 0 CONST HOV RT91 MAIN-MAG 03/18/91 06/30/92 7,347.49 3,221.97 44% 0.00 0%
DEPARTMENT OF KEC CONST JPA
TRANSPORTATION (CALTRANS)
R09134 - 0 40' MOTORHOME,DESIGN & 12/12/90 / / 100.00 92.73 93% 0.00 0%
FLEETWOOD ENTERPRISES, BUILD
INC.
R09200 - 0 PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 07/01/91 06/30/92 1,750.00 0.00 0% 0.00 0%
BECHTEL, CIVIL INC.
R09201 - 0 PHASE 11 PRELIMINARY 09/09/91 03/01/92 31.71 0.00 0% 0.00 0%
TETRA TECH INC. INVESTIGATIONS-COMM RAIL
STAT SITE
R09202 - 0
RIVERSIDE FREEWAY
INCENTIVE PROGRAM
MANAGE RT91 RIDESHARE 07/01/91 06/30/92 179.26
INCENTIVE PROGRAM
60.00 33% 0.00 0%
R09203 - 0 RIDESHARE INCENTIVE FOR 08/14/91 06/30/92 97.72 0.65 1% 0.00 0%
WESTERN RIVERSIDE RESIDENTS LIVING &
INCENTIVE PROGRAM WORKING WRC
R09204 - 0 VANPOOL QUICK START PROG 08/14/91 06/30/92 113.73 0.00 0% 0.00 0%
VANPOOL INCENTIVE PROGRAM FOR RESIDENTS WORKING WRC
R09205 - 0 MONTHLY NETWORKING MTG 1N 07/01/91 06/30/92 15.00 0.00 0% 0.00 0%
CTS THROUGH VARIOUS CVAG WRC FOOD FOR MTGS
PAGE NO. 10 REPORT MPR001
10/30/91
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
CONTRACT STATUS REPORT
(All Dollars X S1000)
CONTRACT NO./ CURRENT EXPENDED PERCENT TOTAL DBE AS X
AMENDMENT #/ START COMPLETION AUTHORIZED AGAINST CONTRACT PAID OF ACTUAL
CONSULTANT SCOPE/DESCRIPTION DATE DATE CONTRACT VALUE CONTRACT EXPENDED TO DBE'S EXPENDED
VENDORS
REMARKS
R09206 - 0 ASBESTOS ABATEMENT / / / / 12.90 0.00 0% 0.00 0%
INTEK ENVIRONMENTAL
R09207 - 0 DEMOLITION OF / / / / 29.60 0.00 OX 0.00 0%
INTEK ENVIROMENTAL IMPROVEMENTS
R09209 - 0 ESTABLISHMENT & 07/01/91 06/30/92 5,554.11 0.00 OX 0.00 OX
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AMINISTRATION OF COMMUTER
REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY RAIL SYSTEM
(SCRRA)
R09211 - 0 TWO MONTH SPECIAL PROJ TO 06/12/91 01/31/92 20.00 0.00 OX 0.00 OX
RIDESHARE MARKETING BUS FOSTER RIDESHARE TO
(BUSPOOL) ORANGE CO
R09212 - 0 GEOTECHNICAL SCVS RT91 / / / / 142.00 0.00 0% 0.00 0%
LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, HOV MEDIAN WIDING
INC. MAG-MARY
PAGE NO.
10/30/91
CONTRACT
NUMBER
CONSULTANT FIRM
REPORT COMMIT
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
COMMITMENT LOG REPORT
Sorted by CONTRACT NUMBER
SCOPE OF WORK
AMOUNT AMOUNT TOTAL
RCTC COMMITTED TO COMMITTED TO AMOUNT
COORD. BASE WORK EXTRA WORK COMITTED
TOTAL
AMOUNT
EXPENDED
0007PS
0007PS0
0007PS1
0007PS2
0007PT1
0007PT2
00081E12
0008581
0008SB2
00098I
00098P1
0009PT2
IMPREST
R08801
R0B900
R08901
R08902
R08905
R08907
R08908
R09000
R09001
R09002
R09003
R09004
R09006
Covers Several Firms/Consultants/Persons
Covers Several Firms/Consultant/Persons
Covers Several Fines/Consultants/Persons
SMITH & ACKLER
Covers Several Firms/Consultants/Persons
COVERS SPECIAL TRANSIT PROJECTS AGENCIES
COVERS SEVERAL FIRMS/CONSULTANTS/PERSONS
Covers Several Fines/Consultants/Persons
COVERS SEVERAL PERSONS & PERS
Covers Several firms/Consultants/Persons
Covers Several Firm/Consultents/Persons
COVERS SEVERAL FIRMS/CONSULTANTS/PERSONS
SECURITY PACIFIC
RCTC/OCTC MOU (Environnental Studies)
Bechtel Corporation
Parsons Brinkerhoff, Ouede and Douglas, Inc.
Persons, Brinkerhoff, Ousde end Douglas, Inc.
Schienseyer Consulting Services
Route 86 Cooperative Agreement
City of Corona
Bechtel Corporation
NBS/Lowry
KsWes and Associates
J.F. Davidson Associates
Caltrans
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)
Professional Services - Common to all tasks
Professional & Specialized Services
Professional Services (Legislative Advocate)
LEGISLATIVE ADVOCATE
Professional Services - Transit Projects
SPECIALIZED TRANSIT
INSURANCE (WC, LIFE, SHORT & LONG DISAB)
Salaries & Benefits
WEALTH INSURANCE BENEFITS
Financial Services - Bond Interest
Bond Principal Repayment
PASS THRU
SET WREST FUND/ACCOUNT
Environmental Studies with the Keith companies
Project Management
Rt. 91 Conceptual Design Services
Rt. 91 Final design - cormrted to a lump sum contract
Commuter Rails Consulting Services
Construct 4 lane expressway at Rt. 86
Cooperative Agreement
Program Management
Final Design Svcs for Rt 91 bet. Series Club & Mein St.
Professional and Technical Design Svcs for Rt 91
Right -of -Way Mapping for RT 60/91/215 IC
Agreement for Rt 60/91/215 IC
Planning and Support
LN
NK
DM
DM
DM
JR
DM
DM
DM
DM
DM
DM
X
MTN
LM
ML
KS
LM
MTM
ML
LM
ML
ML
LM
MTM
JR
1296327.00
119700.00
40000.00
45577.00
2251942.00
1509000.00
20000.00
685479.00
112520.00
1500000.00
10000000.00
472980.00
5000.00
79527.76
170000.00
2234275.00
739000.00
336000.00
21035400.00
14605000.00
1291000.00
970338.00
1458927.00
8500.00
20000000.00
105000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
80000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
12566.00
40077.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1296327.00
119700.00
40000.00
45577.00
2251942.00
1509000.00
20000.00
685479.00
112520.00
1500000.00
10000000.00
472980.00
5000.00
79527.76
170000.00
2314275.00
739000.00
336000.00
21035400.00
14605000.00
1291000.00
982904.00
1499004.00
8500.00
20000000.00
105000.00
515641
O.
61589.,
7008.95
992338.17
1145457.00
108.00
103411.79
22139.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
4539.86
65018.48
170000.00
2040798.86
697944.61
195679.67
1210108.65
6113934.52
1059104.15
963091.73
1323938.24
8500.00
1500000.00
11351.79
tr
PAGE NO. 2 REPORT COMMIT
10/30/91
CONTRACT
NUMBER
CONSULTANT FIRM
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
COMMITMENT LOG REPORT
Sorted by CONTRACT NUMBER
SCOPE OF WORK
AMOUNT AMOUNT TOTAL TOTAL
RCTC COMMITTED TO COMMITTED TO AMOUNT AMOUNT
COORD. BASE WORK EXTRA WORK COMITTED EXPENDED
R09007 PSOMAS Surveying Control WH 2168875.75 260486.25 2429362.00 2173361.60
R09008 NBS/Lowry Rt. 215 Surveying Work OH 676672.00 101501.00 778173.00 321556.05
R09009 Chicago Title Escrow and Title Fees for ROW procured for 60/91/215 IC KS 1092430.00 0.00 1092430.00 1092426.00
R09010 LSA Environmental Study (APA) KS 187530.00 15618.00 203148.00 138647.97
R09011 County of Riverside Cooperative Agreement (Sanderson Project) KDS 802567.00 112433.00 915000.00 2%5491.04
R09012 City of Perris Rt. 74 - Phase 0,2 and Phase 9 Work KS 3000000.00 0.00 3000000.00 663278.98
R09013 DKS and Associates PAA Traffic Engineering TH 1295100.00 150969.00 1446069.00 1109473.51
R09014 County of Riverside / Wilbur Smith Associates Cooperative Agreement for I-15 Galena PSR (Loan) TH 62000.00 3000.00 65000.00 0.00
R09015 Cathedral City Rt. 111 Construction (Loan) - Perez St. Intersection TH 600000.00 0.00 600000.00 0.00
109016 Wilbur Smith Associates Traffic Engineering Services for Rt. 111 Corridor Study TH 381177.00 57177.00 438354.00 356759.94
R09017 P 8 D Technologies Cajalco Corridor Study MD 474800.00 48983.00 523783.00 0.00
R09018 Parsons Brinkerhoff Ouade 6 Douglas Preliminary Engineering/Environmental/Traffic/for 1 215 WH 3656102.00 421602.00 4077704.00 941624.32
R09020 RCTC/SANBAG (RT 215) Prelimminary Project Developement Phase KS 5800000.00 0.00 5800000.00 0.00
R09021 MORRISON-KNUDSEN ENGINEERS PERFORM COMMUTER RAIL STUDY FOR RCTC JR 671789.00 0.00 671789.00 679987.94
R09100 Bechtel Corporation ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT LM 1592000.00 109000.00 1701000.00 1587471.21
R09101 GREINER, INC ROUTE 91 PRLIMINARY ENGINEERING KF 752556.20 114780.80 907337.00 535318.35
R09102 ALBERT A WEBB d ASSOCIATES ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES RT91 MAG-SR60/215 INTER MED WIDE MD 157786.96 0.00 157786.96 34263.82
R09103 JHK AND ASSOCIATES TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SERVICES ON ROUTE 91/MAGNOLIA-INTER TN 291910.00 43786.00 335696.00 216447.33
R09105 NOLTE d ASSOCIATES ROUTE 91 MAPPING i FIELD SURVEY SERVICES OH 237972.00 35696.00 273668.00 57649.99
R09106 RICK ENGINEERING ROUTE 74 MAPPING FIELD SURVEYING OH 306176.00 45926.00 352102.00 133205.48
R09107 CITY MORENO VALLEY Interchange Improvement "Loan" Day/Fredrick at Rt-91 KS 800000.00 0.00 800000.00 0.00
R09108 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PANNING DEPT. UPDATE/S.E.D. d NETWORK DATA FOR RIVSAN TRAFFIC MODEL JW 20000.00 0.00 20000.00 6705.85
R09109 VALLEY RESEARCH L PLANNING ASSOC. DEVELOPMENT OF CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM TH 50000.00 0.00 50000.00 54360.90
R09110 MGA (NOHLE, GROVER 6 ASSOCIATES) CITY OF PERRIS Study the need for new facilities to relieve congestion JW 10000.00 0.00 10000.00 8690.00
R09111 DAMES 8 MOORE PRELIM ENG. ft ENVIRON. SVCS RT. 79 LAMBS CANYON KDS 916003.61 137400.54 1053404.15 192441.79
R09112 Centennial Civil Engineers, Inc. Preliminary Engineering Services for Route 79 KDS 498446.36 74766.95 573213.31 159099.05
i
00'09 00'SUL6 00'0 00'SLLL6 MM 38M ONIXNOM 7 9111AI1 S1N301S3' IIOA 3A111133N1 387163018 MV11904d 3A11N33N1 301S83AIN 10131S3M f0260'
00'00009 00'SSZ6L1 00'0 00'SSZOLL MM MV'9044 3A11N33N1 3HVNS3018 1.61' 391IMVM MVa904d 3A11M33N1 AVM33ad 301S113Ala Z02604
00'0 00'ZLLIf 00'0 00'ZLLL£ OLr 3115 171S IIV8 1M03-SN011V011S3AM1 !'VMIMIl3ad 11 3SVHd '3N1 N331 V11131 10260'
00'0 00'0000SLL 00'0 00'0000SLL MO 1M3M3OVNVM MV49041d '3N1 11A13 '131H338 0026ON
SD'0f426 00'000001 00'0 00.00000L MM a11I18 7 N91S30'3M01121010M .04 '3NI 'S3SIada31N3 000M1331i 4fL6o'
fZ'ZLSIZZf 00'L94L4fL 00'LL9094 00'01 9909 lM Vdr 1SM03 33X 9VW-NIVM 161N AOH 1SN03 (SNVa11V3) N011V1MOdSMVa1 i0 1M3M1VVd30 f£160a
00'0 00'00000SI 00'0 00'00000SL S1Z-1 NO 30 3901111SV3 1SN03 338511 d0-03 30ISM3AIN io A1I3 Zf1608
06'L6L901 06'16L901 00'0 06'16L901 1M L6a5 30 3011N3MOad io 1503 N0113118ISMOO 1N3M3321OV d0-00 VN01103 30 A113 If160d
Z9'9616Z1 02'f49644 OZ'S199S 00'99L16f N1 SL-1 01 IDA Ni 1.61' ONIa33MION3 3IiiV'1 S31V130SSV 7 XHr Ofl60a
4f'OLL9L 00/31102 00'611ZS 00'Z6L94£ OW 011101M 301S1f10 l61d 1N3MSS3SSV 1V1M3MN081AN3 '3NI 'S31V130SSV VSl 6Z16011
00'0 £9'ZSZ6111 00'000Z£Z f9'ZSZL4SL or 1I043' 133r08d/911Ii133M19N3 A'11NIMI1384 S31V130SSV ONV S3Mal Sad a
IL126S9 00'95090 00'00009 00'9S096f lM 161' SNOW S3ONVH3a31M1 S.IISd ANV4403 7 83H1V3 MI13130 LZl604
611M90f 00'9904ZS 00'9f9L9Z 00'2£29SZ lM SLZ/098S SNOW 300143831Ni S.MSd 11IH MZH3 9ZL60a
fZ'9LSZ9 00'ffL4ft 00'0 00'ffL4fL 1M 011 7 L6NS MO /ants road 00A SA3S 9M3 SI133N19143 83SIVX i3I SZL6oa
f0'ZS9L6 00'ZLLLOZ 00'0 00'ZLLLOZ lM 0911S NO (4)831N1 S1110d311 AO111S road 'oi ONIa33M19N3 '3N1 slmvAiI1SNo3 SMa1 4Z16o'
LL'9ff99L f4'OS6919 OL'LL409 frOLV9£S NM l'L1-0'0 Md wool L6 18 ONIA3Aa(IS '3M1 ONIA3ASMS 'WOO £2L6oa
02'9LOSII 00'S900Lf 00'0 00'S9001f OL 4L 31M0' VOA S331A113S 1V1N3MMON1AN3 '3N1 '3014313S 911I1133N19N3 ZZl6oa
00'SLOZZ 00'SZ9Sf 00'0 00'SZ9Sf MM 1M3M331IOV 3SV31 101 3011 7 Mid WNW NVA '3 01VM00/A1ISa3A1NO VOM11 41101 LZIbOa
00'0 00.00SLL1 00'0 00.00SLLL OM SISAIVMV S3A11V)01311V - A01115 A111181SV3i AO11S 8001a803 'SN1011- N1110B/N1aod S319010NH331 0 7 d 02160a
9f'9ZOS9 00'f0f9ZI 00'SfL9L 00'99SLLL 81 1300M NVSAIN 1N3101113A00 i0 30SSV V3 Na3H1MOS 01 1SISSV S31VI306SV ONV XHr !Aldo'
LL'Z£9LL 00'495991. 00'60612 00'S6S94L 1131 61 Woo (S133r0Md 0M1) NO ONIa33N1OM3 311iV111 '3N1 '9NI833N19N3 3ANOA 9LL60a
60'0S4921 0019Z4LOZ 00'fLZ9Z 00'SSLSLL N31 4L alma (s eroJd £) u0 8a31AJaS BulJaaulBu3 31i;u1 •dJ03 BulAaaul8u3 Aopn1 Llt608
9f'ZL9ffL OS'60f9Lf 00'20062 OS'SZZLZf KM 6L 3inoa OMIddVM 1V11910 7 ONIA3A1MS S31V130SSV ONV 1SOad MVI111M 'NI38 183808 91L60a
fl'LL0/04 00'499SLfL 00'909LLL 00'9502% 1 NM 4L 31(loa 9N11133N19N3 A'VNIMI13)1d 11VHN30N3M 7 MOSNHOr 'NNVM '13INV0 SLl6oa
l6'Z0401 00'000SZ 00'0 00'000SZ MM S1N3M331.1OV 3SV31 301'-M-X'Vd 31V11003N '3NI 'S31V130SSV ONV1aV9/SN3A31S 4ll6oa
06'09SZZ 00'000g 00'0 00'000g MM SMOI1VI1003N 3SV31 3018-N-X'Vd 31V110O3N S331A43S 11011V1110dSNVa1 ONV1N1 £11608
030M3dX3 03111)100 ANOM Va1X3 AHOM 3SV8 '08003 MOM i0 3d03S Mali 1NV1111SN03 8380CM
1M(IOMn 1Nf10MY 01 03111+03 01 03111MM03 313N 10Va1NO3
1V101 1V101 Dram/ 1Mf10MV
a38Lrm 13Va11103 Ag 09AAos
1210d3a 901 1N3M1116103
NOISSIMM03 NOI1V1804SNV211 Aldan 301S213Ala
16/0£/Ol
11MM03 1d043a F 'ON 3OVd
6f'Qlll5095 ff'90L21£291, 4h1219L09f 68'LS0016£9L
00'0 00'0002% 00'29981
00'0 00'00002 00'0
00'0 00'OLLVSSS 00'0
00'0 00'00962 00'SL8£
00'0 00'00621 00'5191
00'0 00'000SL 00'0
00'0 00'0fL£lt 00'0
00'Bf££21
00'00002
00'OLLISSS
00'52L52
00'52213
00'000SI
00.0EaLL
SX
MN
NO
SA
SA
AN
MN
ASV11.901 9NIOIM NVIO3N AON 161d SAGS 1V3INN331039
00 39NVs0 01 38VNS3014 s31S01 01 rose 1V103dS 141NON OM'
N31SAS IIVs s31(Nm00 30 NOI1Vs1SINION 7 1N3NHS118V1S3
S1N3613A0sdN1 30 N0111101430
11136131V9V SO1S38SV
S9114 s03 000A 0sM 9VA0 NI 9164 9NIXSOMAN 1114INON
311/1 9NIXSOM S1N30IS3s s03 90dd 121V1S sous 100dNVA
•s• 1e301 •�•
'3N1 'S31V100SSV Y N010131 2126021
(loodsne) Sn8 SAUDI/MN 321VHS30111
(V11113S) A11sOH1nd 11V11 1VN0193s V1Ns0111V3 1013111nOS
1V1N3N0111AN3 A31NI
1V1N3NNOSIAN3 X31N1
Ss00N3A SnOIHVA H9n0611 S10
N11s90sd 3A11N33N1 100dNVA
11260d
60260d
20260d
90260s
S0260a
90260s
030N3dX3 03111NOo XSOM Vs1X3 MOM 3SVe 'Oso03
1NnDNY 1NnONV 01 03111146103 01 0311114400 010d
1V101 1V101 mows isnowV
XSOM 30 3d03S
sewn 10Vs1N00 Aq palJos
1s0d3s 901 1N31111NN00
NOISSINNo3 NOI1V1sOdSNV211 A1Nn03 301S213Als
11NN03 1s0d3s
Nsli 1NV1lnSNO3
num
10Vs1N00
L6/0f/Ol
js 'ON 39Vd
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: November 6, 1991
TO: Budget & Finance Committee
FROM: Dean Martin, Controller
THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Draft of Management Letter from Ernst & Young
Attached for your review and comment is a draft of the management letter comments
from Ernst & Young. This is a draft only, being presented simultaneously to the
Committee and to staff. This procedure has been implemented based on the request of
the Committee members from the previous year's management letter discussion.
