HomeMy Public PortalAbout10 October 23, 2006 Budget & Implementation78443
•
•
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE
MEETING AGENDA
TIME: 9:30 a.m.
DATE: Monday, October 23, 2006
LOCATION: Board Chambers
County Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street, 1" Floor
Riverside, CA 92501
RECORDS
***COMMITTEE MEMBERS***
Jeff Stone, Chair / District Three / County of Riverside
Barbara Hanna, Vice Chair / Art Welch, City of Banning
Roger Berg / Jeff Fox, City of Beaumont
Robert Crain / Joseph DeConinck, City of Blythe
Gregory S. Pettis / Charles "Bud" England, City of Cathedral City
Juan M. DeLara / Richard Macknicki, City of Coachella
Hank Hohenstein / Yvonne Parks, City of Desert Hot Springs
Bob Magee / Robert L. Schiffner, City of Lake Elsinore
Terry Henderson / Don Adolph, City of La Quinta
Rick Gibbs / Douglas McAllister, City of Murrieta
Gordon Moller / Alan Seman, City of Rancho Mirage
Steve Adams, City of Riverside
Jim Ayres / Chris Buydos, City of San Jacinto
John F. Tavaglione, District Two / County of Riverside
***STAFF***
Eric Haley, Executive Director
Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer
***AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY***
Annual Budget Development and Oversight
Countywide Strategic Plan
Legislation
Measure A Implementation and Capital Programs
Public Communications and Outreach Programs
Competitive Grant Programs: TEA 21-CMAO & STP, Transportation Enhancement
and SB 821-Bicycle & Pedestrian
Property Management
SAFE/Freeway Service Patrol
TUMF Program
and other areas as may be prescribed by the Commission
Comments are welcomed by the Committee. if you wish to provide comments to the
Committee, please complete and submit a Testimony Card to the Clerk of the Commission.
11.36.06
"
"
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N
B U D G E T A N D I M P L E M E N T A T I O N C O M M I T T E E
w w w . r c t c . o r g
A G E N D A *
* A c t i o n s m a y b e t a k e n o n a n y i t e m l i s t e d o n t h e a g e n d a
9 : 3 0 a . m .
M o n d a y , . O c t o b e r 2 3 , 2 0 0 6
B O A R D C H A M B E R S
C o u n t y A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C e n t e r
4 0 8 0 L e m o n S t r e e t , 1 s ` F l o o r
R i v e r s i d e , C a l i f o r n i a
I n c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e A m e r i c a n s w i t h D i s a b i l i t i e s A c t a n d G o v e r n m e n t C o d e S e c t i o n
5 4 9 5 4 . 2 , i f y o u n e e d s p e c i a l a s s i s t a n c e t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n a C o m m i t t e e m e e t i n g , p l e a s e
c o n t a c t t h e C l e r k o f t h e B o a r d a t ( 9 5 1 ) 7 8 7 - 7 1 4 1 . N o t i f i c a t i o n o f a t l e a s t 4 8 h o u r s p r i o r
t o m e e t i n g t i m e w i l l a s s i s t s t a f f i n a s s u r i n g t h a t r e a s o n a b l e a r r a n g e m e n t s c a n b e m a d e t o
p r o v i d e a c c e s s i b i l i t y a t t h e m e e t i n g .
1 . C A L L T O O R D E R
2 . R O L L C A L L
3 . P U B L I C C O M M E N T S
4 . A P P R O V A L O F M I N U T E S
5 . A D D I T I O N S / R E V I S I O N S ( T h e C o m m i t t e e m a y a d d a n i t e m t o t h e A g e n d a
a f t e r m a k i n g a f i n d i n g t h a t t h e r e i s a n e e d t o t a k e i m m e d i a t e a c t i o n o n t h e
i t e m a n d t h a t t h e i t e m c a m e t o t h e a t t e n t i o n o f t h e C o m m i t t e e s u b s e q u e n t .
t o t h e p o s t i n g o f t h e a g e n d a . A n a c t i o n a d d i n g a n i t e m t o t h e a g e n d a
r e q u i r e s 2 / 3 v o t e o f t h e C o m m i t t e e . I f t h e r e a r e l e s s t h a n 2 / 3 o f t h e
C o m m i t t e e m e m b e r s p r e s e n t , a d d i n g a n i t e m t o t h e a g e n d a r e q u i r e s a
u n a n i m o u s v o t e . A d d e d i t e m s w i l l b e p l a c e d f o r d i s c u s s i o n a t t h e e n d o f t h e
a g e n d a . )
Budget and Implementation Committee
October 23, 2006
Page 2
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.
7.
6A. INTERFUND LOAN ACTIVITY REPORT
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
Pg. 1
1) Receive and file the lnterfund Loan Activity Report for the first quarter
ended September 30, 2006; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH PSOMAS TO PROVIDE FINAL
DESIGN ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE PERRIS MULTIMODAL
FACILITY
Pg. 3
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Approve Agreement No. 04-33-007-01, Amendment No. 1 to
Agreement No. 04-33-007, with PSOMAS to perform Final Design
Engineering Services for the Perris Multimodal Facility, for a total not
to exceed cost of $524,067;
2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute
the Agreement Amendment on behalf of the Commission; and
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
•
Budget and Implementation Committee
October 23, 2006
Page 3
8. AMENDMENT TO UTILITY AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
GAS COMPANY FOR THE STATE ROUTE 74 SEGMENT II WASSON
CANYON ROAD TO 7T" STREET HIGHWAY WIDENING AND REALIGNMENT
PROJECT
9.
Pg. 16
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Approve Utility Agreement No. 03-31-046-01, Amendment No. 1 to
Agreement No. 03-31-046, with Southern California Gas Company for
the State Route (SR) 74 Segment II Wasson Canyon Road to 7'
Street Highway Widening and Realignment Project for an amount not
to exceed $43,062;
2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute
the Agreement Amendment on behalf of the Commission; and
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
AWARD OF AGREEMENTS TO HENNESSEY & HENNESSEY LLC; PARAGON
PARTNERS LTD; R.P. LAURAIN & ASSOCIATES; LIDGARD AND
ASSOCIATES, INC.; AND VALENTINE APPRAISAL & ASSOCIATES FOR
ON -CALL RIGHT-OF-WAY APPRAISAL SERVICES FOR RESIDENTIAL,
COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND AGRICULTURAL PROPERTIES
Pg. 18
Overview
This item is for the Committee to•
1) Award Agreement No. 07-72-057-00 to Hennessey & Hennessey
LLC; Agreement No. 07-72-061-00 to Paragon Partners Ltd;
Agreement No. 07-31-063-00 to R. P. Laurain & Associates;
Agreement No. 07-73-062-00 to Lidgard and Associates, Inc.; and
Agreement No. 07-33-064-00 to Valentine Appraisal & Associates to
perform On -Call Right -of -Way Appraisal Services (Appraisal Services);
2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute
the Agreements on behalf of the Commission;
3) Approve an amendment to 'the FY 2006/07 budget in the amount of
$225,000; and
4) Forward to the Commission for final action.
Budget and Implementation Committee
October 23, 2006
Page 4
10. AWARD OF AGREEMENTS TO HENNESSEY & HENNESSEY LLC; PARAGON
PARTNERS LTD; AND LIDGARD AND ASSOCIATES, INC., FOR ON -CALL
RIGHT-OF-WAY APPRAISAL REVIEW SERVICES
Pg. 21
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Award Agreement No. 07-33-060-00 to Hennessey & Hennessey
LLC; Agreement No. 07-73-058-00 to Paragon Partners Ltd; and
Agreement No. 07-31-059-00 to Lidgard and Associates, Inc. to
perform On -Call Right -of -Way Appraisal Review Services;
2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute
the Agreements on behalf of the Commission;
3) Approve an amendment to the FY 2006/07 budget in the amount of
$78,000; and
4) Forward to the Commission for final action.
11. APPROVAL OF CITY OF LA QUINTA'S AMENDED BICYCLE
TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
Pg. 23
1) Approve the city of La Quinta's Amended Bicycle Transportation Plan
as submitted; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
12. AWARD OF FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY AGREEMENT
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
Pg. 24
1) Approve Agreement for Federal Legislative Advocacy Services;
2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute
the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
•
•
Budget and Implementation Committee
October 23, 2006
Page 5
13. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA
14. COMMISSIONERS / STAFF REPORT
Overview
1) This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and staff to
report on attended and upcoming meeting/conferences and issues
related to Commission activities.
15. ADJOURNMENT AND NEXT MEETING
The next Budget and Implementation Committee meeting is scheduled to be
held at 9:30 A.M., Monday, November 27, 2006, Board Chambers, 1st
Floor, County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside.
•
ATTENDANCE ROSTER
BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE MEETING
MONDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2006 9:30 A.M.
NAME
Fati4 7/-76%er s'/e,1-2
t.
e-frAL
riJ
Rt C K_ Gi,8 8 5
REPRESENTING
S_,Arn i ✓LC
G�5-e4f5/p4".f
R v
R.cT C
.5,°vim"%Ai;s:71-J
'l )e,, j,-it-�-- ! p=t'
HuR <4-
TELEPHONE OR E-MAIL#
riKen GVI vo® T1I11� ,ced`
i//;S7b/7P COQQQ e.z9
RG113BS0 HuApg- 71?,0/2G
AGENDA ITEM 4
Minutes
"
"
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N
B U D G E T A N D I M P L E M E N T A T I O N C O M M I T T E E
M o n d a y , A u g u s t 2 8 , 2 0 0 6
M I N U T E S
1 . C A L L T O O R D E R
T h e m e e t i n g o f t h e B u d g e t a n d I m p l e m e n t a t i o n C o m m i t t e e w a s c a l l e d t o
o r d e r b y C h a i r J e f f S t o n e a t 9 : 3 4 a . m . , i n t h e B o a r d R o o m a t t h e C o u n t y o f
R i v e r s i d e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C e n t e r , 4 0 8 0 L e m o n S t r e e t , F i r s t F l o o r , R i v e r s i d e ,
C a l i f o r n i a , 9 2 5 0 1 .
2 . R O L L C A L L
M e m b e r s / A l t e r n a t e s P r e s e n t M e m b e r s A b s e n t
S t e v e A d a m s
J i m A y r e s
R o g e r B e r g
A l e x B i a s
R i c k G i b b s
T e r r y H e n d e r s o n
B o b M a g e e
J e f f S t o n e
J o h n F . T a v a g l i o n e
R o b e r t C r a i n
J u a n D e L a r a
B a r b a r a H a n n a
R o n M e e p o s
G r e g o r y P e t t i s
P U B L I C C O M M E N T S
T h e r e w e r e n o r e q u e s t s t o s p e a k f r o m t h e p u b l i c .
