HomeMy Public PortalAbout01 January 23, 2023 Western Riverside County Programs and Projects
MEETING AGENDA
Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee
Time: 1:30 p.m.
Date: January 23, 2023
Location: This meeting is being conducted virtually in accordance with AB 361 due to state or local officials
recommending measures to promote social distancing.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Brian Berkson, Vice Chair/Armando Carmona, City of Jurupa Valley
Sheri Flynn / Rick Minjares, City of Banning
Wes Speake / Jim Steiner, City of Corona
Clint Lorimore / Todd Rigby, City of Eastvale
Linda Krupa / Malcolm Lilienthal, City of Hemet
Bill Zimmerman / Dean Deines, City of Menifee
Ted Hoffman / Katherine Aleman, City of Norco
Michael Vargas / Rita Rogers, City of Perris
Chuck Conder / Patricia Lock Dawson, City of Riverside
Joseph Morabito, / Ashlee DePhillippo, City of Wildomar
Kevin Jeffries, County of Riverside, District I
Karen Spiegel, County of Riverside, District II
STAFF
Anne Mayer, Executive Director
Aaron Hake, Deputy Executive Director
AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY
Air Quality, Capital Projects, Communications and
Outreach Programs, Intermodal Programs, Motorist
Services, New Corridors, Regional Agencies/Regional
Planning, Regional Transportation Improvement Program
(RTIP), Specific Transit Projects, State Transportation
Improvement Program (STIP)
Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF)
Program, and Provide Policy Direction on
Transportation Programs and Projects related to
Western Riverside County and other areas as
may be prescribed by the Commission.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE
www.rctc.org
AGENDA*
*Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda
1:30 p.m.
Monday, January 23, 2023
This meeting is being conducted virtually in accordance with AB 361 due to state or local officials
recommending measures to promote social distancing.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR ELECTRONIC PARTICIPATION
Join Zoom Meeting
https://rctc.zoom.us/j/82606084944
Meeting ID: 826 0608 4944
One tap mobile
+16694449171,,82606084944# US
Dial by your location
+1 669 444 9171 US
For members of the public wishing to submit comment in connection with the Western Riverside
County Programs and Projects Committee Meeting please email written comments to the Clerk of
the Board at lmobley@rctc.org and your comments will be made part of the official record of the
proceedings as long as the comment is received before the end of the meeting’s public comment
period. Members of the public may also make public comments through their telephone or Zoom
connection when recognized by the Chair.
In compliance with the Brown Act and Government Code Section 54957.5, agenda materials
distributed 72 hours prior to the meeting, which are public records relating to open session agenda
items, will be available for inspection by members of the public prior to the meeting on the
Commission’s website, www.rctc.org.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, Government Code Section 54954.2, Executive
Order N-29-20, and the Federal Transit Administration Title VI, please contact the Clerk of the Board
at (951) 787-7141 if special assistance is needed to participate in a Committee meeting, including
accessibility and translation services. Assistance is provided free of charge. Notification of at least 48
hours prior to the meeting time will assist staff in assuring reasonable arrangements can be made to
provide assistance at the meeting.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee
January 23, 2023
Page 2
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS – Under the Brown Act, the Board should not take action on or discuss
matters raised during public comment portion of the agenda which are not listed on the
agenda. Board members may refer such matters to staff for factual information or to be
placed on the subsequent agenda for consideration. Each individual speaker is limited to speak
three (3) continuous minutes or less.
5. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS (The Committee may add an item to the Agenda after making a
finding that there is a need to take immediate action on the item and that the item came to
the attention of the Committee subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an
item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Committee. If there are less than 2/3 of the
Committee members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote.
Added items will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda.)
6. CONSENT CALENDAR - All matters on the Consent Calendar will be approved in a single motion
unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the
Consent Calendar will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda.
6A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – NOVEMBER 28, 2022
Page 1
7. AMENDMENT WITH STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC., FOR THE SANTA ANA RIVER
TRAIL PROJECT PHASES 2, 2A AND 3A IN THE PRADO BASIN
Page 5
Overview
This item is for the Committee to recommend the Commission take the following action(s):
1) Approve Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 21-67-038-00 with Stantec Consulting
Services, Inc. (Stantec) to finish the final California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) document; preliminary engineering
services; prepare plans, specifications, and estimates (PS&E); and to provide
construction design support services for the construction of Phases 2, 2A and 3A in the
Prado Basin of the Santa Ana River Trail (SART 1) project (Project) in the amount of
$468,334, plus a contingency amount of $47,000, for an additional amount of
$515,334, and a total amount not to exceed $1,336,478;
2) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work as may be
required for the Project; and
3) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to finalize
and execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission.
8. ELECTION OF OFFICERS FOR THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS
COMMITTEE
Page 30
Overview
This item is for the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee to conduct
an election of officers for 2023 – Chair and Vice Chair.
Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee
January 23, 2023
Page 3
9. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT
10. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Overview
This item provides the opportunity for brief announcements or comments on items or matters
of general interest.
11. ADJOURNMENT
The next Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee meeting is scheduled
to be held at 1:30 p.m., Monday, February 27, 2023.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
MINUTES
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE
Monday, November 28, 2022
MINUTES
1.CALL TO ORDER
The meeting of the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee was
called to order by Chair Ben J. Benoit at 1:30 p.m., via Zoom Meeting ID: 899 2532 8919.
This meeting was conducted virtually in accordance with AB 361 due to state or local
officials recommending measures to promote social distancing.
2.ROLL CALL
Members/Alternates Present Members Absent
Ben Benoit Jeff Hewitt
Brian Berkson
Edward Delgado
Ted Hoffman
Kevin Jeffries
Linda Krupa*
Clint Lorimore
Wes Speake
Karen Spiegel
Michael Vargas
Bill Zimmerman
*Joined the meeting after it was call to order.
3.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Karen Spiegel led the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects
Committee in a flag salute.
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no requests to speak from the public.
1
RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes
November 28, 2022
Page 2
5. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS
Lisa Mobley, Administrative Services Director/Clerk of the Board, announced that the
agenda was numbered incorrectly as there should have been an item 8, but it was miss
numbered.
M/S/C (Zimmerman/Lorimore) to approve the minutes as submitted.
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – OCTOBER 24, 2022
At this time, Commissioner Linda Krupa joined the meeting.
7. AGREEMENTS FOR ON-CALL ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES
David Lewis, Capital Projects Manager, presented the on-call environmental consulting
services agreements, highlighting the following:
• Background
o Most environmental services are part of larger consultant contracts
o Streamlines process when environmental tasks are needed
o Comprehensive environmental services for a variety of projects/tasks
outside the environmental phase
o Fund type depends on project: eligible for state/federal funding
• Procurement process
o Request for Qualifications (RFQ) was released on June 2, 2022
o Six firms submitted responsive and responsible statements of
qualifications
o Four firms were selected as most qualified – GPA Consulting, HNTB,
Stantec, and ICF
• Task order process
o Work is not guaranteed to any of the awardees
o Pre-qualified consultants will be selected for specific tasks or projects
based on their proposals for each task order
Evaluated on price, qualifications, availability
o Total contract value $3 million over three years + two one-year extensions
M/S/C (Vargas/Delgado) to:
1) Award the following agreements to provide on-call environmental
consulting services for a three-year term, and one, two-year option to
extend the agreements, in an amount not to exceed an aggregate value
of $3,000,000;
a) Agreement No. 22-31-092-00 to GPA Consulting;
b) Agreement No. 22-31-103-00 to HNTB Corporation;
c) Agreement No. 22-31-104-00 to ICF Jones & Stokes, Inc.; and
2
RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes
November 28, 2022
Page 3
d) Agreement No. 22-31-105-00 to Stantec Consulting Services, Inc.;
2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel
review, to execute the agreements, including option years, on behalf of
the Commission; and
3) Authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to execute task orders
awarded to the consultants under the terms of the agreements.
8. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT
• Anne Mayer noted that a key issue for RCTC as they try to move projects along
throughout the County is to ensure they have the funding to do so. By December
8 RCTC is submitting the application for the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and
Safety Improvements (CRISI) Program it is going in for a $3 million ask to
supplement the existing funding RCTC has for the CV Rail Tier 2 environmental
document. This is RCTC’s second time submitting for this federal program and
since the last round they have approved the Tier 1 environmental document. On
November 23 RCTC received a letter of partnership from the state of California
and are very appreciative of Caltrans both the Headquarters District as well as
California State Transportation Secretary Toks Omishakin for their support of the
project. Secretary Omishakin met with Chair V. Manuel Perez and Commissioner
Lisa Middleton in November 2022 to hear more about CV Rail and its importance.
• RCTC is submitting applications to the California Transportation Commission (CTC)
for SB 1 Programs the Local Partnership Program (LPP) for the Mid County Parkway
Phase 3 the Ramona Expressway for that program and then bundled that project
with the Perris Valley Line double tracking along Interstate 215 as a congestion
relief corridor for submittal in the Solutions for Congested Corridors Program and
RCTC is also supporting Metrolink’s application for Tier 4 Locomotives. RCTC has
also written letters of support for member agencies who are applying for projects
within their own jurisdictions in the Trade Corridor Program. It will be a few
months and into 2023 before RCTC hears any results. She expressed appreciation
of the RCTC team and the consultants who helped RCTC get these applications
ready so that they can be as competitive as possible.