Revisions may be made if upon examination and discussion it appears that the auditors
have based their comments on incomplete or inaccurate information. A final draft will be
provided at the meeting if there are changes prior thereto.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Review and discussion.
DM:sc
Board of Commissioners
Riverside County Transportation Commission
In planning and performing our audit of t ments of the Riverside County
Transportation Commission and its component units"irl! g the Measure A Funds, the Local
Transportation Fund, the State Transit Assistance Fund an' the Service Authority for Freeway
Emergencies for the year ended June 30, 1991, we considered its internal control structure in order
to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial
statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control structure. Our consideration of the
internal control structure would not necessarily disclose all matters in the internal control structure
that might be material weaknesses under standards established by the American Institute of
Certified Public Accountants. A material weakness is a condition in which the design or operation
of the specific internal control structure elements does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk
that errors or irregularities in amounts that would be material in relation to the financial statements
being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal
course of performing their assigned functions. However, we noted no matters involving the
internal control structure and its operation that we consider to be material weaknesses as defined
above.
We have separately reported in our letter dated September 24, 1991 addressed to management
certain other matters involving the internal control structure and its operations that we have
submitted to assist in improving procedures and controls.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Board of Commissioners and
management within the organization.
We would be pleased to discuss the above matters or to respond to any questions, at your
convenience.
September 24, 1991
Mr. Jack Reagan
Executive Director DRA r
Riverside County Transportation Commi a
In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements of the Riverside County
Transportation Commission (Commission) and its component units including the Measure A
Funds, the Local Transportation Fund, the State Transit Assistance Fund, and the Service
Authority for Freeway Emergencies for the year ended June 30, 1991, we considered its internal
control structure in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our
opinion on the financial statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control structure.
Our consideration of the internal control structure would not necessarily disclose all matters in the
internal control structure that might be material weaknesses under standards established by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. A material weakness is a condition in which
the design or operation of the specific internal control structure elements does not reduce to a
relatively low level the risk that errors or irregularities in amounts that would be material in relation
to the financial statements being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by
employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. However, we noted no
matters involving the internal control structure and its operation that we consider to be material
weaknesses as defined above.
We have the following suggestions for improvements in procedures and controls.
IMPLEMENTATION OF PRIOR YEAR RECOMMENDATIONS
We would like to recognize the Commission's efforts in implementing our recommendations from
the prior year. In the budgeting process area, the Commission is regularly comparing actual and
budgeted amounts and investigating significant variances. This comparison strengthens the
accounting controls and reporting responsibilities. In addition, the Controller is now assisting in
the preparation of the budget which has added efficiency to the process.
Disbursement processing was greatly improved by assigning one person the responsibility to
submit a daily invoice listing to the Controller for review. Controls over reimbursements were also
improved due to the additional procedures implemented during the current year.
9
ORAgAsir
Our Measure A policy recommendations on interest earned on unexpended monies and annual
budgets were also adopted by the Commission. Currently we understand that the Commission is
preparing and approving a prioritization plan for Measure A projects. The prioritization would
assist the Commission in the event that available funds become unexpectedly low.
ALL FUNDS
Procedures Manual
We recommend that the Commission establish a Standard Accounting, Operating and Compliance
Manual which outlines policies to be followed by all funds, as well as additional policies adopted
by specific funds. The preparation and maintenance of written standard procedures is necessary to:
(1) facilitate review by the Commission staff for adherence to policies; (2) establish consistent
policies; (3) aid in exchange of ideas; and (4) facilitate training of new employees. This manual
should include documentation of employee expense reimbursement policies and other personnel
r s well as compliance, accounting and other Commission policies and
policies and procedures, a p g
practices.
We recognize that the preparation of this manual may be a time consuming task which
implementation may take several years. Therefore, the Commission should establish priorities and
a timetable for the development of the manual. However, we believe it will result in useful
reference data and enhance the Commission's ability to operate efficiently.
During our audit procedures for the current year, we noted that the Commission has organized and
compiled the existing policies and procedures in a loose-leaf notebook format. We recommend that
the Commission use the existing policies and procedures as a starting point for a comprehensive
procedures manual.
Fixed Assets Records
The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) Fund, the Measure A Funds, and the
Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies Fund include general fixed assets account groups.
During the current year audit, we noted that the Commission has begun the process of establishing
a detailed fixed assets listing for office furniture and equipment. To further assist the Commission
in this process we recommend that the records include (1) an asset description, number and
location; (2) historical cost and date of acquisition; and (3) date of disposal or retirement. The
detail fixed asset listing should be reconciled to the general fixed assets account group of each fund
on a regular basis.
It is important to maintain detailed records for fixed assets in order to provide controls to safeguard
assets, substantiate insurance claims, and facilitate the identification of idle assets and proper
recording of retirements and property disposals. We recognize the significant improvements in this
area and the effort required to establish the required records.
DRA6
MEASURE A FUNDS
Conformance Guide
We noted that the Commission has not prepared a Measure A conformance guide for the
city/agency recipients. Such a guide would clarify current policies, procedures, and administrative
instructions for implementing Ordinance 88-1 of the County of Riverside and the Commission's
subsequent interpretations of the Ordinance. The proposed guide should include (1) the purpose of
the funds and eligible expenditures; (2) general guidelines; (3) apportionment process of the funds;
(4) records and reports and; (5) compliance requirements, noting those which will be audited by
independent auditors. Topics should include the establishment of separate funds, recording of
interest on unexpended monies, and submission of annual budgets.
The establishment of a conformance guide would assist recipients in establishing or maintaining
their eligibility and reduce the need for the Commission to answer fundamental questions on the
program.
Policies
In connection with the audit of the Measure A Funds and selected recipients, we noted that the
Commission does not require recipients to complete and file a maintenance of effort certificate to be
filed on an annual basis. We recommend that the Commission require the cities/agencies to comply
annually with this requirement.
Allocation of Monies
During our testing of the calculation for local streets and roads allocations, we noted that the
calculation did not reflect the exact population figures for unincorporated areas provided by the
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Although the difference did not
materially affect the allocations, we recommend that an individual other than the preparer review
the allocation calculation for accuracy and reasonableness, and that the supporting documents be
maintained on file for resolution of questions or for further review. In addition, the calculation
should be updated for revised population figures received from SCAG and payments to the
recipients should be retroactively adjusted.
Revenue Forecasting
Due to the prolonged recession, we recommend that the Commission reevaluate the underlying
assumptions of the Measure A sales tax revenue projections. The reevaluation should include the
expansion of the sales tax area, the effects of the recession and comparison of actual revenues to
forecasted revenues to date. The results should be applicable in preparing the Long Range Plan
and 1992 fiscal budget.
Page 4
This report is intended solely for the use of management.
We wish to take this opportunity to thank you for the facilities and courtesies extended to our audit
staff while conducting our audit. We hope that our comments will be helpful to you. We would
be pleased to discuss the above matters or to respond to any questions, at your convenience.
September 2 AFT
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: November 6, 1991
TO: Budget & Finance Committee
FROM: Mark T. Massman, Measure A Project Manager
Keith Fullenwider, Project Coordinator
THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Route 111 Mapping and Survey Contract Proposal
The Route 111 Corridor Study has been approved by the CVAG TTAS and CVAG has
expressed interest that project development efforts for Route 111 should continue to the
next phase. Staff intends to initiate mapping for all of the identified Route 111 corridor
projects and initiate Project Study Reports for each of the projects within Caltrans District
8 (Caltrans District 11 will initiate PSRs for the projects within District 11 boundaries).
Through the RCTC consultant selection process, Jaykim Engineers, Inc. has been
assigned to perform the photogrammetric mapping and field surveying to support the
preliminary project development of the Route 111.
The Route 111 projects consist of intersection improvements at the intersection of Route
111 and Cathedral Canyon, Date Palm, Magnesia Falls, El Paseo, Monterey, San Pablo,
San Luis Rey, Portola, Cabrillo, Cook and Monroe streets. In addition, several sections
of Route 111 will be widened and improvements made to the intersections. These areas
include:
1. The intersection of Gene Autry Trail and Route 111.
2. Route 111 from west of Perez Road to east of Date Palm Dr.
3. The intersection of Magnesia Falls and Route 111.
4. The intersection of Route 111 and El Paseo.
5. Route 111 from west of Monterey Ave (Route 74) to Cook St.
6. Monroe Street to east of Rubidoux on Route 111.
7. The intersection of Sunrise Way and the former alignment of Route 111 in
Palm Springs.
Jaykim will be responsible for the aerial photography, submittal of all required
photographs, digitized mapping, computer files and reports as specified by the current
fAusers\preprint\ 11-13-91. agd\rte ] 11. kf
Page Two
November 6, 1991
Route 111 Mapping and Survey Contract Proposal
Caltrans mapping and drafting standards. In situations where the preliminary design
consultant requires more precise information, field survey crews will be provided by
Jaykim to obtain this data.
At this time, RCTC and Jaykim are in final negotiations for the contract agreement
concerning scope of work and budget costs and should be completed prior to the
November RCTC meeting. The estimated cost for the Route 111 mapping and survey
scope of work is approximately $480,000.00, subject to final review by staff.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
That the Commission approve the estimated budget for the Route 111 mapping and
surveying scope of work by Jaykim Engineers Inc. for an amount not to exceed
$480,000.00, subject to final negotiations. Our standard consultant contract will be used.
MTM/KF:sc
f:\users\preprint\11-13-91.agd\rtellikt
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: November 7, 1991
TO: Administrative Committee
FROM: Mike Davis, Environmental Manager
THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Contract Amendment with LSA for Categorical Exemptions Studies
Required for the 60/91 /215 Interchange Right -of -Way Acquisitions
LSA Associates has been requested by RCTC to evaluate several individual parcels of
land located in and around the Route 60/91/215 Interchange for a Categorical Exemption
(CE) clearance under CEQA. These parcels have been identified as candidates for
hardship or protective acquisitions prior to the completion of the normal EIR study
process being prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff (PBQ&D).
CE environmental clearances are limited efforts which include studies for historic
resources, biological resources and hazardous materials. These studies are required by
Caltrans before they will begin their appraisal and acquisition process since potential
remediation efforts could directly impact the property value.
LSA Associates was requested to perform the CE clearances for parcel acquisitions as
part of their existing MAPAA contract because they were already working on the overall
regional environmental analysis and it was very easy for them to mobilize to conduct the
required studies. It is eventually intended that PBQ&D will assume preparation of any
future CE clearances for the Interchange when LSA completes the tasks as outlined
under this amendment.
It is expected that this amendment will be the third and final amendment to LSA's MAPAA
contract. Amendment No. 1 for $10,880, authorized May 11, 1990, was necessary to
cover additional environmental constraints analyses for segments of Routes 74 & 79.
Amendment No. 2, approved on June 12, 1991, further increased the MAPAA contract
amount by $10,000 to prepare CE clearances for the Orange Street/Route 60 Park and
Ride lot and hardship acquisition of the "Carlson" property. In August 1991, another
$15,000 was requested by LSA to continue CE clearance evaluation of the Ferguson, Van
Metschke and 3N Realty parcels. Since August, more parcels of land have been added
fAusen\preprint\ 11-1191.agd\lba.md
Page Two
November 7, 1991
Contract Amendment with LSA for Categorical Exemptions Studies Required for the
60/91 /215 Interchange Right -of -Way Acquisitions
to the list including the Friis, Saedi, AM/PM Mini Mart parcels and potential residential
units. LSA has indicated that in order for them to evaluate and obtain CE clearance for
all of these parcels $20,000 more would be necessary bringing the total for Amendment
No. 3 to $35,000. The total contract amount would increase from $197,530 (Amendment
No.2) to $232,530. The contingency cap was initially set at $203,148. This $35,000
supplement would exceed that amount by $29,382 requiring Commission approval before
LSA may proceed to complete all of the requested CE clearances.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Commission approve Amendment No. 3 for LSA to prepare Categoriacal
Exemption environmental clearances for various parcels acquired under "hardship and
protection" for a cost not to exceed $35,000.