A P P R O V A L O F M I N U T E S A p r i l 2 4 a n d J u n e 2 6 , 2 0 0 6
M / S / C ( B i a s / B e r g ) t o a p p r o v e t h e m i n u t e s o f A p r i l 2 4 a n d J u n e 2 6 ,
2 0 0 6 a s s u b m i t t e d .
5 . A D D I T I O N S / R E V I S I O N S
T h e r e w e r e n o a d d i t i o n s o r r e v i s i o n s t o t h e a g e n d a .
6 . C O N S E N T C A L E N D A R
Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes
August 28, 2006
Page 2
M/S/C (Henderson/Adams) to approve the following Consent Calendar
item:
6A. INTERFUND LOAN ACTIVITY REPORT
1) Receive and file the Interfund Loan Activity Report for the
fourth quarter ended June 30, 2006; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
6B. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT
1) Receive and file the Single Signature Authority Report for the
fourth quarter ended June 30, 2006; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
6C. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
1) Receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the
twelve-month period ended June 30, 2006; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
6D. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT
1) Receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter
ended June 30, 2006; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
6E. TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE FINANCING
THROUGH STATEWIDE COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM
1) Receive and file status report on Transportation Uniform
Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Financing through Statewide Community
Infrastructure Program (SCIP); and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
6F. OBLIGATION AUTHORITY LOAN TO SAN BERNARDINO ASSOCIATED
GOVERNMENTS (SANBAG)
1) Receive and file the Obligation Authority Loan Report; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
•
Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes
August 28, 2006
Page 3
6G. TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE (TUMF) REGIONAL
ARTERIAL PROGRAM — QUARTERLY REPORT
1) Receive and file the TUMF Regional Arterial Program Quarterly
Report; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
7. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT NO. 03-31-014-03, AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO
AGREEMENT NO. 03-31-014 WITH CHONG PARTNERS ARCHITECTURE TO
PREPARE CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR A PARKING STRUCTURE FOR THE
NORTH MAIN CORONA METROLINK STATION
Cathy Bechtel, Project Delivery Director, provided background information on
the North Main Corona Metrolink Station parking structure project and an
overview of the amendment with Chong Partners Architecture to address the
need for additional design elements.
M/S/C (Henderson/Bias) to:
1) Approve Agreement No. 03-31-014-03, Amendment No. 3 to
Agreement No. 03-31-014 to prepare plans, specifications and
cost estimate (PS&E) for the additional amount of $141,225,
including a three-month calendar extension to contract time,
and a total not to exceed amount of $1,451,228;
2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to
execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
8. AWARD OF AGREEMENTS TO PARAGON PARTNERS, LTD., OVERLAND
PACIFIC CUTLER, INC., AND, EPIC LAND SOLUTIONS, INC. FOR ON -CALL
RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION AND RELOCATION; REAL PROPERTY
SEARCHES, IDENTIFICATION AND FEASIBILITY STUDIES FOR
REPLACEMENT AND MITIGATION SITES; COST ESTIMATES; AND,
UTILITIES RELOCATION SERVICES
Min Saysay, Program Manager, provided an overview of the selection
process and the scope of services that will be provided by Paragon Partners,
LTD., Pacific Cutler, Inc., and Epic Land Solutions, Inc. for the right-of-way
program.
Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes
August 28, 2006
Page 4
M/S/C (Henderson/Adams) to:
1► Award Agreement No. 07-72-025-00 to Paragon Partners, Ltd.,
Agreement No. 07-72-026-00 to Overland Pacific Cutler, Inc.,
and Agreement No. 07-72-027-00 to Epic Land Solutions, Inc.
to perform On -Call Right -of -Way Acquisition and Relocation;
Real Property Searches, Identification and Feasibility Studies for
Replacement and Mitigation Sites; Cost Estimates; and, Utilities
Relocation Services (ROW Services);
2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to
execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission;
3) Approve an amendment to the FY 2006/07 budget in the
amount of $300,000; and
4) Forward to the Commission for final action.
9. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. 07-72-030-00 WITH THE CITY OF
CORONA FOR THE FUNDING AND PREPARATION OF A PROJECT
REPORT/ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT FOR THE CAJALC0/1-15
INTERCHANGE
Cathy Bechtel provided background information for improvements on the
Cajalco Road/I-15 interchange and the request from the city of Corona to
amend the Mid County Parkway environmental document to expedite the
improvements due to current and projected congestion levels.
In response to Commissioner Terry Henderson's question, Cathy Bechtel
responded that construction for the bridge improvements is anticipated to
begin by 2009-10. She then explained the current and projected lane
configurations for the bridge and connecting roadway.
Chair Stone expressed support for the staff recommendation.
M/S/C (Gibbs/Adams) to:
1) Approve Cooperative Agreement No. 07-72-030-00 between
the city of Corona and the Commission for the preparation of a
Project Report and Environmental Document for the Cajalco/1-15
interchange;
2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to
execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
"
B u d g e t a n d I m p l e m e n t a t i o n C o m m i t t e e M i n u t e s
A u g u s t 2 8 , 2 0 0 6
P a g e 5
1 0 . C I T Y O F C O R O N A T R A N S P O R T A T I O N U N I F O R M M I T I G A T I O N F E E
R E G I O N A L A R T E R I A L P R O G R A M M I N G R E Q U E S T F O R G R E E N R I V E R R O A D
A N D E L C E R R I T O R O A D P R O J E C T S
S h i r l e y M e d i n a , P r o g r a m M a n a g e r , p r e s e n t e d t h e c i t y o f C o r o n a ' s r e q u e s t f o r
r e p r o g r a m m i n g t h e T U M F f u n d i n g f o r t w o p r e v i o u s l y a p p r o v e d r e g i o n a l
a r t e r i a l p r o j e c t s , G r e e n R i v e r R o a d a n d E l C e r r i t o R o a d .
A t C o m m i s s i o n e r J o h n T a v a g l i o n e ' s r e q u e s t , S h i r l e y M e d i n a u p d a t e d t h e
C o m m i t t e e o n t h e s t a t u s o f t h e G r e e n R i v e r i n t e r c h a n g e p r o j e c t .
M / S / C ( T a v a g l i o n e / H e n d e r s o n ) t o :
1 �% A p p r o v e r e p r o g r a m m i n g o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n U n i f o r m M i t i g a t i o n
F e e ( T U M F ) f u n d s f o r t h e G r e e n R i v e r R o a d p r o j e c t t o i n c l u d e
$ 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 f o r t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l p h a s e , $ 6 0 0 , 0 0 0 f o r t h e
d e s i g n p h a s e , a n d $ 3 , 4 4 2 , 0 0 0 f o r c o n s t r u c t i o n ;
2 ) A p p r o v e e x t e n d i n g l i m i t s o n t h e G r e e n R i v e r R o a d p r o j e c t t o
P a l i s a d e s D r i v e f o r p l a n s , s p e c i f i c a t i o n s , a n d c o s t e s t i m a t e
( P S & E ) d e s i g n w o r k o n l y ;
3 ) A p p r o v e T U M F R e g i o n a l A r t e r i a l P r o g r a m f u n d s f o r c o n s t r u c t i o n
o f t h e G r e e n R i v e r R o a d p r o j e c t f r o m S t a t e R o u t e 9 1 t o
D o m i n g u e z R a n c h R o a d ;
4 ) A p p r o v e A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 6 - 7 2 - 5 3 9 - 0 1 , A m e n d m e n t N o . 1 t o
A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 6 - 7 2 - 5 3 9 , t o r e f l e c t t h e a b o v e c h a n g e s ;
5 ) A p p r o v e A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 7 - 7 2 - 0 3 8 - 0 0 f o r p r o g r a m m i n g o f
$ 1 m i l l i o n i n T U M F f u n d s f o r t h e E l C e r r i t o R o a d / I - 1 5
I n t e r c h a n g e i m p r o v e m e n t p r o j e c t t o i n c l u d e $ 1 2 0 , 0 0 0
p r e v i o u s l y p r o g r a m m e d f o r r i g h t - o f - w a y a n d $ 8 8 0 , 0 0 0 i n
a d d i t i o n a l f u n d i n g f o r t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n p h a s e ;
6 ) A u t h o r i z e t h e C h a i r , p u r s u a n t t o l e g a l c o u n s e l r e v i e w , t o
e x e c u t e t h e a g r e e m e n t s o n b e h a l f o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n ;
7 ) A p p r o v e a n a m e n d m e n t t o t h e F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 b u d g e t i n t h e
a m o u n t o f $ 1 . 3 m i l l i o n ; a n d
8 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes
August 28, 2006
Page 6
11. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND CITY OF BLYTHE REGARDING
STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM INTRA-COUNTY
FORMULA FUNDING
Shirley Medina reviewed the proposed State Transportation Improvement
Program (STIP) fund trade with the city of Blythe (City) to address its needs on
its local arterial system.
Eric Haley, Executive Director, explained that due to the constraints of STIP
funding, the Commission cannot assure that the City will ever have success
accessing these funds. In working with the City, staff developed a mechanism
for the City to opt out of the normal STIP process and trade funds back to the
Western County. The STIP trade is proposed to continue in future STIP
cycles.
M/S/C (Henderson/Ayres) to:
1) Approve Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) No. 07-71-028
with city of Blythe (City) trading a total of $2,291,656 of State
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Intra-county Palo
Verde Valley formula funds with Measure A Western County
Highway funds; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
12. AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE CLOSED
CIRCUIT TELEVISION (CCTV) SECURITY SYSTEMS AT METROLINK
STATIONS
Claudia Chase, Property Administrator, reviewed the amendment with Inland
Vault and Security, Inc. for the maintenance of the CCTV at the Metrolink
Stations.
M/S/C (Berg/Bias) to:
1) Approve Agreement No. 04-25-962-02, Amendment No. 2 to
Agreement No. 04-25-962, with Inland Vault & Security, Inc.
for Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Security Systems
Maintenance Services to amend the term and rates of the
agreement;
2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to
execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes
August 28, 2006
Page 7
13. FISCAL YEAR 2007/11 MEASURE A FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PLAN FOR LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FOR THE CITIES OF LAKE
ELSINORE, NORCO AND RANCHO MIRAGE
Jerry Rivera, Program Manager, presented the FY 2007/11 Measure A
Five -Year Capital Improvement Plans (CIP) for the cities of Lake Elsinore,
Norco and Rancho Mirage.