• The CTC will be having their meeting in Riverside on December 7-8 and will be in
the Board Room starting at 1:00 p.m. and First Vice Chair Bob Magee will be
welcoming the CTC. RCTC is preparing a video along with the San Bernardino
County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) that will be presented sharing significant
projects and programs in the Inland Empire. Lisa Mobley will be sending out the
CTC agenda to all Commissioners when it has been posted. She then provided an
overview of the CTC meeting agenda.
9. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
There were no Commissioner comments.
3
RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes
November 28, 2022
Page 4
10. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business for consideration by the Western Riverside County
Programs and Projects Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 1:42 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lisa Mobley
Administrative Services Director/
Clerk of the Board
4
AGENDA ITEM 7
Agenda Item 7
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: January 23, 2023
TO: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee
FROM: David Lewis, Capital Projects Manager
THROUGH: Erik Galloway, Project Delivery Director
SUBJECT: Amendment with Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., for the Santa Ana River
Trail Project Phases 2, 2A and 3A in the Prado Basin
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to recommend the Commission take the following action(s):
1) Approve Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 21-67-038-00 with Stantec Consulting
Services, Inc. (Stantec) to finish the final California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) document; preliminary engineering services;
prepare plans, specifications, and estimates (PS&E); and to provide construction design
support services for the construction of Phases 2, 2A and 3A in the Prado Basin of the
Santa Ana River Trail (SART 1) project (Project) in the amount of $468,334, plus a
contingency amount of $47,000, for an additional amount of $515,334, and a total
amount not to exceed $1,336,478;
2) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work as may be
required for the Project; and
3) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to finalize and
execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The concept for the overall Santa Ana River Trail from the San Bernardino Mountains to the
Pacific Ocean in Huntington Beach has been in development for many years. Much of the trail
has been built through Orange County with short segments remaining to be completed in
Riverside and San Bernardino Counties.
In 2007, the Riverside County Regional Park and Open-Space District (Park District) was successful
in obtaining Proposition 84 Grant funds for the section of trail from the Orange County line to
the United States Army Corps of Engineers’ (USACE) property in the Prado Dam basin.
In early 2015, the Park District requested the Commission to manage the delivery of the Project
between State Route 71 and the city of Eastvale. In March 2015, the Commission and Park District
entered into Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) No. 15-67-059-00, which reimburses the
5
Agenda Item 7
Commission’s costs for providing project management services to complete the environmental,
design, and construction phases and procurement of necessary design consultants and
construction services for the Park District’s Project.
From 2015 to 2019, staff worked with Park District’s design consultant to complete the design of
SART 1 and managed the consultant developing the environmental document for the Project. In
October 2019, the USACE provided extensive and significant comments on the SART 1 trail
alignments. USACE noted that portions of the trail (Phases 1 and 2B) impacted recently
designated protected USACE mitigation land, and therefore the proposed alignment would not
be acceptable. Additionally, environmental studies determined that these two phases would
have significant impacts to waters of the United States, which would trigger extensive mitigation
requirements and a detailed alternatives analysis. Lastly, the USACE also rejected the placement
of the trail on top of the existing dikes due to changes in USACE policy.
These comments resulted in the need to revise the proposed trail alignments to avoid impacts to
the USACE mitigation land, relocate the trail off the USACE dikes, and identify ways to incorporate
the trail into planned USACE projects within the Prado Basin. This resulted in the revision of the
project phasing and placement of the trail on haul roads constructed as part of the USACE Alcoa
Dike Phase 2 project. The revised SART 1 trail alignment phasing is shown in Figure 1.
As a result of the revised phasing of the Project and in consultation with Park District, it was
agreed to focus the environmental and design efforts on Phases that could be delivered in the
shortest period possible. Phase 2, 2A, and 3A were identified and it was agreed to proceed with
these phases, see Figure 2. At its March 2021 meeting, the Commission approved an agreement
with Stantec for supporting the USACE in the preparation of a CEQA and NEPA document, to
perform preliminary engineering services and to prepare PS&E and construction support services
for Phases 2, 2A and 3A of the SART 1 Project in the amount of $714,039 plus a contingency
amount of $107,105 for a total amount of $821,144. In January 2022, Amendment No. 1 was
issued to perform the necessary surveys to support the biological resources and protocol of
federally listed bird surveys and administrative matters. This amendment was issued in the
amount of $48,118 using available contingency funds.
The proposed trail mainly consists of a 10-feet-wide paved Class I bike path as well as a 10-feet-
wide decomposed granite equestrian and pedestrian trail for a total combined minimum width
of 20 feet. The trail does vary in width in phases 2, 2A, and 3A due to environmental constraints
along the alignment.
DISCUSSION:
The contract with Stantec included a detailed scope of work which identified Stantec as
supporting the USACE in the preparation of the CEQA and NEPA documents, trail design, and
engineering, while the USACE responsibilities were to prepare the CEQA/NEPA document (Initial
Study/Environmental Assessment) and coordination with the resource agencies. Stantec’s role
6
Agenda Item 7
for environmental compliance was to be a supportive role to the USACE and not as the lead of
the overall project management and environmental compliance. As the Project progressed, it
was apparent that the USACE did not have the necessary staff or capacity to manage and execute
their project scope. To ensure the Project remained on schedule and would deliver the necessary
environmental document, staff worked with Stantec and USACE on having Stantec provide
additional assistance to USACE with environmental compliance, project management, technical
analysis, report preparation and coordination with the resource agencies. The resulting benefit
of this expanded assistance to the Project is that a majority of tasks and project are nearing
completion. This additional effort was not anticipated by staff or Stantec at the start of the
Project and was addressed by reallocating budget from future tasks.
As the Project moves into the public circulation component of the joint environmental document
(CEQA/NEPA), which is anticipated to be in February/March 2023, the USACE will require
assistance in the preparation of response to comments and required documents such as
Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program and Environmental Commitments. Due to limited
staff capacity with the USACE, Stantec will need to assist in the preparation of these final
documents.
This Amendment requests additional budget for ongoing coordination and meetings with the
various project stakeholders, subconsultants, technical specialists, and design staff. At the
request of USACE, ongoing schedule maintenance and updates are required and included in this
task. The original contract anticipated an approximate 14-month design and permitting duration.
Working through all the regulatory permitting and coordination with the USACE for review of the
technical studies, environmental document, design, and contract documents, the current
estimated completion is 24 months.
Staff has negotiated the revised scope of work (including the appropriate level of effort, labor
categories/mix, etc.), cost, and schedule received from Stantec for the Project services, and it
establishes a fair and reasonable price. The proposed cost of Amendment No. 2, including
contingency, is $515,334.
Staff reviewed the proposed costs with the Park District, and they concur with the
recommendations included in this staff report.
Staff recommends approval of Amendment No. 2 (Agreement No. 21-67-038-02) to Stantec to
cover the additional scope for the Project, based on the final negotiated scope and cost of
$468,334 plus a contingency amount of $47,000 for an additional amount of $515,334, and total
authorized amount not to exceed $1,336,478. Additionally, staff recommends authority for the
Chair or Executive Director to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission, pursuant to
legal counsel review, and for the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work as
may be required for the Project.
7
Agenda Item 7
FISCAL IMPACT:
Costs for Commission project management; preliminary engineering, environmental document,
PS&E, and construction support services; and staff will be reimbursed by the Proposition 84 grant
secured by the Park District through the State Coastal Conservancy on September 28, 2017.
Amendment No. 2 to the Commission-Park District MOU provides for the reimbursement of the
Commission’s Project costs. Anticipated expenditures for Fiscal Year 2022/23 have been included
in the budget.
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget: No
Year: FY 2022/23
FY 2023/24+ Amount: $350,000
$165,334
Source of Funds:
Proposition 84 Grant funds
provided by the State Coastal
Conservancy and secured by Park
District
Budget Adjustment: Yes
GL/Project Accounting No.: 007201 81102 00000 0000 720 67 81101
Fiscal Procedures Approved:
Date: 01/11/2023
Attachments:
1) SART Figure 1
2) SART Figure 2
3) Stantec Scope of Work
4) Stantec Budget Detail
5) Stantec Draft Agreement No. 21-67-038-02
8
9
Project
Location
Phase 3A
Phase 2A
Phase 2A
Phase 2
Figure 2 - 4
Figure 2 - 3
Figure 2 - 2
Figure 2 - 1
71
91
Noah Dr
Vander St
Am
h
e
r
s
t
S
t
JenksCir
Pan
o
r
a
m
i
c
D
r
Ott
S
t
Jenks Dr
Rockcrest Dr
Stag
e
c
o
a
c
h
R
d
Market St
Oak
d
a
l
e
S
t
Majestic Dr
Nottingham
Dr
Alc
o
a
C
i
r
Lewis Ct
Drif
t
w
o
o
d
S
t
MeadowviewCt
Hed
g
e
s
D
r
GranadaAve
Myrtle St Melrose Dr
Elmhurst Dr
Rolling Hills Dr
Klug
C
i
r
Wes
t
b
r
o
o
k
S
t
Rock Ridge Ct
Cor
y
d
o
n
S
t
NShermanAve
Greenbriar Ave
Country ClubLn
Commerce St
Big Spring Ct
AuburndaleSt
Auto
C
e
n
t
e
r
D
r
NMapleSt
NSmithAve
Aviation Dr
Butterfield Dr
WRincon St
Railroad St
ATSFSantaAnaRiver
Temes c al W as h
2 - 0
Riverside County Regional Park & Open-Space District
Santa Ana River Trail Project
Biolgical Resources Technical Report
2042483140
Near Corona
Riverside County, California
Prepared by DL on 2022-04-21
TR by SET on 2022-04-21
IR by JV on 2022-04-21
Site Plan
V:\
1
8
5
8
\
b
u
s
i
n
e
s
s
_
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
\
S
a
n
t
a
_
A
n
a
_
R
i
v
e
r
_
T
r
a
i
l
\
F
i
g
u
r
e
2
_
S
A
R
T
_
B
R
T
R
_
S
i
t
e
P
l
a
n
M
a
p
_
1
2
2
2
2
0
2
1
_
1
1
x
1
7
.
m
x
d
R
e
v
i
s
e
d
:
2
0
2
2
-
0
4
-
2
1
B
y
:
d
a
l
a
w
Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data.