MD:sc
f:\users\preprint\] 1-13-91.agd\ka.ad
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: November 6, 1991
TO: Budget & Finance Committee
FROM: Karl Sauer, Measure A Project Coordinator
THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Consultant Agreement with Leighton and Associates for: Geotechnical
Services for Route 91 Measure A Improvements between Magnolia Avenue
and the Mary Street Undercrossing.
Through the Measure A selection process, Leighton and Associates was assigned the
opportunity to provide Geotechnical Services for Measure A Improvements between
Magnolia Avenue and the Mary Street Undercrossing. Leighton will work closely with
Greiner, the prime engineering consultant for the above subject project, with the task to
produce a Materials Report in support of the final design.
Bechtel and Caltrans have both been involved in the negotiations with Leighton and are
in agreement with the scope and schedule for Leighton to perform the services required
and agree with the proposed level of effort.
Leighton has several minor exceptions to the terms and conditions of the current model
agreement. BB&K will review and resolve these exceptions prior to the Commission
meeting. BB&K will also be provided a copy of the attachments to the final contract for
review prior to the Commission Meeting.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Commission approve the contract with Leighton and Associates not exceed
$123,338 with a 15% contingency amount of $18,662 for a maximum contract amount of
$142, 000.
KS:sc
f:\users\preprint\ 11-13-91.agd\Le ighton. ks
AGREEMENT NO. R09212
BY AND BETWEEN
THE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
AND
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
FOR
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
AGREEMENT NO. RO - 9212
WITH
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
FOR
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
FOR THE
ROUTE 91, MAGNOLIA AVE TO MARY ST UC, PROJECT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ARTICLE
NO. TITLE PAGE
I. PARTIES AND DATE 3
II. RECITALS 3
III. TERMS 3
3.1 General Description of Services 3
3.2 Commencement of Services 4
3.3 Commission's Representative 4
3.4 Consultant's Representative 4
3.5 Substitution of Key Personnel 4
3.6 Preliminary Review of Work 5
3.7 Appearance at Hearings 5
3.8 Responsibility of Consultant 5
3.9 Inspection of Work 5
3.10 Final Acceptance 5
3.11 Term 5
3.12 Termination/Cancellation 6
3.13 Revisions in Scope of Services 7
3.14 Ownership of Materials/Confidentiality 8
3.15 Consultant Status/Subconsultants 9
3.16 Indemnification 9
3.17 Insurance 10
3.18 Prohibited Interest 11
3.19 Affirmative Action 12
3.20 Notification 12
3.21 Audit of Books and Records 12
3.22 Entire Agreement 13
3.23 Governing Law 13
3.24 Attorneys' Fees 13
3.25 Schedule, Progress, and Reporting 13
3.26 Compensation and Payment 15
Appendices
APPENDIX A SCOPE OF SERVICES
APPENDIX B SCHEDULE OF THE SERVICES
APPENDIX C COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT
2
AGREEMENT NO. R09212
1. PARTIES AND DATE This Agreement is made and entered
into this day of , 1991, by and between
the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ("Commis-
sion") and LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ("Consultant") a
corporation authorized to conduct business under the laws of
the State of California with a place of business at
consultant firm address.
2. RECITALS
2.1 On November 8, 1988 the Voters of Riverside County
approved Measure A authorizing the collection of a one-half
percent (1/2%) retail transactions and use tax (the "tax")
to fund transportation programs and improvements within the
County of Riverside, and adopting the Riverside County
Transportation Improvement Plan (the "Plan").
2.2 Pursuant to Public Utility Code Sections 240000 et
seq., the Commission is authorized to allocate the proceeds
of the Tax in furtherance of the Plan.
2.3 The Commission and California Department of
Transportation ("CALTRANS") have entered into an agreement
for joint cooperation in which CALTRANS District 8 has
agreed to provide technical oversight of certain consultant
services provided to the Commission.
2.4 The principal members of the Consultant are
professional Geotechnical Engineers, and represent that they
possess the professional qualifications and expertise to
provide the services called for herein.
2.5 Commission desires to retain the Consultant to
perform Geotechnical Engineering Services/Materials Report
necessary for Final Engineering Design, PS&E, on State Route
91, from Magnolia Ave to the Mary St Undercrossing. (the
"Project").
3. TERMS
3.1 General Description of Services The Consultant
shall furnish all technical and professional services
including labor, material, equipment, transportation,
supervision and expertise to fully and adequately perform
the tasks (the "Services") set forth in Exhibit A attached
hereto (the "Scope of Services"), so as to fully and
adequately complete the Project.
3
3.2 Commencement of Services The Consultant shall
commence the Services when it has received a written Notice
to Proceed from the Commission.
3.3 Commission's Representative The Commission
appoints the Commission's Executive Director as the
Commission's Representative. The Consultant shall work
closely and cooperate fully with the Commission's
Representative and any other agencies which may have
jurisdiction over or an interest in the Services. The
Commission's Representative shall be the principal officer
of Commission for liaison, and shall review and give his
approval to the details of the work as it progresses.
3.4 Consultant's Representative Consultant hereby
designates Steven Poole as the Consultant's Representative
to Commission. The Consultant represents that Consultant's
Representative shall have the authority to make decisions on
behalf of the Consultant and shall work with the Commission
to coordinate all phases of the Services. The Consultant's
Representative shall be available to the Commission's
Representative at all reasonable times. Any substitution in
the Consultant's Representative shall be approved by the
Commission's Representative in writing.
3.5 Substitution of Key Personnel The Consultant has
represented to the Commission that certain key personnel
will perform the Services and if one or more of such
personnel should become unavailable, the Consultant may
substitute other personnel of at least equal competence only
after prior written approval by the Commission's
Representative has been secured. In the event that the
Commission and the Consultant cannot agree as to the
substitution of the key personnel, the Commission shall be
entitled to terminate this Agreement for cause. The key
personnel for performance of this Agreement are:
Houman Makarechi
Jalal Vakili
Steven Poole
George Farra
Doug Cook
Principal -in -Charge
Project Reviewer
Project Manager
Project Engineer
Project Geologist
3.6 Preliminary Review of Work Where the Consultant
is required to prepare and submit reports, working papers,
etc. as products of the work described in the Scope of
Services these shall be submitted in draft form, and the
Commission and CALTRANS shall have the opportunity to
require revisions prior to formal submission. In the event
that the Commission's Representative determines, in his sole
discretion, that the initial work product is wholly
4
inadequate, the Commission's Representative may require the
Consultant to revise and resubmit the work at no cost to the
Commission.
3.7 Appearance at Hearings If and when required by
the Commission, the Consultant shall render assistance at
hearings as may be necessary for the performance of the
Services.
3.8 Responsibility of Consultant The Consultant shall
be responsible for the professional quality, technical
accuracy and the coordination of the Services. The
Commission's or CALTRANS' review, acceptance, or payment for
any work product prepared by the Consultant under this
Agreement shall not be construed to operate as a waiver of
any of their rights under the Agreement, or of any cause of
action arising out of the performance of the Agreement, and
the Consultant shall be and remain liable to the Commission
in accordance with applicable law for all damages to the
Commission caused by the Consultant's negligent performance
of any of the Services.
3.9 Inspection of Work It is understood that
authorized representatives of the Commission and CALTRANS
may inspect or review the Consultant's work in progress at
any reasonable time.
3.10 Final Acceptance When the Commission determines
that the Consultant has satisfactorily completed the
Services, the Commission shall give the Consultant a written
Notice of Final Acceptance, and the Consultant shall not
incur any further costs hereunder unless so specified in the
Notice of Final Acceptance. The Consultant may request a
Notice of Final Acceptance determination when, in its
opinion, it has satisfactorily completed all the work
required under the Scope of Services.
3.11 Term The term of this Agreement shall be from the
date of execution of this Agreement or the date the first
Notice to Proceed was issued by the Commission, whichever
occurred first, to the date upon which a Notice of Final
Acceptance is issued pursuant to Section 3.10, unless this
Agreement is terminated at an earlier time pursuant to
Section 3.12; provided that the indemnification requirements
under Section 3.16.2 shall remain in effect after the
termination of this Agreement.
3.12 Termination/Cancellation
3.12.1 Notice The Commission may, by written
notice to the Consultant, terminate this Agreement in whole
or in part at any time, whether for the Commission's
5
convenience or because of the failure of the Consultant to
perform its duties and obligations under this Agreement
including, but not limited to, the failure of the Consultant
to perform the Services in a timely manner in compliance
with the Schedule of Services described in Section 3.25 of
this Agreement. Upon receipt of such notice, the Consultant
shall:
3.12.1.1 Discontinue all services affected
within seven days of receipt of the notice (unless the
notice directs otherwise), and;
3.12.1.2 Deliver to the Commission all data,
estimates, graphs, summaries, reports, and such other
information and materials as have been prepared or
accumulated by the Consultant in performing this Agreement,
whether completed or in progress.
3.12.2 Effect of Termination For Convenience
If the termination is for the convenience of the Commission,
the Consultant shall be paid for Services performed through
the date of termination. Such payment shall include a pro-
rated amount of profit, if applicable, but no amount shall
be paid for anticipated profit on unperformed services. The
Consultant shall be responsible for providing documentation
deemed adequate by the Commission's Representative to show
the services actually completed by Consultant prior to the
date of termination. Following such termination, the
Commission may take over the work and complete it with its
own forces or by contract.
3.12.3 Effect of Termination for Cause; Damages
If the termination is due to the failure of the Consultant
to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement, the
Consultant shall be compensated for those Services which
have been completed and accepted by the Commission. In such
case, the Commission may take over the work and prosecute
the same to completion by contract or otherwise. In such
case, the Consultant shall be liable to the Commission for
any reasonable additional costs incurred by the Commission
to revise work for which the Commission has compensated the
Consultant under this Agreement, but which the Commission
has determined in its sole discretion needs to be revised in
part or whole to complete the Project. The termination for
cause of this Agreement may be considered by the Commission
in determining whether to enter into subsequent agreements
with the Consultant.
3.12.4 Procedure Upon Termination for Cause
Within seven (7) days of receiving written notice from the
Commission's Representative as provided in Section 3.12.1,
the Consultant shall suspend all work on the Services and
6
shall perform no additional work under this Agreement.
Following suspension of Services, the Commission may arrange
for a meeting with the Consultant to determine what steps,
if any, the Consultant can take to adequately fulfill its
requirements under this Agreement. In its sole discretion,
the Commission's Representative may propose an adjustment to
the terms and conditions of the Agreement, including the
contract price, which if accepted by the Consultant shall
become binding on the Consultant and shall be performed as
part of this Agreement. If the Commission and the
Consultant cannot resolve the dispute, the Commission may
terminate this Agreement within 30 days of the date the
notice to suspend service pursuant to Section 3.12.1 was
mailed.
3.12.5 Cumulative Remedies The rights and
remedies of the parties provided in this Section 3.12 are in
addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or
under this Agreement.
3.12.6 Waivers The Consultant, in executing
this Agreement, shall be deemed to have waived any and all
claims for damages in the event of termination for
convenience or cause as provided in this Section 3.12.
3.13 Revisions in Scope of Services
3.13.1 Extra Work At any time during the term
of this Agreement, the Commission may request the Consultant
to perform Extra Work. As used herein, "Extra Work" means
any work which is determined by the Commission to be
necessary for a proper completion of the Project, but which
the parties did not reasonably anticipate would be necessary
and which is not included in the Scope of Services. The
Consultant shall not perform Extra Work until receiving
written authorization from the Commission's Representative.
3.13.2 Contract Amendment In the event that
the parties determine that the Scope of Services must be
altered by a means other than that described in Section
3.13.1, the parties may execute a contract amendment to add
or delete work within the Scope of Services or amend any
other provision of this Agreement. All contract amendments
must be signed by the original signatories to this
Agreement, or their successors or designees.
3.14 Ownership of Materials/Confidentiality
3.14.1 Documents All data prepared by the
Consultant under this Agreement, such as plans, drawings,
tracings, quantities, specifications, proposals, sketches,
magnetic media, diagrams and calculations, relative to this
7
Agreement shall become the property of the Commission or
CALTRANS, as appropriate, upon the completion of the term of
this Agreement, except that the Consultant shall have the
right to retain copies of all such data for its records.
The Commission and CALTRANS shall not be limited in any way
in their use of such data at any time, provided that any
such use not within the purposes of this Agreement shall be
at the Commission's and CALTRANS' sole risk, and provided
that the Consultant shall be indemnified against any damages
resulting from such use, including the release of this
material to third parties for a use not intended in this
Agreement. If the Consultant should later desire to use any
of the data prepared by the Consultant in connection with
this Project, it shall first obtain the written approval of
the Commission's Representative.
3.14.2 Confidentiality All ideas, memoranda,
specifications, plans, manufacturing procedures, drawings,
descriptions, and all other written information submitted to
the Consultant in connection with the performance of this
Agreement shall be held confidential by the Consultant and
shall not, without the prior written consent of the
Commission, be used for any purposes other than the
performance of the Services, nor be disclosed to an entity
not connected with the performance of the Services or the
Project. Nothing furnished to the Consultant which is
otherwise known to the Consultant, or is or becomes
generally known to the related industry, shall be deemed
confidential. The Consultant shall not use the Commission's
or CALTRANS' name or insignia, photographs of the Project,
or any other publicity pertaining to the Services or the
Project in any magazine, trade paper, newspaper, or other
medium without the prior written consent of the Commission.
3.14.3 Publication No copies, sketches or
graphs, including graphic art work, which are prepared
pursuant to this Agreement, shall be released by the
Consultant to any other person or agency except after prior
written approval of the Commission, except as necessary for
the performance of the Services. All press releases,
including graphic display information to be published in
newspapers, magazines, etc., shall be handled only by the
Commission unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the
Commission.
3.15 Consultant Status/Subconsultants
3.15.1 Independent Contractor The Commission
retains the Consultant on an independent contractor basis
and the Consultant is not an employee, agent or
representative of the Commission. The personnel performing
the Services on behalf of the Consultant shall at all times
8
be under the Consultant's exclusive direction and control.
The Consultant shall pay all wages, salaries and other
amounts due such personnel in connection with their
performance of Services and as required by law, and shall be
responsible for all reports and obligations respecting them,
including but not limited, social security taxes, income tax
withholdings, unemployment insurance, and workers'
compensation insurance.
3.15.2 Assignment or Transfer Services to be
furnished hereunder shall be deemed to be professional
services and, except as herein provided, the Consultant has
neither the right nor the power to assign, sublet, transfer
or otherwise substitute its interest in this Agreement or
its obligations hereunder without the prior written consent
of the Commission.
3.15.3 Prevailing Wages The Consultant is
alerted to the requirements of California Labor Code Section
1770 et seq. and agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold
harmless the Commission and its officers, employees,
consultants, and agents from any claim or liability
including, without limitation, attorneys' fees, arising from
any failure or alleged failure to comply with California
Labor Code Section 1770 et seg.
3.16 Indemnification
3.16.1 Duties The Consultant represents and
maintains that it is skilled in the professional calling
necessary to perform the Services, and its duties and
obligations, as contained herein, required to fully and
adequately complete the Project. The Commission expressly
relies upon the Consultant's representations regarding its
skills and knowledge. The Consultant shall perform the
Services and duties in conformance to and consistent with
the standards generally recognized as being employed by
professionals in the same discipline in the State of
California.