In response to Chair Stone's question regarding the cities with outstanding
CIPs, Jerry Rivera replied that there are four cities; Beaumont, Calimesa,
Cathedral City and Coachella, that have not submitted their CIPs and that
there is not a deadline for submission. He noted that these cities have been
informed that no disbursement of Measure A funds for local streets and
roads will be made until all of the required documents have been received
and approved by the Commission.
M/S/C (Henderson/Tavaglione) to:
1) Approve the FY 2007/11 Measure A Five -Year Capital
Improvement Plan for Local Streets and Roads for the cities of
Lake Elsinore, Norco and Rancho Mirage as submitted; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action
14. FISCAL YEAR 2006/07 LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND ALLOCATION FOR
LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FOR THE PALO VERDE VALLEY
APPORTIONMENT AREA
Jerry Rivera reviewed the allocation of FY 2006/07 Local Transportation
Fund (LTF) funds for local streets and roads purposes in the Palo Verde
Valley area. An Unmet Transit Hearing was held in this area and it was
determined that there were no unmet transit needs that could be reasonably
met.
In response to Commissioner Henderson's question regarding the unused
funds, Jerry Rivera explained that the Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency
requested $759,000 with a balance available for allocation to local streets
and roads for that apportionment area or the funds can be carried over.
•
Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes
August 28, 2006
Page 8
M/S/C (Henderson/Gibbs) to:
1) Approve the allocation of FY 2006/07 Local Transportation
Fund (LTF) funds for local streets and roads purposes in the
Palo Verde Valley area as shown on the attached table; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
15. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
John Standiford, Public Affairs Director, provided an overview of the Senate
Appropriations Bill HR 5576 including the earmarks for Riverside County, the
legislative advocacy services, AB 2630, and the release of a request for
qualifications. He then discussed Propositions 1 A, 1 B, 1 C, 1 D, 1 E, and 90
and the impacts on Riverside County related to these bills.
Commissioner Tavaglione expressed opposition to Proposition 90 and
recommended the Commission take an oppose position on this proposition
with the preface that the Commission understands eminent domain has been
misused in cases and does not condone those actions.
At Commissioner Tavaglione's request, Eric Haley provided an estimate of
additional delays and costs that would have been incurred on the
State Route 74 project if Proposition 90 was currently in place.
Commissioner Henderson stated that the League of California Cities has
taken a strong opposed position on Proposition 90, noting that it is currently
working on language to amend the eminent domain clause for protection
against its misuse. She expressed opposition to Proposition 90 and
explained her position.
Commissioner Tavaglione added that even minor projects such as sidewalks
or signals will be negatively impacted by Proposition 90.
Chair Stone supported an oppose position on Proposition 90, noting that the
use of eminent domain have been inappropriately applied in a very small
percentage of cases, which has tainted the whole process. He suggested
educating residents on this proposition.
John Standiford indicated that staff will revise the agenda item to reflect the
Committee's recommendation to take a oppose position on Proposition 90.
•
•
"
i
"
B u d g e t a n d I m p l e m e n t a t i o n C o m m i t t e e M i n u t e s
A u g u s t 2 8 , 2 0 0 6
P a g e 9
M / S / C ( T a v a g l i o n e / A d a m s ) t o :
1 ) A d o p t t h e f o l l o w i n g p o s i t i o n s o n s t a t e b a l l o t p r o p o s i t i o n s :
P r o p o s i t i o n s 1 A & 1 1 3 S U P P O R T
P r o p o s i t i o n 9 0 O P P O S E ;
2 ) D i r e c t s t a f f t o i s s u e a R e q u e s t f o r Q u a l i f i c a t i o n s f o r f e d e r a l
l e g i s l a t i v e a d v o c a c y s e r v i c e s ; a n d
3 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
1 6 . I T E M S P U L L E D F R O M C O N S E N T C A L E N D A R
N o i t e m s w e r e p u l l e d f r o m t h e c o n s e n t c a l e n d a r f o r d i s c u s s i o n .
1 7 . C O M M E N T S B Y C O M M I S S I O N E R S / S T A F F
1 ) C o m m i s s i o n e r R i c k G i b b s e x t e n d e d a p p r e c i a t i o n t o W i l l K e m p t o n ,
C a l t r a n s D i r e c t o r , a n d M i k e P e r o v i c h , C a l t r a n s D i s t r i c t 8 D i r e c t o r , f o r
a c c e l e r a t i n g t h e L o s A l a m o s R o a d / I - 2 1 5 i n t e r c h a n g e p r o j e c t .
2 ) C o m m i s s i o n e r B o b M a g e e c o m m e n d e d s t a f f o n S t a t e R o u t e 7 4
p r o j e c t .
3 ) M r . H a l e y r e p o r t e d o n :
" T h e G r a n d O p e n i n g C e r e m o n y f o r t h e S t a t e R o u t e 7 4 p r o j e c t .
" C a l t r a n s u s i n g R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y a s a m o d e l f o r c r e a t i n g f u t u r e
r e l a t i o n s h i p s .
" F u t u r e P u b l i c / P r i v a t e P a r t n e r s h i p m e e t i n g s f o r j o i n t m u l t i - c o u n t y
e f f o r t s .
1 8 . A D J O U R N M E N T
T h e r e b e i n g n o f u r t h e r b u s i n e s s f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n b y t h e B u d g e t a n d
I m p l e m e n t a t i o n C o m m i t t e e , t h e m e e t i n g w a s a d j o u r n e d a t 1 0 : 3 2 a . m . T h e
n e x t m e e t i n g o f t h e B u d g e t a n d I m p l e m e n t a t i o n C o m m i t t e e i s s c h e d u l e d f o r
S e p t e m b e r 2 5 , 2 0 0 6 a t 9 : 3 0 a . m .
R e s p e c t f u l l y s u b m i t t e d ,
6 . �� . H
J e n n i f e r H a r m o n
C l e r k o f t h e B o a r d
"
A G E N D A I T E M 6 A
"
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON
DATE:
October 23, 2006
TO:
Budget and Implementation Committee
FROM:
Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager
THROUGH:
Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer
SUBJECT:
Interfund Loan Activity Report
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Receive and file the Interfund Loan Activity Report for the first quarter
ended September 30, 2006; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
On April 14, 2004 the Commission approved the Interfund Loan Policy and adopted
Resolution No. 04-009 "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation
Commission to Authorize Interfund Loans". Subsequently, the Commission
requested that the interfund loan activity be reported on a quarterly basis. The
attached details list all interfund loan activity through September 30, 2006. The
total outstanding interfund loan amounts as of September 30, 2006 are $541,609.
Attachment: Interfund Loan Activity Report
1
" "
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n
I n t e r f u n d L o a n A c t i v i t y R e p o r t
F o r 1 s t q u a r t e r e n d e d S e p t e m b e r 3 0 , 2 0 0 6
L o a n
A m o u n t R e p a y m e n t A m o u n t
D a t e o f L o a n o f L o a n B e g i n s O u t s t a n d i n g L e n d i n g F u n d B o r r o w i n g F u n d
A p r i l 2 , 2 0 0 3 $ 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 J u l y 1 , 2 0 0 6 $ 2 6 6 , 6 0 9 M e a s u r e A - W C H i g h w a y ( 2 2 2 ) M e a s u r e A - W C L S R ( 2 2 7 )
M a r c h 4 , 2 0 0 4 2 7 5 , 0 0 0 J u l y 1 , 2 0 0 9
T o t a l
$ 5 7 5 , 0 0 0
2 7 5 , 0 0 0 M e a s u r e A - W C C o m m u t e r M e a s u r e A - W C H i g h w a y ( 2 2 2 )
A s s i s t a n c e ( 2 2 6 )
$ 5 4 1 , 6 0 9
P u r p o s e o f L o a n
A d v a n c e t o m a k e r e p a i r s a n d
i m p r o v e m e n t s t o R a i l r o a d C a n y o n
R o a d
A d d i t i o n a l l o c a l m a t c h f o r t h e S R 7 1
W i d e n i n g / A n i m a l C r o s s i n g P r o j e c t
D a t e C o m m i s s i o n
A p p r o v e d
M a r c h 1 2 , 2 0 0 3
D e c e m b e r 1 0 , 2 0 0 3
V n 2 0 0 0 1 1 1 N o v e m b e r 1 B u d g e t & I m p l e m e n t a t i o n 1 m c . A t t a c h . l n t e d u n d L o a n A c t i v i t y R p t
AGENDA ITEM 7.
•
"
"
R I V E R S / D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M / S S / O N
D A T E :
O c t o b e r 2 3 , 2 0 0 6
T O :
B u d g e t a n d I m p l e m e n t a t i o n C o m m i t t e e
F R O M :
M a r l i n F e e n s t r a , C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s P r o g r a m M a n a g e r
K a r l S a u e r , B e c h t e l C o n s t r u c t i o n M a n a g e r
T H R O U G H :
H i d e o S u g i t a , D e p u t y E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r
S U B J E C T :
A m e n d m e n t t o A g r e e m e n t w i t h P S O M A S t o p r o v i d e F i n a l D e s i g n
E n g i n e e r i n g S e r v i c e s f o r t h e P e r r i s M u l t i m o d a l F a c i l i t y
S T A F F R E C O M M E N D A T I O N :
T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i t t e e t o :
1 ) A p p r o v e A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 4 - 3 3 - 0 0 7 - 0 1 , A m e n d m e n t N o . 1 t o
A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 4 - 3 3 - 0 0 7 , w i t h P S O M A S t o p e r f o r m F i n a l D e s i g n
E n g i n e e r i n g S e r v i c e s f o r t h e P e r r i s M u l t i m o d a l F a c i l i t y , f o r a t o t a l n o t
t o e x c e e d c o s t o f $ 5 2 4 , 0 6 7 ;
2 ) A u t h o r i z e t h e C h a i r m a n , p u r s u a n t t o l e g a l c o u n s e l r e v i e w , t o e x e c u t e
t h e A g r e e m e n t A m e n d m e n t o n b e h a l f o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n ; a n d
3 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N :
T h e C o m m i s s i o n a n d t h e R i v e r s i d e T r a n s i t A g e n c y ( R T A ) h a v e b e e n w o r k i n g
c o o p e r a t i v e l y t o d e v e l o p P h a s e I o f t h e D o w n t o w n P e r r i s M u l t i m o d a l T r a n s i t C e n t e r
( P e r r i s M u l t i m o d a l F a c i l i t y ) , w h i c h w i l l i n c l u d e t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a R T A b u s
t e r m i n a l , a 1 4 1 s p a c e p a r k i n g l o t , b u s p l a z a w i t h 8 l o a d i n g b a y s , a n d a t r a n s i t
p l a t f o r m f o r a c c e s s t o t h e P e r r i s V a l l e y L i n e s e r v i c e . A t t h e J u l y 9 , 2 0 0 3 m e e t i n g ,
t h e C o m m i s s i o n a w a r d e d A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 4 - 3 3 - 0 0 7 t o P S O M A S t o p e r f o r m P h a s e
I P r e l i m i n a r y E n g i n e e r i n g a n d E n v i r o n m e n t a l S e r v i c e s . P S O M A S w a s a l s o s e l e c t e d
t o p e r f o r m P h a s e I I F i n a l D e s i g n E n g i n e e r i n g S e r v i c e s w h i c h w e r e t o b e i n c l u d e d i n
a n a m e n d m e n t t o b e n e g o t i a t e d a t a l a t e r d a t e , a f t e r a l o c a l l y p r e f e r r e d a l t e r n a t i v e
h a d b e e n s e l e c t e d a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y c l e a r e d .