Notes1.Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California VI FIPS 0406 Feet2.Data Sources:Stantec 2021.3.Background: Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community
Laydown Yard: Temporary Impact
Grading: Temporary Impact
Grading: Permanent Impact
Riprap: Permanent Impact
Trail: Permanent Impact
Phase 2A End Location / Phase 3A Start Location
Railroad
Project Location
Client/Project
Figure No.
Title
0 1,200 2,400
Feet
(At original document size of 11x17)
1:14,400
ATTACHMENT 2
10
Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
38 Technology Drive, Irvine CA 92618-5312
December 20, 2022
File: 2042483140
Attention: David Lewis
Capital Projects Manager
Riverside County Transportation Commission
4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor
Riverside, CA 92502
Reference: SART Phases 2, 2A and 3A Amendment Request
Agreement No. 21-67-038-00
Dear David:
Attached for your consideration (and summarized below) is a proposed amendment for the
above noted project to provide ongoing environmental, permitting, and engineering services
through the anticipated completion of the project with an estimated start of construction
planned for September 2024 and completion at the end of 2025. Additional budget is
requested for the tasks summarized below. The additional funds will restore budgets reallocated
to various tasks to advance the project through the environmental process, permitting, and
construction phase. The funds will also augment budgets for tasks listed due to additional
environmental tasks, agency coordination and meeting time, and increased costs for permitting
fees based upon currently published costs. Please note that we assume that the trail alignment
will not change during the duration of this Amendment. Provided this is not the case, we will
coordinate with Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) on any additional costs that
may occur.
Roles & Responsibilities
Stantec is responsible for trail design engineering on the project, while the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) is responsible for preparation of the joint California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA)/National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) document (Initial Study/Environmental
Assessment) and coordination with the resource agencies. Stantec’s role for environmental
compliance was scoped as supportive in nature (e.g., assistance with the CEQA component of
the joint environmental document and preparation of select technical reports). Stantec was
never assumed to lead the overall project management and environmental compliance effort.
However, early in the project, it became apparent that USACE did not have the staffing
capacity to lead the effort (e.g., preparing for and leading regular meetings, identifying action
items and following up) and execute required work (e.g., technical analysis and coordination)
to meet key milestones and schedule requirements. To address this, Stantec was tasked with
taking the lead role in environmental compliance, including project management, technical
analysis and report preparation, supplemental analysis in support of trail alignment
modifications, and coordination with resource agencies. The net benefit of this expanded role to
the project is that the majority of USACE assigned tasks are largely complete or nearing
completion and the project is adhering to the schedule and key milestones.
ATTACHMENT 3
11
December 20, 2022
David Lewis
Page 2 of 10
Reference: SART Phases 2, 2A and 3A
Page 2
Technical Scope Expansion
The technical scope of the project has expanded since the original engineering design work
was initiated. This has occurred based upon several factors including, the need to reduce
impacts to jurisdictional drainages, avoidance of sensitive habitats and wildlife corridors, trail
width restrictions based upon Western Riverside County Multi-species Habitat Conservation Plan
(MSHCP) requirements, and the need to limit overall temporary and permanent impacts to
biological resources to reduce the project’s overall costs for both on- and off-site mitigation of
species and habitats (and subsequent monitoring). This technical scope expansion was also
required since tasks that either USACE were responsible for (e.g., Section 106 analysis and
subsequent Memorandum, built-environment assessment, paleontological resources assessment,
sensitive species surveys) were unable to be completed due to staffing limitations. Stantec
therefore, was required to complete these and prepare information and/or analysis in support of
USACE (e.g., Information Sheet/Project Description, NEPA Purpose & Need), or new analysis
and/or monitoring was required (e.g., geotechnical monitoring).
The DBESP Addendum (a key component in complying with the MSHCP and supporting
document to the USACE-prepared Biological Assessment [BA]) has also required substantial
reanalysis since it necessitated a detailed comparison between the original 2018 trial alignment
and the new 2022 alignment. These requirements necessitated the refinement to the trail design
and therefore, affected all components of the environment compliance document, including
technical studies. This required reanalysis of the temporary and permanent impacts, rewriting of
sections and reports, and updating figures and exhibits. It also required substantial coordination
with USACE/RCTC/RivCoParks and the resource agencies.
As we move into the public circulation component of the joint environmental document
(anticipated in February 2023), USACE will require assistance in preparing for and addressing
responses to comments and preparing required documents (e.g., Mitigation Monitoring &
Reporting Program, Environmental Commitments). Stantec will be required to assist them in
preparing these documents, due to their limited staffing capacity. For these reasons, both the
engineering and environmental technical scopes have expanded and have had a direct
impact on the engineering task either requiring similar refinements and updates or requiring the
use of assigned budgets to continue the work. As such, replenishment of these tasks is now
required to continue the work into the permitting and construction phases of the project.
Schedule
The Engineering and environmental compliance components of the project have extended
substantially longer than assumed in the scope of work and fee. Our original assumption for the
engineering task was 14 months, while the environmental compliance component was
anticipated to take 10 weeks and was based upon a support role function intended to assist the
USACE in preparation of the joint CEQA/NEPA document. The project is now ending year two of
our involvement and will continue into Fall of 2024. As noted above, Stantec’s expanded role in
project management and leading the technical analysis has allowed the project to meet its
12
December 20, 2022
David Lewis
Page 3 of 10
Reference: SART Phases 2, 2A and 3A
Page 3
schedule and milestone requirements. However, this expanded role has required the use of
previously allocated funds intended for other engineering and environmental tasks. As such,
replenishment of these tasks is now needed to complete the engineering and environmental
components and start the permitting and construction phases.
A description of the additional efforts is provided on Exhibit ‘A’, Scope of Work.
We are requesting a budget amendment amount of $468,334 for the services and direct costs
summarized above. This total amount is detailed in the attached Budget Amendment Detail
Table (Exhibit A) which identifies each of the proposed tasks.
We appreciate your review and approval of this amendment request.
Sincerely,
STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC.
Sherry Weinmeier, PE for
Kevin Brandt, PE Gilberto Ruiz
Senior Associate Principal Environmental Planner
Phone: 949 923-6265 Phone: (323) 449-1050
sherry.weinmeier@stantec.com gilberto.ruiz@stantec.com
Attachments:
Exhibit ‘A’- Scope of Work
Budget Amendment Detail Table
13
December 20, 2022
David Lewis
Page 4 of 10
Reference: SART Phases 2, 2A and 3A
f:\onedrive backup files\sart\sart1\stantec\amendment 2\december 20 2022\let_amend_sart_20221213_gr_sw-mt (12-20-22).docx
EXHIBIT A
Scope of Work
The following summarizes the items and tasks being performed to obtain the project approvals.
1.Management and Meetings for Engineering Design and Environmental Services
This Amendment requests additional budget for ongoing coordination and meetings with
the various project stakeholders, subconsultants, technical specialists, and design staff. At
the request of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and client, ongoing schedule
maintenance and updates are required and included in this task. The original contract
anticipated an approximate 14-month design and permitting duration from April 2021
through June of 2022. Working through all the regulatory permitting and coordination
with the USACE for review of technical studies and contract documents, the current
estimated completion of design and permitting is through April 2024 with the start of
construction expected Fall of 2024. It should be noted the original budget assumed
approximately 10 weeks of environmental project management (see below) once major
tasks were kicked off. Project management time as of the date of this addendum has
increased from 10 weeks to 84 weeks with an additional 65 weeks anticipated through
the completion of design and permitting.
Similar to the time frames listed above, ongoing bi-monthly meeting preparation and
attendance will continue through design and permit completion attended by the
various technical leads, oversight agencies, and stakeholders. Stantec leads the
meetings, prepares agendas, minutes, and follows up with action Items. Approximately
40 meetings have been led and attended between April 2021 through November 2022
while only 6 virtual meetings were assumed and included in the original contract since
the environmental component was understood to be primarily led by the USACE.
However, Stantec environmental staff have been tasked with coordinating, organizing,
and executing much of the work (described below). Various additional coordination and
internal Stantec/RCTC staff project meetings are also included in this task. The additional
budget requested will provide the continued services through design and permitting
completion. It is anticipated that bi-monthly design meetings (34 each) attended by key
task leaders will continue through April 2024. Meetings for engineering support during the
construction phase (36 each) from Fall of 2024 through Spring of 2026 are also
anticipated. It should be noted that our scope of work does not include biological,
cultural, or paleontological monitoring during construction.