3.16.2 Responsibilities The Consultant agrees
to indemnify and hold harmless the Commission, its officers,
agents, consultants, and employees from any and all claims,
demands, costs or liability arising from or connected with
the Services provided hereunder due to negligent acts,
errors or omissions or willful misconduct of the Consultant.
The Consultant will reimburse the Commission for any
expenditures, including reasonable attorneys' fees, incurred
by the Commission in defending against claims ultimately
determined to be due to negligent acts, errors or omissions
or willful misconduct of the Consultant.
9
3.16.3 Opportunity to Cure The Commission may
provide the Consultant an opportunity to cure, at its
expense, all errors and omissions which may be disclosed
during Project implementation after completion of this
Agreement. Should the Consultant fail to make such
correction in a timely manner, such correction shall be made
by the Commission, and the cost thereof shall be charged to
the Consultant.
3.17 Insurance
The Consultant shall obtain and shall require its
Subconsultants to obtain insurance of the types and in the
amounts described below and satisfactory to the Commission's
Representative.
3.17.1 Commercial General Liability Insurance
The Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability
insurance or equivalent form with a combined single limit of
not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. If such insurance
contains a general aggregate limit, it shall apply
separately to this Agreement or be no less than two times
the occurrence limit. Such insurance shall:
3.17.1.1 Name the Commission, its
officials, officers, employees, agents, and consultants as
insureds with respect to performance of Services. Such
insured status shall contain no special limitations on the
scope of its protection to the above listed insureds.
3.17.1.2 Be primary with respect to any
insurance or self insurance programs covering the
Commission, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and
consultants.
3.17.1.3 Contain standard separation of
insureds provisions.
3.17.2 Business Automobile Liability Insurance.
The Consultant shall maintain business automobile liability
insurance or equivalent form with a combined single limit of
not less than $500,000 per occurrence. Such insurance shall
include coverage for owned, hired and non -owned automobiles.
3.17.3 Professional Liability Insurance The
Consultant shall maintain errors and omissions liability
insurance with a limit of not less than $1,000,000 each loss
and annual aggregate. Such insurance shall be maintained
for a minimum of five years following completion of
Services, unless following completion of Services the
Commission determines in writting, in its sole reasonable
10
exercised discretion, that such insurance has become
commercially unavailable and is not customarily purchased in
the industry.
3.17.4 Workers' Compensation Insurance. The
Consultant shall maintain workers' compensation insurance
with statutory limits and employers' liability insurance
with limits of not less than $1,000,000 per accident.
3.17.5 Certificates/Insurer Rating/Cancellation
Notice. The Consultant shall:
3.17.5.1 Prior to commencement of
Services, furnish properly executed certificates of
insurance, and certified copies of endorsements, and
policies if requested by the Commission, to the Commission
which shall clearly evidence all insurance required in this
Section 3.17. Such certificate shall be endorsed to provide
that such insurance shall not be canceled, allowed to expire
or be materially reduced in coverage except on 30 days'
prior to written notice to the Commission.
3.17.5.2 Maintain such insurance from
the time Services commence until Services are completed,
except as may be otherwise required in Section 3.17.3.
3.17.5.3 Place insurance with insurers
having an A.M. Best Company rating of no less than A:VIII
and licensed to do business in California.
3.17.5.4 Replace certificates, policies
and endorsements for any insurance canceled, allowed to
expire or be materially reduced in coverage prior to
completion of Services.
3.18 Prohibited Interest
3.18.1 Solicitation The Consultant warrants
that it has not employed or retained any company or person,
other than a bona fide employee working solely for the
Consultant, to solicit or secure this Agreement and that it
has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other
than a bona fide employee working solely for the Consultant,
any fee, Commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or any
other consideration, contingent upon or resulting from the
award or making of this Agreement. For breach or violation
of this warranty, the Commission shall have the right to
rescind this Agreement without liability.
3.18.2 Conflict of Interest The Consultant
represents and covenants that for the term of this Agreement
no member, officer or employee of the Commission during
11
his/her employment with the Commission shall have any direct
interest in this Agreement, or any direct or material
benefit arising therefrom.
3.18.3 Conflict of Employment by the
Consultant of personnel on the payroll of the Commission
will not be permitted in the performance of this Agreement,
even though such employment may be outside of the employee's
regular working hours or on weekends, holidays or vacation
time.
3.19 Affirmative Action In connection with the
performance of this Agreement, the Consultant shall not
discriminate against any employee or applicant for
employment because of race, religion, color, sex or national
origin. The Consultant shall take affirmative action to
insure that applicants are employed and that employees are
treated during their employment without regard to their
race, religion, color, sex or national origin. Such actions
shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer; recruitment or
recruitment advertising; layoff or termination. The
Consultant shall also comply with the Commission's
Affirmative Action Plan in effect at the time of the
execution of this Agreement.
3.20 Notification All notices hereunder and
communications regarding interpretation of the terms of the
Agreement or changes thereto shall be provided by the
mailing thereof by registered or certified mail, return
receipt requested, postage prepaid and addressed as follows:
Consultant:
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
1737 Atlanta Avenue, Suite 1
Riverside, California 92507
Attn: Steven Poole, Project Manager
Commission: Riverside County Transportation
Commission
3560 University Avenue, Suite 100
Riverside, CA 92501
Attn: Jack Reagan,
Executive Director
3.21 Audit of Books and Records The Consultant shall
make available to the Commission, its authorized agents,
officers and employees for examination any and all ledgers
and books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks,
and other records or documents evidencing or related to the
expenditures and disbursements charged to the Commission,
and shall furnish to the Commission, its agents and
employees, such other evidence or information as they may
12
require with respect to any such expense or disbursement
charged by the Consultant. All such information shall be
retained by the Consultant for at least three (3) years
following termination of this Agreement, and the Commission
shall have access to such information during this three-year
period for the purposes of examination or audit.
3.22 Entire Agreement This Agreement constitutes the
entire agreement between the parties hereto relating to the
subject matter hereof and supersedes any previous agreements
or understandings.
3.23 Governing Law This Agreement shall be governed
by the laws of the State of California.
3.24 Attorneys' Fees If either party commences an
action against the other party arising out of or in
connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such
litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the
losing party reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit.
3.25 Schedule, Progress, and Reporting
3.25.1 Schedule of Services The Consultant
shall perform the Services in accordance with the Schedule
of Services set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto. the
Commission agrees to respond to the Consultant's submittals
in a timely manner to facilitate the Consultant's
conformance with the Schedule.
3.25.2 Detailed Schedule Upon request of the
Commission's Representative, the Consultant shall furnish to
the Commission a detailed schedule for performing the
Services to meet the Schedule of Services.
3.25.3 Modification of the Schedule The
Consultant shall report in a timely manner, through
correspondence or progress reports, whenever it appears the
approved schedules will not be met, whether or not the
reasons for anticipated delay are within the Consultant's
control. In the event that the Consultant determines that a
schedule modification is necessary, the Consultant shall
submit a revised Schedule of Services for approval by the
Commission's Representative.
3.25.4 Trend Meetings The Consultant shall
conduct trend meetings with the designated Project Managers
of the Commission and Caltrans on a bi-weekly basis, with
such meetings scheduled at a standard day and time. Trend
meetings will encompass focused and informal discussions
concerning scope, schedule, work progress, and cost issues
13
in a three week rolling format: current week - activities
and accomplishments; next two weeks - objectives. The
Consultant shall be responsible for the following trend
meeting activities:
a. Preparation and distribution of meeting agendas
to be received by the Commission and Caltrans
Project Managers no later than three (3) days
prior to the meeting;
b. Preparation and distribution of trend meeting
minutes within three (3) working days after the
meeting;
c. Preparation and maintenance of a Data Request
Log and Submittal Status Register in a form
acceptable to the Commission.
3.25.5 Progress Reports As part of its monthly
invoice the Consultant shall submit a progress report in a
form determined by the Commission which will indicate the
progress achieved during the previous month in relation to
the Schedule of Services. Submission of such progress
report by the Consultant shall be a condition precedent to
receipt of payment from the Commission for each monthly
invoice submitted.
3.25.6 Excusable Delays The Consultant shall
not be considered in default in the performance of its
duties and obligations with respect to schedule performance
to the extent that the performance of any obligation is
prevented or delayed by an excusable delay. Excusable
delays include acts of God or of the public enemy; acts or
failures to act of other agencies or the Commission, in
either their sovereign or contractual capacities; fires;
floods; epidemics; quarantine restrictions; strikes; freight
embargoes, and; unusually severe weather. In every case,
the failure to perform must be reasonably beyond the control
and not due to the fault or negligence of, the Consultant.
3.25.7 Extension of Time If the Consultant
believes it is entitled to an extension of time due to an
Excusable Delay, as defined in Section 3.25.6, the
Consultant shall provide written notice to the Commission
within seven (7) working days after the Consultant knows or
reasonably should have known that the Consultant's
performance hereunder will be delayed due to an Excusable
Delay. Failure of the Consultant to notify the Commission
within seven (7) working days shall constitute a waiver by
the Consultant of any right to an extension of time. Should
the Consultant's services be delayed by any mutually agreed
upon Excusable Delay, the Consultant's schedule for
14
completion of the tasks affected by such delay shall be
extended as determined to be necessary by the Commission.
Upon the granting of an extension, the Consultant shall take
all reasonable steps to minimize the delay in completion or
additional cost to the Commission resulting from the
extension.
3.26 Compensation and Payment
3.26.1 Amount Consultant's Services provided
under this Agreement as described in Exhibit A, Scope of
Services, shall be compensated up to $123,338 according to
the Payment Schedule set forth in Exhibit C "Compensation
and Payment" attached hereto. Extra Work may be authorized
pursuant to Section 3.13.1 up to $18,662, which shall be
compensated as set forth in the Payment Schedule or Extra
Work Order as applicable.
3.26.2 No Additional Payment No additional
compensation for Extra Work, as defined in Section 3.13.1,
will be paid except upon the issuance of an Extra Work Order
by the Commission's Representative. In the event an Extra
Work Order is not issued and signed by the Commission's
Representative, the Consultant shall stop providing the
Extra Work and is not obligated to continue providing such
Extra Work.
3.26.3 Invoicing
3.26.3.1 The Consultant shall submit monthly
invoices for Services performed during the preceding month
in accordance with the provisions of Exhibit C attached
hereto.
3.26.3.2 Charges shall be billed in
accordance with the terms and rates included herein, unless
otherwise agreed in writing by the Commission's
Representative.
3.26.3.3 Base Work and Extra Work shall be
charged separately, and the charges for each Milestone
listed in the Schedule of Services shall be listed
separately on an attachment to the invoice.
3.26.3.4 Each copy of each invoice shall be
accompanied by a monthly progress report and spreadsheets
showing hours expended by task for each month and total
project to date.
3.26.3.5 Each invoice shall include a cover
sheet bearing a certification signed by the Project Manager
or an officer of the firm.
15
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES,INC. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION
By:
By:
Title: Chairperson
By:
Title:
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL:
By:
Executive Director
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
16
BEST, BEST & KRIEGER
Counsel for the Riverside
County Transportation
Commission
APPENDIX "A"
[Scope of Services]
6891409-01
ATTACHMENT 1
SCOPE OF WORK
Proposed Project:
The proposed project involves the addition of one high occupancy vehicle lane in each direction,
in the existing median, on State Route 91 in Riverside County between Magnolia Avenue and the
Mary Street undercrossing, and the addition of an east bound auxiliary lane from the Tyler Street
undercrossing to the Van Buren Boulevard overcrossing. All widening will be done in the existing
median area, except for the east bound auxiliary lane. Approximately 2,200 linear feet of retaining
walls up to 12 feet high will be required in the auxiliary lane, as well as up to approximately 28,000
linear feet of sound walls at various locations along the project. Also included in the project are
four overhead signs and four culverts which will be bored and jacked.
Purpose and Scope of Work:
The purpose of our services is to evaluate the subgrade at the proposed median widening and
auxiliary lane locations for the purpose of providing pavement recommendations; and to provide
recommendations for the design and construction of foundations for retaining and sound walls and
overhead signs. A boring will be drilled in the existing median for the four proposed overpasses
which will be modified at a future date. The samples will be tested in the laboratory for
classification and their engineering properties but foundation analysis for the overpasses will not
be performed at this time.
The proposed scope of work is summarized below:
• Review of available information
• Preparation of a boring location plan
• Obtaining encroachments permits from Caltrans
• Clearing buried utilities with Underground Service Alert (USA)
• Traffic diversion in accordance with Caltrans requirements
• Subsurface exploration including hollow -stem auger drilling, and trenching
• Laboratory testing of soil samples obtained
• Corrosion study of soils in contact with underground concrete and steel
• Engineering analyses and recommendations for pavement design, retaining walls, sound walls
and overhead sign foundations, culverts, and pipe bedding materials.
1-1
6891409-01
• QA/QC, project management, and meetings. For estimating purposes, we have assumed a total
of ten meetings (eight "trend" meetings and two coordination meetings with Greiner, Inc.).
• Preparation of a materials report, including the Log of Test Boring Sheets, laboratory test
results, and geotechnical recommendations.
• Preparation of a Materials Information Handout. The scope and cost estimate does not
include any sampling and testing of any potential borrow sites.
• Response to Caltrans and RCTC review comments. The cost estimate for this task is based
upon the assumed man-hours outlined in Attachment No. 3.
• The scope and cost estimate does not include any services during construction. We understand
that these services will be provided under a contract addendum.
Lane Closure:
The existing median area where the high occupancy vehicle lane will be added is presently paved
with asphaltic concrete and includes a concrete barrier separating the east from the west bound
lanes. The median is approximately 10 feet wide on each side of the barrier, which is not enough
for a truck -mounted drilling rig to excavate the necessary borings in the median. As such, it is
necessary to close the left lane when excavating the borings in the median. The inconvenience
that may be created to the traffic may be reduced by performing the necessary field work requiring
lane closure at night between the hours of 8:00 pm to 5:00 am Monday through Friday for
eastbound traffic and 6:00 pm to 3:00 am Monday through Thursday for westbound traffic. This
will increase the cost for field work since a premium will be required to perform the work at night.
The alternative is to perform the work during the day, restricting the lane closure between the
hours of 9:00 am to 3:00 pm. This alternative does not require a premium cost; however, the
inefficiency created by the work hours restriction will end up costing more to the project than the
added premium. We therefore recommend performing the necessary field work requiring lane
closure at night even at the cost of a premium.
Subsurface Exploration
The borings will be drilled by qualified subcontractors using a truck -mounted hollow -stem auger
drilling rig. The number and depths of borings for the pavement widening, overpass structures,
auxiliary lane, retaining and sound walls, overhead signs, and culverts are presented below:
Purpose
Number of Borings
Depth Range, feet
Pavement Widening (Median)
8
5 to 15
Overpass Structures
4
50 to 80
Auxiliary Lane
3
10 to 20
Retaining Wall
3
20 to 40
Sounds Walls
30
20 to 30
Overhead Signs
4
20 to 30
Culverts
4
10 to 15
1-2
6891409-03
Lane closures will be performed in accordance with Caltrans requirements. Excavation within the
freeway lanes will be backfilled using sand -cement slurry up to approximately 6 inches from the
ground surface. The top 6 inches will be backfilled with hot patch asphalt. Excavations outside
freeway lanes will be backfilled with soils tamped in -place.
Laboratory Testing
Laboratory testing will be performed on disturbed and undisturbed samples. The purpose of the
testing will be to classify the soils and to identify their engineering properties. Sieve analysis,
Atterberg limits and sand equivalent tests will be performed to classify the soils. Moisture content,
dry unit weight, maximum dry density, R-value, direct shear, consolidation and expansion index
tests will be performed as necessary to evaluate the soils engineering properties in regards to
foundation and pavement design. A partial list of the number of tests per boring that will be
tested for the different categories of borings is given below:
Category of Boring/Test Pit
Type of Test
Index
Strength
Plasticity/5ieve/S.E
DS/Cons.