O n M a y 3 0 , 2 0 0 6 , t h e P e r r i s C i t y C o u n c i l ( C i t y ) a p p r o v e d t h e D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n
a n d N e g a t i v e D e c l a r a t i o n f o r t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f P h a s e I o f t h e p r o p o s e d P e r r i s
M u l t i m o d a l F a c i l i t y . T h e C i t y ' s a p p r o v a l w a s b a s e d u p o n a C a l i f o r n i a E n v i r o n m e n t a l
Q u a l i t y A c t ( C E Q A ) E n v i r o n m e n t a l E v a l u a t i o n f o r t h e p r o j e c t . T o c o m p l y w i t h
F e d e r a l T r a n s i t A d m i n i s t r a t i o n ( F T A ) r e q u i r e m e n t s , P S O M A S w a s d i r e c t e d a n d h a s
c o m p l e t e d a N a t i o n a l E n v i r o n m e n t a l P o l i c y A c t ( N E P A ) E n v i r o n m e n t a l E v a l u a t i o n ,
3
based upon the City's CEQA Environmental Evaluation. This NEPA Environmental
Evaluation has been transmitted to FTA for its concurrence. Upon FTA's
concurrence, the Commission can proceed with final design of the project.
Commission staff requested PSOMAS to provide the Commission a scope of
services, cost, and schedule to provide Final Design Engineering Services for the
Perris Multimodal Facility. Staff has reviewed and completed its negotiations with
PSOMAS and concurs with the attached PSOMAS proposed scope, cost of
$446,335 for design and $77,732 for bid/construction, and schedule to
accomplish the final design for the proposed Perris Multimodal Facility.
Accordingly, staff seeks approval of Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 04-33-
007.
The estimated construction cost for the facility is approximately $5,000,000,
including the final design at a cost not to exceed $525,000. These design services
are expected to be completed in approximately six months. Funding for final
design will be from FTA reimbursement received as a pass through from RTA; the
20% match will come from Measure A commuter rail funds.
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget:
Yes
Year:
FY 2006/2007
Amount:
$524,067
Source of Funds:
RTA pass through from FTA
reimbursement @ 80% and 20%
match from Measure A commuter rail
funds
Budget Adjustment:
No
GLA No.:
221 33 81102 P 3816
Fiscal Procedures Approved:
\jAmze.e:et,�
Date:
10/23/06
Attachment: PSOMAS Scope of Services and cost for Final Design of the Perris Multi -
Modal Facility
4
"
J u l y 5 , 2 0 0 6 .
M r . K a r l S a u e r , B e c h t e l / R C T C
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y R e g i o n a l C o m p l e x
4 0 8 0 L e m o n S t r e e t , 3 r d F l o o r
R i v e r s i d e , C A 9 2 5 0 1
R e : P e r r i s M u l t i m o d a l F a c i l i t y P h a s e 1 F i n a l D e s i g n
R C T C A g r e e m e n t # 0 4 - 3 3 - 0 0 7
D e a r M r S a u e r :
W e a r e s u b m i t t i n g t h i s r e q u e s t f o r m o d i f i c a t i o n s t o o u r r e f e r e n c e d A g r e e m e n t t o
p r o v i d e f o r p r o f e s s i o n a l d e s i g n s e r v i c e s f o r t h e r e f e r e n c e d p r o j e c t . . E n c l o s e d p l e a s e
f i n d o u r S c o p e o f S e r v i c e s a n d F e e P r o p o s a l f o r y o u r r e v i e w a n d c o n s i d e r a t i o n . .
W e w o u l d a l s o r e q u e s t a n u p d a t e t o o u r D i r e c t L a b o r r a t e s , l a s t u p d a t e d i n 2 0 0 4 , t o
r e f l e c t a r a n g e o f c u r r e n t a n d f u t u r e r a t e s t o c o v e t u s t h r o u g h t h e e n d o f 2 0 0 7 .
I n f o r m a t i o n a n d E n g i n e e r i n g % C a t i o n s
D i r e c t S a l a r y R a t e s N o t a l l i n d i v i d u a l s i n e a c h s t a f f c a t e g o r y w i t h i n t h e f i r m
a r e p a i d p r e c i s e l y t h e s a m e h o u r l y w a g e . A c c o r d i n g l y , s o m e o f t h e " p o s i t i o n s
o r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s " h a v e d i f f e r e n t i n d i v i d u a l s w h o h a v e v a r y i n g d i r e c t l a b o r
r a t e s w i t h i n e a c h c a t e g o r y . W e p r o p o s e t h a t w e a m e n d t h e l i s t o f h o u r l y r a t e s
t o i n c l u d e a " r a n g e " o f h o u r l y r a t e s t h a t a r e c u r r e n t l y i n e f f e c t f o r t h e
r e m a i n d e r o f 2 0 0 6 , a n d t h r o u g h t h e e n d o f 2 0 0 7 , f o r e a c h o f o u r " p o s i t i o n s o r
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s " a s f o l l o w s :
P o s i t i o n O r C l a s s i f i c a t i o n
P r i n c i p a l E n g i n e e r ( 2 0 1 0 )
S e n i o r A s s o c i a t e E n g i n e e r ( 2 0 2 0 )
A s s o c i a t e E n g i n e e r ( 2 0 3 0 )
S e n i o r E n g i n e e r ( 2 0 4 0 )
P r o j e c t E n g i n e e r ( 2 0 6 0 )
S t a f f ' E n g i n e e r ( 2 0 8 0 )
A s s i s t a n t E n g i n e e r ( 2 0 9 0 )
5
R a n g e O f H o u r l y R a t e s
$ 6 6 . 0 0 - $ 8 0 . . 0 0
$ 5 2 . 0 0 - $ 5 9 . . 0 0
$ 5 0 . 0 0 - $ 5 4 . . 0 0
$ 4 4 . 0 0 - $ 4 9 . . 0 0
$ 4 1 0 0 - $ 4 8 . 0 0
$ 2 6 0 0 - $ 3 6 . 0 0
$ 2 6 . 0 0 - $ 2 9 . 0 0
4 4 5 5 M u r p h y C a n y o n C h a d
S u i t e 2 0 0
S a n D i e g o C A 9 2 1 n
3 5 8 5 7 6 9 2 0 0
E l 5 6 5 1 7 3 8 F a x
w w w p s o m a s m m
PSOMAS
Mr. Karl Sauer
WO 1892-011 [A]
Position Or Classification
Senior CADD Drafter (3020)
CADD Drafter (3030)
CADD Operator II (.3040)
Senior Land Surveyor (5020)
Project Surveyor (5040)
Survey Technician (5070)
2-Person Survey Crew (5080)
Word Processor (6010)
Range Of Hourly Rates
$25.00 - $29.00
$18.00 - $25.00
$14.00 - $17..00
$42.00 - $55.00
$36..00 - $42.00
$32..00 - $40.00
$32..00 - $40.00
$14..00 - $22.00
July 5, 2006
Page 2
Additionally, we are also requesting an amendment to our overhead rate, from our
original rate established in 2003, when we were operating as Pountney Consulting
Group.. In January of 2004, we merged with Psomas, and have a new overhead rate as
follows:
As requested, and pursuant to Exhibit C, we are providing the
following information:
Section 1.1.2.3 (Multiplier)
TOTAL MULl'1PLIER
Section 1.2:1 Fixed Fee $20,377.09
Section 1.3 Additional Direct Costs
Section 1.I 2.1 (Multiplier) Direct Salary Costs 1.0
Section 1.1.2.2 (Multiplier) Payroll Additives 0.527
Direct Labor Cost Multiplier 0..527
Overhead Costs 1.372
1.899
Per Diem $90/ day
Car mileage $0..445/mile
All other direct expenses are to be billed on a reimbursable basis.
6
PSOMAS
•
Mr. Karl Sauer
WO 1892-011 [AI
We respectfully submit these modifications to our Agreement. Thank you for your
consideration of this request.
Please call me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Peter J.. Pountney
Vice President & Senior Project Manager
AEC/cjc
Enclosure
7
July 5, 2006
Page 3
PSOMAS
Perris Multimodal Facility -Phase 1 Final Design
Scope of Services
Public Meetings
We have provided for up to one (1) RCiTC commission meeting/presentation, one (1) RTA board
meeting/presentation, and two (2) City of Perris Council meetings/presentations.
Regularly scheduled progress meetings including peer and QA/QC reviews
We will establish a calendar for regularly scheduled team meetings where our design team will meet
to coordinate our progress, exchange check prints, refine the design, and resolve any potential
conflicts. These meetings are scheduled every two weeks initially and stretch out to monthly as the
project progresses. Concurrent with these meetings, we will undertake a series of peer reviews and
quality assurance/quality control checks to establish that each team member's work product is
properly coordinated into the whole, and that the basis for the plan is sound.
Base map and initial geotechnical studies
We will utilize the base map prepared for the Preliminary Study Phase. We have budgeted for
limited field surveys that may be required to tie in where we are matching existing conditions with
our improvements.
