Loading...
11 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