It should be noted that it was originally understood that all the engineering and design
would be to the 65% level (typical for environmental compliance documents) at the time
the environmental services tasks start and that USACE would be lead on the analysis with
Stantec providing support. It was also understood USACE would prepare the Project
Description (including Purpose & Need) and begin the baseline environmental analysis,
including sensitive species and cultural resources surveys for the joint environmental
document. This information would then be included in our technical reports for impact
analysis and if required, identification of mitigation measures. Instead, Stantec’s was
14
December 20, 2022
David Lewis
Page 5 of 10
Reference: SART Phases 2, 2A and 3A
f:\onedrive backup files\sart\sart1\stantec\amendment 2\december 20 2022\let_amend_sart_20221213_gr_sw-mt (12-20-22).docx
required to take on these roles and activities with environmental technical reports
initiated prior to the 20% design. This was necessary since much of the biological
resources data collection is seasonal and only valid for one year and RivCoParks’s
budget constraints would not allow for an additional year of surveys. In addition, other
resource areas (e.g., cultural) require database inquiries (e.g., California Historical
Resources Information System) that can take many months to complete and as such,
Stantec was required to initiate these in earnest. These technical reports and analysis
soon became the critical path elements in keeping the project on schedule. In addition,
there were also additional coordination and analysis efforts related to Native American
Consultation (AB52), Section 106 (including built environment resources), and
paleontological resources to meet schedule requirements. In short, Stantec’s
environmental services role and activities became the primary driver of the schedule
rather than peripheral, as previously anticipated. This level of effort was necessary and
continues to be necessary to hold all the parties accountable to the schedule and
action items. This includes extensive coordination, follow-up, and email and telephonic
communications with USACE and their various departments. There has been extensive
coordination with USACE and the various technical leads (biological/aquatic resources,
wetlands, cultural resources, paleontological, engineering) to minimize and/or avoid
environmental impacts in the design and the geological investigations. Our involvement
has been and is anticipated to be nearly daily through design and permit completion.
As demonstrated above, Stantec’s environmental compliance role has been greatly
enhanced by the need to keep the project moving forward, meeting critical path,
milestone, and schedule requirements. We continue this role at the behest of RivCoParks
and RCTC and are continuing to move the environmental compliance document
forward to completion by providing coordination and strategy of the document, assisting
USACE with the development of the Biological Assessment, sending a variety of specific
data on request, leading the effort to write the Information Sheet/Project Description and
assist with refinement of the project Purpose and Need, preparing multiple revisions and
refinements to the cultural resources Area of Potential Effect (APE), assisting USACE to
identify all applicable Californian Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) thresholds of
significance requirements and proper placement of these in the environmental
document, coordinating the paleontological resources assessments and many
additional tasks that require our input on a daily basis and which will continue through
the permitting phase of the project.
SUMMARY OF TASKS:
a.Daily and ongoing coordination and communication with the regulatory
agencies and technical leads to help expedite the regulatory process and
deliverables.
b.Lead bi-weekly project meetings, agendas, and minutes (70 meetings)
c.Project schedule updates and maintenance
2.Right-of-Way / License Agreements
Restore budgets to provide right-of-way and license agreement exhibit support services.
15
December 20, 2022
David Lewis
Page 6 of 10
Reference: SART Phases 2, 2A and 3A
f:\onedrive backup files\sart\sart1\stantec\amendment 2\december 20 2022\let_amend_sart_20221213_gr_sw-mt (12-20-22).docx
SUMMARY OF TASKS:
a.Right-of-way license agreement exhibit
3.Trail Plans, Specifications and Estimates
Various engineering design, support, and studies have been performed to support the
environmental and regulatory permitting approval process impacting the Trail Plan
budgets. Additional efforts have also been provided during the design and review
process. The following summarizes these additional efforts:
SUMMARY OF TASKS:
a.Plan changes to minimize environmental impacts
Revise trail alignment onto existing Temescal Wash bridge necessitating
coordination and approvals through the City of Corona.
Relocate trail in Phase 2A from top of slope to bottom of slope during
the preliminary design phase to reduce the number of drainage
crossings and reduce the total acreage of impacts to jurisdictional
drainages below one half (0.5) acre thus qualifying for a nationwide
permit.
b.Coordination assistance and environmental support:
Prepare exhibits
Calculate environmental impacts
Refine temporary and permanent impacts lines
Calculate impact area for CEQA and DBESP Addendum
c.City of Corona requested additions:
Investigate implementation of HAWK traffic system at Rincon Road
Design of new HAWK traffic system at Rincon Road
Add median curb
Supplemental studies and cost estimates to implement City requests
d.Geotechnical
Encroachment Permit Application and Process
Drilling Plan and Slope Stability Analysis
Address and coordinate USACE requirements
e.Hydraulic analysis at Temescal Wash
f.Additional structural support due to USACE comments
4.Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP)
Restore budgets to prepare a SWPPP in conformance with the State Water Resources
Control Board (SWRCB) General Permit No. 2009-009-DWQ.
SUMMARY OF TASKS:
a.SWPPP
16
December 20, 2022
David Lewis
Page 7 of 10
Reference: SART Phases 2, 2A and 3A
f:\onedrive backup files\sart\sart1\stantec\amendment 2\december 20 2022\let_amend_sart_20221213_gr_sw-mt (12-20-22).docx
5.Construction Support Services
Restore and augment budgets to provide the following construction support services for
an anticipated construction duration of approximately 18 months. It is understood the
project will be constructed as a single project for all three phases with one over-all bid,
mobilization, and close-out.
SUMMARY OF TASKS (Each phase):
a.Construction Field Meetings (6 total)
b.RFI Responses (10 total)
c.Submittal Reviews (10 total)
d.Site Visits (3 total)
e.Bid Support (1-bid)
f.Record Drawings (1-each)
6.(New Task Under Technical Reports and Permits) Biological & Paleontological Monitoring
in Support of Geotechnical Investigations
Analysis conducted by Stantec concluded that sensitive biological and paleontological
resources could be affected by the geotechnical investigation activities (i.e., test
pits/borings) and as such, monitoring is required. The test locations were not previously
known, or their sensitivity and therefore could not be included in our original budget
assumptions.
Note: If paleontological resources are discovered, recovery and other activities are not
included in this scope of work or fee estimates. This assumes no regulatory permits are
required and support during construction is not a part of this contract and if requested,
will be provided under a separate agreement.
SUMMARY OF TASKS:
a.Biological and paleontological monitoring support and brief memorandum with
results of monitoring activities (up to 7 days of fieldwork)
7.Supplemental California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Analysis
Stantec will review the Project Description and CEQA Initial Study (IS) (including
thresholds of significance determinations and mitigation measures) currently under
preparation by the USACE. If it is found that the IS is deficient and/or non-compliant,
Stantec will provide comments and recommendations for USACE’s implementation. If
needed, Stantec will also assist USACE with minor analysis (not to include technical
calculations, analysis, and summaries) required to support the joint environmental
document and ensure it is CEQA compliant.
SUMMARY OF TASKS:
a.Non-technical support of CEQA component of joint environmental document
8.Response to Comments, MMRP, and File NOD
17
December 20, 2022
David Lewis
Page 8 of 10
Reference: SART Phases 2, 2A and 3A
f:\onedrive backup files\sart\sart1\stantec\amendment 2\december 20 2022\let_amend_sart_20221213_gr_sw-mt (12-20-22).docx
Pending circulation of the joint environmental document, Stantec will assist RCTC and
USACE in responding to comments received and if needed, prepare Master Responses
for select topical areas (e.g., biological resources, air quality/greenhouse gases). The use
of Master Responses will assist in reducing the overall individual responses required to be
prepared to address comments raised on the joint environmental document. It is
assumed the level of controversy of the project is low and no attorney letters or form
letters will be received. In the event this is not the case, Stantec will evaluate these letters
and advise RCTC on the level of effort expected and if this effort would be beyond the
scope of work and associated budget. Utilizing the mitigation measures included in the
joint environmental document, Stantec will prepare the Mitigation Monitoring &
Reporting Program (MMRP) for the CEQA document and assist USACE with the
Environmental Commitments document (if needed) for the National Environmental
Protection Act (NEPA) document. Once the CEQA document has been approved by
RCTC/RivCoParks, Stantec will also file the Notice of Determination (NOD) with the
County Recorder’s Office and pay the associated fees (including California Department
of Fish and Wildlife [CDFW] CEQA).
SUMMARY OF TASKS:
a.Prepare MMRP
b.Assist with Responses to Comments and Environmental Commitments
c.File NOD
9.(New Task Under Technical Reports and Permits) Section 106 Memorandum and
Paleontological Resources Support
Stantec, in conjunction with the USACE has finalized the Section 106 Memorandum which
analyzes impacts between the 2018 and 2022 trail alignments. USACE is currently
preparing to send the Memorandum to the State Office of Historic Preservation (SHPO)
and Tribes shortly (December 2022). Stantec’s current assumption is that SHPO and the
Tribes will provide concurrence on the Memorandum and no additional analysis will be
required and the results can be incorporated into the joint environmental document.
Provided there are comments, Stantec will make the requested revisions. Our assumption
includes only one round of revisions. Stantec also assumes that no cultural monitoring will
be required in support of the geotechnical investigation activities.
SUMMARY OF TASKS:
a.Section 106 Memorandum and Paleontological Resources Support
10.Biological Assessment & DBESP Addendum Support
Stantec will assist USACE with minor revisions and updates to the Biological Assessment (if
needed) based upon finalization of the Determination of Biologically Equivalent or
Superior Preservation (DBESP) Addendum. Stantec assumes the current revised submittal
of the DBESP Addendum (December 2022) will be finalized by the resource agencies and
no and/or minor additional changes will be required. Stantec has assumed a minimal
effort in support of the DBESP Addendum.
18
December 20, 2022
David Lewis
Page 9 of 10
Reference: SART Phases 2, 2A and 3A
f:\onedrive backup files\sart\sart1\stantec\amendment 2\december 20 2022\let_amend_sart_20221213_gr_sw-mt (12-20-22).docx
This task includes time to coordinate with RCTC/RivCoParks to determine a mitigation site
and confirm a 2:1 ratio for permanent impacts to coastal sage scrub (including
buckwheat scrub) that occurs on federal lands is suitable for coastal California
gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica).