T ne geotechnicai and geology report will provide the foiiowing data: condition of existing soils;
percolation potential (for drainage of landscape areas), soluble sulfates (for concrete design), soil.
quality (for landscape design), foundation design parameters (for platforms and structures), and grading
recommendations. This scope item was not performed until a final site plan was established and
approved by the City of Perris. We anticipate that a design level geotechnical study can now be
performed as part of the Final Design Phase.
Traffic engineering
All traffic studies were completed with the Preliminary Engineering Phase and we do not anticipate
additional traffic studies. Our traffic engineer will prepare traffic signal designs at the intersection of
4t and C Streets, prepare traffic control plans, and signing and striping design for C Street.
Schematic design of selected alternative (15%) - Not Included
We will utilize the Schematic Design that was prepared during the Preliminary Engineering Phase,
which depicted the approved alternative by the City of Perris, through their Development Plan
Review process.. This altemative site plan, landscape plans, and architectural designs of the shelters
were approved by the Planning Commission and City Council of the City of Perris, and will be the
basis for final design for this project. We anticipate that we will proceed with the final design, and
include 60%, 90%, and final submittals.
Construction Documents (60%, 90%, and Final PSE's)
Onsite Construction Documents
Preparation of detailed plans, specifications, and construction estimate, suitable for bidding. We
anticipate the following construction documents for the onsite improvements as follows:
Title Sheet/Notes/Legend/Work to be Done
Existing Conditions
General Site Plan
•
8
PSOMAS
•
•
Perris Multimodal Facility -Phase 1 Final Design
Scope of Services
Civil Plans
Demolition Plan
Horizontal Control/Striping Plan
Finished Grading/Drainage Plan
Utilities Plan
Miscellaneous Profiles
Site Details
Platform Details
Erosion Control Plan (will also be part of the SWPPP)
Architectural Plans
Platform Shelter. Plans
Prefabbed Restroom Drawings
Elevations
Structural Details
Mechanical/Plumbing Plans
We do not anticipate any mechanical or plumbing plans with Phase L Water and
sewer connections will be shown on the civil utilities plans.
Structural Plans
Platform/Miscellaneous Structural Details
Electrical Plans
Legend/Notes/Fixture Schedule
Lighting/Power Site Plan
Communication/PA/CCTV (conduit only) Site Plan
Single Line Diagram/Load Calculations
Electrical Details
Landscape Drawings
Landscape Legend/Notes
Planting Plans/Plant Schedule
Planting Details
Irrigation Plans/Irrigation Schedule
Irrigation Details
Construction Plans (including hardscape and fencing)
Construction Details (including hardscape and fencing)
Offsite Public Improvements - C Street (San Jacinto to 4th Street and San Jacinto'h street
improvements)
Title Sheet/Notes/Legend/Work to be Done
Civil Plans
Demolition Plan
9
PSOMAS
Perris Multimodal Facility -Phase 1 Final Design
Scope of Services
Full Street Improvement Plans (including new street pavement, curb, gutter,
sidewalks, pedestrian ramps, cross gutters, storm inlets/piping, and street lights)
Utilities Plan
Miscellaneous Profiles
Traffic Plans
Traffic Signal Plan (C Street and 4th Street intersection)
Signal Interconnect Plan
Traffic Signing and Striping Plan
Construction Period Traffic Control/Detour Plans
Landscape Plans
Planting and Irrigation Plans for the street frontage improvements (east frontage on
C Street and south frontage on San Jacinto Street)
Technical Specifications
Technical specifications for all onsite improvements (CSI format). We anticipate that
all offsite public improvements will be done in accordance with the City of Perris
standards for public works construction.
Opinion of Probable Construction Costs
Update of our construction estimates for each of the submittals (60%, 90%, and
Final), bond estimates to be submitted to the City of Perris, and prepare Bid Schedule
suitable for line item bids, if/as required.
Stormwater Compliance Documents
We anticipate that we will prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP),
Notice of Intent (NOI), and establishment of a WDID number with the Regional
Water Quality Control Board for construction -related activities. The contractor will be
responsible for enforcing and updating the requirements of this SWPPP during
construction.
We anticipate that the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), previously prepared
for the City's Development Plan Review (DPR) process, and approved by the City of
Perris, is sufficient through this phase of the design. No further documentation is
anticipated.
Permitting
We anticipate that all construction permits will be issued through the City of Perris, including grading
permits for all onsite grading and site development, improvement permits for public improvements
(streets improvements, drainage, water, and sewer connections), and building permits for all onsite
shelters:. No other permits through other outside agencies are anticipated at this time.
•
•
10
Perris Multimodal Facility -Phase 1 Final Design
Scope of Services
Outside Agency Coordination
We will coordinate our work with outside agencies, if/as required, including SCRRA, Ca'trans, BNSF,
Riverside Flood Control District, and the appropriate franchise utility agencies relating to the
undergrounding of existing overhead utilities on C Street.. We will also coordinate our station design
with your consultants for the Perris Valley Line, in order to better anticipate their new track
improvements through the station.
Sid Period Service
We will attend the Pre -Bid meeting, document questions, and assist with the responses to questions
from the potential bidders. We will prepare addenda as necessary to clarify the intent of the
construction documents. However, if revisions to the design, beyond the control of the design
team, requires preparation of addenda, we will prepare this on a time and material basis.
Construction Period Support Service
We will attend the Pre -Construction meeting, review submittals/RFI/RFC's, provide periodic field
observations, review change order requests, and participate in the preparation of record drawings.
Our subconsultants will also provide similar limited services during the construction period, if/as
required.
11
PSOMAS
June 12,2006
FEE PROPOSAL
PERRIS MULTI -MODAL FACILITY
PHASE I -FINAL ENGINEERING
DESCRIPTION
HOURS/QUART.
RATE
TOTAL
PROJECT MANAGEMENT (6 Months)
Project Management
Principal Engineer
6
$77.63
$465.78
Project Manager
60
$58.86
$3,531.60
Meetings -
Meetings w/ RCTC 8 RTA (8 meetings)
Principal Engineer
24
$77.63
$1,863.12
Project Manager
40
-$58.86
$2,354.40
Wad Processor/Clerical
8
$21.60
$172.80
Monthly Progress Reports (6 total)
Project Manager
18
$58.86
$1,059.48
Word Processor/Clerical
6
$21.60
$129.60
Design Team Meetings (6 total)
Project Manager
24
$58.86
$1,412.64
Senior Engineer
12
$50.94
$611 28
Word Processor/Clerical
12
$21.60
$259.20
Subconsultants-
Architect (Oncina) (0 meetings)
1.05
$0.00
$0.00
Landscape Architects (IMA) (0 meetings)
1.05
$0.00
$0.00
Electrical Engineer (13SE) (0 meetings)
1.05
$0.00
$0.00
Structural Engineer (Psomas) (0 meeting)
1.05
$0.00
$0.00
Geotechnical (Ninyo) (0 meeting)
1.05
$0.00
$0.00
Traffic Engineer (KOA) (0 meetings)
1.05
$0.00
$0.00
Public Meetings-
RCTC Commission (up to 1 meeting)
Principal Engineer
4
$77.63
$310.52
Project Manager
8
$58.86
$470.88
CADD Drafter
4
$28,98
$115.92
Word Processor/Clerical
2
$21.60
$43.20
SubconsultaMs-
Archilect (Oncina) (0 meetings)
1.05
$0.00
$0.00
Landscape Architects (IMA) (0 meeting)
1.05
$0.00
$0.00
Riverside Transportation Agency (up to 1 meetings)
Principal Engineer
4
$77.63
$310.52
Project Manager
8
$58.86
$470.88
CADD Drafter
4
$28.98
$115.92
Word Processor/Clerical
2
$21.60
$43.20
City of Perris (up to 2 meetings)
Principal Engineer
8
$77.63
$621.04
Project Manager
16
$58.86
$941.76
CADD Drafter
16
$28.98
$463.68
Word Procrwcor/Clerical
4
$21.60
$86.40
Subconsukants-
Archilect (Oncina) (0 meetings)
1,05
$0.00
$0.00
Landscape Architects (IMA) (0 meeting)
1.05
$0.00
$0.00
Traffic Engineer (KOA) (0 meeting)
1.05
$0.00
$0.00
Public Workshops (up to 0 workshops)
Principal Engineer
0
$77.63
$0.00
Project Manager
0
$58.86
$0.00
CADD Drafter
0
$28.98
$0.00
Word Processor/Clerical
0
$21.60
$0.00
Subconsultants-
Architect (Oncina) (0 workshops)
1.05
$0.00
$0.00
Landscape Architects (IMA) (0 workshops)
1.05
$0.00
$0.00
Traffic Engineer (KOA) (0 workshops)
1.05
$0.00
$0.00
SubconsultantCoordination (6 months)
Project Manager
60
$58.86
$3,531.60
Senior Engineer
20
$50.94
$1,018.80
Word Processor/Clerical
12
$21.60
$259.20
Quality Control
Principal Engineer
24
$77.63
$1,863.12
Project Manager
24
$58.86
$1,412.64
Project Engineer
12
$38.00
$456.00
SUBTOTAL - Project Management
$24,395.18
RCTC-Penis
12
Page 1