Pavement Widening
1 to 6
0 to 3
Overpass Structures
3 to 8
2 to 5
Auxiliary Lane
0 to 3
0 to 3
Retaining Wall
2 to 6
1 to 5
Sounds Walls
2 to 6
1 to 5
Overhead Signs
1 to 4
2 to 4
Culvert
1 to 3
0 to 3
1-3
6891409-03
ATTACHMENT 2
DIRECT SALARY COST
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
RCTC/ROUTE 91 IMPROVEMENT
ESTIMATED COST BREAKDOWN - GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
TOTAL
PERSONNEL CATEGORY
AVG RATE
HOURS
COST
PRINCIPAL
S40.00
40
S1,600.00
PROJECT MANAGER
33.00
90
2,970.00
PROJECT ENGINEER
26.00
166
4,316.00
ENGINEER/DESIGNER
22.00
410
9.920.00
CADaECHNICIAN
15.00
100
1.500.00
CLERICAL
13.00
84
1,092.00
TOTAL
890
S20.498 (x)
INDIRECT RATE
TOTAL
S20,498.00 X 189%
MI
SY.741.W
NET FEE
TOTAL
S59,239.00 X 1096
S5.924.00
OTHER DIRECT COSTS
TOTAL
1
• ' BORATORY TESTING
1DITIONAL DIRECT COSTS
S21.620.00
2.555.00
TAL
S24.175.00
SUBCONTRACTOR COSTS
TOTAL,
CORROSION STUDY
TRAFFIC DIVERSION
DRILL RIG
BACKFILL OF EXCAVATIONS
$5.0(x).0(1
5.0n0.00
21,000.00
3,000.00
TOTAL
S:4.0(M).00
TOTAL
S123 138.(10
2-1
6891409-03
SUMMARY OF OTHER DIRECT COSTS
TOTAL
TESTING TYPE
COST/TEST
# OF TESTS
COST
R-VALUE
S165
8
S1,320 O0
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY
113
10
1.130 (X)
MOISTURE/DRY DENSITY
19
180
3.420.00
DIRECT SHEAR
98
30
2,940.00
CONSOLIDATION
105
20
2,100.00
EXPANSION INDEX
91
10
910.00
A11bRBERG LIMITS
83
50
4.150.00
SIEVE ANALYSIS
50
30
1,500.00
-200 WASH
35
80
2,800.00
SAND EQUIVALENT
45
30
1.350.00
TOTAL
448
521.6:0 0a)
ADDITIONAL DIRECT COSTS
TOTAL
TYPE
COST PER
EACH
COST
MILEAGE'
50.14/mile
750
S 105.00
REPRODUCTION
COPYING
0.05/sheet
15,000
750.00
REDUCTION OF PLAN AND LOG OF TEST BORING SHEETS TO A-3 SIZE (11x17)
15.00/sheet
30
450.00
MYLAR
25.00/sheet
50
1.250.00
TOTAL
S2.555.00
'Assume 50 trips at 15 miles round-trip from the office.
2-2
6891409-03
ATTACHMENT 3
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
RCTC/ROUTE 91 IMPROVEMENT
SUMMARY OF DIRECT MANHOURS
BACKGROUND REVIEW
PERSONNEL CATEGORY
TOTAL
PROJECT ENGINEER
4
ENGINEER/DESIGNER
16
SUBTOTAL
20
FIELD WORK (Incladtn
ul11 clearance and permit acgaiiition)
_
PERSONNEL CATEGORY TOTAL
PROJECT ENGINEER 20
ENGINEER/DESIGNER 150
TECHNICIAN 20
SUBTOTAL 190
OFFICE ANALYSIS
PERSONNEL CATEGORY
TOTAL
PROJECT ENGINEER
40
ENGINEER/DESIGNER
120
SUBTOTAL
160
REPORT PREPARATION
PERSONNEL CATEGORY
^ROJECT ENGINEER
iGINEER/DESIGNER
O/TECHNICIAN
CLERICAL
'SUBTOTAL
TOTAL
60
100
80
60
PONSE TO RCTC CALTRANS' REVIEW COMMENTS
300
PERSONNEL CATEGORY
TOTAL
PROJECT MANAGER
10
PROJECT ENGINEER
32
ENGINEER/DESIGNER
24
CLERICAL
24
SUBTOTAL
90
PROJECT MGMT, QA/QC, MEETINGS
PERSONNEL CATEGORY
TOTAL
PRINCIPAL
PROJECT MANAGER
PROJECT ENGINEER
40
80
10
SUBTOTAL
130
TOTAL DIRECT SALARY HOURS
PERSONNEL CATEGORY
TOTAL
PRINCIPAL
PROJECT MANAGER
PROJECT ENGINEER
ENGINEER/DESIGNER
CAD/TECHNICIAN
CLERICAL
40
90
166
410
100
84
UBTOTAL
890
3-1
I-b
X
—
-
-
—
I99cuddv Pohl
XX
,.b,eae ao, uodau ,.a=mat I•of1 >mqns
nuauraim8 .Kuodm8trI
X
X
X
X
Al 909,911
9119r1•aral311
X•wwmoo
aapw Jo) uodaa si.Ia.wo q p *ors
.naoda000l
X
X
X
X
la Ewa
•ou1l•aa1a11
XX
X
t
wow ,ol ww5
WNW sualleyautt Jo, mods" speumeta paw mum uns
XX
X
X
ll"""a°og
""y'°'
XX
X
9tmem homage-1
X(raJ
99901 50194.1. 14 119,*91
X
�tS01d borara oq.l
/OWN
po..� PRY •� o+ a1.111 0O. +Q,OD aw.
X
X
X
.0009vltd
XX
X
orap•mIMd. >w•d •m „ mdd. po...M., m .ue»I•J
X=Id
1°O.rn
is0/19,00109 ••I.•/ m WM! v°• /./..1•D a.-
X*wed
OW/M. ,o; !Wad MOWS *.0I0++ 0.
00..•a ./.a./d .uolwaol oaK WP/Ola
JO, an
9C
6Z
gl
a
92
SZ
81
a
A
IZ
OZ
61
91
LI
91
SI
►I
CI
ZI
it
01
6
9
L
9
S
►
C
Z-I
aaeri IN NAHM 71110M
16 glf1021
NOISSIIAMOD NOLL` D:10dSNVILL 1LLNf10D �QIS2I�ARI
NOLLVOLLSgANI 'IVDINHDALOJ 1103 TIf1QgHDS A2IdNIL�tII�?Id
�N1 `SALVIDOSSV QNV NO.I.HJIT1
b LN3Y�IH�d.LLt'
£0-60b 1689
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
AGREEMENT NO. RO - 9212
WITH
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES,INC
FOR
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
FOR THE
ROUTE 91, MAGNOLIA AVE TO MARY ST UC, PROJECT
APPENDIX C
COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ARTICLE
NO. TITLE PAGE
1.
Elements of Compensation 2
1.1 Direct Labor Costs 2
1.2 Fee 3
1.3 Additional Direct Costs 3
2. Direct Salary Rate 4
3, Invoicing 4
4. Payment 5
5, Cost Proposal 6
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
AGREEMENT NO. RO - 9212
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
For the satisfactory performance and completion of the Services
under this Agreement, the Commission will pay the Consultant
compensation as set forth herein.
1. ELEMENTS OF COMPENSATION
Compensation for the Services will be comprised of the
following elements: 1.1 Direct Labor Costs; 1.2 Fixed Fee,
and; 1.3 Additional Direct Costs.
1.1 DIRECT LABOR COSTS
Direct Labor costs shall be paid in an amount equal to the
product of the Direct Salary Costs and the Multiplier which
are defined as follows:
1.1.1 Direct Salary Costs
Direct Salary Costs are the base salaries and wages
actually paid to the Consultant's personnel directly
engaged in performance of the Services under the
Agreement. (The range of hourly rates paid to the
Consultant's personnel appears in Section 2 below.)
1.1.2 Multiplier
The Multiplier to be applied to the Direct Salary Costs
to determine the Direct Labor Costs is 2.89, and is the
sum of the following components:
1.1.2.1 Direct Salary Costs 1.00
1.1.2.2 Payroll Additives .28
The decimal ratio of Payroll Additives to Direct
Salary Costs. Payroll Additives include all
employee benefits, allowances for vacation, sick
leave, and holidays, and company portion of
employee insurance and social and retirement
benefits, all federal and state payroll taxes,
premiums for insurance which are measured by
payroll costs, and other contributions and
benefits imposed by applicable laws and
regulations.
2
1.1.2.3 Overhead Costs 1.61
The decimal ratio of allowable Overhead Costs to
the Consultant firm's total direct salary costs.
Allowable Overhead Costs include general,
administrative and overhead costs of maintaining
and operating established offices, and consistent
with established firm policies, and as defined in
the Federal Acquisitions Regulations, Part 31.2.
Total Multiplier 2•89
(sum of 1.1.2.1, 1.1.2.2, and 1.1.2.3)
1.2 FIXED FEE
1.2.1 The fixed fee is $5,924.00
1.2.2 A pro-rata share of the Fixed Fee shall be
applied to the total Direct Labor Costs expended
for services each month, and shall be included on
each monthly invoice.
1.3 ADDITIONAL DIRECT COSTS
Additional Direct Costs directly identifiable to the
performance of the services of this Agreement shall be
reimbursed at the rates below, or at actual invoiced
cost.
Rates for identified Additional Direct Costs are as
follows:
Item
Car mileage
Photocopies
Mylar
Mylar Reductions
Reimbursement Rate
$ 0.14/mile
$ 0.05/copy
$25.00/sheet
$15.00/sheet
Travel by air and travel in
Consultant's office nearest
have the Commission's prior
under this Agreement.
excess of 100 miles
to the Commission's
written approval to
3
from the
office must
be reimbursed
2. DIRECT SALARY RATES
Direct Salary Rates, which are the range of hourly rates to be used
in determining Direct Salary Costs in Section 1.1.1 above, are
given below and are subject to the following:
2.1 Direct Salary Rates shall be applicable to both straight
time and overtime work, unless payment of a premium for overtime
work is required by law, regulation or craft agreement, or is
otherwise specified in this Agreement. In such event, the premium
portion of Direct Salary Costs will not be subject to the
Multiplier defined in Paragraph 1.1.2 above.
2.2 Direct Salary Rates shown herein are effect for one year
following the effective date of the Agreement. Thereafter, they
may be adjusted annually to reflect the Consultant's adjustments to
individual compensation. The Consultant shall notify the
Commission in writing prior to a change in the range of rates
included herein, and prior to each subsequent change.
POSITION OR CLASSIFICATION
Principal
Project Manager
Project Engineer
Engineer/Designer
Drafter/Technician
Clerical
RANGE OF HOURLY RATES
$40.00/hour
$33.00/hour
$26.00/hour
$22.00/hour
$15.00/hour
$13.00/hour
2.3 The above rates are for the Consultant only. All rates
for subconsultants to the Consultant will be in
accordance with the Consultant's cost proposal.
3. INVOICING
3.1 Each month the Consultant shall submit an invoice
for Services performed during the preceding month. The
original invoice shall be submitted to the Commission's
Executive Director with two (2) copies to the
Commission's Project Coordinator.
3.2 Charges shall be billed in accordance with the terms
and rates included herein, unless otherwise agreed in
writing by the Commission's Representative.
3.3 Base Work and Extra Work shall be charged
separately, and the charges for each task and Milestone
listed in the Scope of Services, shall be listed
4
separately. The charges for each individual assigned by
the Consultant under this Agreement shall be listed
separately on an attachment to the invoice.
3.4 A charge of $500 or more for any one item of
Additional Direct Costs shall be accompanied by
substantiating documentation satisfactory to the
Commission such as invoices, telephone logs, etc.
3.5 Each copy of each invoice shall be accompanied by a
Monthly Progress Report and spreadsheets showing hours
expended by task for each month and total project to
date.
3.6 Each invoice shall indicate payments to DBE
subconsultants or supplies by dollar amount and as a
percentage of the total invoice.
3.7 Each invoice shall include a certification signed by
the Consultant's Representative or an officer of the firm
which reads as follows:
I hereby certify that the hours and salary rates charged in
this invoice are the actual hours and rates worked and paid to
the employees listed.
Signed
Title
Date
Invoice No.
4. PAYMENT
4.1 The Commission shall pay the Consultant within four
to six weeks after receipt by the Commission of an
original invoice. Should the Commission contest any
portion of an invoice, that portion shall be held for
resolution, without interest, but the uncontested balance
shall be paid.
4.2 The final payment for Services under this Agreement
will be made only after the Consultant has executed a
Release and Certificate of Final Payment.
5
S1S1001030
33t/1S
030 'A000 sel6noa
181001030
103 r01:1 d
301:1 '!I!WA lelef
1=13M31A3H
103f OlId
301:1 '!4oemen uewnoH
301:1VHO-NI
1ddIONIbld
SI:133NION3
33d1S
SNVIOINH031
30a 'elood ueudels
)=13OdNb1N
103f'OHd
010EI
30b 'ened e6Joeo
1:133NION3
103r011d
1ue11nsuo0
_ _ upsea peal
'ONI 'd314131:10
S1NRW3n0EldW1 l6 amou
NOISSIW0100 NOI1d1HOdSNdH1 Jl1N1100 3aISEI3nI1:1
IMMO iENTODH0
`S31V IOOSSV ONV NO1H0137
5 iNHINITDVI v
APPENDIX "B"
[Schedule of Service]
•
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: November 6, 1991
TO: Budget & Finance Committee
FROM: Mark Massman, Bechtel Project Manager
Tom Horkan, Bechtel Project Coordinator
THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Wilbur Smith Contract for Traffic Engineering Services on Route 60
Wilbur Smith Associates has prepared a scope of services to perform traffic engineering
services on the Route 60 Measure A projects. Caltrans is handling the project
development of the Route 60 projects in District 8. This contract will provide traffic
forecasts, traffic analysis, HOV analysis, and freeway simulation model development for
use in the project development process. Wilbur Smith will serve in a role of providing
support to the Caltrans Project Development Team.
Wilbur Smith was the number two selected firm to provide traffic engineering services on
the Measure A selection list. They have completed work on the Route 111 Corridor Study
and have performed very well on that project. While Wilbur Smith will continue providing
services on the next phases of the Route 111 studies, their involvement will be
significantly less than during the Corridor Study stage. All of the firms selected to
perform traffic engineering services have been used for one or more scopes of work.
Because of Wilbur Smith's fine performance on the Route 111 project, staff proposes to
use Wilbur Smith to provide traffic engineering services on the Route 60 projects.
The Route 60 project limits are from the Riverside/San Bernardino County Line to Main
Street in Riverside, and from the 60/215 interchange near Moreno Valley to Gilman
Springs Road. Wilbur Smith will work with District 8 engineering and environmental staff
in the preparation of project reports, environmental document preparation, and design.
The RIVSAN model will be used a basis for traffic forecasting for the alternatives to be
analyzed. The scope of work prepared by Wilbur Smith is similar to the scopes of work
being performed by other traffic consultants on the Measure A projects which RCTC is
currently funding project development.
Important outcomes of the Wilbur Smith work will be the expected level of service of
various alternative improvements to be studied, defining the need for auxiliary lanes,
identifying bottleneck locations through freeway simulation of the alternatives, and
f:\users\preprint\ 11-13-91.agd\wilbur.th
Page Two
November 6, 1991
Wilbur Smith Contract for Traffic Engineering Services on Route 60
analyzing the impacts of ramp metering on freeway operation. Wilbur Smith will also
provide traffic analysis for input to localized air quality and noise impacts of the proposed
alternatives.
The tentative schedule calls for completion of this scope of work in November of 1992.