This task assumes that CDFW and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) accept the Santa
Ana River Van Buren units for permanent impacts to riparian and riverine habitat from the
implementation of this Project.
SUMMARY OF TASKS:
a.DBESP Addendum Support
b.Biological Assessment Support
c.Coastal Sage Scrub Mitigation Site Support
11.Clean Water Act (CWA) Sections 401 and 404, California Fish & Game Code1602 Permits,
and Habitat Mitigation & Monitoring Plan (HMMP)
Restore budgets to prepare the associated permits and permit packages (figures, design
drawings, avoidance, and mitigation measures, etc.) required for impacts to state and
federal jurisdictional waters and wetlands, per Sections 401 and 404 of the federal Clean
Water Act (CWA) and Section 1600 of the California Fish & Game Code.
Augment budget for the preparation of two Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plans
(HMMP) that were not included in the original contract. One HMMP is for a
5-year monitoring and maintenance plan for on-site restoration of vegetated areas that
are temporarily impacted during trail construction. A draft plan would be prepared for
RCTC/RivCoParks. Once you approve the HMMP it will be submitted to the agencies then
updated as needed.
The second HMMP is for a 5-year monitoring and maintenance plan for an off-site
mitigation site for permanent impacts during trail construction. A draft plan would be
prepared for RCTC/RivCoParks. Once you approve the HMMP it will be submitted to the
agencies then updated as needed.
Stantec will pay the associated fees as budgeted and outlined below under ‘Direct
Costs’, and coordinate and track these permits with the corresponding agencies. These
costs are updated based upon current published rates/costs. CDFW and State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and increase each year.
Note: Stantec is not including budget to pay for the MSHCP Mitigation fee.
19
December 20, 2022
David Lewis
Page 10 of 10
Reference: SART Phases 2, 2A and 3A
f:\onedrive backup files\sart\sart1\stantec\amendment 2\december 20 2022\let_amend_sart_20221213_gr_sw-mt (12-20-22).docx
SUMMARY OF TASKS:
a.Prepare, submit draft and final permit application package for a nationwide
permit, and track Section 401 permit to Regional Water Quality Control Board –
Santa Ana and pay associated fee
b.Prepare, submit draft and final permit application package, and track Section
404 permit with the USACE
c.Prepare, submit draft and final permit application, and track Section 1602 permit
with CDFW and pay associated fee
d.HMMP for on-site restoration areas-Prepare and submit draft and final plan
e.HMMP for off-site restoration- Prepare and submit draft and final plan
12.Direct Costs
Restore and augment budgets for the direct costs associated with the regulatory permits
as currently published. Fees may be updated by the permitting agencies on an annual
basis. Stantec is not responsible for any increase in fees.
SUMMARY:
a.NOD Fee – (2022) $2,548
b.CDFW CEQA Filing Fee – (2023) $2,764
c.CDFW 1602 Permit Application Fee (2022) – $31,176
Assumes a 9 of the 11 drainages will be impacted and are considered
separate projects by CDFW (2022)
$3,464 per drainage x 9 drainages = $31,176
Assumes a construction cost per drainage of more than $100,000, but
less than $200,000
d.Section 401 Application Fee (2022) - $26,499
This fee assumes the work within the drainage/jurisdictional areas will
occur in a single season.
Fee is $2,031 annually if work continues more than 1 year.
20
BUDGET REALLOCATION and AMENDMENT DETAIL
Task No.
Budget
Remaining
10/28/22
Budget to
Reallocate Out
Budget to
Reallocate In
Proposed
Reallocation
Budget
(Orig. + Adjust.)
Amendment
Amount
1
$ 0.00 $ 3,183.33 $ 12,701.33 $ 21,000.00
$ 0.00 $ 5,083.33 $ 7,306.93 $ 8,000.00
$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 8,266.66 $ 20,008.26 $ 29,000.00
2
$ 5,171.53 -$ 5,171.53 $ 4,154.59
$ 791.07 -$ 791.07 $ 4,109.57
$ 5,962.60 -$ 5,962.60 $ 0.00 $ 8,264.16 $ 0.00
3
$ 2,816.92 -$ 2,816.92 $ 238.04 $ 2,816.92
$ 2,816.92 -$ 2,816.92 $ 0.00 $ 238.04 $ 2,816.92
4
$ 15,433.12
$ 15,433.12
5
$ 2,081.48
$ 3,485.60
$ 4,059.62
$ 1,216.26
$ 10,842.96
6
$ 10,507.31 $ 18,000.00
$ 7,209.60
$ 2,067.77 $ 2,300.00
$ 19,784.68 $ 20,300.00
7
$ 5,982.09 -$ 5,982.09 $ 499.83 $ 5,982.09
$ 0.00
$ 5,982.09 -$ 5,982.09 $ 499.83 $ 5,982.09
8
$ 8,079.78
$ 8,079.78
9
$ 2,223.60 -$ 2,223.60 $ 0.00 $ 2,223.60
$ 4,135.40 -$ 4,135.40 $ 0.00 $ 4,135.40
$ 4,135.40 -$ 4,135.40 $ 0.00 $ 4,135.40
$ 1,693.85 -$ 1,693.85 $ 0.00 $ 1,693.85
$ 1,907.70 -$ 1,907.70 $ 0.00 $ 1,907.70
$ 1,299.15 -$ 1,299.15 $ 0.00 $ 1,299.15
$ 15,395.10 -$ 15,395.10 $ 0.00 $ 15,395.10 $ 15,395.10
$ 84,297.25 -$ 30,156.71 $ 8,266.66 $ 73,494.11
Task No.
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
Additional budget for plan revisions to reduce environmental impacts, environmental support and
calculations, City of Corona requests, studies, geotechnical permitting and preparation of drilling plan
with environmental impacts.
COMMENTS and JUSTIFICATION FOR AMENDMENT
See Amendment Letter Item 1. Provide budget and staff for ongoing project coordination, internal QC
reviews, client and agency communications, contract and progress reporting, and schedule updates
through permitting and contract document preparation currently anticipated through Spring of 2024
for a total of 15 months from February 2023 through April 2024. Budget provides for an overall average
for all three phases combined of approximately 5 hours per week of project management time.
See Amendment Letter Item 1. Provide budget for meeting attendance through the duration of design,
permitting, contract document and construction. These meetings are attended by the various
technical leads, oversight agencies and stakeholders. An estimated total of 16 months of virtual bi-
monthly meetings are provided for a total of 34 bi-monthly meetings during the design, permitting, and
contract document phase through Spring of 2024, and another 36 bi-monthly meetings during the
construction phase. An average of 1.5 Stantec engineering staff will attend these meetings averaging
1.20-hour/each for attendance, preparation, and follow-up.
Task Description
M
a
n
Direct
Costs
Subcons
ultant
Geotech
TOTAL
TASK
HOURS
TOTAL
TASK FEE
Brandt
$237.95
SUBTOTAL PHASE 2 $ 1,500 $ 15,083 908.0 $ 163,642.04
Record Drawings 9.0 $ 1,299.15
Subtotal $ 500 98.0 $ 15,395.10
Site Visits (3 total)$ 500 9.0 $ 1,693.85
Bid Support (3 RFIs total)12.0 $ 1,907.70
RFI Responses (10 total)28.0 $ 4,135.40
Submittal Reviews (10 total)28.0 $ 4,135.40
Construction Support Services
Construction Meetings (6 total - virtual)12.0 $ 2,223.60
Subtotal $ 500 52.0 $ 8,109.64
Water Quality Managment Plan $ 500 52.0 $ 8,109.64
0.0 $-
Water Quality Management Plan
0.0 $-
Subtotal $ 500 44.0 $ 6,481.92
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
SWPPP $ 500 44.0 $ 6,481.92
Subtotal $ 372.0 $ 57,702.20
Estimates 20.0 $ 3,074.20
0.0 $-
Plans 304.0 $ 47,418.40
Specifications 48.0 $ 7,209.60
Trail Plans, Specifications and Estimates
0.0 $-
Subtotal $ 186.0 $ 29,833.86
Water Quality Flow Rates and Volumes 32.0 $ 4,535.44
Drainage Report 22.0 $ 3,274.22
Hydrology 32.0 $ 4,535.44
Hydraulics 100.0 $ 17,488.76
Drainage Studies
0.0 $-
Subtotal $ 12.0 $ 17,096.00
Geotechnical Investigation
Geotechnical Investigation $ 15,083 12.0 $ 17,096.00
Subtotal $ 20.0 $ 3,054.96
Right-of-Way / License Agreements 20.0 $ 3,054.96
0.0 $-
Right-of-Way / License Agreements
0.0 $-
Subtotal $ 72.0 $ 14,226.76
Field Surveys (3 days total)40.0 $ 9,326.12
Mapping Base 32.0 $ 4,900.64
Survey and Mapping
0.0 $-
Subtotal $ 52.0 $ 11,741.60
Project Management 40.0 $ 9,518.00
Meetings (6 total - virtual)12.0 $ 2,223.60
A. SART Phase 2
Project Management
Direct
Costs
Subconsult
ant
Geotech
TOTAL
TASK
HOURS
TOTAL TASK
FEETask Description
Additional quantity and cost estimates include City of Corona requested betterments for the project
and RCTC requested cost estimates for drainages to support a new Grant Application.