PSOMAS
June 12, 2006
FEE PROPOSAL
PERRIS MULTI -MODAL FACILITY
PHASE I -FINAL ENGINEERING
PROJECT INITIATION
Research
Project Engineer
Staff Engineer
Ward Processor/Clerical
16
24
8
$38.00
$31.49
$21.60
$608.00
$755.76
$172.80
Site Reconnaissance
Principal Engineer
Project Manager
Project Engineer
B
8
8
$77.63
$58.86
$38.00
$621.04
$470.88
$304.00
Reimbursables/Other Direct Costs (ODC's)
Site Photographs
Postage & Mileage
1LS
1LS
$100.00
$400.00
$100.00
$400.00
SUBTOTAL - Project Initiation
$3,432.48
SURVEY SUPPORT
Subconsu8ants-
Surveys (Psomas)
1.05
$5,000.00
$5,250.00
Reimbursables/Other Direct Costs (ODC's)
CADD Plotting
Reproduction
Postage & Mileage
1LS
1LS
10
$10.00
$500.00
$500.00
$100.00
$500.00
$500.00
SUBTOTAL - Base Maps
$6,350.00
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS
Subconsullanis-
Geotechnical Consultant (Ninyo)
1.05
$14,892.00
$15,636.60
SUBTOTAL - Geotechnical Investigations
$15,636.60
CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS (60% DESIGN)
Principal Engineer
Project Manager
Senior Project Engineer
Project Engineer
Staff Engineer
Designer
CADD Drafter
Word Processor/Clerical
8
40
24
80
80
40
100
$77.63
$58.86
$50.94
$38.00
$31.49
$27.00
$28.98
$621.04
$2.354.40
$1,222.56
$3.040.00
$2,519.20
$1,080-00
$2,898.00
Subconsultants-
Architect (Oncina)
1.05
$13,850.00
$14,542.50
Landscape Architects (IMA)
1.05
$34,085.00
$35,789.25
Electrical Engineer (BSE)
1.05
$16,000.00
$16.800.00
Structural Engineer (Psomas)
1.05
$5,000.00
$5,250.00
Traffic Engineer (KOA)
1.05
$10,000.00
$10,500.00
Reimbursables-
CADD Plotting
24
$10.00
$240.00
Reproduction
1LS
$1,000.00
$1,000.00
Postage & Mileage
1LS
$500.00
$500.00
SUBTOTAL - Construction Documents (60% Design)
$98,443.35
CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS (90% DESIGN)
mama! Engineer
Project Manager
Senior Project Engineer
Project Engineer
Staff Engineer
Designer
CADD Drafter
Word Processor/Clerical
8
32
24
80
80
40
80
4
$77.63
$58.86
$50.94
$38.00
$31.49
$27.00
$28.98
521.60
$621.04
$1,883.52
$1,222.56
$3,040.00
$2,519.20
$1,080.00
$2,318.40
$86.40
SubconsultaMs-
Architect (Oncina)
Landscape Architects (IMA)
Electrical Engineer (BSE)
Structural Engineer (Psomas)
Traffic Engineer (KOA)
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
$9,975.00
$22,715.00
$12,000.00
$10,000.00
S10,000.00
$10,473.75
$23.850.75
$12,600.00
$10,500.00
$10,500.00
RCTC-Perris
13
Page 2
PSOMAS
June 12,2006
FEE PROPOSAL
PERRIS MULTI -MODAL FACILITY
PHASE I -FINAL ENGINEERING
Reimbursables-
CADD Plotting
24
$10.00
$240.00
Reproduction
1LS
$1,000.00
$1,000.00
Postage & Mileage
1LS
$500.00
$500.00
SUBTOTAL- Construction Documents (90%Design)
$82,435.62
CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS (100% DESIGN)
Principal Engineer
4
$77.63
$310.52
Project Manager
24
$5886
• $1,412.64
Senior Project Engineer
18
$50.94
$916.92
Project Engineer
60
$38.00
$2,280.00
Staff Engineer
60
$31.49
$1,889.40
Designer
40
$27.00
$1,080.00
CADD Drafter
60
$28.98
$1,738.80
Word Processor/Clerical
4
$21.60
$86.40
Subconsultants-
Architect (Oncina)
1.05
$16,675.00
$17,508.75
Landscape Architects (IMA)
1.05
$11,415.00
$11,985.75
Electrical Engineer (BSE)
1.05
$12.000.00
$12,600.00
Structural Engineer (Psomas)
1.05
$5,000.00
$5,250.00
Traffic Engineer(KOA)
1.05
$8,000.00
"$8,400.00
Reimbursables-
GADD Plotting
24
$10.00
$240.00
Reproduction
1LS
$1,000.00
$1,000.00
Postage & Mileage
1LS
$500.00
$500.00
SUBTOTAL - Construction Documents (100% Design)
$67,199.18
OUTSIDE AGENCY COORDINATION
SCRRA
Ca!trans
BNSF
Riverside Flood Control District
Project Manager
40
$58.86
$2,354.40
Project Engineer
40
$38.00
$1,520.00
CADD Drafter
8
$28.98
$231.84
Word Processor/Clerical
8
$21.60
$172.80
SUBTOTAL - Outside Agency Coordination
$4,270.04
TOTAL HOURS/DIRECT LABOR - Psomas
1604
$67,914.10
OVERHEAD MULTIPLIER (1,90)
$129,036.79
REIMBURSABLES
$6,820.00
TOTAL- PSOMAS
$203,770.89
FIXED FEE (10%)
$20,377.09
SUBCONSULTANTS (with 5%mark-up)
$222,187.35
TOTAL - DESIGN
$446,335.33
BID/CONSTRUCTION PERIOD SERVICES 8 Month BM/Construction Period)
Psomas-
Project Manager
80
$58.86
$4,708.80
Senior Project Engineer
40
$50.94
$2.037.60
Project Engineer
60
$38.00
$2,280.00
CADD Drafter
24
$28.98
$695.52
Word Processor/Clerical
32
$21.60
$691.20
Subtotal - Psomas
$10,413.12
Subconsultants-
Architect (Oncina)
1.05
$7,140.00
$7,497.00
Landscape Architects (IMA)
1.05
$11,720.00
$12,306.00
Electrical Engineer(BSE)
1.05
$10,915.00
- $11,460.75
Structural Engineer (Psomas)
1.05
$5,000.00
$5,250.00
Traffic Engineer (KOA)
1.05
$5.000.00
$5,250.00
Subtotal - Subconsultants
$41,763.75
RCTC-Perris
14
Page 3
PSOMAS
June 12,2006
FEE PROPOSAL
PERRIS MULTI -MODAL FACILITY
PHASE I -FINAL ENGINEERING
Reimbursables
1LS
$2,500.00
$2,500.00
TOTAL HOURS/DIRECT LABOR - Psomas
1965.85
$10,413.12
OVERHEAD MULTIPLIER (1,90)
$19,784.93
REIMBURSABLES
$2,500.00
TOTAL- PSOMAS
$32,698.05
FIXED FEE (111%)
$3,269.80
SUBCONSULTANTS (with 5 % mark-up)
$41,763.75
TOTAL - BID/CONSTRUCTION PERIOD SERVICES
$77,731.60
Construction Costs - Phase I
% of Construction Costs - Design
% of Construction Costs - BPS/CPS
$4,168,680.00
10.71%
1.86%
SUBCONSULTANTS-DESIGN
Sub. Markup (5%)
Sub. Fees
Sub. Fees +5%
Oncina -Architect (MBE/DBE)
1.05
$40,500.00
$42,525.00
IMA Design - Landscape Architects (MBE)
1.05
$68,215.00
$71,625.75
BSE Engr. - Electrical Engineer -
1.05
$40,000.00
$42,000.00
Ninyo & Moore - Geotechnical (MBE)
1.05
$14,892.00
$15,636.60
Katz Okitsu - Traffic Engineer (MBE/DBE)
1.05
$28,000.00
$29,400.00
Structural Engineer (TBD)
1.05
$20,000.00
$21,000.00
SUBCONSUTANTS-BPSICPS
Architect(Oncina)
1.05
$7,140.00
$7,497.00
Landscape Architects(IMA)
1.05
$11,720.00
$12,306.00
Electrical Engineer(BSE)
1.05
$10,915.00
$11,460.75
Structural Engineer (Psomas)
1.05
$5,000.00
$5,250.00
Traffic Engineer(KOA)
1.05
$5,000.00
85,250.00
Subtotal - Subconsuhants
$41,763.75
P&A Direct Labor- DESIGN
Principal Engineer
Project Manager
Sr. Project Engineer
Project Engineer
Staff Engineer
Project Surveyor
Designer
CADD Drafter
Word Processor/Clerical
Subtotal
P&A Direct Labor - BPS/CPS
191,607.00
98 $77.63
402 $58.86
98 $50.94
296 $38.00
244 $31.49
0 $40.42
120 $27.00
272 $28.98
74 $21.60
1604
$305,714.85
$7,607.74
$23,661.72
$4,992.12
$11,248.00
$7,683.56
$0.00
$3,240.00
$7,882.56
$1,598.40
867,914.10
Projed Manager
80
$58.86
$4,708.80
Senior Project Engineer
40
$50.94
$2,037.60
Project Engineer
60
$38.00
$2,280.00
CADD Drafter
24
$28.98
$695.52
Word Processor/Clerical
32
$21.60
$691.20
Subtotal
236
$10,413.12
DBE Calculation-
MWBE Calculation-
32.16%
35.67%
% of Total Fee
9.53%
16.05%
9.41 %
3.50%
6.59%
4.70%
1.68%
2.76%
2.57%
1.18 %
1.18%
RCTC-Perris
15
Page 4
1
AGENDA ITEM 8
RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
October 23, 2006
TO:
Budget and Implementation Committee
FROM:
Marlin Feenstra, Capital Projects Program Manager
Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager
Karl Sauer, Bechtel Construction Manager
THROUGH:
Cathy Bechtel, Project Delivery Director
SUBJECT:
Amendment to Utility Agreement with Southern California Gas
Company for the State Route 74 Segment II Wasson Canyon Road
to 7"' Street Highway Widening and Realignment Project
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Approve Utility Agreement No. 03-31-046-01, Amendment No. 1 to
Agreement No. 03-31-046, with Southern California Gas Company for
the State Route (SR) 74 Segment II Wasson Canyon Road to 7"' Street
Highway Widening and Realignment Project for an amount not to
exceed $43,062;
2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute
the Agreement Amendment on behalf of the Commission; and
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
On January 8, 2003, the Commission approved Utility Agreement No. 03-31-046,
with Southern California Gas Company (SCGC) to relocate the existing SCGC
natural gas pipelines and other appurtenances for a not to exceed amount of
$176,517. The relocation was required to accommodate construction of the
Commission's SR-74 Segment II Wasson Canyon Road to 7"' Street Highway
Widening and Realignment Project (SR-74 Segment II Project).
The agreement amount was the "Estimated Relocation Cost" by SCGC prior to
construction. During construction, SCGC tracked all costs associated with the
relocation of the existing SCGC natural gas pipelines and other appurtenances
required to accommodate construction of the SR-74 Segment II Project.
16
At the end of construction, SCGC submitted a final invoice with supporting
documents for $219,579 related to the relocation of the existing SCGC natural gas
pipelines and other appurtenances. Staff has reviewed and concurs with the SCGC
final invoice and has approved a partial payment of $176,517 to SCGC consistent
with the current authorized amount. Staff now recommends approval of Utility
Agreement Amendment No. 1, 03-31-046-01, with SCGC for the SR-74 Segment
ll Project to allow for payment of the balance of $43,062 to SCGC for utility
relocation services.