Once a final project schedule for the Route 60 projects is developed, the Wilbur Smith
schedule may be adjusted to meet the demands for input to the project development
process. The base contract amount for the traffic engineering services for the two
Measure A Route 60 projects is $226,600. An extra work account amounting to 15% of
the base amount for $33,990, will be established for unforeseen extra work which may
arise. The total base plus extra work amount will equal $260,590.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Commission approve the contract with Wilbur Smith Associates for $226,600 and
an extra work contingency amount of $33,990 for a total base contract plus extra work
contingency of $260,590. The services to be performed will be to provide traffic
engineering services on the Route 60 Measure A Projects. The standard contract
agreement will be used.
TH:sc
f:\users\preprint\ 11-13-91.agd\wilb ur.th
APPENDIX A
Scope Of Work
State Route 60 Operational Analysis
WSA Scope of Work
Introduction
This Scope of Work encompasses traffic engineering services for two separate sections along State
Route 60 (SR60) in Riverside County.
o Section 1, or SR-60 East Segment, extends from I-215/SR60 interchange to Gilman Spring
Road interchange (approximately 10 miles).
o Section 2, or SR-60 West Segment, extends from Riverside/San Bernardino County Line to
Main Street interchange (approximately 11.5 miles).
The study is intended to evaluate number of alternative widening improvements that can be
implemented within the two sections of SR60 included in the study. The alternatives include the
addition of HOV lanes, mixed lanes or combinations of both. The evaluation process will include
utilizing the FREQ simulation model to evaluate the different strategies and the effect of
implementing ramp metering operation on SR60. All future 2015 traffic forecasts for the different
alternatives will be obtained from the Rivsan model. The operational analysis of the freeway and the
corridor components will be accomplished according to the Highway Capacity Manual procedures.
The proposed Scope of Work for this study is divided into fifteen (15) tasks. The following is a
detailed description of the work involved in each task. An estimate of hours required for the
completion of each task is included in Appendix A.
Task 1 Project Coordination
Projects as big and as complex as the proposed operational analysis of SR60 require a great deal of
coordination and cooperation between all participants in the study. Wilbur Smith Associates (WSA)
understands the great importance of maintaining this close coordination with Riverside County
Transportation Commission (RCTC) and all other agencies involved in the project. It is also
important to maintain close cooperation with consultants conducting concurrent projects on SR 60
and its surrounding area. To ensure that this cooperation is maintained at all levels of the project,
numerous meetings will be required. The following sub -tasks details the proposed coordination
process with the different groups and agencies involved in the project.
1.1 Attend Trend Meetings
Trend meetings will be held on a biweekly basis with RCTC, Caltrans, and other consultants. These
meetings will be led by WSA staff. WSA will have responsibility for the preparation and distribution
of meeting agendas at least three days prior to these regularly scheduled meetings. In addition, WSA
will prepare summary minutes of each trend meeting within three working days of the meeting and
submit these minutes to RCTC for review and comment.
The purpose of the trend meetings will be to discuss scope, schedule, work progress, and budget
issues. The status of data request and submittal will also be reviewed at each meeting. To facilitate
tracking of each requests and submittal, WSA will maintain a Data Request Log and Action Item
Register. These tools will aid in identifying potential impacts to project schedule, and ensure that
information flow between local agencies, consultants, and RCTC occurs in a timely and efficient
manner. For budgetary purposes, a total of 20 trend meetings have been assumed for this project.
1.2 Attend MAPAA Coordination Meetings
Because the traffic operations analysis and assessment of various corridor alternatives will be
integrally linked with the concurrent Measure A Project Alternatives Analysis (MAPAA), significant
coordination will be required with the consultants performing this work. This coordination will be
particularly important in the early stages of WSA's work. To this end, WSA will attend three (3)
(MAPAA) meetings.
Specific areas of coordination which will be focussed on in the meetings include the identification of
corridor alternatives, modeling assumptions with respect to ramp entry points, model treatment and
assumptions relating to outside lane operation, the level of detail for the model network relative to
local streets and determination of probable corridor traffic volumes for the additional outside lanes.
1.3 Attend Project Development Team Meetings
In order to facilitate coordination and cooperation among the consultants working on the two
segments of S.R. 60 under study, Project Development Team (PDT) Meetings on a monthly basis.
These meetings will provide for a regular means of communication among PDT members which will
facilitate the exchange of data and information. A total of 12 PDT meetings have been assumed for
the 12 month project duration.
1.4 Attend Public Meeting/Hearings or Other Meetings
Because the ultimate sponsor of the Measure A program is the general public through sales tax
financing, it is imperative that the public be kept informed of project progress. To this end, WSA
will attend two (2) public meetings, and one public hearing during the course of the project. The
2
schedule for these meetings will be carefully coordinated with the RCTC Project Coordinator. The
public meetings will be informational in nature and will follow on open house format. In this format,
the public will be able to view displays and exhibits and ask questions of PDT staff in an informal
setting. Comment forms will be distributed throughout the room. The public hearing will be
scheduled for the end of the project and will be conducted in a formal setting. WSA will prepare
all the graphic and presentation board necessary for these meetings.
Task 2 Project Administration
This task includes the development, submittal, and approval of WSA's Quality Control Plan and Work
Program for the project, quality control for all technical products, oversight of work tasks activities,
budget monitoring, and staff resource management.
2.1 Develop and Submit Quality Control Plan and Work Program
The submittal of a Quality Control Plan will be the first project milestone. In this Quality Control
Plan WSA will outline its approach for ensuring that all products and analyses are subjected to a
regimented procedure of quality assurance. The plan will be submitted to RCTC within the first
monthof the project. It is recognized that this plan is to be approved by the RCTC Project
Coordinator prior to implementation.
2.2 Develop and Submit Detailed Work Schedule
In accordance with the Quality Control Plan and after consultation with RCTC Project Coordinator,
WSA will develop a master work schedule of anticipated milestone project submittal and coordination
meetings which will occur over the proposed 12-month project period. This master schedule will be
submitted to RCTC Project Coordinator for approval.
23 Prepare Monthly Progress Reports/Invoices
To facilitate close monitoring of project progress on behalf of the RCTC Project Coordinator,
monthly progress reports will be prepared and submitted in advance of a regularly scheduled trend
meeting. The progress reports will summarize the major accomplishments of the reporting period
on a task by task basis. In addition, major decisions resulting from meetings with local agencies will
be documented. The progress reports will provide supportive documentation of updated schedule
and budget information which will be appended to each report.
WSA will also prepare and submit monthly project invoices to RCTC. Invoices will be formatted to
include labor and overhead costs and direct expenses on a per task basis.
3
2.4 Implement Quality Control Plan and Conduct Project Management
Review of work products and implementation of the Quality Control Plan will occur in this task. The
specific procedures used in this regard will be outlined by the plan. Technical oversight of day to day
project activities as well as independent review of all technical products by senior staff not associated
with the project will be the focus on the plan. Project files in accordance with the Caltran.s Project
Development Uniform File System will also be included in this task.
Task 3 Collect and Assemble Existing Data
WSA will conduct a comprehensive review of all available reports, plans, laws, ordinances, and
regulations which pertain to the project area.
3.1 Review Existing Studies and Assemble Existing Data
All available studies and documents that pertain to the project area will be obtained and reviewed.
This includes but not limited to : As -Built plans, Right-of-way plans, DKS model network, DKS and
other 1990 traffic data, Caltrans project study report, route concept report and any local agency
reports.
From the review of available studies and documents, all available traffic and safety data will be
assembled for the SR 60 corridor and adjacent local streets.
3.2 Define Data Needs
The data gathered in subtask 3.1 will be compared to a list of data needs to identify the deficiency
in existing data. This comparison will determine the extent of additional data needs. WSA will
submit a list of data deficiencies to the RCTC Project Coordinator along with suggested data
collection plan to address each data item.
Task 4 Collect Additional Data
Based on the data collection plan developed in the previous task, afield data collection effort will
be undertaken. The actual cost of obtaining the data will be treated as a direct expense through a
subconsultant. The data described in the following subtasks will be needed to perform the traffic
operations analysis and will likely not be available form an alternative source. Therefore, collection
of such data was used as the basis for the development of the cost estimate for this task.
4
It has been assumed that 24-hour, hourly, and 15-minute volumes on the mainline and ramps will be
available from past or on -going projects. Similarly, it is assumed that information on daily and
seasonal volume variations on the mainline freeway will be available. It is also assumed that turning
movement counts for ramp terminal intersections and local street intersections will be available from
local agencies or past or on -going projects.
WSA will coordinate with Caltrans to obtain encroachment permits for collection of data within the
freeway right -or -way.
4.1 Collect Local Traffic Data
WSA will collect traffic data, including volumes, signal timing/phasing, vehicle distribution and other
operational data to be used to assess the impact of various freeway alternatives on the local street
system. Identification and quantification of existing and future traffic conditions on the local street
system will be necessary in developing appropriate mitigation measures, especially during construction.
WSA will assemble all existing local traffic data which pertains to the SR 60 corridor. If necessary,
WSA will supplement the existing database with limited field collection, particularly at major
intersections. This data will also be used to calibrate the FREQ corridor model.
4.2 Local Street Inventory
A major focus of the evaluation of ramp metering and freeway mainline traffic congestion will be the
impact of such conditions on the local street system. To perform this evaluation, an inventory of the
local street system within close proximity to the freeway must be taken. The number of lanes and
locations of traffic signals in the freeway interchange areas as well as on arterial roadways paralleling
the freeway will be emphasized. Availability of storage for ramp meter queues on the local street
system will also be assessed through this local street inventory. The study area for this inventory will
extend approximately one-half mile on each side of the SR 60 centerline. The final study area for
the freeway influence area will be defined in consultation with RCTC and the Project Coordinator.
4.3 Assemble Accident Rates
Caltrans TASAS accident data will be used to assess the existing conditions from a safety perspective.
These data will also be used to identify deficiencies in existing traffic operations and design. For
those sites which experience high accident rates, field reconnaissance will be conducted to identify
possible design or operation deficiencies which may contribute to the high accident rates. Such
deficiencies may include poor sight distance, insufficient acceleration or deceleration zones, and
intersection offsets, among others.
5
4.4 Obtain Vehicle Classification, Occupancy, Speed and Headway Data
Vehicle classification counts will be conducted at two sites within the SR 60 corridor. The
classification counts at each site will determine the percentage of various truck categories relative to
the total traffic volume. These counts will be conducted for a two-hour period during both the a.m.
and p.m. commute hours, as well as for a two-hour off-peak period. Classification information will
be gathered for each direction of freeway travel.
The vehicle classification counts will be needed for the calculation of the Caltrans Traffic Index
values for use in pavement design, as well as for the derivation of traffic factors used in establishing
maximum service flow rates for the corridor. Data on vehicle occupancy is assumed to be available
from past studies.
Vehicle speed and headway data will be collected for the freeway mainline during the peak periods.
Two sites will be studied during the a.m. and p.m. commute periods (a total of 7 hours). Data will
be gathered for both directions of travel. These data will be used in the calibration of the Highway
Capacity Manual speed -flow relationships. These relationships form the basis for the definition of
capacity and other traffic operations measures of effectiveness. Past freeway corridor studies have
indicated that calibration of these values can have significant impacts on the level of recommended
corridor improvements and ultimately on the construction cost of the recommended corridor projects.
4.5 Prepare Corridor Data Inventory Base
All data collected in this task and assembled from the previous task will be structured and input to
a corridor inventory database. The data included in each data file will be indexed through a common
reference system so that data for specific corridor segments or ramps can be easily identified.
Freeway and ramp geometric information will be obtained from as -built roadway plans, aerial
photographs, and photologs as available. This information will also be assembled in the database.
The geometric data will include the number of mainline and ramp lanes, mainline section lengths,
ramp lengths and mainline and ramp grades. Geometry and lane usage of ramp terminal
intersections and signal timing information will also be assembled in this task. The database
assembled during this task will be delivered to the RCTC Project Coordinator along with the Draft
Existing Conditions Report in Task 8.
Task 5 Calculate Traffic Indices for Freeway Segments
Traffic Index (TI) values will be determined for freeway sections under study through an evaluation
of projected truck traffic, lane distribution, and axle loadings. As per Caltrans procedures (Topic
603), this information will be converted into 20-year, 18-kip equivalent single axle loads (ESLs) which
6
equate directly to a Traffic Index value. In performing this evaluation, special attention will be given
to the determination of individual traffic index values for the existing and proposed mainline travel
lanes, auxiliary lanes, shoulder areas, and freeway ramps. Several sections of the freeway will be
analyzed to ensure that the traffic Index factors remain consistent throughout the project area.
Traffic index values will be calculated for existing conditions and estimated for future conditions.
Task 6 Calibrate Freeway Simulation Model (FREQ) With MAPAA Data
The FREQ simulation model (version 10) will be used as a key tool for assessing future conditions
in the SR 60 corridor. In this task, a FREQ model will be established and calibrated with new and
existing data. Model outputs of delay, fuel consumption, and vehicle emissions from existing
condition scenarios will be summarized for use in comparisons with future conditions.
6.1 Establish and Code FREQ Models
Existing freeway traffic and geometric data will be coded into the FREQ model in order to establish
a base model. These data will include mainline and ramp counts, vehicle occupancy, and vehicle
classification. Based on the results of the analysis of Task 7, the capacities of mainline sections and
ramps will also be coded. The base model will also include the number of lanes, sections lengths, and
grades of the mainline and ramps. WSA will require 15-minute volume counts in order to provide
greater model sensitivity. The following eight (8) models will be coded:
- SR-60 East Segment: Between Escondido Expwy (I-215) and Gilman Spring Road
o AM Peak Period EB
o PM Peak Period EB
o AM Peak Period WB
o PM Peak Period WB
- SR-60 West Segment: Between Main Street interchange and I-15 interchange
o AM Peak Period EB
o PM Peak Period EB
o AM Peak Period WB
o PM Peak Period WB
6.2 Compare Model Outputs with Field Conditions
Once the existing conditions have been coded, the models will be calibrated using existing freeway
performance data. Speed contour maps and travel time plots generated by the model will be
7
compared with actual freeway speeds and travel times to determine the reasonableness of the model
results. Model parameters will be adjusted as necessary to provide a more realistic representation
of existing freeway conditions. It is anticipated that the calibrated models will predict the beginning
and ending of congested conditions within 15 minutes of the actual occurrence, predict trip times
within 10 percent, and predict total vehicle hours of travel within two percent of the actual value.
An additional result of the calibration subtask will be an estimate of existing freeway and ramp delay,
ramp queuing, full consumption, and vehicle emissions. These results will be used as a base condition
to compare impacts of future operations and geometric alternatives.
63 Prepare Technical Memorandum on Model Calibration
Upon completion of Subtasks 6.1 and 6.2, a technical memorandum will be prepared which
documents the establishment and calibration of the FREQ models. Key assumptions and parameter
settings made during the calibration process will be emphasized. Summary information relating to
delay, fuel consumption, and vehicle emissions will be presented in tables and exhibits with
supplementary text.
Task 7 Conduct Traffic Operations Analysis for Existing Conditions
Work in this task will involve the analysis of existing traffic and safety conditions in the SR 60
corridor.
7.1 Evaluate Mainline Segments
The evaluation of freeway mainline segments on SR 60 will be conducted according to criteria
contained in Chapter 3 of the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). The analysis will begin by
determining the maximum service flow (MSF) rates for the freeway mainline. Based on the speed
and headway data collected, WSA will recommend to the Project Coordinator whether adjustments
to the speed flow relationships contained in the 1985 HCM are appropriate for SR 60. The
calculation of mainline level of service (LOS) will be found by comparing the peak directional
volumes in terms of passenger cars per hour per lane to the threshold MSF values contained in the
HCM, or developed explicitly for SR 60. It is assumed that a total of 17 mainline segments will be
analyzed.
7.2 Evaluate Ramp Merge and Diverge Areas
Ramp merge and diverge areas for the freeway corridor will be evaluated according to the
methodologies contained in Chapter 5 of the 1985 HCM. For those ramp configurations not covered
by the HCM methods, WSA will recommend an alternative approach to evaluating the ramp merge
and diverge areas. It is assumed that a total of 38 merge and diverge areas will be analyzed.