Project requires regular coordination with multiple stakeholders, subconsultants, and design staff. At the request of ACOE and
client, ongoing schedule maintenance and updates are also required. The original contract anticipated an approximate 14-
month design and permitting duration from April 2021 through June of 2022. Working through all the regulatory permitting and
coordination with ACOE for review of technical studies and contract documents, the current estimated completion of design
and permitting is approximately April 2024 with a start construction the fall of 2024. Note: Original budget assumed approximately
10 weeks of project management for coordinating with the environmental tasks once major tasks were kicked off. Actual weeks
of project management as of November 2022 are at 80 and will continue through design, permitting, and contract document
preparation, April of 2024.
Similar to the time frames listed above, ongoing bi-monthly meeting preparation and attendance has been required with the
various technical leads, oversight agencies and stakeholders. Approximately 40 bi-monthly meetings have been attended
between April, 2021 through November, 2022. Note: Only 6 virtual meetings were assumed. Additional meetings have been
attended that include internal Stantec/RCTC staff project meetings. Additional budget will be required through permitting and
construction completion.
COMMENTS and JUSTIFICATION FOR REALLOCATION
Task complete. Additional costs are not anticipated.
Task complete. Additional costs are not anticipated.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
ATTACHMENT 4
21
BUDGET REALLOCATION and AMENDMENT DETAIL
1
$ 6.00 $ 3,183.33 $ 12,701.33 $ 21,000.00
$ 59.55 $ 5,083.33 $ 7,306.93 $ 8,000.00
$ 65.55 $ 0.00 $ 8,266.66 $ 20,008.26 $ 29,000.00
2
$ 3,309.62 -$ 3,309.62 $ 9,478.94
$ 1,827.32 -$ 1,827.32 $ 3,073.32
$ 5,136.94 -$ 5,136.94 $ 0.00 $ 12,552.26 $ 0.00
3
$ 2,773.23 -$ 2,773.23 $ 237.89 $ 2,773.23
$ 2,773.23 -$ 2,773.23 $ 0.00 $ 237.89 $ 2,773.23
4
$ 40,753.51
$ 40,753.51
5
$ 1,194.98
$ 9.72
$ 4,176.57
$ 543.92
$ 5,925.19
6
$ 16,137.44 $ 18,000.00
$ 10,475.40
$ 7,209.60
$ 3,129.01 $ 2,300.00
$ 36,951.45 $ 20,300.00
7
$ 5,196.60
$ 2,885.96
$ 8,082.56
8
$ 6,481.92 -$ 6,481.92 $ 0.00 $ 6,481.92
$ 6,481.92 -$ 6,481.92 $ 0.00 $ 6,481.92
9
$ 7,784.78
$ 7,784.78
10
$ 2,223.60 -$ 2,223.60 $ 0.00 $ 2,223.60
$ 4,135.40 -$ 4,135.40 $ 0.00 $ 4,135.40
$ 4,135.40 -$ 4,135.40 $ 0.00 $ 4,135.40
$ 1,693.85 -$ 1,693.85 $ 0.00 $ 1,693.85
$ 1,907.70 -$ 1,907.70 $ 0.00 $ 1,907.70
$ 1,299.15 -$ 1,299.15 $ 0.00 $ 1,299.15
$ -$ 0.00
$ 15,395.10 -$ 15,395.10 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 15,395.10
$ 129,350.23 -$ 29,787.19 $ 8,266.66 $ 73,950.25
Task No.
1
$ 45.39 $ 3,183.33 $ 8,894.13 $ 21,000.00
$ 66.34 $ 5,083.33 $ 7,306.93 $ 8,000.00
$ 111.73 $ 0.00 $ 8,266.66 $ 16,201.06 $ 29,000.00
2
$ 3,741.03 -$ 3,741.03 $ 5,585.09
$ 1,573.46 -$ 1,573.46 $ 3,327.18
$ 5,314.49 -$ 5,314.49 $ 0.00 $ 8,912.27 $ 0.00
3
$ 3,011.12 -$ 3,011.12 $ 0.00 $ 3,011.12
$ 3,011.12 -$ 3,011.12 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 3,011.12
4
$ 18,070.02
$ 18,070.02
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
See comments in Phase 2 above
See comments in Phase 2 above
See comments in Phase 2 above
See comments in Phase 2 above
Subtotal 4.0 $ 12.0 $ 19,939.00
Geotechnical Investigation 4.0 $ 17,926 12.0 $ 19,939.00
0.0 $
Geotechnical Investigation
0.0 $
Subtotal 2.0 $ 20.0 $ 3,011.12
Right-of-Way / License Agreements
Right-of-Way / License Agreements 2.0 20.0 $ 3,011.12
Subtotal 0.0 $ 72.0 $ 14,226.76
0.0 $
Field Surveys (3 days total)40.0 $ 9,326.12
Mapping Base 32.0 $ 4,900.64
Survey and Mapping
0.0 $
Subtotal 30.0 $ 36.0 $ 7,934.40
Meetings (6 total - virtual) 6.0 12.0 $ 2,223.60
Project Management
Project Management 24.0 24.0 $ 5,710.80
A. SART Phase 3A
Task Description
Direct
Costs
Subconsult
ant
Geotech
TOTAL
TASK
HOURS
TOTAL TASK
FEE
Brandt
$237.95
SUBTOTAL PHASE 2A 136.0 32.0 $ 1,500 $ 40,434 1056.0 $ 213,054.72
0.0 $ -
Subtotal 18.0 0.0 $ 500 98.0 $ 15,395.10
Bid Support (3 RFIs total)3.0 12.0 $ 1,907.70
Record Drawings 1.0 9.0 $ 1,299.15
Submittal Reviews (10 total)4.0 28.0 $ 4,135.40
Site Visits (3 total)$ 500 9.0 $ 1,693.85
Construction Meetings (6 total - virtual)6.0 12.0 $ 2,223.60
RFI Responses (10 total)4.0 28.0 $ 4,135.40
Construction Support Services
0.0 $ -
Subtotal 4.0 0.0 $ 500 52.0 $ 8,109.64
Water Quality Management Plan
Water Quality Managment Plan 4.0 $ 500 52.0 $ 8,109.64
Subtotal 0.0 0.0 $ 500 44.0 $ 6,481.92
0.0 $ -
SWPPP $ 500 44.0 $ 6,481.92
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
0.0 $ -
Subtotal 8.0 0.0 $ 52.0 $ 8,082.56
Bridge Selection Memo 4.0 16.0 $ 2,885.96
Bridge Type Selection Memo
Bridge Schematics 4.0 36.0 $ 5,196.60
Subtotal 52.0 0.0 $ 524.0 $ 83,658.12
Estimates 4.0 28.0 $ 4,135.40
0.0 $ -
Abutment Design 48.0 $ 10,475.52
Specifications 8.0 48.0 $ 7,209.60
Trail Plans, Specifications and Estimates
Plans 40.0 400.0 $ 61,837.60
Subtotal 2.0 0.0 $ 114.0 $ 16,438.46
Drainage Report 2.0 22.0 $ 3,274.22
0.0 $ -
Hydraulics 32.0 $ 4,652.36
Water Quality Flow Rates and Volumes 32.0 $ 4,652.36
Drainage Studies
Hydrology 28.0 $ 3,859.52
Subtotal 4.0 0.0 $ 12.0 $ 42,447.00
Geotechnical Investigation 4.0 $ 40,434 12.0 $ 42,447.00
0.0 $ -
Geotechnical Investigation
Subtotal 2.0 0.0 $ 20.0 $ 3,011.12
0.0 $ -
Right-of-Way / License Agreements
Right-of-Way / License Agreements 2.0 20.0 $ 3,011.12
Subtotal 0.0 32.0 $ 88.0 $ 17,689.20
0.0 $ -
Field Surveys (4 days total)32.0 56.0 $ 12,788.56
Mapping Base 32.0 $ 4,900.64
Survey and Mapping
0.0 $ -
Subtotal 46.0 0.0 $ 52.0 $ 11,741.60
Meetings (6 total - virtual) 6.0 12.0 $ 2,223.60
Project Management
Project Management 40.0 40.0 $ 9,518.00
A. SART Phase 2A
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task complete. Additional costs are not anticipated.
Task complete. Additional costs are not anticipated.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task complete. Additional costs are not anticipated.
Task complete. Additional costs are not anticipated.
See comments on Phase 2 above.
See comments on Phase 2 above.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
See comments in Phase 2 above
See comments in Phase 2 above
See comments on Phase 2 above.
See comments on Phase 2 above.