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget:
Yes
Year:
FY 2006/07
Amount:
$43,062
Source of Funds:
Measure A Funds
Budget Adjustment:
No
GLA No.:
222 31 81401 P3001.
Fiscal Procedures Approved:
\ ,94/4(4/4434.6
Date:
10/23/06
17
"
A G E N D A I T E M 9
"
"
"
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M / S S / O N
D A T E :
O c t o b e r 2 3 , 2 0 0 6
T O :
B u d g e t a n d I m p l e m e n t a t i o n C o m m i t t e e
F R O M :
M i n S a y s a y , P r o g r a m M a n a g e r
T H R O U G H :
C a t h y B e c h t e l , P r o j e c t D e l i v e r y D i r e c t o r
S U B J E C T :
A w a r d o f A g r e e m e n t s t o H e n n e s s e y & H e n n e s s e y L L C ; P a r a g o n
P a r t n e r s L t d ; R . P . L a u r a i n & A s s o c i a t e s ; L i d g a r d a n d A s s o c i a t e s ,
I n c . ; a n d V a l e n t i n e A p p r a i s a l & A s s o c i a t e s f o r O n - C a l l R i g h t - o f -
W a y A p p r a i s a l S e r v i c e s f o r R e s i d e n t i a l , C o m m e r c i a l , I n d u s t r i a l a n d
A g r i c u l t u r a l P r o p e r t i e s
S T A F F R E C O M M E N D A T I O N :
T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i t t e e t o :
1 ) A w a r d A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 7 - 7 2 - 0 5 7 - 0 0 t o H e n n e s s e y & H e n n e s s e y L L C ;
A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 7 - 7 2 - 0 6 1 - 0 0 t o P a r a g o n P a r t n e r s L t d ; A g r e e m e n t N o .
0 7 - 3 1 - 0 6 3 - 0 0 t o R . P . L a u r a i n & A s s o c i a t e s ; A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 7 - 7 3 -
0 6 2 - 0 0 t o L i d g a r d a n d A s s o c i a t e s , I n c . ; a n d A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 7 - 3 3 -
0 6 4 - 0 0 t o V a l e n t i n e A p p r a i s a l & A s s o c i a t e s t o p e r f o r m O n - C a l l R i g h t -
o f - W a y A p p r a i s a l S e r v i c e s ( A p p r a i s a l S e r v i c e s ) ;
2 ) A u t h o r i z e t h e C h a i r m a n , p u r s u a n t t o l e g a l c o u n s e l r e v i e w , t o e x e c u t e
t h e A g r e e m e n t s o n b e h a l f o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n ;
3 ) A p p r o v e a n a m e n d m e n t t o t h e F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 b u d g e t i n t h e a m o u n t o f
$ 2 2 5 , 0 0 0 ; a n d
4 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N .
O n M a y 1 0 , 2 0 0 6 , t h e C o m m i s s i o n a p p r o v e d a n d d i r e c t e d s t a f f t o r e l e a s e a
R e q u e s t f o r P r o p o s a l s ( R F P ) f o r O n - C a l l A p p r a i s a l S e r v i c e s t o s u p p o r t c u r r e n t
C o m m i s s i o n p r o j e c t s a n d f u t u r e M e a s u r e A h i g h w a y a n d c o m m u t e r r a i l p r o j e c t s .
F e d e r a l a n d s t a t e r e g u l a t i o n s r e q u i r e t h a t b e f o r e t h e i n i t i a t i o n o f n e g o t i a t i o n s w i t h
p r o p e r t y o w n e r s , t h e p u b l i c a g e n c y s h a l l e s t a b l i s h a n a m o u n t w h i c h i t b e l i e v e s i s
j u s t c o m p e n s a t i o n f o r t h e r e a l p r o p e r t y . T h e a m o u n t s h a l l n o t b e l e s s t h a n t h e
a p p r o v e d a p p r a i s a l o f t h e m a r k e t v a l u e o f t h e p r o p e r t y , t a k i n g i n t o a c c o u n t t h e
v a l u e o f a l l o w a b l e d a m a g e s o r b e n e f i t s t o a n y r e m a i n i n g p r o p e r t y .
1 8
In order to comply with the regulations, the Commission can either hire staff
appraisers or establish a list of on -call appraisers, staff recommended the latter.
The Calendar of Events was as follows:
Calendar of Events
Distribution of RFP
Proposals Delivered to RCTC prior to 2 PM
Evaluation Committee Review of Proposals
Staff Recommendation to Commission
- Selection Process:
June 15, 2006'
July 17, 2006
July 25, 2006
November 8, 2006
A selection panel was assembled, which consisted of representatives from the
Commission, Ca[trans and county of Riverside. Staff received five proposals. The
selection panel reviewed the proposals based on qualifications of the firms, staffing
and project organization, work plan, cost and price; and, completeness of response.
After review, the panel determined that all five firms submitted good quality
proposals and ranked the firms as follows:
Top Ranked
Hennessey & Hennessey LLC
Second
Paragon Partners Ltd
Third
R. P. Laurain & Associates
Fourth
Lidgard and Associates, Inc.
Fifth
Valentine Appraisal & Associates
Due to the amount of potential appraisal services required to deliver future
Commission projects, such as the State Route 79 Realignment and the Mid County
Parkway projects, staff recommends that agreements be executed with all five
firms. Cost will be based on fixed firm price and the term of each contract is three
years with two one-year contract extension options, to be exercised at the sole
discretion of the Commission. Work will be awarded to the firms on a rotating basis
and assigned in accordance with their ranking.
These Appraisal Services were not included in the FY 2006/07 budget. A budget
amendment is hereby recommended in the amount of $225,000.
•
19
"
"
F i n a n c i a l I n f o r m a t i o n
I n F i s c a l Y e a r B u d g e t :
N o
Y e a r :
F Y 2 0 0 6 / 2 0 0 7
A m o u n t :
$ 2 2 5 , 0 0 0
T U M F $ 1 0 0 , 0 0 0
S o u r c e o f F u n d s :
C M A Q $ 2 5 , 0 0 0
B u d g e t A d j u s t m e n t :
Y e s
M e a s u r e A $ 1 0 0 , 0 0 0
2 1 0 - 7 2 - 8 1 4 0 3 P 5 1 2 3 $ 5 0 , 0 0 0
G L A N o . :
2 1 0 - 7 2 / 7 3 - 8 1 4 0 3 P 5 1 2 3 $ 5 0 , 0 0 0
2 2 2 - 3 1 - 8 1 4 0 3 P 3 0 1 5 $ 5 0 , 0 0 0
2 2 1 - 3 3 - 8 1 4 0 3 P 3 8 0 0 $ 7 5 , 0 0 0
F i s c a l P r o c e d u r e s A p p r o v e d :
v 1 i b u i t
D a t e :
1 0 / 2 3 / 0 6
2 0
i
AGENDA ITEM 10
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
October 23, 2006
TO:
Budget and Implementation Committee
FROM:
Min Saysay, Program Manager
THROUGH:
Cathy Bechtel, Project Delivery Director
SUBJECT:
Award of Agreements to Hennessey & Hennessey LLC; Paragon
Partners Ltd; and Lidgard and Associates, Inc., for On -Call Right -of -
Way Appraisal Review Services
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
' This item is for the Committee to:
1) Award Agreement No. 07-33-060-00 to Hennessey & Hennessey
LLC; Agreement No. 07-73-058-00 to Paragon Partners Ltd; and
Agreement No. 07-31-059-00 to Lidgard and Associates, Inc. to
perform On -Call Right -of -Way Appraisal Review Services;
2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute
the Agreements on behalf of the Commission;
3) Approve an amendment to the FY 2006/07 budget in the amount of
$78,000; and
4) Forward to the Commission for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
On May 10, 2006, the Commission approved and directed staff to release a
Request for Proposals (RFP) for Appraisal Review Services to support current
Commission projects and future Measure A highway and commuter rail projects.
Federal regulations (49 CFR Part 24, Subpart A) require that review appraisers
examine the presentation and analysis of market information in all appraisals and
support the appraisers' opinion of value. The review appraisers develop, report and
recommend the amount believed to be just compensation for real property interests
to be acquired by a public agency.
The Calendar of Events was as follows:
Calendar of Events
Distribution of RFP
Proposals Delivered to RCTC prior to 2 PM
June 15, 2006
July 17, 2006
21
Evaluation Committee Review of Proposals July 25, 2006
Staff Recommendation to Commission November 8, 2006
Selection Process
A selection panel was assembled, which consisted of representatives from the
Commission, Ca!trans and county of Riverside. Staff received four proposals. The
selection panel reviewed the proposals based on qualifications of the firms, staffing
and project organization, work plan, cost and price, and completeness of response.
After review, the panel determined that three firms submitted good quality
proposals and ranked the firms as follows:
Top Ranked
Hennessey & Hennessey LLC
Second
Paragon Partners Ltd
Third
Lidgard and Associates, Inc.
Due to the amount of potential Appraisal Review Services required to deliver future
Commission projects, such as the State Route 79 Realignment and the Mid County
Parkway projects, staff recommends that agreements be executed with all three
firms. Cost will be based on firm fixed price and the term of each contract is three
years with two one-year contract extension options, to be exercised, at the sole
discretion of the Commission. Work will be awarded to the firms on a rotating basis
and assigned in accordance with their ranking.
These Appraisal Review Services were not included in the FY 2006/07 budget. A
budget amendment is hereby recommended in the amount of $78,000.
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget:
No
Year:
FY 2006/07
Amount:
$78,000
TUMF $36,000
Source of Funds:
CMAQ $ 9,000
Budget Adjustment:
Yes
Measure A $33,000
210-72-81403 P 5123 $18,000
GLA No.:
210-72/73-81403 P 5123 $18,000
221-31-81403 P 3015 $18,000
221-33-81403 P 3800 $24,000
Fiscal Procedures Approved:
VIlLbudzitate
Date:
10/23/06
22
AGENDA ITEM 1 1
•
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
October 23, 2006
TO:
Budget and Implementation Committee
FROM:
Jerry Rivera, Program Manager
THROUGH:
Anne Mayer, Deputy Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Approval of City of La Quinta's Amended Bicycle Transportation
Plan
I
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
i
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Approve the city of La Quinta's Amended Bicycle Transportation Plan
as submitted; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The city of La Quinta's (City) amended Bicycle Transportation Plan has been
submitted to the Commission for certification that it complies with the
requirements of the State Bicycle Lane Account (BLA) program as required by State
law. The State Bicycle Lane Account program may fund a maximum of 90% of the
cost of an eligible project(s) and each jurisdiction is eligible to receive up to 25% of
the funds available for any given year.
