Loading...
10 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 • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE www.rctc.org AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 9:30 a.m. Monday, .October 23, 2006 BOARD CHAMBERS County Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, 1s` Floor Riverside, California In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Government Code Section 54954.2, if you need special assistance to participate in a Committee meeting, please contact the Clerk of the Board at (951) 787-7141. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to meeting time will assist staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility at the meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 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.) 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 • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE Monday, August 28, 2006 MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting of the Budget and Implementation Committee was called to order by Chair Jeff Stone at 9:34 a.m., in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California, 92501. 2. ROLL CALL Members/Alternates Present Members Absent Steve Adams Jim Ayres Roger Berg Alex Bias Rick Gibbs Terry Henderson Bob Magee Jeff Stone John F. Tavaglione Robert Crain Juan DeLara Barbara Hanna Ron Meepos Gregory Pettis PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no requests to speak from the public. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — April 24 and June 26, 2006 M/S/C (Bias/Berg) to approve the minutes of April 24 and June 26, 2006 as submitted. 5. ADDITIONS / REVISIONS There were no additions or revisions to the agenda. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR 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. • Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes August 28, 2006 Page 5 10. CITY OF CORONA TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE REGIONAL ARTERIAL PROGRAMMING REQUEST FOR GREEN RIVER ROAD AND EL CERRITO ROAD PROJECTS Shirley Medina, Program Manager, presented the city of Corona's request for reprogramming the TUMF funding for two previously approved regional arterial projects, Green River Road and El Cerrito Road. At Commissioner John Tavaglione's request, Shirley Medina updated the Committee on the status of the Green River interchange project. M/S/C (Tavaglione/Henderson) to: 1► Approve reprogramming of Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) funds for the Green River Road project to include $200,000 for the environmental phase, $600,000 for the design phase, and $3,442,000 for construction; 2) Approve extending limits on the Green River Road project to Palisades Drive for plans, specifications, and cost estimate (PS&E) design work only; 3) Approve TUMF Regional Arterial Program funds for construction of the Green River Road project from State Route 91 to Dominguez Ranch Road; 4) Approve Agreement No. 06-72-539-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 06-72-539, to reflect the above changes; 5) Approve Agreement No. 07-72-038-00 for programming of $1 million in TUMF funds for the El Cerrito Road/I-15 Interchange improvement project to include $120,000 previously programmed for right-of-way and $880,000 in additional funding for the construction phase; 6) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission; 7) Approve an amendment to the FY 2006/07 budget in the amount of $1.3 million; and 8) Forward to the Commission for final action. 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 • Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes August 28, 2006 Page 9 M/S/C (Tavaglione/Adams) to: 1) Adopt the following positions on state ballot propositions: Propositions 1 A & 113 — SUPPORT Proposition 90 — OPPOSE; 2) Direct staff to issue a Request for Qualifications for federal legislative advocacy services; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 16. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR No items were pulled from the consent calendar for discussion. 17. COMMENTS BY COMMISSIONERS/STAFF 1) Commissioner Rick Gibbs extended appreciation to Will Kempton, Caltrans Director, and Mike Perovich, Caltrans District 8 Director, for accelerating the Los Alamos Road/I-215 interchange project. 2) Commissioner Bob Magee commended staff on State Route 74 project. 3) Mr. Haley reported on: • The Grand Opening Ceremony for the State Route 74 project. • Caltrans using Riverside County as a model for creating future relationships. • Future Public/Private Partnership meetings for joint multi -county efforts. 18. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Budget and Implementation Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 10:32 a.m. The next meeting of the Budget and Implementation Committee is scheduled for September 25, 2006 at 9:30 a.m. Respectfully submitted, 6 .� .H Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board • AGENDA ITEM 6A • 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 • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Interfund Loan Activity Report For 1st quarter ended September 30, 2006 Loan Amount Repayment Amount Date of Loan of Loan Begins Outstanding Lending Fund Borrowing Fund April 2, 2003 $ 300,000 July 1, 2006 $ 266,609 Measure A - WC Highway (222) Measure A - WC LSR (227) March 4, 2004 275,000 July 1, 2009 Total $ 575,000 275,000 Measure A - WC Commuter Measure A - WC Highway (222) Assistance (226) $ 541,609 Purpose of Loan Advance to make repairs and improvements to Railroad Canyon Road Additional local match for the SR71 Widening/Animal Crossing Project Date Commission Approved March 12, 2003 December 10, 2003 Vn2000111 November1Budget & Implementation1mc.Attach.lntedund Loan Activity Rpt AGENDA ITEM 7. • • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: October 23, 2006 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Marlin Feenstra, Capital Projects Program Manager Karl Sauer, Bechtel Construction Manager THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Amendment to Agreement with PSOMAS to provide Final Design Engineering Services for the Perris Multimodal Facility STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 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. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission and the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) have been working cooperatively to develop Phase I of the Downtown Perris Multimodal Transit Center (Perris Multimodal Facility), which will include the construction of a RTA bus terminal, a 141 space parking lot, bus plaza with 8 loading bays, and a transit platform for access to the Perris Valley Line service. At the July 9, 2003 meeting, the Commission awarded Agreement No. 04-33-007 to PSOMAS to perform Phase I Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Services. PSOMAS was also selected to perform Phase II Final Design Engineering Services which were to be included in an amendment to be negotiated at a later date, after a locally preferred alternative had been selected and environmentally cleared. On May 30, 2006, the Perris City Council (City) approved the Development Plan and Negative Declaration for the construction of Phase I of the proposed Perris Multimodal Facility. The City's approval was based upon a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Environmental Evaluation for the project. To comply with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) requirements, PSOMAS was directed and has completed a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Environmental Evaluation, 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 • July 5, 2006. Mr. Karl Sauer, Bechtel/RCTC RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Riverside County Regional Complex 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Re: Perris Multimodal Facility — Phase 1 Final Design RCTC Agreement #04-33-007 Dear Mr Sauer: We are submitting this request for modifications to our referenced Agreement to provide for professional design services for the referenced project.. Enclosed please find our Scope of Services and Fee Proposal for your review and consideration.. We would also request an update to our Direct Labor rates, last updated in 2004, to reflect a range of current and future rates to covet us through the end of 2007. Information and Engineering %Cations Direct Salary Rates —Not all individuals in each staff category within the firm are paid precisely the same hourly wage. Accordingly, some of the "positions or classifications" have different individuals who have varying direct labor rates within each category. We propose that we amend the list of hourly rates to include a "range" of hourly rates that are currently in effect for the remainder of 2006, and through the end of 2007, for each of our "positions or classifications" as follows: Position Or Classification Principal Engineer (2010) Senior Associate Engineer (2020) Associate Engineer (2030) Senior Engineer (2040) Project Engineer (2060) Staff'Engineer (2080) Assistant Engineer (2090) 5 Range Of Hourly Rates $66.00 - $80..00 $52.00 - $59..00 $50.00 - $54..00 $44.00 - $49..00 $41 00 - $48.00 $26 00 - $36.00 $26.00 - $29.00 4455 Murphy Canyon Chad Suite 200 San Diego CA 921n 358 576 9200 El5651738 Fax www psomasmm 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 • AGENDA ITEM 9 • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON 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; 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 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 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. BACKGROUND INFORMATION. On May 10, 2006, the Commission approved and directed staff to release a Request for Proposals (RFP) for On -Call Appraisal Services to support current Commission projects and future Measure A highway and commuter rail projects. Federal and state regulations require that before the initiation of negotiations with property owners, the public agency shall establish an amount which it believes is just compensation for the real property. The amount shall not be less than the approved appraisal of the market value of the property, taking into account the value of allowable damages or benefits to any remaining property. 18 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 • • Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: No Year: FY 2006/2007 Amount: $225,000 TUMF $100,000 Source of Funds: CMAQ $ 25,000 Budget Adjustment: Yes Measure A $100,000 210-72-81403 P 5123 $50,000 GLA No.: 210-72/73-81403 P 5123 $50,000 222-31-81403 P 3015 $50,000 221-33-81403 P 3800 $75,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: v1ibuit Date: 10/23/06 20 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 • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: October 23, 2006 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Aaron Hake, Staff Analyst - Government Relations THROUGH: John Standiford, Public Affairs Director SUBJECT: Award of Federal Legislative Advocacy Agreement STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 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. 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 begun to implement 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 24 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