22
BUDGET REALLOCATION and AMENDMENT DETAIL
5
$ 995.99
$ 357.03
$ 3,827.97
$ 453.40
$ 5,634.39
6
$ 14,449.83 $ 18,000.00
$ 7,209.77
$ 3,234.30 $ 2,300.00
$ 24,893.90 $ 20,300.00
7
$ 6,481.92 -$ 6,481.92 $ 0.00 $ 6,481.92
$ 6,481.92 -$ 6,481.92 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 6,481.92
8
$ 7,157.99
$ 7,157.99
9
$ 3,462.44
$ 8,003.72
$ 3,947.16 -$ 2,339.73 $ 1,607.43 $ 2,339.73
$ 15,413.32 -$ 2,339.73 $ 1,607.43 $ 2,339.73
10
$ 2,223.60 -$ 2,223.60 $ 0.00 $ 2,223.60
$ 4,135.40 -$ 4,135.40 $ 0.00 $ 4,135.40
$ 4,135.40 -$ 4,135.40 $ 0.00 $ 4,135.40
$ 1,693.85 -$ 1,693.85 $ 0.00 $ 1,693.85
$ 1,907.70 -$ 1,907.70 $ 0.00 $ 1,907.70
$ 1,299.15 -$ 1,299.15 $ 0.00 $ 1,299.15
$ 15,395.10 -$ 15,395.10 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 15,395.10
$ 101,483.98 -$ 32,542.36 $ 8,266.66 $ 76,527.87
$ 0.00 $ 9,550.00 $ 17,965.60 $ 18,000.00
$ 0.00 $ 15,250.00 $ 20,339.84 $ 20,000.00
$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 24,800.00 $ 38,305.44 $ 38,000.00
$ 0.00 $ 3,376.36
$ 0.00 $ 28,000.00 $ 58,834.00 $ 25,000.00
$ 2,689.13 $ 2,935.34
$ 13,248.18 -$ 13,248.18 $ 169.26 $ 13,248.18
$ 15,937.31 -$ 13,248.18 $ 28,000.00 $ 38,248.18
$ 0.00 $ 6,818.00 $ 20,715.99
$ 2,422.89 $ 42,746.00 $ 55,706.89
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
See Amendment Letter Item 1 for justification. Budget here represents environmental management
budget and is separate from the engineering management budget noted above.
See Amendment Letter Item 1 for justification. Budget here represents environmental meeting time
budget and is separate from the engineering meeting time budget noted above.
See Amendment Letter Item 7 for Justification
See Amendment Letter Item 8 for Justification
See comments in Phase 2 above
See comments in Phase 2 above
24.0 $ 5,089.84
5 Jurisdictional Determination/Wetland Delineation
Report (JD/WDR)
$ 400 83.0 $ 13,897.99
6 Biological Resources Technical Report $ 400 77.0 $ 12,960.89
Subtotal $ - 278.0 $ 50,563.14
Technical Reports and Permits
4 Response to Comments, MMRP, and File NOD 72.0 $ 13,417.44
0.0 $
2 Prepare Supplemental CEQA Analysis 176.0 $ 30,834.00
3 Coordination w ith RCTC/USACE on Circulation of
NOI / MND
14.0 $ 2,935.34
CEQA Compliance
1 Coordination with USACE on CEQA Document 16.0 $ 3,376.36
Subtotal $ - 64.0 $ 13,505.44
Project Management / Meetings
0.0 $
Project Management $ 8,415.60
Meetigs / Hearings
A. SART Phases 2, 2A and 3A CEQA Compiance
40.0
Task No. Task Description
Direct
Costs
Subconsult
ant
Geotech
TOTAL
TASK
HOURS
TOTAL TASK
FEE
SUBTOTAL PHASE 3A 116.0 $ 1,500 $ 17,926 976.0 $ 174,774.52
Record Drawings 1.0 9.0 $ 1,299.15
Subtotal 18.0 $ 500 98.0 $ 15,395.10
Site Visits (3 total) $ 500 9.0 $ 1,693.85
Bid Support (3 RFIs total) 3.0 12.0 $ 1,907.70
RFI Responses (10 total) 4.0 28.0 $ 4,135.40
Submittal Reviews (10 total) 4.0 28.0 $ 4,135.40
Construction Support Services
Construction Meetings (6 total - virtual) 6.0 12.0 $ 2,223.60
Subtotal 8.0 $ 92.0 $ 15,413.32
Bridge Study Report 4.0 24.0 $ 3,947.16
0.0 $
Field Survey (1 day total)16.0 $ 3,462.44
Bridge Alignment and Profile 4.0 52.0 $ 8,003.72
Phase 3B Bridge Study
0.0 $
Subtotal 0.0 $ 500 52.0 $ 8,057.84
Water Quality Management Plan
Water Quality Managment Plan $ 500 52.0 $ 8,057.84
Subtotal 0.0 $ 500 44.0 $ 6,481.92
0.0 $
SWPPP $ 500 44.0 $ 6,481.92
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
0.0 $
Subtotal 52.0 $ 436.0 $ 67,876.60
Specifications 8.0 48.0 $ 7,209.60
Estimates 4.0 28.0 $ 4,135.40
Trail Plans, Specifications and Estimates
Plans 40.0 360.0 $ 56,531.60
Subtotal 2.0 $ 114.0 $ 16,438.46
Drainage Report 2.0 22.0 $ 3,391.14
0.0 $
Hydraulics 32.0 $ 4,535.44
Water Quality Flow Rates and Volumes 32.0 $ 4,652.36
Drainage Studies
Hydrology 28.0 $ 3,859.52
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Environmental PM has had to work on the project daily in order to coordinate with Stantec, RCTC, and USACE staff. Ongoing
schedule maintenance and updates. In addition, PM has to coordinate tasks and disciplines daily in order to meet schedule
requirements. Original schedule provided a NTP on 4/26/21 with a completion of the final EA/FONSI/IS/MND and NOD date of
4/14/22. Due to alignment refinements and other requested tasks from USACE, the project has continued for some 66 additonal
weeks and will continue into 2023.
Project has required daily coordination on the environmental scope or work items and action items derived from the bi-monthly
and incidental weekly meetings. PM and staff have had to prepare agendas, minutes, conduct meetings, and implement and
follow up with Action Items. The level of effort originally anticipated was incidental in nature and not extensive, as has been the
case with the project. Note: More than 32 additional meetings have been held beyond the original 6 virtual meetings assumed.
PM and staff continue to require meetings with RCTC and USACE staff on a weekly basis and project will be extending into 2023
for major environmental related tasks.
To continue the sustained work effort on this project, budget from this task has been needed to cover the required work effort.
This work has included preparation of materials (e.g. infodrmation Sheet & Proejct Description - revised various times due to
alignment changes) and assisting USACE with understanding of the project and providing information needed in order to
prepare the joint CEQA/NEPA document. We have also had to use some of this budget to address the additional efforts required
for biological, cultural, and paleontological resources and assoicated support (e.g. GIS). Our efforts were originally scoped to be
incidental in nature, but we have had to dedicate much more time and effort in providing USACE and RCTC with requested
information. Note: The scope of work assumed approximately 6-8 weeks of effort to complete these tasks, including reviews and
approvals. The project has continued for some 76 additional weeks.
Additional work related to field visits and comments provided by USACE required more effort in preparing and revising the
JD/WDR with a number of alignment refinements, requiring text, table, and figure revisions. Note: The duration for completing this
task was 4-6 weeks including review and comments. The actual duration was more than double, due to additional work noted
above.
Additional work related to field visits and comments provided by USACE required more effort in preparing and revising the BRTR
with a number of alignment refinements, requiring text, table, and figure revisions. The BRTR was anticipated to be typical in
nature, but comments received from USACE required additional analysis (e.g., wildlife corridor), senstive species surveys (floral
and faunal), and other unanticipated information. Note: The anticipated duration of this task was 4-6 weeks, including review
and revisions. The actual time required to complete this task was substantially more, based upon the information above, and
was some four times the effort.
23
BUDGET REALLOCATION and AMENDMENT DETAIL
$ 2,839.58 $ 21,857.00 $ 32,780.56
$ 0.00 $ 6,358.72 $ 10,000.00
$ 24,132.84 -$ 24,132.84 $ 0.00 $ 58,132.84
$ 0.00 $ 1,312.88
$ 37,000.00
$ 3,000.00
$ 29,395.31 -$ 24,132.84 $ 71,421.00 $ 108,132.84
$ 2,530.00 $ 2,530.00 $ 234.00
$ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00
$ 4,500.00 $ 4,500.00
$ 800.00 -$ 800.00 $ 0.00 $ 800.00
$ 1,271.70 -$ 1,271.70 $ 728.30 $ 1,271.70
$ 7,082.00 -$ 7,082.00 $ 0.00 $ 31,176.00
$ 10,000.00 -$ 10,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 26,499.00
$ 28,183.70 -$ 19,153.70 $ 0.00 $ 59,980.70
$ 73,516.32 -$ 56,534.72 $ 124,221.00 $ 244,361.72
$ 388,647.78 -$ 149,020.98 $ 149,020.98 $ 468,333.95
See Amendment Letter Item 6 for Justification
See Amendment Letter Item 9 for Justification
Subtotal
See Amendment Letter Item 10 for justification. Includes additional time for subconsultant -Hernandez.
Includes additional time to include ESA Section 7 BA assistance.
See Amendment Letter Item 11 for justification. This task includes the additional scope and budget for
the HMMP (onsite for temporary and offsite mitigation), Biological Assessment for the ESA permitting
and the MSHCP Permit support.
$ 10,000 0.0 $ 10,000.00
TOTAL PHASE 2, 2A, 3A CEQA
TOTAL REMAINING, REALLOCATIONS, and AMENDMENT
0.0 $
1602 Long Term Permit Application Fee 0.0 $ 7,082.00
$ 30,062 744.0 $ 162,567.46
Misc. Expenses (equipment, field expense,s and $ 2,000 0.0 $ 2,000.00
$ 28,912 0.0 $ 28,912.00
401 Application Fee
$ 7,082
Radius Map $ 2,000 0.0 $ 2,000.00
Mailing & Newspaper Notice $ 4,500 0.0 $ 4,500.00
Records Search $ 800 0.0 $ 800.00
Direct Costs
CDFW and County CEQA Filing Fees (2021) $ 2,530 0.0 $ 2,530.00
0.0 $
Subtotal $ 1,150 402.0 $ 69,586.88
8 401, 404 and 1602 Permits $ 175 138.0 $ 24,132.84
11 (New)Section 106 Memorandum and Paleontological
Resources Support
9 Tribal Cultural Resources (AB 52) 8.0 $ 1,312.88
10 (New)Bio & Paleo Monitoring during Geotech Invest
(Up to 7 days)
7 Habitat Assessment/MSHCP Consitency Analysis $ 175 60.0 $ 10,923.56
DBESP 36.0 $ 6,358.72
Includes the 404 Permit
See Amendment Letter Item 12 for Justification. Assumes a total of 9 drainage at $3,464/ea.