8
7.3 Evaluate Freeway Weaving Sections
The analysis of freeway weaving sections will be conducted by using criteria contained in Chapter 4
for the 1985 HCM. It is assumed that up to 10 weaving sections will be analyzed.
7.4 Evaluate Interchange Areas
Interchange areas will be analyzed including the operation of the arterial roadway and local traffic
signals. The methodology will be sensitive to ramp queues which extend onto the local streets and
the integral operation of closely spaced traffic signals on the cross streets. It is assumed that a total
of 17 interchanges will be analyzed.
7.5 Evaluate Ramp Terminal Intersections
The analysis of ramp and intersections will be conducted using various methods depending on the
configuration of the interchange area. Isolated signalized intersection locations will be analyzed using
the operational evaluation procedures contained in Chapter 9 of the 1985 HCM. Diamond type
interchange areas will be analyzed during the PASSER III-88 program. Unsignalized intersections
will be assessed using criteria contained in Chapter 10 of the 1985 HCM. Up to 17 ramp terminal
areas will be analyzed.
7.6 Evaluate Local Streets and Intersections
Local streets and intersections will be evaluated for existing conditions to serve as a basis for
comparison with operational impacts of various freeway corridor alternatives. The existing conditions
analysis will include assessments of intersection operations as well as arterial traffic progression. The
methodologies to be used in these analyses include Chapters 9 and 11 of the 1985 HCM. Existing
local street volumes will also be noted for comparison with model outputs for future alternatives. It
is assumed that up to 18 local intersections and five arterials will be analyzed.
Task S Prepare Existing Condition Report
8.1 Prepare Preliminary Draft Existing Conditions Report
The data collection and analysis activities for existing conditions will be documented in a Preliminary
Draft Conditions Report. This report will be prepared in a form consistent with Caltrans standards
for such reports. The report will include text with supplementary graphics and table needed to
describe the existing traffic operations and safety conditions. Three copies of the preliminary report
will be submitted to the RCTC Project Coordinator for review and comment.
9
8.2 Prepare Draft Existing Conditions Report
Upon receipt of written comments concerning the Preliminary Draft Existing Conditions Report, the
report will be reviewed as necessary and submitted as a Draft Existing Conditions Report. The
Corridor Inventory Database will be submitted along with the Draft Existing Conditions Report as
a secondary deliverable. Twenty copies of the Draft Existing Conditions Report will be submitted.
8.3 Prepare Final Existing Conditions Report
Twenty copies of the Final Existing Conditions Report will be submitted to the RCTC Project
Coordinator. The final report will address written comments received concerning the Draft Existing
Conditions Report.
Task 9 Develop Future Traffic Forecasts
It is assumed that DKS will provide unsmoothed 1990 and 2015 traffic forecasts to be utilized in
evaluating future operations. These forecasts will cover all future alternatives for the SR-60 West
Segment and the SR-60 East Segment except three alternatives. These alternatives are identified in
Task 10. The traffic forecasts for last alternative of the SR-60 East Segment and the second and
forth alternatives on SR-60 West Segment will not be provided. WSA will run the RIVSAN model
for the second alternative of SR-60 West Segment to forecast future traffic for that alternative. WSA
will smooth forecasts submitted by DKS.
The ability of RNSAIs1 to model HOV lanes and mixed flow lanes makes it more desirable to run
a new assignment for each alternative rather than trying to adjust the forecasts of a basic assignment
manually. Using the RNSAN model to develop the forecasts for each alternative will give the
resulting traffic forecasts more credibility than if they were adjusted by hand.
WSA will adjust model outputs as needed to reflect expected traffic loadings for each alternative
concept or operational strategy. After the adjustments have been completed, a technical
memorandum will be prepared. The memorandum will specifically focus on the impacts of the
alternatives relative to diversion of traffic to local streets.
Task 10 Evaluate Traffic Operations of Future Alternatives
. All alternatives will be assessed from traffic, operations and safety perspectives in this task. It may
be necessary to subject some alternatives to the procedures defined in Task 13 to further define
operational characteristics associated with the improvements. Such refinements will likely be
necessary for ramp metering alternatives.
10
The analyses in this task will be conducted according to the same criteria used for the analyses of
existing conditions. The following subtasks describe the specific methodologies that will be applied.
It has been assumed that the following corridor alternatives will be evaluated in this task:
- SR-60 East Segment Alternatives:
o Do-nothing.
o Add one HOV lane in each direction.
o Add one mixed flow lane in each direction.
o Add two lanes in each direction (one HOV lane and one mixed flow lane).
o Add two mixed flow lanes in each direction.
- SR-60 West Segment Alternatives:
o Do-nothing.
o Add one HOV lane in each direction.
o Add one mixed flow lane in each direction.
o Add two mixed flow lane in each direction.
o In each direction add one HOV lane between I-15 and Valley Way and two lanes (one
HOV and one mixed lane) between Valley Way and Main Street.
10.1 Evaluate Mainline
The evaluation of mainline freeway sections will be conducted according to criteria contained in
Chapter 3 of the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual. As indicated elsewhere in this work plan, WSA
will use calibrated maximum service flow rates for the freeway mainline to ascertain level of service
thresholds to travel characteristics for the SR 60 corridor.
10.2 Evaluate Corridor Components
Ramp merge and diverge areas will be assessed according to criteria contained in Chapter 5 of the
HCM. This analysis will include an assessment of auxiliary lanes. Weaving section which result from
ramp and auxiliary lane configurations on the freeway mainline will be assessed according to
procedures contained in Chapter 4 of the 1985 HCM. Interchange areas will be assessed according
to the same criteria used to evaluate existing conditions.
The intersection of ramps with local cross street will be assessed according to applicable criteria for
signalized and/or unsignalized intersection in the ramp area, procedures such as PASSER III-88 will
be used to optimize signal operations.
11
The impact of alternatives which divert traffic from the freeway facility will be a primary concern for
local agencies. In order to assess the impact of freeway traffic diversion or queue backups on local
streets, a two tiered process will be used.
The first level of analysis will be to determine the volume of traffic which is expected to be diverted
from the freeway or queued along a ramp for each alternative. The source of this information will
be comparisons of various traffic forecasting runs, and estimates which are output from the FREQ
model. The availability of alternative travel routes, and the travel time for vehicles on the freeway
mainline are key parameters to the degree of traffic diversion. The second aspect of the analysis
process will involve an assessment of the local capacity on streets used by vehicles which have
diverted from the freeway.
103 Summarize Results
At the conclusion of this task, summary graphics will be prepared to summarize level of service values
for each freeway component and for local streets for each alternative. The summary graphics will be
combined with supplementary text to document the analysis conducted in this task. This information
will be submitted to the RCTC Project Coordinator in the form of a technical memorandum.
Task 11 Model and Evaluate Traffic Speed, and Locations and Lengths of
Traffic Queues
The importance of this task is to evaluate the corridor alternatives from a systems perspective. The
previous task will have defined estimates of level of service for each corridor component on an
individual basis. However, it is also essential to assess traffic operations over segments of several
miles, by combining the individual components.
11.1 FREQ Analysis for Future Conditions
In order to derive system evaluation criteria for each corridor alternative, a FREQ model will be
utilized. Each of the ten alternatives will be coded into the calibrated model developed in Task 6.
This coding will include modification of the freeway mainline and ramp capacities, addition or
deletion of ramps, and disaggregation of hourly ramp and mainline volumes. The traffic forecasts for
the a.m. (2-hour) and p.m. (3-hour) peak periods will be extrapolated in order to cover a longer
period of perhaps 4 hours. This will allow for the accurate determination of the duration of freeway -
congestion expected from each alternative. Analyses will then be conducted to determine the
location and lengths of traffic queues and average vehicles speeds on the freeway mainline. It is
anticipated that forty model runs will be performed.
12
11.2 Summarize FREQ Outputs
System evaluation measures which result from the FREQ model which will be used in the traffic and
environmental analysis will be summarized into a technical memorandum. These measures include
the duration of congested conditions, vehicle hours of travel, ramp queuing delay, fuel consumption,
and vehicle emissions.
Task 12 Identify and Run Other Traffic Forecasting Needs
It is expected that a number of special traffic forecasting runs will be needed to refine and evaluate
specific corridor alternatives. The following sections describe various model runs that may be
necessary to aid in the traffic analyses.
12.1 Define Select Link Analyses Needed to Assess Traffic Diversion
Select link analyses will be needed to assess the origins and destination of vehicles using the local
streets. Such analyses will enable WSA and local agencies to estimate the percentages of traffic on
specific local streets which originates from or is destined for the freeway. It is estimated that up to
10 assignments will be needed for this subtask.
12.2 Define Various HOV Operation Alternatives (2+, 3+, etc., Hours of Operation)
The addition of one lane in each direction will have an effect on HOV operation. In order to
accurately portray and analyze any HOV alternative assumptions, the hours of operation, operational
restrictions and access must be defined. It is anticipated that model runs will be needed to assess
whether the HOV lanes are most effective when used by vehicles with 2+ or 3+ occupants.
Similarly, it will be important to refine access controls to determine whether vehicles will be able to
freely access HOV Lanes at any interchange or whether the lanes will operate as express facilities
with very limited access.
123 Define Various Metering Rate Scenarios
Any alternative scenario which considers the operation of ramp meters at freeway entries will need
to be modeled to determine the relationship of traffic diversion and ramp queues with respect to the
metering rate. It is anticipated that model runs will be conducted. Such operation will be modeled
by alternating the degree of impedance at the ramp/freeway nodes. In the TRANPLAN model, turn
penalties are used for this purpose.
13
12.4 Define Priority Entry at Metered Ramps
In association with the modeling of ramp meter operations and HOV lanes, assessments of benefits
associated with priority entry for HOV vehicles at the entry ramps will need to be conducted.
Generally, operation of HOV lanes in association with ramp meters is not effective unless priority
entry is permitted at the ramp meter. The effectiveness of the exclusive lane only comes as a result
of travel time savings when compared to travel in mixed use lanes. One of the primary purposes of
ramp metering is to provide a good level of service in mixed use lanes. As a result, operations in
mixed use lanes become comparable to HOV lane travel. In order to provide some incentive for use
of the HOV lanes, priority entry should generally be provided at entry ramps where mixed use traffic
will be delayed. Typical ramp designs and determinations of whether metered on ramps will have one
or two lanes will also impact the decision to provide priority entry and the modeling effort needed
to evaluate it.
Task 13 Refine Corridor Alternatives
Concurrent with the evaluation of corridor alternatives which takes place in Task 10, will be the
refinement of specific corridor elements. This refinement suggests that the evaluation of corridor
alternatives and the development of the alternatives themselves will take place in an iterative mode.
In this manner, elements which are found to experience poor operations or appear to be safety
problems can be corrected during the analysis process. Examples would include modifying rates or
HOV operation restrictions.
Task 14 Assess Construction Traffic Impacts
With any corridor improvement project such as this, there is significant and justified concern,
especially among local agencies, regarding the traffic impacts which will occur during the corridor
construction. One of the primary issues which will be addressed relative to construction impacts will
be the degree of traffic diversions which impacts local streets. This diversion will be addressed
through by considering the closure of specific ramp and/or reductions in capacity which occur on the
mainline. Attention will be focussed on both peak and off-peak periods, recognizing that the
significant restrictions in mainline capacity during construction will be directed to off-peak concerns.
Impacts of construction zones and associated traffic delays will also be assessed from the perspective
of truck operations. Lower travel speeds and congestion which are typically associated with freeway
work zones can be exacerbated by the presence of significant numbers of large trucks. Therefore,
an assessment of truck routing will be conducted to identify altemative travel routes for truck traffic.
14
Task 15 Prepare Future Conditions Report
15.1 Prepare Preliminary Draft Future Conditions
Analysis work associated with the evaluation of the corridor alternatives will be compiled into a
Preliminary Draft Future Conditions Report. Summary tables, exhibits, and graphs will be prepared.
Three copies of this preliminary report will be submitted to the RCTC Project Coordinator for review
and comment.
15.2 Prepare Draft Future Conditions Report
Written comments received concerning the Preliminary Draft Future Conditions Report will be
addressed and a Draft Future Conditions Report will be prepared. Twenty copies of this report will
be distributed to the Project Coordinator.
15.3 Prepare Final Future Conditions Report
Twenty copies of a Final Future Conditions Report will be prepared which address written comments
received by WSA concerning the Draft Future Conditions Report.
15
APPENDIX B
Project Schedule
Project Deliverable Schedule
2
Task
Exhibit B-1
Project Deliverables Schedule
Deliverable Date
1. Meeting Schedule 11/13/91
2. Quality Control Plan 11/20/91
2. First Monthly Progress Report 12/ 9/91
6. Technical Memo. on FREQ Model Calibration 2/14/92
8.1 Preliminary Draft Existing Condition Report 3/20/92
8.2 Draft Existing Condition Report 4/17/92
8.3 Final Existing Condition Report 5/15/92
10. Technical Memo. on Alternatives Analysis 7/24/92
11. Summary of FREQ Future Analysis Results 8/25/92
15.1 Preliminary Draft on Future Conditions Report 9/30/92
15.2 Draft Future Conditions Report 10/30/92
15.3 Final Future Conditions Report 11/30/92
APPENDIX C
Cost Proposal
Hours Estimate
Cost Estimate
Cost of Service Range
Direct Expense Estimate
3
Exhibit C-1
Wilbur Smith Associates
State Route 60 Traffic Operations
Hours Estimate
Project Senior Support Total
Task Manager Engineer Engineer StaffV Task Hrs.
Task 1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
124
60
12
40
12
28
0
16
0
12
4
0
0
0
4
78
6
6
6
60
234
Task 2 70 52 0 28 150
2.1 8 0 0 4
2.2 8 4 0 4
2.3 14 24 0 12
2.4 40 24 0 8
Task 3 18 48 20 30 116
3.1 16 32 16 18
3.2 2 16 4 12
Task 4 4 24 54 46 128
4.1 0 4 4 6
4.2 0 4 4 4
4.3 0 4 16 8
4.4 0 4 6 4
4.5 4 8 24 24
Task 5 0 12 16 12
40
Task 6 12 88 108 28 236
6.1 4 48 72 8
6.2 4 16 24 4
6.3 4 24 12 16
Exhibit C-1
Wilbur Smith Associates
State Route 60 Traffic Operations
Hours Estimate
Project Senior Support Total
Task Manager Engineer Engineer Staff Task Hrs.
Task 7
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.6
6
1
1
1
1
1
1
72
12
16
12
14
12
6
174
18
48
24
36
24
24
16
2
2
2
2
4
4
268
Task 8 22 54 24 64 164
8.1 10 30 16 30
8.2 6 12 4 20
8.3 6 12 4 14
Task 9 18 40 56 36 150
Task 10 14 88 428 60 590
10.1 6 16 80 6
10.2 4 48 300 6
10.3 4 24 48 48
Task 11 20 80 208 40 348
11.1 12 48 160 16
11.2 8 32 48 24
Task 12 20 42 92 38 192
12.1 8 12 20 12
12.2 4 10 24 8
12.3 4 10 24 10
12.4 4 10 24 8
Exhibit C-1
Wilbur Smith Associates
State Route 60 Traffic Operations
Hours Estimate
Project Senior Support Total
Task Manager Engineer Engineer Staff Task Hrs.