The City received a grant in the amount of $30,400 in FY 2000/01 to establish
facilities and routes throughout the City; however, the City amended its Bicycle
Transportation Plan in August 2006. Accordingly, the Commission must reaffirm
that the amended plan meets the requirements of the BLA program.
Commission staff has reviewed the city of La Quinta's amended Bicycle
Transportation Plan and finds that the Plan satisfies the requirements of the BLA
program as specified by state law.
Attachment: City of La Quinta Amended Bicycle Transportation Plan
23
AGENDA ITEM 12
•
f
REVISION TO AGENDA ITEM 12
ADDITIONS IN BOLD ITALICS
RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON
DATE:
October 23, 2006
TO:
Budget and Implementation Committee
FROM:
John Standiford, Director of Public Affairs
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Award of Federal Legislative Advocacy Agreement
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Award Agreement for Federal Legislative Advocacy Services to
Cliff Madison Government Relations;
2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to legal counsel review, to
execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission;
3) Direct Staff to review overall, long-term lobbying needs and
return to the Commission in early 200i with a comprehensive
plan; and
4) Forward to the Commission for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The Commission currently shares a contract for federal advocacy services
with San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG). Previously, the
Commission and SANBAG also shared a staff member who coordinated and
led legislative affairs efforts, and thus the shared federal advocate made ,
sense for both agencies. As part of the contract with SANBAG, the
Commission is currently represented in Washington by Cliff Madison
Government Relations, Inc., which has provided the Commission with the
services of the firm's principal veteran lobbyist, Cliff Madison.
During the last three years, however, the Commission and SANBAG have
implemented their own separate legislative efforts while still working in close
cooperation on regional matters. Each agency now has its own legislative
affairs staff, and on December 31, 2006 the joint federal advocacy services
contract with SANBAG will expire.
In July 2006, the Commission awarded a contract for State Advocacy
Services to the Commission's incumbent Sacramento lobbying firm, Smith,
Watts & Company, who was previously also shared between the
Commission and SANBAG. Based on the positive results of procuring state
advocacy services independently of SANBAG, Commission staff sought the
same independent approach in securing federal services. Pursuant to the
Commission's longstanding commitment to open and competitive bidding for
contracted services, staff released a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for
Federal Advocacy Services at the Commission's direction on September 13,
2006.
The RFQ was mailed to over a dozen Washington lobbying firms and was
advertised on the Commission's website. Four qualifying proposals were
received:
1. Cliff Madison Government Relations, Inc.;
2. The Skancke Company (jointly with Ruffalo & Associates);
3. Xenophon Strategies; and
4. David Turch and Associates.
A five -member evaluation panel consisting of government relations staff from
the Commission and sister agencies met on Wednesday, October 18, 2006,
and recommended the selection of Cliff Madison, one of the above firms for
a two-year contract with two, two-year optional extensions. The first two
years will be paid at a fee of $6,000 per month. The first extension (if
executed by the Commission) would be for $6,500 per month and would rise
to $7,000 per month if the second and final extension is exercised. Mr.
Madison has performed in an exemplary manner on behalf of the Commission
for a number of years and was recently instrumental in obtaining federal
funding for the Perris Valley Line extension and is an excellent source of
information and gaining access to decision makers in Washington, D.C. His
proposal was also the most cost effective of those received. Finally, Mr.
Madison has close contacts in both political parties, which would become
increasingly important if there are changes in committee assignments and
chairmanships after the November election.
Representation in Washington will become increasingly important in the
coming years as the expiration of SAFETEA-LU is already approaching
quickly, now less than three years away. Once the dust has settled from the
intensity of this year's midterm elections, reauthorization discussions are
expected to commence in 2007. The Commission will have a great interest
in being a party to the reauthorization talks, thus making the selection of a
federal representative critical to the Commission's agenda moving forward
over the long term.
A number of transportation agencies employ more than one legislative
representative, and the Commission might need to consider such a possibility
as Riverside County's needs increase with its growth. Given the uncertainty
that is likely in Washington during the first few months of the new Congress
in 2007, the timing provides Commission staff and the Commission with an
opportunity to fully review its long-term lobbying needs. Should there be a
need to expand the Commission's lobbying team, budget adjustments could
be made for next fiscal year to accommodate the need. Additional lobbying
support could benefit the Commission with increased access and
specialization that might be necessary when major projects such as the Mid
County Parkway, Perris Valley Line and goods movement near
implementation. The reauthorization of the Federal Transportation bill might
also require overall policy changes that require specific expertise in crafting
federal law and regulations.
Staff suggests using the early part of 2007 to interview Xenophon Strategies
and The Skancke Company to fully consider the Commission's options and
long-term opportunities. While this is taking place, the Commission will
continue to receive effective representation from Mr. Madison who would
continue to be part of the Commission's team in the long-term.
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget:
Yes
Year:
FY 2006/07
Amount:
$36,000
Source of Funds:
Measure A Funds
Budget Adjustment:
No
GLA No.:
S 14 65506
Fiscal Procedures Approved:
\44,4,,a
Date:
10/23/06
"
"
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M / S S / O N
D A T E :
O c t o b e r 2 3 , 2 0 0 6
T O :
B u d g e t a n d I m p l e m e n t a t i o n C o m m i t t e e
F R O M :
A a r o n H a k e , S t a f f A n a l y s t - G o v e r n m e n t R e l a t i o n s
T H R O U G H :
J o h n S t a n d i f o r d , P u b l i c A f f a i r s D i r e c t o r
S U B J E C T :
A w a r d o f F e d e r a l L e g i s l a t i v e A d v o c a c y A g r e e m e n t
S T A F F R E C O M M E N D A T I O N :
T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i t t e e t o :
1 ) A p p r o v e A g r e e m e n t f o r F e d e r a l L e g i s l a t i v e A d v o c a c y S e r v i c e s ;
2 ) A u t h o r i z e t h e C h a i r m a n , p u r s u a n t t o l e g a l c o u n s e l r e v i e w , t o
e x e c u t e t h e a g r e e m e n t o n b e h a l f o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n ; a n d
3 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N :
T h e C o m m i s s i o n c u r r e n t l y s h a r e s a c o n t r a c t f o r f e d e r a l a d v o c a c y s e r v i c e s
w i t h S a n B e r n a r d i n o A s s o c i a t e d G o v e r n m e n t s ( S A N B A G ) . P r e v i o u s l y , t h e
C o m m i s s i o n a n d S A N B A G a l s o s h a r e d a s t a f f m e m b e r w h o c o o r d i n a t e d a n d
l e d l e g i s l a t i v e a f f a i r s e f f o r t s , a n d t h u s t h e s h a r e d f e d e r a l a d v o c a t e m a d e
s e n s e f o r b o t h a g e n c i e s . A s p a r t o f t h e c o n t r a c t w i t h S A N B A G , t h e
C o m m i s s i o n i s c u r r e n t l y r e p r e s e n t e d i n W a s h i n g t o n b y C l i f f M a d i s o n
G o v e r n m e n t R e l a t i o n s , I n c . , w h i c h h a s p r o v i d e d t h e C o m m i s s i o n w i t h t h e
s e r v i c e s o f t h e f i r m ' s p r i n c i p a l v e t e r a n l o b b y i s t , C l i f f M a d i s o n .
D u r i n g t h e l a s t t h r e e y e a r s , h o w e v e r , t h e C o m m i s s i o n a n d S A N B A G h a v e
b e g u n t o i m p l e m e n t t h e i r o w n s e p a r a t e l e g i s l a t i v e e f f o r t s w h i l e s t i l l w o r k i n g
i n c l o s e c o o p e r a t i o n o n r e g i o n a l m a t t e r s . E a c h a g e n c y n o w h a s i t s o w n
l e g i s l a t i v e a f f a i r s s t a f f , a n d o n D e c e m b e r 3 1 , 2 0 0 6 t h e j o i n t f e d e r a l
a d v o c a c y s e r v i c e s c o n t r a c t w i t h S A N B A G w i l l e x p i r e .
I n J u l y 2 0 0 6 , t h e C o m m i s s i o n a w a r d e d a c o n t r a c t f o r S t a t e A d v o c a c y
S e r v i c e s t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s i n c u m b e n t S a c r a m e n t o l o b b y i n g f i r m , S m i t h ,
W a t t s & C o m p a n y , w h o w a s p r e v i o u s l y a l s o s h a r e d b e t w e e n t h e
C o m m i s s i o n a n d S A N B A G . B a s e d o n t h e p o s i t i v e r e s u l t s o f p r o c u r i n g s t a t e
a d v o c a c y s e r v i c e s i n d e p e n d e n t l y o f S A N B A G , C o m m i s s i o n s t a f f s o u g h t t h e
s a m e i n d e p e n d e n t a p p r o a c h i n s e c u r i n g f e d e r a l s e r v i c e s . P u r s u a n t t o t h e
C o m m i s s i o n ' s l o n g s t a n d i n g c o m m i t m e n t t o o p e n a n d c o m p e t i t i v e b i d d i n g f o r
2 4
contracted services, staff released a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for
Federal Advocacy Services at the Commission's direction on September 13,
2006.
The RFQ was mailed to over a dozen Washington lobbying firms and was
advertised on the Commission's website. Four qualifying proposals were
received:
1. Cliff Madison Government Relations, Inc.;
2. The Skancke Company (jointly with Ruffalo & Associates);
3. Xenophon Strategies; and
4. David Turch and Associates.
A five -member evaluation panel consisting of government relations staff from
the Commission and sister agencies will meet on Wednesday, October 18,
2006, and recommend the selection of one of the above firms for a four-year
contract with an option for a two-year extension. Due to time constraints
for publishing this agenda, the evaluation committee's assessment and
recommendation to the Commission will be included in a separate
attachment to be distributed to Commissioners and members of the public at
the Committee meeting.
Representation in Washington will become increasingly important in the
coming years as the expiration of SAFETEA-LU is already approaching
quickly, now less than three years away. Once the dust has settled from the
intensity of this year's midterm elections, reauthorization discussions are
expected to commence in 2007. The Commission will have a great interest
in being a party to the reauthorization talks, thus making the selection of a
federal representative critical to the Commission's agenda moving forward
over the long term.
•
25