See Amendment Letter Item 12 for Justification. Amount based on 2023 fees.
Restore original budget
Restore original budget
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
The MSHCP/DBESP was expected to be straight forward, but instead, it required a comparitive analysis between the 2018
alignment and 2022 alignment. In addition, the MSHCP mapping layers in many instances were not available and required
extensive GIS support and cross checking of tables, text, and figures, in addition to translation of Phases versus Segments that
were not universally equivalent. Design changes to the alignment were also necessary and resulted in additional reanalysis of
existing information. Note: The anticipated duration for this task was approximately 4 weeks. However, the actual duration was
some 12 weeks, due to information noted above.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
Task not complete. Anticipate future budget augmentation.
24
1
17336.03500\34673323.1
Agreement No. 21-67-038-02
AMENDMENT NO. 2
TO AGREEMENT
WITH
STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES,
INC FOR
PREPARATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT,
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING, PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES,
AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES RELATED TO THE
SANTA ANA RIVER TRAIL PROJECT PHASES 2, 2A AND 3A IN THE PRADO
BASIN
1.PARTIES AND DATE
This Amendment No. 2 to Agreement for the Preparation of Final Environmental
Document, Preliminary Engineering, Plans, Specifications and Estimates, and
Construction Support Services ("Amendment No. 2") is entered into as of this
_______ day of _________, 2023, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ("Commission") and STANTEC
CONSULTING SERVICES, INC ("Consultant"), a New York corporation.
2.RECITALS
2.1 The Commission and the Consultant have entered into Agreement No. 21-
67-038-00, dated April 23, 2021, (the "Master Agreement") for the purpose
of providing Preparation of Final Environmental Document, Preliminary
Engineering, Plans, Specifications and Estimates, and Construction
Support Services for the Santa Ana River Tail Project Phases 2, 2A, and 3A
in the Prado Basin (the "Project").
2.2 The Commission and the Consultant have entered into Amendment No. 1,
dated January 12, 2022, for the purpose of providing additional funding for
additional services for the Preparation of Final Environmental Document,
Preliminary Engineering, Plans, Specifications and Estimates, and
Construction Support Services for the Santa Ana River Tail Project Phases
2, 2A, and 3A in the Prado Basin (the "Project").
2.3 The Commission and the Consultant now desire to amend the Master
Agreement in order to provide additional funding to compensate Consultant
for additional Consultant services required for the Project.
DRA
F
T
ATTACHMENT 5
25
2
17336.03500\34673323.1
3.TERMS
3.1 The Services, as that term is defined in the Master Agreement, shall be
amended to include the additional services required to complete the Project,
as further described in Exhibit "A" attached to this Amendment No. 2 and
incorporated herein by reference.
3.2 The maximum compensation to be provided under this Amendment No. 2
for the Services as set forth in the attached Exhibit "A" shall not exceed
Four Hundred Sixty-Eight Thousand Three Hundred Thirty-Four Dollars
($468,334), as further detailed in Exhibit "B" attached to this Amendment
No. 2 and incorporated herein by reference.
3.3 The total not to exceed contract value of the Master Agreement, as
amended by this Amendment No. 2, is One Million Two Hundred Thirty
Thousand One Hundred Nine Dollars ($1,230,109).
3.4 Except as amended by this Amendment No. 2, all provisions of the Master
Agreement and Amendment No. 1, including without limitation the
indemnity and insurance provisions, shall remain in full force and effect
and shall govern the actions of the parties under this Amendment No. 2.
3.5 This Amendment No. 2 shall be governed by the laws of the State of
California. Venue shall be in Riverside County.
3.6 A manually signed copy of this Amendment No. 2 which is transmitted by
facsimile, email or other means of electronic transmission shall be deemed
to have the same legal effect as delivery of an original executed copy of this
Amendment No. 2 for all purposes. This Amendment No. 2 may be signed
using an electronic signature.
3.7 This Amendment No. 2 may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall
constitute an original.
[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
DRA
F
T
26
SIGNATURE PAGE
TO
AGREEMENT NO. 21-67-038-02
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of
the date first herein above written.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
By: __________________________ By: _______________________________
Anne Mayer, Executive Director
Title: _______________________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
By: _____________________________ By: ______________________________
Best Best & Krieger LLP
Counsel to the Riverside County Its: ______________________________
Transportation Commission
One signature shall be that of the chairman of board, the president or any vice president and the second
signature (on the attest line) shall be that of the secretary, any assistant secretary, the chief financial officer
or any assistant treasurer of such corporation.
If the above persons are not the intended signators, evidence of signature authority shall be provided to
RCTC.
3
DRA
F
T
27
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES
[attached behind this page]
DRA
F
T
28
EXHIBIT B
COMPENSATION
[attached behind this page]
DRA
F
T
29
SANTA ANA RIVER TRAIL PROJECT –PHASES 2, 2A AND 3A –STANTEC AMENDMENT
Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee
January 23, 2023
David Lewis, Capital Projects Manager
1
Santa Ana River Trail –Phases 2, 2A and 3A
Key Features
2
•RCTC has been managing SART for the Park District since 2015
•One of the last gaps in 110-mile trail from the Mountains to the
Sea
•Equestrian, bicyclist & pedestrian ADA accessible trail
•All costs are reimbursed by the District
Santa Ana River Trail –Phases 2, 2A and 3A
Historical Background
3
•October 2019 –USACE rejected previous alignments due to a
variety of reasons
•Resulted in major changes to project phases and alignments
•March 2021 -Commission approved agreement with Stantec on
Phases 2, 2A, & 3A
Santa Ana River Trail –Phases 2, 2A and 3ASART –Alignment & Phasing
4
Santa Ana River Trail –Phases 2, 2A and 3A
Stantec Agreement Amendment
5
•Stantec role changed to lead overall project
•USACE staff limited capacity to perform important, time sensitive
tasks
•Schedule delays
•Parks concurs with recommendations in staff report
Santa Ana River Trail –Phases 2, 2A and 3A
Staff Recommendations
6
•Approve Amendment No. 2 for additional scope and cost of
$468,334 plus a contingency amount of $47,000 for an additional
amount of $515,334.
•Total authorized not to exceed $1,336,478
QUESTIONS
7
AGENDA ITEM 8
Agenda Item 8
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: January 23, 2023
TO: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee
FROM: Lisa Mobley, Administrative Services Director/Clerk of the Board
THROUGH: Aaron Hake, Deputy Executive Director
SUBJECT: Election of Officers for the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects
Committee
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee to conduct an
election of officers for 2023 – Chair and Vice Chair.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The election of officers for the full Commission and its Committees are held on an annual basis.
Commissioners Ben J. Benoit (Chair) and Brian Berkson (Vice Chair) were elected as the Western
Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee’s officers for 2022. Once the election for
2023 is conducted, the new Chair and Vice Chair will immediately assume the positions.
Past Chairs of the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee are as follows:
2022 – Ben J. Benoit, City of Wildomar
2021 – Clint Lorimore, City of Eastvale
2020 – Michael Vargas, City of Perris
2019 – Brian Berkson, City of Jurupa Valley
2018 – Adam Rush, City of Eastvale
2017 – Deborah Franklin, City of Banning
2016 – Ben J. Benoit, City of Wildomar
2015 – Ben J. Benoit, City of Wildomar
2014 – Frank Johnston, City of Jurupa Valley
2013 – Andrew Kotyuk, City of San Jacinto
2012 – Adam Rush, City of Eastvale
2011 – Darcy Kuenzi, City of Menifee
2010 – Karen Spiegel, City of Corona
30
TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM: Lisa Mobley, Clerk of the Board
DATE: January 18, 2023
SUBJECT: G.C. 84308 Compliance – Potential Conflict of Interest
California Government Code 84308 states a Commissioner may not participate in any discussion or
action concerning a contract or amendment if a campaign contribution of more than $250 is
received in the past 12 months or 3 months following the conclusion from a bidder or bidder’s agent.
This prohibition does not apply to the awarding of contracts that are competitively bid. The
Commission’s procurement division asks potential vendors to disclose any contributions made to
the campaigns of any Commissioner as part of their submitted bid packets. As an additional
precaution, those entities are included below in an effort to give Commissioners opportunity to
review their campaign statements for potential conflicts. Please note the entities listed in this
memo are not encompassing of all potential conflicts and are in addition to any personal conflicts
of interest such as those disclosed on Statement of Economic Interests – Form 700 or prohibited
by Government Code Section 1090. Please contact me should you have any questions.
Agenda Item No. 7 - Amendment with Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., for the Santa Ana River
Trail Project Phases 2, 2A and 3A in the Prado Basin
Consultant(s): Stantec Consulting Services, Inc.
Gilberto Ruiz, Principal Environmental Planner
801 S. Figueroa Street
Los Angeles, CA 90017
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS
COMMITTEE
ROLL CALL
JANUARY 23, 2023
Present Absent
County of Riverside, District I X
County of Riverside, District II X
City of Banning X
City of Corona X
City of Eastvale X
City of Hemet X
City of Jurupa Valley X
City of Menifee X
City of Norco X
City of Perris X
City of Riverside X
City of Wildomar X