Task 13
Task 14 8
12
24
48
Task15 84 152
16 18 70
60 32 148
22 100 358
15.1 48 80 12 60
15.2 20 36 4 24
15.3 16 36 6 16
Total 432 852 1282 626 3192
Exhibit C-2
Wilbur Smith Associates
State Route 60 Traffic Operations
Cost Estimate
Project Senior Support Labor
Task Manager Engineer Engineer Staff Task Cost
$35 $26 $19 $12
Task 1
$4,340 $728
1.1 2100 0
1.2 420 416
1.3 1400 0
1.4 420 312
$76 $936 $6,080
0
0
0
76
72
72
72
720
Task 2 $2,450 $1,352 $0 $336 $4,138
2.1 280 0 0 48
2.2 280 104 0 48
2.3 490 624 0 144
2.4 1400 624 0 96
Task 3 $630 $1,248 $380 $360 $2,618
3.1 560 832 304 216
3.2 70 416 76 144
Task 4 $140 $624 $1,026 $552 $2,342
4.1 0 104 76 72
4.2 0 104 76 48
4.3 0 104 304 96
4.4 0 104 114 48
4.5 140 208 456 288
Task 5 $0 $312 $304 $144 $760
Task 6 $420 $2,288 $2,052 $336 $5,096
6.1 140 1248 1368 96
6.2 140 416 456 48
6.3 140 624 228 192
Exhibit C-2
Wilbur Smith Associates
State Route 60 Traffic Operations
Cost Estimate
Project Senior Support Labor
Task Manager Engineer Engineer Staff Task Cost
$35 $26 $19 $12
Task 7
$210
$1,872 $3,306
7.1 35 312 342
7.2 35 416 912
7.3 35 312 456
7.4 35 364 684
7.5 35 312 456
7.6 35 156 456
$192
24
24
24
24
48
48
$5, 580
Task 8 $770 $1,404 $456 $768 $3,398
8.1 350 780 304 360
8.2 210 312 76 240
8.3 210 312 76 168
Task 9 $630 $1,040 $1,064 $432 $3,166
Task 10 $490 $2,288 $8,132 $720 $11,630
10.1 210 416 1520 72
10.2 140 1248 5700 72
10.3 140 624 912 576
Task 11 $700 $2,080 $3,952 $480 $7,212
11.1 420 1248 3040 192
11.2 280 832 912 288
Task 12 $700 $1,092 $1,748 $456 $3,996
12.1 280 312 380 144
12.2 140 260 456 96
12.3 140 260 456 120
12.4 140 260 456 96
Exhibit C-2
Wilbur Smith Associates
State Route 60 Traffic Operations
Cost Estimate
Project Senior Support Labor
Task Manager Engineer Engineer Staff Task Cost
$35 $26 $19 $12
Task 13 $420 $624 $304
Task 14 $280 $1,248 $1,140
Task 15 $2,940 $3,952 $418
$216 $1,564
$384 $3,052
$1,200 $8,510
15.1 1680 2080 228 720
15.2 700 936 76 288
15.3 560 936 114 192
Total: $15,120 $22,152 $24,358 $7,512 $69,142
Labor = $69,142
Provisional Overhead (1.60) = $110,627
Fee (10.5% of Labor & Overhead) = $18,876
Total (Execludas Direct Cost) = $198,645
Exhibit C-3
Wilbur Smith Associates
State Route 60 Traffic Operations
Employee "Cost of Service" Range by Catagory
Range of Cost of
Sevice Per Hour
Project Manager $30 - $40
Senior Engineer $22 - $30
Engineer $15 - $22
Support Staff $ 8 - $1 5
Exhibit C-4
Wilbur Smith Associates
State Route 60 Traffic Operations
Direct Expense Estimate
Communication
Office
MBE/DBE Sub-
Total
(2)Repro-
(3)Phone/
(4) Postal/
Computer/
Supplies/
Consultants
Task
Task
(1)Mileage
duction
Fax
Fed-Exe
(5),(6)Cad
Miscel.
(7),(8)
Cost
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
$400 $350 $300
450 520
250 150 150
400 250 60
75 50
200 50
60 40
50 800 120
50 50
250 50
75 65
50 50
65 65
200 75 80
50 1200 150
$300
350
150
$100
400
75
300
120
1300
1200
100 500
400
1600
900
200
250
50
100 300
150 1600
100 1820
150 925
200 $10,500 11710
80 325
75 1625
60 1360
60 1630
60 560
100 2000
50 1090
75 375
50 430
100 505
200 2000
I $1,350 $4,100 $1,800 $1,000 $7,695 $1,510 $10,500 $27,955
(1) Mileage is billed at $0.26 per mile
(2) Reporduction is billed at $0.10 per copy
(3) Fax communications are billed at $0.75 per Fax sheet
(4) Federal Express is estimated at $15 per package
(5) Computer/CAD time is billed at $10 per hour
(6) Task 6 cost includes $550 for FREQ model upgrade
(7) This is a preliminary estimate that might change
based on availability of data and need for field surveys
'�."Ifi RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
TO:
RCTC Administrative Committee
RCTC Budget and Finance Committee
FROM: Jack Reagan, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Property in the North Quadrant of the Route 60/91/1-215 Interchange
The Riverside County Transportation Commission, on June 12, 1991, took action to
acquire approximately 35-acre property in the north quadrant of the Route 60/91 /1-215
Interchange bounded by Orange and Strong Streets for the State Route 60/91 /1-215
Interchange Improvement Project. The Commission, as owner of the property, must
abide by the City's Municipal Code requirements and must secure structures in
accordance to HUD/FHA standards.
Staff inspected the property and it appears that there is one structure on Strong Street
that needs to be secured. In some of the areas of the property, there is no fence and
some of the fencing needs to be repaired. This is necessary to deter dumping and avoid
liability problems. To secure the property, approximately 3000 lineal ft. of fencing using
6 ft. chain link with 11 gage chain link is sufficient.
Three proposals to fence the area were received. The proposals received per lineal ft.
are: 1) $6.97 (Anchor Fence); 2) $3.94 (Harris Fence); and 3) $6.20 (Elrod Fence).
There is additional cost per corner ($30) and for double (drive-thru) gates ($325).
If the Commissioner selects the lowest bid, it would cost approximately $13,425
including corners and three gates.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That the Commission authorize the Executive Director to contract with Harris Fence to
secure the property and engage an individual to secure the building.
nk
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: November 6, 1991
TO: Budget & Finance Committee
FROM: Mike Davis, Environmental Manager
THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Cooperative Agreement to Convert the DTIM Computer Model from Main -
Frame to PC Based Version
The Direct Traffic Impact Model (DTIM) computer model is used exclusively throughout
California to evaluate regional air quality and energy usage impacts for environmental
analyses. The model was developed by Caltrans to operate on a mainframe computer.
Presently, only SCAG and Caltrans have the ability to run it. LSA Associates has been
working with SCAG to analyze the Measure "A" highway improvement program with their
DTIM main-frame computer model.
With a PC version, RCTC would no longer be dependent on either SCAG or Caltrans for
DTIM results. In-house staff and/or consultants would readily be able to run the model to
predict regional air quality impacts on a specific project by project basis. Air quality
conformity and other what -if analyses could also be conducted to support or supplant
those conducted by SCAG if they were overloaded or otherwise unable to do so in a
timely fashion.
Staff has been investigating ways to gain improved access to the DTIM model. Staff
recently discovered that other local Commission's and COG's around the state shared
our desire to improve access to the model. It was further discovered that the Sacramento
Area Council of Governments (SACOG) has already embarked on a program to
accomplish the conversion of the DTIM from a main-frame to a PC version. Staff has met
with SACOG, Fresno COG, Caltrans, the Air Resources Board and others to discuss the
status of the conversion process. The firm of Systems Applications International (SAI) is
under contract with SACOG to perform the conversion. SAI has completed initial phases
of the conversion at a cost of nearly $100,000. The second phase including provision of
complete documentation on how to use the PC model, addition of flexibility or switches
(ability to readily add or eliminate data), and completion of a "canned" version that will run
efficiently anywhere in the State and be completely user friendly remains to be completed.
f:\users\preprint\11-13-91.agd\dtimcomp.md
Page Two
November 6 1991
Cooperative Agreement to Convert the DTIM Computer Model from Main -Frame to PC
Based Version
This additional work (scope attached) will cost approximately $80,000. In order to receive
the benefits of having the PC version of the model SACOG has proposed that RCTC
provide $30,000 (approx. 17% of the total cost) to complete the final conversion. Fresno
would be contributing a similar amount. It has also been proposed that RCTC pursue
contributions from other Southern California agencies such as SANBAG, SANDAG, OCTA,
LACTC and VCTC to help defray the overall cost to RCTC. Fresno is approaching other
agencies as well in Central California. Staff has made initial contacts and the response
appears to be positive.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Commission approve RCTC's participation in a program with the Sacramento
Area Council of Governments (SACOG), Fresno COG, Air Resources Board (ARB),
Caltrans, FHWA and other agencies State-wide to convert the present main-frame
computer model of DTIM to a PC version. SACOG will act as the lead agency. RCTC
would enter into a Cooperative Agreement with SACOG, Fresno COG and Caltrans to
prepare the final conversion of the DTIM model at a cost not to exceed $30,000. Staff will
pursue other interested agencies to assist RCTC in paying for this effort.
MD:sc
attachment
(:\ users \preprint\ 11-13-91.agd\dtimcomp.md
DEVELOPMENT AND DOCUMENTATION OF A PC -BASED
VERSION OF DTIM FOR ESTIMATING MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS
DRAFT SCOPE OF WORK
BACKGROUND
The Direct Travel Impact Model (DTIM) has been used in many areas of California to
develop detailed mobile source emission estimates, based on travel demand model simulations
from models such as UTPS, M NUTP, and TRANPLAN. Historically, DTIM has primarily
been run by CALTRANS in a mainframe environment. Increased emphasis in the California
Clean Air Act and the 1990 federal Clean Air Act Amendments on tracking of emissions,
and comparative analyses of mobile emissions requires more frequent and expanded
accessibility of emission estimation tools to local planning agencies. The tasks described in
this scope of work will provide a tool for readily developing local mobile source emission
estimates on readily accessible and inexpensive computers. In addition, written
documentation and procedures will be developed to facilitate the use of the DTIM program
system by those without extensive programming backgrounds.
This work would be carried out under five tasks:
Restructuring and internal documentation of program code
Development of a user-friendly front end to simplify input preparation and emission
processing
Development of default values for county -level inputs and other parameters
Expansion of summary and diagnostic output options for DTIM
Preparation of external documentation of the DTIM system
TASK 1 - RESTRUCT[JRING, CLEANUP, AND INTERNAL DOCUMENTATION OF
CODE
Starting with the SACOG PC version of IRS and DTIM, we will revise the code to include
the latest changes made by CALTRANS and also to improve the running efficiency of these
programs. All programs which have been developed for creating inputs and processing
rgi.001 10/25/91
outputs from the IRS and DTIM programs will also be revised to streamline these steps and
improve running efficiency.
The goal of this work will be to develop code which can run both on 386 and 486 PC's as
well as on most mainframe computer systems. The emphasis in code development will be
upon improving the efficiency of these programs, simplifying and eliminating unused
portions of these programs, and streamlining the entire inventory development process. This
will result in a modularized code which can be easily adapted for future extensions of its
current capabilities.
Standardization and expansion of internal documentation within the DTIM system will
facilitate any subsequent extensions and refinements of the code, and help prevent
programming errors.
Work Elements. Major work elements are as follows:
Restructure IRS program to eliminate unused subroutines and improve efficiency. [ 1 ]
Restructure DTIM program to eliminate unused subroutines, improve running
efficiency, maximize portability to different machines. [1,4,18]
Restructure all other pre and post -processor programs currently developed for
SACOG mobile inventory work such that they are no longer region specific, and to
eliminate unused routines and output files. [1]
Expand upon and standardize internal documentation within the DTIM and all other
programs used by SACOG for preparing inputs or outputs for DTIM. [2]
Estimated Cost: $32,000
TASK 2 - DEVELOP USER-FRIENDLY FRONT-END TO SIMPLIFY EMISSIONS
PROCESSING
Since use of the IRS and DTIM programs is currently a multi -step process, it is desirable to
reduce and simplify the number of steps required to produce mobile emission estimates for a
region. Ideally, a straightforward job script would be developed which would prompt the
user for information on which files a run should use, supply default input options as
appropriate, query the user as to the desired form of output from these programs, and then
internally, in a manner invisible to the user, take care of all the separate steps required to
produce emission estimates for a region. This script would also prompt the user for the
descriptions of the TDM outputs being input to DTIM, thereby allowing the program to
function with most commonly used TDMs.
rgi.001 10/25/91
Work Elements. Task work elements are as follows:
•
,.
Preparation of a FORTRAN program (capable of running on both PC and mainframe
computer systems) which will prompt users for information on the job to be run and
then automatically handle all the steps required to produce mobile emission estimates
for a region. [15]
Preparation of FORTRAN routines that prompt users for descriptions of TDM output
files, and that map the information in these files to the input variables required within
DTIM. [5]
Estimated Cost: $10,000
TASK 3 - DEVELOP DEFAULT INPUTS TO MODELS
Any region wishing to run DTIM must be able to supply regional link and zone -specific
speeds and volumes from transportation models specific to the year of interest. Also, the
emission rate data provided by the program EMFAC should be obtained or generated for the
specific year (and with future versions of EMFAC, region) to be modelled. However,
default values by county for the temperature, fleet composition, and hourly distributions of
travel activity, in part derived from inputs to the ARB-developed model BURDEN, could be
developed for users of the models who will not be preparing gridded, hourly emission
inventories. The default values would be suitable for preparing regional emission estimates
suitable for conformity planning and California CAA emission tracking. In addition, options
would be provided which would allow refinement of TDM speed estimates based upon V/C
values.
Work Elements. Task work elements are:
Develop county -specific default temperatures and fleet compositions, and statewide
default distributions of hourly vehicle activity. [8,16]
Develop optional speed corrections based upon V/C values. [14]
Estimated Cost: $12,000
TASK 4 - EXPAND OUTPUT OPTIONS FOR DTIM
Although DTIM currently provides a fairly extensive amount of information on hourly
distributions of emissions by process for each region modelled in addition to the actual
hourly, gridded emissions file for the region, interest has been expressed in the development
of simple daily or hourly (the user would specify which) regionwide emissions summaries.
rgi.001 10/25/91
These would be provided at the request of the user either in addition to or as replacement of
the hourly, gridded emission file produced by DTIM and the current report files produced by
the program.
Since the hourly, gridded emission file generated by DTIM is extremely large and strains
the disk storage capabilities of many PC systems (SACOG modeling region files are larger
than 40 megabytes), and is not required if only areawide emission estimates are needed, an
option will be incorporated into the front-end developed for these programs to eliminate
production of this file. If the user did want the program to create this file, its form would
also be specified through user options either as (1) an hourly, gridded ARB MEDS file; (2)
gridded link -specific estimates; (3) a gridded daily total ARB MEDS file.
Work Elements. Task work elements are:
Development of alternative output formats, including summary and diagnostic tables;
inclusion in the user front-end of prompts for selecting program output options.
[7,10]
Restructuring of program code to provide for the flexibility to provide any
combination of the current or suggested output files from these programs. [1,7]
Estimated Cost: $14,000
TASK 5 - EXTERNAL DOCUMENTATION: PREPARATION OF A SYSTEMS
MANUAL AND USER'S GUIDE
Although a user's guide has been developed by CALTRANS for the programs IRS and
DTIM, there is currently no documentation of the other programs (pre and post -processors)
which have been developed for SACOG as part of their mobile source inventory effort.
With the proposed changes to the DTIM modeling system, there would be need for expanded
documentation of these programs and the options available to users wishing to develop
regional mobile emission estimates.
As part of Task 5, user's guides would be developed explaining the use, options, and input
and output file structures for all programs developed under Task 1 of this effort. In addition,
a systems manual would be prepared for all code, in particular for the programs IRS and
DTIM, which would fully describe the internal logic followed within these programs. The
emphasis would be placed on providing clear and concise discussions of how these programs
work and how they can be used for air quality planning purposes in any area of the state.
Work Elements. Task work elements are as follows:
Develop user's guide and systems manuals for IRS, DTIM, and all programs
rgi.001 10/25/91
$
developed for the processing of inputs and outputs to these programs. [3]
Estimated Cost: $11,000
rgi.001 10/25/91